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

[Allegra]

Even modern Church authorities have admitted that many of the Church Fathers and quite a number of medieval theologians held to the common view that women were physically and or morally inferior. Pope John Paul II himself admitted as much in some of his official documents concerning women. Here is a quote from Letter of Pope John Paul II to Women (which I read on the official Vatican site here:

1. I know of course that simply saying thank you is not enough. Unfortunately, we are heirs to a history which has conditioned us to a remarkable extent. In every time and place, this conditioning has been an obstacle to the progress of women. Women’s dignity has often been unacknowledged and their prerogatives misrepresented; they have often been relegated to the margins of society and even reduced to servitude. This has prevented women from truly being themselves and it has resulted in a spiritual impoverishment of humanity. **Certainly it is no easy task to assign the blame for this, considering the many kinds of cultural conditioning which down the centuries have shaped ways of thinking and acting. And if objective blame, especially in particular historical contexts, has belonged to not just a few members of the Church, for this I am truly sorry. May this regret be transformed, on the part of the whole Church, into a renewed commitment of fidelity to the Gospel vision. **When it comes to setting women free from every kind of exploitation and domination, the Gospel contains an ever relevant message which goes back to the attitude of Jesus Christ himself. Transcending the established norms of his own culture, Jesus treated women with openness, respect, acceptance and tenderness. In this way he honoured the dignity which women have always possessed according to God’s plan and in his love. As we look to Christ at the end of this Second Millennium, it is natural to ask ourselves: how much of his message has been heard and acted upon?

-AngryAtheist8

P.S. I realize that the Pope’s words could be interpreted as a kind of ‘I’m sorry if you’re offended’ apology. Of course if it was meant that way, it calls into question the sincerity of the whole document.

This is hardly an acknowlegement that many of the fathers of the church had “problems with women”. The Pope is making an overall apology, not even for specific statements or actions by individuals. If you don’t have specific evidence to support your claim that the church fathers had problems with women, just say so. You are still entitled to think that is the case, but I’m not excepting “everyone knows that and even the Pope admitted it” as evidence enough to convince me.

 

[LilyM]

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.

You want women in positions of authority? The Virgin Mary - probably the second most revered figure in the history of faith (which is very much the history of history, as secular society has very much been shaped by its faith).

You want women in secular authority? Queen Victoria - the woman ruled a quarter of the globe for half a century. THAT, my friend, is authority.

 

[Nimzovik]

Your blaming the Atomic Bomb on atheists?

Based on what?

Unless you want to argue that Science (e.g. an understanding of the world around us and its physical laws) equals atheism

Was it a Christian that invented the bomb? Would Christ have given us the Bomb? If not a Christian-if not Christ -then guess what – an atheist perhaps?

 

[Nimzovik]

This thread was never meant to be about the the official or mainstream (modern) version of Catholic patriarchy. Read the opening thread again and you will see that the main question is posed to Catholics that believe that:
women with authority (specifically in the secular world) = Sin/Corruption

Oh yes? I dare say the topic has indeed evolved and addressed a very wide variety of a number of issues other than what you indicate is thread appropriate. When one addresses patriarchy on the scale addressed here - on this very thread- then attendant inseperable issues follow.

Note: You yourself have initiated what some may call untoward thread topics.

Note: When you parade aberations of the Faith such as: “To embrace a woman is to embrace a sack of manure.
-Saint Odo of Cluny”
Then you open up the doorway to addressing the tenets of Atheism in it’s heinous mode at the very least.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

This is hardly an acknowlegement that many of the fathers of the church had “problems with women”. The Pope is making an overall apology, not even for specific statements or actions by individuals. If you don’t have specific evidence to support your claim that the church fathers had problems with women, just say so. You are still entitled to think that is the case, but I’m not excepting “everyone knows that and even the Pope admitted it” as evidence enough to convince me.

I have already listed specific evidence, you simply reject some of my sources.

It might interest you to know that most Feminists in academia and the media also think that the Pope’s comment in this document was of the ‘I’m sorry if you’re offended’ variety (at least based on my observations) and therefore virtually worthless.

As for one of the sources you didn’t object to.

