The Fraudulent Prerogation of Male Primacy
History testifies that theological discrimination against women by institutional religion is advanced politically in patriarchal societies, and, with destructive and dysfunctional effects on the individual person and on society.
Fraudulently evolved prerogation of male primacy underlies cultural traditions of discrmination against women. Misinformed patriarchal theologies have poisoned women and men in their relationships and have brought about familial and societal dysfunction.
Anti-social violence against women comes in forms of unhealthful male obsession in sexual power, obsession [to] control, and in physical and psychological abuse.
When all is said and done, the working of Eucharist is quintessentially sexual and interpersonal, for quantum-electric bi-polarity is the cosmic motor of transformational energy/ matter...
There is, with bi-polar sexuality, a certain alienation of consciousness which identifies with moral loneliness. Male and female have to make distinctive choices in life which have effects of equal authentication though qualified by sexual difference. The subject matter of the procreation of the species is a deeply personal matter that affects both sexes, but with distinctly different consequences...
In the face of life's complexity, making decisions of mutual sensitivity can be agonizing [and fraught with uncertainty]...
The personal experience of making life decisions of Eucharistic consequence, of altruistic sacrifice, is ultimately a lonely decision. Eucharistic consciousness is radical in the personal sense of evolutionary necessity, which involves unavoidable transformation, whether we want to focus on the fact or not. We do age and die [which is for the better interest of future life].
In the end, it is important that we have something to show for our having been born. It is well that we make personal choices [now in our lives] that harmonize personal and social wellbeing.
We cannot in right mind want to bring violence and ruin to others [to nature]. Religion, personal and group, is rightly purposeful and exemplary when its word and work motivates others to altruistic living. The test of human authenticity is love's motive and its consequence, for love alone endures.
[Sylvester L. Steffen, RELIGION & CIVILITY, pp 207, 208, www.authorhouse.com]
Lessons of history testify to the need for a global change of consciousness and conscience, NOW; political decisions have moral connsequences for the longterm future. Change begins with honest communication, and, religious/ political integrity rests on honest communication.
A priest is one who offers a
A priest is one who offers a sacrifice. This is what separates Mary's giving life to Jesus and the Sacrifice of the Mass.
Life is so structured by the
Life is so structured by the Sacrament of Natural Order that everyone is at the same time, and for all time, altar and victim of Eucharist. I agree with the position of littlebear that in view of the "divine" prerogative of Mary (of all women in self-donation to life) what need have they of further "ordination"?
The Pope cannot seem to find
The Pope cannot seem to find any reason to ordain women, even though he will build a great church that seats many worshippers because there is a priest shortage. Here are some thoughts on ORDINATION --
The word of God to a patriarchal society
is bound to reflect that society.
A society where the majority of the leaders are men
is liable to be more willing to draw swords
than to sheathe them.
Men are more comfortable working with men
and will appoint and ordain other men
to assist in trade and governance.
Women are called by the inner voice
rather than by some proclamation
to help the needy and the children.
Those ordained by the voice within
are called for special service
not for privilege and title.
Those ordained by men
reflect the hands that send them.
Perhaps you ask, what is
Perhaps you ask, what is "fraudulent" about the male prerogation (presumption) of primacy over female.
In the reproductive evolution of life, there was first the asexual maternal method of live continuity by way of single cell division, and only very much later was the complexity of the division of the sexes introduced.
The cultural myth that woman is from the rib of man reverses the biological facts of evolutionary history and falsely feeds the male presumption of primacy over female.
What does this say about "religious" culture as it prevails? About Eucharist? About Priesthood? Whither the future?
Interesting things to
Interesting things to ponder:
The countries where womens rights have been most effectively championed (admittedly still a long way to go) are in North America and Europe.
North American and Europe are the prime targets of countries that continue to demand a subservient role for women.
Coincidence?
Interesting point COL55.
Interesting point COL55. North America and Europe are also the prime targets of the current and seemingly endless campaign of the major Christian denominations and their authority structures with regards to homosexuality, women's reproductive rights, and women's pastoral authority.
These would also be the same Church authorities who see their future in evangelizing third world countries. Suppose that's a coincidence?
Please note this: http://enlightenedcatholicism-colkoch.blogspot.com
Is it not ironic that Jesus,
Is it not ironic that Jesus, at the Last Supper, performed a 'feminine' role in washing the feet of the disciples? Usually the wife of the host (or daughters) of the host, washed the feet of visitors. If the host was rich, then his servants performed this task. But this task was usually performed by women. And here is Jesus, a Jewish man, performing this feminine task. And this would be another reason that the disciples (especially Peter) would be upset. They were expected to perform a lowly task, a feminine task---in their role of leadership of the people of the "New Covenant".
Then at the actual Supper, Jesus told the disciples, to "do this in memory of me."
What? Take bread and wine, and bring it to life---give it life---his life. If a family is gathered---and a new life is brought forth, who brings it forth? It is the woman of the house. Bringing forth new life is a feminine attribute.
The official Church states that only men, the Apostles were given the 'power, the authority' to change bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. If (and it's a big IF), there were only men present at the Last Supper, was it bacause women are already able to bring forth life?
The official Church likes to state, that Jesus' mother, Mary, was not ordained a priest. And if even Jesus didn't ordain her, then no woman can be ordained a priest. The truth is that Mary, through the power of the Holy Spirit, brought Jesus to birth. His body and blood came from her. Why would a woman, who had given birth to Jesus, "the Bread of Heaven", in Bethlehem (the House of Bread), need to be ordained again---she already was a priest.
But women who can bring forth life can't be ordained to bring forth the Lord of Life as Mary, Jesus' mother did? Amazing, isn't it?