Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Women's Ordination on the Docket Again
The Vatican recently threatened to excommunicate Father Roy Bourgeois for his position that women be ordained priests. This out-of-the-blue, extreme measure against a prominent social justice advocate seems strange and ill-conceived. On the other hand, it serves as an opportunity to re-visit the issue since Pope John Paul II suspended all talk on it in 1994.
Father Bourgeois, 70, who began his 36-year ministry as a
Maryknoll priest in Bolivia,
has been an outspoken critic of U.S.
foreign policy in Latin America since 1980 after a
Salvadoran death squad raped and killed four American churchwomen. In 1990 he
founded the School of the Americas Watch (http://www.soaw.org),
which has been holding weekend vigils annually at Fort
Benning, Ga., to demand closure
of the U.S. Army's combat training school for Latin American soldiers. The School of the Americas (renamed "Western
Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation" in 2001) "has trained over
60,000 Latin American soldiers in counterinsurgency techniques, sniper
training, commando and psychological warfare, military intelligence and
interrogation tactics," according to the SOAW (http://www.soaw.org/type.php?
What led to the altercation between the Vatican
and Father Bourgeois was the fact that he showed his support for women's
ordination by delivering a homily at the ordination of Janice Sevre-Duszynska,
58, on August 9 in Lexington, Ky.
She was the sixth woman ordained this year in the United
States, according to the National Catholic
Reporter (http://ncronline3.org/drupal/
Actually, Sevre-Duszynska
is among 60 other women who have been ordained since June 29, 2002, when the first seven women stepped
forward, according to the Women's Ordination Conference (www.womensordination.org/
It is no small matter that these women seek ordination. As priests they are demanding that women be seen as equals to men in the eyes of the Church. Women's ordination reflects secular society's movement toward gender equality that sprouted in the late 1960s and which we largely take for granted today. During this time women all over the world have made bold strides in taking on various roles to show that they ARE equal to men. One who was well-schooled in that idea almost made it to the White House!
However, the process for change in the Church is long and difficult because theology and tradition hold a lot of sway. For example, the Church's case that the priesthood remain male is summed up this way: Jesus was a man, his 12 apostles were all men and the Church has never had women priests. Many theologians and Church historians have differed on this judgment and on Thanksgiving weekend 1975, hundreds of people met for the first Women's Ordination Conference (WOC) in Detroit to hear them respectfully and logically make the case that women be ordained.
The work of the WOC has continued since then and the idea of women priests is no longer an aberration. According to a September 2005 Gallup Organization survey, 63 percent of U.S. Catholics said they supported ordaining women and only 29 percent indicated that an exclusive male, celibate clergy was "very important." The Associated Press-Ipsos poll taken in April 2005 found the same result.
The Episcopalian Church can probably be thanked for much of this attitude change. On July 29, 1974, eleven women forced the issue by finding three bishops willing to ordain them. Although the Church immediately and vociferously declared the ordinations invalid, two years later, the 72nd General Convention in Philadelphia passed a resolution declaring that "no one shall be denied access" to ordination on the basis of their sex. In 2006 the American Episcopalians elected their first woman presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori.
The Vatican is undoubtedly fearful that women's ordination will further divide the Church. The dissension suffered since the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) has been enormous and no one is in the mood for much more. Back then Catholics left the Church in droves. Priests and nuns quit. Vocations plummeted. Recently, the priest shortage has precipitated numerous and heart-wrenching parish closings and mergers in most dioceses and, of course, the pedophilia scandals have caused much mistrust and anger among regular parishioners.
The most revealing statistics from all of this fallout is the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, which reported last February that 28 percent of adults have left the faith of their youth with Catholics coming out as the largest group-about 10 percent out of a population of 305 million Americans.
Admittedly, it's difficult for an institution to change, especially one as huge, as old and as steeped in tradition as the Catholic Church. But traditions are man-made, not God-made. And one might conclude that this confluence of events in both secular and religious society signals God's call for the Church to change.
The Church has endured difficulties in the past and it has adjusted. Quite frankly, today's problems are so great, we need every leader we can get. To eliminate half of the population from priestly ministry is to see the world with only one eye or to fix it with only one arm.
Gender shouldn't determine whether or not a person is fit to be a priest. Neither should class, race, ethnicity or sexual orientation for that matter. The priesthood should be open to men and women who are called to it. We need to concentrate our energies on the things that matter!
