The role of women as wives and mothers

helenofbritain

St Mary MacKillop of the Cross, pray for us
Oct 24, 2006
10,294
700
Canberra
✟21,561.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
lol.. that quote was not even written by St. Ambrose.. It was written by PJPII when he was talking about regarding the issues of slavery. And is actually in a relation to a post that supports the headship of the husband..

Ah, no. He was quoting St Ambrose.

“Authentic conjugal love presupposes and requires that a man have a profound respect for the equal dignity of his wife: You are not her master…but her husband; she was not given you to be your slave, but your wife…Reciprocate her attentiveness to you and be grateful to her for her love.”[/I]

Notice how it says dignity? nothing about authority..He is relating that the wife should not have the lessened dignity of that of a slave..

Are we asking for authority? I'm asking for equality. JPII says I've got it.

And can you answer the, about 20-30 quotes from the ECF? helonfbritan??

ECFs are lovely people, with much wisdom to impart. Some things they said still stand, undeveloped, to this day. Other things, like their views on the role of women, have been developed over time. I think what Pope John Paul II said (as I have already quoted) in Mulieris Dignitatem kind of blows their ideas out of the water:

The author of the Letter to the Ephesians sees no contradiction between an exhortation formulated in this way and the words: "Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife" (5:22-23). The author knows that this way of speaking, so profoundly rooted in the customs and religious tradition of the time, is to be understood and carried out in a new way: as a "mutual subjection out of reverence for Christ" (cf. Eph 5:21). This is especially true because the husband is called the "head" of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church; he is so in order to give "himself up for her" (Eph 5:25), and giving himself up for her means giving up even his own life. However, whereas in the relationship between Christ and the Church the subjection is only on the part of the Church, in the relationship between husband and wife the "subjection" is not one-sided but mutual.

Does that explain my position clearly?
 
Upvote 0

helenofbritain

St Mary MacKillop of the Cross, pray for us
Oct 24, 2006
10,294
700
Canberra
✟21,561.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
In Detroit you can buy a house for as low as $5,000. Granted it may have had the plumbing ripped out.

But there are options... we may not find them desirable but they are almost always there. But we tend to expect a certain "quality" of life and this almost always entails things that are not listed under needs but under wants. I am as guilty as many and more so then some.
Jack, you are unwittingly being very unfair to Assisi. Housing prices in Australia are completely out of whack with what people earn. Assisi's husband's job is of a kind that only exists in a capital city. Read this - Sydney homes more expensive than world cities | The Daily Telegraph - and understand they are not "choosing" to live somewhere expensive, but that in order for Mr Assisi to have a job where he can support his family in the area he was trained in, they need to live in Sydney. And they aren't even near the city. They are on the fringe-iest fringe bit, where houses still cost a fortune.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Assisi
Upvote 0

helenofbritain

St Mary MacKillop of the Cross, pray for us
Oct 24, 2006
10,294
700
Canberra
✟21,561.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Helenofbritain has asked us over and over again to go back to her original post and comment on it. I think she deserves that respect, don’t you?

I know who wrote that passage, HoB, but I won’t say – let others have a try, too.

It is a beautiful, true and meaningful passage (as is the whole opus), but I have a big objection to it. It is wholly about the WOMAN, and HER vocation of motherhood. The author does not really compare or contrast the woman’s role with that of the man. The woman is told that her first responsibility is towards her children and husband – as if this was not equally true of the man! The woman is told that she has the right to work outside the home – the man is not told that he has the right to stay at home! The woman is reminded (not in this passage, but elsewhere in this work) repeatedly of the special blessing and holiness that goes with motherhood – the man is not dignified with similar words about fatherhood. As a result, the overall effect confirms the old misconception: woman’s vocation is motherhood; a man’s is – everything else!

Note that this passage does not say that the ideal thing for a mother is to stay at home. It only says that she needs to put her children first. If she has a professional vocation (and millions of us do – medicine, research etc!) and she can balance the two things (for example, if she lives in an extended family where there is a grandmother or an aunt to take care of the kids during the day – something that DOES happen, even in the West!), she is encouraged to contribute to society outside the home. This is a vital point. We generally talk of the woman who is forced to work, or chooses to work, for financial reasons, true or selfish. It is true that this is the "majority problem", but we should not forget the sizable minority of women who have a real professional interest/vocation. You cannot possibly ask all of them to give up that vocation or give up having children!
Hi Global! :hug: Can't believe I went to bed and missed you!

Thank you for responding so thoughtfully. It is sad that men's fatherhood isn't more celebrated. This is the best I could come up with:

Men as Husbands and Fathers

25. Within the conjugal and family communion-community, the man is called upon to live his gift and role as husband and father.

In his wife he sees the fulfillment of God's intention: "It is not good that the man should be alone, I will make him a helper fit for him,"(67) and he makes his own the cry of Adam, the first husband: "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."(68)

Authentic conjugal love presupposes and requires that a man have a profound respect for the equal dignity of his wife: "You are not her master," writes St. Ambrose, "but her husband; she was not given to you to be your slave, but your wife.... Reciprocate her attentiveness to you and be grateful to her for her love."(69) With his wife a man should live "a very special form of personal friendship."(70) As for the Christian, he is called upon to develop a new attitude of love, manifesting towards his wife a charity that is both gentle and strong like that which Christ has for the Church."

