In the great struggle between the Culture of Death and the Culture of Life, a propaganda war against the Church and her view of women has been waged with great success in many quarters. Several lies have become the food of feminists, a grotesque bread of life for their disciples to feed upon. Chief among these lies are:
The Church teaches that women are servile.
The Church teaches that sex is only for making babies.
The Church teaches that women have no place in the work force.
The Church teaches that men are dominant in marriage.
We also know that war has been declared by these lost souls on motherhood, fatherhood, babies, family and sacramental union in marriage.
This is the first of several articles that will systematically deconstruct the tissue of lies fabricated by the feminist radicals. We begin with the writings of Pope John Paul II, who loved women and was loved by them in return. From:
“Motherhood involves a special communion with the mystery of life, as it develops in the woman’s womb. The mother is filled with wonder at this mystery of life, and “understands” with unique intuition what is happening inside her. In the light of the “beginning”, the mother accepts and loves as a person the child she is carrying in her womb. This unique contact with the new human being developing within her gives rise to an attitude towards human beings – not only towards her own child, but every human being – which profoundly marks the woman’s personality. It is commonly thought that women are more capable than men of paying attention to another person, and that motherhood develops this predisposition even more. The man – even with all his sharing in parenthood – always remains “outside” the process of pregnancy and the baby’s birth; in many ways he has to learn his own “fatherhood” from the mother. One can say that this is part of the normal human dimension of parenthood, including the stages that follow the birth of the baby, especially the initial period. The child’s upbringing, taken as a whole, should include the contribution of both parents: the maternal and paternal contribution. In any event, the mother’s contribution is decisive in laying the foundation for a new human personality.
“In God’s eternal plan, woman is the one in whom the order of love in the created world of persons takes first root…
“Unless we refer to this order and primacy we cannot give a complete and adequate answer to the question about women’s dignity and vocation. When we say that the woman is the one who receives love in order to love in return, this refers not only or above all to the specific spousal relationship of marriage. It means something more universal, based on the very fact of her being a woman within all the interpersonal relationships which, in the most varied ways, shape society and structure the interaction between all persons – men and women. In this broad and diversified context, a woman represents a particular value by the fact that she is a human person, and, at the same time, this particular person, by the fact of her femininity. This concerns each and every woman, independently of the cultural context in which she lives, and independently of her spiritual, psychological and physical characteristics, as for example, age, education, health, work, and whether she is married or single.
“Therefore the Church gives thanks for each and every woman: for mothers, for sisters, for wives; for women consecrated to God in virginity; for women dedicated to the many human beings who await the gratuitous love of another person; for women who watch over the human persons in the family, which is the fundamental sign of the human community; for women who work professionally, and who at times are burdened by a great social responsibility; for “perfect” women and for “weak” women – for all women as they have come forth from the heart of God in all the beauty and richness of their femininity; as they have been embraced by his eternal love; as, together with men, they are pilgrims on this earth, which is the temporal “homeland” of all people and is transformed sometimes into a “valley of tears”; as they assume, together with men, a common responsibility for the destiny of humanity according to daily necessities and according to that definitive destiny which the human family has in God himself, in the bosom of the ineffable Trinity.”
if only our Muslim brothers would embrace this teaching…..:(
I suspect that the reference to Muslims is as much a stereotype as those made about Catholics. Muhammad himself was deeply devoted to his first wife, who was an astute business woman. After her death, he married multiple women but supposedly helped with housework and encouraged his wives to dialogue and debate with him and sought their advice.
Many of the anti-female attitudes go back to cultural customs of Middle Eastern nomadic tribes that adopted Islam several centuries ago. And just like there are some Christians who take submission to one’s husband too far, there are Muslims who have warped views of a woman’s rights.
But there are Muslim women who are doctors and other professionals. In fact there is a demand for females in the medical professions due to modesty laws. My husband has a handful of young Muslim women who wear the hijab in every section of the college classes that he teaches.
