GENDERED HOLINESS: THE CHARACTERISTICS FEMALE COLLEGE

STUDENTS ASSIGN TO HOLY MEN AND WOMEN

Thesis

Submitted to

The College of Arts and Sciences of the

UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

The Degree of

Master of Arts in Theological Studies

By

Tinamarie Stolz

Dayton, Ohio

December 2017

1

THE UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON THESIS APPROVAL PAGE FOR THE SCHOOL

OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

Name: Stolz, Tinamarie Suzanne

APPROVED BY:

______Dr. Sandra Yocum, PhD Faculty Advisor University Professor of Faith and Culture Department of Religious Studies

______Dr. Meghan Henning, PhD Committee Chair Assist Professor Department of Religious Studies

______Dr. Vincent J. Miller, PhD Committee Chair Gudorf Chair in Catholic Theology and Culture Department of Religious Studies

ii

ABSTRACT

GENDERED HOLINESS: THE CHARACTERISTICS FEMALE COLLEGE

STUDENTS ASSIGN TO HOLY MEN AND WOMEN

Name: Stolz, Tinamarie University of Dayton

Advisor: Dr. Sandra Yocum

After surveying 82 Catholic female college students from around the United States on their definition of holiness for men and women, it is clear they equate gender-normative characteristics with holiness. In other words, a woman must possess gender-normative feminine characteristics to be considered holy, and a man must possess gender-normative masculine characteristics to be considered holy. After analyzing the Catholic Church’s theology on the nature of women, it is apparent the Church strongly urges men and women to stay in their respective gender-normative roles, and develop a gendered set of characteristics. The Church names a specific and gendered set of characteristics for women; which can be seen in the androcentric interpretation of the Creation Story, and androcentric teachings such as complementarity theology and the feminine genius. The participant’s definitions of holiness, and the Church’s androcentric theologies strongly align. Meaning, the Church’s theologies on the nature of women are explicitly and implicitly teaching young women that gender-normative characteristics are the sole path to holiness.

Emphasizing a narrow path to holiness is harmful to young Catholic women because it

iii inhibits them from living out their fullest, most Christ-centered selves. Additionally, it leaves all women who do not fit the narrow list of gender-normative characteristics without a spiritual home. Instead, the Church needs to embrace women as individuals who possess various God-given characteristics, personalities, and abilities.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work would not have been possible without the guidance, wisdom, and insight of the most brilliant woman I know - my thesis advisor, Dr. Sandra Yocum,

Department of Religious Studies at the University of Dayton. Her door and e-mail inbox

(and sometimes phone!) were always open to me whenever I came across a new finding, found myself in a tough spot, or had a minor thesis-induced panic moment. She challenged me in ways I never thought possible, and pushed me to dig deep into theology in ways I never thought I could. Her intelligence and knowledge are unparalleled, and her questions ridiculously, intellectually, and spiritually challenging. She is the kind of professor who makes you a better person and academic along the journey. Working with

Dr. Yocum on this project has been a privilege, and the highlight of my time at the

University of Dayton. On a personal note, there were points in this project where I truly started asking why I was Catholic. Each time, Dr. Yocum had the perfect words, article, or prayer to keep me going. I can truly say she has kept me Catholic, and will forever be someone I strive to emulate. Although, I am unsure if I could ever be comfortable sitting in a chair like she does.

I would like to thank Dr. Laura Lemming of the Department of Sociology at the

University of Dayton. She took on the research section of this project with me, despite her extremely busy schedule. Dr. Lemming truly constructed my mindset for the duration

v of this project. She told me, "You have too many young women looking at you to not do excellent academic work." Her experience and expertise in women's issues, theology, higher education, and sociology were invaluable to this project. I will forever appreciate her time, energy, and wisdom.

I would also like to thank and acknowledge Dr. Meghan Henning of the Religious

Studies Department at the University of Dayton for being a reader, providing me with inspiration and support during the struggles of writing, and being an excellent example of a strong and intelligent Christian woman who is thriving in the academic realm. I would like to thank and acknowledge (an astounding writer) Dr. Vincent Miller of the Religious

Studies Department at the University of Dayton for being a reader, giving me advice on writing, and pointing me in the direction of some great resources. On a personal note, seeing Dr. Miller weekly at Church always reminded me that theological intelligence is as much about the heart as it is the head. I am grateful for their comments and time.

A special thanks to the loving support of Brendan Dillon, unwavering spiritual support of Kelly Adamson, and the sassy support of Mike Ingram. Special thanks to Jose,

Amberly and Luis Santana, Molly Cook, Emily Cutler, Ashley Sweet, Elyse Oosterman,

Cynthia Crudale, Danielle Pip, Brianna Deegan, the best Parental-Units you could ask for, and all the G4G Girls!

Never underestimate what a determined student can do, even if they have a learning disability - they just might end up writing a 200-page master’s thesis. Thank you to all of the North Rockland Central School District Teachers, and my amazing mom,

vi who helped me develop the skills to cope with dyslexia, encouraged me when I felt like I would never understand material, and constantly reminded me that I am smart.

In loving memory of Ashley Nicole Badenchini

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………...……iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………...….…… v

INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………...1

CHAPTER 1 THE THEOLOGY AND NATURE OF WOMEN………………...... 6

CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH……………………………………………...………………69

CHAPTER 3 DATA ANALYSIS……………………………………………...... 101

CHAPTER 4 WHAT NOW? ………………………………………………...... 144

BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………...…….153

APPENDICES ……………………………………………….....…………………..…..

A. Male and Female Role Models of Holiness……………………………...….161

B. Women’s Role in the Church ……………………………………………….187

viii

INTRODUCTION

Sexism is a word that has been used to define discrimination or prejudice based on a person's biological sex. Sexism assumes there are psychological, mental, intellectual, emotional and spiritual differences among men and women. These assumptions have deemed women inferior to men. For this study I will be using the phrase “gendered norms” as a term to describe the stereotypical characteristics often found in accounts of traditional

American culture and have been used to define normative behavior and normative roles for men and women. For example, a man who is following gendered norms can be described as dominant, a strong leader, confident, logical, stoic and honorable. While a woman who is following gendered norms can be described as gentle, quiet, nurturing, mother, pure, sacrificial, obedient and subservient.

Within the Church, the magisterium has official interpretive and teaching authority and is entirely made up of men. Within the structural setup of the Church, females hold no official interpretative and teaching authority. Yes, women can have roles with some teaching authority, for example, in their classrooms and inside their families, but not official authority to interpret or teach doctrine. Although a woman can be in positions which hold other kinds of authority such as minister, music minister, organizer, theologian, campus minister (for those at universities and high schools), youth minister, catechist and other parish leadership roles, there are no roles for women that provide official interpretive and teaching power. In both the family and the Church, men are given the role of

1 authoritative leader and decision maker. In both the family and the Church, women are mothers, caretakers and the hands and feet that carry out tasks. The Church argues this is the nature of women. I argue this is androcentric.

Contemporary culture has created and engaged in a more complex understanding of gender over the years. Modern American society recognizes gender as a spectrum where biology, sexual orientation and gender-normative characteristics and behaviors do not have to correlate in traditional ways.1 For example, a man today can be homosexual and also have traditional masculine characteristics and behaviors. Some academics believe gender is a social construct, so gender-norms are not born, but bred into people starting at birth.

As the secular realm began to define gender as a social construct the Church pushed back more emphatically saying men and women are ontologically different.2 The implications of a different nature of men and women has greatly influenced the theology around women, the role of women in the Church, and which characteristics and qualities are emphasized as holiness for women.

1 This does not mean every American or academic in modern society accepts or condones the practice of the new complex understanding of gender.This simply means there is an increased understanding of the complexity of gender.

2 Office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, On the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, The Holy See, May 31, 2004. Accessed October 12, 2016. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_2 0040731_collaboration_en.html.

2

Vatican II made great strides in acknowledging the changing role of women in society and reaffirming the dignity of women. However, Vatican II and subsequent documents and statements also emphasized traditional gendered norms for men and women. The Church has strongly urged men and women to stay in their respective gender- normative roles and develop a gendered set of characteristics. The interesting part about the Church is their teaching of gendered norms is often explicitly and implicitly associated with holiness. Since the Church is teaching people how to be holy men and holy women predominantly within gender normative categories, it creates what I call the Holiness

Standard. The Holiness Standard is an invisible, but all too real, bar set by the Catholic

Church for men and women to be holy. This bar limits and negatively impacts the way young Catholic college-aged women view God, the Catholic Church and their own holiness. The Holiness Standard is greatly formed specifically by the teaching of complementarity theology and the feminine genius.

Since the Catholic Church is immersed in a sinful world where sexism toward women is a common cultural practice (in the United States and in many parts of the world) and has imperfect people with interpretive and teaching authority - it is not immune to sexist and androcentric ideology. My claim is not that every male in the Church who has the authority to promulgate and teach doctrine, or any person who operates within the

Church as a leader, is automatically and blatantly misogynistic. However, because the

Church operates as a patriarchal institution with a male-only hierarchy holding all the authority to promulgate and teaching doctrine, it operates androcentrically. Men, as the principal authors of theology3, teach theologies about the nature of women from their solely

3Elizabeth A. Dreyer, Accidental Theologians (Cincinnati: Franciscan Media, 2014), xiii.

3 male perspective. In other words, doctrine promulgated and taught by the magisterium is androcentric, or male-centered. I argue that the androcentricity of the magisterium can clearly be seen in the theology around the nature of women.

Androcentric lenses see maleness as the standard and femininity as “the otherness.”4 In other words, androcentric lenses define what women are by what men are or are not. Theologies such as the feminine genius and complementarity theology demonstrate how male-centered the Church’s lens can be. In this thesis I examine these theologies to explain what is taught on the nature of women and what characteristics are explicitly or subtly emphasized for women and their holiness.

It is the Church’s job to teach Catholics what holiness is and what it means to be holy through example and teaching. This responsibility is especially important for the ordained, who are in positions of teaching authority in a special and unique way. How the ordained interpret doctrine and scripture and use those interpretations to teach on the nature of women comes with influence. What the ordained decide to teach Catholics is considered truth – God’s truth. When the Catholic teachings, especially on the nature of women, are androcentric the Holiness Standard is created.

What is truly horrible about this standard is its roots are in androcentric teaching, not in the fundamental message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Androcentric lenses absolutize gender roles and has distorted what characteristics make a holy man and a holy woman.

4 Serene Jones, Horizons in Feminist Theology (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1997), 51.

4

This thesis looks into how theologies focusing on women, such as complementarity theology and the feminine genius, have created the Holiness Standard and how Catholic female college students assign characteristics of holiness to men and women. To research this hypothesis, I received 82 survey responses from female college students around the country, who identify as Catholic and are attending Catholic colleges, Catholic universities or Newman Centers to see if they associate gendered normative feminine characteristics with holy women and gendered normative masculine characteristics with holy men. I looked into college students specifically because they are the future of the Church.

My hope is this thesis will provide a starting point to begin answering two critical questions: What does the Church teach on the nature of women? How does the teaching enable or limit Catholic college-aged females in living out the Gospel? Ultimately, this information will be a way to begin considering the implications of women’s future participation and sense of belonging in the Church.

My data clearly indicates Catholic female college students have gendered versions of holiness. This attitude and ideology currently has and will continue to have great ramifications on Catholic women, their relationship with the Church, and their relationships to God. To remedy this issue, I suggest a greater number women be included in authoritative positions of promulgating and teaching doctrine. I would also suggest there be immense education for all Catholic leaders (priests, bishops, cardinals, Catholic school teachers, CCD teachers, RCIA teachers and lay leaders) on how to teach and minister to men and women (boys and girls) in a more holistic way while still being able to cater to the separate needs of men and women (boys and girls) as they arise.

5

CHAPTER 1

THE THEOLOGY AND THE NATURE OF WOMEN

To understand the effect androcentric theologies and ideologies5, have on Catholic college-aged females, one needs to begin with understanding how gender and religion tie into identity, defining “androcentric” and looking at how androcentricity has affected women and history.

Four kinds of literature were used in this research: (1) scholars who have looked at the Church’s impact on women (historically and currently), (2) the theology and ideology of complementarity and the feminine genius (3) selected papal statements, church documents and letters and (4) popular mainstream blogs, websites and books.

Gender and Religion

Gender and religion intensely influence each other. Gender is not a synonym for biological sex. Academia use the term gender to refer to the way human males and female are defined as men and women.6 Author and Catholic feminist theologian Catherine Mowry

LaCugna explains gender as, “the social-psychological-political interpretation of what it

5 Such as the feminine genius and complementarity theology

6 Mary McClintock Fulkerson, Horizons in Feminist Theology: Identity, Tradition, and Norms. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997), 99.

6 means to be male or female.”7 From the moment a baby girl or boy is born there are gendered social-cultural expectations of him/her, which of course varies depending on their culture8, social location and religion. For Catholic females, the most common gendered expectations and characteristics are nurturing, compassionate, receptive, generous and sensitive.

Religion, in a “sociological sense, consists of how people make sense of their world – the stories of [sic] which they live.”9 Gendered expectations vastly influence the way Catholic women make sense of their world - the stories by which they live. Author and Professor of Sociology and Anthropology at Trinity University in San Antonio Texas,

Meredith B. McGuire states, “Gender profoundly affect[s] people’s religion-as-lived, because gender differentiation permeates so many aspects of life in most cultures.”10

Because gender greatly influences religion-as-lived (and vice versa), it is crucial to understand in order to see how gender has formed all Catholic women, but specifically for this thesis, Catholic college-aged females.

Women and men make sense of the world differently because specific gender norms and expectations immensely impact the way they see the world. Because gender- norms and expectations shape the way men and women navigate society, women have a

7 Catherine Mowry Lacugna, “Catholic Women As Ministers and Theologians,” America October 10, 1992, 239.

8 McGuire, Horizons in Feminist Theology, 159

9 Ibid., 98.

10Meredith B. McGuire, Lived Religion: Faith and Practice in Everyday Life (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 159.

7 distinct story due to their shared experiences and social location.11 Catholic women grow up with particular gendered set of expectations (mentioned above) because they also simultaneously use their religion to make sense of the world around them. Gender and religion need to be discussed and reflected on together because both are extremely important factors in the way men and women interpret and receive scripture and the

Catholic faith, and what it means to be holy. McGuire writes a key reminder, “religious meanings attached to gendered bodies are likewise socially defined, contested and changeable.”12

Because there is a strong relationship between gender and religion, a woman’s lived-religion is strongly dependent on the relationship between two factors. Catholic women live their lives trying to be moral and holy in the eyes of God and the Church. An issue arises when the ‘how to be good and holy women of God’ is taught androcentically.

Androcentrism

As defined by Darlene Juschka, associate professor in the Women's and Gender

Studies Program and the Religious Studies Department at the University of Regina, androcentrism is, “…a perspective that proposes to be gazing from ‘human’ eyes at

‘human’ subjects but the ‘human’ in both instances is always male and masculine.”13 It is

11 Please note that all women have different experience within the shared experience of being women. For example, white women have a different experience than women of color, who also have a different experience than native women (and so on and so forth). In addition, women who come from various socioeconomic statuses have different experiences within the shared experience of being women. My point is that there are shared experiences, but that is not to be confused with identical experiences.