Love for his wife as mother of their children and love for the children themselves are for the man the natural way of understanding and fulfilling his own fatherhood. Above all where social and cultural conditions so easily encourage a father to be less concerned with his family or at any rate less involved in the work of education, efforts must be made to restore socially the conviction that the place and task of the father in and for the family is of unique and irreplaceable importance.(72) As experience teaches, the absence of a father causes psychological and moral imbalance and notable difficulties in family relationships, as does, in contrary circumstances, the oppressive presence of a father, especially where there still prevails the phenomenon of "machismo," or a wrong superiority of male prerogatives which humiliates women and inhibits the development of healthy family relationships.

In revealing and in reliving on earth the very fatherhood of God,(73) a man is called upon to ensure the harmonious and united development of all the members of the family: he will perform this task by exercising generous responsibility for the life conceived under the heart of the mother, by a more solicitous commitment to education, a task he shares with his wife,(74) by work which is never a cause of division in the family but promotes its unity and stability, and by means of the witness he gives of an adult Christian life which effectively introduces the children into the living experience of Christ and the Church.

It's lovely, but it's not the celebration of fatherhood that women get about motherhood, is it? But clearly, Dads are meant to be involved in family life - not leave it all to the Mums - are shouldn't be working so hard they can't help out when they get home.

Oh, and their wives are their equals. I love that bit.
 
Upvote 0

helenofbritain

St Mary MacKillop of the Cross, pray for us
Oct 24, 2006
10,294
700
Canberra
✟21,561.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
What does one do with someone like Saint Gianna Molla? I mean she was a doctor????

ANd what does one do with that pesky Proverbs 31 woman? Out selling stuff and buying property and instructing others and clothed with strength?

She considers a field and buys it;
out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
17 She sets about her work vigorously;
her arms are strong for her tasks.
18 She sees that her trading is profitable,
and her lamp does not go out at night.
19 In her hand she holds the distaff
and grasps the spindle with her fingers.
20 She opens her arms to the poor
and extends her hands to the needy.
21 When it snows, she has no fear for her household;
for all of them are clothed in scarlet.
22 She makes coverings for her bed;
she is clothed in fine linen and purple.
23 Her husband is respected at the city gate,
where he takes his seat among the elders of the land.
24 She makes linen garments and sells them,
and supplies the merchants with sashes.
25 She is clothed with strength and dignity;
she can laugh at the days to come.
26 She speaks with wisdom,
and faithful instruction is on her tongue.
27 She watches over the affairs of her household
and does not eat the bread of idleness.
28 Her children arise and call her blessed;
her husband also, and he praises her:
29 “Many women do noble things,
but you surpass them all.”
Who was St Gianna Molla? (I could google, but I like asking questions :D)

And Proverbs 31 Woman is my hero. After Our Lady.
 
Upvote 0

helenofbritain

St Mary MacKillop of the Cross, pray for us
Oct 24, 2006
10,294
700
Canberra
✟21,561.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Agree with it totally. Written by one of my favorites in one of my four favorite things he wrote. Women and men are equal but not the same. And we can not ignore the personal dimension as well. What I mean by that is non-gender related skills and God given talents play a role in how active a particular person (no matter what gender) is active in care giving, jobs or personal endeavors.

In that each of us, are uniquely and personally gifted in ways that have nothing to do with gender. So to have gender be a barrier to exercising those gifts for the common good of society and the individual good of the family...would be to waste gifts from God.
QFT :thumbsup:

"Equal but not the same" indeed.
 
Upvote 0

helenofbritain

St Mary MacKillop of the Cross, pray for us
Oct 24, 2006
10,294
700
Canberra
✟21,561.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I am well over the age of eighteen. I plan to remain single and celibate. This is not for the sake of the Kingdom of God, but for the sake of retaining my sanity. My virginity was taken from me at knife point and left me with no desire for a sexual relationship.

With no husband in my future, I must support myself.

My brother and I are business partners. We own two buildings with a mixture of office space and residential units. Right now, I am responsible for the day to day operation. He is currently looking into our next acquisition. Maybe management isn't in accordance with a woman's role, but it is what I do.
That was a brave thing to share, sylvia. I hope you are well on the path toward healing from such a traumatic experience :hug:

As I have been trying to show in this thread, the Church affirms there is nothing beyond or beneath a woman in whatever godly vocation she chooses (let's avoid things like running drug cartels, that would be ungodly). There is nothing "wrong" with working outside the home, or supporting yourself, or caring for relatives, or being a missionary in Asia, or being a CEO or a teacher, or a lawyer or a mother or an aunty or a policewoman or a property developer. It's not unfeminine. It's not wrong. In whatever we do - male or female - we should be striving to give glory to God through the work that we do. If motherhood and marriage are not your vocation then they are not your vocation. Something else is.

