Z
Zundrah
Guest
Amen!
- Status
S
swampboy
Guest
THE GREAT BIBLICAL COMMENTARY OF CORNELIUS À LAPIDE says the following regarding this verse:
"*Ver. 34.—Let women keep silence in the churches. Ambrose, and after him Anselm, say that even the prophetesses are to keep silence: (1.) Because it is against the order of nature and of the Law, in Gen. iii. 16, for women, who have been made subject to men, to speak in their presence. (2.) Because it is opposed to the modesty and humility which befits them. (3.) Because man is endowed with better judgment, reason, discursive power, and discretion than woman. (4.) She is rightly bidden, says S. Anselm, to keep silence, because when she spoke it was to persuade man to sin (Gen. iii. 6). (5.) To curb her loquacity, for, as it is said, “when two women quarrel it is like the beating of two cymbals or the clanging of two bells.” This might readily enough happen in the church if they were allowed to teach. About this silence enjoined on women, see notes on 1 Tim. ii. 9. How much is it then against the command of S. Paul, against all law, right, and seemliness, for a woman to be the head of a church!
Tropologically woman stands for passion and lust, man for reason. Let the first then be silent and obey the reason. Cf. S. Chrysostom (Hom. 37 in Morali.). Aristotle (de Nat. Animal. lib. ix. c. 1) says: “Woman is more pitiful and more inclined to tears than man; also more envious, more ready to complain, to utter curses, and to revenge; she is besides more anxious and desponding than man, more pert and untruthful, and more easily deceived.”
Ver. 35.—And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home. Hence Primasius says that men ought to be well taught enough to teach their wives in matters of faith. But what if they are themselves untaught, as is often the case? Who, then, is to teach the woman? Primasius answers that they have preachers, confessors, and teachers to instruct them. Again, it is better for them to be ignorant of some things that are not essentials than to ask and learn about them in public, to their own shame and the scandal of the Church.
You may say that it is recorded in S. Luke ii. 38 that Anna the prophetess spoke in the Temple to all concerning Christ. The answer is that she spoke to all in private, and one by one, not in a church assembly, nor in the Temple properly so called, for neither man nor woman, but the priests alone, were allowed to enter the Temple at Jerusalem. Anna, then, spoke to the women singly in the court of the women; for, as Josephus says, the women had a court distinct from the men’s court.
You may say again, “Nuns sing in their churches.” I answer that theirs is not a church in the sense of being an assembly of the faithful, but merely a choir of nuns. The Apostle does not forbid women to speak or sing among women, but he forbids it in the common assembly only, where both men and women meet. In this Cajetan agrees. Moreover, S. Paul does not allude to such public speaking as is sanctioned by authority, but that particular and individual speech which consists in teaching, exhorting, and asking questions.
Add to this that he is speaking of married women only, for he orders such to keep silence in the church and be subject to their husbands, and ask them at home what they want to know*."
Similar to the Haydock commentary, which I see as a result of the time period during which the commentaries were written…however, the interpretation of modern society would not be the same, as most people would find such an interpretation sexist. What is interesting is that as Catholics we are supposed to follow the traditions of the Church and teachings of Saints/Fathers…but as is clearly demonstrated here some things have changed in the past 400 years as humanity has developed…
"*Ver. 34.—Let women keep silence in the churches. Ambrose, and after him Anselm, say that even the prophetesses are to keep silence: (1.) Because it is against the order of nature and of the Law, in Gen. iii. 16, for women, who have been made subject to men, to speak in their presence. (2.) Because it is opposed to the modesty and humility which befits them. (3.) Because man is endowed with better judgment, reason, discursive power, and discretion than woman. (4.) She is rightly bidden, says S. Anselm, to keep silence, because when she spoke it was to persuade man to sin (Gen. iii. 6). (5.) To curb her loquacity, for, as it is said, “when two women quarrel it is like the beating of two cymbals or the clanging of two bells.” This might readily enough happen in the church if they were allowed to teach. About this silence enjoined on women, see notes on 1 Tim. ii. 9. How much is it then against the command of S. Paul, against all law, right, and seemliness, for a woman to be the head of a church!
Tropologically woman stands for passion and lust, man for reason. Let the first then be silent and obey the reason. Cf. S. Chrysostom (Hom. 37 in Morali.). Aristotle (de Nat. Animal. lib. ix. c. 1) says: “Woman is more pitiful and more inclined to tears than man; also more envious, more ready to complain, to utter curses, and to revenge; she is besides more anxious and desponding than man, more pert and untruthful, and more easily deceived.”
Ver. 35.—And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home. Hence Primasius says that men ought to be well taught enough to teach their wives in matters of faith. But what if they are themselves untaught, as is often the case? Who, then, is to teach the woman? Primasius answers that they have preachers, confessors, and teachers to instruct them. Again, it is better for them to be ignorant of some things that are not essentials than to ask and learn about them in public, to their own shame and the scandal of the Church.
