SSPX and women in positions of authority

[GerardP]

So now I’m a liberal? Funny, Jesus Himself may have been called that if He walked here today.

No. Jesus can’t be a liberal. Liberals believe in a changing truth. God is unchanging. As it was in the beginning , is now and ever shall be. “I Am” is another proof of this. By the way, we’re not talking about political “liberalism” but rather the liberalism condemned by the Church especially by Leo XIII.

He was not bound by empty customs imposed on people from without but taught us to let our behavior be guided from within.

Empty customs are one thing, but he never ignored customs that were related to and harmonized with the natural order. “Guided from within” is pure modernist dreck. Aren’t we guided from without by an objective Divine Revelation and a physical Church?

That is why He ignored the social customs of the day with regard to women and actually spoke to them (a no-no in the society of His day).

He didn’t ignore the social customs, he corrected them. I don’t see anywhere where he advocated women abandoning their femininity in pursuit of equality with men.

In addition to indicating His regard for women He was teaching us to let our actions be guided by not by arbitrary rules and customs but by His principles (not man’s) the protection of which is bequeathed to our Church.

His principles. Not the principles of the modern world that insist that women start acting like men in every activity under the sun simply because “men can do it.”

Until all these rules and regulations, do’s and don’ts you’ve posted here become official Church teaching, I’ll follow my conscience and God-given free will, thank you.

But there are two things you aren’t considering. First, is that the Church has taught all of these things and they are conveniently ignored. There was a Church that did teach things that are still bound from prior to Vatican II.

Second, you are not following your free-will as if it is detached and pure, you are following the arbitrary rules and customs of our decadent age. Knowingly or unknowingly you are imbibing in a philosophy that has been built to be anti-God, anti-Catholic and anti-natural as the genders were created by God. A person’s conscience must be formed by the Church’s teaching to have any validity as any kind of guide.

You can pretend to have your cake and eat it too, but you will be held culpable for trying to serve God and Mammon. That sounds harsh but that’s the way the devil wants you to hear it. We are in war against the world, the flesh and the devil. Until people realize this and get out of the polly-anna utopian Christianity attitude adopted in the last few decades, there is going to be more degradation of women, men and the family.

 

[whatevergirl]

Oh go sing Melissa Etheridge songs about it. “Bigotry and misinformation” are just buzz words used by those who drink the Kool-aid poured out by the modern, pagan, dehumanized world.

No. That’s an exaggeration. It’s not “all” of Eve’s fault. But the fact is that she was instrumental in his downfall.

That’s a rather lousy argument and some false modern reasoning. The Marathon as one example developed out of the legend of Phillippides needing to deliver messages of military import across great distances. Marathon to Athens and Athens to Sparta. Just look at the sports themselves. Wrestling, Javelin throwing and later we have jousting, fencing and a whole host of other military inspired sports. In modern times it was believed that increasing the vigor of the young would prevent war by making each country a fiercer competitors.

Not having time means it’s not that important to you. Not having the patience means that you don’t have the arguments to be persuasive.

Catholic dogma is not opposed to reason. There is a nature in females that is incompatible with the priesthood and it is compatible with males. Avoiding that issue and hiding behind a papal command means that you can’t take what is implicit in the teaching and find it’s corollary in God’s created order. So, you can’t argue that women who engage in “ultimate fighting” are abandoning their femininity.

Ah…yes. the babysitter Pope argument. Arguments from silence aren’t arguments in favor of something. Do you want to do something wrong until a Pope issues a statement or would you rather stay on the side of right? Popes aren’t watchdogs that give people the right to behave in any way they feel until corrected.

Another exaggeration. No one has called it a sin. It’s been called an error. I guess debating the substance of the argument is too much so you have to set up straw men to rail against.

Pius XII gave many allocutions on fashion. He especially condemned the idea that objectively inappropriate and immodest fashions were determined by cultural relativity. He called it an “absurd sophism.”

Honor thy Father and thy Mother.

(not honor thy parents as equals, there is a separate way to honor the Mother different from the Father.)

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.

(there is an implication of inequality here–a warning to men that certain women are under the protection of other men )

Thou shalt not bear false witness… (men pretending to be women, women acting like men.)

What is a absured is that anyone is arguing that women and men are unable to anything in mixed company. The argument is about sports and the inappropriateness of women intruding on a man’s sporting event in the name of a false and deceptive “equality.”

