Posted on 10/11/2015 12:00:18 PM PDT by NYer
New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd took the occasion of his triumphant visits to Cuba and the United States to refer to His Holiness as “the perfect 19th-century pope”, largely because he seems disinterested in creating female priests.
In her piece, Dowd’s assertions often lack context and the column itself is not particularly interesting, but it was a welcome one, nevertheless, because it allows us to consider how the Catholic Church, more than any other institutional body in history, has uplifted women and encouraged them to live to their highest potential.
Yes, a very sound argument can be made that the Catholic Church has been the means of freeing women, and not – as many unthinkingly charge – the means of their oppression. Prior to perhaps the last 150 years, the great majority of educated and accomplished women were Catholic female religious, who conceived completely original ideas and ran with them.
Think of Elizabeth Bailey Seton, a widow with 5 children, cut off from her own family’s fortune due to her conversion, conceiving of what we have come to think of as Catholic elementary education, and essentially inventing a means for the children of the poor and the marginalized to become educated and competitive in the “new world.”
Think of Teresa of Avila, who not only reformed a corrupted religious order, but then went on to build 16 monasteries, both for men and women, while often in paralyzing pain. Oh, and she wrote a few books that are considered classics of theology, and is now a Doctor of the Church. Not bad for a woman who had spent her youth reading romance novels.
Think of Henriette DeLille, the daughter of freed slaves, and Katharine Drexel, the daughter of a wealthy industrialist, both founding individual orders of women who spent their time and energy building schools and hospitals for Native Americans and African Americans in the deep south.
Think of Catherine of Siena, counselor to both popes and royalty, dictating her letters to two scribes at a time. Another Doctor of the Church. Interestingly Catherine was almost entirely uneducated and “unaccomplished” by worldly standards, but the church – hardly an elitist institution – calls her “Doctor” just as it does Saint Hildegard of Bingen, an intellectual giant of music, science, medicine, letters and theology. Just as it does Saint Therese of Lisieux, who entered a Carmel at age 15 and never left it, but whose influence has traveled far.
Oh, and let’s not forget Joan of Arc, a female warrior who led men into battle. Self-actualization, anyone? Sure, the men in the church let her down. But we don’t remember them, or call them “saints”, do we?
The fact is, for all of the talk about how oppressive the church has been for women, there has been no other institution in history which has given women such free reign to create, explore, discover, serve, manage, build, expand, usually with very little help from the coffers of the diocese in which they worked, and largely without intrusion on the part of the male hierarchy.
Rose Hawthorne, daughter of Nathaniel Hawthorne, founded the Hawthorne Dominicans, an order of nuns who take care of cancer patients – free of charge – and who subsist entirely on donations. An American woman named Vera Duss received her medical degree from the Sorbonne and, less than a week later entered a Benedictine abbey in Paris, where she hid and treated Jews who were being hunted by Nazis. After Patton liberated Paris, Mother Benedicta Duss felt called to return to America, and establish a Benedictine abbey in Connecticut where, ironically, Patton’s granddaughter is a member of the community.
Almost from its inception, the church has been a force and fomenter of feminine self-actualization. One is hard-pressed to name a single institution on the planet, other than the Catholic Church, which would have allowed women to simply run with their heads, be who they were born to be, and accomplish great things.
The church has fostered literally thousands of great, great women, whose accomplishments are unjustly overlooked because they were done in a habit and a wimple. Compare them with the “empowered” women of today – women often trapped in their own bitter vortex of unmet expectations, or trained to find “microaggressions” all around them – and the contrast could not be more stark.
Have modern women truly been more inventive, more socially conscious than the Catholic women who essentially invented social service programs through the church, long before governments knew what to do with the orphans and illiterate children of the poor, or how to treat and nurture the sick? It’s doubtful. Are modern women any more free than the religious women who have built and served the churches? Sadly, no, because in our secularist society, women’s creativity follows not the course of God, but whatever has already succeeded for men. Their sense of success is measured not by their service to others, and to heaven, but by the false – and masculine – worldly measures.
Whatever Dowd thinks of Pope Francis, it is worth remembering that it was the Catholic church, before anything else, which looked at the women who surrounded the most Important Being delivered upon the earth and saw them as women-in-full, worthy of honor and exclamation and respect. While Sarah and Rebecca and Esther and Ruth had their roles, and were honored, that respect – that willingness to look at women as more than footnotes but as persons essential to the whole great pageant of salvation – that began with Mary; the woman called by the Catholic Church the greatest of all saints, and the greatest of God’s creation.
Well said. Unfortunately, headline writers make things sound differently.
Well then you need to brush up on the truth, ma’am.
one of my pastors always said that it was the Catholic church that gave women their start and recognized their value and potential, the church made them saints, they were administrators and CEO’s of Hospitals, religious orders, schools, universities, etc., for hundreds of years.