- Posted in
74 Comments so far
Show AllThe why's as to the Catholic Church still being an almost exclusively male hierarchical organization could fill many books. If the authors expect those powers-that-be to relinquish all that comes with their current structure, then they've got another thing coming. Unless and until there are no male priests left (and the demographic trend is occurring that way in North American & Europe, which explains all the Third world origin Catholic priests filling the ranks), then wannabe women priests will be on the outside looking in.
www.wunderman-comics.com
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12780
I love the rationalization given by the Church. Because Jesus was a male as were the apostles, women can't be priests, etc.
First of all, if you want to be so ridiculously literalistic (as though the Bible is fact based), then I would assert that all Catholic priests must be Jewish fishermen. I am not trying to be humorous. That is really what the Church should demand, based on their reasoning. In fact, since there was no 'Christianity' in those days, no Catholics should be in the clergy.
I really don't know why women would want to be part of a Church whose stance on women's rights and 'equality' is at least 100 years behind the rest of democratic society. Yes, tradition is tradition. But it seems strange that women would find meaning in patriarchal organizations who dictate female lifestyles and reproductive rights.
I don't find the demise of this institution which is a tribute to the middle ages, to be a bad thing for the world. Women will not be priests because that would mean the Church is no longer, well, the Church. It is the only real distinction-its mysogeny. To merely call it sexism is to minimize the reality of what has gone on for the past two thousand years.
After all, aren't women the reason for the 'fall' of man? Unclean and sinful by virtue of physiology.
Sioux Rose
READY TO TRANSFORM: Excellent analysis. I have looked into this topic from a number of perspectives, and feel that Wilhelm Reich (seeking an explanation for how and why the Nazi movement gained such popularity among Germans) had the best explanation. The church must have understood that the best way to instill a belief in an external authority was to turn people against themselves, which is to say their basic instincts. And what basic instinct (apart from feeding biological hunger and/or survival) is more primary that sexuality? By creating the PREMISE of "original sin" and thus turning men against women, secondarily creating a hierarchy by which males had dominant powers, the entire egalitarian paradigm was disabled. CENTURIES of aberrant behaviors have come out of this unnecessary schism between the Divine masculine and equally Divine feminine.
I have often used the analogy of mankind navigating its shared vessel with only one oar, so was glad to see the author use the ONE eye analogy. Some in this forum have at times mistaken my meaning for saying women are better. I do feel women incarnate to largely identify with more YIN values; but there are many men who do Yin better than women. And some notable females who arguably employ the Mars-rules traits of aggression and rabid competition to make it to the top of the political heap, thus doing Yang better than many men. Ideally EACH of us must learn to balance both inner masculine and inner feminine traits.
To the extent societies belittle boys and men by comparing them to women, calling them fags, sissies, girlie-men, etc shows how the feminine gender has been long seen as something lesser. WHEN both sides of the Divine equation are equally respected, we would see far more respect for NATURE, the EARTH MOTHER, and technologies, as well as lifestyles that indeed support life. Instead we get the big bands playing their war cries tunes, and the opposing BS polarity of "right to life," which as Granny D said, fetishizes the fetus, but could care LESS about actual lives of living, born, breathing children.
Unfortunately MUCH that ails us in the way of assymmetric socialization and twisted stuck energy comes from the church (and related patriarchal bastions of programming the masses).
Siouxrose---BRILLIANT!
This is the underlying issue of all dominance/submission empire models.
There are so many cycles in the evolution of consciousness and this system of beliefs that the church embodies and promotes is going to need to fall apart, so that the more evolved beliefs can emerge. As long as this fear based system underlies our human identity, we will create no meaningful transformation in our world. It is predictably obvious.
Sioux Rose
READY TO TRANSFORM: Thank you for the acknowledgement, and I'm glad we resonate to the same HIGHER understanding.
Good post Rose. It was not Hitler or Bismarck but Martin Luther who originated the German attitude of hierarchy in every detail of everyday life, and competition as a virtue.
Sioux Rose
Germany and England both incorporated to become nation-states under the time frame that would make them ARIES (I.e. Mars ruled) entities. Aries is the sign that must divide to conquer and puts self first. Jesus taught that the true leader is the servant of mankind. And Jesus taught fairness, equality, mercy and compassion. It is the antithesis of the Mars-ruled FIRST AT ARMS state or status, the one that is coveted by the U.S. today having learned from its ancestral rivals. Or as a Cancer (July 4) entity, devoured them to become what it ate, metaphysically, of course.