Woman was created to be the helpmate of the man. Not a co-equal partnership. After the Fall God delivers two separate punishments, one for the man, one for the woman.

So, my husband should not view our marriage as an equal partnership, according to you–but I should be looked at as ‘lesser than’ him? You can’t have it both ways, with what you are saying here. You can’t say…well, the woman was designed as a help mate. That doesn’t mean we were to be looked at as inferior, or less than a man. We are different, but thankfully in my marriage, my husband views me as his equal, not less than him, because he is a man. We serve one another in different ways, but he is not superior to me, because he is a man. You are entitled to your opinion, but that is not God’s truth…

 

[whatevergirl]

He didn’t ignore the social customs, he corrected them. I don’t see anywhere where he advocated women abandoning their femininity in pursuit of equality with men.

.

Why would a woman abandon her feminity if she is performing a job that is customarily a man’s job? I would imagine that you are against women in the army, marines, police force, etc…because this lowers their feminity? I’m female because God created me this way. I have an identity as a child of God–not because of what I do for a living. (I’m not in a male job as I list above, just making a general statement) You are not a man because you work in a man’s role…You are a man, because God created you this way.

We should be seeking our identities through God’s eyes, and if a woman is trying to ‘be like a man,’ I can see a problem with that, most definitely. But, it should be emphasized that just because a woman seeks to referee a basketball game for boys–she is not ‘abandoning her feminity.’ She is still feminine in the eyes of God. Maybe not to you–but you should be wary of judging others by what they choose to do for a living.

How about men who go into nursing? Who are cooks/chefs? Who stay at home while their wives work (because maybe the wife makes more)? Are these men crossing over into female roles? Or are we as a society too judgemental as to what people do for a living? I heard something that goes along with this, that we are not who we are based on what we DO. We are who we are in the eyes of God, and how we follow Him. I thought that was priceless.

 

[GerardP]

Why would a woman abandon her feminity if she is performing a job that is customarily a man’s job?

The question is, why wouldn’t a woman be abandoning her femininity if she’s doing a man’s job? She’s certainly not cultivating it. What is the deeper philosophical reason that makes a job naturally a man’s job to begin with?

I would imagine that you are against women in the army, marines, police force, etc…because this lowers their feminity?

Not lowers their femininity, it is opposed to their femininity.

I’m female because God created me this way. I have an identity as a child of God–not because of what I do for a living. (I’m not in a male job as I list above, just making a general statement)

But God created you in a female identity. What you do for a living should conform to your nature.

You are not a man because you work in a man’s role…You are a man, because God created you this way.

And I work in a man’s role because God created me a man. My role, my duties, my responsibilities are part and parcel of the nature God has given me. It would be wrong for me to engage in feminine roles and responsibilities and shirk my duties as a man.

We should be seeking our identities through God’s eyes, and if a woman is trying to ‘be like a man,’ I can see a problem with that, most definitely.

So, in order to be consistent, we shouldn’t be seeking our identities through society’s fallacy of ignoring gender roles. That is seeing things through the Devil’s eyes.

But, it should be emphasized that just because a woman seeks to referee a basketball game for boys–she is not ‘abandoning her feminity.’

That’s inconsistent. A man who seeks to be a transvestite actress (a la Tootsie) is abandoning his masculinity for a role that is feminine.

She is still feminine in the eyes of God. Maybe not to you–but you should be wary of judging others by what they choose to do for a living.

So, I can’t look at the transvestite cabaret singer and think that there is something wrong here? Ultimate Fighting for women isn’t wrong? Female bodybuiding isnt’ wrong? Female powerlifting? Female boxing? Aren’t they all still masculine and feminine respectively in God’s eyes? What is He to think of how they have treated what he has given to them?

How about men who go into nursing?

There are different kinds of “nursing,” some is suited to women, others are more suited to men. Though they are more properly labeled as therapists and physician’s assistants. When you think about “nursing” in its original definition, it’s kind of gross to associate that with men.

Who are cooks/chefs?

Cooks and chefs are two very different professions for one thing.

But, as I pointed out above, there is a huge difference in the approach to cooking between men and women. For example, Alton Brown and Giada DiLaurentis are completely different in their approaches and purposes for cooking. Neither has abandoned their gender identity because eating is a universal attribute.

