Wonder if Paul would of permitted Sister Ann to teach?

[BRB]

I recently heard Catholic Church support Paul’s decision on women not being allowed to talk/instruct … based on fact it was probably the females who were doing most of the talking in tongues. Possibly disrupting the early Church masses, and Paul was frustrated by events.

IMO … if Paul had met today’s Sister Ann, he would not of held his views so strongly.

Don’t get me wrong … I’m a big fan of Paul’s, but, always wondered what caused him to feel so strongly on this matter. I also know his teaching has chafed many good women.

Ideas ?

 

[Mintaka]

Women were permitted to teach. You will notice that when St. Paul gives advice to St. Timothy, Paul notes that Timothy learned the faith from his mother and his grandmother.

Women were not allowed to teach publicly during Mass, in the manner of a priest/bishop, and women were not allowed to take off their headcoverings in church and prophesy publicly during Mass. But that’s hardly the same as “weren’t allowed to teach”, “weren’t allowed to prophesy”, or even “weren’t allowed to preach”, since plenty of the female martyrs preached up a storm in court or at their place of execution.

Deaconesses (wives of deacons, or old women who were beyond suspicion) and canonesses (their assistants) did a great deal of teaching to women who couldn’t easily go to church because their non-Christian husbands wouldn’t give permission. Canonesses in fact founded many schools for women, which lasted from early Christian times up almost to our own day, besides performing many charitable activities. The various orders of nuns and sisters performed similar charities as time went on.

Throughout time, we have had many famous women saints portrayed in the act of teaching: St. Anna teaching her daughter Mary to read, and Mary teaching Jesus in turn; St. Catherine of Alexandria lecturing the philosophers; and many more. There were many famous early Christian women preachers and prophetesses, as well. They just didn’t do their thing publicly during Mass.

 

[BRB]

Women were not allowed to teach publicly during Mass, in the manner of a priest/bishop, and women were not allowed to take off their headcoverings in church and prophesy publicly during Mass. But that’s hardly the same as “weren’t allowed to teach”, “weren’t allowed to prophesy”, or even “weren’t allowed to preach”, since plenty of the female martyrs preached up a storm in court or at their place of execution.

.

I’m not sure I see the connection you make here … saying teaching for women is only disallowed in Mass.

!st Timothy 2:11-15 … would seems to forbid teaching in any setting … otherwise, why would he bring up the first Eve and childbearing aspects, etc ?

In todays times … women do read the Bible in Mass, but don’t give the homily.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

I’m not sure I see the connection you make here … saying teaching for women is only disallowed in Mass.

!st Timothy 2:11-15 … would seems to forbid teaching in any setting … otherwise, why would he bring up the first Eve and childbearing aspects, etc ?

In todays times … women do read the Bible in Mass, but don’t give the homily.

You have a point BRB. St Paul seems to qualify his statement with:

A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.

So apparently it would have to do with a woman teaching men. This would certainly cause some raised eyebrows and pursed lips in many Catholic Universities and even Seminaries!

On the other hand maybe St. Paul is referring to husbands and wives and their proper role with each other. But either way, there’s going to be some raised eyebrows and pursed lips in abundance!

 

[Mintaka]

Apparently, St. Paul felt that, since women had absolute authority over children for the first few years of their lives, and since women were busy teaching each other, that women shouldn’t also be “in authority” over men.

But honestly, the paradigm here is the one from classical times, of a bishop or a pedagogue (schoolteacher) teaching from his seat while his listeners stood attentively. A pedagogue had a big ol’ stick and whacked the students around a lot, or whipped them. You can see where St Paul wouldn’t be happy with this sort of behavior by a woman teacher to a grown man. Since a lot of Roman “new women” who claimed to be philosophers and hung out in philosophy circles were kinda loose (and dressed that way – braiding their hair, coloring it, and not wearing headcoverings, just like the fashionable prostitutes did), you can see where it might give people the wrong idea about the Church.

OTOH, teaching in the home was much like homeschooling is now.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Apparently, St. Paul felt that, since women had absolute authority over children for the first few years of their lives, and since women were busy teaching each other, that women shouldn’t also be “in authority” over men.

But honestly, the paradigm here is the one from classical times, of a bishop or a pedagogue (schoolteacher) teaching from his seat while his listeners stood attentively. A pedagogue had a big ol’ stick and whacked the students around a lot, or whipped them. You can see where St Paul wouldn’t be happy with this sort of behavior by a woman teacher to a grown man. Since a lot of Roman “new women” who claimed to be philosophers and hung out in philosophy circles were kinda loose (and dressed that way – braiding their hair, coloring it, and not wearing headcoverings, just like the fashionable prostitutes did), you can see where it might give people the wrong idea about the Church.

OTOH, teaching in the home was much like homeschooling is now.

The only problem I see with an argument of the times being quite different then, is that it puts everything in Scripture on this footing. That everything was said in such and such a way, because that was how the culture was. This is basically the argument if favor of women priests.

St. Paul was caught up into the seventh heaven, and had been taught by Christ himself not by the Apostles; He says so himself. So suggesting he is just a product of his times may not be a satisfactory answer.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

I’m not sure I see the connection you make here … saying teaching for women is only disallowed in Mass.

!st Timothy 2:11-15 … would seems to forbid teaching in any setting … otherwise, why would he bring up the first Eve and childbearing aspects, etc ?

In todays times … women do read the Bible in Mass, but don’t give the homily.

And only the ordained men may read the gospels at mass (except parts of the passion narratives).

 

[Claire_from_DE]

IMHO there may be good reasons for women not teaching at mass. I think men accept instruction from men better than from women whereas women are open to being taught by men or women. So it was really for the good of the men that this was done, altho Paul may not have meant it that way. And some women, like myself, have a tendency to take over and that would not have been good for the men in the congregations.

