Theology of the Body Article in "U.S. Catholic"

[Journeyman]

Please take a look at the following article by a self-proclaimed feminist theologian in “U.S. Catholic”. Wow, talk about agendas! Real shame that so called Catholic publications publish so many articles of dissent like this one.

uscatholic.org/2005/09/featb0509.htm

How would you respond to an article like this?

The shame of it is that this is one of the publications in our parish’s office. Our parish has no orthodox publications available. Real Shame!

 

[Journeyman]

As I went back and read this article again, it is actually sad that feminist have a tough time seeing through their fogged up feminist glasses. Everything is viewed with the vision and agenda of a feminist. They are always ready to strike back, they are always suspicious of anything talking about differences between men and women. Instead they miss the main points of an article or a discussion or in this case, the writer misses the sheer genius of the John Paul II and instead laments about women not being priests, about contraception etc…

 

[stanley123]

Journeyman:

How would you respond to an article like this?
!

According to the article:
“It is well-known that the overwhelming majority of U.S. Catholics do in fact use artificial contraception.”
“After much thought and prayer, they decided that contraception was the best solution for them. Freedom from fear of conception has had a very positive impact on their relationship and their family life as a whole.”
Positive impact on the relationship? I thought it was a mortal sin to use ABC? Why do Catholic theologians writing in Catholic magazines now say that being in mortal sin has a positive impact ?

 

[fix]

stanley123:

I thought it was a mortal sin to use ABC? Why do Catholic theologians writing in Catholic magazines now say that being in mortal sin has a positive impact ?

It is a mortal sin in most cases. One would be hard pressed to claim an involuntarily formed conscience in this culture.

The theologian in this piece places herself above the Church and claims equal authority as the magisterium.

 

[contemplative]

Month after month

Issue after issue

Sadly that magazine qualifies to be used as cheap personal tissue in the outhouse.http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y188/ginnyroc/disgust.gif

Why is that magazine still in publication? Who in the heck is buying it? What is their readership number? Can’t someone put it out of it’s misery? Can’t someone force them to change the title.? Isn’t a lawsuit in order for defamation of the Catholic Church?

 

[kev7]

Susan A. Ross has excommunicated herself with this article.

What she doesn’t realize is that you can’t be a feminist and a catholic at the same time. Feminism is bascially another religion.

For John Paul II, God is always the bridegroom, never the bride; God is the one who acts, who invites. We, the brides, are the ones who respond. While there is a profound truth to this metaphor in that God is the one who issues us the invitation, I am uncomfortable with the gendered way that this comes across and its implications for real-life marriages, and indeed for society at large.

In an article in America magazine last fall, I asked the question, “Can God be a bride?” My hopeful answer was “yes,” if we as men and women are really both created in God’s image and likeness, if we as women and men are both vehicles of God’s grace to each other.

What she fails to understand here is that we are only like God when we are perfect mothers and perfect fathers respectivly.

There is what he called a “special genius” in womanhood that is oriented toward relationship and nurturing. And, because of the essential differences between men and women, only men can be ordained priests, as they represent Christ the bridegroom in relation to his bride, the church.

My response: No one could deny the obvious differences between the sexes. There are fundamental differences that exist at the genetic level and other differences that seem to accompany being male or female within a given society. Nature and culture are intertwined in complex ways, and a definitive answer as to which differences are “natural” and which are “cultural” is impossible.

Why do feminsts always try to make their case based on exceptions from natural world? Why do they never ask the question, “What does God want for me?” “What is the kingdom of God like?” What is the spirtual nature of men and women?

Does she not understand that there is such a thing known as divine inspiration? Does she not accept the fact that John Paul II is a great man who wrote with the inspirited of the holy spirit?

My response: It is well-known that the overwhelming majority of U.S. Catholics do in fact use artificial contraception. But mere numbers cannot constitute a genuine theological response. This may mean that the overwhelming majority of Catholics are morally mistaken. Yet I think it is worth asking whether there is any wisdom in their experience.

Here we go again with her trying to look at the behavior of humanity for justification. Doesn’t she realize that we all must strive for perfection in the eyes of God? If everyone in the neighborhood started doing crack it doesn’t mean that it is ok.

This woman is just plain stupid.

As John Paul II placed a high premium on complementarity as the recognition that we are not complete on our own, let me suggest another way of expressing it: The wisdom of the clergy is not complete without the wisdom of the lay faithful.

This is the part that is the most disturbing. Who does she think that she is? does she really think that the wisdom of the catholic church is from the clergy? Doesn’t she realize that the clergy simply protect the wisdom that was given to us by Jesus?
It is not for us to argue with the wisdom of Christ.

doesn’t the bible say that “The wisdom of man is foolishness!”

 

[stanley123]

fix:

One would be hard pressed to claim an involuntarily formed conscience in this culture.
.

I am not sure I understand what is meant here.

 

[kev7]

The more I read articles like this the more I am inspired to create a website that debunks them all.

I think I’ll include a section with profiles of people who have excommunicated themselves and/or are anti-Catholic.
I will post their address and contact information

 

[mosher]

The more I read the article the more I realized that she had not read the Theology of the Body. The obvious indicator of this is that she does not recognize the subtile and blunt duscussion of how each person man or woman each are not only either masculine or feminine in their subjectivity according to their natural gender but that also there is a bit of the other in each because Man was created with masculinity and femininity contained within until the creation of Eve and then some of the other remained within the other. This basic point is so clear in the writtings of JPII that I can’t believe that the author of this article actually read anything other than the opening and concluding paragraph of each audience.

 

[kev7]

mosher:

The more I read the article the more I realized that she had not read the Theology of the Body. The obvious indicator of this is that she does not recognize the subtile and blunt duscussion of how each person man or woman each are not only either masculine or feminine in their subjectivity according to their natural gender but that also there is a bit of the other in each because Man was created with masculinity and femininity contained within until the creation of Eve and then some of the other remained within the other. This basic point is so clear in the writtings of JPII that I can’t believe that the author of this article actually read anything other than the opening and concluding paragraph of each audience.

You are most likely correct about this. She is making a living from the articles she writes. I doubt that she even had time to read the entire book. Let alone take the time to reflect on it, accept it as an inspired work, and pray to God for understanding.

 

[fix]

stanley123:

I am not sure I understand what is meant here.

I was responding to a post that said contraception is a mortal sin. While I cannot read people’s hearts I am saying that many claim contraception is not a mortal sin because their decisions do not fulfill the three criteria for an act to be a mortal sin. I know many reading this will claim most contraceptionists are not in mortal sin because the contraceptionists have not properly formed their consciences.

In other words, most folks who claim to be Catholic, and in full communion, know that the Church teaches contraception ought not be done, yet do it anyway and try to justify it as the author of this piece tries.

 

[JimG]

While there is a profound truth to this metaphor in that God is the one who issues us the invitation, I am uncomfortable with the gendered way that this comes across. . .

Heaven forbid that anything should come across as “gendered.” We’ve moved beyond that now, haven’t we?

 

[mosher]

JimG:

Heaven forbid that anything should come across as “gendered.” We’ve moved beyond that now, haven’t we?

Yeah, unfortunatelly she does not understand that it is vitally important to understanding the nature of God that He be refered to as a He. While He does not have a body per se He does have a masculine compliment to us and has instructed us by divine revelation to refer to Him as Father.