Umm… Go to the family life boards on this board. There are lots of Catholic men who feel that women should submit to them and that husbands have a right to make all the decisions in the family. They also feel the need to judge divorced women dating, etc. I could give you examples if you would like.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.
I agree with everything you said, but had never really interpreted that as saying Mary was more important. More perfect, and holier, to be sure. The ideal human, certainly.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.
And there are lots of women who doesn’t understand their role and men’s roles as intended by God, in both marriage and society. You see it on these boards, and in real life all the time. As many women don’t know or understand it as men, from my experience. I have found this is usually because the person doesn’t like what they hear or read, and doesn’t want to understand it, for men and women.Umm… Go to the family life boards on this board. There are lots of Catholic men who feel that women should submit to them and that husbands have a right to make all the decisions in the family. They also feel the need to judge divorced women dating, etc. I could give you examples if you would like.
I would guess that 70-80% of all people working for the Church are women. From women who help clean churches, to professors and in Deans in Colleges, to surgeons and heads of departments in Catholic hospitals, to Catechists, teachers and Principals in elementary schools…women have a much deeper impact on the faith, then do men…the only exception is in Holy Orders…everything else is heavily over-represented by 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.
This is one of the most outrageous and blatantly untrue comments I have ever seen on CAF!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.
My thought is that Pope’s “Mary is more important than the apostles” comment was mainly - or merely - a way to stimulate humility in priests and bishops, as part of his fight against clericalism, pride and isolation of the clergy from the laypeople. His call for a theology of women, his declaration that women should not be limited to being altar girls and his warning that without women, the church as an institution would be sterile are probably to be understood in the same particular context.I agree with everything you said, but had never really interpreted that as saying Mary was more important. More perfect, and holier, to be sure. The ideal human, certainly.
But without the Apostles, there would be no confecting the Eucharist, and no Catholic Church, and no salvation for the rest of humanity after Christ.
I view the roles they both fulfill as vital and invaluable, but to say one is important than another seems to miss what the other does for us as humans. Why rank central figures in Catholic theology in terms of importance? Are we going to rank the Apostles 1 through 12 next?
Everything you said and everything Pope Francis said points to the emphasis being that Mary, a woman, was the holiest human whoever lived, and the model for us as humans.
Well… Apparently some Catholic men think that a womenz role is to make them sammiches and have a gazillion babies. Which means that they are excluded from the economic and political life of society.And there are lots of women who doesn’t understand their role and men’s roles as intended by God, in both marriage and society. You see it on these boards, and in real life all the time. As many women don’t know or understand it as men, from my experience. I have found this is usually because the person doesn’t like what they hear or read, and doesn’t want to understand it, for men and women.
The theology of men and women is clear to many of us, and the Church has defined our complimentary roles well. What you are trying to do is eliminate sin and ignorance, which is never going to happen completely. Just because men or women don’t understand the Church’s beliefs on their roles doesn’t mean the Church hasn’t defined those roles. It just means we are ignorant.
Look at how ignorant many of us are on the Scriptures, or Catechism, and what they actually say? It doesn’t mean they need to be more defined, it just means we are ignorant. Big difference.
Well… What else is one supposed to take away from this? It seems the Church is suggesting that it is virtuous for little girls to get their throats slit to preserve their sexual purity.This is one of the most outrageous and blatantly untrue comments I have ever seen on CAF!
Not sure what your point is. Just as many women do not understand the man’s proper role in the Church and society. Do we need a new theology of men, or to simply clarify what a man’s role is, just as we should clarify what a woman’s role is?Well… Apparently some Catholic men think that a womenz role is to make them sammiches and have a gazillion babies. Which means that they are excluded from the economic and political life of society.
I do not dispute what you are saying about men.I would guess that 70-80% of all people working for the Church are women. From women who help clean churches, to professors and in Deans in Colleges, to surgeons and heads of departments in Catholic hospitals, to Catechists, teachers and Principals in elementary schools…women have a much deeper impact on the faith, then do men…the only exception is in Holy Orders…everything else is heavily over-represented by women.
We do NOT have a crisis with women, we have a crisis of not having true men. Men are lost in a wilderness of not knowing their spiritual place in the world…it is no wonder they do not mature until age 26 or older, they have no demands placed on them to help them grow.
I once read a survey that state 75% of children who live in a home with a father who is inactive in the faith, will grow up inactive in the faith. Conversely, in homes where the father is active in the faith, 75% of those children grow-up to be active in the faith. Fathers have a profound impact on their children–that is simply how God has built his human family, with specific spiritual roles.
