Refute Elaine Pagal, and Feminist Gnostics

[Candescent]

I hope that I have put this in the correct forum…
I am trying to interest my daughter in the Catholic church, she is drawn to Christ and Mary, but in her college they are reading Elaine Pagals and the like, which is giving her a very anti Catholic bias. They are also talking about the ( I thought completely discredited) idea that a worldwide matriarchal goddess culture ( M. Gimutas…ect) was violently overrun by patriarchal Christians.

Can anyone give me, or point me toward some succinct material refuting these ideas? There is so much to study, digest and then discuss, that I’m afraid I won’t have compelling answers for her in time.

And one more thing, her professor claims that in the bible Christ says ‘not to have sex’. Did I miss something? I don’t know of any passages which could even be miss interpreted to mean that…?

 

[Gorgias]

And one more thing, her professor claims that in the bible Christ says ‘not to have sex’. Did I miss something? I don’t know of any passages which could even be miss interpreted to mean that…?

Some of the Gnostic writings call themselves “gospels”, even though the Church (who, by definition, is who identifies what’s in the canon of Scripture and what’s not) says that they’re not part of the Bible. In some of these writings, then, there’s the idea that the flesh is evil and the spirit good and therefore, any physical activity (e.g., sex) is evil. In these writings, then, they have Christ saying that it’s wrong to have sex.

To summarize, then: it’s not the Bible, it’s not one of the Christian Gospels, but it’s a writing that on its own authority calls itself a ‘gospel’. Within that context, you have the kinds of statements you’re being confronted with.

Here’s the ‘beauty’ of Pagels’ (and her cohorts’) claims: since she’s essentially claiming a conspiracy theory (of a mysogynistic Church vs all women), anything the Church says, she’ll end up countering with “well, it wasn’t like that in the beginning – and the Church not only changed it, but got rid of all the evidence that they changed it!” Neat trick, that…

 

[christofirst]

Check out the writings of Philip Jenkins, in particular the book, Hidden Jesus; How the Search for Jesus Lost its Way. He does a fine job of refuting Elaine Pagels and others with a similar revisionist agenda.

 

[christofirst]

Oops. The Jenkins book is Hidden Gospels; How the Search for Jesus Lost its Way.

 

[dshix]

I hope that I have put this in the correct forum…
I am trying to interest my daughter in the Catholic church, she is drawn to Christ and Mary, but in her college they are reading Elaine Pagals and the like, which is giving her a very anti Catholic bias. They are also talking about the ( I thought completely discredited) idea that a worldwide matriarchal goddess culture ( M. Gimutas…ect) was violently overrun by patriarchal Christians.

Can anyone give me, or point me toward some succinct material refuting these ideas? There is so much to study, digest and then discuss, that I’m afraid I won’t have compelling answers for her in time.

And one more thing, her professor claims that in the bible Christ says ‘not to have sex’. Did I miss something? I don’t know of any passages which could even be miss interpreted to mean that…?

Yeah, so if Christ commanded to “not have sex,” he’d essentially be commanding Christianity to exterminate itself, since without sex you have no… new people.

I’m sorry, but no legit religious leader is THAT STUPID.

 

[Gorgias]

Yeah, so if Christ commanded to “not have sex,” he’d essentially be commanding Christianity to exterminate itself, since without sex you have no… new people.

No; he’d be commanding Christianity to regenerate itself each generation through evangelization.

 

[dshix]

No; he’d be commanding Christianity to regenerate itself each generation through evangelization.

Which means that either (1) the Church would die out because they failed to evangelize enough, or (2) the Church would die out AND kill off the rest of the world once everyone is Catholic.

 

[tabycat]

Yeah, so if Christ commanded to “not have sex,” he’d essentially be commanding Christianity to exterminate itself, since without sex you have no… new people.

I’m sorry, but no legit religious leader is THAT STUPID./QUOTE

'Mother Ann Lee and the Shakers tried the ‘no sex’ route and they lasted only about 300 years.

 

[Gorgias]

Which means that either (1) the Church would die out because they failed to evangelize enough,

…no, since, as Gamaliel said, “if it’s not of God, it’ll fail, but if it is, you won’t be able to stop it”.

or (2) the Church would die out AND kill off the rest of the world once everyone is Catholic.

