|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:19 AM August 1st, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
The Catholic church has done me a whole world less harm than feminism so if they open up another front against the radical feminists I say good for them and good for me. In fact I've already offered to join them for a protest if they should have one. Radial feminism has always hated the church, and that is very evident in there writing, something about patriarchy.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I see your point. But I also think the Cath Church is not going far enough for fear it will offend its biggest membership constituency: women. Oh don't get me wrong, I understand that fundamentally the report is critical of feminism. The question is, is it critical enough? Does it really call it for what it is? Consider the analogy of a civil engineer that designs and oversees the construction of a large public building that also happens to be constructed wrong-- it is destined to collapse within 5 years for whatever reasons and any reasonably competent and detached engineer would say so. However said engineer is good buddies with the mayor and half the city council, while also being not too bright. Now a local more competent engineer (who just so happens to owe money to the city in back business taxes) is asked to review and approve the first engineer's work. Mind you, it's been built with public funds and it has cost the city a fortune, and the design and execution was overseen by a crony of the mayor and half the city council. The second engineer can't in good conscious say that the first one did his job right; in fact he should be nailing up a sign that reads "Do not enter: Public Danger! Building will collapse within 5 years! Don't know when!" But instead, the second engineer, to keep the mayor and the city council happy, and to keep then from pursuing, maybe, his back-tax collection too aggressively, instead reports that the building has some flaws here and there, but all in all, it's OK.
Now, is the second engineer fulfilling the duty to conscious and public safety he should be fulfilling?
That's the sort of point I was making.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I read the letter. It struck me largely as being highly self-conscious and tending to spend a lot of time trumpetting the glory of women while implicitly accepting the assumptions of feminism. while also trying to find a scriptural/doctrinal basis for reconciliation between feminism and its own ideas about the sexes. But that's just it-- it can't: it doesn't exist. That is because feminism is about placing the interests of women above men and the abrogation of our civil and human rights for whatever some or certain men (thinking of family court judges here among others) and women perceive, as a class and as individuals, they can get out of doing so. There is no basis for this in any major religion. Yet, this letter is trying to create just that.
It's a sop to feminists in an effort to try to reconcile the public to some of the church's more unpopular doctrines and traditions. The joke, as they say, is on the authors, however. The fight has already been fought -- and lost. This letter basically constitutes a flag of surrender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:27 PM August 1st, 2004 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
In recent times, much reflection has been given to the question of the dignity of women and to women's rights and duties in the different areas of civil society and the Church....the Church is called today to address certain currents of thought which are often at variance with the authentic advancement of women.
Much reflection...well, actually, much reflection has more are less turned into grabbing for goods and spewing hatred of men. Sure that hurts the authentic advancement of most women, who naturally like men if they haven't been indoctrinated in anti-male hate by women's studies media minions. Time for some renewal, some reflection on the dignity of men and on men's rights and duties in the different areas of civil society. For a start I recommend www.trueequality.com
Here what John Paul II has termed the genius of women becomes very clear. It implies first of all that women be significantly and actively present in the family, “the primordial and, in a certain sense sovereign society”, since it is here above all that the features of a people take shape; it is here that its members acquire basic teachings.
Great. But ever noticed all the legal and cultural efforts driving men out of the family? See www.fathers-4-justice.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:13 PM August 1st, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Check out the stories on this on Google News:
http://news.google.com/news?num=30&hl=en&edition=u s&q=cluster:www%2ecathnews%2ecom%2fnews%2f407%2f17 1%2ephp
Then take a peak at the Vatican article itself
http://www.vis.pcn.net/doc/040731x_en.htm
This story is reported as if the Vatican blasts feminists as hate-mongers. How outrageous! Everyone knows that feminism is a great force for progress and enlightenment. And of course the Vatican, champion of male privilege, is viciously attacking feminism. Er, umm, not quite.
Welcome to the alternative universe of the misandristic world!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:43 PM August 1st, 2004 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
I can't understand why you guys get so excited.
It's an encyclical, for God's sake - a papal opinion piece - not a pronouncement ex cathedra. It has no standing whatever - theologically or otherwise. It can - and, hopefully, will - be ignored at will and without peril to the soul - which it is a comfort to konw!
And anyway - why the surprise? Holy Church has been supping with the Devil for yoncks. It accommodated Nazism, it came to terms with Mussolini's Fascism, it positively loved Franco, it was silent on the Persecution of the Jews and others. It even kept up with that most godless lot: the Soviets. So now it embraces Feminism - what else is new? It's a political machine. fighting for its survival in a world in which it is becoming more and more irrelevant. And it writes letters - like we all do from time to time.
However, if that's the best Rathsinger Card can come up with it doesn't augur well; let's all pray and wish John Paul 2 a long and ever longer life! JP2 will be hard act to follow, in any case.
But, who cares what sexless men in fancy drag think about men and women in the "real" world, anyway? Theirs, at best, is a spiritual mission - not a social one. The world marches on and God will work His Wonders regardless. Rejoice, oh ye of little faith!The Fall of the Feminists is at hand!
Revocate animos!
Tertullian the Apostate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've noticed this too. Most of the articles on the Pope's letter are negative. Makes me wonder whether they actually read the letter.
The letter itself is actually very pro-woman and more "feminist" than anything previously officially put forth by the Catholic Church. In one section it ever exorts EVERYONE to develop (what they termed) the feminine inclination to be "for the other".
The letter has much bigger implications than simply about women. I think the Pope is making a case against the me-me-me materialism of the modern world. He is IMO going about it clumsily, by invoking women as naturally holding the more altruistic values he advocates. I read the letter as a message to everyone to be less selfish and more "for the other" in their overall thinking.
I don't agree that this thinking comes more naturally to women which is implied in a backhand way in this letter, but this is quibbling.
It's intersting that supposedly "feminists" are blasting this very pro-woman letter without noticing the very profound shifts the Catholic Church has made toward feminism in it.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
