sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ordination of women, Women in Church history

LaVanway 1

Sarah LaVanway

Prof. Quirk

UCWR 110

14 December 2019

Mary as the Model for All…Sexists?

For many of us living in the age of technology, science, and reason, religion may seem ever more antiquated and irrelevant. The , however, is still about 1.1 billion members strong. Even as membership expands rapidly throughout Asia, Africa, and South

America, the relevance of the Church continues to fade fast. Part of this waning influence can be attributed to the Church’s seeming disconnect on many modern social issues, including women’s rights. The Catholic Church’s continued refusal to causes tension and debate for

Church members and secular people alike (Clemmitt). As the questioning among Catholics grows stronger, the Vatican has been forced to provide explanations for why women are unfit to be or (Rocca). Though John Paul II tried to settle the conversation once and for all, the debate over the religious legitimacy of barring women from ordained positions is far from settled (John Paul II). Is the Catholic Church’s decision to prohibit women’s rooted in strong theological reasoning or in prejudice against women? I would argue that the

Church’s continued reliance on antiquated, limited ideas about femininity derived solely from

Mary, the mother of , is sexist, not religious. If the Church chose instead to set an example of equality and accepted women into official leadership positions, the positive impact would be revolutionary for women worldwide.

For the Vatican, the official governing body of the Catholic Church, Mary’s existence, and the ministry of her son, Jesus, prove the impossibility of women’s ordination. The Vatican LaVanway 1 even tried “closing the question” indefinitely through the publication of an apostolic letter in

1994. In this letter, Pope John Paul II declared that “the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women” (John Paul II). Additionally, Mary is contrasted with Jesus in order to demonstrate the differing roles appropriate for each sex. Not only did Jesus specifically select twelve men in forming his ministry, but he intentionally left Mary out of this cohort. She is still greatly respected in the Church, but for her role as a mother, not as a leader

(John Paul II). As former papal theologian Wojciech Giertych put it, “…women don’t need the priesthood because their mission is so beautiful in the church anyway” (Rocca). For the Vatican,

God created men and women to fulfill different roles in society, with men, like Jesus, always being the ones called the leadership and women, like Mary, always being called to roles of service, love, and motherhood (John Paul II). Mary is construed as an immutable model for women, her virgin motherhood laying the foundations forever of what a can and cannot do in the Church.

Attempts by Vatican leaders to define femininity in a limited way by making Mary the only model for all women always fail to recognize the complex diversity of roles that women inhabit in their everyday lives. Catholic theologians have long adhered to a similar line of thought as Father J. Galot: “In Mary are revealed the intentions of the divine plan concerning the whole of femininity” (qtd. in Daly 162). Even though very little historical or Biblical information is available concerning who Mary was and how she lived her life, she is almost always defined by a very fixed set of characteristics: her lack of leadership in Christ’s ministry, her “receptivity” rather than agency in giving birth to Jesus, and her submission to her son (Daly 162-163). Most important in the formulation of Church doctrine is her role as a model for how women should be

“virgins and mothers of families” rather than leaders like Jesus and his disciples (John Paul II). LaVanway 1

Yet, as Daly notes, it is impossible to reflect on Mary’s fixed roles without discovering

“interference from reality” (163). In other words, how women actually function in a Catholic framework fits poorly with the inflexible model that the Church has set forth in Mary.

This reality was set out starkly in October 2019 at the Synod of for the Pan-

Amazonian Region, where it was decided that married men were allowed to become priests in the region, but women were still not allowed to be ordained (McDougall). Evaristo

Pascoal Spengler, however, pointed out that this decision simply does not match the reality of the roles that women inhabit on the ground. Over 60% of religious communities in the Amazon region are organized and led by women, and they make up the majority of current teachers and ministers (Hansen). Women’s leadership in their local communities is absolutely necessary, and they do their duties well despite their mismatch with Mary’s traditional roles. Additionally, many devout Catholic women throughout history have experienced a calling to the priesthood.