But Giada (or any other populare female example Rachel Ray, Nigella Lawson, Pauls Dean) will surround their cooking shows with the larger intention of sharing and nurturing for a family.

Alton Brown’s “Good Eats” is about building a meal and all the gadgets and scientific data are about the proper achievement of a stated goal. He openly admits that he’s not interested in presentation but rather systematically making good food.

Who stay at home while their wives work (because maybe the wife makes more)? Are these men crossing over into female roles?

Yes. How much money is worth the loss of a woman’s femininity and a husband’s masculinity? How much is it worth to the children when they get half-baked mothering from the Father and second rate mothering from the Mother? How about the loss of dignity of the Father for letting the wife take his responsibilities?

And no, I’m not talking about the situations where a physical impediment requires a wife to work and care for a husband. In that case, the model is one of sacrifice.

Or are we as a society too judgemental as to what people do for a living?

Yes. This society demands that we “push the boundaries” of what was wisely ordered by God. We all have cell phones and nothing worthwhile to say. We slowly die in the suffocating unnatural isolation established by the modern world while being bewitched by a television showing an ironically titled show called “Survivor.” We forget our relationship with God while we will corporately decide who will be the next “American Idol.”

As G.K. Chesterton pointed out:

“The effect of this staleness is the same everywhere; it is seen in all drug-taking and dram-drinking and every form of the tendency to increase the dose. Men seek stranger sins or more startling obscenities as stimulants to their jaded sense. They seek after mad oriental religions for the same reason. They try to stab their nerves to life, if it were with the knives of the priests of Baal. They are walking in their sleep and try to wake themselves up with nightmares.”

I heard something that goes along with this, that we are not who we are based on what we DO. We are who we are in the eyes of God, and how we follow Him. I thought that was priceless.

Is not HOW we follow Him, what we DO? Is not our dignity (value) based in being a Child of God created by Him according to His order? So our created end is to follow his order. And if that is true, then any activity which is not ordered towards our end, is anti-thetical to His order and therefore devalues our selves. That is why women and men encroaching on areas that are not in accord with the roles pre-ordained by God is undignified.

 

[Nechasin]

I really think it is a matter of how we do something that determines our masculinity or femininity, not what we do. The cooking example is a great example of this. I’m sure GerardP will find fault with what I say, and point out something about female ultimate fighting. Pointing out the extremes is great, but doesn’t mean a whole lot in a rational conversation and people tend to dismiss you when you point out the extremes. The same thing about extremes occur in pro-life/pro-abortion debates (rape/incest). Debating the extremes doesn’t work. I personally have never met a female ultimate fighter and don’t think that they are in abundance in our society. Yes they exist, but not the norm. But oh well.

I do agree with him that we need to maintain our gender identities, but I don’t agree with him that what we do determines our gender identities.

 

[Margarite]

As I mentioned earlier, my mother has to work. I mean, if she did not work, we would not live. She has told this to her SSPX family, but they still think that she should quite. She does not work in a “man’s” job; she is a sales representative for a linen company. Most of her coworkers are men, and though they may have higher degrees than she does, they are not nearly as good at the job as she is.
If find it terrible, that my SSPX relatives would treat their own daughter/sister in this way.
They offered to pay for the private education of all six of us, even through college, if we would go to St. Marys Academy and St. Marys College. Of course, we had to say no because they are not in union with Rome and they would be teaching us something that would be contrary to what our parents have taught us. That is very confusing especially when aunts, uncles, and grandparents are also teaching contrary to the parents.
They won’t pay for us to go anywhere else. Next year I am hoping to go to Wyoming Catholic College. The tuition is around 22,000 for freshman year, and since I don’t have that kind of money in the bank and neither do my parents, so I will come out of college, at least $100,000 in debt. And that is double majoring with a scholarship worth $10,000.
It is especially sad, since they are mostly Catholic. I have a Presbyterian Great-Grandmother and a Mormon Aunt who are much more “Christian” and giving than our “Catholic” family.

My SSPX grandfather owns the Onyx Collection, a business that employs about half of St. Marys, and from what I have seen, most of SSPX people are like my SSPX family. :nope:

PS: thanks for the hint about Firefox, but I usually do this on my work computer, and I cannot download anything on it.