You may say that it is recorded in S. Luke ii. 38 that Anna the prophetess spoke in the Temple to all concerning Christ. The answer is that she spoke to all in private, and one by one, not in a church assembly, nor in the Temple properly so called, for neither man nor woman, but the priests alone, were allowed to enter the Temple at Jerusalem. Anna, then, spoke to the women singly in the court of the women; for, as Josephus says, the women had a court distinct from the men’s court.
You may say again, “Nuns sing in their churches.” I answer that theirs is not a church in the sense of being an assembly of the faithful, but merely a choir of nuns. The Apostle does not forbid women to speak or sing among women, but he forbids it in the common assembly only, where both men and women meet. In this Cajetan agrees. Moreover, S. Paul does not allude to such public speaking as is sanctioned by authority, but that particular and individual speech which consists in teaching, exhorting, and asking questions.
Add to this that he is speaking of married women only, for he orders such to keep silence in the church and be subject to their husbands, and ask them at home what they want to know*."
Similar to the Haydock commentary, which I see as a result of the time period during which the commentaries were written…however, the interpretation of modern society would not be the same, as most people would find such an interpretation sexist. What is interesting is that as Catholics we are supposed to follow the traditions of the Church and teachings of Saints/Fathers…but as is clearly demonstrated here some things have changed in the past 400 years as humanity has developed…
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
In the context of the time the Scripture was written, and for the group it is being written for and about, I believe that many gentile women, especially of the Greek or Hellenistic culture of that time, were notorious for **disruptive speaking. **Basically you had the equivalent then of hecklers coming into places of worship and loudly contradicting the leaders. . . mostly (though not always) women who came into an assembly as paid ‘agitators’ either for another ‘god’ or element, or simply rabble rousing for the ‘principle of the thing’. (The Greek tradition of public speaking and oratory had its shining lights in history, but it also had its ‘dim bulbs’ so to speak.)
IOW, St. Paul wasn’t doing a hissy “keep dem wimmen in the kitchen” speech. Rather, he was addressing a very specific problem --that many gentile women, coming not only from a culture of ‘priestesses’ being the norm, and further from a culture where a given woman could indeed ‘speak for herself’, hold property, and engage in trade, etc., would be prone to err in trying to thus ‘hellenize’ the Faith by insisting that ‘it’ conform to their worldview.
Precisely BECAUSE Christianity did respect women was St. Paul’s message necessary. . .without it there was grave danger of a split whereby the gentile element would have pushed for the ‘norm’ of female priests and tried to completely overcome the Jewish tradition --the God-given tradition furthermore–of male priesthood.
IOW, St. Paul wasn’t doing a hissy “keep dem wimmen in the kitchen” speech. Rather, he was addressing a very specific problem --that many gentile women, coming not only from a culture of ‘priestesses’ being the norm, and further from a culture where a given woman could indeed ‘speak for herself’, hold property, and engage in trade, etc., would be prone to err in trying to thus ‘hellenize’ the Faith by insisting that ‘it’ conform to their worldview.
Precisely BECAUSE Christianity did respect women was St. Paul’s message necessary. . .without it there was grave danger of a split whereby the gentile element would have pushed for the ‘norm’ of female priests and tried to completely overcome the Jewish tradition --the God-given tradition furthermore–of male priesthood.
O
OchsFam
Guest
I found the commentary in the Navarre Bible to be helpful describing this passage. This link is to the Google books copy which has this passage on page 108-109.
Think of how God chose to become man and think of who the Church honors above all other creations. Think about which sex the Church is associated with. Think and pray on these before you start acting as though the Church thinks less of women because they have a different role in the Church.
God Bless.
I think passing a verse of the Bible off as something meant to show us what the Church used to do is a mistake. There are no passages in scripture which are not there for a reason. I think the verbiage may sound harsh, but I do not think it was meant to be demoralizing or to diminish women. Women simply have a different role in the Church. Swampboy’s post illustrates that the times have changed in regard to what men think of women, but not what their role is in the Church. God did not come to diminish women and the Church does not put women below men.
Think of how God chose to become man and think of who the Church honors above all other creations. Think about which sex the Church is associated with. Think and pray on these before you start acting as though the Church thinks less of women because they have a different role in the Church.
God Bless.
L
Lisa44
Guest
Hi Swampboy,
Thank you for sharing that.
According to the above then, women should not be reciting the rosary aloud in church. No? Especially not leading the rosary when there are men and women in the church.
I really wonder if I should be saying the rosary in church or just at home. What do you all think?
One time I was overcome with tears and it was awful. After that I just decided I should only pray the rosary at home. And when I feel like crying during the Mass, I just tell myself to quit it because Jesus didn’t cry on the cross.
Its true, women are more emotional, who would deny that?
- Status