Hundreds of women around the globe, many of whom are already carrying out almost all of the

Church’s priestly duties, feel called by God to be ordained. Even St. Thérèse of Lisieux, a

Catholic saint and a , wrote longingly about her desire to be a and her suffering at not being able to act on her call (Wijngaards 164). Many men in the hierarchy, including John Paul II himself, have said that it is God that called them to their vocation, not the

Church hierarchy. Yet, the Church claims that, for women, this inner pull is invalid unless authenticated by the Vatican (Wijngaards 164-168). This hypocritical argument implies that female members are unable to hear the true voice of God unless mediated through Church leadership. Yet, women are already serving as effective Catholic leaders, proficiently following in the footsteps of Jesus and his disciples regardless of whether the Vatican believes that to be contrary to the passive, motherly model of Mary. LaVanway 1

Even women who ostensibly agree with Vatican teachings that women are not made for leadership do not fit into the Marian model that supposedly bars them from ordination. Take, for example, Dawn Eden Goldstein, a Catholic theologian who has written multiple books

(Giangravè). She agreed with ’ comments in May 2019 that female deacons would never exist, declaring that “the Pope is indeed Catholic” in his justifications and beliefs (qtd. in

Giangravè). Yet, she herself does not fit perfectly into Mary’s roles, defined by Pope John Paul

II as reason to prevent ordination. She is a theologian, a professor, and an author, meaning that she does not automatically submit to the thoughts of others, even men, in the Catholic Church.

She chooses to reason about doctrine herself. Additionally, she has never married nor had children (Goldstein). Therefore, even as she claims that the Pope is justified in continuing to bar women from leadership, her lived experience does not reflect any of the “inherent” markers of womanhood that the Vatican finds so self-evident.

Additionally, while there are many examples of female leadership in the Bible and in the early Church, the Catholic Church presents Mary as the only appropriate model for women. One of the most prominent figures is , a woman mentioned in the . The passage Romans 16:1-2 makes her role in the Church explicit: “I commend you to our sister

Phoebe, of the Church at Cenchreae…” (qtd. in Zagano 88). Zagano argues that this specific title makes it clear that Phoebe’s position reflects real ordination in the early Catholic

Church (88). Though Phoebe may be the only clearly delineated deaconess in the Bible, another passage from Scripture, 1 Timothy, references their existence when explaining the necessary qualities of deacons: “…the women must be respectable, not gossips but sober and quite reliable” (qtd. in Zagano 88). This Biblical passage, like Romans 16: 1-2, makes it clear that the existence of ordained women has a precedent not just theoretically in the early Church, but LaVanway 1 explicitly in the holy Scriptures. The Catholic Church may pretend like women have never led before, but their fundamental religious text declares otherwise. Historical evidence also suggests the real presence of ordained . Firstly, two Councils of the Church,

Chalcedon (AD 451) and Trullo (AD 692), reference the requirements for women who wish to become (Wijngaards 148). If the early Church felt the need to lay down these specific rules, enough women must have been becoming deaconesses to merit them.

Additionally, the Orthodox Church, originally a unified part of the Catholic Church, continues to celebrate a variety of ordained deaconesses. These include St. Phoebe, St. Xenia, and St.

Apollinia, just to name a few (Zagano 93). In sum, the Church has allowed women to inhabit non-Marian roles in the past, making the argument that they cannot lead in the present nonsensical and biased.