12 Ibid., 160.

13 Catherine A.Brekus, The Religious History of American Women: Reimagining the past (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007), 13.

8 important that androcentrism is not automatically equated with misogyny.14 Although misogyny is always androcentric, androcentrism is not always misogynistic.

Androcentrism means male-centered which still drastically impacts women. Throughout this thesis I often use the phrase “androcentric lens” in reference to the male-centered way a person looks at and interprets the world. A simple example of this is a young girl knowing more male saints then female saints because she was taught about more males.

This kind of lens is, often unintentionally, developed from living in a patriarchal culture where men have a majority of authority in the government, academia, religion and family. Even though times have progressed in the United States and there are female professionals in those fields, parity has not been reached. The cultural norm is still vastly androcentric which can cause both men and women to assume an androcentric lens. For this thesis I will be specifically focusing on the androcentricity of the Church.

It is the androcentric lens which leads the male hierarchy to promulgate and teach doctrine that creates the Holiness Standard through the creation of sexist theologies such as the feminine genius and complementarity theology. Evidence for this androcentric lens can clearly be seen throughout history.

Androcentrism in Church History

Professor of the History of Religion at Harvard Divinity school, Catherine A.

Brekus, specifically applies the term ‘androcentric’ to the way American Catholic history is written. In the Western world, the normative historical narrative is androcentric because it was (and is) being told, written and dominated by males and male voices; particularly by

14 The hatred of women.

9 white males in places of power and authority. Men are telling the story of Catholic history, culture and religion to women who are basically absent from the story itself.15

American Catholic Church history is full of stories about white, ordained, powerful men. If women are present in a Church history book at all, it is generally a quick mention, a fast summary16 or ghettoized into one section of a book or chapter.17 The implicit statement is women were not (and are not) important enough to write about. Mary Jo

Weaver, Professor Emerita in the Department of Religious Studies at Indiana University, discusses French author, activist, and feminist Simone de Beauvior’s thoughts on androcentrism. As explained by Weaver, Beauvior dives into secular and church history, sees androcentrism, and explains, “Humanity is male. Man defines woman not in herself but as relative to him; she is not regarded as an autonomous being…He is the Subject, he is the Absolute – she is the Other.”18 Beauvior’s statement sums up one of the most crucial points about androcentrism -it gives people (not just men) the perspective that being male and viewing the world through a male lens is the norm. Because this male lens is engrained into culture and history it becomes normalized and viewed as the best functional way to navigate society.

Because the androcentric lens has such an impact on on American Church history,

Catholic women often do not learn about the contributions women of the past have made

15 Brekus, Catherine A. The Religious History of American Women: Reimagining the past (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007).

16Ibid., 3.

17Ibid., 13.

18Weaver, New Catholic Women, 7.

10 to the Church. Having a lens focused on men as the standard creates an incomplete picture of history.19 It is untrue that women were absent, completely passive and had no important roles throughout Church history. One example of this is the vast history and intensive work of religious sisters and laywomen during (and leading up to) the Progressive Era.

Kathleen Sparrow Cummings is an Associate Professor of American Studies at the

University of Notre Dame and also has a joint appointment with the Department of History.

She discusses the extraordinary work of religious sisters and laywomen during and leading up to the Progressive era. Cummings wrote a book with the stories of these women to provide a complete story of American Church history; because without the stories of these women, the story of American Church history was essentially an “incomplete reading”20

Cummings writes about Margaret Buchanan Sullivan, a journalist in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century,21 who also believed secular versions of history tended to ignore Catholics and their contributions to America. Sullivan was determined to document their stories to change the American Catholic historical narrative. This originally seems like a great idea - make sure Catholics who contributed to history get their stories told. However, the work and stories brought to light also supported distinctions between

19Ibid.

20Kathleen Sprows Cummings, New Women of the Old Faith: Gender and American Catholicism in the Progressive Era (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009), 29.

21 "Mrs. Margaret Buchanan Sullivan, the Chicago Journalist," NYPL Digital Collections, accessed December 6, 2016, http://lizard.digital.nypl.org/items/1acbea70- 510e-0130-bfb9-58d385a7bbd0.

11 genders.22 The stories were predominantly about Catholic men and a few females who fell into the ideal feminine qualities that the Church approved of.23

Cummings and other feminist theologians often tell untold stories of Catholic women from the past to create a full and holistic historical truth. For example, during the

Progressive Era, work completed by nuns was unparalleled. Especially when it came to building the Catholic school and hospital systems. Yet, these nuns and their contributions often only get a brief mention in history books on American Catholicism and even in

American Catholic education.24

Similarly, Weaver also takes a feminist approach to history and desires to liberate women’s stories. Since Weaver also takes issue with women being absent from American

Catholic history she names the various roles women have had over the course of history.

One example she describes is the absence of mention of the Women’s Trade Union League while reading textbooks in American Catholicism.25 During the 20th century the Women’s

Trade Union League was the largest and most efficient labor support system for women. 26

This group was run and organized by mostly Catholic women, yet they are not mentioned in American Catholic history books. However, Weaver points out the Catholic male leadership of Terrence Powderly, another union activist, is present in almost every textbook

22 Cunnings, New Women of the Old Faith, 29.

23 Ibid., 29.

24 Ibid., 102.

25Weaver, New Catholic Women, 21.

26 Ibid., 21.

12 about American Catholicism.27 To stick with the labor movement as an example, the one woman who is well known by average Catholic history readers is Mary Harris - better known as ‘Mother’ Jones.28 She worked as an extremely active leader for United Mine

Workers... into her nineties.29 During her adult life she became famous for her work and

“wily”30 personality. However, historians mentioning a token woman cannot make up for the exclusion of the many Catholic women who participated in the labor movement.

Weaver also brings the stories of female religious in the medical and missionary professions to light. She provides a plethora of examples showing how women provided exceptional contributions to the medical field but are rarely mentioned in history books.

For example, until 1936 canon law did not even allow nuns to become “doctors or even to be aids in childbirth.”31 However, the rule changed because of the hard work of Mother

Anna Dengel, who founded the Medical Mission Sisters in 1925.32 Another example of how only men receive recognition for the same work women do is the well known ‘leper priest’ Father Damien.33 While he is well known, few know of Mother Marianne Cope who was also a missionary and did “equally distinguishable”34 work with lepers. She was even

27 Ibid.

28 Ibid., 24.

29 Ibid.

30 Ibid.

31 Ibid., 33.

32 "History," Medical Mission Sisters, accessed December 6, 2016, http://www.medicalmissionsisters.org/history/.

33 Weaver, New Catholic Women, 30.

34 Ibid., 30.

13 recognized by the “king of the Hawaiian Islands”35 for her missionary work. Yet, until recently acknowledged in her canonization, she goes completely unmentioned. She had to become canonized to become known at all. The same goes for The Catholic Foreign

Mission Society of America (which later became known as Maryknoll.36) The men who were part of this order, such as Thomas Frederick Price and James Anthony Walsh, are represented in history books but the Maryknoll sisters are not although they did the same work.37

A desire to recognize historical Catholic women for their work is not about recognition for the sake of recognition, and it is not about women wanting vain remembrance and personal glory. Telling Catholic women’s stories and demanding they be told in the normative historical narrative is about today’s young Catholic women.

Rescuing these untold stories gives young Catholic women of today a chance to look at what they could be and achieve with their gifts and vocation. Liberating the stories of historical Catholic women liberates Catholic women of today by giving them the freedom to see the various ways they can truly live their religion and faith.

McGuire discusses “lived religion” or how members of a religion live out their faith. She states before any can truly live out their religion they must first “remember, share, enact, adapt and create the stories out of which they live,”38 only then can they use

35 Ibid.

36 Ibid.

37 Ibid.

38 Meredith McGuire, Lived Religion: Faith, Practice in Everyday Life (NY: Oxford University Press, 2008), 118.

14 those stories, turn them into action, and live out their religion. To live out the Catholic faith, a person must remember the stories of tradition, share the Gospel story, enact the life of Christ they have heard through stories, adapt the truth of biblical stories to modern ways of expression, and create the way the Gospel story is lived out in their own lives. Living out Catholicism is more challenging for a woman because there is less foundation for her to build her story upon. McGuire states the first part of living out religion is to remember.

We build our stories from remembering the people and actions of those like us from the past. For Catholic women, looking to Catholic women’s stories for guidance and inspiration is a challenge because historically Catholic women's stories are ignored.

Especially the stories where gender-roles are challenged by women. The lack of Catholic women’s stories limits women because they have a small scope of female role models to look to and build their story upon. Men can easily look into Catholic history and have ample stories of men doing a wide range of amazing actions to build their story upon.

Women cannot say the same, not because there are no amazing women, but because the stories of these amazing women are untold.

One might be tempted to think, “Why is this important? So what if I know more men’s stories then women’s stories? What good does that do? It’s fine if we do not acknowledge women in history, we have women such as Saint Teresa of Calcutta to look to now.” But that would be missing the point. The point (a concerning and sad point) is authors of American Catholic history books are able to ignore the contributions of women, and it is the norm. We, as American Catholics, find history which lacks women completely normal. It is normal to read a book on American Church history or take a class on church history and learn about no women. The absence of women has become so normalized the

15 question, “Where are the women?” is not even asked. It is often assumed that since women were part of the private sphere they were not notably contributing to society or the faith.

The immense feminist scholarship on women in the Church proves this is a false assumption, but there is little to correct this error. If the stories of these Catholic women do not live on through history books, how will they live on at all?

Men are both the storytellers and the protagonists of the historical narrative.

However, feminist scholarship tells a different story. Feminist scholarship attempts to free the holistic historical narrative from androcentricity by liberating women’s stories and creating a better understanding of women’s contributions. An American Catholic history which includes the stories of men and women equally creates a truer and fuller story; A history which demonstrates what a group of hardworking, intelligent and faithful Catholic women and men can do.

The other problem with an androcentric historical norm is its implicit and explicit messages to women of today. The issue truly arises when male and female Catholics begin to read and learn Church history. Men see other great men contribute to Catholicism and

America. They can see the amazing and meaningful work of Thomas Frederick Price and

James Anthony Walsh (to name a few). Men look into American Church history, see other men, thus themselves and what they could become. Women, on the other hand, see a few token women. Women look into American Church history and can only see a narrow and specific type of woman they could become. In the documentary Miss Representation39 CBS

Evening News anchor Katie Couric critiques the way media sexualizes and objectifies

39 a 2011 film that shows how awful the portrayal of women in media is due to the objectification, gender stereotyping and sexualization of women.

16 women. She says this occurs because men are the ones “piloting the plane.”40 She is speaking about how media portrays women in the same way men in power look at women, which is another way to say the media is looking at women through an androcentric lens.

Later in the documentary Marie Wilson, Founding President of the White House Project, stated, “You can’t be what you can’t see.”41 Although Wilson’s quote is about modern day media, it also applies to history.

Catholic women can’t be what they can’t see. If they cannot see strong Catholic women in religious history, they cannot see themselves as strong Catholic women in

Catholicism today. History does not simply stay in the past, it shapes the present and the future. George Lipsitz is a professor at the University of California Santa Barbara. He studies “social movements, urban culture and inequality.”42 Even though he specializes in race, he also writes “on the relationship between collective memory and identity,”43 which can easily be applied to gender. Lipsitz states

What we choose to remember about the past, where we begin and end our retrospective accounts, and who we include and exclude from them- these do a lot to determine how we live and what decisions we make in the present44

In other words, androcentric choices made in writing and teaching Catholic Church history lives in our present situation.

40 Jennifer Siebel,. Miss Representation (Francisco, California, 2011).

41 Newsom, Miss Representation, 2011.

42 "Department of Black Studies - UC Santa Barbara.", accessed December 7, 2016, http://www.blackstudies.ucsb.edu/people/george-lipsitz.

43 Linell Elizabeth Cady, Horizons in Feminist Theology: Identity, Tradition, and Norms (Davaney. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1997), 25.

44 Cady, Horizons in Feminist Theology, 25-26.

17

As I dove deeper into the meaning of androcentrism and continued reading the history of women in the Church (or lack thereof), I quickly realized the term androcentric is not just applicable to the subject of history. This led me to start asking important questions: If one can look at history through such a deep-seated androcentric lens, that it consciously or subconsciously deems women unimportant enough to write about, how far does that lens extend? How far does that lens penetrate? Does my Church function androcentrically? If so, what does the Church view androcenticlly? Does the Church view women androcenticlly? What are the products of such a lens? What would the effects and consequences for women be?

Androcentrism and Authority

Androcentrism is so ingrained into how humans function and navigate the world it easily (and tragically) applies to the way people view people. What I mean is a person’s androcentric lens does not come off between looking at history and looking at the woman reading the history book. I believe androcentrism impacts women in the Catholic Church in a unique way. In the Catholic Church, the magisterium has official authority to promulgate and teach doctrine about the nature and holiness of women. The word magisterium comes from the Latin word magister, which in English means master.45 Yet, according to Francis A. Sullivan S.J., theologian and professor at Boston College, the

45 Francis A. Sullivan, S.J., Magisterium Teaching Authority in the Catholic Church (Ramsey: Paulist Press, 1983).

18

English word which more accurately describes magister is mastery.46 Originally, magisterium was used to describe the “role and authority of one who was the magister.”47

In today’s Catholic culture, the magisterium is a term used when referring to “the teaching office of the hierarchy.”48 The hierarchy includes bishops and the Pope as well as their teachings and interpretations of doctrine and documents. Sullivan discusses a new development in the meaning of the word magisterium. Magisterium has come to refer to not only the teaching role of the hierarchy, “but also the hierarchy itself as the bearer of this office.”49 Sullivan points out a clear example of the new meaning of magisterium, which can be found in the Vatican II’s 1965 document Dei Verbum,

But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed50

The above is significant. Dei Verbum specifically states the authentic interpretation of God and God’s word in all forms is entrusted to the magisterium. The entirely male magisterium has the task of interpreting “the word of God” because their office’s “authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” The magisterium is entirely male. Women cannot enter into

46 Sullivan, Magisterium Teaching Authority, 24.

47 Ibid., 24.

48 Ibid., 25.

49 Ibid., 26.

50 Ibid.

19 the office and be entrusted with the task of interpreting the word of God with the authority exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.

Another Vatican II document, Lumen gentium, also discusses the teaching authority of the magisterium. The section I am referring to here is pointedly about the role of bishops.

The Church teaches Bishops are “endowed with the authority of Christ.”51 Lumen gentium

25, discusses the teaching role of bishops specifically: “...they are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ.”52

There is also a hierarchy of authority within the hierarchy itself. The Church recognizes there is no difference in value of truths or truths of documents which come from any office. In other words, a truth can come from the Pope or a bishop, an encyclical or a letter to a group. Yet, there is a hierarchy of truths in regards to how “definitively defined”53 the truth is. The higher in the hierarchy one is, the more definitively defined their truth is considered. For example, when the Pope makes a statement, his truth is more definitively defined than a bishop’s truth, or an encyclical has more definitively defined truth than a letter from the Congregation of Catholic Bishops. The hierarchy of truths is a clear and simple system. However, there is one fundamental issue when it comes to women and who gets to have authentic interpretive and teaching authority in the Church.

