Pope hits out at feminist radicals

[BayCityRickL]

Charbrah is hitting the nail rather hard, I’d say.

One of my pet peeves is that lay people do not get enough recognition for their service. That is compounded by the fact that priests come and go, and so they don’t have the perspective on the service that is rendered. In simple terms, they rather take it all for granted.

When some big shindig goes on at the parish, often there are “thanks” posted in the bulletin but there are too many people to thank, and they don’t want to offend anyone by leaving them out. Baloney. I think the parish should recognize people and keep doing it until it gets things right.

It raises a more general issue. Why do so many things change when priest assignments change? Some things are suddenly “out” and other things are “in”. I think parish activities vary too much and are not standardized enough. This is perhaps not a failure of the seminaries, per se, but probably more a function of the diocesan operation.

 

[Panis_Angelicas]

Charbrah:

The purpose of our lives is to be perfect in holiness through the Church. A truly holy person is not going to care whether or not she received any recognition for the greatness she has done because she knows that she is nothing and it is only through the power of the holy Spirit that she is able to accomplish anything good.

This is so true. I agree 100%.

Not only does a truly holy person “not care” whether or not she receives recognition, I would think that she would actually prefer not to receive accolades here on earth at all.

Of what value, really, are repeated “thanks” and “pats on the back” in the long run?

What little good works we may have accomplished are then rewarded with a few fleeting words of praise. Personally, I’d rather not have them spoken. I’d rather lay up my treasures in heaven, than receive rewards here on earth.

Better that we receive our rewards for whatever poor little works we do, when we face the Just Judge. Any accomplishments on my part are insignificant enough, (especially when compared to the Saints!) but to constantly receive public recognition for anything I might do, would be unbearable.

I hope one day to stand before God and have Him show me at least one good thing I did to please Him, that went unrewarded while I was on earth.

Pax Christi. <><

 

[deogratias]

The full letter is now available on the Vatican site

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040731_collaboration_en.html

 

[Minerva]

I’m glad that the letter did not condemn mothers who work outside the home and even called for women to have equal access to the professional world. Too many conservative Catholics, including some on these boards, are very quick to condemn any deviation from 1950s gender roles. It’s nice to see the Pope not take this path

 

[deogratias]

I thought the letter was beautifully writen and that the message within it was inspirational.

 

[Peace-bwu]

I enjoyed the article, it was nice to see a blurb about the Pope in entertainment news but I am guessing they put it there because it would be counteracting much of what the entertainment industry holds dear! I am guessing many readers did not find this as positive as we did. Ok, Im all for women having equal rights, but I agree,the radical feminist movement *is *evil because it promotes self love to the extreme and unnatural and dysfunctional situations for women. It promotes murder for the sake of a woman’s convenience, killing her own offspring. It has spawned generations of children who were shoved to the side, or worse, never even allowed to be born. It has malaffected many angles of society. The radical feminist movement lies to women.

 

[deogratias]

I particularly liked this paragraph

This intuition is linked to women’s physical capacity to give life. Whether lived out or remaining potential,** this capacity is a reality that structures the female personality in a profound way**. It allows her to acquire maturity very quickly, and gives a sense of the seriousness of life and of its responsibilities. A sense and a respect for what is concrete develop in her, opposed to abstractions which are so often fatal for the existence of individuals and society. It is women, in the end, who even in very desperate situations, as attested by history past and present, possess a singular capacity to persevere in adversity, to keep life going even in extreme situations, to hold tenaciously to the future, and finally to remember with tears the value of every human life.

CW News gave a good analysis of the letter’s contents.

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=31200

 

[csr]

I have some doubts about the new letter.

quote=Ratzinger These reflections are meant as a starting point for further examination in the Church, as well as an impetus for dialogue with all men and women of good will, in a sincere search for the truth …
[/quote]

I don’t like the orientation here of searching for truth. There has been a problem within the Church over the last 45 years, of turning from telling the truth to suggesting that the Church “searches” for the truth. This is part of the problem with ecumenism: the Church is in some measure suggesting to other religions that we all “search”. I don’t like the overlap here with that concept. On the other hand, I understand that we explore what the truth means to us.