 

[latinmasslover]

The devil wants us worried…let’s hold fast to the Gospel–nothing will prevail against the Church Christ instituted. I do understand your points though–but take comfort in knowing that those faiths that appear to be flourishing, will not prevail over the one True Church.

(PS–Women working outside of the home–and having places of authority in the work place really is separate from the Church–and Jesus nor anywhere in the Bible do we see there being a problem with women holding places of ‘authority’ in public square) It is in the Church that we must hold true to Christ’s tradition of the Apostolic succession (being men)

I know they’ll never triumph over the Church, they can’t. The problems in the Church today don’t bother me myself; what’s is so infuriatings is how it scandalizes those that are not…well aquainted with her teachings.

As to your PS statement, please understand that I mean no disrespect in asking this (tones are so hard to know sometimes which is why I say this) but what makes you say that women held places of authority in public and that this was okay in the Church and Bible? Could you provide some examples please? Thanks.

 

[whatevergirl]

The question is, why wouldn’t a woman be abandoning her femininity if she’s doing a man’s job? She’s certainly not cultivating it. What is the deeper philosophical reason that makes a job naturally a man’s job to begin with?

Not lowers their femininity, it is opposed to their femininity.

But God created you in a female identity. What you do for a living should conform to your nature.

And I work in a man’s role because God created me a man. My role, my duties, my responsibilities are part and parcel of the nature God has given me. It would be wrong for me to engage in feminine roles and responsibilities and shirk my duties as a man.

So, in order to be consistent, we shouldn’t be seeking our identities through society’s fallacy of ignoring gender roles. That is seeing things through the Devil’s eyes.

That’s inconsistent. A man who seeks to be a transvestite actress (a la Tootsie) is abandoning his masculinity for a role that is feminine.

So, I can’t look at the transvestite cabaret singer and think that there is something wrong here? Ultimate Fighting for women isn’t wrong? Female bodybuiding isnt’ wrong? Female powerlifting? Female boxing? Aren’t they all still masculine and feminine respectively in God’s eyes? What is He to think of how they have treated what he has given to them?

There are different kinds of “nursing,” some is suited to women, others are more suited to men. Though they are more properly labeled as therapists and physician’s assistants. When you think about “nursing” in its original definition, it’s kind of gross to associate that with men.

Cooks and chefs are two very different professions for one thing.

But, as I pointed out above, there is a huge difference in the approach to cooking between men and women. For example, Alton Brown and Giada DiLaurentis are completely different in their approaches and purposes for cooking. Neither has abandoned their gender identity because eating is a universal attribute.

But Giada (or any other populare female example Rachel Ray, Nigella Lawson, Pauls Dean) will surround their cooking shows with the larger intention of sharing and nurturing for a family.

Alton Brown’s “Good Eats” is about building a meal and all the gadgets and scientific data are about the proper achievement of a stated goal. He openly admits that he’s not interested in presentation but rather systematically making good food.

Yes. How much money is worth the loss of a woman’s femininity and a husband’s masculinity? How much is it worth to the children when they get half-baked mothering from the Father and second rate mothering from the Mother? How about the loss of dignity of the Father for letting the wife take his responsibilities?

And no, I’m not talking about the situations where a physical impediment requires a wife to work and care for a husband. In that case, the model is one of sacrifice.

Yes. This society demands that we “push the boundaries” of what was wisely ordered by God. We all have cell phones and nothing worthwhile to say. We slowly die in the suffocating unnatural isolation established by the modern world while being bewitched by a television showing an ironically titled show called “Survivor.” We forget our relationship with God while we will corporately decide who will be the next “American Idol.”

As G.K. Chesterton pointed out:

“The effect of this staleness is the same everywhere; it is seen in all drug-taking and dram-drinking and every form of the tendency to increase the dose. Men seek stranger sins or more startling obscenities as stimulants to their jaded sense. They seek after mad oriental religions for the same reason. They try to stab their nerves to life, if it were with the knives of the priests of Baal. They are walking in their sleep and try to wake themselves up with nightmares.”

Is not HOW we follow Him, what we DO? Is not our dignity (value) based in being a Child of God created by Him according to His order? So our created end is to follow his order. And if that is true, then any activity which is not ordered towards our end, is anti-thetical to His order and therefore devalues our selves. That is why women and men encroaching on areas that are not in accord with the roles pre-ordained by God is undignified.