Some might argue that the does allow women to assume moral leadership through the official vocation of nunhood. Yet, the roles allotted for women presently in the official Catholic hierarchy only serve to reinforce restrictive and harmful ideas. Women can become more involved in the Church by becoming , a position that involves devoting their entire lives to the Catholic Church. It mandates an “intense training period,” a lifelong willingness to remain unmarried and a virgin, and even taking a vow of “obedience” (“How to

Become a ”). Women are giving up as much as men to join the official ranks of the Catholic

Church, yet, how are they rewarded? The ideas that women are not meant to be leaders, are created to be passive, and do not deserve the same roles as men, all reinforced by the Church’s emphasis on Mary, have allowed the Church to inflict trauma and pain upon the nuns in their ranks. In February 2019, after an official report in Women Church World, the Pope finally acknowledged the long history of priests sexually abusing nuns (Poggioli). The victims were not LaVanway 1 assisted if they came forward with their story, because “these nuns believe they’re the guilty ones for having seduced that holy man into committing sin…that’s what they’ve always been taught”

(qtd. in Poggioli). The women interviewed for the report believed that their abuse has been ignored and covered-up by the Church for so long specifically because of male domination in leadership and a lack of respect for female voices in the institution (Poggioli). An overemphasis on Mary is not just limiting and inconsistent with women’s lived experience, but is also, frankly, dangerous. If the Vatican continues to emphasize a vision of womanhood in which women are to be blame if they are mistreated or disrespected, nuns will not be the only ones to bear the consequences; female Catholics everywhere will feel the pain of these insidious stereotypes.

Most importantly, even Jesus did not uphold Marian ideas about femininity. He was a figure of for women, breaking radically with all restrictions on women at the time and even calling them to share in his ministry. At the time of Jesus, traditional Jewish law was not particularly hospitable to women. They were only allowed to leave their homes to go to synagogue, were constantly under the authority of either their father or their husband, had no right to divorce, and could not own any of their own property (Leonhard). This required submission and lack of agency mirrors many of the respected qualities of Mary (Daly 162-163).

Jesus, however, did not adhere to this model. In the New Testament, Jesus treats women not only as full persons with dignity, but also as real friends. He speaks to women in public, defends and forgives women who have been deemed “sinners,” and even calls them to be present at the critical moments of his death and resurrection (Daly 79-80). , one of Jesus’ followers, is even named in John’s Gospel as the very first to witness Jesus’ resurrection

(Carroll). Jesus’ actions were so progressive at the time that many of his disciples were shocked by his behavior; some, like Paul, chose not to follow in his footsteps (80). Jesus treated women LaVanway 1 as more than homebodies and wives, allowing them to bear witness to his teachings and be present with him during his time on Earth. The Vatican, therefore, seems to be more like Paul than Jesus, breaking with the precedent set by the Church’s very founder. Jesus did not view the women around him in a single, fixed way, yet the Vatican still chooses to do so. The Catholic

Church cannot rely on the teachings of Jesus for their justifications in barring female leadership; their decision is sexist, contradicting the message of equality proclaimed by the Church’s own creator.

The Catholic Church’s arguments against women’s ordination are rooted in flawed and restrictive Marian conceptions of what it means to be a woman and ignore many Biblical and historical realities. The insistence on maintaining such a flawed argument, therefore, demonstrates a sexist rationale. The Catholic Church has, historically, been willing to modify its views on a variety of issues in light of new understandings. One extremely recent example was at the Synod on the Amazon, where the Vatican voted to overturn its thousand-year-old ban on ordaining married men in order to combat the priest shortage in the region (McDougall). Even

Vatican II, occurring back in 1959, dramatically overhauled the Catholic Church. Just a few of the many changes included allowing the possibility of interfaith dialogue and even recognizing that discussion and dialogue around church doctrine was acceptable (Teicher). The moral of the story is that the Church has changed before. Yet, on the issue of women’s ordination, it claims that it cannot change again or, more accurately, return to its roots in recognizing women in leadership. By singling out this particular issue and making it so unyielding, women in the

Catholic Church seeking leadership or a role divergent from Mary’s standard are left feeling hopeless, ignored, or even broken. The Gospel calls Christians to make a firm “commitment to supporting and uplifting the poor and vulnerable in our midst” (“Pastoral Aid”). Yet, the Church LaVanway 1 seems to be disempowering women rather than lifting them up. Jesus, the Bible, history, and the reality of women’s lives all make it clear. By making Mary the sole model for all women, the

Catholic Church is doing its female members worldwide a disservice. How can the Church move forward? By finally listening to the example of its founder, Jesus Christ.

