G
GodHeals
Guest
Good point… : ) Are there any official Church teachings on this that you know of?
If human beings are made in God's image & likeness, why do humans have gendered souls?
- Status
G
GodHeals
Guest
Thank you for sharing… are there any official church teachings on this very question of the soul having a sex?
G
GEddie
Guest
Good question, and I don’t really know yet.
However, the Council of Vienne, in the 1330s, declared the soul to be the “form” of the human body. Therefore uniquely linked to the specific body.
There can be no wrong body.
ICXC NIKA.
G
GodHeals
Guest
The soul being the “form” of the human body seems to say the soul has a sex. Or to say the sex of the soul animates the very same sex of the body, as the body and soul are intimately united and not opposed one to the other. As you said, we ARE a body, not have a body… Sound about right? Thank you for hanging with me on this topic…
Thank you for helping me to understand there can be no wrong body regardless if there is no official church teaching on the subject!
G
GEddie
Guest
sounds a-ok to me
…YVW!
Remember, also, “Church teaching” requires generations, if not centuries, to be formalized; while the issue of “wrong bodies” has surfaced only very recently…
ICXC NIKA.
G
GodHeals
Guest
Good point again! What do you say to the “transsexual” who says we have a sex for a soul, but are in the wrong body? How do we prove the body and soul have the same sex, since we ARE body and soul as was previously posted, and not a soul that has a body, which is wrong teaching. Thank you for your help on this!!!
G
Gorgias
Guest
No, I think this is a misunderstanding of what it means for the soul to be the ‘form’ of the body. It’s the form in the philosophical sense, not in a physical sense. It’s not like our soul is our ‘outline’, such that it circumscribes our body and therefore takes on the sexual identity that the body has.
Let’s approach it this way: we are a body-soul composite. Our bodies, too, are composites. So, this means that we have a heart and hands and feet and genitalia. Our genitalia can be described in terms of sex; but, would you say that, since our genitalia is ‘male’ or ‘female’, so too are our hearts, or hands, or feet? Is there such a thing as a ‘female’ heart or ‘male’ feet? (Of course not! There can be variations in size, of course, but these parts of the composite body are genderless!) Now, we need to remember that there is unity in the body – after all, without a heart, we cannot be a living human; yet, this doesn’t mean that, if one part of the body has sexual characteristics, we must conclude that all parts are gendered. Similarly, then, although we are a soul-body composite, it is not the case that our soul must be a ‘male’ or ‘female’ soul.
My point is that the soul doesn’t have the characteristic of ‘sex.’ What the person is describing is that, for him, it seems that the societal/cultural gender role that he is expected to embrace, based on his physical gender, seems ‘wrong’ to him; to this person, the other gender ‘feels’ more ‘right’. This does not mean that he “is in the wrong body,” but merely that he feels more attached to a different societal/cultural gender experience. As Catholics, we would sympathize with the plight that his feelings have created and recognize the anguish that he feels; but we would not agree that there’s been a mismatch of ‘soul’ and ‘body’ or even that he’s “in the wrong body.”
G
GEddie
Guest
I never suggested that the soul was like a moldline for the human body; my understanding is that rather, it is intimately wound up with all aspects of the body. Gender is as intrinsic to body as you can get!
As to female heart or feet. There are definitive differences between the heart, or the feet, of a male versus a female body (as there are with the nose, shoulders, neck, hands, etc, all bodyparts that we would consider gender less). The fact that there really are male and female feet has led to sport-shoe design different for the two sexes; the fact there are male and female hearts results in different heart-health issues for men and women.
But as you said, the soul is not a moldline for the body. External appearance or structure is not where gender resides. Remove a cell from the pericardium, or from the skin of the footsole, and the cell will contain the either male or female DNA of that heart or foot.
Gender is a cell thing, not a skin-level (or primarily social) thing.
ICXC NIKA.
As to female heart or feet. There are definitive differences between the heart, or the feet, of a male versus a female body (as there are with the nose, shoulders, neck, hands, etc, all bodyparts that we would consider gender less). The fact that there really are male and female feet has led to sport-shoe design different for the two sexes; the fact there are male and female hearts results in different heart-health issues for men and women.
But as you said, the soul is not a moldline for the body. External appearance or structure is not where gender resides. Remove a cell from the pericardium, or from the skin of the footsole, and the cell will contain the either male or female DNA of that heart or foot.
