The Stability of Truth in the Spirit of an Age

"The teaching which I have rehearsed is indeed against the grain of the world, against the current of our time. But that, after all, is what the Church as teacher is for. The truths that are acceptable to a time - as, that we owe it as a debt of justice to provide out of our superfluity, for the destitute and the starving - these will be proclaimed not only by the Church: the Church teaches also those truths that are hateful to the spirit of an age."

G. E. M. Anscombe, female philosopher and feminine genius extraordinaire, from Contraception and Chastity, 1975.

Benedict's Catechesis on Women in Church History

VATICAN CITY, FEB 14, 2007 (VIS) - The role of women in the history of the Church was the theme chosen by Benedict XVI for his catechesis at today's general audience, which was held in the Paul VI Hall in the presence of 20,000 people.

"Jesus chose 12 men as fathers of the new Israel, 'to be with Him and to be sent out to proclaim the message'," said the Holy Father, "but ... among the disciples many women were also chosen. ... They played an active role within the context of Jesus mission. In the first place ... the Virgin Mary, who with her faith and her maternal care worked in a unique way for our redemption. ... Having become a disciple of her Son, ... she followed Him even to the foot of the cross where she received a maternal mission for all his disciples in all times."

After mentioning other women who appear in various parts of the Gospel - such as Susanna, and Lazarus' sisters Martha and Mary - the Pope pointed out that "the women, unlike the Twelve, did not abandon Jesus at the hour of His Passion. Outstanding among them was Mary Magdalene ... who was the first witness of the Resurrection and announced it to the others." Pope Benedict also recalled how St. Thomas Aquinas referred to Mary Magdalene as "the apostle of the apostles."

In the first Christian communities, Benedict XVI went on, "the female presence was anything but secondary." St. Paul "starts from the fundamental principle according to which among the baptized 'there is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female'." Furthermore, "the Apostle admits that in the Christian community it is quite normal that there should be women who prophesy, in other words who pronounce openly under the influence of Holy Spirit for the edification of the community."

Therefore St. Paul's subsequent assertion that "women should be silent in the churches" must "be relativized," said the Pope, and he explained that "the problem ... of the relationship between these two apparently contradictory indications should be left to the exegetes."

"The history of Christianity would have developed quite differently without the generous contribution of many women," said the Pope and he recalled how John Paul II had written: "The Church gives thanks for each and every woman ... for all the manifestations of the feminine 'genius'."

"We share this appreciation, giving thanks to the Lord because He leads His Church, generation after generation, indiscriminately using men and women who know how to bring their faith to fruition ... for the good of the entire body of the Church.

Equality Under the Law in a Culture of Life

This is the conclusion from my first talk for the Newman Club: "The Gift of Life: Abortion, Euthanasia and the Death Penalty". I think I did borrow at least some parts verbatim from other's articles and wove them into my own, particularly at the end, but I did not reference them. Not quite the best start for my new method :D, but it shall have to do.

Conclusion

The Church asserts that one cannot argue for any right to kill as a basic right of human beings and certainly not as a basis for any claim to universal human rights. Thus, a woman’s right to effectively kill her child cannot, by its very definition, serve as a basis for women’s rights. Doing so maligns and destroys the dignity of the most weak, vulnerable members of our society.

I purposely have waited till now to mention one clause of the Catechism’s remarks about abortion because I thought it was so apt and brought out something so profound that ties all of these issues together:

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation: "The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law.

Thus, these matters are not just about trying to insert “religious morality” into the civil state. A rational analysis in light of faith illustrates that by legalizing abortion, euthanasia and [in most instances] the death penalty, America is acting in grave contrast to its own ideals of equality. The result is the rule of the strong over the weak, who are counted as less than equal citizens under the law. This results in the mentality known as the “Culture of Death” that John Paul II has famously defined.

In contrast, Jesus’ ministry, from the Catholic perspective, is completely counter-cultural to modern mentality’s culture of death. He taught that suffering was beneficial, important, vital, full of dignity. Because it is through suffering, that we come to learn our own humility before God and our own connection to God.

As the Beatitudes speak, the meek will inherit the land, not the strong. Not the rich, the proud, the ones in control – but the weak, the defenseless, and the humble.

As a society, we often associate what is “receptive” (traditionally, a feminine trait) with being weak – children who depend on the mothers body for growth, the ill who depend on compassion and medical care, the criminal who depend on society’s containment so they do not injure themselves or others – society often looks upon all these people not as gifts, but as burdens. We are having more and more trouble appreciating and protecting them, and esteeming them precisely as receivers – acknowledging their indispensable part in the very real process of discovering and realizing ourselves as gifts from God, by God, and for God.