And if that were God’s plan for the end times, then what would the problem be with that?

(On the other hand, you’re assuming that folks wouldn’t slip up and sin and have sex and have babies, right? 'Cause we all know that we’re perfect and sinless… )

 

[Candescent]

Oops. The Jenkins book is Hidden Gospels; How the Search for Jesus Lost its Way.

Thank you, I’ll check that out right away.

 

[Dale_M]

Yeah, so if Christ commanded to “not have sex,” he’d essentially be commanding Christianity to exterminate itself, since without sex you have no… new people.

I’m sorry, but no legit religious leader is THAT STUPID.

It would be stupid only if Christians didn’t believe that Christ would return during their lifetime…

Although I am not sure if Christ advised people not to marry, St. Paul certainly did.

1 Now in regard to the matters about which you wrote: “It is a good thing for a man not to touch a woman,”*

2 but because of cases of immorality every man should have his own wife, and every woman her own husband.

6 This I say by way of concession,* however, not as a command.

**7 *Indeed, I wish everyone to be as I am, but each has a particular gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.

8 Now to the unmarried and to widows, I say: it is a good thing for them to remain as they are, as I do,

9 but if they cannot exercise self-control they should marry, for it is better to marry than to be on fire.

**10 *To the married, however, I give this instruction (not I, but the Lord): A wife should not separate from her husband

11 —and if she does separate she must either remain single or become reconciled to her husband—and a husband should not divorce his wife.

nccbuscc.org/bible/1corinthians/7/#v1

One of the challenges of early Christianity was dealing with Christ’s delay in returning and why having children was not morally inferior to being celibate.

 

[Dolezal]

I am trying to interest my daughter in the Catholic church, she is drawn to Christ and Mary, but in her college they are reading Elaine Pagals and the like, which is giving her a very anti Catholic bias.

Deo gratias, but at some point she may be taught the popular theory that the Cult of Mary is a continuation of the Cult of Isis. Or that Catholic depictions of the Virgin and Child are based on that of Isis and Horus. There is no historical connection between the Cult of Mary and the Cult of Isis. The theory is based on the logical fallacy that correlation equals causation, which is not a sound historical approach. For more on this, see Is Catholicism Pagan?.

They are also talking about the ( I thought completely discredited) idea that a worldwide matriarchal goddess culture ( M. Gimutas…ect) was violently overrun by patriarchal Christians.

Maybe she is referring to the Venus figurines, which have been found in Europe and Asia from France to as far as Siberia, from 35,000 BC to 10,000 BC. According to some theories they are a representations of a fertility goddess, proof of a widespread mother goddess religion, or even sex toys. The fact is, no one knows. Needless to say, there were no Christians in the Paleolithic Age.

When Christianity came into existence, there existed no “worldwide matriarchal goddess culture.” The Christianization of ancient Rome was not particularly violent. Not until the end of the fourth century were pagan temples actively destroyed and the pagan priests arrested, by which time Christianity had become the majority religion.

And one more thing, her professor claims that in the bible Christ says ‘not to have sex’.
Did I miss something? I don’t know of any passages which could even be miss interpreted to mean that…?

No, her professor is an idiot if he really said that.

 

[Dolezal]

Some of the Gnostic writings call themselves “gospels”, even though the Church (who, by definition, is who identifies what’s in the canon of Scripture and what’s not) says that they’re not part of the Bible. In some of these writings, then, there’s the idea that the flesh is evil and the spirit good and therefore, any physical activity (e.g., sex) is evil. In these writings, then, they have Christ saying that it’s wrong to have sex.

To summarize, then: it’s not the Bible, it’s not one of the Christian Gospels, but it’s a writing that on its own authority calls itself a ‘gospel’. Within that context, you have the kinds of statements you’re being confronted with.

