Pope discusses women in the church, divorce, his own spirituality

[irishpatrick]

Again, I am pretty sure Pope Francis has read Theology of the Body and I am certain he knows the Catechism of the Catholic Church inside and out. Nevertheless, it was he who said, “we don’t yet have a truly deep theology of women in the church.”.

I really don’t know why people keep trying to argue me out of agreeing with him. If the answer were as obvious as you suggest, then how do you explain his words?

Would you say, “Excuse me, Your Holiness, but if you had only read your Catechism you would know that the Church already has a deep theology of women.”

We really do not know what the Holy Father was saying with those words, since in truth it is hard to imagine what, “deep theology of men” the Church holds (which is the clear implication, that we have something for men that we do not have for women). So, while the Pope was imparting a message about women, it is quite difficult to understand exactly what that message is. In truth, there are enormous theological teachings centered around Mary, and around females in general…so I think we need more information to more fully understand what the Pope was saying.

My personal guess, and this is merely a guess, is that the Pope was trying to show love toward all women (by publicly acknowledging their equal human dignity). Once again we see the Pope attempting to extend a merciful hand to people across the world…I think we are going to see more-and-more stress given to God’s mercy as time goes on. Some women feel somehow, “left out” since they cannot be ordained, and some have pulled away from the faith because of that–I believe the Pope is extending the Lord’s Mercy toward all people because he wants to help saves as many souls as possible.

IMO, that should give everyone pause.

 

[FrStevenJones]

We really do not know what the Holy Father was saying with those words, since in truth it is hard to imagine what, “deep theology of men” the Church holds (which is the clear implication, that we have something for men that we do not have for women). So, while the Pope was imparting a message about women, it is quite difficult to understand exactly what that message is. In truth, there are enormous theological teachings centered around Mary, and around females in general…so I think we need more information to more fully understand what the Pope was saying.

My personal guess, and this is merely a guess, is that the Pope was trying to show love toward all women (by publicly acknowledging their equal human dignity). Once again we see the Pope attempting to extend a merciful hand to people across the world…I think we are going to see more-and-more stress given to God’s mercy as time goes on. Some women feel somehow, “left out” since they cannot be ordained, and some have pulled away from the faith because of that–I believe the Pope is extending the Lord’s Mercy toward all people because he wants to help saves as many souls as possible.

IMO, that should give everyone pause.

Thank you for this, great post! My hunch about what the Pope is trying to do, in reaching out to women who “feel” estranged by Catholic theology, but in reality (truth) are not estranged, is in alignment with your perspective!

We’ll have to see where he takes it. Certainly the model of Mary as mother and “archetype” of the Church needs to be understood and deepened, in both men and women! With modern cultural developments, and a disordered “feminism” (as opposed to authentic respect for woman’s unique gifts) effecting our culture, women may need special pastoral attention to help them live holy lives.

 

[Tigg]

And there is yet other evidence of women enjoying prestigious positions in churches, well into the late second century.

Sorry, but as a woman I find the most attractive element comes from Mother Mary, who chose humility and holiness not prestige. It is disconcerting to me that women still feel unfulfilled and must seek things antithetical (like prestige) to a truly spiritual (and happy) state of life.

 

[FrStevenJones]

Sorry, but as a woman I find the most attractive element comes from Mother Mary, who chose humility and holiness not prestige. It is disconcerting to me that women still feel unfulfilled and must seek things antithetical (like prestige) to a truly spiritual (and happy) state of life.

Excellent point! Christ teaches us that we can never find true and lasting hapiness through such vanities as prestige and money, but only by living holy lives. The Evil One always tries to make us believe that we must rely on the values of the world rather than emptying ourselves to depend on God alone, and offer our lives as an oblation of dependence on His love!

 

[kag1982]

I’m going with the Pope on this one. There isn’t a deep theology of the women. I think that what Francis is getting at is that women have felt alienated by the Church just like the other groups he mentioned… gay people and divorcees. Women play a huge role in the Gospels but the Church has made women feel unwelcome.

I have two big qualms with the Church today… First, policy is set by mainly elderly men who I don’t think have a clue about women and the practical implications of their policies on women. Secondly, more conservative Catholics seem to think that women are lesser than men and their only role is to have a gazillion babies and make their husband sandwiches. They are even against women wearing pants. (Hence the Little House on the Prairie dresses). There is some casual misogyny I’ve encountered in these forums, including an instance that wives must submit to their husbands and don’t have any say in the marriage.

This isn’t to say that women shouldn’t be focused on their family; they should be. But men should be as well. This means that men can contribute to domestic tasks and care for the kids. However, women should be able to contribute to their family’s financial well being and have a say in civil society.