Tertullian was notorious for his negative views of women and the fallen (physical) world in general. Moreover, he only got worse over time, eventually leaving the Church and joining a (heretical) Gnostic sect, and dying outside the Church.

 

[Allegra]

I have already listed specific evidence, you simply reject some of my sources.

It might interest you to know that most Feminists in academia and the media also think that the Pope’s comment in this document was of the ‘I’m sorry if you’re offended’ variety (at least based on my observations) and therefore virtually worthless.

As for one of the sources you didn’t object to.

Tertullian was notorious for his negative views of women and the fallen (physical) world in general. Moreover, he only got worse over time, eventually leaving the Church and joining a (heretical) Gnostic sect, and dying outside the Church.

I can’t object to the sources, because other than the Thomas Aquinas quote I haven’t seen them! I wouldn’t say that the Pope’s comment was a “sorry if you were offended” as much as a “sorry that happened to you”. It is kind of difficult to apologize for something someone else did. I would argue that any such apology wouldn’t be very meaningful to me. Sort of like, “I’m so sorry for my son’s murder victims and their families.” It’s probably the right thing to say, but it still isn’t very satisfying to the aforementioned families.

 

[Benadam]

You make a lot of claims without any kind of proof (or even a coherent argument).

I thought I made it plain that the earliest and most fundamental example of matriarchy in the biblical tradition is easily compared to the mindset of our culture today.

The earliest and most fundamental biblical evidence of a matriarchal structured society is Eve’s statement when Cain was born.

It’s the same kind of statement women not only make today but have made **law. **

Mainstream societies today are matriarchal in character.

Mothers have the authority to end the life of the offspring of fathers. That is a fundamental characteristic of a matriarchy.

What more profound and encompassing authority is there?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Was it a Christian that invented the bomb? Would Christ have given us the Bomb? If not a Christian-if not Christ -then guess what – an atheist perhaps?

So no evidence whatsoever then.

Good to know.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I thought I made it plain that the earliest and most fundamental example of matriarchy in the biblical tradition is easily compared to the mindset of our culture today.

The earliest and most fundamental biblical evidence of a matriarchal structured society is Eve’s statement when Cain was born.

It’s the same kind of statement women not only make today but have made **law. **

Mainstream societies today are matriarchal in character.

Mothers have the authority to end the life of the offspring of fathers. That is a fundamental characteristic of a matriarchy.

What more profound and encompassing authority is there?

That’s it?

One short Biblical statement taken out of context

Well at least I know what your evidence is now.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I can’t object to the sources, because other than the Thomas Aquinas quote I haven’t seen them! I wouldn’t say that the Pope’s comment was a “sorry if you were offended” as much as a “sorry that happened to you”. It is kind of difficult to apologize for something someone else did. I would argue that any such apology wouldn’t be very meaningful to me. Sort of like, “I’m so sorry for my son’s murder victims and their families.” It’s probably the right thing to say, but it still isn’t very satisfying to the aforementioned families.

There is a link to the site for the encyclopedia* right there.*
It goes directly to the article about Tertullian.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

You want women in positions of authority? The Virgin Mary - probably the second most revered figure in the history of faith (which is very much the history of history, as secular society has very much been shaped by its faith).

You want women in secular authority? Queen Victoria - the woman ruled a quarter of the globe for half a century. THAT, my friend, is authority.

What does that have to do with anything I have said in this thread?

 

[Allegra]

There is a link to the site for the encyclopedia* right there.*
It goes directly to the article about Tertullian.

I thought you were talking about the other quotes. The source you provided wasn’t the original source of their work. It was the femenist book you found them in. How is anyone supposed to read them in context? How do we know that they weren’t edited as the first one was in favor of an ajenda?

 

[Benadam]

That’s it?

One short Biblical statement taken out of context

Wouldn’t a society that gives mothers authority over fathers be considered matriarchal in character?

Doesn’t matriarchal authority flow from mothers?

 

[Allegra]

Wouldn’t a society that gives mothers authority over fathers be considered matriarchal in character?

Doesn’t matriarchal authority flow from mothers?

I’m also having difficulty following you. Is it your contention that we currently live in a matriarchy, due to the fact that mothers tend to be afforded the majority of legal rights over the children and family by our court system and also currently have the right to have their child murdered, despite the father’s objections?