I agree with some of what you say–but not most. I think most of what you say if your opinion–which you are entitled to. God bless–thank you for chatting with me.

 

[GerardP]

So, my husband should not view our marriage as an equal partnership, according to you–but I should be looked at as ‘lesser than’ him?

Is your husband the head of your household or not? Or do you have a two-headed household?

Again, the females capitulate to the false premise that value (dignity) is determined by equality. That is false.

You can’t have it both ways, with what you are saying here. You can’t say…well, the woman was designed as a help mate. That doesn’t mean we were to be looked at as inferior, or less than a man.

Nonsense. That is like saying that the Blessed Mother is of less value than the Pope. But the Pope is of a different nature than the Blessed Mother and neither can do what the others function is. And when the Blessed Mother was on the Earth. She would have accepted the God-given authority of St. Peter and St. Linus after him.

We are different, but thankfully in my marriage, my husband views me as his equal, not less than him, because he is a man.

Equal in dignity but not in authority or function. Your husband’s duty is to get you and he and your children and whatever extensions you can make into the larger family and community to Heaven. Your job is to help him accomplish that.

We serve one another in different ways, but he is not superior to me, because he is a man.

He is the bishop of your home. He’s the top dog. That is the Church’s teaching.

You are entitled to your opinion, but that is not God’s truth

I disagree, if you could cite some appropriate and constant theological teaching of the Church, I might be swayed.

 

[GerardP]

I really think it is a matter of how we do something that determines our masculinity or femininity, not what we do. The cooking example is a great example of this.

How we do something is either in accord with or against our masculinity or femininity. Men doing enough feminine activities will forfeit much of their masculine identity. Why should women not also have this crisis? They do. But we don’t acknowledge it.

I’m sure GerardP will find fault with what I say, and point out something about female ultimate fighting. Pointing out the extremes is great, but doesn’t mean a whole lot in a rational conversation and people tend to dismiss you when you point out the extremes.

That’s because you will defend the less extreme versions of the same problem. “There’s nothing wrong with female referees in boys sports.” Well guess what? Today is the referee issue which is a problem. Tomorrow is ultimate fighting which is an outright perversion. If you can’t see the seeds of the one in the other, what kind of rationale will you accept?

The same thing about extremes occur in pro-life/pro-abortion debates (rape/incest). Debating the extremes doesn’t work.

It’s the people that are consistent about pro-life and not making exceptions that are considered the extreme. The Catholic Church is considered extreme.

I personally have never met a female ultimate fighter and don’t think that they are in abundance in our society. Yes they exist, but not the norm. But oh well.

How is this different from the female referee? Will it be a problem when female ultimate fighters are more abundant in numbers? Just what is the criteria you use to determine a problem? When it shows up or when it blows up?

I do agree with him that we need to maintain our gender identities, but I don’t agree with him that what we do determines our gender identities.

As I wrote above: “And I work in a man’s role because God created me a man. My role, my duties, my responsibilities are part and parcel of the nature God has given me. It would be wrong for me to engage in feminine roles and responsibilities and shirk my duties as a man.”

 

[dixieagle]

How we do something is either in accord with or against our masculinity or femininity. Men doing enough feminine activities will forfeit much of their masculine identity. Why should women not also have this crisis? They do. But we don’t acknowledge it.

That’s because you will defend the less extreme versions of the same problem. “There’s nothing wrong with female referees in boys sports.” Well guess what? Today is the referee issue which is a problem. Tomorrow is ultimate fighting which is an outright perversion. If you can’t see the seeds of the one in the other, what kind of rationale will you accept?

It’s the people that are consistent about pro-life and not making exceptions that are considered the extreme. The Catholic Church is considered extreme.

How is this different from the female referee? Will it be a problem when female ultimate fighters are more abundant in numbers? Just what is the criteria you use to determine a problem? When it shows up or when it blows up?

As I wrote above: “And I work in a man’s role because God created me a man. My role, my duties, my responsibilities are part and parcel of the nature God has given me. It would be wrong for me to engage in feminine roles and responsibilities and shirk my duties as a man.”

Gerard,

I am beginning to think that you are unhealthily obsessed with female “ultimate fighting.” And your ideas about male and female nurses are pretty ridiculous, too. Your views are so extreme as to make it difficult to take them seriously, but then again, you are apparently SSPX which is already beyond the pale.