As for Catholicism, the biggest complaint from my mother’s generation is the whole ban on female priests. I used to feel the same way but figured it would eventually change in a couple hundred years. But now I have a different understanding. Men can’t be called to be mothers (despite the story of the “pregnant man”), and women can’t be called to be priests. Most of me accepts this, but that niggling part of me that was raised in our cultural still chafes a little. 😉
Mary Catherine,
Yes, if only it were a perfect world…
barboo77,
I think you make a very good point about stereotypes.
Regarding female priests… I trust in the Church’s teachings about male priesthood for all the reasons it gives…too many to state here.
My two cents…In the world today, there are so many new religious orders filled with young women that there is no reason a woman should feel she cannot have a fulfilling life as a religious. I feel that we live in a society that demeans men so often, it is refreshing to see an area where a man holds such a position and a woman can’t “take it away”. I’m sure there are a few women who truly feel they’d like to be a priest, but I suspect that if you asked most women who complain about it if they themselves want to be a priest, they’d answer “no”. So do they complain for the sake of complaining?
Gerard,
Great post. Speaking of the dignity of women….a few weeks ago, Oprah interviewed some nuns (The Dominican Sisters of Mary of Ann Arbor, MI) on her show. They were a joy to behold.
The video is available online.
barboo 77, it’s not a stereotype.
In Muslim countries you might be interested to know that women cannot drive, cannot choose their own husband, are often married against their will to much older men, are married off very very young, cannot see a doctor without a male relative present and in some cases cannot even be examined by a doctor, often have no access to institutions of higher learning, if they go to school at all.
Most Muslim countries have a very distorted view of honor. A woman seen just talking to a man can be killed by any male relative. Women must cover themselves completely in many countries with the burkha. One would think that this might offer them some protection but many women report that when and if they do go outside, they are often grabbed, pinched and squeezed.
In Jordan, Jweideh Correctional and Rehabilitation Centre for Women is a prison where victims of honor killings are imprisoned to protect them from being killed by their families. For many of these women, their only hope to get out of prison, is to marry – usually a much older man (as in 70+) who comes seeking the companionship of a younger woman. The other option available is to have a male relative post a guarantee worth $7000, that no harm will come to the woman. Many women have such guarantees posted only to learn this has been a ruse used to get them out of prison, to be killed. After all, $7000 isn’t much to restore the honor of a family. 😦
These are not stereotypes. As for Muhammad he married a 9 year old girl. I don’t know about you but even hundreds of years ago, I think most 9 year old girls were not physically, emotionally or psychologically ready to be a wife and mother. He also urged his followers to take several wives.
The Muslim view of women is that they were not created equal to men. A woman’s testimony is only worth half that of a man’s.
I could go but it’s tiresome.
Except to say that there is something profoundly wrong and disturbing about this view of women. This was not what God had in mind for the relationship between men and women. Women have little dignity in a Muslim country. It may be politically incorrect to say such a thing but it is true.
Hi Janet,
I saw that episode and it was great!
A friend of mine has a daughter in that community!
The quoted words from John Paul II are quite good.
The four examples of negative attitudes toward women, which have been attributed to the church, have at various times and places been enunciated in the name of the church. They cannot be found in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, without some incredible twisting of the plain words, but there are those who have proclaimed all of these things about women in the name of Jesus. That certainly isn’t limited to the Roman Catholic priesthood — there are such currents in many Protestant sects to the present day.
Likewise, Islam has been used in a similar manner. Mary Catherine’s statements ARE stereotypes, not because they are false — in various times and places, each thing she says has been true, and in some places is true today. But Islam is practiced from Senegal to Indonesia, from Tanzania to Bosnia, from Trinidad and Tobago to Minneapolis, MN. It is no more true of Islam than of Christianity that the worst treatment ever inflicted upon women in the name of a faith is universally representative of that faith.
As to the roles women can serve in… I belong to a church which has taught since about 1870, that church doctrine should not prevent the church from using in the ministry whomever God may be pleased to call. I was first introduced to that church by a married man who told me he couldn’t imagine relating to a woman as his pastor. My response was, he shouldn’t have to. There are a wide diversity of churches available. It should be possible for a man, or a woman, who expects a pastor, minister, priest, to be a man, to belong to a church which will guarantee one, while those willing to accept either men or women can join a church which is more flexible.