Mulieris Dignitatem has a long passage on virginity for the kingdom. It's mainly theological, not practical, in argument but I'll put it in for you to read anyway:

MOTHERHOOD - VIRGINITY

Two dimensions of women's vocation"

17. We must now focus our meditation on virginity and motherhood as two particular dimensions of the fulfillment of the female personality. In the light of the Gospel, they acquire their full meaning and value in Mary, who as a Virgin became the Mother of the Son of God. These two dimensions of the female vocation were united in her in an exceptional manner, in such a way that one did not exclude the other but wonderfully complemented it. The description of the Annunciation in the Gospel of Luke clearly shows that this seemed impossible to the Virgin of Nazareth. When she hears the words: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus", she immediately asks: "How can this be, since I have no husband?" (Lk 1: 31, 34). In the usual order of things motherhood is the result of mutual "knowledge" between a man and woman in the marriage union. Mary, firm in her resolve to preserve her virginity, puts this question to the divine messenger, and obtains from him the explanation: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you" - your motherhood will not be the consequence of matrimonial "knowledge", but will be the work of the Holy Spirit; the "power of the Most High" will "overshadow" the mystery of the Son's conception and birth; as the Son of the Most High, he is given to you exclusively by God, in a manner known to God. Mary, therefore, maintained her virginal "I have no husband" (cf. Lk 1: 34) and at the same time became a Mother. Virginity and motherhood co-exist in her: they do not mutually exclude each other or place limits on each other. Indeed, the person of the Mother of God helps everyone - especially women - to see how these two dimensions, these two paths in the vocation of women as persons, explain and complete each other.


..... long bit on motherhood....

Virginity for the sake of the Kingdom

20. In the teaching of Christ, motherhood is connected with virginity, but also distinct from it. Fundamental to this is Jesus' statement in the conversation on the indissolubility of marriage. Having heard the answer given to the Pharisees, the disciples say to Christ: "If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry" (Mt 19: 10). Independently of the meaning which "it is not expedient" had at that time in the mind of the disciples, Christ takes their mistaken opinion as a starting point for instructing them on the value of celibacy. He distinguishes celibacy which results from natural defects - even though they may have been caused by man - from "celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom of heaven". Christ says, "and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of heaven" (Mt 19:12). It is, then, a voluntary celibacy, chosen for the sake of the Kingdom of heaven, in view of man's eschatological vocation to union with God. He then adds: "He who is able to receive this, let him receive it". These words repeat what he had said at the beginning of the discourse on celibacy (cf. Mt 19:11). Consequently, celibacy for the kingdom of heaven results not only from a free choice on the part of man, but also from a special grace on the part of God, who calls a particular person to live celibacy. While this is a special sign of the Kingdom of God to come, it also serves as a way to devote all the energies of soul and body during one's earthly life exclusively for the sake of the eschatological kingdom.

Jesus' words are the answer to the disciples' question. They are addressed directly to those who put the question: in this case they were men. Nevertheless, Christ's answer, in itself, has a value both for men and for women. In this context it indicates the evangelical ideal of virginity, an ideal which constitutes a clear "innovation" with respect to the tradition of the Old Testament. Certainly that tradition was connected in some way with Israel's expectation of the Messiah's coming, especially among the women of Israel from whom he was to be born. In fact, the ideal of celibacy and virginity for the sake of greater closeness to God was not entirely foreign to certain Jewish circles, especially in the period immediately preceding the coming of Jesus. Nevertheless, celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom, or rather virginity, is undeniably an innovation connected with the incarnation of God.

From the moment of Christ's coming, the expectation of the People of God has to be directed to the eschatological Kingdom which is coming and to which he must lead "the new Israel". A new awareness of faith is essential for such a turn-about and change of values. Christ emphasizes this twice: "He who is able to receive this, let him receive it". Only "those to whom it is given" understand it (Mt 19:11). Mary is the first person in whom this new awareness is manifested, for she asks the Angel: "How can this be, since I have no husband?" (Lk 1:34).Even though she is "betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph" (cf. Lk 1:27), she is firm in her resolve to remain a virgin. The motherhood which is accomplished in her comes exclusively from the "power of the Most High", and is the result of the Holy Spirit's coming down upon her (cf. Lk 1:35). This divine motherhood, therefore, is an altogether unforeseen response to the human expectation of women in Israel: it comes to Mary as a gift from God himself. This gift is the beginning and the prototype of a new expectation on the part of all. It measures up to the Eternal Covenant, to God's new and definitive promise: it is a sign of eschatological hope.

On the basis of the Gospel, the meaning of virginity was developed and better understood as a vocation for women too, one in which their dignity, like that of the Virgin of Nazareth, finds confirmation. The Gospel puts forward the ideal of the consecration of the person, that is, the person's exclusive dedication to God by virtue of the evangelical counsels: in particular, chastity, poverty and obedience. Their perfect incarnation is Jesus Christ himself. Whoever wishes to follow him in a radical way chooses to live according to these counsels. They are distinct from the commandments and show the Christian the radical way of the Gospel. From the very beginning of Christianity men and women have set out on this path, since the evangelical ideal is addressed to human beings without any distinction of sex.