I wonder if other women see women as being more naturally religious and men needing encouragement to be active in the church?

 

[Refugium]

Don’t get me wrong … I’m a big fan of Paul’s, but, always wondered what caused him to feel so strongly on this matter. I also know his teaching has chafed many good women.

Ideas ?

You do realize that St. Paul wasn’t just spouting his own personal opinion, right? You do know that his writings are inspired by God Himself?

 

[jcrichton]

I wonder if other women see women as being more naturally religious and men needing encouragement to be active in the church?

Hi, Claire!

…not just women… it is a fact everywhere I go. Women are more religious than men. In the NY NJ DL area I’ve witnessed that very fact–and it is not just simply that there are more females than males in the Church… both single females and married/coupled females do a better representation and are, usually, more involved in the Church than their counter parts.

This increases the problem of Paul’s adamant stance against women preaching/teaching.

So are we to claim that Paul was and is wrong and that we know better–some “Christians” claim to be closer to the Holy Spirit than all of the Apostles were… they say homosexuality is OK and they ordain homosexual “priests” and “bishops.” Some do not go that far they simply say that men and women are the same and ordain women as “priests” and “bishops” (yeah even if they happen to be lesbians–just “don’t ask and don’t tell”).

These modern teachings are forced onto the Holy Scriptures. We cannot seek to conform the Holy Scriptures to the world; rather, we should aspire to conform the world to the Holy Scriptures: to be a friend to the world means to be an enemy of Yahweh God.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Lily_Marlene]

I RECENTLY READ IN THE NEWS THAT A WOMAN PROFESSOR WHO TAUGHT HEBREW AND ARAMAIC WAS FIRED FROM A BAPTIST SEMINARY ON THE BASIS OF PAUL’S COMMENTS ON WOMEN TEACHERSIN HIS LETTER TO TIMOTHY. SHE TOOK HER CASE TO COURT AND THE COURTS UPHELD THE SCHOOL’S DECISION! SHE WAS AN INSTRUCTOR FOR 5 YEARS AT LEAST.

WERE THEY JUSTIFIED? HOW MANY INSTRUCTORS ARE THERE WHO TEACH THESE TWO LANGUAGES?

I HAVE OFTEN WONDERED HOW MANY TROUBLESOME SCRIPTURAL PASSAGES ARE PUZZLING DUE TO TRANSLATIONS. ARE TRANSLATIONS SUBJECT TO THE SAME ABUSE THAT REPEATED RUMORS ARE?

ON THE OTHER HAND, WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF GOD, WHO HAS BEEN HIS COUNSELOR?

 

[jcrichton]

I RECENTLY READ IN THE NEWS THAT A WOMAN PROFESSOR WHO TAUGHT HEBREW AND ARAMAIC WAS FIRED FROM A BAPTIST SEMINARY ON THE BASIS OF PAUL’S COMMENTS ON WOMEN TEACHERSIN HIS LETTER TO TIMOTHY. SHE TOOK HER CASE TO COURT AND THE COURTS UPHELD THE SCHOOL’S DECISION! SHE WAS AN INSTRUCTOR FOR 5 YEARS AT LEAST.

WERE THEY JUSTIFIED? HOW MANY INSTRUCTORS ARE THERE WHO TEACH THESE TWO LANGUAGES?

I HAVE OFTEN WONDERED HOW MANY TROUBLESOME SCRIPTURAL PASSAGES ARE PUZZLING DUE TO TRANSLATIONS. ARE TRANSLATIONS SUBJECT TO THE SAME ABUSE THAT REPEATED RUMORS ARE?

ON THE OTHER HAND, WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF GOD, WHO HAS BEEN HIS COUNSELOR?

Hi, Lily Marlene!

…I’m no scholar/theologian… it seems to me that it is not an issue of translation…

The issue you’ve presented seems to me to be a political one: allow Christians to win one, for a change–that should distract them from real issues as removing the words God and Christ from society or equating the Constitutional freedom of religion to mean anything and everything but Christianity or separating the state from the Church by extinguishing any and all rights to preach, in a temple, the Word of God…

If we read the Holy Scriptures carefully, we will find that Paul statements are in direct relationship to the Faith; men are called to be priests in the Temple of God… is this a means to demean women? No. Just compare with the other passage of Paul where he talks about women bieng obedient to their husbands while he compels the husbands to love their wives as themselves… to imitate Christ who gave His Life for His Wife, the Church!

…when reason fails remember that ignorance can be other than bliss–perhaps the action taken against the professor was due more to envy than observance of Paul’s words.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[BRB]

I personally think Paul was most respectful and appreciative of women in the church. Some even believe that he was married … since Pharisees were married men.

And, in his letters to the churches … Paul would single out certain women in his greetings. I don’t recall his teachings on Mary … but, we know he had major respect for the Mother of our Lord.

Paul on occasion would say he had no specific direction on a certain topic from the Lord … but, would then go ahead and express his opinion on the matter - relying on H.S. [When he talked on marriage, etc. … for example],

Perhaps his beliefs on ability / appropriateness of women as teachers … was based on his opinion, and not a specific directive from the Lord.

Regarding bishops and deacons … those roles appear clearly reserved for men. But, women as seminary teachers, or bible teachers, or as inspirational messengers to us would seem to be highly desirable.

Women are clearly set apart for the Lord’s work … in many different ways. Sister Ann for example, is as devoted and spiritual as they come. And, a highly effective spokesperson for the Church in today’s times.

Anyone who doubts that this Sister is on fire for the Lord … needs to tune in to Catholic Radio and let her ‘dish out’ some Soul Food on daily basis.