The magisterium is entirely male. Which doctrine is promulgated and taught by the magisterium on the nature and holiness of women, is viewed by laypeople as an accurate and authentic interpretation of God’s truth. The magisterium’s interpretations, which are

51 Ibid.

52 Ibid.

53 Ibid.

20 deemed as authoritative and authentic, are interpreted through an entirely male lens. Thus, what the Church is authoritatively teaching has all been viewed and presented through a male lens which reinforce gender-norms, as if gender-norms were a symptom of holiness or path to holiness. These androcentric interpretations of doctrine are then used to teach on women’s nature. It is with a this lens the magisterium looks at women and tells them who they are in their beings and how they ‘ought’ to be in order to be holy and live a life in line with God.54 An entirely male magisterium has been teaching women about women’s allegedly authentic nature and what constitutes a woman’s holiness through the creation story, complimentary theology and the feminine genius.

Identity

Human beings want and need to know who they are, that is why people hunger for identity. Religious identity is at the deepest core of identity. The bishops have provided a

Catholic identity for women through their magisterial teaching. The episcopacy raises questions about the way Catholic woman are learning what it means to be, and identity as, a Catholic woman. Can men have authority in what it means to identify as Catholic female?

Should the episcopacy be the most authoritative source for women’s Catholic identity? I do not think so. Plus, because Catholics attempt to live in a way which exemplifies counter- cultural Gospel-values in mainstream American culture, having a strong identity is key. In simpler words, to be a faithful Catholic one needs to root their identity in being a Catholic.

Rebecca Chopp, non-Catholic feminist theologian and President of Colgate

University, states identity is not simply handed out. Instead, it is, “continually achieved in and through specific ways which the self-negotiates multiple, contesting currents and

54 Despite the fact every person in the magisterium has zero experience as a woman...I can’t emphasise this enough!

21 loyalties that constitute her.”55 Because identities are formed, not necessarily given, the struggle to find identity becomes increasingly complex the more currents and loyalties a person has. The complexity of negotiating loyalties that define oneself drastically increases when different loyalties do not line up in a perfect way. For example, women who want to identify as both Catholic and feminists often find themselves in a social-political and religious crossfire when it comes to navigating their loyalty to the Church and loyalty to women’s equality and rights. Women who are attempting to find an identity holding both of these beliefs are often navigating dichotomous ideologies which causes intellectual, emotional and spiritual tension. There is a struggle that comes with attempting to find and form an identity. For Catholic college-aged women who identify with feminism or untraditional characteristics, behaviors, and roles, there is a struggle of using and expressing their God-given selves within the characteristics, behaviors and roles the

Catholic Church explicitly and implicitly teaches are holy.

Nancy Ammerman, Professor of Sociology of Religion at Boston University, explains that when people form identities, there is also constant tension between fitting in with a group and being a unique individual.56 This tension is increased for Catholic women because of how important faith and tradition are held. Ammerman believes humans need a better way to talk about who they are, without being reduced to a single factor or a rogue lone wolf.57 People do not belong to one group or category. As Ammerman says, “we are

55 Rebecca Chopp and Sheila Devaney, Horizons in Feminist Theology (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1997), 25.

56 Nancy Ammermann, Religious Identities and Religious Institutions. Chap. 16 in Handbook of the Sociology of Religion (NY: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 210.

57 Ammermann, Handbook of the Sociology of Religion, 2011.

22 always many things at once.”58 As discussed above, being “many things at once” is where the complexity increases for young Catholic women who agree and identify with the

Church and also with identities which do not entirely line up with the Church (such as being feminist or part of the LGBTQ+ community). Especially because the Church claims to have authentic teaching authority, having part of a person's identity be in contrast to the

Church’s teaching causes immense tension. In other words, having any kind of identity which the Church does not approve of often feels like going against God, even if it is technically an androcentric and human male perspective, interpretation and teaching of

God’s word.

Ammerman also points out how influential communities are as people construct an

“autobiographical narrative.”59 An autobiographical narrative is how individuals act out socially constructed stories. People carry out these socially constructed stories because they are often rewarded for doing so.60 A simple and common example is Catholic women are rewarded with praise when they cook for and clean up after church event. Is it oppressive to cook and clean at Church event? Not solely in itself. Remember, identity is not formed by one isolated incident that creates an autobiographical narrative, but a lifetime of various incidents which form us. On the flip side, women are discouraged from preaching. Women cannot give homilies. If women are allowed by a priest of a bishop to speak during mass

(not as a lector), it is called a reflection and must be done after the homily is over. I personally have only seen one woman give a reflection at one parish I attended. Once again,

58 Ibid., 212.

59 Ibid., 213.

60 Ibid., 214.

23 a woman who asks to preach and is told she cannot due to her gender might bounce back and keep fighting, but a lifetime of being denied and not seeing a woman preaching on the altar will shape her.

There are also public narratives which shape and form identities. Public narratives are the narratives “attached to groups, categories, cultures and institutions.”61 Religious organizations create narratives through “elaborate sets of roles, myths, rituals and behavioral prescriptions.”62 To be part of a religious organization, one has to fit into their public narrative which requires participation in behavior which correlates to certain social institutional code and categories.63 Public narratives give a person specific behavioral requirements, a reason for those behavioral requirements and a belonging due to following the behavioral requirements. For example, if a Catholic woman self-sacrifices for her family she will be affirmed for partaking in such behavior by other Catholics (family, friends, church hierarchy and community) because the Church clearly states this kind of sacrificial-love is a positive characteristic. Sacrificial-love is a characteristic men and women are asked to have and act on, but due to the cultural-expectations, women are specifically asked to be self-sacrificial in ways which have a greater potential to harm her.

Women are praised for being loving, when in fact they could be hurting themselves in the process or be hurt by someone else in the process. Author and Franciscan sister, Barbara

E. Reid, discusses how women can be hurt by androcentric behavioral requirements. She

61 Ibid.

62 Ibid., 217.

63 Ibid., 214.

24 discusses how women64 in Latin America women are often kept in a cycle of abuse because they believe staying silent and in the abuse is self-sacrificing for their families, since self- sacrificing is emphasized for a good Catholic wife.

Of course, being self-sacrificial is a great general requirement of holiness on paper and a positive characteristic to add to self-identity, if you have the privilege of not living in a misogynistic, desperate and abusive situation with children to feed.65 Ammerman claims understanding religious identity requires an understanding and questioning of

“institutional power and hegemony”66 because those within dominant groups “claim legitimate authority to determine who may give voice to those narratives.”67 Those who have authority and power control the narrative by controlling the stories told and choosing

“the people they valorize [by] highlight[ing] some life plans and ignor[ing] or denigrat[ing] others.”68 To have a true understanding and form a strong religious identity, a person has to question the storyteller. Questioning is the only way to truly understand and form opinions, beliefs and values. For Catholics, the magisterium is the powerful, authoritative and influential storyteller. Yet, it is a little more complex than a simple, one-word answer.

64 Although Reid’s book is specifically about women in Latin America, I believe the same phenomenon she discusses happens in the United States despite cultural differences.

65 I do not claim to know everyone in the magisterium’s story or experience with domestic violence. However, I will claim they all have zero experience as a woman in an abusive relationship.

66 Ibid.

67 Ibid., 223.

68 Ibid.

25

There are two levels - the doctrinal level and the personal level. On the doctrinal level is the magisterium because they have the authority and primary responsibility to teach and promulgate doctrine. On a the personal level, priests, deacons and those in religious life because know their congregation personally69 and have the authority, obligation, and influence to represent the bishop's teachings. To put this metaphorically, those on the doctrinal level build a fenced in-yard for the religious identity of the sheep (lay people).

Those on the personal level help engrain the fenced boundaries into the sheep’s religious identity. I want to point out women are only allowed to be in one group, and it is on the personal level.

Within the Church, males are assigned roles that hold all official interpretive and teaching authority. Within the institutional Church female roles hold no official interpretative and teaching authority. Yes, women can have teaching authority in their classrooms and inside their families, but not within the Church. Woman can also have the roles of minister, music minister, lector, organizer, Eucharistic minister, campus minister

(for those at a university), youth minister, catechist and other parish-centered roles, but those roles do not provide official interpretive or teaching authority. In both the family and the Church, women are mothers, caretakers and the hands and feet that carry out tasks. The

Church argues this is the God-given nature of women. I argue this is an androcentric interpretation of women’s nature.

Those in the magisterium have the authority to teach women what it means to be holy Catholic women, and those on the personal level reinforce those approved

69 This is not to say every priest knows or is friendly with every person in their congregation. It is to say they work and communicate with their congregation in person and on a weekly basis (minimum).

26 characteristics and behaviors with praise or disapproval. Women and men being ontologically different is not necessarily an issue in itself. I argue the issue comes into play when the androcentric view of men and women’s nature creates absolutized gender roles, and all of it is seen as God’s truth. This androcentically created and approved list of characteristics and behaviors for men and women create, what I call, the Holiness Standard.

The Holiness Standard

The Holiness Standard is a term I have coined to describe the set of characteristics for men and women to be holy or ‘achieve’ holiness. They reach this standard when they comply with particular and Church-approved characteristics and behaviors. I argue these characteristics and behaviors correlate with cultural gender norms. Essentially, the Church reinforces these characteristics and behaviors as holy and part of God’s original design through the teaching of complementarity theology and the feminine genius.

The document Mulieris Dignitatem was written in 1988 by John Paul II and focuses

“on the dignity and vocation of women on the occasion of the Marian year.”70 It begins with the Second Vatican Council’s closing message which states, “The hour is coming, in fact has come, when the vocation of women is being acknowledged in its fullness…”71

Mulieris Dignitatem states the Church understands and recognizes the vocation of women in its entirety. I completely disagree - the Church limits the vocation of women by putting

70 Pope John Paul II, Mulieris Dignitatem, Vatican Website, August 15, 1988, accessed December 7, 2016, https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul- ii/en/apost_letters/1988/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_19880815_mulieris-dignitatem.html.

71 Mulieris Dignitatem, sec. 27.

27 women into a gendered box and labeling it holiness. In other words, androcentricity creates a narrow and specific Holiness Standard. What I mean by this, is the Church names particular qualities a woman must have to be considered holy through complementarity theology and the feminine genius. For example, Section 27 of Mulieris Dignitatem states,

In our own days too the Church is constantly enriched by the witness of the many women who fulfil their vocation to holiness. Holy women are an incarnation of the feminine ideal…72

The statement above may be short, but it is packed with meaning. Pope John Paul II uses the phrase “feminine ideal” which means there is an optimal way for females to be holy.

This feminine ideal is reached when a woman conforms to behaviors and characteristics learned through the theology of complementarity and the feminine genius. This ideal is created from the qualities of Jesus, except the qualities are twisted due to gendered- expectations and the androcentric way the magisterium interprets and teaches doctrine on women.

Another place the Church explains the Holiness Standard is in another section 31 of Mulieris Dignitatem,

The Church gives thanks for all the manifestations of the feminine "genius" [sic] which have appeared in the course of history, in the midst of all peoples and nations; she gives thanks for all the charisms which the Holy Spirit distributes to women in the history of the People of God, for all the victories which she owes to their faith, hope and charity: she gives thanks for all the fruits of feminine holiness73

This once again is specifically naming feminine holiness and correlating it directly with the feminine genius - which tells women how they should be and act according to the assumed characteristics women should have due to their nature. The feminine genius

72 Ibid.

73 Mulieris Dignitatem, sec. 31.

28 clearly lays out the qualities a woman should have, and since it is now linked with holiness, those qualities become a component in the Holiness Standard. Mulieris Dignitatem is an apostolic letter written by John Paul II on the dignity and vocation of women. Mulieris

Dignitatem describes a clear and consistent distinction between feminine and masculine.

The distinction follows gender-normative characteristics and household codes. Pope John

Paul II explains even when women are fighting for their rights they,

must not under any condition lead to the "masculinization" [sic] of women. In the name of liberation from male "domination" [sic], women must not appropriate to themselves male characteristics contrary to their own feminine "originality" [sic]. There is a well-founded fear that if they take this path, women will not "reach fulfilment" [sic], but instead will deform and lose what constitutes their essential richness74 According to the Church, if a woman has masculine characteristics. she is not acting like a woman and will “deform and lose what constitutes [her] essential richness.”75 But there is no explanation of what those masculine characteristics are. However, feminine genius ideology is there to tell women who they are in their nature. To prevent this deformity, the characteristics which make up the feminine are packaged in the term feminine genius. They are sensitivity,76 service-oriented,77 generosity,78 virginity79 and motherhood.80

74 Ibid., sec, 10.

75 Yes, I felt I had to repeat that statement because I wanted you to read it twice and I’m having a hard time processing the absurdity of it all. The amount of sexism is almost too much for me to take-in.

76 Mulieris Dignitatem, sec. 16. Letter to Women, sec, 2.

77 Letter to Women., sec, 9-11.

78 Letter to Women., sec. 2 and 9.

79 Mulieris Dignitatem, sec. 17, 20- 22.

80 Mulieris Dignitatem, sec. 3-5, 17-19, 21-22.

29

In this next section I will be exploring the work of those with the authority to interpret and teach on the nature of women. Specifically, in the Creation Story, complementarity theology and the feminine genius to see how they contribute to women’s understanding of holiness.

The Nature of Women and Androcentric Interpretation

According to the Catholic Catechism No. 370 God is not male or female. Mulieris

Dignitatem also states God is not male or female, and because God made us in God’s image and likeness, “it is understandable that the Bible would refer to God using expressions that attribute to him both "masculine" and "feminine" qualities.”81 I want to point out the pronoun “him” is the only pronoun used for God in the Roman Missal despite the fact God is completely above sex, gender and the way humans think and act. Humans have gendered

God because it helps us to understand God. It is completely and utterly safe to assume God does not have an androcentric or gynocentric lens. God has a lens of truth because God is truth. I want to make it perfectly clear that God is not the problem when it comes to sexist ideologies and theologies in the Church - androcentric teaching is.

When the magisterium interprets Scripture and tradition (tradition as divine revelation82) it is vital for them to critically look at their cultural influences, biases and prejudices toward women83 because they use Scripture to promulgate and teach doctrine.

Every time Scripture and tradition are interpreted they are just that - interpreted. Since

81 Mulieris Dignitatem, sec, 8.

82 Weaver, New Catholic Women, 56.

83 Toward ALL people, but for the purpose of this thesis I am discussing women.

30

Scripture and tradition have been interpreted and taught within a patriarchal cultural framework and perspective, the theologies and ideologies have been impacted by a

“patriarchal mindset.”84 In other words, theologies taught about women have “an underlying bias in favor of men.”85 Because of this underlying bias, many feminist theologians use hermeneutics of suspicion as a method of interpreting scripture.86 They do not trust theologies and ideologies taught with such a strong androcentric bias. Instead, feminist theologies believe the true Word of God cannot be silenced by any form of sexism because it “can transcend human limitation.”87 Alternatively, they look to liberation theology with the belief that Scripture can and must be liberating to both men and women.88

This methodology of hermeneutics is best summed up by theologian and feminist scholar

Rosemary Radford Ruether. She states,

Whatever denies, diminishes, or distorts the full humanity of women is, therefore, appraised as not redemptive. Theologically speaking, whatever diminishes or denies the full humanity of women must be presumed not to reflect the divine or an authentic relation to the divine, or to reflect the authentic nature of things, or be the message or work of an authentic redeemer or a community of redemption89

84 Catherine Mowry Lacugna, “Catholic Women As Ministers and Theologians,” America October 10, 1992, 243.

85 Lacugna, America, 243.

86 Ibid., 243

87 Ibid.

88 Ibid.

89 Rosemary Ruther, Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology (Boston: Beacon Press, 1983).

31

Given that the magisterium is composed entirely of males formed in an androcentric culture, it is not surprising that these teachings on the doctrine of women bear a strong androcentric cast. It begins with an androcentric interpretation of the creation story.