LaVanway 1

Works Cited

Carroll, James. “Who Was Mary Magdalene?” Smithsonian.com, June 2006,

www.smithsonianmag.com/history/who-was-mary-magdalene-119565482/. Accessed 11

December 2019.

Clemmitt, Marcia. “Future of the Catholic Church.” CQ Researcher, vol. 23, no. 21, 7 June

2013, pp. 497-520, library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2013060700. Accessed 10

November 2019.

Daly, Mary. The Church and The Second Sex. Harper and Row, Publishers, 1975.

Giangravè, Claire. “Catholic women divided over pope’s remarks on female deacons.” Crux:

Taking the Catholic Pulse, 15 May 2019, cruxnow.com/vatican/2019/05/15/catholic-

women-divided-over--remarks-on-female-deacons/. Accessed 2 November 2019.

Goldstein, Dawn Eden. “Biography/Contact.” The Dawn Patrol: The blog of author Dawn Eden

Goldstein, S.Th.D., aka Dawn Eden, dawneden.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html. Accessed

9 December 2019.

Hansen, Luke. “As the Amazon Synod nears the end, a Brazilian bishop makes the case for

women deacons.” America: The Jesuit Review, 25 Oct. 2019,

www.americamagazine.org/faith/2019/10/25/amazon-synod-nears-end-brazilian-bishop-

makes-case-women-deacons. Accessed 1 December 2019.

“How to Become a Nun.” HowStuffWorks, 30 June 2011, money.howstuffworks.com/how-to-

become-a-nun.htm. Accessed 9 December 2019.

John Paul II. “Ordinatio Sacerdotalis.” The , 22 May 1994,

http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii//apost_letters/1994/documents/hf_jp-

ii_apl_19940522_ordinatio-sacerdotalis.html. LaVanway 1

Leonhard, Barbara. “Jesus’ Extraordinary Treatment of Women.” Franciscan Media,

www.franciscanmedia.org/jesus-extraordinary-treatment-of-women/. Accessed 5

November 2019.

McDougall, Sarah. “Catholic Bishops Agree: Anything but a Woman.” The New York Times, 30

Oct. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/10/30/opinion/catholic-married-priests-

women.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share. Accessed 2 November 2019.

“Pastoral Aid for the Thirty-Third Sunday in Ordinary Time (3rd World Day of the Poor).”

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 17 Nov. 2019, www.usccb.org/issues-and-

action/human-life-and-dignity/poverty/upload/world-day-of-poor-2019-pastoral-aid.pdf.

Accessed 9 December 2019.

Poggioli, Sylvia. “After Years of Abuse by Priests, #NunsToo Are Speaking Out.” NPR, 18 Mar.

2019, www.npr.org/2019/03/18/703067602/after-years-of-abuse-by-priests-nunstoo-are-

speaking-out. Accessed 9 December 2019.

Rocca, Francis X. “Why not woman priests? The papal theologian explains.” National Catholic

Reporter, 5 Feb. 2013, www.ncronline.org/news/theology/why-not-women-priests-papal-

theologian-explains. Accessed 7 November 2019.

Teicher, Jordan G. “Why is Vatican II So Important?” NPR, 10 Nov. 2012,

www.npr.org/2012/10/10/162573716/why-is-vatican-ii-so-important. Accessed 2

December 2019.

Wijngaards, John. The in the Catholic Church: Unmasking a Cuckoo’s

Egg Tradition. The Continuum International Publishing Group Inc., 2001.

Zagano, Phyllis. Holy Saturday: An Argument for the Restoration of the Female Diaconate in the

Catholic Church. The Crossroad Publishing Company, 2000.