In this wider context, virginity has to be considered also as a path for women, a path on which they realize their womanhood in a way different from marriage. In order to understand this path, it is necessary to refer once more to the fundamental idea of Christian anthropology. By freely choosing virginity, women confirm themselves as persons, as beings whom the Creator from the beginning has willed for their own sake.41 At the same time they realize the personal value of their own femininity by becoming "a sincere gift" for God who has revealed himself in Christ, a gift for Christ, the Redeemer of humanity and the Spouse of souls: a "spousal" gift. One cannot correctly understand virginity - a woman's consecration in virginity - without referring to spousal love. It is through this kind of love that a person becomes a gift for the other.42 Moreover, a man's consecration in priestly celibacy or in the religious state is to be understood analogously.

The naturally spousal predisposition of the feminine personality finds a response in virginity understood in this way. Women, called from the very "beginning" to be loved and to love, in a vocation to virginity find Christ first of all as the Redeemer who "loved until the end" through his total gift of self; and they respond to this gift with a "sincere gift" of their whole lives. They thus give themselves to the divine Spouse, and this personal gift tends to union, which is properly spiritual in character. Through the Holy Spirit's action a woman becomes "one spirit" with Christ the Spouse (cf. 1 Cor 6:17).

This is the evangelical ideal of virginity, in which both the dignity and the vocation of women are realized in a special way. In virginity thus understood the so-called radicalism of the Gospel finds expression: "Leave everything and follow Christ" (cf. Mt 19:27). This cannot be compared to remaining simply unmarried or single, because virginity is not restricted to a mere "no", but contains a profound "yes" in the spousal order: the gift of self for love in a total and undivided manner.

I'm cutting here cos my post was too long, apparently.
 
Upvote 0

helenofbritain

St Mary MacKillop of the Cross, pray for us
Oct 24, 2006
10,294
700
Canberra
✟21,561.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
John Paul goes on:

Motherhood according to the Spirit

21. Virginity according to the Gospel means renouncing marriage and thus physical motherhood. Nevertheless, the renunciation of this kind of motherhood, a renunciation that can involve great sacrifice for a woman, makes possible a different kind of motherhood: motherhood "according to the Spirit" (cf. Rom 8:4). For virginity does not deprive a woman of her prerogatives. Spiritual motherhood takes on many different forms. In the life of consecrated women, for example, who live according to the charism and the rules of the various apostolic Institutes, it can express itself as concern for people, especially the most needy: the sick, the handicapped, the abandoned, orphans, the elderly, children, young people, the imprisoned and, in general, people on the edges of society. In this way a consecrated woman finds her Spouse, different and the same in each and every person, according to his very words: "As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me" (Mt 25:40). Spousal love always involves a special readiness to be poured out for the sake of those who come within one's range of activity. In marriage this readiness, even though open to all, consists mainly in the love that parents give to their children. In virginity this readiness is open to all people, who are embraced by the love of Christ the Spouse.

Spousal love - with its maternal potential hidden in the heart of the woman as a virginal bride - when joined to Christ, the Redeemer of each and every person, is also predisposed to being open to each and every person. This is confirmed in the religious communities of apostolic life, and in a different way in communities of contemplative life, or the cloister. There exist still other forms of a vocation to virginity for the sake of the Kingdom; for example, the Secular Institutes, or the communities of consecrated persons which flourish within Movements, Groups and Associations. In all of these the same truth about the spiritual motherhood of virgins is confirmed in various ways. However, it is not only a matter of communal forms but also of non-communal forms. In brief, virginity as a woman's vocation is always the vocation of a person - of a unique, individual person. Therefore the spiritual motherhood which makes itself felt in this vocation is also profoundly personal.

This is also the basis of a specific convergence between the virginity of the unmarried woman and the motherhood of the married woman. This convergence moves not only from motherhood towards virginity, as emphasized above; it also moves from virginity towards marriage, the form of woman's vocation in which she becomes a mother by giving birth to her children. The starting point of this second analogy is the meaning of marriage. A woman is "married" either through the sacrament of marriage or spiritually through marriage to Christ. In both cases marriage signifies the "sincere gift of the person" of the bride to the groom. In this way, one can say that the profile of marriage is found spiritually in virginity. And does not physical motherhood also have to be a spiritual motherhood, in order to respond to the whole truth about the human being who is a unity of body and spirit? Thus there exist many reasons for discerning in these two different paths - the two different vocations of women - a profound complementarity, and even a profound union within a person's being.

"My little children with whom I am again in travail"

22. The Gospel reveals and enables us to understand precisely this mode of being of the human person. The Gospel helps every woman and every man to live it and thus attain fulfilment. There exists a total equality with respect to the gifts of the Holy Spirit, with respect to the "mighty works of God" (Acts 2:11). Moreover, it is precisely in the face of the "mighty works of God" that Saint Paul, as a man, feels the need to refer to what is essentially feminine in order to express the truth about his own apostolic service. This is exactly what Paul of Tarsus does when he addresses the Galatians with the words: "My little children, with whom I am again in travail" (Gal 4:19). In the First Letter to the Corinthians (7: 38) Saint Paul proclaims the superiority of virginity over marriage, which is a constant teaching of the Church in accordance with the spirit of Christ's words recorded in the Gospel of Matthew (19: 10-12); he does so without in any way obscuring the importance of physical and spiritual motherhood. Indeed, in order to illustrate the Church's fundamental mission, he finds nothing better than the reference to motherhood.