Woman's Abnormal Abdominal Growth

In no rush to get to sleep tonight, I found my self in a rare poetry-writing mood. Reflecting upon the internal logic of a woman who denies the life within her womb, rejecting the real truths of science and of faith, I think she believes it to be merely a growth, like a tumor that is part of her body to try to control and fix. Though her voice is more like Modern Eve's, crafted by fear, anger and bitterness, than the actual beauty of her own. I am not a poet, so feel free to take my efforts lightly ;)

Woman's Abnormal Abdominal Growth

As soon as thick my lining grow
The mind within me starts to know –
In contrast to the heart’s fond care
And body’s efforts to prepare –
Reminding of the social No.

Thus to the Doctors! who prescribe
A Pill to make the Growth reside
No fear have I to do the deed
That Terminates the taxing seed
With Women’s laws do I abide.

Should I refuse this action weak to keep
Nine months a babe my arms would rock asleep…
But without heart and without thought
Life within cannot be caught.
I am Free to say it’s so!

Indeed I rage at Fate’s cruel heart
No more shall We be set apart
This Penalty for Freedom’s ease
While men no consequence appease?
Mistakes and Burdens from the start.

For why should I my Body’s rights
Submit to zealots who despite
All logic and all progress made
Insist my killing be forbade
Science demands no meek contrite.

But accidents caused by sexual acts?
When linked conception is with its objects?
Mothers’ bodies outward cry
Have cells rights to live or die?
Fertility I must Reject.

Genetic code is merely token
Forget faith for I have spoken.

No life within me to defend!
No soul within Cellular Blend!

Abnormal Growth of Abdomen.

The Courtship Ritual of Anti-Plagerism

I'm really beginning to disdain the abstract formalities of introducing and establishing quotations or paraphrased ideas. The words as property "belonging" to another. If it is effective, I want to use its effectiveness as such without being hindered by the elaborate rituals of credit due. Shall I introduce the author in a dependent clausal link, or perhaps just the work that she has written? If I do so, I may omit the name of the author in the MLA parentheses but not in the Chicago footnote. So I must take a step back and determine if an introductory two sentences explaining this author's primary purpose for their particular contruction of a quality sentence I just wish I could seamlessly interweave into my essay. I step forward again, trudgingly admitting that such an in-depth character analysis detracts from my purpose, even in a circituitious way, and keeping in line with the argumentative style of writing decide to spin around - introducing the author with a momentary comma-pause right before the quote is interwoven into the sentence.

In expression my frustration at this dance, I do not mean to be selfish in a very contraceptive, utilitarian sense - that I want something for its good qualities without its bad. I fully acknowledge that writers and scholars have ideas, and those ideas should properly be associated with the way they had presented it - particularly for aid in tracing ideas and scholarship. [Trained as an undergraduate historian, I don't think I could ever eschew references].

Indeed, I will fully acknowledge that such words are not my own, if asked, and in a paper I should well cite. Perhaps in a speech including in a transcription the description of the location of places borrowed from at the bottom. But I certainly get frustrated having to insert "So and so said x" or "In this or that publication, it said y". If the phrasing, particularly as a speaker making a point (when you're not trying to use the credidation of the source to augment your argument) but also as a writer, why not, if you like the way someone phrased something in an argument, mold it seamlessly into your own as part of a coherent unit? An extended conversation and thought process hopefully improved upon and certainly presented in different ways.

Intelligence in composition includes not only originality in thought and paraphrasing in purpose, but also the quality use of effective modes of expression. If that means I shall quote whole passages without every refering to the source, but give technical credit for legal and consideration purposes, then what should it matter?

Is this method of presentation in the academic discourses, which as a whole structure and monitor the courtship ritual of anti-plagerism, a remnant of particular masculine ways of structuring information? As a whole, academic writing does indeed follow this pattern, but the history of citations and what plagerism is seems to be much more varied (as perusals of various students' final speeches at my colonial institution attest). What then are some alternatives that present this information in a more feminine way? A molded, interweaving cooperative use of language seems to me much more effective and beneficial to expressing one's idea, because, as women, and as people, we think in relation to other things, even if we don't always identify them.

The Infancy Gospel of James and Joseph's Part in the Triumph over Original Sin

In reading a small portion of the Infancy Gospel of James in one of my New Testament textbooks, it struck me how one elaboration of that uncanonical text sheds light on one of the New Feminist theological developments of original sin (based upon John Paul the Great). While nothing in the Infancy Gospel is proclaimed as authoritative or accurate by the church, its influence is important enough to glean from beneath its wordings ideas that could help explain some elements of the Church's essential Truth. Indeed, as the textbook by Stephen L . Harris commented, "Traditional lore about Mary incorporated into the Infancy Gospel of James probably contributed significantly to the unique position that Jesus' mother eventually held in both the Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches...Although never officially admitted to the New Testament canon, in some Christian groups the book has exerted as much influence in shaping orthodox belief as have the canonical Gospels" (Harris, The New Testament, 5th ed, 263). Other lore contained in the book include information and names for Mary's parents, Anna and Joachim.