Sioux Rose --
Wonderful post--
Quote --
The church must have understood that the best way to instill a belief in an external authority was to turn people against themselves, which is to say their basic instincts. And what basic instinct (apart from feeding biological hunger and/or survival) is more primary that sexuality? By creating the PREMISE of "original sin" and thus turning men against women, secondarily creating a hierarchy by which males had dominant powers, the entire egalitarian paradigm was disabled. CENTURIES of aberrant behaviors have come out of this unnecessary schism between the Divine masculine and equally Divine feminine. Unquote
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
I do hope you will listen to Dr. Kreeft's explanation on this. That priests must be men because the Apostles were men is like pointing to the tip of an iceburg and saying that you see the whole of it.
Here is a link for you to listen:
http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/09_priestesses/peter-kreeft_priestesses.mp3
I was astounded by the arogrance displayed in the link associated with Peter Kreeft. As a Catholic, now secular, I was taught that all beings are "made in the imagine and likeness of God and endowed by the creator. . ." Mr. Kreeft doesn't show respect for women or their gifts [other than being the bearer of the next generation]; he insults us by implying we have nothing to offer but reproduction. Well, take that attitude and well "analyze this!" He and so many like him, just do their best to deny the impovement in the treatment and respect for women. He and so many wonder why the Church is loosing believers; well, go look into the mirror; for those of you with daughters, the daughters have my sympathy.
DeColores,
Rockerbabe1
Like the corrupt financial system, the Churches have become more dirty and corrupt. Let them rot and lose their members. They'll come around when they find their funding drying up. It's bad enough that just about every religion is so easily prone to misuse and fudging it to abuse and marginalize women at large.
Well said!
Oh please. Much as I hate to see women suffering here in the US in these bloody churches, it's even worse in Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, etc ... where women are basically rendered lifeless and hopeless. Between the radical Islamic fanatics and the evangelical bible thumping Christian cultists, I see no difference. As I've learned the hard way, religion is nothing more than a powerful tool misused to control to the point of total fascism be it Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc ...
I thought we were commenting on Women's Ordination.
I hate to say this to you but just about every religion has been FUDGED to oppress women. Even if women get ordination, I seriously doubt they'd be able to change much for the better.
Amen.
Some of us encourage change by leaving and others by staying and reforming from within.
And readytotransform makes good sense with comments on what happens when literally interpreting that current priests must resemble Christ and the twelve apostles. More thoughts: they have to look and/or be Semitic -- anybody blond-haired or blue-eyed is out. Otherwise we reduce the priesthood to a certain part of the anatomy. And if that is the case, what are they doing on the altar that that "item" is intrinsically important??
Personally, I subscribed to the belief spoken in the Episcopal/Anglican church, "We are a priestly people." We are hopefully evolving to a point where we don't need someone else, male or female, to be an intermediary between us and whatever we call God. That said, it is also interesting to note that the current Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church Katharine Jefferts Schori is a former Roman Catholic.
Peace hugs,
Kate Anne
"gender equality that sprouted in the late 1960s and which we largely take for granted today"
largly? "take for granted"
who takes ir for granted???
& the 1960's were 40+ almost 50 years ago!!! WOW! Aren't we moving forward with incredible speed toward gender equality!?!?!?
Here is a very well thought out reasoning by Professor Peter Kreeft of Boston College on why the Church cannot allow for women's ordination. It is without anger, hyperbole, or hatred. I would ask all here who wish a well defined reasoning against such ordination to thoughtfully consider what he has to say.
http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/09_priestesses.htm
or use this link
http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/09_priestesses/peter-kreeft_priestesses.mp3
I'm glad I became an atheist and didn't bother switching from Christianity to Catholicism. Thank you for the warning. :-)
Hi Faithful Catholic,
I checked out the link you recommended. Wow! What incredibly medieval philosophy/theology! In a nutshell, the romanticization of the infantalizing of women. If you find that persuasive, then that is your right. But that "logic" is the one of the reasons that the best and the brightest are leaving the Catholic Church in droves and why the Cathlic hierarchy stumbles so badly when trying to address (or not address) real issues related to sexuality, such as the clergy abuse of children. It's really too bad. There is one vein of Catholicism that has distinguished itself by speaking out for justice on behalf of the poor. But Catholicism cannot be a credible voice for justice if it persists in its discrimination against women and homosexuals. It will simply become a refuge for immaturity and regressive fundamentalism. When I read the gospels, Jesus doesn't seem to come across that way at all. Rather, the Catholic hierarchy has become the Pharisees of our day - folks who pervert the spiritual message in the name of upholding it, and who persecute their prophets, such as Bourgeouis, all to retain their power base.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm......did you listen to the entire presentation? You come across as if you kind of skimmed over the surface of the presentation rather than dealing with the ontological symbolic reasons for the masculine priesthood.