I do not agree…look around any parish, they are filled with women working. Almost all teachers in Catholic elementary schools are women, so are the principals, secretaries, catechists, etc. We have a true crisis in vocations to the Priesthood, and there is a true absence of men being involved across the spectrum…that is not the case with women–they are working in every aspect of the faith, excluding Holy Orders only (which is only a tiny percentage of the whole).I do not dispute what you are saying about men.
But I do not believe there is no crisis with women. Look at your first paragraph. The truth is that many of the women religious in the Church have self-disempowered by destroying the very communities that set up those schools and hospitals and, in so doing, weakening or destroying the institutions themselves.
It was all done in the name of a secular view of feminism that emphasizes idiosyncratic individualism at the cost of much more effective coordinated community action.
Can women mean more in the life of the Church than particular priests or bishops? Definitely. Particular priests or bishops ultimately retire or die and their work often dies with them. Communities of women live on, or at least they once did.
And laywomen? Can anybody truly say that laywomen have a greater effect on the future of the Church than formerly when so many are now obliged to be away from home all day for economic reasons, entrusting the teaching of their children to strangers? Again, women are “atomized”, thus throwing away the “collegial” characteristics some studies have shown are strengths peculiar to women.
Again, I don’t purport to know what the Pope meant when he said what he did. But nobody who looks objectively at the situation of women in the Church now can truly say that the role of women has advanced since the 1960s. It has, instead, become constricted.
I believe the Holy Father is trying to spread a message of Divine Mercy…and in a very real way, that should give us all pause (if true).Not sure what your point is. Just as many women do not understand the man’s proper role in the Church and society. Do we need a new theology of men, or to simply clarify what a man’s role is, just as we should clarify what a woman’s role is?
When I was looking for a wife, I sought a woman who wanted to stay home with our children. My wife was looking for a man who agreed that she should be at home. That was our choice. Other opinions and situations can and do vary. My mother worked, as does my sister. Some couples want the wife to work, and others do not even have the choice financially.
I think where the Pope lost me (and more than a number of Priests and lay people, given interviews I have seen) is when he said that women were more important than Priests or Bishops. I understand he is going out of his way to satiate the desires of certain groups who somehow feel marginalized by the Church (homosexuals, some women apparently, TBD), and perhaps is not the best speaker at this point in his pontificate, but there are a couple issues some people have.
For one, as I mentioned before, ranking people in terms of importance serves no purpose other than to do the exact opposite of his intent, which is not marginalize a certain group. What purpose does saying “so and so is more important than so and so?” You don’t have to build someone up by tearing someone else down. Is it not enough to say something along the lines of “women are as vital to society’s continued existence as a God-fearing holy culture as are men. For without Eve, Adam would be incomplete. Without Mary, we would never had our Lord and Savior.” That’s the hole point of teaching about our complimentary nature!
Secondly, and more specifically on point, to frankly demean Priests and Bishops by saying they are less important than women is not only borderline insulting, but is theologically untrue. Those same Priests and Bishops are the successors of Apostles, and are the only ones alive who can confect the Eucharist. No woman ever has, and no man outside of the Sacrament of Holy Orders does. The Pope himself, the successor of Peter, the Holy See, the Bishop of Rome, is one of those Bishops who he says are less important than women.
It just seems that at times the Holy Father, who is theologically far wiser than I am, attempts a noble pursuit in his dialogue, but takes it a step to far and ends up losing part of his audience as they walk away scratching their heads.
Lots of things in this post, but I only have time to respond to some of it.I do not agree…look around any parish, they are filled with women working. Almost all teachers in Catholic elementary schools are women, so are the principals, secretaries, catechists, etc. We have a true crisis in vocations to the Priesthood, and there is a true absence of men being involved across the spectrum…that is not the case with women–they are working in every aspect of the faith, excluding Holy Orders only (which is only a tiny percentage of the whole).
While I agree that female religious groups have far less numbers, actual parish life is simply brimming full with women…everywhere (and this include girls as altar servers, oftentimes there are only girls serving at the altar).
Further, in the home, men have in very large numbers abdicated their roles as spiritual leaders (to their wives). Even in the church pews there are far more women, than men. Wives/mothers are often the ones bringing kids to Mass, and worrying about their faith formation…not men/husbands/fathers.