I believe that, as in a good marriage, the roles of men and women in the Church dovetail. I'm a woman and I don't feel put upon by the Church.
I liked your response. That's kind of where my analogy to marriage came from. In the culture in which I grew up, the man was the head of the house, but the woman stood with him- he made the rules, but she was the one who enforced them. She also, whether he realized it or not, had a great influence on his decisions.
In our home, my father was indubitably the head, and my Mom and I enjoyed making him feel that way. We never had supper until he was finished with work. If he was going to be late, we brought supper out to the garage and ate with him there (he was a mechanic). My father, in turn, respected my mother for the intelligent woman she was, and there was never assn important decision made in our home without the two of them consulting one another. His decision was final, but never without input and consideration.
For my Mom's part, she more than proved herself worthy of my father's respect. She was a lady. She carried herself with a humble modesty. She dressed modestly and spoke like a lady, as well. My father was always proud of her, and had reason to be.
As for me, I wish I could have found a man in my life who would treat me add my Dad treated us. He didn't swear or use obscene language in front of women. He opened doors. He watched to make certain I followed my Mom's example of modesty and if I didn't, he would have her talk to me. I grew up being proud to be a woman, realising that I had a role in my little microcosm that was just as important as anyone else's. Problem was, outside of that, the world became "feminized" and suddenly turned upside down. The pride that we had taken in doing little things for my Dad to make him feel loved and appreciated was frowned upon. The respect he showed us as women would be considered an insult in the outside world.
And so it is with the Church. Women are grasping at roles that are not theirs to take, while neglecting the little, humbler things that helped keep things on an even keel.
Everyone has a place. To know it and keep it, out of love for God is a wonderful thing: and God is never outdone in His generosity.
As a final word, please pardon my vanity, but I wish to thank God for the mother and father He gave me, and all the sacrifices they made for me. A family works when they work together, each in their roles, appreciating one another. It's a matter of love, not money, nor anything tangible on this earth. We were poor, but Dad was a man to be proud of; Mama was ill most of the time, (a cancer survivor!) but would do anything to make sure my father knew how much he was loved and respected; I helped wherever I could, and stayed with them both to the end. We were a team. May we meet one day in Heaven!
Thank you for your post. It brought back a flood of beautiful memories...
Comparing devotion to the mother of Jesus to jihad? Really? We shall keep our devotion all the more, to compensate for the hatred shown to our Church and to the Mother of God.
And you, who profess to follow Christ would disrespect his mother so? Look to your own soul, my friend, before judging ours.
>>If roman catholicism continues to advance this false doctrine I'll continue to oppose it.
We know the ills of Islam. But they don't advance a false doctrine within the church as we see catholics doing with Mary. <<
Recommend you follow the context of the conversation and get your facts correctly before you make assertions you cannot back up. Not once have I equated mary with jihad.
Yes, I do follow Christ.
Do I disrespect Mary? No. Luke records all generations shall count her blessed. Why? Because she gave birth to the only Son of God. I agree with the good doctor.
Do I accord to Mary the roman catholic titles of Queen of Heaven, Queen of the Apostles, etc? No.
Do I agree with roman catholicism that tells people to pray to Mary, to look to her for answered prayers when Christ won't answer them? No.
We have catholic writings that tell us the following:
No one can enter into Heaven except through Mary,
that Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary and on account of Mary,
that Mary is the dispensatrix of all the graces God bestows on man,
that no man is delivered or preserved from the world-wide snares of Satan except through Mary, and God grants His graces to no one alone except through her,
every grace granted to man in this life has three successive steps: from God it comes to Christ, from Christ to the Virgin and from the Virgin it descends to us.
There's a lot more. http://www.catholictradition.org/Mary/mary18a.htm
Now, let the reader take note. The above quotes from the website all contradict the Bible and Mary's own Son.
We have John recording these Words of Jesus.
John 14:6 I am the way, the truth, the life, no one comes to the Father but through ME.
I ask, who is disrespecting who?
No, but you continue to oppose Mary (do you capitalize your mother’s name?) while acknowledging that Islam is a problem. Surprise! It’s a much bigger one! Preach to them- a good Catholic will always stand by Mary.
A good Christian will stand by Jesus.
JESUS is the one who died for us to bring us into right relationship with God.
HE is the only mediator between God and man.
He is the One Scripture testifies of.
HE is the one towhom the HOly Spirit leads people.
CHRISTianity is about CHRIST, not about Mary, or anyone else who played a role in His life.
If y'all are so focused on Mary, seems that Catholics have lost their first love, which would be (and should be) Jesus.
Revelation 2:4-5 But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first. Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent.
Sad to say, there's many who are like Simon the sorcerer, who are more interested in the power.
I know people like that and they call themselves Christians and I have to wonder.
Both are a problem as they are false doctrines.
