True Womanhood/Manhood

[Sarcelle]

I don’t think that’s an assumption that is consciously made. My idea of true manhood is inspired by my step-father. I think people often think of manhood and womanhood in terms of marriage because that’s when it becomes a very clear and tangible thing. Fatherhood is manly, etc. Obviously there are priests and religious who are extremely masculine or feminine, but the fact is that most people associate it with marriage because thats what most people have experience of.

IMO, I just think true manhood or womanhood is just being the man or woman that God has called you to be, accepting your ‘God given’ role as such and living this out to the best of your ability.

What is this God given role?

 

[edwest2]

What is this God given role?

God, not radical feminists and their false gospel, tells us - man and woman - what is our proper role. Yes, some will not get married for whatever reason, but most of us will and too many have not been taught how to find a friend, a companion, a person that, while not perfect, you can create a family with.

But the constant noise in the background boils down to: “Men are evil and marriage needs to be destroyed, especially marriage as God intended.”

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

That is the greatest challenge we face as human beings today.

Ed

 

[Xantippe]

**God, not radical feminists and their false gospel, tells us - man and woman - what is our proper role. **Yes, some will not get married for whatever reason, but most of us will and too many have not been taught how to find a friend, a companion, a person that, while not perfect, you can create a family with.

But the constant noise in the background boils down to: “Men are evil and marriage needs to be destroyed, especially marriage as God intended.”

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

That is the greatest challenge we face as human beings today.

Ed

You still haven’t said what it is.

 

[AdamP88]

There is an absolute difference in the roles the two sexes can play is in the giving of life. By natural law, only women can give physical life by serving as mothers and only men can be fathers. By supernatural law, only men can give spiritual life to the faithful by serving as priests. Women have the privilege of being intimately associated in the giving of life through birth, and men have the privilege of being intimately associated in the giving of life through the priesthood.

Mary displayed the fullest extent of the maternal calling by becoming the Mother of Christ, who is God, while Christ displayed the fullest extent of the priestly calling by becoming our High Priest before his Father.

In a certain sense all men are called to motherhood and all women to fatherhood.
I also would say that men do more naturally tend to want to work outside the home and women tend to be more natural caregivers and homemakers. Not to say that it can’t be the other way around, but I don’t think that’s purely a social construct.

 

[Sarcelle]

There is an absolute difference in the roles the two sexes can play is in the giving of life. By natural law, only women can give physical life by serving as mothers and only men can be fathers. By supernatural law, only men can give spiritual life to the faithful by serving as priests. Women have the privilege of being intimately associated in the giving of life through birth, and men have the privilege of being intimately associated in the giving of life through the priesthood.

Mary displayed the fullest extent of the maternal calling by becoming the Mother of Christ, who is God, while Christ displayed the fullest extent of the priestly calling by becoming our High Priest before his Father.

In a certain sense all men are called to motherhood and all women to fatherhood.
I also would say that men do more naturally tend to want to work outside the home and women tend to be more natural caregivers and homemakers. Not to say that it can’t be the other way around, but I don’t think that’s purely a social construct.

So what I understand about your take on women is that in either natural or supernatural law, women are meant to give birth. Men in natural law become fathers and in spiritual law become spiritual fathers through the office of priesthood. You equate the essence of womanhood to the physical act of giving birth in both natural and supernatural law.

So what about infertile women or unmarried women? Remember, not all women are blessed with either the ability or opportunity to become mothers. Surely, there must be more to womanhood than in giving birth. What about women who adopt?

Does it take marriage for a woman to truly achieve true womanhood? Otherwise she cannot give birth without involving sin.

What about women religious? Are they fake women because they have not given birth?

Aside from motherhood, what other markers are there to womanhood?

No one has given an answer yet. It seems all the definitions given are always intimately tied to marriage.

Where does this leave single women?

 

[AdamP88]

I said called to motherhood, of some description. Not give birth. I would also widen that out to “sisterhood”. I do believe that men and women have different things to offer and I do think that the complementarity of men and women is most obvious in marriage, also where the natural roles of men and women are most obvious. I don’t think that people are less man or woman because they’re not married. I think that one is most masculine or feminine when they are trying to follow the path that God has for them.