I think that one problem that most liberals have is that they have a comfortable "god" who is neither very demanding of them, nor very involved in the world. The question then becomes whether or not Jesus presented Himself as that God manifest in the Flesh and therefore more than just a force in the world. Is God Person or merely thing? I think that liberals choose thing, for relationships with persons demand something of us -- perhaps something that we don't wish to give.
Catholic social justice is part and parcel of orthodox Catholicism -- the same Catholicism which insists upon the masculine priesthood for the reasons which Dr. Kreeft gave. I can hardly think that you thoughtfully listened to the entire lecture when you use words like "infantalizing women"
1. Reasons of Authority (11:01)
2a. Reasons of Sexual Symbolism (22:14)
2b. The Father's Masculinity (35:15)
2c. Christ's Maleness (44:20)
3. Reasons of the Common Good (50:18)
4. Reasons of Discernment (57:46:)
That is a rather good list of reasonings. And for me, they have the ring of Truth, not medieval philosophy.
These days priests often come under fire more often than not for whatever their crimes and misbehaviors. Better to leave the priesthood to macho-egotisticals and let them take the fall instead of put women at risks. Besides , most religions are nothing but scams anyway misused to justify abusing women.
Sioux Rose
NO SURRENDER: Excellent commentary. The thing about a great many religious experts (or "authorities") is that they are trapped inside their own paradigm and argue for evidence in support of it. Regardless of its lack of justice, or preposterous paradoxes, they will find cause to justify the merits of the dying dinosaur on THEIR limited terms.
The arguments raised by "Faithful Catholic" remind me of those used to at one time seek to justify that women had no right to vote, or that Blacks were inherently less intelligent, or that Jews didn't have souls, or whatever the fashionable beliefs based on excluding one in favor of another require. They reveal to the Initiated their own flawed prejudices. There will always be rituals made that seem holy but break apart the WHOLENESS. If we believe in a Supreme Being, and acknowledge the limitations in our small human intellects/understanding in describing said Being, then we may at least in grace acknowledge that an aspect of the Essence of that Creative force is either present in all living beings, or not at all. It cannot be that a Supreme intelligence would identify ONE group as superior to another... that is NOT the way Creation works. Even in nature's web of life, the smallest are a necessary living facet of the workings of the whole.
I've never understood why anyone with half a brain would be catholic. I don't believe for one moment that Jesus would approve of this religion (where in the bible did he say "go forth and wear tall funny hats" amongst other things). There are healthier catholics and former catholics - I refer you to
http://www.matthewfox.org/sys-tmpl/door/
for starters.
There ARE other churches; there ARE other dogmas. There is also the spiritual within ourselves.
God would never exclude women from anything.
Well, dear, He excluded them from having penises which makes them unable to give life, but rather to bear it. If your statement were really true, we would all be androgynous beings with both sex organs that could use either one we wished.
Oh, and I agree. There are other places one can go. Why not leave us and the Church alone? We make no one stay and we are quite happy following the rules.
Thank you for your patronizing tone. Women are unable to give life? I will check my college biology text in a few minutes. But I DO thank you for reminding us of the importance of the phallus in the catholic church.
In the meantime: Jesus, a Jew, had 12 disciples (I assume also Jews). Therefore, priests should be Jewish.
Yes you are happy following the rules. When one is unable to think for themselves, it's necessary to have someone else's rules to follow.
Ergo - the catholic boys club.
Don't feed the churches. Just let them collapse and let them be taxed just like people and corporations.
GIA:some animals have already been reproduced by just pricking the egg with a needle and/or other methods, meaning that a male was not necessary.
Women contribute 57% of genes to new life -- males only 43% --
plus 10 months gestation and breast feeding - i.e., nature/god trusts
women over males.
Women are the MAJORITY everywhere on the planet, despite the murder
amd mayhem oppressing them in every country.
Let the church preach to its members and stop tryng to spread its hateful
teachings.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Have you ever stopped to ask yourself why you liberals feel such a need to change the Church? If you don't like the rules, you don't have to be a member. Why not go start your own organization where you can make up whatever rules you like and be happy?