Gender is a cell thing, not a skin-level (or primarily social) thing.
ICXC NIKA.
G
Gorgias
Guest
G
GEddie
Guest
Yet, if presented with photos of several sets of feet, you’d have no difficulty for the most part telling the male from the female feet. We are primarily physical, not philosophical.
Or consider the other human limb: the hand. Remember the sitcom jokes about chicks with “man hands”?? There is an expected difference in male and female hands. Sometimes our humor and our stereotypes reflect a further truth.
In the study of whiplash injury, it has been discovered that “female necks are not just narrower male necks.”
The entire human body reflects the gender.
ICXC NIKA
Or consider the other human limb: the hand. Remember the sitcom jokes about chicks with “man hands”?? There is an expected difference in male and female hands. Sometimes our humor and our stereotypes reflect a further truth.
In the study of whiplash injury, it has been discovered that “female necks are not just narrower male necks.”
The entire human body reflects the gender.
ICXC NIKA
I
Ignatius
Guest
Nothing that you said implies that the soul has a gender. Gender is a characteristic determined by DNA and genitalia, both physical characteristics.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Great. So, if I give you photos of baby feet, you’d be able to tell them apart?
‘Reflects’ it? Sure. Does each body part have gender characteristics? Not so much…
A
abucs
Guest
I’m not sure I agree with the thinking that God has no gender.
Putting aside the incarnation where God took human male form, we would say God is spirit and is not made of flesh and so has no material body.
The thinking then extends this line of reasoning to say - therefore God has no gender.
In saying this though we limit gender to material, physical characteristics.
It is pretty obvious men and women in general think in slightly different ways and have slightly different ways of doing things and have different concerns.
God thinks, has concerns and has certain ways of doing things.
Is it not possible that He does this in a gendered way?
Putting aside the incarnation where God took human male form, we would say God is spirit and is not made of flesh and so has no material body.
The thinking then extends this line of reasoning to say - therefore God has no gender.
In saying this though we limit gender to material, physical characteristics.
It is pretty obvious men and women in general think in slightly different ways and have slightly different ways of doing things and have different concerns.
God thinks, has concerns and has certain ways of doing things.
Is it not possible that He does this in a gendered way?
G
Gorgias
Guest
Spaniels and German shepherds breathe, eat, and sleep. Spaniels and German shepherds are dogs.
You breathe, eat, and sleep. Is it not possible that you are a dog?
(In a word, the answer to your question is ‘no’. The fact that certain characteristics exist in the presence of a particular accident (philosophically speaking) in a particular being does not imply that the presence of these characteristics in another being means that the other being has that particular accident as well.)
G
GEddie
Guest
Whether God, apart from the human ICXC, has a gender has no bearing on whether our souls have a gender.
Embodiment, and therefore gender, is not intrinsic to the Divinity as it is to human life.
ICXC NIKA.
Embodiment, and therefore gender, is not intrinsic to the Divinity as it is to human life.
ICXC NIKA.
A
abucs
Guest
Thank you for your reply.Spaniels and German shepherds breathe, eat, and sleep. Spaniels and German shepherds are dogs.
You breathe, eat, and sleep. Is it not possible that you are a dog?
Given only the axioms above, then the answer is YES, it is possible I am a dog.
Humans breathe, eat and sleep. It is possible I am a human - YES it is possible.
Yet I am a human and not a dog because of other more fully defined considerations outside those axioms.
I would say that it is possible that God can be gendered in some regards, specifically in the areas I have mentioned to do with character and personality.
My point is that the lack of physicality does not rule out gender because gender can be seen as more than simply outward physicalities. I would suggest that if we are to rule out all attributes of gender from God, then we must look for a full definition of gender and rule out all considerations.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Similarly, God is not gendered because of other more fully defined considerations outside those characteristics which you listed.
The problem is that the characteristics that you listed arise from societal roles. It’s not that “men and women think differently”, it’s that, based on their social conditioning, they accept different social roles. In these various roles, different patterns of thought, behavior, and concerns play themselves out. In other words, these differences proceed from gender itself. You are asserting the opposite – that the patterns of thought are themselves ‘gendered’. That is not the case. (Moreover, your assertion, itself, is quite sexist. Not all women (or men) exhibit the patterns of thought and behavior that you ascribe to their gender. Therefore, it’s clear that you cannot say "behavior X is a female behavior, and behavior Y is a male behavior.)