The same analogy - and the same truth - are present in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. Mary is the "figure" of the Church:43 "For in the mystery of the Church, herself rightly called mother and virgin, the Blessed Virgin came first as an eminent and singular exemplar of both virginity and motherhood. ... The Son whom she brought forth is He whom God placed as the first-born among many brethren (cf. Rom 8: 29),namely, among the faithful. In their birth and development she cooperates with a maternal love".44 "Moreover, contemplating Mary's mysterious sanctity, imitating her charity, and faithfully fulfilling the Father's will, the Church herself becomes a mother by accepting God's word in faith. For by her preaching and by baptism she brings forth to a new and immortal life children who are conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of God".45 This is motherhood "according to the Spirit" with regard to the sons and daughters of the human race. And this motherhood - as already mentioned - becomes the woman's "role" also in virginity. "The Church herself is a virgin, who keeps whole and pure the fidelity she has pledged to her Spouse".46 This is most perfectly fulfilled in Mary. The Church, therefore, "imitating the Mother of her Lord, and by the power of the Holy Spirit, ... preserves with virginal purity an integral faith, a firm hope, and a sincere charity".47

The Council has confirmed that, unless one looks to the Mother of God, it is impossible to understand the mystery of the Church, her reality, her essential vitality. Indirectly we find here a reference to the biblical exemplar of the "woman" which is already clearly outlined in the description of the "beginning" (cf. Gen 3:15)and which procedes from creation, through sin to the Redemption. In this way there is a confirmation of the profound union between what is human and what constitutes the divine economy of salvation in human history. The Bible convinces us of the fact that one can have no adequate hermeneutic of man, or of what is "human", without appropriate reference to what is "feminine". There is an analogy in God's salvific economy: if we wish to understand it fully in relation to the whole of human history, we cannot omit, in the perspective of our faith, the mystery of "woman": virgin-mother-spouse.

Mulieris Dignitatem, John Paul II, 15 August 1988 - Apostolic Letter

So get out there and make this world a better place, sister!
 
Upvote 0

Assisi

not a sissy
Sep 7, 2006
4,155
463
Sydney
✟14,280.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Another important point from the OP (it is JPII, right?) is that women shouldn't renounce their femininity and imitate men when working outside the home. So often I hear working women talking about their male coworkers, or about something bad that happened at the office and I think 'if you were a man you'd just do xyz about this - simple!' But I think what is really needed is for women to place their stamp on the workforce. At the moment (at least in Australia) I think there are many things about the workplace which come easier for a man, I hope that with time, femininity will be better valued in the workforce.
 
Upvote 0

JacktheCatholic

Praise be to Jesus Christ. Now and forever.
Mar 9, 2007
24,545
2,797
56
Michigan, USA
Visit site
✟44,388.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Jack, you are unwittingly being very unfair to Assisi. Housing prices in Australia are completely out of whack with what people earn. Assisi's husband's job is of a kind that only exists in a capital city. Read this - Sydney homes more expensive than world cities | The Daily Telegraph - and understand they are not "choosing" to live somewhere expensive, but that in order for Mr Assisi to have a job where he can support his family in the area he was trained in, they need to live in Sydney. And they aren't even near the city. They are on the fringe-iest fringe bit, where houses still cost a fortune.

Then my apologies to Assisi. :)
 
Upvote 0

CreedIsChrist

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2008
3,303
193
✟4,612.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Ah, no. He was quoting St Ambrose.



Are we asking for authority? I'm asking for equality. JPII says I've got it.



ECFs are lovely people, with much wisdom to impart. Some things they said still stand, undeveloped, to this day. Other things, like their views on the role of women, have been developed over time. I think what Pope John Paul II said (as I have already quoted) in Mulieris Dignitatem kind of blows their ideas out of the water:



Does that explain my position clearly?

You skimmed through an ENORMOUS amount of writings from the ECF and Popes. I address what PJII said, why don't you address what they have said now. Instead of just writing them off..

And oh really? was St. Paul's words on women "undeveloped" too?? Maybe in reality, considering the horrid failure of marriage in the US with its 50% divorce rate, maybe the egalitarian one is the undeveloped one?

As I told you before authority has nothing to do with dignity. The headship of the husband is a BASIC biblical concept.


taking one quote out context is called quote mining. Or trying to take Saint Gianna Molla out of context

Not to mention you are trying to pit one pope against a few 20-30 ECFS and 2-3 other Popes.

I'll myself will take what everyone says in context. Not take one quote out of context.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

CreedIsChrist

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2008
3,303
193
✟4,612.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Epiclesis and Sylverpiano, please don't take this too far! NOBODY ever said that a woman shouldn't work, full stop. Even Creed - who is the biggest extremist I have met so far on this board - wouldn't say that - he would just say (correct me if I'm wrong, Creed) that she should not work once she is married - she should stay at home so she can welcome her husband every evening with hot dinner and warm slippers.

"Management is not in accordance with a woman's role"? Nobody has ever said that. On the contrary: look at the last chapter of Proverbs. That picture is confirmed by Christian tradition: every landowner-farmer's wife through all Christian history, has had to be a competent manager of several house-servants, of the dairy, of the chicken-farm, of canvas-making, wool-spinning and weaving - and of all the marketing and financial accounts connected with that. The husband managed the fields and their products, the large animals, and the construction work. Besides, he sometimes rode off to war, leaving the wife to oversee the entire enterprise.

