If Matriarchy & Feminism Are Sinful, Why Isn't There More Of It?

[Heliotropium]

We do understand that a woman willingly submitting to her own husband in accordance with her faith is infinatly different from a woman being sold into marriage and forced to do so by law? Right? I’m still trying to figure out if we are arguing against the teaching of the church regarding sacramental marriage or secular legal gender inequalities that no longer seem to be present in our society. As far as I can tell, they are entirely seperate issues and can’t logically be discussed at the same time.

Exactly!

In the end AA’s argument that patriarchy is wrong because such a system would lead to women being unjustly treated and exploited by men is rather a moot point. I could easily say the same thing about any form of government but this would not be a valid reason to disagree with such a system of government. Unfortunately for AA opinions are not facts.

 

[Allegra]

You wanted responses from Catholic defenders of patriachy. I am not one so I am not sure if you are interested in what I have to say.

I do not believe that God requires a wife to submit to her husband. Some Catholics like to point to Ephesians to justify that position. They never refer to 1 Corinthians 11-12 for example. St Paul said a lot of things, some were on the basis of Jewish culture of that time. He said women should be veiled, the Church does not require this even in church. Some also refer to St Paul likening the relationship of the husband to the wife as Christ to the Church again to justify the subordination of wives. I do not see how any human being ever able to live up to Christ.
The argument that no good Catholic man would abuse his authority over his wife can never be an argument to support the submission of wives. The unfortunate thing is that some women prefer to be in a submissive position perhaps because its easier to let someone else take responsibility for you. I know of Catholic men on CAF who have stated that they would never expect their wives to submit to them.
John Paul II explained marriage as a mutual submission of husband and wife to each other. Catholic marriage vows do not require the wife to obey or submit to her husband.

Sometimes its just fear that want people to maintain a position, right or wrong.

I disagree with pretty much all of your conclusions. I don’t think St. Paul was only speaking to Jews in Ephesians and I don’t see how you’ve come to that conclusion. Your arguement that no one can live up to Christ so why bother trying doesn’t make much sense to me either. Do you not think that we should each aspire to be Christlike in all things? I think the passage in Ephesians means exactly what it says, that wives should submit to their husband. I interpret that to mean that a Christian wife must always but her husband, and by extention her husband’s children’s need first. Most women do this anyway, not because they are lazy, feeble-minded wenches without the ability to think for themselves but because it is the natural thing for them to do 95% of the time. St. Paul is simply giving us the reminder we need to keep in line the other 5% of the time. (Like when we’re tired, frustrated, irritable, PMSing, or whatever.) In the same passage, Paul’s assignment for men is even more challenging, to love his wife even as Christ loved the church. Being that Christ gave his life for the church, that’s a pretty tall order, especially given the fact that men seem to be less apt than women to willing sacrifice for others. (Genenralization, Yes I know) The fact that you say you know men who say they wouldn’t expect a woman to submit to them has no bearing on whether or not its a valid teaching of the church so I’m not sure what your point was on that. Also, your insinuation that women who accept this role as a Christian wife is only doing it because she finds it easier than thinking for herself is downright insulting. First of all, there is nothing easy about the call to be submissive. Sometimes even the best men fail to achieve perfection in husbandry and it can be downright frustrating at times. More often, in our culture, it is the men who are happy to lay back and let the wife handle everything in the household, refusing to ‘man up’ and make decisions, take responsibilities for the household, and in some cases complete any task other than insemination that could be classified as fathering a child.Why would they ask their wife to submit to them when they only thing they have to do is life their feet once and a while so she can get the vacumn under? It seems to me than many ‘liberated’ women take pride in having a useless post for a domestic partner while they work a fulltime job, micromanage everything in the household, are practically a single parent, and then can’t seem to figure out why they’re tired, frustrated, and unhappy in their marriage. (I know. It’s probably not enough sex.) This is what the secular world calls ‘supermom’. Frankly, this is not my idea of a family. I’d much rather take the equal role of a Christian wife as described by St. Paul, even if it means relinquishing a little control to my spouse.

 

[Vico]

Since coming to this forum I have come across Catholics who say that firm patriarchy is the good and natural norm for the Church and society as a whole.

That men are naturally dominant and women are naturally submissive, and that that is the way it ought to be.

…

In fact, it seems like virtually anything the God of Abraham dislikes (and that is a long list) has flourished at some point in human history.