Perhaps we should all keep in mind this excerpt from the more than 40 year old encyclical, Pacem in Terris:

“Human beings have also the right to choose for themselves the kind of life which appeals to them: whether it is to found a family—in the founding of which both the man and the woman enjoy equal rights and duties—or to embrace the priesthood or the religious life.”

The Vatican document “On the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World” (2004), while lengthy, deserves a thorough reading. It puts in context the Church’s view of the complementarity of the sexes, while promoting fair treatment of women in society. Here is a link:

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

So, do your own “manly” thing, whatever it is, but don’t presume to judge the career choices others make.

 

[SenorSalsa]

That’s a rather lousy argument and some false modern reasoning. The Marathon as one example developed out of the legend of Phillippides needing to deliver messages of military import across great distances. Marathon to Athens and Athens to Sparta. Just look at the sports themselves. Wrestling, Javelin throwing and later we have jousting, fencing and a whole host of other military inspired sports. In modern times it was believed that increasing the vigor of the young would prevent war by making each country a fiercer competitors.

they also competed naked becuase they believed it made them more capable of winning, if we base part of sport on the greek reasons, why not all of them?

Not having time means it’s not that important to you. Not having the patience means that you don’t have the arguments to be persuasive.

not having time means i was posting at midnight, and had school at 7 the next morning, i posted, then went to bed. Not having the patience means that there were so many bad arguments in the 9 pages i was beginning to get angry, and the best way to lose an argument is to base it on anger

No. Jesus can’t be a liberal. Liberals believe in a changing truth. God is unchanging. As it was in the beginning , is now and ever shall be. “I Am” is another proof of this. By the way, we’re not talking about political “liberalism” but rather the liberalism condemned by the Church especially by Leo XIII.

I would venture to say Jesus was very Liberal. He disregarded the established customs of the time, including rules made by the Pharisees, the ruling body, He is often mentioned by historians of the time of causing insurrections, He “cleansed” the Temple, changing how things worked.

two definitions of liberal: # having political or social views favoring reform and progress

tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition "​

He definately reformed practices on Earth. He was not bound by the orthodoxy of tradition extablished. Sounds Liberal to me.

The problem is that “Liberal” has become a bad word. I would say every Catholic is Liberal in some parts. We protest abortions, the established norm, there are other examples as well

If a male is so caught up by the sight of a female that it causes him to lose his mind, we should not punish the female. We should not stop temptation by avoiding it. Don’t forget that Jesus went to the desert because He knew the devil would tempt him there. Temptation is meant to be overcome, not avoided.

 

[whatevergirl]

Is your husband the head of your household or not? Or do you have a two-headed household?

My husband is considered the head, yes.

Again, the females capitulate to the false premise that value (dignity) is determined by equality. That is false.

I didn’t say that–but I agree–I do not wish to be a man–but we are equal in dignity and equal as human beings. We have different bodies, which would mean we were created for different purposes–to thwart the purposes God gave us, would be wrong. (ie: birth control, aborting babies, etc) But, for women to work in the same roles as men do–say in police roles, or as principals of schools, etc…is not thwarting God’s purpose.

Nonsense. That is like saying that the Blessed Mother is of less value than the Pope. But the Pope is of a different nature than the Blessed Mother and neither can do what the others function is. And when the Blessed Mother was on the Earth. She would have accepted the God-given authority of St. Peter and St. Linus after him.

Agreed

Equal in dignity but not in authority or function. Your husband’s duty is to get you and he and your children and whatever extensions you can make into the larger family and community to Heaven. Your job is to help him accomplish that.

*I like how your worded this. Again–not sure how the initial topic of this thread led you to say this? The female in question in this news story, is not thwarting her God given role as wife (I don’t know if she is married or not–just saying in general)…if our roles outside of the home, cause us to thwart God’s purpose for our lives–that is a different story. *

He is the bishop of your home. He’s the top dog. That is the Church’s teaching.