We in the Catholic Church believe that She is of God, She speaks for God, and we happily submit ourselves to Her rules. Why does that bother you so much when you are quite free to leave Her and go where you wish? No one makes anyone stay in the Church.
Could someone give me an answer to this?
"Why does that bother you so much when you are quite free to leave Her and go where you wish? No one makes anyone stay in the Church."
As an atheist, I agree. I've come across Catholic Churches and most are often filled with bribery and corruption all too often and since most religions are often tools misused to control and abuse women, I strongly believe that Churches should stay private and anyone who joins should first be given the opportunity to read the contract and either agree or leave. And since they're private, they deserved to be taxed just like people and corporations. Overall, sounds great to me.
Interesting comment. The Church in Russia was driven underground and suffered. Persecution and martyrdom followed. After Russia was broken up, there were still believers, and in the Ukraine, our seminary cannot hold all the young men applying for the priesthood. These young men grew up in the underground Church, worshiping in secret places in fear of jail or worse.
What then makes you think something as simple as removing tax exempt status will kill the Church?
"What then makes you think something as simple as removing tax exempt status will kill the Church?"
Ok, so I must have sounded confusing but I'll clarify. I'm not saying that getting the churches to pay their fair share of taxes will kill them for they have plenty to spare and taxes are just small potatoes compared to the overall costs of maintaining the churches and providing the services. If a church falls apart, it has its own reasons. All I say is let it stay private and no bailouts either. We're already seeing the consequences of bailing out Wall $treet and it's not pretty.
Russia is being pounded into "third world" status with organized crime
and destruction of social safety nets since the fall of the Wall and
being "baited" by US into Afghanistan.
Joining a Church may just be a way to survive all of that today.
The Vatican has written off America and Canada and Western Europe at
this point finding their new fortunes in Asia and China.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Sioux Rose
FAITHFUL: If the church stopped meddling with politics that impact OTHERS' lives your plantive request would make sense.
As for feeding the poor, great; but the church (Vatican) also collected enormous wealth, invested in fine furniture, materials made of gold, while many starved outside said doors. In other words, there is MUCH to atone for.
The very fact that the church demonizes birth control when it's been shown that impoverished women worldwide fare better when they can control the number of children they bear is a TYRANNY and hardly based on respect for life, given the poor quality of life so many are forced to lead as a result.
The suppression of HEALTHY sexuality is another big problem, the most obvious response of which is seen in the matter of so much pediophilia on the part of priests.
And the list goes on...
Why the intertest in changing the church ...?
The Vatican/Catholic Church has always and everywhere sought to enforce
their religious beliefs on the wider world -- see Crusades, genocide
of native American, enslavement of Africans here, oppression of women,
Jews, homosexuals.
Not to mention it's arrogant and inane war on nature:--
"Manifest Destiny" and "Man's Dominion Over Nature" which are the
licenses to exploit nature, natural resources, animal-life and even
other human beings according to various myths of inferiority.
See: Global Warming, Pollution of Planet
And my question to you .....
Why the right-wing coup on Vatican II which changed the church in
such positive ways? Pope John XXIII -- beloved throughout the world --
was a LIBERAL who brought a humane and compassionate face to the church.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Has anyone read the Gnostics? The Magdalene was one of Christ's disciples and wrote gospels herself, in a woman's voice. The misogynous re-writers of the "Bible," exacerbated with Augustine's writings, decreed that women were only "vessels" and that the Magdalene was a "whore." It is of no consequence anyway; organized religions are all patriarchal.
Obviously Jesus was trying to change his Jewish faith and elevating
women. Mary Magdalene was Jesus' Apostle to the Apostles - she was
to lead the church after his death.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
I must say that this thread is going exactly where I expected it to go. I love how Liberals and Socialists find absolutely nothing good in the Church and gleefully dredge up every personal failure they can find, pointing to these failures as if this is what constitutes the Church.
My Socialist son does this constantly. Yet when I ask him who he fed this week among the poor, which of the naked he clothed, or who he visited in prison, he has no answer. It was the Catholic Church which started hospitals, orphanages, and schools. It is still the Catholic Church that has apostolates all over the world who are feeding the hungry and caring for the poor. It is the Catholic Church's bishops, like Oscar Romero, who at the price of their lives, have voiced opposition to those who use the poor like toilet paper for their imperialist aims.
We have seen the face of Socialism -- 70 million dead in Russia and 100 million in Mao's little paradise. When there is no religion to hold back the evil passions of men, beware! The life next decreed worthless by the Socialist masters where you live just might be yours!!
You confuse socialism with communism...the two are quite different.