In §2 there is a reasonable statement of the problem, that confusion over sex roles has resulted in broader confusions (see “Mad Meg” by Bruegel). And there have been attempts to criticize Sacred Scripture and to ignore the significance of God assuming “human nature in its male form” (§3). The document establishes that male-female is consecrated originally to the good for mutual complementarity. Fine.

quote=Ratzinger Original sin changes the way in which the man and the woman receive and live the Word of God as well as their relationship with the Creator. … God’s decisive words to the woman after the first sin express the kind of relationship which has now been introduced between man and woman: “your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (Gn 3:16). It will be a relationship in which love will frequently be debased …
[/quote]

I am not understanding the word “frequently” here. It sounds to me as though the effects of sin are indefinite, that perhaps sometimes the relationship will actually not be debased. And of course, who would think of themselves as debased, given the least excuse not to?

Ratzinger:

(§8) … the relationship is good, but wounded and in need of healing. … The logic of sin needs to be broken and a way forward needs to be found that is capable of banishing it from the hearts of sinful humanity.

The logic of sin needs to be broken, yes: but it is broken, by adhering to the Church. The document’s language implies that there is some other, superior healing, that sin can be banished. The “logic of sin” cannot “be broken” as we do have a fallen nature. This “dialog” would no doubt lead to charges of quibbling, but the lack of clarity will tend to encourage people to think too much in terms of being cured.

Then the document discusses the marriage metaphor for our union with God (§§9, 10). Indeed, all true, but we work within our fallen natures toward and through a perfect metaphor: the details of how we must relate are brushed aside by referring only to the perfect example.

Ratzinger:

(§11) … The power of the resurrection makes possible the victory of faithfulness over weakness, over injuries and over the couple’s sins. In the grace of Christ which renews their hearts, man and woman become capable of being freed from sin and of knowing the joy of mutual giving.

This is true, but the details of the relationship are glossed over. The particular point which is misplaced can be found in Ephesians 5. Yes, a model of perfection exists and guides us, and the sacraments change us, but we still have a fallen nature, we are dependent upon the sacraments, and we do not become literally equal, much as the Church is not equal to God; Christ is the head of the Church.

Ratzinger:

§12) … in Christ the rivalry, enmity and violence which disfigured the relationship between men and women can be overcome and have been overcome.

Ah, no they haven’t. The statement made in the document is too absolute, too conclusive, too much of a gloss: otherwise why would Ephesians 5 have been written?

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

How many truly radical feminists are out there? Too many, but not an overwhelming amount. Be that as it may, the small number of radical voices reaches a large amount of ears and the public at large picks up lots of the main themes without necessarily giving lip service to the whole package. Many people my age would tell you that a woman who doesn’t work has something wrong with her. Take a walk through academia and see the poison of radical feminism at work all around you. This person picks up one bit, that person another, but they’re all getting something. The main idea being attacked in the letter (or one of the main ideas) is that women and men are the same - an idea that enjoys quite a bit of credence, no matter how moderate an individual may feel himself to be.

As far as women doing lots of the grunt work, that’s true. Our Catholic education system in America was built on the backs of nuns. Women currently perform all sorts of functions in the parish. So what? If we need to be paying more attention to the contributions of all the laity, that’s one matter of discussion. But your language implies that we need to be paying more attention to the contributions of women. Just because they are women? Either not a single man has ever lifted a finger in your parish, or you want special attention paid to the women, which would not alleviate gender inequality (if it existed), merely invert it.

 

[Origen]

Today’s readings draw a *sharp *distinction between material ambition and spiritual treasure. The verdict is clear: those who seek material gain in and of itself are on the false path. Those who want to be more prominent in the community for the sake of pride and “self esteem” are on the false path.

Feminism seeks material, earthly gain. They can couch it in all sorts of noble sounding principles and post-modernist clap trap, but make no mistake: it’s material gain they want. Feminists are on the same bad footing as the rich man who hoardes his wealth. Both rich men and poor feminists are doomed because they put their trust in material goals.

Moreover, when forced to choose their alliances, feminists will side with the enemies of the Church every time. The churches feminists do find attractive are the ones that deny sin.

The icing on the cake is feminism’s profaning our culture with the barbaric crime of abortion.

 

[Lilyofthevalley]

Somebody had to say something. I am glad he did. I know it will probably vex most of society, but too bad. It has been the agenda of radical feminists to do away with family and motherhood from the get go.

 

[BobCatholic]

Lilyofthevalley:

Somebody had to say something. I am glad he did. I know it will probably vex most of society, but too bad. It has been the agenda of radical feminists to do away with family and motherhood from the get go.