*The Church teaches this–but the Church does not teach that women should not be working in the world. In many civilzations, for matters of survival in many cases, women work in the fields, in factories, etc…to provide for their families. (Phillipines, Africa, etc) The Church has never taught that women should not hold jobs outside of the home–nor has the RCC ever said that women should stick to jobs that are strictly for females, which I’m sure you might think that is a broad spectrum. The Church’s stance will never change when it comes to clergy positions–it does not condemn or speak out against women working in positions of authority in the secular world. If you believe it does, please show me in the CCC where it protests against women working outside of the home, in jobs that, in your opinion, should only be for men. Please do not talk about female wrestlers/boxers, etc…they are not who we are talking about here. haha And those are not places of authority, anyways. Thank you, Gerard. *

 

[GerardP]

Gerard,

I am beginning to think that you are unhealthily obsessed with female “ultimate fighting.”

I think you are entirely too passive about each threshold of depravity against women that occurs.

And your ideas about male and female nurses are pretty ridiculous, too.

Oh right. Because you say so. I used to work as a patient advocate for several hospitals large and small. I’ve literally met hundreds of nurses. I know what I’m talking about.

Your views are so extreme as to make it difficult to take them seriously, but then again, you are apparently SSPX which is already beyond the pale.

Extreme by what standards? Beyond what pale? Find me a criteria by which to judge things and then let’s put your whacko pointless, unanchored opinions to the test.

Perhaps we should all keep in mind this excerpt from the more than 40 year old encyclical, Pacem in Terris:

"Human beings have also the right to choose for themselves the kind of life which appeals to them: whether it is to found a family—in the founding of which both the man and the woman enjoy equal rights and duties—or to embrace the priesthood or the religious life."

What about it? The Church has always taught that women can’t be coerced into marriage.

The Vatican document “On the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World” (2004), while lengthy, deserves a thorough reading. It puts in context the Church’s view of the complementarity of the sexes, while promoting fair treatment of women in society.

The language is softer but JPII even mentions that society would benefit if it would let women be women and do the things that God has ordained women to do.

“As John Paul II has written, “it will redound to the credit of society to make it possible for a mother – without inhibiting her freedom, without psychological or practical discrimination and without penalizing her as compared with other women – to devote herself to taking care of her children and educating them in accordance with their needs, which vary with age”.”

And later on:

“On a more concrete level, if social policies – in the areas of education, work, family, access to services and civic participation – must combat all unjust sexual discrimination, they must also listen to the aspirations and identify the needs of all. The defence and promotion of equal dignity and common personal values **must be harmonized with attentive recognition of the difference and reciprocity between the sexes **where this is relevant to the realization of one’s humanity, whether male or female.”

It doesn’t rule out proper boundaries between the sexes, it rules out “unjust” discrimination.

So, do your own “manly” thing, whatever it is, but don’t presume to judge the career choices others make.

Right, I have no right to judge the career choices of male wetnurses, dragqueens, cross-dressers or two women that want to beat the hell out of each other in front of cameras and spectators for money. Heck, let’s add pornstars to the mix. They’re great! They’re doing their thing!

Hah! Meanwhile, you’re resorting to patronizing feminist babble.

And also, don’t try to put me on the hotseat as the persecutor.

This whole thread is about a private school,-- where the parents have specifically chosen to send their children precisely because of the philosophy and religious emphasis taught —is being persecuted for not towing the line with the modern, confused and insane secular attitude.

So you go off and do your “manly” thing if it makes you feel equal. Don’t expect everyone to applaud your “breaking down boundaries” when all you’re really doing is degrading society, the family and God’s gifts of masculinity and femininity.

 

[whatevergirl]

I don’t liken porn stars, drag queens, etc to a female refereeing a boys basketball game. Thinking that there is a comparison is actually pretty degrading to women. To make such a leap…that if women referee sporting events…then, this paves the way for the degradation of women in porn? Huh?

Porn is a disgusting industry on its own…and has nothing to do with the original topic that the OP started.

 

[dixieagle]

I think you are entirely too passive about each threshold of depravity against women that occurs.

Oh right. Because you say so. I used to work as a patient advocate for several hospitals large and small. I’ve literally met hundreds of nurses. I know what I’m talking about.

Extreme by what standards? Beyond what pale? Find me a criteria by which to judge things and then let’s put your whacko pointless, unanchored opinions to the test.

What about it? The Church has always taught that women can’t be coerced into marriage.

The language is softer but JPII even mentions that society would benefit if it would let women be women and do the things that God has ordained women to do.

“As John Paul II has written, “it will redound to the credit of society to make it possible for a mother – without inhibiting her freedom, without psychological or practical discrimination and without penalizing her as compared with other women – to devote herself to taking care of her children and educating them in accordance with their needs, which vary with age”.”