In interpretations of the Genesis narratives, the beginnings of original sin lay first and primarily with the temptation of Eve, seduced by the serpent. While Adam's acceptance of the fruit included all mankind in Eve's first sin, it was done after the fault had been initiated by his weaker wife. In more contemporary analyses, Eve did indeed do a fault by saying "No" to God, and thus departing from her role as a human and as a woman, but so too did Adam, simultaneously as or even before Eve's sin, by not fulfilling his role as a man, as a guardian of his wife - not in the domineering sense, but in the self-sacrificial love Jesus later exemplified and in the service of authority. A misunderstanding of the faults of each sex in the Fall of Mankind has also subsequently led to a misunderstanding of the nature of sex (as gender), sexuality and human relations. Mary's "Yes" to God and Jesus's sacrifice for the fault of all mankind thus redeemed humanity and overturned the Original Sin of Adam and Eve.

But Eve's "No" and Mary's "Yes" notably took place in very similiar contexts - without the presence of a Guardian male. While this may have been obvious to other theologians (I have not read widely enough to discern one way or the other), this fact was first illuminated to me in the reading of the Infancy Gospel of James which expands upon the life of Mary and the emotional turmoil they were put through when Jesus was conceived. It reads:

"She [Mary] was in her sixth month when one day Joseph came home from his building projects, entered his house, and found her pregnant. He struck himself in the fact, threw himself to the ground on sackcloth and began to cry bitterly: "What sort of face should I present to the Lord God? What prayer can I say on her behalf since I received her as a virgin from the temple of the Lord God and didn't protect her? Who has set this trap for me? Who has done this evil deed in my house? Who has lured this virgin away from me and violated her? The story of Adam has been repeated in my case, hasn't it? For just as Adam was praying when the serpent came and found Eve alone, decieved her, and corrupted her, so the same thing has happened to me."

Joseph first thinks, then, that he is merely another suffering man doomed to repeat the sins of Adam and Eve and that Satan has tempted and stolen the woman under his protectorate. But, beautifully, he acknowledges the part of the sin of Adam that has often gone overlooked or misunderstood - his failure in his duties as a man to protect that which is the most sacred and beautiful of life, in this case, the virgin Mary. He knows that he has repeated this sin of Adam and cries out in dismay, "What prayer can I say on her behalf...?" - the deed has already been done.

Interestingly, though, the Genesis account reveals nothing of Adam "praying when the serpent came and found Eve alone" - we simply know that he was not there, regardless of the reason. In light of what this commentary reveals about how original sin was overcome, it seems likely that Adam was not praying - he was simply not fulfilling one of his duties and remained alone somewhere else. If that is the case, then Joseph's own "prayer", as we can assume he was involved in because of the parallel he made to Adam, is the complete opposite of Adam's motivation for not guarding Eve. In Joseph's case, his virtuous prayer and connection with his God left his wife to find her own spiritual calling - to be the Mother of God with her resounding "Yes." This is a complete reversal from Adam's selfish pursuit of pure solitude when God had given him a companion.

Joseph also immediately recognized the seeming error of the woman under his guardianship. In his mind, she, under Satan's temptation, had committed a gross offense under Jewish law - pregnancy out of wedlock. He is thus turn, saying to hmself "If I try to cover up her sin, I'll end up going against the law of the Lord. And if I disclose her condition to the people of Israel, I'm afraid that the child inside her might be heaven-sent and I'll end up handing innocent blood over to a death sentence." Being a virtous man, as the canonical Gospels also record, he decided to "divorce her quietly". What a contrast Joseph's choice is from Adam's! who instead decided to succomb to his wife's temptations and eat of the fruit himself! Mary's resounding "Yes" is indeed the triumph and model of all mankind, but so is (perhaps on a lesser degree), Joseph's "Yes" to God - to his love of the Law, but also to his care and sensitivity to its circumstance and his openness to the revelation of God. This is indeed remarkable.

What, then, does this say about masculinity and femininity? In Adam's response to Eve is seen the response of weaker men to some of the more radical fallacies of the Feminist Movement - that their "No" to God is something to be followed and praised. If women should "own" their bodies, so should men. If the pursuit of sex solely for sexual pleasure is to be followed, the door is open for men to succomb to their own temptations as well. But in Joseph's response, he adapts his masculinity, as all holy men do (and all holy women do in vice versa), to express in his own actions some of the characteristic strengths of the opposite sex - caring about the person, sensitivity to complicated situations, and the openness of receptivity to God's call.

As New Feminists endeavouring to find the place of women, Mary's "Yes" has been a resounding affirmation of the love of God to which we are all called. But the position of men is equally as important in a feminim that advocates that complementary equality in dignity. Joseph's model as a human man trying to fulfill God's word is equally worthy of study. While he might not be the New Adam - as Jesus was in his sacrifical offering - he is certainly an Adam for all mankind to learn from.