He needs to rebuke the evil ones. Even if they’re a group of certain modern women trying to destroy society with their anti-male, anti-family, anti-children, anti-unselfishness, anti-heterosexual doctrines.

 

[Lilyofthevalley]

Catholic Bob, yes, the ones that are radical and seem to be angry women have uteruses need to have their agenda set back a few yards.
The feminists who believe in equal pay for equal work and that women should not have to live with a physically abusive husband are a different bunch.

 

[Digitonomy]

ricatholic:

How many radical feminists do you guys think are really out there, and in the church?

Since it is generally women who do most of the heavy spiritual lifting at the parish level, it seems that the church would be better served by recognizing their efforts instead of wasting time attacking the female fringe elements.

ric isn’t the only one who thinks radical feminists are merely a fringe element. From the National Catholic Reporter

Mary Ann Glendon, who teaches law at Harvard University and is the first female president of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, said the document is “essentially a critique of certain aspects of old-line ‘70s feminism” that have long since faded. So why issue it?

“I think the answer must be that, like rays from a dead star, the old ideology is still causing harm in some parts of the world, especially to children,” Glendon told NCR.

 

[deogratias]

yes, the ones that are radical and seem to be angry women have uteruses need to have their agenda set back a few yards.

huh?

 

[ricatholic]

I would speculate that the majority of radical feminists who were born catholic are not probably catholics now. The views of the church are just too alien to these people and the liklihood of generating change toward their vews by the church is less than slim.

On the opposite end of the spectrum are those that will obey the church in any instance or situation.

However, most people live between the extremes and liked or not by those on the extremes, they may share some views of both extremes but are unlikely to have all of either.

And this middle is where most catholics live and it is where the church must do the most to bring more people to Christ.

I realize that many people are content with a smaller more orthodox church, but that orthodox core will always be there despite what the church does or how it acts.

However that is not the case of the middle, where credibility is as important as authority and where seeing congruency between action and Jesus’ teaching is important and an ongoing concern.

Peace

 

[deogratias]

I would speculate that the majority of radical feminists who were born catholic are not probably catholics now

Or they are nuns in certain orders or running Call to Action groups - they have not gone away - unfortunately.

 

[ricatholic]

deogratias:

Or they are nuns in certain orders or running Call to Action groups - they have not gone away - unfortunately.

Since it is a small minority that join orders and a small minority of orders that are even radical, they are vastly outnumbered by those that are extremely uber orthodox, say opus dei types.

Peace

 

[reggie]

I am so glad that finally our church has spoken out about radical feminism in the world. To me it is so clear the harm this thinking has done to society. I can hardly abide those women who have so lost their feminine identity they are no longer recognizable as women. Listen to the women of the Democratic Party. They are lost to the real role of women in the world. I have always felt that I was a dinosaur in this world. I am a stay at home mom and I have been able to do this because I have a husband who has supported me and our children. We have sacrificed a new and bigger home, new cars, expensive vacations, closets full of new clothes, nice dinners out etc… I have at times had a hard time not having money of my own that I earned but my needs have always been met and I have never been begrudged anything. I thank God that I have had the opportunity to spend countless hours with my children. I have had time to volunteer in their schools, with their extracurricular activities and in our church. I have been able to attend all of their games, school awards ceremonies and all performances. I thank God that I have been so blessed. I don’t condemn any women who chooses to work outside the home but am grateful that I haven’t had to. I have a daughter and while it is my hope that one day she will have a husband who will give her this same choice, I also encourage her to be educated and to take care of herself. I pray that she has seen me as a woman with choices that has not given anything up by staying out of the rat race but has gained the joys of womenhood by being a mother first and foremost. As for recognition from the church, that is pride speaking, and there is no place for that in a Christian life. We are all called to build up and support our church; we do this because we love Jesus and our brothers in Christ, we should not seek earthly praise, but heavenly treasure. Patricia Heaton, from Everbody Loves Raymond, is one of the founders of Feminists for Life. There is a voice out there for women who seek equality in the working world without sacrificing womenhood. Once again, JPII has shown leadership and truth to a secular world, he is a rock standing against the tide and we as Catholics should be grateful for his holiness and love for us, the body of Christ, where there is neither man nor woman, only believers in the Word.

 

[deogratias]

ricatholic:

Since it is a small minority that join orders and a small minority of orders that are even radical, they are vastly outnumbered by those that are extremely uber orthodox, say opus dei types.

Peace

Hopefully you are right but we really have no statistics. I worry most about the nuns who teach our children.