Saints' days in LOTH

[Batfink]

I noticed when praying the office that the Common of Doctors refers several time to ‘this man’, which got me wondering. It turns our that the Common of Doctors may be used for Teresa of Avila but not for Catherine of Siena or Teresa of Lisieux (the other female Doctors). Anyone know why? It seems incongruous since the fact that they are Doctors is surely more noteworthy than that they are virgins, and yet that’s the Common they both get.

In addition, any ideas on why (apart from the obvious historico-cultural reasons) the Common of Virgins is used only for women? John (the beloved disciple) is the only man whose virginity is mentioned at all (in LOTH) and he obviously gets the common of Apostles, but there are other men whose chastity is as least as well documented as that of many of the women and yet…?

All help appreciated, thank you. BTW, am not trying e.g. to promote any kind of feminist counter-church/mount a campaign against the status quo etc., am just genuinely interested in how the commons were decided.

 

[OraLabora]

there are other men whose chastity is as least as well documented as that of many of the women and yet…?

Chastity is not the same as virginity. A man can be sexually active, and still be chaste.

Of course he has to be married to do so. I think you probably meant celibate.

 

[Evan]

I think it is up to you to made modifications as required.

For the memorial of Timothy and Titus we were to use the common of pastors. Everything there is about ‘this man’ where we need to change this to ‘these men’

 

[PhilotheaZ]

It turns our that the Common of Doctors may be used for Teresa of Avila but not for Catherine of Siena or Teresa of Lisieux (the other female Doctors). Anyone know why? It seems incongruous since the fact that they are Doctors is surely more noteworthy than that they are virgins, and yet that’s the Common they both get.

First, I respectfully challenge your assertion that “thefact that they are Doctors is surely more noteworthy than that they are virgins.” There are many paths to holiness. How can we know which is more important? Perhaps in the eyes of the world, someone who does “active” things (great writers, teachers, healers, etc.) may seem greater, but I firmly believe that in the eyes of God some of the greatest saints are those who never did anything “noteworthy,” those we never heard of. A woman who chooses to live her earthly life as the bride of Christ (in anticipation of the Church’s eternal marriage to Christ which hopefully we will all experience in the world to come) is not a “lesser” saint because she did not write volumes of wisdom.

As to how the Commons are selected for these particular saints, I can only hazard a guess. I have the impression that the writings of Catherine and Therese of Lisieux were done more as expressions of their own private spiritual experiences, and the writers themselves probably did not write them as lessons nor expect them to reach wide audiences (although, happily, they eventually became available to the rest of us). Little Therese was recording events from her life under obedience to her superior, and I doubt she ever thought her writings would go any further than her own convent. Catherine’s writings describe her own mystical experiences, but they were not written as instructions per se. This is not to minimize the importance of their writings, but rather that they were not written in an official teaching capacity.

The writings of Teresa of Avila were done more specifically as instructional materials for others, as guides to prayer and holiness of life for the nuns under her authority. She was more of an “official” teacher (doctor).

In addition, any ideas on why (apart from the obvious historico-cultural reasons) the Common of Virgins is used only for women? John (the beloved disciple) is the only man whose virginity is mentioned at all (in LOTH) and he obviously gets the common of Apostles, but there are other men whose chastity is as least as well documented as that of many of the women and yet…?

The texts of the Common of Virgins reflect the role of the virgin as the bride of Christ. To me they would seem odd if used for a male saint.