A
abucs
Guest
So what are they? and remember the claim is that God can have attributes of gender as experienced, observed, categorised and defined by man. You will have to provide fully defined considerations that rule out all attributes of gender not just some aspects, but all.Similarly, God is not gendered because of other more fully defined considerations outside those characteristics which you listed.
Gorgias, you have stated as fact a theory that was introduced some decades ago at the height of the militant feminist push in our universities. What is the proof for such a theory?
There is certain proof which is evidence against such a theory. That’s not to say that society influences have no affect, but there is something other than such an affect.
youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70
Firstly, I have been careful to not ‘ascribe’ any particular patterns of thought. I have merely stated that they exist.(Moreover, your assertion, itself, is quite sexist. Not all women (or men) exhibit the patterns of thought and behavior that you ascribe to their gender. Therefore, it’s clear that you cannot say "behavior X is a female behavior, and behavior Y is a male behavior.)
Pointing out that negroes have the characteristic of dark skin is not racist, not can it be said that it is sexist to point to possible differences between men and women.
Producing an albino negro does not invalidate the characteristic that negroes are dark skinned.
When we talk about such things it is obvious we are talking in generalities. My comment is s not the slightest bit sexist in the sense of ascendency/.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Well… if you’re going to put it that way…
tell me – what ‘attributes of gender’ in God has humanity “experienced, observed, categorized, and defined”? Please note that this is an entirely different question than the one you don’t realize that you’re really asking, which is, “what attributes of gender in humans can we impute to God, such that we project notions of humanity upon God and mistakenly attribute those notions to God?”
But, to the question itself: gender is a distinction that inherently divides; it speaks of incompleteness in an individual (complementarity and equality, to be sure, but incompleteness – a man is not a woman, nor vice versa). God, on the other hand, is simple not composite; God does not have parts; and God is fully complete and perfect. By God’s own nature, God cannot be defined as “this but not that”: God is the very source of all good and does not lack anything. And that’s just by definition; I’m not even going to get started on the notion of what it means to have ‘characteristics’ and what it means to try to compare human characteristics to God’s characteristics (in a Thomistic framework). God is not human. God is not a creation. God does not reproduce. Gender is a characteristic of creatures, including humans, which allows for physical reproduction. Gender is not a characteristic of God.
Seriously? Have you, in any way, kept abreast of current research in psychology in gender roles? If you need a laundry list of studies that show that this is not just a dogmatic assertion of “some decades ago”, but is solid science, I would recommend you to do a simple Google search.
LOL! Tell you what – why don’t you watch this video? In particular, watch at about the 7 minute mark, when the interviewer asks the researcher whether the notion in pop science about “men’s and women’s brains being different” is true. She rolls her eyes and tells him that no, it’s not true. And then, the next researcher, at the university, is asked the same question. And he responds, “no; that’s an old-fashioned idea… most of that research has been refuted.”
But hey, it’s always fun when my interlocutor helps prove my point.
There’s a distinct difference there, though. People are born with their skin color; they learn gender roles through observation and personal experience, though.
A
abucs
Guest
My comment (and specific naming) was regarding attributes of gender that have been experienced etc and the discussion is on the possibility that God also expresses some of these attributes. When you ask "what attributes of Gender IN GOD’ have been experienced, categorised etc then you are asking something quite different. We could talk about this but then we will get bogged down in different interpretations of God’s actions. It is sufficient for the point I am making that attributes of gender are quite possible without getting into an argument over God’s display of such attributes.
No, not only is this not the question I am asking, it is the ideology that you wish to put upon me which is why you are not making much sense in responding to what I am actually saying and asking. Perhaps you should confine yourself with what I am actually saying instead of what you would wish me to say.Please note that this is an entirely different question than the one you don’t realize that you’re really asking, which is, “what attributes of gender in humans can we impute to God, such that we project notions of humanity upon God and mistakenly attribute those notions to God?”
You are simply stating many aspects of gender that we both would agree do not apply to God. This does not address my point. I have already stated that certain aspects of gender do not apply to God. Please address what I am actually saying.
How about you deal with what was presented?Seriously? Have you, in any way, kept abreast of current research in psychology in gender roles? If you need a laundry list of studies that show that this is not just a dogmatic assertion of “some decades ago”, but is solid science, I would recommend you to do a simple Google search.
- Status