No I never said that. In fact I said a woman can work as long as it doesn't effect her family life in a bad way..

Of course some people with bad comprehension will always force my words.

I will put it in all caps so it "sinks"

IN REGARDING MOTHERHOOD(WHICH IS SECOND BEST ROLE ONLY TO CHASTITY FOR GOD) A SECONDARY JOB IS OK AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT EFFECT HER ROLE IN MOTHERHOOD IN A BAD WAY OR IMPEDES HER WHERE HER CHILDREN AND HUSBAND BECOME IGNORED. FOR A MARRIED WOMAN WITH CHILDREN, HER JOB SHOULD ALWAYS BE TREATED AS SECONDARY.

and my views aren't extreme and supported by the bible, the ECF, and many Popes. I support a view that has existed for thousands of years and been a bulwark for society. If you honestly think the western view of marriage is normal, then you haven't obviously looked at the state that it is in..

now please, I would like everyone to address all those statements by the ECF and councils please..
 
Upvote 0

Rebekka

meow meow meow meow meow meow
Oct 25, 2006
13,101
1,229
✟34,375.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Good to see you, GN! :wave:
I like the way you call it the "personal dimension". I tend to call it the "human dimension". In my opinion, we are 90% persons and only 10% male or female. The "men are from Mars, women from Venus" thing is garbage, IMO.... EXCEPT when people believe it so much that it truly becomes 90% of what they are and think. There are far too many people like that around, I'm afraid.
I don't believe in the Mars and Venus thing either. And I think you're spot on, it is a self-fulfilling prophecy, it becomes true because we think we can't understand the other sex when we would if we truly listened to each individual. Using the Mars/Venus approach does more damage than good.

The two people I have the most in common with and who understand me best are men - happen to be men, I should say. That's because personality/character is not defined by gender.
 
Upvote 0

CreedIsChrist

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2008
3,303
193
✟4,612.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
“Nor can it be doubted that it is more consonant with the order of nature that men should bear rule over women than women over men. It is with this principle in view that the apostle says, ‘The head of the woman is the man’ [1 Cor 11:3]; and ‘Wives submit yourselves to your own husbands.’” Augustine, On Marriage and Concupiscence


Now if you delve in the bible and the wordings of the saints. You will find that the husband being head of the wive is bound in God;s natural law. Outside of it is unnatural. Why is it this way? because it is in relation to the fall. Eve sinning first and then joining her husband in her sin. Thus this showed that Eve was unable and unfit to lead. Since she showed a pliancy in character and a feebleness in resisting Satan. Whereas Adam partook with her out of conjugal love. Thus Adam was put in authority over her.

I you don't believe that. Then you don't believe the bible because it is so explicitly stated that even a 4 year old could understand what a "helpmeet" is.

And seriously Warriorangel. I cannot believe you would use the Pagan Gentiles as an example of the 'freed' woman. Yea, people who burned their children on idols. Wonderful parallel..

Yea, those horrid 'misogynistic' Jewish laws that were given down to Moses and Abraham by God.

Does it make you uncomfortable that you have to brush off an enormous amount of scripture, ECF writings, councils, and patristics to support your position?


Sadly this thread is going the wrong way since people don't comprehend my posts. I find it really saddening the Church is being infiltrated by feminists who bring this venomous doctrine within the Church. They attacked the biblical roles of man and woman and partly won(meaning their influence), I wouldn't be surprised that decades from now it will be the exact same thing except it will be with holy orders. And I will be the lone one here defending Holy Orders with the feminists making the exact same arguments they are making right now. In fact it has already started with feminist nutjobs like Joan Chissiter.

The husband as head of the family is a christian tradition and rooted deeply in the bible and the saints. It goes all the way back to Genesis 3:16(your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you).. If you deny such a basic biblical concept, with St. Paul giving very defivinive reasons for this, then you simply either do not believe the bible or any of the fathers. You may as well twist semantically other things in the bible you "dislike" too. The fact that WarriorAngel would completely discredit the Jewish law in order to make her egalitarian point seem justified , really made my jaw drop. You used the Gentiles to justify it? Who gave up children to molech? yea the horrid backwards jews..

I'm gonna leave a wording from St. Thomas Aquinas, since his words speak from authority regarding this.

“For though the wife be her husband's equal in the marriage act, yet in matters of housekeeping, the head of the woman is the man, as the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 11:3).” Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Treatise on the Theological Virtues, Question 32, Article 8.

“For the higher reason which is assigned to contemplation is compared to the lower reason which is assigned to action, and the husband is compared to his wife, who should be ruled by her husband, as Augustine says (De Trinitate xii,3,7,12).”
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Treatise on Gratuitous Grace, Question 128, Article 4.

“The Apostle says (1 Corinthians 14:34): ‘Let women keep silence in the churches,’ and (1 Timothy 2:12): ‘I suffer not a woman to teach.’ Now this pertains especially to the grace of the word. Therefore the grace of the word is not becoming to women. I answer that, Speech may be employed in two ways: in one way privately, to one or a few, in familiar conversation, and in this respect the grace of the word may be becoming to women; in another way, publicly, addressing oneself to the whole church, and this is not permitted to women. First and chiefly, on account of the condition attaching to the female sex, whereby woman should be subject to man, as appears from Genesis 3:16" Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Question 177, Article 2.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

helenofbritain

St Mary MacKillop of the Cross, pray for us
Oct 24, 2006
10,294
700
Canberra
✟21,561.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
You skimmed through an ENORMOUS amount of writings from the ECF and Popes. I address what PJII said, why don't you address what they have said now. Instead of just writing them off..