No thoughts on post 48??
What’s the issue with capitalizing ealgeone’s mother’s name?
All names are proper nouns and should be capitalized.
Thank you for your beautiful words — very much like the household in which I grew up. Middle class, not a lot of money, but a husband/father and wife/mother who loved and respected each other and performed their family roles to their best abilities.
A different era, but Dad was the breadwinner, Mom the manager of the home & the finances. We ate dinner every day as a family when Dad arrived home; Mom always had it ready for him. Children under the age of 12 were in bed by 8pm, except on special occasions (e.g., Christmas Eve Church services) so that husband & wife could have their own time and prepare for the next day. Male & female children did chores and learned to cook, wash dishes, wash clothes, iron, and make basic sewing repairs. We cut the grass, washed the car, and cleaned whatever we were instructed to clean. The only TV allowed was “Gunsmoke” and “Ed Sullivan”...in black & white. If we mouthed off, a bar of soap went into our pie holes (courtesy of Mom), and if we were really bad, the boys got a leather belt across the rump and the back of the legs (courtesy of Dad). We were given many gifts at Christmas, Easter, and for birthdays, and allowed as many books, sports, & hobby items as they could afford. Dad was a Boy Scout Leader and Mom was a Den Mother. We didn’t consider ourselves abused, but well-cared for and loved.
A better time, wasn’t it?
Oh, that's for certain! Thank you for sharing your story, too! I'm totally with you on the not-feeling-abused part. I never got hit unless I deserved it, and never in front of anyone. Funny thing about that last part: it was more effective because, until you got home and got hit, you spent your time dreading it! I'm smiling as I write this, because it was a pretty smart tactical move, lol!
My parents would sit down with me and tell me what it was that I did wrong, so I understood not to do it again. It wasn't abuse. It was good parenting!
Years later, when I was too old to hit, but not old enough to stop being stupid, lol, I would get yelled at, have extra chores to do, or have some privilege suspended. Sometimes I'd listen in and hear one parent say to the other that they may have been too tough- but neither would say that in front of me. They stuck together, and stuck with the punishment. I wasn't too dumb not to respect that!
My friends all had chores, as I did. On weekends, the one who got finished first would go to the other's house to help out, so we had the rest of the time to ourselves. That time pretty much consisted of going to the store to buy candy, maybe walk to the show, then going back to somebody's house to hang out on the porch, lol! None of us minded being around the OTHER kid's parents- we were only allergic to our own! And you could count on each other's parents just as your own, because they, and my parents cared about each other's kids, too.
Families are so broken-down today. We were lucky to be brought up the way we were, in the world we did. Thank you so much for your post- you made my day!
G-d ♡ bless you!
Grateful ✟ ✡
My point exactly. Post 47: neither Roman, nor Catholic, nor even the name of Mary, the mother of Jesus are capitalized. E- you and I have been over this issue before. It is a sign of disrespect, and childish.
So we ignore all the false teaching on Mary and focus on grammer?? Ok.
Does it matter to a devout Roman Catholic? Not in the least. But we won't have her dissed, either, FRiend.
" No one can enter into Heaven except through Mary, that Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary and on account of Mary, "
Where did you get that last one? The first one is "twist and shout" as far as I'm concerned. I'm not saying it's you, but the source. Luke's Gospel, although Martin Luther (who, IMHO, is the one who deserves lower case) decided the world needs no other Gospel but that of St. John as a source of doctrine, relates the story of the Incarnation of Jesus, which obviously includes Mary. Our Catholic tradition concludes that St. Luke spoke with Mary when writing his Gospel, for details about His Life before His public ministry. That part of the Scripture was about Mary as the Woman who was the mother of Jesus.
As for the remainder, yes, we do believe that Mary is the Mediatrix of All Graces. She was given to us as our Mother by Jesus as He was dying upon the Cross. It's a matter of interpretation, E- a Catholic believes that it is not so much that a person is a Christian that Jesus spoke : no one comes to the Father but through Me." It is His Incarnation, Ministry, Passion, Death, and Resurrection that makes it POSSIBLE for us to gain Heaven- original sin had precluded that. It was through Mary's "fiat", her choice to accept the unimaginable Grace of being the Mother of Jesus, insomuch as He was given to the world through her, by the Power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity, God and has two Natures in one Being: thus Mary's title, "Mother of God."
Sorry for not answering sooner, E, no disrespect intended- my life has been kind of zooey lately, there was a disaster and I'm beginning to recover from it. Not a pity thing, just that my thoughts are still a bit scattered, and I'm kind of shaken up- that's why I was absent for awhile.
We may not agree, but we've had some interesting discussions! God bless and keep you! I'm back, just a little at a time for now...
There are so many writings on Mary, catholics are unaware of them unless they research them. But one can see how they contradict the Bible in so many ways.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.