I know the Roman Catholic church has liturgical reasons for limiting priesthood to men, which have nothing to do with individual choice, but my point is, there is no reason every church should reduce itself to a common denominator. I have a Coptic friend who is always genially critical of my church allowing women to preach from the pulpit. Well, his church doesn’t have to allow it.
Mary Catherine,
I am not saying that indignities to women don’t occur to women in some predominantly Muslim countries, especially places like Iran. What I am saying is that it is not necessarily inherent in Islam. Not all orthodox Muslims believe or practice those extremes. The extremes are more tied to tyranny and culture than the actual faith.
And why do you think Jordan has such a prison…to protect the women from the cultural beliefs about “honor”. King Hussein tried several times to get the Jordanian Parliament to make honor killing illegal.
And while the idea of Muhammad marrying a nine-year-old now is abhorrent at the time it was not considered that strange, especially since it was done to make a political alliance not out of perversion. King Solomon had how many wives and concubines, and not doubt most of them would be considered underage by today’s standards.
If you study the difference between Arab Islam and African Islam, you can see how each culture has taken elements of Islam and skewed them to support their own cultural beliefs. Christianity is no less guilty of this if in more innocuous ways (like banning alcohol consumption). And you can see the same concerns about honor in Hindu India, especially in rural areas where child brides and female circumcision are practiced to protect family honor. So it is not endemic to just Islam.
I’m sorry barboo but again I MUST disagree.
Fundamentalist Muslim countries BELIEVE everything I have written about.
It is part of their religious belief system as a Muslim.
Muslim women who are doctors or teachers are not orthodox Muslims. If they are, in rare cases, their work is very very limited.
The Muslim faith simply doesn’t believe that women are equal. Under Sharia law women simply are not treated equally. Islamic law sanctions the marriage of very very young girls.
It also sanctions the forced conversion and rape of infidel females – a practice continuing today in many countries. This is NOT a cultural practice. It is a religious practice.
I’m not going to get into a debate with you but I do encourage you to do more research.
It is a myth which is perpetrated in the west that these are cultural ideas.
They are not. They are part of the belief system of orthodox Muslims everywhere.
And btw, I am Catholic Christian and Catholics do not ban alcohol. 😉
Christianity has uplifted women. It represents a different view of humanity – the dignity of each person including women. In the Bible Christ went against the cultural traditions of the time. The woman caught in adultery was not stoned to death. Christ forgave her and told her not to sin anymore. The woman who had many husbands was told to stop sinning.
It is directly BECAUSE of the Christianizing of barbaric Europe that the condition of women in society began to improve.
However, Islam does not view women this way. There are multiple passages from the Koran that clearly state that the man is the owner of the woman and that he may be free to beat his wife if she is disobedient.
“Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.” (Qur’an 4:34)
If King Hussein REALLY wanted to ban child marriages and honor killings he could have done it.
I suggest you read Murder in the Name of Honor by Rana Husseini. She is Jordanian and she has been working for YEARS to have honor killings banned.
Peace to you barboo 77! 🙂
Honor killing is also a plague in Brazil. At least up until ten years ago, a man who killed his wife over a manner of honor who managed to avoid arrest for 24 hours could report to a police station, be released on his own recognizance, and expect to be found not guilty by a jury of men who would cheer him on his way out of the courtroom.
A Jordanian Muslim man convicted in Missouri of the honor killing of his teen age daughter, had an accomplice convicted with him — his wife, a Brazilian Roman Catholic woman. Of course her church did not condone the killing, and I’ve read no evidence that his did either.
The Meaning of the Glorious Koran,
Marmaduke Pickthall.
Surah IV
15. As for those of your women who are guilty of lewdness, call to witness four of you against them. And if they testify (to the truth of the allegation) then confine them to the houses until death take them or (until) The God appoint for them a way (through new legislation).
19. Oh you who believe! It is not lawful for you forcibly to inherit the women (of your deceased kinsmen), nor that ye should put constraint upon them that ye may take away a part of that which ye have given them, unless they be guilty of flagrant lewdness. But consort with them in kindness, for if ye hate them it may happen that ye hate a thing wherein The God hath placed much good.