The Creation Story

Most Catholics know the creation story because it was likely one of the first stories they learned as children. I begin by examining the creation story because it is the foundation and is used as primary evidence for backing complimentary theology and the feminine genius.

The first three chapters of Genesis are incredibly significant because it is a faith statement about human origins before the fall. The first part of the creation story demonstrates God’s design for the earth and people. Because the first part of the creation story shows God’s work before sin, it is viewed as a time of perfection. In other words, the world before the fall was God’s original design, which is the best example of the “divine

(or natural) order”90 for men and women that humans have.

The creation story is used as evidence to explain the natures of men and women as

God intended - which is why the interpretation of this story is crucial. The various interpretations have led to assumptions about the nature and the characteristics of women.

Some of these interpretations have been created through a misogynistic lens informed by inaccurate biology. For example, many Fathers of the Church, who were vital in forming the Catholic tradition, thought only men were made in the image of God. According to

Mary Jo Weaver, Aquinas said women were “naturally defective” and “of eternal

90 Ibid., 53.

32 childhood in which she would be subject to man ‘for her own benefit.”91 Of course, as time has progressed the Catholic Church’s theology on women has as well. Now, the Catholic

Church fully recognizes and accepts that women are made in the image of God. However, this does not mean the Church’s interpretation of the creation story is less androcentric.

Pope John Paul II discuss the creation story in Mulieris Dignitatem. He calls the creation story and the “truth concerning man as “the image and likeness” of God...[a] the immutable basis of all Christian anthropology.”92 Essentially, he uses the creation story to explain the “both man and woman are human beings to an equal degree, both are created in God’s image.”93 It is in Genesis the Pope also offers reasoning for men and women as

“unity of the two”94 and why he believes women have a spousal identity,

the creation of man and woman, the biblical account speaks of God's instituting marriage as an indispensable condition for the transmission of life to new generations, the transmission of life to which marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordered: "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it” (Gen 1:28)95

In 1995 Saint John Paul II wrote a Letter to Women.96 In section 7 and 8, he specifically discusses the creation story and what it means for women and their nature. He begins this section of his letter by reiterating the first three chapters of Genesis are key for understanding the nature of women. He states,

91 Ibid., 56.

92Mulieris Dignitatem, sec, 6.

93Ibid.

94 Ibid.

95 Ibid.

96 Please note there was no letter written to men.

33

let us reflect anew on the magnificent passage in Scripture which describes the creation of the human race and which has so much to say about your dignity and mission in the world97 and then directly discusses Genesis. The Pope, who according to Lumen gentium is “the supreme teacher to the universal Church,”98 is specifically teaching women the creation story has a direct message to women about their dignity and mission - which is why the interpretation of Genesis is of the utmost importance.

He begins by discussing Genesis 1:27, “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” Pope John Paul II explains humans were made in the image and likeness of God and are different from animals and other creations. This applies to both men and women. In the preceding paragraphs he discusses the implications for women due to Genesis 2:18, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” He writes,

The creation of woman is thus marked from the outset by the principle of help: a help which is not one-sided but mutual. Woman complements man, just as man complements woman: Men and women are complementary. Womanhood expresses the "human" as much as manhood does, but in a different and complementary way. When the Book of Genesis speaks of "help," it is not referring merely to acting but also to being. Womanhood and manhood are complementary not only from the physical and psychological points of view, but also from the ontological. It is only through the duality of the "masculine" and the "feminine" that the "human" finds full realization.99

97 Pope John Paul II, Letter to Women for Beijing Conference, EWTN, July 10, 1995, accessed February 11, 2017, https://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2wom.htm

98 Pope Paul VI, Lumen gentium, Vatican Website, November 21, 1964, sec. 25. Accessed February 11, 2017, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat- ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html.

99 Letter to Women, sec, 7.

34

As will be explained more in depth later in this chapter, Saint John Paul II, interprets the creation story through an androcentric lens. His role as supreme teacher combined with his androcentric perspective, give him a huge platform to influence and spread his androcentric teaching. As mentioned above, the creation story is seen as God’s original design before the fall. When women learn about their creation story the end product is women learn about their “dignity and mission” and the creation of their sex through an androcentric lens. I do agree the Creation Story is an excellent way to begin understanding God’s design for men and women. However, I do not agree with the necessity of an androcentric interpretation and teaching of the Creation Story because it has historically given reasoning to the inferiority of women, some of those ideas are lingering today.

Fortunately, due to the hermeneutics of suspicion, the creation story can be freed from androcentric chains. Phyllis Trible rereads the creation story and hopes to “understand and appropriate”100 it without thousands of years of male exegesis.101 In other words, she wants to liberate the creation story from the androcentric interpretive framework. Trible’s interpretation and liberated interpretative framework is groundbreaking. The hermeneutics of suspicion do not only apply to recent androcentric interpretations of Scripture, but also to the original writers of Scripture. For example, Trible’s discusses the “Yahwist account of creation”102 because it demonstrates hostility to women.103 Yahwist, also known as the

100 Phyllis Trible, Eve and Adam: Genesis 2-3 Reread (Rochester, NY: Women's Ordination Conference, 1983), 1.

101 Trible, Eve and Adam, 1.

102 Ibid.,1.

103 Ibid.

35

J source, are one among many sources of the first books of the Bible (the Torah). According to scripture scholar James L. Kugel, the J source was uninterested in the creation of other creatures,104 but instead found importance in the “first two humans and how the details of their creation related to later reality.”105 In other words, the J sources were more interested in how the creation story related to humanity and made meaning of humanity. I think Kugel would agree with Trible in the sense that the remnants of blatantly sexist interpretations of the creation story, which have been corrected by the Church, “continue[s] to be felt today”106 Trible, interprets the story with a liberated lens, and argues it is a story of true equality.

She begins her work by explaining the word ‘adham can be interpreted in two ways

- as the human male called Adam or a “generic term for humankind.”107 This means the first person was not male but androgynous.108 The evidence used for this interpretation is

Genesis 2:16-17, where God forbids ‘adham to eat from the tree of knowledge. It is only after (in verses 21-23) God splits the androgynous person in two and the ‘adham becomes male and female, Eve and Adam.109 This demonstrates males were not made first because both male and female were created simultaneously. For Trible, the creation of humanity

104 James L. Kugel, How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture, Then and Now (New York, NY: Free Press, 2008), 55.

105 Kugel, How to Read the Bible, 55.

106 Ibid., 55.

107 Trible, Eve and Adam, 1.

108 Ibid., 1.

109 Ibid.

36

(androgynous being) preceding the creation of sexuality means “male embodies female and female embodies male. The two are neither dichotomies nor duplicates.”110

This conflicts with Saint John Paul II’s idea - “creation of women is marked by the onset of help.”111 When God says, “it is not good for man to be alone,” God is referring to the androgynous person, not the male human Adam. It counteracts the idea that women were created to be helpmates to men, but instead with men. It demonstrates equality because this androgynous ‘adham was not meant to be alone. Pope John Paul II states that women being helpmates to men is “not one sided but mutual.”112At first, this is a relief.

But what does that statement really mean for women? Mutual does not mean equal, it means reciprocal. Is it wrong or automatically demeaning to be a helpful woman? No. But it is important to note in the context of American culture and history being a helpmate has a clearly subordinate connotation within the normative gender roles of American society.

When Pope John Paul II explains ‘mutual “help”113 the only concrete example he gives is,

the principle of mutually being “for” the other, in interpersonal “communication”, there develops in humanity itself, in accordance with God's will, the integration of what is "masculine" and what is "feminine"114

110 Ibid., 3.

111 Letter of Pope John Paul II to Women, sec. 7.

112Ibid., sec. 7.

113Mulieris Dignitatem, sec, 7.

114Ibid., sec, 7.

37

The mutual relationship explained above is called “communio personarum.”115 However, he also explains sin created a break in this unity and affects their relationship.116 Pope John

Paul II explains,

At the same time, however, as the author of the evil of sin, the human being - man and woman - is affected by it. The third chapter of Genesis shows this with the words which clearly describe the new situation of man in the created world. It shows the perspective of "toil", by which man will earn his living (cf. Gen 3:17-19) and likewise the great "pain" with which the woman will give birth to her children (cf. Gen 3 :16). And all this is marked by the necessity of death, which is the end of human life on earth.117

These new issues described in Genesis correlate to what we know today as gender-roles, the woman stays home with the kids, and the man goes to work and earn a living.

Yet, another piece of evidence Trible uses to show the creation story is one of equality between males and females is the word ‘ezer. The word ‘ezer means helper in the

Old Testament.118 In the context of Genesis 2 it is a “relational term”119 used to demonstrate social location within relationships.120 In this verse, ‘ezer is used to show the relationships between God, humans and animals121 - it has nothing to do with inferiority. To further this point,‘Ezer is also a term which describes a beneficial relationship between animals, people

115Ibid.

116 Ibid.

117 Ibid.

118 Trible, Eve and Adam, 2.

119 Ibid., 2.

120 Ibid.

121 Ibid.

38 and God.122 Trible points out when the word ‘ezer is joined with the word neged (as it does in this verse) the meaning changes to a “helper who is a counterpart.”123 A counterpart connotes equality, a helpmate connote inferiority.

Theology of Complementarity

Through the entire creation story, one theme truly begins to form - complementarity theology. Saint John Paul II’s Letter to Women demonstrates and explains complementarity theology. The theology of complementarity is used to describe and explain the role and nature of women. Its roots lie in the androcentric interpretation and teaching of the creation story.

Complementarity theology explains men and women are ontologically different and were created to complement each other. As partially analyzed in the previous section,

Pope John Paul II states,

Woman complements man, just as man complements woman: men and women are complementary. Womanhood expresses the ‘human’ as much as manhood does, but in a different and complementary way124

In other words, the Church believes men and women are both human, but how they express their personhood is different. Expression of personhood is done in the form of characteristics, role, and behaviors. The Church believes this difference of expression is due to an ontological difference between men and women. Saint John Paul II proclaims,

Womanhood and manhood are complementary not only from the physical and psychological points of view, but also from the ontological. It is only through the

122Ibid.

123 Ibid.

124 Letter of Pope John Paul II to Women, sec. 7.

39

duality of the ‘masculine’ and the ‘feminine’ that the ‘human’ finds full realization125

Stating characteristics and roles for men and women are determined ontologically means they are given by God’s “divine will.”126 Teaching men and women their characteristics, behaviors, and roles which have already been determined ontologically creates explicit and implicit implications for women. The claim, women and men are ontologically different, is enormous and has immense theological implications. Weaver quotes feminist theologian Anne Carr to explain issues that arise with the Church believing sexual differences can be equated with ontological differences.

Carr claims that it is “a kind of biological determination from which psychological, sociological and religious or theological natures and roles are derived.”127 In other words, female anatomy automatically gives women a certain nature with certain characteristics.

Specifically the characteristics of being “dependent, submissive, [and] maternal.”128 The

Vatican claims complementarity also demands equal dignity. Mary Anne Case, Professor of Law at the University of Chicago, argues the “equal dignity” discussed by the Vatican

“is premised on and manifested in essential and complementary differences.”129 Plus, those

125 Ibid., sec. 7.

126 Weaver, New Catholic Women, 51.

127 Ibid., 51.

128Ibid.

129 Mary Anne Case, "The Gender Agenda." The Tablet (2016).

40 differences look like “sex stereotypes”130 to the modern American. I argue they do not

“look” like sex stereotypes, they are sex stereotypes.

Case also points out it is “impossible to find any trace of the term

‘complementarity’ before the twentieth century.”131 Sister Prudence Allen, a member of the International Theological Commission, wrote The Concept of Women, a two-volume history of women in the Church.132 It covered 750 BCE to 1500 AD, and the word

‘complimentary’ does not appear in that period..133 Another important finding in Allen’s research was “those who asserted essential difference between the sexes also asserted the superiority of men.”134 This correlation holds true today, even if it is disguised as God’s design.

Case examines the Gospels for herself and states she “can find no trace of sexual complementarity.”135 She also reflects on Jesus’ actions toward women in the Gospels and finds no evidence of him endorsing sex role differentiation.136 Case says the opposite is true – “Jesus explicitly repudiates it, sending women out to preach…”137

130 Case, "The Gender." (2016).

131 Ibid., 2016.

132 Ibid.

133 Ibid.

134 Ibid.

135 Ibid.

136 Ibid.

137 Ibid

41

Another document where complementarity theology is found is in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church: On the collaboration of men and women in the Church and in the world.” The Congregation begins their letter with a bold sentence, “The Church, expert in humanity, has perennial interest in whatever concerns men and women.”138 I agree that the Church does specialize in humanity. The Congregation has a strong understanding of what is good for humanity and constantly attempts to find the Godly truths humanity needs. The CDF then claims they have the “correct understanding of active collaboration, in recognition of the difference between men and women in the Church and in the world.”139 In short, the CDF, promulgating doctrine which is later taught to women. The CDF is almost an entirely male body. Although they have excellent insight into humanity in some ways, the vast majority have never been women or had a woman’s experience. The CDF is in fact limited in their understanding of humanity, because there is a limited amount of female contributions. If the CDF believes they are experts in humanity without understanding they need to do more than consult a few women to fully understand humanity, it is further evidence of their androcentric lens.

In the next section the CDF addresses various components of the collaboration for men and women in the Church and in the world. They discuss three important tendencies

138 Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of men and Women in the Church and in the World, Vatican Website, May 31, 2004, sec. 1, accessed November 5, 2016, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_2 0040731_collaboration_en.html.

139 Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of men and Women in the Church and in the World, sec. 1.

42 they believe occur when people approach women’s issues. However, they offer little evidence for their claims.

The CDF claims the first tendency surrounds issues of power and aggression. The

CDF writes,

A first tendency is to emphasize strongly conditions of subordination in order to give rise to antagonism: women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves the adversaries of men. Faced with the abuse of power, the answer for women is to seek power. This process leads to opposition between men and women, in which the identity and role of one are emphasized to the disadvantage of the other, leading to harmful confusion regarding the human person, which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the structure of the family.140

In other words, when women highlight their “conditions of subordination” the CDF views their action as antagonistic, thus making women “adversaries of men.” When women “seek power” the CDF claims it leads to conflict between men and women. According to the

CDF, women seeking power is leading to conflict between men and women, which in turn is leading to “confusion regarding the human person” and a misunderstanding of complementarity theology. Simply put, the CDF does not believe women should seek and advocate for positions of power because complementarity given men and women different and divinely ordained roles. One reasons the CDF is concerned about women seeking positions of power in the Church is because doing so would change the mother and homemaker role of women, which is why the CDF asserts women seeking power is “most immediate and lethal effects in the structure of the family.”141 It is clear the CDF sees change in the balance of power between men and women as negative for the family.142

140 Ibid., sec. 2.

141 Ibid.

142 Further showing they see women's place as in the home only.

43

The second tendency the CDF recognizes in the approach to women’s issues is the denial of differences between the sexes. The CDF states differences between sexes are

“denied, viewed as mere effects of historical and cultural conditioning.” Because the

Church sees differences between men and women as ontological, they think the term gender minimizes the importance of those differences and natures. Essentially, denying ontological differences between men and women means denying God made men and women ontologically different, which would make an enormous theological chain reaction, especially in the realm of women’s ordination and homosexuality. This second tendency also concerns the CDF because the ideology behind the term gender provides fluidity of gender normative roles and characteristics. The CDF’s number one concern is the effect on the family and “its natural two-parent structure.”143 The key word here being ‘natural.’