The fact that things God dislikes frequently flourish is usually justified by the explanation that humans are fallen people in a fallen world, and because of that Satan has great influence in the world. Influence the fallen angel uses to corrupt and distort God’s Creation and plan.

…

So I ask you Catholic defenders of patriarchy (in the home and in society) do you have any rational explanation for this, or this one of those ‘He works in mysterious ways’ type of things (which I don’t consider a real argument at all)?

Firstly, this is not a defense of patriarchy.

God has great respect for human will, including all women, created in the image and likeness of God. Do to free will actions are consequences that mankind must live with, even though God may dislike it. Genesis 6:6-7:
It repented him * that he had made man on the earth. And being touched inwardly with sorrow of heart, He said: I will destroy man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth, from man even to beasts, from the creeping thing even to the fowls of the air, for it repenteth me that I have made them.

• “It repented him”… God, who is unchangeable, is not capable of repentance, grief, or any other passion. But these expressions are used to declare the enormity of the sins of men, which was so provoking as to determine their Creator to destroy these his creatures, whom before he had so much favoured.
  The Catholic teaching is that disorder was introduced by the mutual disobedience of Adam and Eve. Some of the results of the disorder is that (Gen 3:16-19):

Serpent is cursed for deceiving Eve, and shall be crushed by her seed
Eve gets more sorrows and conceptions and her desire is to her husband
Adam gets toil, from the cursed earth, and must eat the herbs

And mankind is a slave to desire. Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2514 St. John distinguishes three kinds of covetousness or concupiscence: lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and pride of life. 301 In the Catholic catechetical tradition, the ninth commandment forbids carnal concupiscence; the tenth forbids coveting another’s goods.

2515 Etymologically, “concupiscence” can refer to any intense form of human desire. Christian theology has given it a particular meaning: the movement of the sensitive appetite contrary to the operation of the human reason. The apostle St. Paul identifies it with the rebellion of the “flesh” against the “spirit.” 302 Concupiscence stems from the disobedience of the first sin. It unsettles man’s moral faculties and, without being in itself an offense, inclines man to commit sins. 303

2516 Because man is a composite being, spirit and body, there already exists a certain tension in him; a certain struggle of tendencies between “spirit” and “flesh” develops. But in fact this struggle belongs to the heritage of sin. It is a consequence of sin and at the same time a confirmation of it. It is part of the daily experience of the spiritual battle:

For the Apostle it is not a matter of despising and condemning the body which with the spiritual soul constitutes man’s nature and personal subjectivity. Rather, he is concerned with the morally good or bad works, or better, the permanent dispositions - virtues and vices - which are the fruit of *submission *(in the first case) or of *resistance *(in the second case) to the saving action of the Holy Spirit. For this reason the Apostle writes: “If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.” 304

 

[h88ter]

Eve comitted the first sin.
Women are more sinfull than men.

 

[vsedriver]

If you didn’t want to discuss the issue, why bother posting about it?

at no time did I say I didn’t want to discuss the issue. I just asked that you clarify what it was you were wanting to discuss, secular or religious because of the following quote:

I was not speaking about marriage or even authority in the Church, I was talking about women having positions of authority and power in secular society.

It seems silly to come on a religious forum to discuss a secular POV and then get upset when people post religious reasons for their thinking.

 

[vsedriver]

Unfortunately there is a significant number of Catholics who think that women should have no power and few (if any) legal rights. Here’s a link to such a group explaining their views: catholicplanet.com/women/roles.htm

there are a significant number of people of all faiths and cultures all around the world who think that women should have no power and few (if any) legal rights.

What has that got to do with what the Catholic Church of the Latin Rite teaches? I feel you are trying to say all Catholics along with the Catholic Church are bad because some Catholics hold stupid ideas? Or you are saying the Catholic Church is responsible for these people holding to stupid ideas? That would be a neat trick considering this stupid idea is held in places that never heard of the Catholic Church.

 

[vsedriver]

So women naturally assume power through behind the scenes manipulation

you never heard of the expression… the power behind the throne? You need to read more history.

 

[Heliotropium]

Eve comitted the first sin.
Women are more sinfull than men.

Mary’s obedience brings the work of redemption.
Are women now less sinful than men?

I smell troll.npatrol:

 

[vsedriver]

From a realist’s perspective, probably because no Jews would have listened to a female savior.

the majority didn’t listen to him as man either.

