A group of women in England want the Pope to allow women to become priests, and their saying so with large bus boards all throughout London.
The Church defends its men-only stand in two ways this time. (1) Jesus was a man and priests are "stand-ins" for Him and (2) Jesus had 12 disciples who were all men.
Admittedly, this is better than labeling the ordination of women as priests a sin on par with pedophilia. Thank Ra for small favors.
Still, why not just say "because God said so" and end the debate. Because as long as the explanation is based on interpretation, it's just discrimination.
Let's address the "Stand-in" argument first. OK, so, his stand-in HAS to be a man? Jesus was Jewish and (therefore) circumcised. Are all priests Jewish and circumcised? No? Then isn't this really just an arbitrary qualification. Are women less able to give a homily or understand scriptures? Are women less able to pray or sacrifice? I fail to see how having a vagina instead of a penis somehow makes someone less qualified to be a symbol and engage in liturgical rites. It just sounds like sexism to me.
And the disciple argument.... Well, Jesus chose his disciples 2000 years ago. Have gender roles changed at all in the past two millennia? Apparently not in the Catholic Church. Though outside the walls of the Vatican and the Seminaries, um, yeah, just a little. We get to own property, choose who we marry, vote and everything! Almost as good as being a man! Right?!
The priest addressing this issue also said that "[m]en and women are equal in Christianity," but apparently not enough to actually be equal in the eyes of the Catholic Church. It's separate but equal, right? Segregation. Because men and women are different. Separate but equal. Right.
As I have gotten older, I have observed people engaging in religion more as a cultural phenomenon than a true spiritual exercise. That's OK. It's a free country and all that. Let your faith flag fly. But IMHO, as long as churches perpetuate a culture of inequality, they are undermining the spiritual growth of their members.
Growing up Catholic and female must create quite a stigma. "You're valuable, honey, just not as valuable as your brother is. He is more like Jesus, having a penis and all." *rolling eyes*
I don't mean to pick on the Catholic church. Truly, it is hard to find a Christian denomination or any religion that does not institutionalize and actually teach gender inequality (though there are some). I think churches are like art, they reflect the society out of which they emerge. Churches are just perpetuating the biases and prejudices rampant in society. The problem is that because these proclamations come from behind stained glass, they are treated as divine and irrefutable. But 50 years later, we all look back and groan at our ignorance.
Let me boil this down: any church that tries to tell me that God made men and women intending women to be inferior and subservient is NEVER going to get my ass in the pew or my coin in the plate. NEVER. I have enough self esteem at this point in my life to tell that smiling preacher-man to take his "women are to be silent in church" and stick it where the Son don't shine. And mean it.
It's not my intention to directly debate the question of woman pastors, but I want to challenge you're thinking. You talk about teaching that women are inferior and subservient, but that's not an honest interpretation of the position you are attempting to oppose--even if you want to claim it is.
ReplyDeleteThe role of being subject to another authority is not inherently one of inferiority. I do not consider myself inferior to my boss, but I respectfully submit to his authority. Without those roles, things wouldn't work. Jesus was subject to God the Father, but they are equally God. God the Son is not inferior to God the Father, but he placed himself under the rule of the Father to fulfill a role and serve a divine purpose.
If you really believe that people are not trying to be deeply spiritual in their beliefs if they interpret Biblical teaching as prohibiting woman pastors, then I think you're overly cynical and misunderstand a lot of people--presumably due to a biased view. I myself (along with others I know) have struggled with the issue and diligently pursued an understanding of Biblical teaching. It was not a struggle for cultural understanding or acceptance of cultural norms, it was a struggle to understand the teachings of my Creator.
Now, let me ask you this. What if, beyond all doubt in your mind, God was telling you that it was indeed His plan to specify particular roles within the Church body and that His design was to place men in pastoral roles. Could you personally accept the sovereignty of your Creator and concede that, though you cannot understand it, there must be a reason for His plan other than the simple-minded conclusion that women must somehow be inferior to men? If you accepted the notion and started attending a Church who practiced what your Creator instructed, would you be surprised to find blessings and a peace in your life even more inexplicable than your Creator's instructions? Woman do not have to be seen as inferior to be divinely fixed to non-pastoral roles in Church, and you do not have to understand why God's plan may work that way for it to work.
That said, I can--let's just say--sympathize with those who wish to interpret God's word differently, though I would also caution that that too may be a cultural phenomena more than a true spiritual exercise. Still, I only point out the possibility--I won't be arrogant enough to make such an assumption. If you diligently seek in God's word to understand and accept His will no matter how hard it may be to do so, your resulting beliefs are between you and God.
-Jason
Jason, you just said "the role of being subject to another authority is not inherently one of inferiority." Really? Does 2 +2 = 5 now?
ReplyDeleteIf I am the "subject" of another, than makes me beneath, lower than, and subjugated to that person.
I agree that I am not inferior. That is precisely my point. Nevertheless, religious teaching that disqualify women form leadership roles purely for gender reasons are treating women as if they are.
You can try to gloss it with whatever polish you want. Segregation, whether in school or in church, is a mark of inferiority.
And no, I will not sympathize with people who would use any religion to keep a thumb on women. It's an excuse. Much of the abuse and subjugation of women all over the world is couched in religion: immolation of widows, female circumcision, stoning, beheading, beating, burquas - all of it out of some fouled up religious belief that women are the barely tolerated property of first their fathers and then their husbands.
"Oh, God works in mysterious ways. No one knows why women cannot be in the clergy. It's all part of God's mysterious plan." That's a load of crap. The reason women are prohibited from joining the clergy in so many churches is not because of God, it's because of men. And if it seems like I'm mocking a little, I am. It's an excuse to keep things as they are.
I am a tolerant person. But I will not tolerate intolerance. Even if it comes cloaked in scripture and robes.