What leads directly into the third tendency - “to be freed from one’s biological conditioning.”144 In other words, CDF does not believe people have a choice in their expression of their gender because biological sex is an outward representation of an ontological nature. This is expressed by their statement,

... the human attempt to be freed from one's biological conditioning. According to this perspective, human nature in itself does not possess characteristics in an absolute manner: all persons can and ought to constitute themselves as they like, since they are free from every predetermination linked to their essential constitution.145

143 Ibid.

144 Ibid., sec. 3.

145 Ibid.

44

The Church sees two important consequences when its members do not believe their biological sex automatically give them “characteristics in an absolute manner.”

The first consequence is the CDF sees “the liberation of women” as congruent with

“criticism of Sacred Scripture…” When women see sexism in scripture, or when women are oppressed and scripture is used as justification for their oppression, women do often criticize scripture in order to liberate themselves. However, critically looking at scripture to find God’s truth and to save scripture from an androcentric (or misogynistic) interpretation is extreme different from criticizing scripture to simply criticize.

The second consequence the CDF states is when biology becomes less important than gender expression. The CDF feels when biology is less important than gender expression there comes a “lacking importance and relevance the fact that the Son of God assumed human nature in its male form.”146 If Catholics do not believe it was important that Jesus was male, the Church’s whole argument for not ordaining women becomes obsolete. A major reason given for not ordaining women is that only the male form can stand in persona Christi or in the person of Christ. If Jesus’s male-form becomes less important, the base of the Church's’ argument for not ordaining women diminishes. I believe this is another reason why the Church is so keen on how Catholics are supposed to live out their biological sex in gender-normative ways. Additionally, some theologians question the church on the importance of Jesus’s male-form, because if Jesus’s male-form is as important as the Church is saying it is, the question, “Did/Could Jesus also save women?” arises.

146 Ibid.

45

This document begins with the consequences of not adhering to the Church’s teaching before even discussing the Church’s teaching. I do not know the reason why they begin in such a way. I hypothesize it is to instill fear as to what will happen to families and society if ignored. Discussing consequences first might be a tactic to get readers to take their teaching seriously. In this document the CDF also states God’s original plan for the relationship for women and men was ruined by sin although it cannot be abolished.147 They claim God’s first words to Eve after sin came into the world, “your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (Gen 3:16) introduce a “new kind of relationship”148 men and women will have,

It will be a relationship in which love will frequently be debased into pure self- seeking, in a relationship which ignores and kills love and replaces it with the yoke of domination of one sex over the other. Indeed the story of humanity is continuously marked by this situation, which recalls the three-fold concupiscence mentioned by Saint John: the concupiscence of the flesh, the concupiscence of the eyes and the pride of life (cf. 1 Jn 2:16). In this tragic situation, the equality, respect and love that are required in the relationship of man and woman according to God's original plan, are lost.149

The statement above also makes it seem as if Jesus and the resurrection has no effect on humanity.

The CDF’s document then dives into the meaning of personhood from a complementarity and biblical perspective. Starting with the creation story, the CDF sees a strong “spousal perspective”150 within Genesis. In other words, man and women were

147 Ibid., sec. 6.

148 Ibid. sec. 5.

149Ibid. sec. 7.

150 Ibid., sec. 6.

46 meant to be a unified team. The CDF uses Genesis 2:20 to explain this concept: “From the very beginning they appear in the ‘unity of the two', and this signifies that the original solitude is overcome, the solitude in which man does not find ‘a helper fit for him.” Another example of this spousal perspective is in the Garden of Eden, both Adam and Eve were naked and felt no shame. The CDF says this is a “nuptial attribute.” The document explains,

through this same spousal perspective, the ancient Genesis narrative allows us to understand how woman, in her deepest and original being, exists “for the other” (cf. 1 Cor 11:9): this is a statement which, far from any sense of alienation, expresses a fundamental aspect of the similarity with the Triune God, whose Persons, with the coming of Christ, are revealed as being in a communion of love, each for the others.151

The explicit statement – that women are naturally predisposed in their being to exist “for the other” is also an example of what the Church calls ‘The Feminine Genius.’

The Feminine Genius

Saint John Paul II truly popularized the term ‘feminine genius.’ The ideology behind the feminine genius comes out of the creation story and complimentary theology.

The feminine genius can be defined as the God-given characteristics and roles women naturally have. According to the CDF’s document, there are certain “feminine values”152 society needs, and women are the ones who can provide those values. The CDF states the feminine genius explains “the irreplaceable role of women in all aspects of family and social life involving human relationships and caring for others.”153 The Church claims these

151 Ibid., sec. 6.

152 Ibid., sec. 14.

153 Ibid., sec. 13.

47

‘feminine values’ are human values, but in the same breath states, “It is only because women are more immediately attuned to these values that they are the reminder and the privileged sign of such values.”154 The previous statement is an example of the Church boxing women into gender normative characteristics, while simultaneously believing gendered assumptions are positive. The only privilege I see here is male privilege. Once again, despite the fact the CDF says the values which make up the feminine genius are human values, they drastically emphasize the importance of those values for women.

While these traits should be characteristic of every baptized person women in fact live them with particular intensity and naturalness. In this way, women play a role of maximum importance in the Church's life by recalling these dispositions to all the baptized and contributing in a unique way to showing the true face of the Church, spouse of Christ and mother of believers . . . women are called to be unique examples and witnesses for all Christians of how the Bride is to respond in love to the love of the Bridegroom.155

It is with this androcentric mindset and attitude toward women and doctrine, certain characteristics and behaviors are named as part of the feminine genius.

The most emphasized characteristic of the feminine genius is a “capacity for the other.”156 This means the Church believes women “preserve the deep intuition of the goodness in their lives of those actions which elicit life, and contribute to the growth and protection of the other.”157 John Paul II’s Letter to Women shares this same idea. He applauds women for, “giving themselves generously to others, especially in serving the

154 Ibid., sec. 14.

155 Ibid., sec. 16.

156 Ibid., sec. 13.

157 Ibid.

48 weakest and most defenseless.”158 John Paul II goes so far as to say, “For in giving themselves to others each day, women fulfill their deepest vocation.” One reason this ideology is linked with women is because women’s bodies have the ability to create, grow and give life. This ties in with another component of the feminine genius – motherhood.

John Paul II uses the Virgin Mary as an example of the “highest expression of the

‘feminine genius.”159 His first example of Mary expressing the feminine genius is in Luke

1:38, when she calls herself the “handmaid of the Lord.” Pope John Paul II explains it is

“through obedience to the Word of God she accepts her lofty yet not easy vocation as wife and mother in the family of Nazareth.”160 The first example Pope John Paul II gives to explain Mary as the best exemplification of the feminine genius is obedience. He specifically says obedience to the Word of God. However, because of household codes women are placed women in a submissive and subordinate position to men. Household codes are the instructions given by Paul and Peter’s writings on the way Christians were to construct their private and public spheres. Presbyterian Pastor and author C.R. Wiley refers the household codes specifically to Ephesians 5:22-6:9, Colossians 3:18-4:1, Peter 2:13-

3:7 and 1 Corinthians 11:2-16.161 Ephesians 5:22-6:9 compares the relationship between

158 John Paul II, Letter to Women, sec. 9.

159 Ibid., sec. 13.

160 Ibid.

161 C.R. Wiley, "New Testament Household Codes: Embarrassing or Enlightening?," Pater Familias Today (web log), September 29, 2016, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/gloryseed/2016/09/household-codes-embarrassing-or- enlightening/.

49 wives and husbands, children and parents, and slaves and masters, clearly demonstrating the unequal power between men and women.

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.162

It does not matter that the scripture also says men should be kind to their wives, it still ups women in an inferior and unequal position. The same ideology of wives submitting to their husbands and comparing the marital relationship with children and parents, and slaves and masters, in Colossians 3:18, “Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.”163

1Peter takes this ideology to a whole new level, and tells men women are weak.

Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct. Do not let your adorning be external— the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious. For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening. Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you[d] of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.164

162 "BibleGateway," Ephesians 5:22-6:9 ESV - - Bible Gateway, accessed June 09, 2017,https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%2BCorinthians%2B11%3A2- 16&version=ESV.

163 “BibleGateway," Colossians 3:18 ESV - - Bible Gateway, accessed June 09, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+3%3A18- 4%3A1&version=ESV

164 “BibleGateway," 1 Peter 2:13-3:7 ESV - - Bible Gateway, accessed June 09, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Peter+2%3A13- 3%3A7&version=ESV

50

In 1 Corinthians 11:3 Paul writes a continued reinforcement of the man as the head of the household and the woman in an inferior position, “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is

God.”165 This passage also uses the creation story as a way to explain women’s place,

For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God.166

Because of these household codes there is no clear cut line between obeying God and obeying males.167 For example, For women, obedience to God has always been wrapped up in obeying fathers and husbands. Plus, household codes of obedience have been

Christianized. This means obeying household codes became part of what it meant to be a

Christian and partake in Christian culture.

The second characteristic used to express the feminine genius is motherhood. The

CDF’s document states, “Although motherhood is a key element of women's identity, this does not mean that women should be considered from the sole perspective of physical

165 “BibleGateway," 1 Corinthians 11:3 ESV - - Bible Gateway, accessed June 09, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+11%3A2- 16&version=ESV

166 “BibleGateway," 1 Corinthians 11:1-12 ESV - - Bible Gateway, accessed June 09, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+11%3A2- 16&version=ESV 167 Barbara E. Reid, Taking up the Cross, 74.

51 procreation.”168 The document follows this statement by discussing the importance of virginity as a way to “refute any attempt to enclose women in mere biological destiny.”169

In the same breath, the document explains motherhood does not have to be biological, but

“can find forms of full realization where there is no physical procreation.”170 Pope John

Paul II echoes this sentiment by claiming that spiritual motherhood is another way women can partake in motherhood without actually birthing children.171 With or without bearing children, women are expected to be some kind of mother.

Pope Francis continues to promote this ideology around women. Pope Francis believes the feminine genius is the way women can contribute to the world.172 Specifically, through their “sensitivity, intuition and other specific qualities.”173 these qualities were affirmed by Pope Francis who discussed the role of women in Evangelii gaudium,

The Church acknowledges the indispensable contribution which women make to society through the sensitivity, intuition and other distinctive skill sets which they, more than men, tend to possess174

168Office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, On the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, sec. 13.

169 Ibid., 13.

170 Ibid.

171 Pope John Paul II, Letter to Women, sec., 9.

172 Elise Harris, "Pope: The 'Feminine Genius' Takes on Theology's Uncharted Territory," Catholic News Agency, 2014.

173 Harris, The “Feminine Genius’, 2014.

174 Pope Francis, Evangelli gaudium, Vatican Website, June 29, 2007, sec., 103, accessed January 2, 2017, http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/pap a-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html

52

Once again, stating women have certain characteristics and qualities more so than men.

Pope Francis also believes it is “by the virtue of the feminine genius, women theologians can take up, for the benefit of all, certain unexplored aspects of the unfathomable mystery of Christ.”175 It is with the Holy Spirit and the feminine genius the Pope believes the Church can enter “the fullness of truth.”176 In addition, Pope Francis stated at an International

Union of Superiors General meeting that women view problems and look at life with a different lens, but in a complementary way.177 What can be seen by comparing Pope

Francis’s thoughts on the feminine genius and complementarity theology with Pope John

Paul II’s, is Pope Francis is attempting to use the feminine genius and complementarity theology to include women in a more expansive way.178 He recognizes that the Church needs a “stronger female presence”179 and to do so, there needs to be more openings for women to be involved.180 Expanding the role of women within the feminine genius and elevating the feminine genius slightly is still not enough and missing the mark because women are still expected to possess certain gender normative characteristics. Pope Francis is not addressing the issues with the feminine genius, but is dulling the explicit sexism to well-intentioned-but-still-is sexism.

175 Ibid.

176 Ibid.

177 Manson Jamie, "It's Time to Be Honest about Pope Francis and Women," National Catholic Reporter (2016).

178 Pope Francis, Evangelli gaudium, sec., 103.

179 Ibid.

180 Ibid.

53

Despite the fact Pope Francis states the feminine genius can expand the role of women, he also uses the feminine genius to explain why women cannot have an ordained priestly role.181 To me, this is further evidence the feminine genius is rooted in androcentricity and will always hold women back. He believes consecrated women are icons of the Church and Mary while men are icons of the Apostles “who were sent to preach.”182 This is an example of how the feminine genius plays into the creation of roles for women. Instead of ordaining women, Pope Francis wants to expand the application of the feminine genius in the life of the Church. He claims women do not and cannot have sacramental power, but they do have equal dignity183 and the role of women in the Church is still important. To prove so, he states, “…a woman, Mary, is more important than the bishops.”184 Mary...the highest expression of the feminine genius, one women, is more important the bishops - that does nothing for ordinary female Catholics attempting to figure out their role today. Despite the fact the Pope disagrees with women’s ordination and assigns them a certain role due to the feminine genius,

All of the statements above were focused on what Church hierarchy has to say about the feminine genius. What are lay women saying? To find out, I did what any other

American Catholic would do – I googled it. According to Rick Lomas, owner of Indexicon

(a company dedicated to improving the visibility of businesses online and offline), Google

181 "Pope Backs Male Priesthood, Urges 'feminine Genius' in Church.", Catholic News Agency, (2013).

182 Manson, “It’s Time to Be” (2016).

183 "Pope Backs Male Priesthood, Urges 'feminine Genius' in Church.", Catholic News Agency, (2013).

184 Ibid.

54 uses a complex algorithm to ensure the searcher is able to find what they are truly looking for.185 The algorithm uses “200 unique signals or “clues” that make it possible to guess what you might really be looking for. These signals include things like the terms on websites, the freshness of content, your region and PageRank.”186 When I typed “feminine genius” into the Google search engine, the first website that came up was called, “Made in

His Image.” This website was created by Maura Byrne, a woman who has worked for

Varsity Catholic, as pastry chef and then felt called by God to launch her website. The mission of the website is, “To begin a dialogue, a discussion, in a safe and compassionate setting, to foster hope and healing, and to empower women to turn from victim to survivor.

Ultimately, to provide holistic medical treatment and healing for women suffering from eating disorders, physical, and or sexual abuse, which entails, educating all women on the nature and dignity of the human person, created in the image and likeness of God.”187 The website there is an entire tab and section devoted to “Feminine Genius.” The website states the feminine genius is “lasting beauty [that] stems from virtue and character, which is found within.”188 The author is using the feminine genius as a way for women to positively view themselves to help heal from the situations listed above. The article then dives into the

185 Rick Lomas, "How does Google decide who is on the first page?," LinkResearchTools, October 04, 2016, , accessed May 14, 2017, http://www.linkresearchtools.com/case-studies/ways-to-improve-your-google-rankings/.