Here’s the ‘beauty’ of Pagels’ (and her cohorts’) claims: since she’s essentially claiming a conspiracy theory (of a mysogynistic Church vs all women), anything the Church says, she’ll end up countering with “well, it wasn’t like that in the beginning – and the Church not only changed it, but got rid of all the evidence that they changed it!” Neat trick, that…

Yes, the gnostic gospels have no historical value. They lack any connection to the apostolic period or the people associated with the apostles. They were opposed from the very beginning by Irenaeus for historical reasons. Irenaeus knew Polycarp who was a student of the Apostle St. John. In his Letter to Florinus, a priest from Rome who was convinced by the gnostic Valentinus that God was the author of evil, he writes “these [gnostic] doctrines, the presbyters who were before us, and who were companions of the apostles, did not deliver to you.”

 

[_Abyssinia]

I hope that I have put this in the correct forum…
I am trying to interest my daughter in the Catholic church, she is drawn to Christ and Mary, but in her college they are reading Elaine Pagals and the like, which is giving her a very anti Catholic bias. They are also talking about the ( I thought completely discredited) idea that a worldwide matriarchal goddess culture ( M. Gimutas…ect) was violently overrun by patriarchal Christians.

Can anyone give me, or point me toward some succinct material refuting these ideas? There is so much to study, digest and then discuss, that I’m afraid I won’t have compelling answers for her in time.

And one more thing, her professor claims that in the bible Christ says ‘not to have sex’. Did I miss something? I don’t know of any passages which could even be miss interpreted to mean that…?

Pale was raised an atheist

Articles refuting Elaine Pagel’s writings

Gnosticism, Anti-Catholicism and the Da Vinci Code

More Serious Attacks on Church Lurk Behind ‘Code’

New Testament scholar Luke Timothy Johnson has written an article about her writings but you have to be a paid subscriber of Commonweal magazine to see it. I think the full article is also available here

Gnostics’ favorite scholar gets a free pass from critics

RE: The Origin Of Satan, for Beth T.

The Pagels Imposture

Getting Satan Behind Us

Beyond Good and Evil?

 

[Mintaka]

Well, first of all, the Gnostic books are pretty much all insulting to women. The ones that are the least insulting, like the “Gospel of Mary,” allow as how some women have men’s souls, unlike the rest that are just evil animals! (Yay.) Most of them say that women are imperfect yucky dirty bloody critters that only exist because the world got broken by a depressed and angry demigoddess (and that goes for the world in general, blah blah blah). Basically, everybody would be happier if they got out of this prison world, but you can’t unless you’re a perfect person and you know the secret magic password that the founder of this here Gnostic cult will teach you if you give him all your money and time, etc.

Real patristics works are pretty darned interesting, and women are at the center of quite a few of them. Like St. Perpetua’s prison diary. Like the Desert Mothers. Like St. Gregory of Nyssa’s deathbed conversation with his sister and teacher, St. Macrina, which she spent cheering him up and talking about automatons as a proof of God’s existence. Or St. Methodius of Olympus’ witty Symposium of the Ten Virgins, which is full of strong female Christian characters. Like St. Jerome’s large corps of middle-aged female Roman students and their daughters, almost all of whom were formidable forces for Christianity and good.

Studying Gnosticism is boring and a little creepy. I got a lot more wholesome fun out of my Nessie and UFO period as a kid.

 

[Candescent]

Pale was raised an atheist

Articles refuting Elaine Pagel’s writings

Gnosticism, Anti-Catholicism and the Da Vinci Code

More Serious Attacks on Church Lurk Behind ‘Code’

New Testament scholar Luke Timothy Johnson has written an article about her writings but you have to be a paid subscriber of Commonweal magazine to see it. I think the full article is also available here

Gnostics’ favorite scholar gets a free pass from critics

RE: The Origin Of Satan, for Beth T.

The Pagels Imposture

Getting Satan Behind Us

Beyond Good and Evil?

These were extremely helpful, thank you!

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

…They are also talking about the ( I thought completely discredited) idea that a worldwide matriarchal goddess culture ( M. Gimutas…ect) was violently overrun by patriarchal Christians…

That “idea” is discredited in actual religious studies, let alone anthropology, but the refutations of Gimutas are relegated to academic journal and books and Gimutas books keep getting printed for the popular, conspiracy-minded, “goddess worshipping” reader–someing Wiccan author Ronald Hutton flat-out admits in his seminal Triumph of the Moon