 

[severus68]

I disagree with pretty much all of your conclusions. I don’t think St. Paul was only speaking to Jews in Ephesians and I don’t see how you’ve come to that conclusion. Your arguement that no one can live up to Christ so why bother trying doesn’t make much sense to me either. Do you not think that we should each aspire to be Christlike in all things? I think the passage in Ephesians means exactly what it says, that wives should submit to their husband. I interpret that to mean that a Christian wife must always but her husband, and by extention her husband’s children’s need first. Most women do this anyway, not because they are lazy, feeble-minded wenches without the ability to think for themselves but because it is the natural thing for them to do 95% of the time. St. Paul is simply giving us the reminder we need to keep in line the other 5% of the time. (Like when we’re tired, frustrated, irritable, PMSing, or whatever.) In the same passage, Paul’s assignment for men is even more challenging, to love his wife even as Christ loved the church. Being that Christ gave his life for the church, that’s a pretty tall order, especially given the fact that men seem to be less apt than women to willing sacrifice for others. (Genenralization, Yes I know) The fact that you say you know men who say they wouldn’t expect a woman to submit to them has no bearing on whether or not its a valid teaching of the church so I’m not sure what your point was on that. Also, your insinuation that women who accept this role as a Christian wife is only doing it because she finds it easier than thinking for herself is downright insulting. First of all, there is nothing easy about the call to be submissive. Sometimes even the best men fail to achieve perfection in husbandry and it can be downright frustrating at times. More often, in our culture, it is the men who are happy to lay back and let the wife handle everything in the household, refusing to ‘man up’ and make decisions, take responsibilities for the household, and in some cases complete any task other than insemination that could be classified as fathering a child.Why would they ask their wife to submit to them when they only thing they have to do is life their feet once and a while so she can get the vacumn under? It seems to me than many ‘liberated’ women take pride in having a useless post for a domestic partner while they work a fulltime job, micromanage everything in the household, are practically a single parent, and then can’t seem to figure out why they’re tired, frustrated, and unhappy in their marriage. (I know. It’s probably not enough sex.) This is what the secular world calls ‘supermom’. Frankly, this is not my idea of a family. I’d much rather take the equal role of a Christian wife as described by St. Paul, even if it means relinquishing a little control to my spouse.

I am not sure why you sound so angry in your post. I was responding to the OP and giving my view. I know that some on CAF do not agree with me and some have been nasty to say the least. I am sure many who believe as you do, do so sincerely. While I apologise if I generalised, I do think for some it is easier in a way to do so.

I do think we all should try to follow Christ, both men and women. I think you have not gotten my “argument”.

You are entitled to your views and have whatever marriage you want. I rather than go into your sexual frustration issue.

 

[StarFireKK]

I disagree with pretty much all of your conclusions. I don’t think St. Paul was only speaking to Jews in Ephesians and I don’t see how you’ve come to that conclusion. Your arguement that no one can live up to Christ so why bother trying doesn’t make much sense to me either. Do you not think that we should each aspire to be Christlike in all things? I think the passage in Ephesians means exactly what it says, that wives should submit to their husband. I interpret that to mean that a Christian wife must always but her husband, and by extention her husband’s children’s need first. Most women do this anyway, not because they are lazy, feeble-minded wenches without the ability to think for themselves but because it is the natural thing for them to do 95% of the time. St. Paul is simply giving us the reminder we need to keep in line the other 5% of the time. (Like when we’re tired, frustrated, irritable, PMSing, or whatever.) In the same passage, Paul’s assignment for men is even more challenging, to love his wife even as Christ loved the church. Being that Christ gave his life for the church, that’s a pretty tall order, especially given the fact that men seem to be less apt than women to willing sacrifice for others. (Genenralization, Yes I know) The fact that you say you know men who say they wouldn’t expect a woman to submit to them has no bearing on whether or not its a valid teaching of the church so I’m not sure what your point was on that. Also, your insinuation that women who accept this role as a Christian wife is only doing it because she finds it easier than thinking for herself is downright insulting. First of all, there is nothing easy about the call to be submissive. Sometimes even the best men fail to achieve perfection in husbandry and it can be downright frustrating at times. More often, in our culture, it is the men who are happy to lay back and let the wife handle everything in the household, refusing to ‘man up’ and make decisions, take responsibilities for the household, and in some cases complete any task other than insemination that could be classified as fathering a child.Why would they ask their wife to submit to them when they only thing they have to do is life their feet once and a while so she can get the vacumn under? It seems to me than many ‘liberated’ women take pride in having a useless post for a domestic partner while they work a fulltime job, micromanage everything in the household, are practically a single parent, and then can’t seem to figure out why they’re tired, frustrated, and unhappy in their marriage. (I know. It’s probably not enough sex.) This is what the secular world calls ‘supermom’. Frankly, this is not my idea of a family. I’d much rather take the equal role of a Christian wife as described by St. Paul, even if it means relinquishing a little control to my spouse.

:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

 

[Allegra]

there are a significant number of people of all faiths and cultures all around the world who think that women should have no power and few (if any) legal rights.

What has that got to do with what the Catholic Church of the Latin Rite teaches? I feel you are trying to say all Catholics along with the Catholic Church are bad because some Catholics hold stupid ideas? Or you are saying the Catholic Church is responsible for these people holding to stupid ideas? That would be a neat trick considering this stupid idea is held in places that never heard of the Catholic Church.

Besides that, I don’t think that those who feel that women’s legal rights should be abolished are “signifigant” either in number or in influence. There are many who believe that a Catholic woman should willingly submit to her husband, but that’s her own husband, (they guy she chose to marry, suposedly of her own free will) That doesn’t mean the same people believe that all women should be politically inferior to all men in society at large.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Eve comitted the first sin.
Women are more sinfull than men.

Here is someone defending theological (Christian) patriarchy in its pure form.

This sort of* reasoning *has been used to put down women for centuries, and is why Feminists tend to dislike and distrust most forms of Christianity.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

there are a significant number of people of all faiths and cultures all around the world who think that women should have no power and few (if any) legal rights.

What has that got to do with what the Catholic Church of the Latin Rite teaches? I feel you are trying to say all Catholics along with the Catholic Church are bad because some Catholics hold stupid ideas? Or you are saying the Catholic Church is responsible for these people holding to stupid ideas? That would be a neat trick considering this stupid idea is held in places that never heard of the Catholic Church.

This thread was never about the current official Catholic Church position.
It was specifically addressed to those that think women in power is somehow ungodly.

 

[Allegra]

I am not sure why you sound so angry in your post. I was responding to the OP and giving my view. I know that some on CAF do not agree with me and some have been nasty to say the least. I am sure many who believe as you do, do so sincerely. While I apologise if I generalised, I do think for some it is easier in a way to do so.

I do think we all should try to follow Christ, both men and women. I think you have not gotten my “argument”.

You are entitled to your views and have whatever marriage you want. I rather than go into your sexual frustration issue.

I’m not angry. I’m simply trying to explain a different interpretation of that scripture you were referencing. I wasn’t trying to suggest that you felt anyone was unentitled to their views, I was simply offering a different conclusion than the one you’ve come to, based on the same scripture.
I also attempted to demonstrate how the “non-submissive” wife scenario often plays out in our society. There’s no need to go into the details of sexual frustration, except to acknowlege that many people automatically assume it is the underlining cause of many marital problems when actually it might be more of a symptom of an inability to trust, to be intimate, or to “submit” to one’s spouse. I didn’t mean to express anger, but to illustrate some of the problems with the secular family model today and to suggest that maybe good 'ole Saint Paul might have actually known what he was talking about.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
So women naturally assume power through behind the scenes manipulation

you never heard of the expression… the power behind the throne? You need to read more history.

That sounds an awful lot like a (snarky) yes.

 

[Heliotropium]

Here is someone defending theological (Christian) patriarchy in its pure form.

Says the person that cannot answer questions regarding some of the basic teachings of Christianity.

This sort of* reasoning *has been used to put down women for centuries, and is why Feminists tend to dislike and distrust most forms of Christianity.

This sort of “reasoning” is used by the same people that wear a dunce cap.

http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/00043/DunceCap_43426a.JPG

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Mary’s obedience brings the work of redemption.
Are women now less sinful than men?

I smell troll.npatrol:

Its hard to say.
A great many people sincerely believe that women are more sinful than men and that men are generally superior. He may just be a sincere misogynist.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

I personally disliked the post if only because massive blocks of text are harder to read (especially if you have been staring at a computer screen for too long).

 

[severus68]

Here is someone defending theological (Christian) patriarchy in its pure form.

This sort of* reasoning *has been used to put down women for centuries, and is why Feminists tend to dislike and distrust most forms of Christianity.

I think that person was just trying to stir things up.

That is wrong reasoning but it has been and is used by some to put women down. You can be a feminist and a follower of Christ before whom all, men and women, are equal.