186 Ibid.

187"About the Founder," Made in His Image, , accessed May 14, 2017, http://madeinhisimage.org/about-the-founder/.

188 Maura Bryne,"Feminine Genius - Made in His Image," Made in His Image, 2016. http://madeinhisimage.org/fashionandthefemininegenius/.

55 feminine genius based in the ideas of Saint John Paul II’s Theology of the Body. The article says John Paul II’s work, “delves into what it truly means to be a man and woman, and how we should live out our masculinity and femininity in accords [sic] with how God created us.”189 To equate Pope John Paul II’s work with truth on how God created human to live out their masculinity and femininity is momentous because shows some women are taking Pope John Paul II’s thoughts extremely seriously.

In this section of the website uses the creation story as evidence of God’s original design for men and women. The qualities women are supposed to have are rooted in self- less love and viewing the self and the other as gift,

…after God created the world he saw that it wasn’t good for man to be alone, thus He created woman. Eve was created as a sincere gift for Adam, and Adam as a gift for her. They were created to complement one another in their union, each to offer themselves to the other as a gift190.

The way the article views selfishness is in the form of overt sexuality – the hookup culture, not respecting human dignity, lack of chastity, no self-control and pornography. The article suggest to bring society back to God’s original design, women “must embrace [their] femininity in a unique way.”191 Specifically, those unique qualities for women are,

“receptivity, sensitivity, generosity and maternity”192 To conclude, the article reminds the reader men and women are different, not better or worse.

189 Bryrne,"Feminine Genius”, 2016.

190 Ibid.

191 Ibid.

192 Ibid.

56

The second lay article I looked at was written by written by author, Catholic journalists, and public speaker Mary Jo Anderson and was the 6th hit on the first page of

Google. Anderson also sits on the board of directors of Women For Faith and Family193 and has written a book on men, women, marriage, and same-sex unions which was published by Catholic Answers194 in 2005.

In her article, she sees a direct correlation between the feminine genius and the vocation of women. She states,

This fullness of the feminine vocation is missing in the debate over "power-sharing" in the Church and the insistence on the ordination of women, because the fullness of the human experience can be realized only when the inherent gifts of each gender are ordered to each other. This is the "known but forgotten truth" that has proved prickly for those who are critical of the Church.195

193 An organization whose mission is to “assist orthodox Catholic women in their effort or provide witness to their faith, both to their families and to the world.” According to their website, which discusses the organization's history, “We had concerns. We were deeply concerned about the impression given in the media that most Catholic women felt alienated from the Church and dissented from essential Catholic teachings — on issues ranging from abortion to ordination. We were also aware that feminist theology has influenced many Catholic leaders. So our concern was increased when well-known feminist theologians were appointed as consultants to the Bishops’ Committee on Women, and when the committee announced its intention to gather information through “listening sessions” to be held in all dioceses of the United States. We were concerned that these “listening sessions” would not give the bishops an accurate picture of Catholic women — in part because only a small minority of Catholic women would be able to attend them.”

194According to their mission statement on their website, Catholic Answer is an internet based, “lay-run apostolates of Catholic apologetics and evangelization” who are, “dedicated to serving Christ by bringing the fullness of Catholic truth to the world. We help good Catholics become better Catholics, bring former Catholics “home,” and lead non-Catholics into the fullness of the faith.”

195 Mary Joe Anderson , "Feminine Genius," accessed December 2, 2016. https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6709.

57

She also names receptivity, sensitivity, generosity and maternity as key characteristics “to the feminine battle plan,”196 but she goes into much greater detail.

Anderson uses Mary the Mother of God as an example of receptivity. She claims every woman is called to be a "genius’ of receptivity — biologically, emotionally, and spiritually.”197 In other words, women are called to be receptive in their being. Also,

Anderson compares this female receptive nature to male’s generative nature.198 She believes to understand these gifts, men and women have to understand themselves in relation to each other.199 This receptivity is allegedly rooted in sensitivity. Anderson urges that this sensitivity be used to change and shape public policy and meet human needs.200 It is in generosity that a woman is “available for the needs of her community and her profession.”201 She once again uses Mary as an example of a generous heart, but makes a point to state, “generous service is not servitude.”202 When it comes to the topic of motherhood, Anderson brings up issues with diminishing differences between men and women. Echoing Saint John Paul II, she wants women to participate in “an affective, cultural and spiritual motherhood.”203 The article concludes with a bold statement,

196 Anderson, “Feminine Genius,” 2016.

197 Ibid.

198 Ibid.

199 Ibid.

200 Ibid.

201 Ibid.

202 Ibid.

203 Ibid.

58

“Ultimately, feminine genius is centered on the redemptive act of Jesus Christ.”204 She explains, women who want to be holy despite secular society and,

desire to take their position in this war for life must anchor their efforts in the Eucharist, which "expresses the redemptive act of Christ" (MD 26). It is women, joined to Christ eucharistically, who have the power and perseverance to extend that redemption to society in their unique, feminine manner.205

She draws a direct connection to a woman’s femininity and Jesus, specifically as Catholics know him in the Eucharist.

The last lay article I found was written by author and international speaker specifically on faith and marriage, Mary Beth Bonacci. Bonacci earned her MA in

Theology of Marriage and Family from the John Paul II Institute and also has an advice column on Catholic Match. She begins her article on the feminine genius by stating, “At first I was planning to start by discussing men, because in general I find men much more interesting than women.”206 She discusses women as, “intuitive. We are relationship oriented. Tenderness and empathy often come more naturally to women than to men.”207

Bonacci claims those are not gendered stereotypes, but tendencies.208 She brings up society not appreciating women’s gifts such as relationships, nurturing – which is a loss for the public sphere as well. One issue she addresses is the expectation of women acting like men

204 Ibid.

205 Ibid.

206 Marth Beth Bonacci, "The Feminine Genius," Catholic Exchange, accessed December 3, 2016, http://catholicexchange.com/the-feminine-genius.

207 Bonacci, “The Feminine Genius”, 2016.

208 Ibid.

59 in the workplace. She quotes Saint John Paul II’s document Mulieris Dignitatem which tells women they,

must not appropriate to themselves male characteristics contrary to their own feminine ‘originality. There is a well-founded fear that if they take this path, women will not ‘reach fulfillment’ but instead will deform and lose what constitutes their essential richness.”209

But what kinds of characteristics would make women deform and lose what constitutes their essential richness? Mulieris Dignitatem does not explain specifics, but Bonacci does.

She concludes, “that we women all of us have been poisoned by these “deforming” attitudes so prevalent in the social air that we breathe.”210 Bonacci discuss her experience at a conference, when a man raise his hand and said, “all of the women he met had been in careers for a long time. They were hard, they were tough, and they were already able to give themselves everything they needed. Why would they need him?” Bonacci answered his question by explaining,

first of all that, in our defense, a lot of us single women have had to support ourselves for a long time. We have thus become very accomplished in an environment that rewards more “masculine” behavior. We can’t exactly break down crying in the boardroom. And so, we can sometimes lose touch with our more vulnerable sides. It’s not gone forever we just may need a little help and patience to find it again. I also told him that our “needs” aren’t necessarily material, but that we still definitely want and need men in our lives. Some of our less-healthy sisters may have lost touch with that need (Gloria Steinem famously said that a woman needs a man “like a fish needs a bicycle”) but it’s still there211

209 Ibid.

210 Ibid.

211 Ibid.

60

From the statement above and through the rest of Bonacci’s article, she makes it clear that unfeminine behavior is not needing a man, being bitter, being hard or tough, anger with men. being non-relational and career-focused. Bonacci ends her article with a summary of her beliefs of femininity – the true nature of femininity is being “strong, confident, vibrant” but in a “uniquely feminine way.”212

Androcentrism in Complementarity Theology

Androcentric assumptions take on new dimensions of authority in the theology of complementarity. There is scientific evidence which proves men and women are biologically different in some ways. My dispute comes into play when the Church claims men and women have different natures which constitute an absolutized set of characteristics and gender-roles.213 The issue grows exponentially when there is little to no flexibility between those roles. The theology of complementarity absolutizes gender roles and characteristics by putting the natures of men and women into separate boxes.

According to complementarity theology the role of men (outside of the Church) are to work in the public sphere, financially provide for the family, lead the family and be a decision maker for the family. The role for women are to work in the private sphere as a mother, caretaker, homemaker, devoted wife, and religious role model for the family. This can be easily seen in Saint John Paul’s Letter to Women. He states women were marked by the onset as helpers, which in turn helps humans find full realization. To say women were created to be helpers in this context is problematic. First, it leads to defining women by

212 Ibid.

213 Weaver, New Catholic Women, 51.

61 their relationship with men. What about women in religious life, single or consecrated virgins? Can they find “full realization” within themselves and with God and without gender-normative characteristics? I argue absolutely. Women can find full realization as long as they are doing what God is calling them to do. Pope John Paul II would agree women can find full realization within themselves and God too, but he has gender- normative ways of women doing so. For example, he would most likely say women religious, single women or consecrated virgins can express their helping and receptive nature through a kind of spiritual motherhood. Is it wrong to be helpful? Of course not! But if the nature of women is only explained through the context of her relationship to men and their ability to be helpers - we are missing the fullness of what woman is. If the Church cannot define men and women as creations who are whole in their identity in God, they are not defining the natures of men and women. Instead, the Church is defining what women are by what men are not, and what men are by what women are not. Even though men are also expected to help women it is also in a gender normative way. For example, the man works financially to provide for the family. When the Catholic Church teaches men and women about their natures in a limited way, the Church does not provide Catholics with an understanding of men and women in their fullness, and it is certainly not providing

Catholic college-aged females with an understanding of their fullness. Pope John Paul II’s vision of men and women assumes a different economic time and social structure. If the fullness of men and women can only be found, accomplished, and lived-out within certain economic and social structure, I argue it is not fullness at all. The fullness of men and women can be found in any circumstance because it is a fullness which come from God.

62

Second, John Paul II does not say women are also helpers to God, humanity, or other women. He does not place the idea of ‘helper’ into a larger modern context. For example, helping break the glass ceiling in professional work places or helping cure cancer in the medical field. His statement only refers to women being helpers to men (which also implies help to families).

Third, Pope John Paul II claims this help is “not one sided but mutual.” At first, this is a relief. But what does that statement really mean for women? Mutual does not mean equal, it means reciprocal. Is there a problem with men and women being mutual helpers?

No. Until, mutual also implies absolutizing gender normative roles and expectations. For example, due to historical and cultural norms a female helper works in the private sphere and helps take care of the home. A male helper works in the public sphere to take care of finances. Does Pope John Paul II’s statement apply the opposite way? Can a female helper work to take care of finances and a male helper work in the private sphere and take care of the home? After reading his letter in entirety, I believe not. He continues to feed gender- normative characteristics and traditional roles. Specifically, he emphasizes women are, and should be, self-sacrificial. This kind of androcentric translation becomes detrimental to women. It has given rise and justification for women to completely self-sacrifice for their families, husbands and others to the point where it is harmful and potentially keeps women in abusive and oppressive situations because they see their suffering as suffering with

Christ.214 Pope John Paul admits men have oppressed women. He sees that women have been subjected to sexual violence, physical violence, and are not fully integrated into

214Barbara E. Reid, Taking up the Cross: New Testament Interpretations through Latina and Feminist Eyes (Minneapolis, IN: Fortress Press, 2007), 18.

63 social, political and economic life.215 However, he never addresses the problem of women staying in harmful situations because they are trying to be good Catholics. As a Church we need to avoid such “dichotomous thinking about expectations for ‘male’ and ‘female”216 in order to understand the fullness of women’s role and nature, especially in our modern world.

Yet, the Church says God made men and women ontologically different. Saint John

Paul II proclaims, “Womanhood and manhood are complementary not only from the physical and psychological points of view, but also from the ontological. It is only through the duality of the ‘masculine’ and the ‘feminine’ that the ‘human’ find full realization.”

This implies a woman needs a man to “find full realization.” A woman does not need a man to find full realization - she can find it in God in conjunction with her womanhood, and with any characteristic she is called to.

Androcentrism in the Feminine Genius

The ideology surrounding the feminine genius is the most androcentric concept discussed in this thesis. I do not deny differences between men and women, but to narrow women’s nature to receptivity, sensitivity, generosity and maternity is suffocating. I would be curious to see what women (who do not totally buy into the Church's teaching on the feminine genius) would come up with if they were able to interpret and teach doctrine on this topic.

215 Note he does not mention Church or faith life 216 Ibid.

64

Mary Beth Bonacci believes Vatican II “elaborated on the timeless and the definitively feminine contributions to society.”217 The key word here is ‘definitively.’

Believing all women must have four definitive characteristics plays into the Holiness

Standard. Honestly, I also think it attempts to put the beautiful work God has done in the soul of each woman into a box.

Jamie Manson clearly disagrees with the feminine genius. She boldly puts into words what the implementation and application of the feminine genius means for women,

In case it eluded you, the "importance of woman," is what Pope Francis (quoting John Paul II) calls "the feminine genius." That is, the reality that God, by giving us uteruses as well as genitalia that "complement" the male anatomy, has called women specifically to be wives and mothers, receivers and nurturers.218

For Manson, the feminine genius is not a theoretical concept – it is a narrow life path

Catholic woman must walk. I agree and take it a step further in my thesis by naming it the

Holiness Standard.

Impact of the Holiness Standard

The Holiness Standard severely impacts women. First, women are objects of their role, not subjects of their role. The subject of their role is men - what men want, need and expect from women. Women have no active part or voice in discerning their role in the

Church, which leaves the role of women and nature of women to be completely determined by men who believe they understand (and are partaking in) God’s design. The Holiness

217 Bonacci, “The Feminine Genius”, 2016.

218 Manson, “It’s Time to Be” (2016).

65

Standard for women is set and is not even based upon how women view themselves and their own role.

Second, an imaginary ‘ideal’ holy woman is created. Which also means for those who do not reach the Holiness Standard an imaginary unholy woman is also created. For example, the CDF’s document claimed when there is a disagreement in approach to women’s issues, women “emphasize strongly conditions of subordination in order to give rise to antagonism.” Women in “conditions of subordination” have every right to fight for dignity and equality. The fact those conditions exist in the first place is problematic and against Gospel-values and Catholic Social Teaching. She CDF document is saying those conditions are being “emphasized strongly in order to give rise to antagonism” as if women were discussing these conditions because they simply want to be hostile to men. That is absurd. Women strongly emphasize their subordinate conditions because they do not want to be in subordinate conditions! This is an example of what happens when Catholic women do not meet the Holiness Standard. When Catholic women speak out in some way they are perceived as antagonistic because one of the gender norms for female holiness is gentleness and quietness.

Those who accept and even embrace complementarity theology argue complementary roles do not make women inferior. I disagree and argue the role of women in this context does put women in inferior positions. Weaver explains within the Church, men have options. They can get married and be fathers, join the brotherhood or partake in the Sacrament of ordination and become deacons, priests, bishops, cardinals or even the pope. Holiness for men can be found in the form of various roles. Women have the option

66 of “motherhood and the convent.”219 That is not to put down motherhood or women who discern religious life! It is an honor and holy to partake in those calls. However, it points out the options for women keep them in “powerless positions”220 within the Church. For this thesis, by powerless positions I specifically am referring to official interpreting and teaching authority in the Church. Some will argue women have more power than men since they can greatly influence people due to their strong relationships. The kind of power discussed here is personal power. Others argue that since women can be ministers and hold various parish positions they do have some kind of official power. Especially when it comes to interpreting doctrine and creating authoritative theologies to whom women believe themselves to be.