This is not to say that there are no problems or issues with women, of course there are some, yet if we can find a way to get the men back involved, we will solve a lot of the Church’s woes, and with that we will solve a lot of the woes of the culture.
What do men see in the Church:
Women are everywhere across the Catholic faith spectrum…and serving men are hard to find in most parishes…it is an authentic crisis and the glut of females is NOT making men more attracted to service in their local parishes.
I also am not sure what the Pope was saying…though I feel he is trying to speak a message of Mercy to everyone.
Well, we both are making valid points, yet see things differently. I agree the loss of women to religious vocations is something that must be addressed, and that it has caused great harm. Yet, I remained of the belief that the crisis we face is with men. Here is why I say that: women, despite not wanting to be part of religious orders today, still step-up to serve the Church in far greater numbers than men, and women have still held on to their faith, and women have become a massive part of the functional Church; however, men have almost completely collapsed in their involvement, and the Church/faith will continue to suffer pain if we cannot solve the problem with men.Lots of things in this post, but I only have time to respond to some of it.
I don’t think most Catholics realize how devasted the orders of religious women are. Nor do I think most Catholics now alive realize how much they did in the past. Fundamentally, most of the orders abandoned teaching both the future laity and future priests and religious. This was an extremely devastating blow to catechesis, and I believe the results are pretty evident.
Yes, most teachers in Catholic schools are women; married women with families for the most part. The young no longer get any up close exemplars of what it is to be a member of a religious order. And let’s be clear, most lay teachers have no real backgrounding in theology or biblical studies. Some aren’t even Catholics. That’s the reality we have now. Perhaps it can be improved, perhaps not. But it’s hardly ideal.
Indeed vocations are fewer now. However, the only orders that are receiving new postulants are those that actually live in community; that have a clear and unified central purpose, are faithful to the Magesterium, and are actually useful within the institutions of the Church. Imaginably, Pope Francis can give them a boost by clearly affirming their way of life and encouraging additional support by dioceses and the faithful.
One of my teenage granddaughters recently had an interesting experience in attending a retreat put on by a very “classic” order which attracts more applicants than it can manage. Interestingly, most of the retreat participants were young black women from terrible neighborhoods in New York City and other eastern cities. One can never know whether those retreats will attract additional vocations, but it’s difficult to think they will not because the participants are, in the course of those retreats, integrated into the community and prayer life of the order. “Being there” is a very big deal. But even for those who do not have a vocation, it’s a “world of women” those nuns are serving by doing what they’re doing.
As to vocations to the priesthood, I think we can safely say that with priests being assigned more and more duties, the likelihood of their being able to truly replace what the religious orders used to do, is doubtful at best. There seems to be an upturn in vocations to the priesthood presently, and the quality appears quite good.
But in the U.S. it’s going to take a lot of years and a lot of work to repair the damage that has been done to religious institutions including the priesthood, and to the situation of women generally. Actually, I don’t think we have even seen the worst of what’s still to happen with Catholic institutions. But their replacements are already budding.
Pope Francis might be taking a much longer view than we realize.
Agreed, andWell, we both are making valid points, yet see things differently. I agree the loss of women to religious vocations is something that must be addressed, and that it has caused great harm. Yet, I remained of the belief that the crisis we face is with men. Here is why I say that: women, despite not wanting to be part of religious orders today, still step-up to serve the Church in far greater numbers than men, and women have still held on to their faith, and women have become a massive part of the functional Church; however, men have almost completely collapsed in their involvement, and the Church/faith will continue to suffer pain if we cannot solve the problem with men.
One aspect that I feel is also a serious blow (regarding women) is the almost complete lack of desire to have many children, which in itself fuels a lack of vocations because families with one or two children are less likely to encourage their kids to consider a vocational path (for boys and girls).
Francis isn’t concerned with communicating to a small group of faithful Catholics. He is going after the 99 sheep who he considers lost. To people like me, who have had an on again off again relationship with the Church, these words have resonance. And far from being a bad speaker, I think Francis is quite good at repackaging Church teachings. In the Gospels, women occupy a high place. Mary is more important than the Apostles. And Mary Magdalene is the “Apostle of the Apostles.”.Not sure what your point is. Just as many women do not understand the man’s proper role in the Church and society. Do we need a new theology of men, or to simply clarify what a man’s role is, just as we should clarify what a woman’s role is?
When I was looking for a wife, I sought a woman who wanted to stay home with our children. My wife was looking for a man who agreed that she should be at home. That was our choice. Other opinions and situations can and do vary. My mother worked, as does my sister. Some couples want the wife to work, and others do not even have the choice financially.