A man is most manly when he accepts his role from God as a brother or father. I mean both spiritual brother or father. I think as catholics we are required to be spiritual brother to all, and sometimes a spiritual father.

 

[edwest2]

So what I understand about your take on women is that in either natural or supernatural law, women are meant to give birth. Men in natural law become fathers and in spiritual law become spiritual fathers through the office of priesthood. You equate the essence of womanhood to the physical act of giving birth in both natural and supernatural law.

So what about infertile women or unmarried women? Remember, not all women are blessed with either the ability or opportunity to become mothers. Surely, there must be more to womanhood than in giving birth. What about women who adopt?

Does it take marriage for a woman to truly achieve true womanhood? Otherwise she cannot give birth without involving sin.

What about women religious? Are they fake women because they have not given birth?

Aside from motherhood, what other markers are there to womanhood?

No one has given an answer yet. It seems all the definitions given are always intimately tied to marriage.

Where does this leave single women?

Single women, and men, are called to live chaste lives. To live by the Commandments and Church teachings. Single people are not one size fits all. Some want to be single and have a job or vocation they are dedicated to. Some have become single after divorce or loss of their spouse. We are all called to do good works and be the kind of people God wants us to be. And we are taught that the Holy Spirit gives each of us certain Gifts as He wills. We are all called to do something.

For women, marriage and motherhood, or not. Friends, family and, if possible, service to others for single women.

Ed

 

[Bill_Martin]

The Catechism is full of examples. Young women and men were once taught how to behave in general and with each other. I was there when the US was more Christian, so I had no trouble finding a young lady and knew by her behavior that we were both on the same page. The SAME page. Then the radicals appeared and said: Deny what you’ve been taught. It’s wrong. We will replace it with something totally wrong while telling you it is right.

Do young singles today know how to date? Do they care? What do they believe?

Do young singles today understand how to form relationships between each other? At all?

Do young singles today understand courtship? Going steady?

I submit that thanks to constant propaganda, the answer is no. For too many.

Ed

“I often notice Evangelicals following this fallacy, especially the patriarchal complentarians.” I have never heard of such a thing. It sounds weird. Mind explaining?

This is all true of singles looking to get married, but doesn’t really answer the question. Defining manhood/womanhood by how one acts in courting/dating/etc assumes the purpose of the single life is to get out of the single life.

I agree that true womanhood and manhood require appropriate behaviors toward the opposite sex, both while dating and in a marriage, but this does not imply that marriage is necessary. That’s a very common logical fallacy. You must be a good driver to race in NASCAR, but you do not need to race in NASCAR to be a good driver. You must be a true man to be a good father and husband, but you do not need to be a husband and father to be a true man. That is the real problem with trying to define everything about manhood and womanhood by their relation to marriage, and it’s a fallacy that a lot of fundamentalist Protestant groups (and many Catholics) fall into.

 

[Sarcelle]

This is all true of singles looking to get married, but doesn’t really answer the question. Defining manhood/womanhood by how one acts in courting/dating/etc assumes the purpose of the single life is to get out of the single life.

I agree that true womanhood and manhood require appropriate behaviors toward the opposite sex, both while dating and in a marriage, but this does not imply that marriage is necessary. That’s a very common logical fallacy. You must be a good driver to race in NASCAR, but you do not need to race in NASCAR to be a good driver. You must be a true man to be a good father and husband, but you do not need to be a husband and father to be a true man. That is the real problem with trying to define everything about manhood and womanhood by their relation to marriage, and it’s a fallacy that a lot of fundamentalist Protestant groups (and many Catholics) fall into.

This is the logical fallacy I was talking about. Just because a statement is true it does not necessarily follow that its commutation is true.

For example:
It takes a man to be a husband and father but it does not mean that the commutation, it takes a husband and a father to be a true man, is true.

A lot of people however believe that the commutation is true and even teach it to be true.