Weaver asks her readers a simple question, “...is powerlessness linked with inferiority?” To answer this question, one has to put the term power into context. For example, a female youth leader has the power to influence her members to grow in their faith. I call this personal power, and personal power is not the kind of power I am discussing in this thesis. I am discussing what I call official power. Official power comes from holding a seat in magisterium of the Catholic Church, specifically the power to interpret doctrine and the power to create official and authoritative teachings in the Church. Women are unable to hold any of those positions due to their sex. In the context of official power, powerlessness is completely linked with inferiority.

Conclusion

219 Ibid., 52.

220 Ibid.

67

My hope for my Church is women will be free to do what God is calling them to do without limitations (gendered standards of holiness). I believe if women were free to participate in a true universal call to holiness, the best of each gender and individual would be called out and upon. If women were free to follow God’s call despite gendered standard of holiness, I think our world would change because the other half of the Church would have the authority and influence to change it. The first step is to remove the androcentric lens.

68

CHAPTER 2

RESEARCH

The purpose of my research was to see if college-aged females who identify as

Catholic associate gender normative characteristics with characteristics of holiness. In other words, do college-aged females who identify as Catholic and are involved in their faith in some way define a holy woman with gender normative characteristics such as submissiveness, receptivity, self-sacrifice, sensitivity and motherhood (to name a few) and holy men as strong, confident, leaders and fathers? I hypothesized college-aged females who identify as Catholic would associate gender normative feminine characteristics with holy women and gendered normative masculine characteristics with holy men - thus participating in and perpetually creating the Holiness Standard. To answer this question, I decided to study college-aged females who identify as Catholic from all regions of the

United States by asking them to partake in an online survey.

Demographics

I decided to narrow my demographic to female college students for a variety of reasons. First, I work with college students as a campus minister, and they fascinate me.

Second, I find college students willing, open, and brave enough to share their honest opinions which I thought would help me get good and honest data. Three, college students

69 are part of the next generation of Catholics. How they understand gender and holiness will greatly impact the Church and the Church’s future. For example, if Catholic female college students strongly associate gender normative characteristics with characteristics of holiness, they will also raise their Catholic families to believe gender normative characteristics can be equated to holiness. Yet, to ensure my research could actually provide clear information, I narrowed my demographics even more.

I wanted to ensure the Catholic college-aged females I was studying actively identified as Catholic and were involved in their faith in some way because, as stated above, they are the future of the Church. To find this demographic,221 I sent an e-mail to campus ministers at 49 Catholic Colleges and Universities and 25 Newman Centers from every region of the United States.222 In this e-mail I asked the campus ministers if they would forward my survey via email to 10-20 female students who identified as Catholic. This was a great way to find Catholic females who identified as Catholic and practiced their faith in some way because campus ministers work directly with the demographic I was searching for. However, I want to point out, although all of these students were female, Catholic, college-aged and involved in campus ministry, they are still diverse in terms of regions, opinions, and beliefs.

221 I will be referring to college-aged females who identify as Catholic as my demographic from this point forward

222 A full list of the Catholic Universities, Catholic Colleges and Newman Centers will not be provided for privacy purposes.

70

Why an Online Survey?

To find out if college-aged females who identify as Catholic associate gender- normative feminine characteristics with holy women and gender-normative masculine characteristics with holy men, sociologist Laura Lemming PhD and I decided an online survey would be the best research tool. Earl Babbie, sociologist and Campbell Professor

Emeritus in Behavioral Sciences at Chapman University, explains an online survey would provide an efficient way to measure the beliefs and attitudes of my targeted demographic in a short period of time.223 Even though I work with many female students who fit my demographic and could have designed focus groups or face-to-face interviews, I wanted to survey a large amount of diverse participants to properly see the their patterns of opinion and belief regarding holiness for men and women. Babbie states, “survey research is probably the best method available to the social researcher who is interested in collecting original data for describing a population too large to observe directly.”224 The online survey program I used is called SurveyMonkey.225 Even though it has a silly name, Babbie states

SurveyMonkey, “is sometimes used by professional researchers and research associations.”226 In addition, using a survey provided flexibility because I could ask many questions on a single topic.227 Although I believe a survey was the best way to complete my research, I still admit to its weaknesses which will be discussed later on in this chapter.

223 Babbie, Earl, ˜The Practice of Social Research, 8th ed. (Belmont: Wadsworth Publication, 1998). 224 Babbie Earl, The Practice, 253.

225 The SurveyMonkey program was paid for by the University of Dayton’s Sociology Department, which meant I had full access to all of SurveyMonkey’s features.

226 Babbie Earl, The Practice, 285.

227 Ibid. 272.

71

Questions

According to an article about U.S. Survey Research by Pew Research, “perhaps the most important part of the survey process is the creation of questions that accurately measure the opinions, experiences and behaviors of the public.”228 Because the creation of the questions is one of the most important parts of the survey process I took it extremely seriously.

I fully recognize my passion for this topic. However, I never wanted my passion to get in the way of doing excellent and trustworthy research which is why I constantly collaborated with and sought feedback from sociologist Dr. Laura Lemming and professor of theology Dr. Sandra Yocum.

Creating a survey which accurately measured Catholic college-aged females’ opinions and beliefs on holiness was no easy task. The creation of the survey involved writing questions which elicited answers that could accurately measure participants’ opinions and beliefs, while also constructing the questions into an organized order for the survey as well.229 There were 7 close-ended questions and 10 open-ended questions which totaled a 17 question survey.

The first question was, “How important is the Catholic faith for you?” Participants answered from a Likert Scale - “very important, important, somewhat important, somewhat unimportant, unimportant.” I phrased this question to specifically ask participants how

228 Michael Suh, "Questionnaire design,” 6.

229 Ibid., 6.

72 important the Catholic faith is to them personally. It was the first question asked because I wanted their initial and honest answers before they started reading more questions which could have possibly swayed them in some kind of way.

The second question was, “Characteristics that make me a holy person are…” I wanted participants to answer what made them holy before I asked them to think about holiness in terms of men and women because I wanted their honest and initial opinions before I gave them something more specific to think about,230 which could have possibly influenced their answers on the characteristic of holiness for men and women. This question was open-ended because I did not want to limit their answers but strove “to discover which answers [were] most common.”231 Knowing what participants said was holy about themselves first gave me insight into their original opinions and beliefs on holiness.

The third question was a bit tougher for participants because it asked a more controversial question, “What do you think is the proper role of women in the Church?” I phrased this question in an intentional way as to have each participant answer for what they thought the proper role of women was. I did not want participants to answer what they thought the Church’s beliefs were on the proper role of women. This question is open- ended because I knew the range of answers would be diverse, and I wanted participants to explain their answer without any limits from me. This open-ended question also allowed me see which answers commonly arose.

230More specific meaning asking participants about holiness for men and holiness for women.

231 Michael Suh, "Questionnaire design,” 6.

73

The fourth question was, “The Catholic Church values the voice of women.”

Participants could answer, “very true, true, somewhat true, somewhat untrue, untrue.” I asked this question after question number three intentionally. As an article by Pew

Research explains, when there is a “close-ended question before open-ended question people are more likely to mention concepts or considerations raised in those earlier question when responding to open-ended questions.” In other words, if I put close-ended question 4 before open-ended question 3, participants would have been more likely to bring up the value of women’s voices in their answer. I did not want participants to feel they had to defend their answers to the close-ended question in the open-ended question. I wanted participants to provide their opinions and beliefs on the role of women before I asked them about the Church valuing women’s voices as to not skew the way participants were thinking about the role of women in the Church in terms of voices. Question 4 was also a close-ended question because I did not think finding out the ‘why’ participants though the

Church valued women’s voice or not was pertinent to this thesis232 on holiness directly.

Question 5 is where I began to specifically ask about the characteristics of holiness for men. The questions about men’s holiness were all open-ended so I could see which characteristics were the most common. Question five asked, “What are the top 4 characteristics of a holy man?” Question 6 asked, “Who are your top 3 male role models for holiness?” Question seven asked, “What characteristics make those men holy?” and question eight asked, “What are the top 4 characteristics of an unholy man?” I asked this set of questions about men in a row because I wanted participants to be focused on men

232 Although I do admit it would have been fascinating and could be an entirely other thesis in itself.

74 only and not catch on that my research was going to be comparing their answers about holy men to holy women. If participants caught on to my desire to compare their answer, they might change their answers out of social desirability bias, fear of making the Church look negative or simply thinking there was a right or wrong answer.233 I also intentionally asked question 8 last in the set of male-holiness questions because measuring unholiness was another way to measure holiness, but through a different lens.

Question nine is where I began to ask about characteristics of holiness for women,

“What are the top 4 characteristics of a holy woman?” Question ten asks, “Who are your top 3 female role models for holiness?” question eleven asked, “What characteristics make those women holy?” and question twelve asked, “What are the top four characteristics of an unholy woman?” These questions mimic the previous four questions about men with the only difference being this set of questions were directed toward women. Keeping the questions exactly the same (except for switching sexes) was done to keep the questions standard for comparing and analyzing answers accurately later on.

Question 13 asks the participant to “Rank the top 5 characteristics of a holy man with 1 being the most important characteristic and 5 being a somewhat important characteristic.” Question 14 asks the same, except it is directed at the most important characteristic of holiness for women. These two questions were to see what participants think is most important characteristic of holiness for men and women by making them choose between predetermined answers. I thought this would give me insight into true opinions because it forced participants to make a ranked decision.

233Or maybe they would have another personal reason for not wanting to share their true answers.

75

The last three questions were demographic questions. Question 15 asked, “I attend a…” and gave participants two options, “Catholic University/college” or “University with a Newman Center” because those were the locations I found participants. Question 16 asked the participants ages via multiple choice ranging from “18 years old” to “24+ years old.” The last question was, “I identify as a…” and participants chose between “male” and

“female.” I recognize now this could have been the first question on the survey as a qualifier question. I am also aware our American culture recognizes there are more ways to identify gender than the binary categories of male and female. However, because this thesis is specifically looking into how females associate holiness with men and women, I thought it would be easier to keep binary categories as the only options.

It should be noted that due to the nature of the survey, I had to take participants at their word and cannot physically observe the participants behaviors and decisions in their real lives.234 As Babbie explains, “Surveys cannot measure social action; they can only collect self-reports or recalled past action or of prospective of hypothetical action.”235 I am measuring participant’s perception of holiness, not their actually actions.

Shortcomings

Although this data was designed and collected in the most efficient and accurate way possible, there are shortcomings. First, the possibility of social desirability bias. Social desirability bias is when a subject answers the questions based on what the subject believes

234 bid., 287.

235 Ibid.

76 they should say.236 Because the survey is asking their beliefs and opinions on religion, some of the participants may have felt pressure to answer a particular way for a variety of reasons. For example, a participant may have not wanted to truthfully answer a question because their answer would be against Church teaching.

Second, a survey is required to be standard237 - every participant answers the same question. On one hand, the survey then provides a consistent standard to measure data to find patterns of belief and opinion. On the other hand, I was unable to ask participants follow up questions or clarification. There is no way to ask more follow up questions to understand specifically why participants responded in a certain way. Because there was no way for me to ask these follow up questions via a survey, I spent an immense amount of time with Dr. Laura Lemming and Dr. Sandra Yocum, writing clear and effective set of questions possible.

Another shortcoming is I only surveyed college-aged Catholic females who are practicing their faith in some way. This means the data cannot speak for all Catholic women, but can suggest patterns of thought and opinion as well as help surface other important questions. Lastly, 82 participants are a small sample size compared to how many

Catholic college-aged females there are attending Catholic Universities/colleges or

Neumann Centers. Despite these shortcomings, the data demonstrates a loud, clear and important message that young Catholic women associate gender-normative characteristics with characteristics of holiness.

236 Michael Suh, "Questionnaire design," Pew Research Center, January 29, 2015, , accessed March 06, 2017, http://www.pewresearch.org/methodology/u-s-survey- research/questionnaire-design/.

237 Babbie Earl, The Practice, 272.

77

Data

There were a total of 82 participants who took my survey. All 82 participants said their faith was important to them in some way, even if it is in varying degrees. 80 participants naming their faith as important or very important is crucial to discuss first because it shows Catholicism is important to 100% of participants.

Chart A

Answer Percentage # Of Participants

Very important 73.17% 60

Important 24.39% 20

Somewhat important 2.44% 2

The data shows the Catholic faith is important to the participants interviewed which sets up the framework to see the rest of this data in. Although I cannot speak to the story of each of these young women, I can say their faith is important to them.

Question #2 asked what characteristics participants thought made them holy.

According to the data, being Catholic in some way is the number one characteristic, out of the top 5 characteristics, participants believe makes them holy. I coded Catholic-ness as the mention of something specifically Catholic (such as receiving the Eucharist or

Sacraments) or their Catholic faith specifically (such as “active practice of the faith”). Holy

Characteristic #2 is having an active and strong prayer life. A participant stated, “we are holy when we actively seek communion with God through prayer.” Actively seeking God through prayer and having prayer be a central staple of faith-life is a common theme throughout answers in the Prayer category. The third most common answer is “loving”

78 followed closely by “selfless.” The fifth most common answer was having a relationship with God. Relationship with God was categorized by a desire to live for Christ or with

Christ, following the example of Christ, loving Jesus/God238 or specifically stating they desired a personal relationship with Jesus/God.

Chart B

# in line up Characteristic # of participants

#1 Catholic-ness 23

#2 Prayerful 22

#3 Loving 18

#4 Selfless 17

#5 Relationship with God 15

It is crucial to understand the importance Catholic-ness as the top characteristic participants believe makes them holy. Participants believing being Catholic is the number one holy characteristic they possess is significant because it shows how important the Catholic faith is to their understanding of and identity with, holiness. Because Catholicism is key to their identity as holy women it strongly suggests participants will take the Catholic Church’s teaching on holiness and the nature of women seriously.

Question #3, “What is the proper role of women in the Church?” brought about a variety of answers, the most common answer totaled only 18 participants. The top 5 answers are demonstrated in Chart C.

238 I fully recognize Jesus and God and two persons of the Trinity. I put a slash to show participants named both Jesus and God

79

Chart C

# in line up Topic # of participants

#1 Equality 18

#2 Motherhood/marriage 11

#2 Tied Leadership of some kind 11

#2 Tied Service 11

#3 Role model 9

#3 Tied Pro-Women’s Ordination 9

#4 Religious Life 8

#4 Tied Love 8

#5 Anti-Women’s Ordination 7

#5 Tied Not seeing a difference between men 7 and women’s role

#5 Tied Not naming feminine genius, but 7 speaking it

#5 Tied Participation in other roles besides 7 ordination at Church/parishes

There is little consensus among Catholic college-aged women on the role of women in the Church. I coded all the responses into 12 different categories. However, because some categories had the same amount responses, the 12 categories were in the top 5 spots, further demonstrating how little consensus there was.