I'm not writing them off. I read the quotes. I didn't skim them. However, the world has developed some since 200AD. Church teachings develop over time. Some more so than others. Teaching on women get filed under "more developed" hence I'm running with what John Paul said.

And oh really? was St. Paul's words on women "undeveloped" too?? Maybe in reality, considering the horrid failure of marriage in the US with its 50% divorce rate, maybe the egalitarian one is the undeveloped one?

Undeveloped as in "haven't changed" as in "haven't been developed". For example, the Nicene Creed is undeveloped because it hasn't changed in 1700 years. The Immaculate Conception is something that has developed. Make sense?

Oh, and I'm not an American.

As I told you before authority has nothing to do with dignity. The headship of the husband is a BASIC biblical concept.

Good to know. I'll tell my husband. (I told him. He said "Oh. Does he think you're hiding it from me? I thought we were meant to be Christlike. You know, 'husbands love your wives as Christ loves the Church'.") (and no, I didn't put him up to it. That's genuinely what he said, with God as my witness.)

taking one quote out context is called quote mining. Or trying to take Saint Gianna Molla out of context

1. If nothing else, I've posted long sections of everything. Precisely because I think context *is* important.

2. I still don't know who St Gianna Molla is.

Not to mention you are trying to pit one pope against a few 20-30 ECFS and 2-3 other Popes.

Are you serious? I'll say it again. Teachings develop. If Benedict further develops what John Paul said and frames men and women in less equal terms, I will run with that. If you can only give me popes and ECFs from *before* JPII, then it's not gonna wash.

I'll myself will take what everyone says in context. Not take one quote out of context.

Onya.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Rebekka

meow meow meow meow meow meow
Oct 25, 2006
13,101
1,229
✟34,375.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
If Benedict further develops what John Paul said and frames men and women in less equal terms, I will run with that.
My prediction is that he will rather do the opposite and focus on more equality, considering how he further developed JPII's ideas on good stewardship, environmentalism and the treatment of animals. Humans (including women) are worth more than animals, and even the animals are worth protecting, have dignity.


(Matthew 10:29-31: Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? And not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father. But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: better are you than many sparrows.)



Just my prediction. But the Vatican's policy to put more and more women on high positions supports that. ;)
 
Upvote 0

CreedIsChrist

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2008
3,303
193
✟4,612.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I'm not writing them off. I read the quotes. I didn't skim them. However, the world has developed some since 200AD. Church teachings develop over time. Some more so than others. Teaching on women get filed under "more developed" hence I'm running with what John Paul said.



Undeveloped as in "haven't changed" as in "haven't been developed". For example, the Nicene Creed is undeveloped because it hasn't changed in 1700 years. The Immaculate Conception is something that has developed. Make sense?

Oh, and I'm not an American.



Good to know. I'll tell my husband. (I told him. He said "Oh. Does he think you're hiding it from me? I thought we were meant to be Christlike. You know, 'husbands love your wives as Christ loves the Church'.") (and no, I didn't put him up to it. That's genuinely what he said, with God as my witness.)



1. If nothing else, I've posted long sections of everything. Precisely because I think context *is* important.

2. I still don't know who St Gianna Molla is.



Are you serious? I'll say it again. Teachings develop. If Benedict further develops what John Paul said and frames men and women in less equal terms, I will run with that. If you can only give me popes and ECFs from *before* JPII, then it's not gonna wash.



Onya.

:doh:

The Nicene Creed was never "undeveloped"

The Immaculate Conception hasn't "developed"! it was a truth that was simply defined later on! seriously.. .

"Its not gonna wash, if there are quotes past JPII"? lol? Based on this quote, I can conclude you have zero understanding of Church dogma and doctrine. I mean seriously. You may as well throw away the bible, the saints, the council of Trent which defined transubstantiation(guess that means you don't believe in that anymore since it was before PJPII), and everything else the Church has been for the past 2000 years. If you really believe that then I cannot take you seriously and having a normal discussion with you is impossible because you have no concept of the communion of saints and the issues of ex-cathedra doctrines that existed before PJPII..I sometimes wonder if you even took a proper RCIA course with a statement like that..

The heart of modernism is thinking that dogma evolves and changes..If you think dogmas evolve and change by the definition of the Church you are a heretic.

You just fully contradicted yourself and seem to have barely any understanding of what dogma and doctrine is..

In case you didn't know the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit and leads the Church from error. Doctrines cannot be "undeveloped" because they are guarenteed by the Keys of Peter of the binding of the Church.

was the resurrection "undeveloped" too? lol

was the canon of the bible undeveloped??

is baptism undeveloped?

Please tell us what other doctrines are undeveloped so we can go inform the Pope of all that undevloped doctrine that Church has infallibly declared for 2000 years. I wonder what his response will be..