 

[Schism_hater]

The default we currently live under is a theology of men. So it is not surprising to me that men find it a good fit - it suits them well, because it was tailor made for them.

I think that’s a little off. First, you do realize, I hope, that several women are considered “doctors” of your church? One of them is St. Theresa of Avila. So women have been involved in some development of Catholic theology.

Further, if the theology of your church were actually “tailor made for men”, it’s hard to see how it lays on us men (quite rightly of course) teachings requiring men to respect the sanctity of marriage, not to look on a woman with lust, etc. etc.

Now if you’re looking for a theology truly “tailor made for men” you might look at the first century Judaism that Jesus reformed, which allowed men to divorce their wives at will, etc. Or maybe at modern day Islam.

 

[kag1982]

I think that’s a little off. First, you do realize, I hope, that several women are considered “doctors” of your church? One of them is St. Theresa of Avila. So women have been involved in some development of Catholic theology.

Further, if the theology of your church were actually “tailor made for men”, it’s hard to see how it lays on us men (quite rightly of course) teachings requiring men to respect the sanctity of marriage, not to look on a woman with lust, etc. etc.

Now if you’re looking for a theology truly “tailor made for men” you might look at the first century Judaism that Jesus reformed, which allowed men to divorce their wives at will, etc. Or maybe at modern day Islam.

Umm… So in Islam, men are not to look at women in lust either. To do this, Islam requires women to be covered from head to toe and locked up in the house at all time.

I do agree that the teachings of the Church regarding women, especially in the Gospels are quite strong (La Madonna, Mary Magdalene at the empty tomb, etc.) And I think that there are many great female saints. The Church, however, has not always been welcoming to women. One thing that has always really annoyed me is the focus on woman’s “purity” as opposed to a man’s. I’m actually fairly troubled by the modern day virgin martyrs like Maria Goretti because so much emphasis is put on the fact that they were still virgins. Little 12-year-old girls are generally unable to overcome their attackers. If Maria Goretti had been forcibly raped by her attacker and still stabbed multiple times, does that make her any less worthy of veneration? I’d really like other virtues emphasized with women.

Additionally, I have read some fairly misogynist posts on this board. Such as ones insisting that a husband is superior to his wife and thus gets to make decisions concerning the children’s baptism, etc. or criticizing abused women separated from their husbands for dating.

 

[PTL]

It means do a Holy Hour every day, or as often as you can in the Church. Do this in in front of the tabernacle, and ask God to take your whole life, as an offering. Talk to Him, tell Him about your life, your frustrations, your fears. Praise and thank him for your life, and ask forgiveness for your sins. Ask Him to lead you, then see what he says to you. He will show you what His plan is, for your life. If you don’t know how to pray well, ask a priest you trust for spiritual direction.

Frequent the sacraments. Confess your sins to a priest at least once a month. Attend Mass every Sunday and as often as you can, during the week.

While at Mass pray hard and offer Him your soul. Beg for His grace, and unite your sufferings with Christ, on the Cross.

Join a Catholic small group that loves Christ’s Church, and pray together every week.

Amen! and

 

[Elizabeth502]

The Church, however, has not always been welcoming to women.

This is called “the past.” How, in the present age, does the Church “not welcome” women? Or, why would think it appropriate to “punish” the Church (i.e., not embrace the Church fully in her teaching) for any past “failure to welcome women?”

One thing that has always really annoyed me is the focus on woman’s “purity” as opposed to a man’s. I’m actually fairly troubled by the modern day virgin martyrs like Maria Goretti because so much emphasis is put on the fact that they were still virgins.

You would have been happier had they submitted to their rapists – the approximately 10 martyred women who resisted and suffered for it? As a woman, have you not considered the obvious? That generally a man can subdue a woman, which means that by definition the protection of purity will be an aspect of martyrdom more frequent, historically, in women than in men? I don’t understand why you would see some great prejudice or imbalance in that. The imbalance is a reflection of an imbalanced physical reality and the greater vulnerability of women versus men. Men and women, both, also and more often suffered non-sexual martyrdoms of all manner of suffering. Those men and women of the latter category are not less revered for their different martyrdoms.

 

[Julian_Bashir]

I am not sure about the “Madonna is more important than the Apostles” bit.

She was holier, and without sin, but she could not confect the Eucharist, and without the Apostles, there would be no Christian Church after Jesus’s crucifixion. Without Mary, we would never have had Christ. It seems they were equally important. Take a way Peter, and there is no Church, making Jesus’s death all for naught.