Not only Catholics are benevolent givers...so are many atheists and agnostics. That is because they judge not and are humanists.
Faithful Catholic: (I am an atheist Jew. I grew up in an Orthodox Jewish family.) I have been rather fond of Liberation theology. I have two close friends who are Catholic. One is a convert, in another country. I grew up with Italian Catholics in Brooklyn, in an area that was l/2 Italian and 1/2 Jews,mostly from E. Europe/Russia. We got along well, as most of NYC does. Do you ever read James Carroll's articles on CommonDreams? He wrote "Constantine's Sword" about the history of the Church in re Jews. He was a seminarian and left. There's a video of the same name. There's room on this planet for people who believe in religion and those who do not. If I were you, I wouldn't do a body count by sectarian "socialists" or "communists" vs religion in history. This article is about women in the priesthood. What is your opinion on that? (Graham Greene, a great novelist who I read a lot, was also a convert to Catholicism.)
NYCartist, I appreciate your comments.
I have read Carroll's column and usually appreciate him. I also appreciate liberation theology. When it comes to priests who teach this perspective, I have often thought that if they truly wished to teach it and model that ideology, they would need to leave the priesthood. Because they are allowing themselves to be controlled, underneath it all, by the vatican and its empirical laws.
I personally believe one cannot serve empire and preach true human freedom at the same time. There is an innate dissonance here. And Roy Bourgeois (bringin us back to topic), was/is willing to be excommunicated for his beliefs. That is liberation theology in action. At least, that is my own humble opinion.
Ready to transform:there's a wonderful interview with Father Roy Bourgeois on DemocracyNow just before the weekend. He is going to "fight"/appeal excommunication. The interview has a moving (to me) description of his talk with his father who is in his 90s and his family's support. His father told him that he only has to answer to God. Bourgeois and some priests are going to the Vatican to ask for an appeal, if they do/did excommunicate him yesterday, as threatened (the day after Thanksgiving, I think).
NY--I saw that interview. I felt that it was important. I got a sense that it was a kind of transformational moment.
Roy Beourgois is telling the 'Church' that the truth lies within one's own conscience and it needs to be followed. He is chosing the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. That is liberation theology in action. This is what the Church can't allow. It would make them unnessary in the long run.
May I suggest that you listen to Kreeft's audio lecture. He is much more brilliant than I am, much more Catholic (I am a recent convert) and very lucid in presenting the opposition to women's ordination.
Here is the link. I do hope you will listen
http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/09_priestesses/peter-kreeft_priestesses.mp3
Thank you.
It is also the Catholic Church which gave us violent Crusades -
"Introducing the Sword with the Cross" -- setting new precedents in torture.
Oppression of Jews in Papal Strates in ghettoes, barred from society, education,
employment; forced to wear Yellow Stars.
Papal Bulls which called for enslavement or death of native American and
Africans enslaved here. Church Schools which brainwashed native children
taken from their families. "When they came, we had the land and they had
the book. When they left, we had the book and they had the land."
Oppression of women -- The Vatican still does not recognize the full
personhood of females as it recognizes the full personhood of males.
These oppressive teachings about women have negatively influenced all
societies in regard to female equality. Vatican worked with tax-exempt
dollars to stop the ERA.
Additionally, "Socialism" slways had a positive resonance all over the
world. That's why Hitler co-opted the Socialist Party in Germany which
supported women's equality, human rights and reversed it all.
And, what you are talking about in Russia is what J. Edgar Hoover always
referred to as "Totalitarian Socialism."
Let me also remind you that Catholic hospitals have long received taxpayer
assistance - and now their charities as well.
If you release some of the anger and animosity you are displaying you may
find some true understanding of the history of this Patriarchal religion.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Can you direct me to or name specifically the papal bulls which called for the enslavement of native peoples?
What do you mean by the "full personhood" of females?
Sound bite lectures do not go over well with me. Prove your points, please. This is an open forum, so you have the ability to do so if you wish.
Thank you
By the way, to the people complaining about Catholic churches not being led by women, can you name me a single Muslim Mosque that's being led by a female? What about Hindu and Buddhist Temples? What about Jewish churches? I wonder why it's ok to pick on some religions as not giving women a leadership role all the while being silent about others that are no better. If you don't like it that your church, mosque, temple or whatever religious place doesn't accept the idea of women for leadership, just leave or even better stay out of religion altogether.
The article is about the catholic church. Women are allowed to become rabbis in the Jewish faith.