And later on:

“On a more concrete level, if social policies – in the areas of education, work, family, access to services and civic participation – must combat all unjust sexual discrimination, they must also listen to the aspirations and identify the needs of all. The defence and promotion of equal dignity and common personal values must be harmonized with attentive recognition of the difference and reciprocity between the sexes where this is relevant to the realization of one’s humanity, whether male or female.”

It doesn’t rule out proper boundaries between the sexes, it rules out “unjust” discrimination.

Right, I have no right to judge the career choices of male wetnurses, dragqueens, cross-dressers or two women that want to beat the hell out of each other in front of cameras and spectators for money. Heck, let’s add pornstars to the mix. They’re great! They’re doing their thing!

Hah! Meanwhile, you’re resorting to patronizing feminist babble.

And also, don’t try to put me on the hotseat as the persecutor.

This whole thread is about a private school,-- where the parents have specifically chosen to send their children precisely because of the philosophy and religious emphasis taught —is being persecuted for not towing the line with the modern, confused and insane secular attitude.

So you go off and do your “manly” thing if it makes you feel equal. Don’t expect everyone to applaud your “breaking down boundaries” when all you’re really doing is degrading society, the family and God’s gifts of masculinity and femininity.

Gerard, now you’ve really spun out of control. I’m normal and “feminine” by anyone’s standards. I stayed at home with my girls the entire time they were in school, loving it. I’ve worked in education and the arts, and am now home again to be able to spend more time with my husband, and volunteer instead. The type of “feminism” I embrace is pro-life and supports equality in social, political and economic spheres. I believe individuals should have access to careers based on their specific abilities, not on pre-conceived archaic notions. If a woman cannot “make the cut”, she shouldn’t be in the profession. I believe in high standards.

I also believe in common sense, and also in the fact that we are no longer in the middle ages. I think that this is exactly the view the Church has espoused.

Off now to make dinner for my sweet, reasonable, very masculine husband

 

[whatevergirl]

Gerard, now you’ve really spun out of control. I’m normal and “feminine” by anyone’s standards. I stayed at home with my girls the entire time they were in school, loving it. I’ve worked in education and the arts, and am now home again to be able to spend more time with my husband, and volunteer instead. The type of “feminism” I embrace is pro-life and supports equality in social, political and economic spheres. I believe individuals should have access to careers based on their specific abilities, not on pre-conceived archaic notions. If a woman cannot “make the cut”, she shouldn’t be in the profession. I believe in high standards.

I also believe in common sense, and also in the fact that we are no longer in the middle ages. I think that this is exactly the view the Church has espoused.

Off now to make dinner for my sweet, reasonable, very masculine husband

Great post.

 

[seekerz]

You know GerardP, I seem to remember Jesus washing His disciples feet to show them that they were not called to “lord it” over those over whom they had authority but to be of loving service. How does that jive with your referring to the spiritual head of the home as “top dog”? I find the use of this term offensive both to a man’s masculinity and to his wife’s femininity.

 

[dixieagle]

You know GerardP, I seem to remember Jesus washing His disciples feet to show them that they were not called to “lord it” over those over whom they had authority but to be of loving service. How does that jive with your referring to the spiritual head of the home as “top dog”? I find the use of this term offensive both to a man’s masculinity and to his wife’s femininity.

I think you have hit the nail on the head with this; the “top dog” reference is offensive and shows that poster’s true colors. Perhaps it’s time for those of us with more reasonable points of view to ignore him.

 

[GerardP]

I don’t liken porn stars, drag queens, etc to a female refereeing a boys basketball game. Thinking that there is a comparison is actually pretty degrading to women. To make such a leap…that if women referee sporting events…then, this paves the way for the degradation of women in porn? Huh?

I’m really curious. Why do you take my answer and divorce it from the argument in which it responds to?

I mean seriously, do you actually read the posts that I’m replying to?

dixieagle wrote:

“but don’t presume to judge the career choices others make.”

That was what I was replying to. Watch out though, you can’t judge career choices people make.

Porn is a disgusting industry on its own…and has nothing to do with the original topic that the OP started.

I’m just following the train of thoughts that the posters disagreeing with me are using and taking them to their obvious conclusions.

It’s an absurd argument that is being made and I’m pointing out the absurdity in holding to that position.