I get that he wants to make a point and try to grab every group that apparently feels somehow marginalized by the Church (women, homosexuals, TBD), but why use such hyperbole?

What is the point of using terms like “so and so is more important than so and so” when dealing with people far better than any of us will ever be, most likely including the Pope, statistically speaking?

 

[kag1982]

This is called “the past.” How, in the present age, does the Church “not welcome” women? Or, why would think it appropriate to “punish” the Church (i.e., not embrace the Church fully in her teaching) for any past “failure to welcome women?”

I still don’t think that women are fully embraced in the Church. There is still a huge subset of Catholic men who do see women as lesser. For instance, they believe that wives must submit to husbands. I can probably provide you with a good list of examples by just casually browsing the family life or sacraments subforums.

You would have been happier had they submitted to their rapists – the approximately 10 martyred women who resisted and suffered for it? As a woman, have you not considered the obvious? That generally a man can subdue a woman, which means that by definition the protection of purity will be an aspect of martyrdom more frequent, historically, in women than in men? I don’t understand why you would see some great prejudice or imbalance in that. The imbalance is a reflection of an imbalanced physical reality and the greater vulnerability of women versus men. Men and women, both, also and more often suffered non-sexual martyrdoms of all manner of suffering. Those men and women of the latter category are not less revered for their different martyrdoms.

If Maria Goretti had been raped and still brutally murdered by her attacker, would she be any less worthy of reverence as a saint? The part of story that I like is Maria’s forgiveness toward her attacker and his subsequent conversion. I think that it goes quite well with Francis’ emphasis on divine mercy. However, that gets lost with the emphasis on female virginity.

And my main trouble with the emphasis on purity is that it seems to be telling little girls who are the victims of rape, sexual assaults, etc. that they are somehow not as pure or good in the eyes of the Church because they were the victims of a sexual crime. I’m sure that it is comforting to rape victims to know that the Church infers that they are somehow at fault for not fighting back hard enough.

 

[irishpatrick]

Thank you for this, great post! My hunch about what the Pope is trying to do, in reaching out to women who “feel” estranged by Catholic theology, but in reality (truth) are not estranged, is in alignment with your perspective!

We’ll have to see where he takes it. Certainly the model of Mary as mother and “archetype” of the Church needs to be understood and deepened, in both men and women! With modern cultural developments, and a disordered “feminism” (as opposed to authentic respect for woman’s unique gifts) effecting our culture, women may need special pastoral attention to help them live holy lives.

I agree completely.

 

[irishpatrick]

I am not sure about the “Madonna is more important than the Apostles” bit.

She was holier, and without sin, but she could not confect the Eucharist, and without the Apostles, there would be no Christian Church after Jesus’s crucifixion. Without Mary, we would never have had Christ. It seems they were equally important. Take a way Peter, and there is no Church, making Jesus’s death all for naught.

I get that he wants to make a point and try to grab every group that apparently feels somehow marginalized by the Church (women, homosexuals, TBD), but why use such hyperbole?

What is the point of using terms like “so and so is more important than so and so” when dealing with people far better than any of us will ever be, most likely including the Pope, statistically speaking?

I agree that they are all critical and important–yet as you said, without Mary, there is not Christ, we have no Savior, we would all remain trapped in our sins. None of those realities diminishes the Pope or Priests in any way–it just properly defines the situation. Without God there would be no humanity, without Christ in the flesh there would be no redemption/salvation, without Mary there would be no Christ, without the Apostles and the Church there would be no continuing Christian faith.

 

[Julian_Bashir]

I agree that they are all critical and important–yet as you said, without Mary, there is not Christ, we have no Savior, we would all remain trapped in our sins. None of those realities diminishes the Pope or Priests in any way–it just properly defines the situation. Without God there would be no humanity, without Christ in the flesh there would be no redemption/salvation, without Mary there would be no Christ, without the Apostles and the Church there would be no continuing Christian faith.

I agree. It just struck me as pandering to women a bit too much to begin ranking central figures in Catholic theology in terms of importance. Mary was vital, sinless, humble, and frankly, the most ideal human ever created outside of Christ, who had the advantage of being part God, and she was a woman. No man has equaled her in terms of their desire to serve God.

My own personal belief is that the deep theology of women some are searching for is more of a cover for the dissatisfaction for the all-male Priesthood, even in softer, more nuanced terms. The ultimate pursuit of Christ and desire to live a sinless life, emulating Him is a genderless pursuit, and one that doesn’t require defined roles, frankly.