 

[Benadam]

I’m also having difficulty following you. Is it your contention that we currently live in a matriarchy, due to the fact that mothers tend to be afforded the majority of legal rights over the children and family by our court system and also currently have the right to have their child murdered, despite the father’s objections?

Yes, that authority is over human generation. Mothers are givin authority over their offspring that fathers are not.

A matriarchy is about a mother’s authority over fathers not so much womens authority over men.

This is because the primary society from which larger societies are structured is the society that provides the maternal environment. If the opportunity to live is under the authority of mothers then that reality characterizes the social environment into which human life enters.That reality will characterize the larger societies that flow from it.

A matriarchy isn’t so much a society that gives women more authority than men but a society that gives mothers more authority than fathers.

 

[Allegra]

Yes, that authority is over human generation. Mothers are givin authority over their offspring that fathers are not.

A matriarchy is about a mother’s authority over fathers not so much womens authority over men.

This is because the primary society from which larger societies are structured is the society that provides the maternal environment. If the opportunity to live is under the authority of mothers then that reality characterizes the social environment into which human life enters.That reality will characterize the larger societies that flow from it.

A matriarchy isn’t so much a society that gives women more authority than men but a society that gives mothers more authority than fathers.

I believe I understand you now. I think you have a point.

 

[Nimzovik]

Originally Posted by Nimzovik forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
Was it a Christian that invented the bomb? Would Christ have given us the Bomb? If not a Christian-if not Christ -then guess what – an atheist perhaps?

So no evidence whatsoever then.

Good to know.

Rather deliberately missing the point again - eh wot? This is a stellar example of your avoident behavior of addressing the issues posting style. Address the issue. You *will *feel better…

 

[Nimzovik]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif

Your blaming the Atomic Bomb on atheists?

Based on what?

Unless you want to argue that Science (e.g. an understanding of the world around us and its physical laws) equals atheism

Bold lettering mine.^

*If the shoe fits… I can not for the life of me think it did not come from Atheists. Certainly not from any RIGHT thinking Christian. It certainly did not come from the teachings of Christ IMHO. After all if you divorce yourself from the Spirit to the extent that you think abortion is O.K. then how can you even know the difference from good or evil? Just to prove my point I say answer this question Do you have a workable definition of ‘good?’ This will be good for a laff!! Probably 5 laffs!! Oh wait! I forgot. You don’t answer questions -**do *you! heh heh heh…

P.S. Oh puh-lease!! let us not confuse W. of M.D.'s with your rather hallowed concept of Science -O.K.??? Sheeeeesh!

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by Nimzovik forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
Was it a Christian that invented the bomb? Would Christ have given us the Bomb? If not a Christian-if not Christ -then guess what – an atheist perhaps?

Rather deliberately missing the point again - eh wot? This is a stellar example of your avoident behavior of addressing the issues posting style. Address the issue. You *will *feel better…

Address what issue?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence to be taken seriously.
You have presented NO evidence for your assertion.

-AngryAtheist8

P.S. Sorry it took me so long to reply, I have been on a business trip for the last few weeks and didn’t have much access to the internet.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif

Your blaming the Atomic Bomb on atheists?

Based on what?

Unless you want to argue that Science (e.g. an understanding of the world around us and its physical laws) equals atheism

Bold lettering mine.^

If the shoe fits…* I can not for the life of me think it did not*** come from Atheists. Certainly not from any RIGHT thinking Christian. It certainly did not come from the teachings of Christ IMHO. After all if you divorce yourself from the Spirit to the extent that you think abortion is O.K. then how can you even know the difference from good or evil? Just to prove my point I say answer this question Do you have a workable definition of ‘good?’ This will be good for a laff!! Probably 5 laffs!! Oh wait! I forgot. You don’t answer questions -**do **you! heh heh heh…

P.S. Oh puh-lease!! let us not confuse W. of M.D.'s with your rather hallowed concept of Science -O.K.??? Sheeeeesh!

Then you lack imagination.

At the time the atomic bomb was created virtually everyone in the United States was a Christian of some sort. At least officially, there’s no way of knowing what most individuals at the time actually believed.