20. And if ye wish to exchange one wife for another and ye hgave given unto one of them a sum of money (however great), take nothing from it. Would ye take it by the way of calumny and open wrong”
21. How can ye take it after one of your hath gone in unto the other, and they have taken a strong pledge from you?
Not exactly a modern 21st century code — but less than 100 years ago, a husband had the legal right in most states to inflict “reasonable chastisement” on his wife as well as his children — and that included physically.
Of course, Leviticus and Deuteronomy contain injunctions which so violent and harsh that Jesus had to cast them aside by telling a group of self-righteous men “Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone.” It would have been worth his whole ministry just to put that sentence before the world.
“A Jordanian Muslim man convicted in Missouri of the honor killing of his teen age daughter, had an accomplice convicted with him — his wife, a Brazilian Roman Catholic woman.”
yup, get in your anti-Catholic hatred once again Mr Jenkins.
you got a real thing against the RC church eh? 😉
BTW, Mr Jenkins there are thousands of killings and maimings per year per Muslim country that are based directly on the words of the Koran.
The evidence is there brother. Open thy eyes. 😉
Mary Catherine, I know that the Roman Catholic Church is very dear to you, and to Dr. Nadal and his entire family. I try to tiptoe around even obvious facts which would set off your reflex against “anti-Catholic hatred.” You pointed to honor killings and oppression of women as particularly connected to Islam. I took the opportunity to point out that a Muslim father had an accomplice of another religion in the honor killing of their daughter. If his wife had been Southern Baptist, I would have said so, if she had been Unitarian, I would have said so, if she had been a charter member of godlessatheistsforhonor I would have said so. (There is, or was, Ihaven’t checked lately, a group called GodlessAtheistsForLife, who are on your side of this debate).
I am always dubious of people who make flat statements, followed by gratuitous comments like “the evidence is all around” or “Open thy eyes.” I offered several direct citations from what is generally considered to be a good English approximation of the Koran. I expect you to do likewise. Quote me the passage from the Koran that is cited to justify honor killings and maimings, and then mention specific cities in specific countries where such maimings occur based on reference to that passage.
I would note, with regard to maimings, that a good deal of female genital mutiliation occurs in Muslim areas of Africa, but this custom was NOT traditional even in pagan times in Arabia, nor in Persia, and is not commonly practiced in Asian Muslim areas to this day. It is a practice that Islam failed to eradicate, not a practice sanctioned by the Koran.
A good deal of the liberating influence of Islam was cut off at the death of Muhammed, simply because the leading pagan tribes of Mecca, which fought him for so long, then surrendered, were determined that the Quraysh clan were going to lead this new movement as it became militarily powerful. That, and the temptations of empire, rapidly submerged the original impulse. Ref: God’s Crucible: Islam and the Making of Europe, 570-1215 by David Levering Lewis.
Thank you, Gerard, for a great post. I enjoy the opportunity to read Pope John Paul II every chance I get.
I know this isn’t a place to go on and on about Islam, but for those who might not know where to get Quran quotes you can look into the Online Quran Project. Comparing the following with JP II’s thoughts above is especially illuminating.
To address the challenge by Siarlys:
“Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will.” Sura 2 Verse 223.
Translation: Men do what they want when they like with their wives, who are fields to be planted.
“If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (Reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or God ordain for them some (other) way.” Sura 4 Verse 15, and men only get punished once if they are lewd and then they are left alone. Sura 4:16
Translation: Men are forgiven for lewdness, women receive death.
“Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because God has given the one more strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what God would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first),(Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly)-A but if they return to obedience, seek not against them. Means (of annoyance): For God is Most
High, great (above you all).” Sura 4 Verse 34.
Translation: Women obey men, beat the women if they don’t obey, and “lightly”is open to interpretation.
Women are to look down, stay covered and walk lightly so they don’t reveal any sounds of jewelry. Sura 24 Verse 31
Translation: If you look up, uncover or let others know of your beauty you are being lewd and may be dealt with as determined above.
Islamic men can refer to these passages and treat any woman as a thing, and treat her to death if the woman is displeasingly lewd.
There are too many examples in the news, but the Iranian hanging sentence of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani for adultery is a recent example of the horrible treatment possible for women in countries ruled by Islamic law.