The two lynchpins of God’s creation are mothers and fathers, and my own mother was the best person I have ever known, and shows me daily how to be a model Catholic moreso than any other person I’ve ever met. And she managed to do so while apparently having a muddled theology for women up until this point too. I don’t believe it is as muddled as some would believe.

 

[irishpatrick]

I agree. It just struck me as pandering to women a bit too much to begin ranking central figures in Catholic theology in terms of importance. Mary was vital, sinless, humble, and frankly, the most ideal human ever created outside of Christ, who had the advantage of being part God, and she was a woman. No man has equaled her in terms of their desire to serve God.

My own personal belief is that the deep theology of women some are searching for is more of a cover for the dissatisfaction for the all-male Priesthood, even in softer, more nuanced terms. The ultimate pursuit of Christ and desire to live a sinless life, emulating Him is a genderless pursuit, and one that doesn’t require defined roles, frankly.

The two lynchpins of God’s creation are mothers and fathers, and my own mother was the best person I have ever known, and shows me daily how to be a model Catholic moreso than any other person I’ve ever met. And she managed to do so while apparently having a muddled theology for women up until this point too. I don’t believe it is as muddled as some would believe.

I agree. It seems to me that if there is an implication that we need a theology of women, than I suppose that also implies that there already is a theology of men–and frankly, I have no idea what the “theology of men” is or how it would even exist. God’s truths apply to everyone equally, not just to men, and not just to women.

Again, I feel the Pope is striving to extend God’s Mercy to all people, and I believe the Pope is working hard to make sure everyone knows that God loves each person. I also think his references to mercy is somehow connected to the age of mercy in which we live–for me it could be a signal that the age of mercy is coming to a close and the Pope is trying to draw worldwide attention to God’s Mercy before this period comes to an end.

 

[vames]

I am not sure about the “Madonna is more important than the Apostles” bit.

She was holier, and without sin, but she could not confect the Eucharist, and without the Apostles, there would be no Christian Church after Jesus’s crucifixion. Without Mary, we would never have had Christ. It seems they were equally important. Take a way Peter, and there is no Church, making Jesus’s death all for naught.

There’s a reason why the Church says there is only one saint who is entitled to hyperdulia. That saint is Mary, not the apostles. None of the apostles had such a deep and complete relationship with all the three Persons of the Trinity. And Mary didn’t betray, didn’t misunderstand and didn’t abandon Jesus like the apostles did. That’s why Mary is the model for the whole Church and for each of us, who are called to recreate Mary’s unique “yes” towards God and to unite ourselves with God like she did. The apostles teach us that humans are weak, fallible, prone to conflicts and misunderstandings; Mary teaches us that humans can overcome their weakness and can legitimately aspire for what the Orthodox call theosis.

 

[vames]

I have no idea what the “theology of men” is or how it would even exist. God’s truths apply to everyone equally, not just to men, and not just to women.

A theology of men looks like this:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11046574&postcount=15

 

[irishpatrick]

A theology of men looks like this:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11046574&postcount=15

None of that constitutes a theology of men. God revealed Himself to us in a male form, that does not mean God or the Church places women in some “other” category. In fact, since women are the bearers of God’s life it seems obvious God sees we humans as equals.

 

[livingwordunity]

I still don’t think that women are fully embraced in the Church. There is still a huge subset of Catholic men who do see women as lesser.

Excuse me, but what about the Blessed Virgin Mary? She’s the one that the Church says is the ultimate of God’s creation, Queen of the Universe, Queen of Heaven, Queen of Angels, Mother of God, Mother of the Church, etc. Do these men you speak of refuse to pray the Rosary and venerate Our Lady as their Mother? Because I’ve never heard any such men as this in the Catholic Church unless you are talking about the fallen away Catholics who became Protestant.

 

[JackyB]

I agree. It just struck me as pandering to women a bit too much to begin ranking central figures in Catholic theology in terms of importance. Mary was vital, sinless, humble, and frankly, the most ideal human ever created outside of Christ, who had the advantage of being part God, and she was a woman. No man has equaled her in terms of their desire to serve God.

My own personal belief is that the deep theology of women some are searching for is more of a cover for the dissatisfaction for the all-male Priesthood, even in softer, more nuanced terms. The ultimate pursuit of Christ and desire to live a sinless life, emulating Him is a genderless pursuit, and one that doesn’t require defined roles, frankly.

The two lynchpins of God’s creation are mothers and fathers, and my own mother was the best person I have ever known, and shows me daily how to be a model Catholic moreso than any other person I’ve ever met. And she managed to do so while apparently having a muddled theology for women up until this point too. I don’t believe it is as muddled as some would believe.

Beautifully said.