I think where the Pope lost me (and more than a number of Priests and lay people, given interviews I have seen) is when he said that women were more important than Priests or Bishops. I understand he is going out of his way to satiate the desires of certain groups who somehow feel marginalized by the Church (homosexuals, some women apparently, TBD), and perhaps is not the best speaker at this point in his pontificate, but there are a couple issues some people have.
For one, as I mentioned before, ranking people in terms of importance serves no purpose
other than to do the exact opposite of his intent, which is not marginalize a certain group. What purpose does saying “so and so is more important than so and so?” You don’t have to
build someone up by tearing someone else down. Is it not enough to say something along the lines of “women are as vital to society’s continued existence as a God-fearing holy culture as are men. For without Eve, Adam would be incomplete. Without Mary, we would
never had our Lord and Savior.” That’s the hole point of teaching about our complimentary nature!
Secondly, and more specifically on point, to frankly demean Priests and Bishops by saying they are less important than women is not only borderline insulting, but is theologically untrue. Those same Priests and Bishops are the successors of Apostles, and are the only
ones alive who can confect the Eucharist. No woman ever has, and no man outside of the Sacrament of Holy Orders does. The Pope himself, the successor of Peter, the Holy See, the Bishop of Rome, is one of those Bishops who he says are less important than women.
It just seems that at times the Holy Father, who is theologically far wiser than I am, attempts a noble pursuit in his dialogue, but takes it a step to far and ends up losing part of his audience as they walk away scratching their heads.
A) I am not sure you can pick and choose who the Pope is speaking to at any given time, unless he says who he is directing his comments to. Thus far, he had been speaking to all Catholics, and frankly, his job is to speak to the world.Francis isn’t concerned with communicating to a small group of faithful Catholics. He is going after the 99 sheep who he considers lost. To people like me, who have had an on again off again relationship with the Church, these words have resonance. And far from being a bad speaker, I think Francis is quite good at repackaging Church teachings. In the Gospels, women occupy a high place. Mary is more important than the Apostles. And Mary Magdalene is the “Apostle of the Apostles.”.
I do not agree…look around any parish, they are filled with women working. Almost all teachers in Catholic elementary schools are women, so are the principals, secretaries, catechists, etc. We have a true crisis in vocations to the Priesthood, and there is a true absence of men being involved across the spectrum…that is not the case with women–they are working in every aspect of the faith, excluding Holy Orders only (which is only a tiny percentage of the whole).
While I agree that female religious groups have far less numbers, actual parish life is simply brimming full with women…everywhere (and this include girls as altar servers, oftentimes there are only girls serving at the altar).
Further, in the home, men have in very large numbers abdicated their roles as spiritual leaders (to their wives). Even in the church pews there are far more women, than men. Wives/mothers are often the ones bringing kids to Mass, and worrying about their faith formation…not men/husbands/fathers.
This is not to say that there are no problems or issues with women, of course there are some, yet if we can find a way to get the men back involved, we will solve a lot of the Church’s woes, and with that we will solve a lot of the woes of the culture.
What do men see in the Church:
Women are everywhere across the Catholic faith spectrum…and serving men are hard to find in most parishes…it is an authentic crisis and the glut of females is NOT making men more attracted to service in their local parishes. I believe we have an imbalance in the faith today, too few men serving. In years gone by, parishes had 3-6 Priests (who helped teach in the schools), males only served at the altar, and men led many faith groups…today almost of that has been ceded to women (many parishes do not even have one fulltime Priest), and I believe there now exists an imbalance in the order of things. After all, God gave women the gift of bringing his life into this world, and today women now carry the brunt of the load of helping save the souls they personally helped bring into this world…so in all that, what is there left for men?
It is a serious problem because there is a serious imbalance, it lies at the hands and feet of Catholic men who need to start stepping-up and serve…it is not women’s fault that men do not serve, it is a true crisis in men. Men, by nature, want to work and solve things, yet when they look at the Church, they do no see anything for them to do because women have it all covered…so they just stay home. We do not expect or demand anything from men today, so women step-up and fill the gap, which just becomes a repeating visious circle. Of course, that it is a large credit to the women who step-up and full those gaps, and it is a **large flag of crisis **on so many Catholic men who do not bother serving.
I also am not sure what the Pope was saying…though I feel he is trying to speak a message of Mercy to everyone.