Now, I suggest you try to address those ECF quotes. I addressed PJII. Now address them. . Or are you unable too(sign of weak argument?)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gwendolyn

back in black
Jan 28, 2005
12,340
1,647
Canada
✟20,680.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
As much as I love St. Augustine, he loathed women in part for the fact that he struggled so much with sexual sin due to temptation. And as much as I adore St. Thomas Aquinas, he believed that man is the perfection of woman and that woman is merely an imperfect man... something we do not believe today.

And St. Thomas also believed in delayed hominisation - that a child cannot be said to be a human being in the womb until a brain develops. Something I have been assured by a Thomistic theologian that we do not accept today, given the emphasis on a fetus being a human person from conception.

I was waiting for the feminist card to get thrown out here.

We've said numerous times that men and women are equal in dignity, but different as well. No one is touting feminism and saying that women have to be just like men. We're just saying that there is no problem with female politicians or teachers or women who take out the garbage because their husband is never home.

I wonder, if a woman ought not work so much that it impedes her home life, does the same hold true for the man? What good is a man as a husband and a father if he is never around?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rebekka
Upvote 0

helenofbritain

St Mary MacKillop of the Cross, pray for us
Oct 24, 2006
10,294
700
Canberra
✟21,561.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
:doh:

The Nicene Creed was never "undeveloped"

OK Creed. I'm guessing that since you are always talking about Armenia that you speak English as a second language, and you may be having difficulty with my use of the term "undeveloped." Trust me when I say, I don't mean what you think I mean when I say it. Let's move on.

"Its not gonna wash, if there are quotes past JPII"? lol? Based on this quote, I can conclude you have zero understanding of Church dogma and doctrine. I mean seriously. You may as well throw away the bible, the saints, and everything else the Church has been for the past 2000 years. If you really believe that then I cannot take you seriously and having a normal discussion with you is impossible because you have no concept of the communion of saints and the issues of ex-cathedra doctrines that existed before PJPII..I sometimes wonder if you even took a proper RCIA course with a statement like that..

1. I am a cradle Catholic. I didn't need RCIA.
2. I understand plenty. I understand the majesty and grandeur of the faith. I appreciate Scripture, Tradition and Reason. I know that Truth doesn't change. I also know that the Church has developed Her understanding of many things over the past 2000 years.
3. What I think that you fail to understand is that we are no longer living in 312 - or 1949 for that matter. Church teaching on the role and dignity of women has developed since Aquinas.
4. Therefore, if we are comparing documents from 1700 years ago to documents from 15 years ago on a teaching which has developed, it stands to reason that the most recent documents are the ones which reflect *current* Church teachings, and to which we should give greater credence.



The heart of modernism is thinking that dogma evolves and changes..If you think dogmas evolve and change by the definition of the Church you are a heretic.

You just fully contradicted yourself and seem to have barely any understanding of what dogma and doctrine is..

Please give me details of any DOGMA related to women and their place (excluding Our Blessed Mother).

Exactly where have I suggested anything I was arguing was dogma and that it had changed?

In case you didn't know the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit and leads the Church from error. Doctrines cannot be "undeveloped" because they are guarenteed by the Keys of Peter of the binding of the CHurch.

was the resurrection "undeveloped" too? lol

I'm taking a line from Inigo Montoya. "You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."


Now, I suggest you try to address those ECF quotes. I addressed PJII. Now address them. . Or are you unable too(sign of weak argument?)

Will it truly make you happy Creed? Will you get to call me a heretic and an uppity woman if I go through them all and disagree?

I cut my teeth on CF in GT. You've got nothing on them.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

CreedIsChrist

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2008
3,303
193
✟4,612.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
As much as I love St. Augustine, he loathed women in part for the fact that he struggled so much with sexual sin due to temptation. And as much as I adore St. Thomas Aquinas, he believed that man is the perfection of woman and that woman is merely an imperfect man... something we do not believe today.

And St. Thomas also believed in delayed hominisation - that a child cannot be said to be a human being in the womb until a brain develops. Something I have been assured by a Thomistic theologian that we do not accept today, given the emphasis on a fetus being a human person from conception.

I was waiting for the feminist card to get thrown out here.

We've said numerous times that men and women are equal in dignity, but different as well. No one is touting feminism and saying that women have to be just like men. We're just saying that there is no problem with female politicians or teachers or women who take out the garbage because their husband is never home.

I wonder, if a woman ought not work so much that it impedes her home life, does the same hold true for the man? What good is a man as a husband and a father if he is never around?


St. Thomas was talking about animation..

St. Augustine did not loath women. Did you know him personally?? His quotes reflect what the Church nearly has always taught and that is why he was a bishop and was of the greatest theologians.

So whos quote should we take? the bible and St. Augustine was was considered one of the greatest theologians of all time. Or eglatarians who say the Nicene creed is "underdeveloped", have no understanding of dogma, and has no concept of the communion of saints?..lol

I'm sorry but Thomas Aquinas and Augustine had more theological knowledge of the Church and dogma than probably all the feminists combined in earth today. Feminists simply will not delve deeply into dogma and scripture. Their theological knowledge is horrible because they are not looking for the truth, just an argument to make. I mean look at people like Joan Chrittiser.
 
Upvote 0