The most common answer given for Question #3 is Equality. The interesting part of the answers given is many use the word “should.” For example, “ Women should have opportunities equal to that of men in the Church” and “If a woman feels called to be a member of the church, I think all roles should be open to her, including the option for

80 priesthood.” These shoulds are significant because the shoulds show what role the participant is describing is not happening. Let us take the statement above as an example,

“Women should have opportunities equal to that of men in the Church.” If this participant thought woman's proper role was currently the same status as men, the statement would have been, “Women have opportunities equal to that of men in the Church.” The addition of should means the participant believes equality is not currently happening.

I also noticed, more than any other question, participants wrote the most for this short answer question. To code the categories, I broke each response down by sentence, and place them into their perspective categories. Due to the complexities of the responses, if a sentence could be in two categories, I did place it in both categories. For example, “I think women should be allowed to be priests, deacons (we’re working on it), and basically hold any position a man is allowed to hold.” was put in the category of Equality and the category of Pro-Women’s Ordination. No sentence was put in more than 2 categories.

There were 188 statements made for Question #3, 35 of those statements directly answered

Question #3 in comparison to men. For example, “Doing anything a man can do” and, “

Women and men are equals in the Church.” I found this particularly interesting because the participants do not explain the role of women without the use of the role of men. Out of the 12 categories which made up the top 5 answers, and ensuring no sentence was counted twice, there were 113 responses and 29 made statements directly comparing the role of men and women.

The number one answer to the question about women’s role automatically goes to equality between men and women, but equality really was not my question. I asked about the proper role of women. Because proper role of women automatically brought up into a

81 discussion on equality means the role of women is significantly impacted by the role of men. Participants said the primary proper role of women is to be equal to men - which means the proper role of women’s equality has not been reached. Also, participants are unable to provide an explanation about the role of women in the Church without defining what men’s role is.

The second most common answer was a three-way tie between

Motherhood/Marriage, Leadership of Some Kind, and Service. Interestingly enough, one participant wrote, “Well obviously mother that raise holy children.” To this participant, woman's proper role clearly is to raise holy children. I want to reiterate, my question was,

“What is the proper role of women in the Church?” Participants see a direct connection between motherhood and their role in the Church - which is not a negative connection in and of itself. Yet, I wonder about the implications of motherhood being a role in the

Church. If the proper role of women are to be mothers, what about women who are not married or cannot have children? Do they not have a place? Is fatherhood a proper role of men in the Church? Another participant partially answered my questions by writing “But I think that women are particularly called to spiritual motherhood -- to use gifts like empathy and compassion to give birth to Christ in the world around us every day.”239 It is this answer in conjunction with the other answers such as, “They have unique gifts to bring, especially the role of mother...” which demonstrate motherhood is a crucial identity piece for Catholic women and in this motherhood they fulfill their role.

The category of leadership was also intriguing because of how many qualifiers participants used to explain what they meant by leadership. For example, “They should

239 I would like to point out how specific this answer is. It is a very particular way to live out womanhood in God.

82 lead formation groups and lead prayer and reflection” and “To be leaders in faith that are

(not ordained) for their children and others in the community.” There are qualifiers as to not confuse women’s role in leadership with male-ordained leadership. One participant did write women should have more leadership roles.

The next category is alone in this three way tie for second place - Service. Two participants correlated service and the Blessed Mother. One wrote, “I think the proper role is to be a servant for others (we look to Mary as our role model).” The other wrote, “To serve and live like Mary.” Another participant directly correlated the single life with service saying, “...or single life in devotion to service.” The other participants did not specify how women should serve, but instead stated to serve “in any way they can.” Which demonstrates how the Church emphasizes women as helpers and people who serve in any and all ways, no matter the circumstance - whether it hurts women or not.

The third most common answer was a tie between Role Model and Pro-Women’s

Ordination. The interesting piece about the category of Role Model is participants specifically say a woman's proper role is to be role models for “other women” or “younger women.” One participant even said, “Women should act as older siblings” for others. Also, a participant said, “To be a role model for future generations.” There were no answers in this category which would suggest woman's proper role is to be a theological role model, academic role model or role model to men. There is a clear distinction that women should be role models for those who have equal or less power than they do, for example, other women, younger women or children.

The answers surrounding Pro-Women’s Ordination were fascinating as well. One participant wrote, “I think women should be allowed to be priests, deacons (we’re working

83 on it) ....In the hierarchy of the church, a woman can only reach the second tier, religious sisterhood. That’s ridiculous.” One participant even states, “...I would love to work as a deacon someday.” Equally fascinating are statements which specifically explain the proper role of women is not priesthood. I named this category Anti-Women’s Ordination. One participant wrote, “To be supporters. Women are not meant to be priests, deacons, or hold offices like that. They are however able to hold high pastoral offices which support the roles of men.” Another participant explains,

The issue of women priests is probably the first thought many have when asked about the “role” of women in the church, as this is really one of the only defined “roles” someone can have as part of the official Church structure. However, I do not think women “need” to be priests. The priesthood was designed by God to be masculine, and that does not detract in any way from female presence within the life of the Church.

Another participant’s reasoning for not having women priests is, “The church knows what

She is doing. She hasn’t changed for thousands of years.” Pro-Women’s Ordination had 9 total responses while Anti-Women’s Ordination had 7 total responses.

Another category as the fifth most common answer is No Difference between the role of men and women in the church. One participant stated, “I’m not sure what you mean by proper role of women, because I think that in almost every way it is the same as a man’s role: to attend, to take part, volunteer their time and money, voice their opinion and live their faith...” The rest of the participants echo the same ideas. Also tied for fifth, is women’s role being related to participation in other duties besides ordination at mass. For example, Eucharistic ministering, lectoring or in choir.

The last category to be tied for fifth is what I called, “Speaking the Feminine

Genius.” These participants do not name the feminine genius, but they do speak about it.

Four of the seven answers included the idea of women using their special gifts as women

84 for the betterment of the Church. A common theme throughout the answers were women have unique or a “special charism” which is different from men. One participant wrote, “I do believe that women as a whole have a special charism demonstrating the deeply relational aspect of God Himself as that this is usually expressed in a particular interest in relationships (family, friends, the needy, etc) with others.”

The fourth question asked, “The Church values the voices of women.” Participants could answer, “Very true, True, Somewhat true, Somewhat untrue, untrue and very untrue.”

Chart D

Answer Percentage # of participants

Very true 24.39% 20

True 40.24% 33

Somewhat true 21.95% 18

Somewhat untrue 9.76% 8

Untrue 3.66% 3

In total, 64.63% of participants believe the statement, “The Church values the voices of women” is true or very true. However, 35.37% of participants believe the statement is somewhat true, somewhat untrue or untrue. I will discuss this question and why these numbers are exceedingly concerning in the next chapter. This is the last question I asked before getting into the actual characteristics of holy men and women.

Question number five asks, “What are the top 4 characteristics of a holy man?” The top five answers in descending order are Loving, Humble, Prayerful, Honest and Faithful.

85

The range between the number one most common answer and the fifth most common answer.

Chart E

# in line up (men) Characteristic (men) # of participants (men)

#1 Loving 28

#2 Humble 27

#3 Prayerful 26

#4 Honest 20

#5 Faithful 19

Question number nine asked the same question but for women, “What are the top

4 characteristics of a holy woman? The top four answers in descending order are Loving,

Humble, Caring/Nurturing, Compassionate, and Prayerful. The range between the number one spot and the number five spot is 18 participants.

Chart F

# in line up Characteristic # of participants

#1 Loving 32

#2 Humble 21

#3 Caring/nurturing 19

#4 Compassionate 16

#5 Prayerful 14

86

When comparing the top four characteristics of a holy man and a holy women side by side, as done in Chart G, some important observations can be made.

Chart G

# in Characteris # part. # in line Characteri #part. line up tics up stics

#1 Loving 32 #1 Loving 28

#2 Humble 21 #2 Humble 27

#3 Caring/nurtu 19 #3 Prayerful 26 ring

#4 Compassion 16 #4 Honest 20 ate

#5 Prayerful 14 #5 Faithful 19

First, there is more consensus among participants about what characteristics make a holy man then a holy woman, even though the top answer for a holy woman has 32 participants while the top answer for men has 28 participants. The top three most common answers - Loving, Humble, Prayerful - for men all stay within one participant range - 28 participants, 27 participants, 26 participants - respectively. The biggest drop is 6 participants - from the third most common answer, Prayerful, to the fourth most common answer, Honest. In comparison, the top three most common answer for characteristics of a holy women are Loving, Humble, and Caring/Nurturing - 32 participants, 21 participants,

19 participants - respectively. The biggest drop is 11 participants - from the most common answer, Loving to the second most common answer, Humble.

87

Second, there was a greater number of categories to explain the characteristics of a holy man then a holy woman. What I mean by this is I coded 72 different categories made of participants, answers to this question. In other words, participants used 72 different kinds of codes (characteristics, actions, descriptors) to describe the top four characteristics of a holy man. In comparison, there were 62 categories for what made a holy woman.

Last, there are three shared characteristics of holiness for holy men and holy woman

- Prayerful, Loving and Humble. Although they are not all in the same place in the lineup and do not have the same number of participants, they are shared among the two groups.

Another interesting way to look at this data is comparing what participants said made them holy verses what they said were characteristics of a holy woman. Chart H compares the top five characteristics participants said made them holy verse the top five characteristics participants said made a holy woman.

Chart H

# in line up Characteris # of Holy # of tics that participants women participants make me characterist holy ic

#1 Catholic- 23 Loving 32 ness

#2 Prayer/Praye 22 Humble 21 r

#3 Loving 18 Caring/nurtu 19 ring

#4 Selfless 17 Compassion 16 ate

#5 Relationship 15 Prayerful 14 with God

88

First, there is more consensus around what characteristics participants say makes them holy in comparison to what characteristics make a holy woman. Second, there is one overlapping characteristic which is Prayerfulness. However, I’d like to note there is a large different between the Prayerful category in each question. Twenty-two participants said

Prayerfulness made them holy, while 12 participants said it was a characteristic of a holy woman. The lack of consensus surprised me. Since only females were surveyed, I thought the characteristics between these two questions would be similar. Participants see a difference between the characteristics which make a holy women and the characteristics which make them holy.

There is another way of observing the data within these two questions. Chart I describes the top most common answers for the characteristics participants say make them holy and compares them to the characteristics participants say make a holy woman.

Chart I

# in Characteristi # of # in line Holy women # of line cs that make participa up characteristi participa up me holy nts c nts

#1 Catholic-ness 23 #20 Catholic-ness 5

#2 Prayer 22 #4 Prayer 14

#3 Loving 18 #5 Loving 32

#4 Selfless 17 #10 Selfless 9

#5 Relationship 15 #15 Relationship 8 with God with God

The biggest difference between what participants believe makes them holy versus what makes a holy woman is Catholic-ness. Twenty-three participants said their Catholic-ness

89 made them holy, but only five participants said Catholic-ness is a characteristic of a holy woman. All of the categories were on both answers to the question; however, there is a big difference in the frequency of the answers in all categories.

Question eight asks, “What are the top 4 characteristics of an unholy man?” Chart

J provides the top five answers - Dominance, Selfishness, Self-Centered/Prideful and

Lustful.

Chart J

# in line up Characteristic # of participants

#1 Dominance 39

#2 Self-centered/Prideful 31

#3 Selfish 29

#4 Disrespectful 24

#5 Lustful 17

It is important note the difference between Selfish and Self-Centered/Prideful.

Although those two characteristics are very similar, I kept them in two distinct categories.

I define Selfish as not caring about others and only caring about what is best for oneself. I define Self-centered/Prideful as being into one’s self in an egotistical way. Despite the fact these definitions appear small, they make a big difference when describing unholiness because the motive for each characteristic and the actions taken with each characteristic are distinct. For example, a selfish person would take up two parking spots in the parking lot and not care about the repercussions. A self-centered person would take up two parking

90 spots because they think their car is better than everyone else's car. I also want to point out

Self-Centered/Prideful with 39 participants is the highest frequency of a characteristic for women in the entire survey.

The number one characteristic was categorized as Dominance. Dominance encompasses hyper-masculine traits such as “abusive, violent, hurting women, controlling, cruel, harming others, anger, temper, forceful” etc. For this question, the answer, “Hurting

Women” came up twice.

An important note is in the category Disrespectful, the words, “physical disrespect”

“demeaning” and “degrading” arose. In addition, the category Objectification came up four times. Participants wrote a characteristic of an unholy man is, “one who objectifies women”

“treats others as objects” “treats people as objects” and “treats women as objects.”

Chart K compares the characteristics of an unholy man verse a holy man

Chart K

# in Unholy # of # in line Holy # of line Characteristic parti up Characteristi particip up cipa c (men) ants nts (men)

#1 Dominance 39 #1 Loving 28

#2 Self- 31 #2 Humble 27 centered/Prideful

#3 Selfish 29 #3 Prayerful 26

#4 Disrespectful 24 #4 Honest 20

#5 Lustful 17 #5 Faithful 19 There is more consensus on the characteristics of an unholy man then a holy man.

91

Question twelve asks, “What are the top 4 characteristics of an unholy woman?”

Chart L shows the top 5 answers are - Self-Centered/Prideful, Selfish, Sexual Promiscuity,

Dominance and Dishonesty.

Chart L

# in line up Characteristic # of participants

#1 Self-centered/Prideful 39

#2 Dominance 29

#3 Selfish 26

#4 Sexual promiscuity 25

#5 Dishonest/untruthful/decei 17 tful

The Dominance category for women was created from similar characteristics as the man’s category of Dominance, but was not made up of all the same characteristics. For example, “abusive” and “violent” are two answers which came up in the Dominance category for both men and women. However, “outspoken” and “power hungry” only came up in the women’s version of Dominance.

Another important way to view this data is comparing characteristics of holy women verses characteristics of unholy women as demonstrated in Chart M,

92

Chart M

# in Unholy # of # in Characteri # of line Characteristic particip line stic participa up ants up nts

#1 Self- 39 #1 Loving 32 centered/Pridef ul

#2 Dominance 29 #2 Humble 21 Selfish

#3 Selfish 26 #3 Caring/nurt 19 uring

#4 Sexual 25 #4 Compassion 16 promiscuity ate

#5 Dishonest/untru 17 #5 Prayerful 14 thful/ deceitful

The data clearly shows there is significantly more consensus about characteristics which make an unholy woman then what characteristics make a holy woman.

When comparing the top 5 characteristics of an unholy man versus an unholy woman, as seen in Chart N, it may seem as if participants see unholy men and and women in the same light, but that is not the case.

93

Chart N

# in Characteristic # of # in Characteristic # of line up partici line participants pants up

#1 Self- 39 #1 Dominance 39 centered/Prideful

#2 Dominance 29 #2 Self- 31 centered/Prideful

#3 Selfish 26 #3 Selfish 29

#4 Sexual 25 #4 Disrespectful 24 promiscuity

#5 Dishonest/untruth 17 #5 Lustful 17 ful/deceitful

First, Self-centered/Prideful, came up 39 times as a characteristic of an unholy woman - the most consensus around any characteristic in the entire survey. The category of

Dominance comes up 39 times for a characteristic of an unholy man. The categories with the greatest number of participants are both named as the most unholy characteristics for men and women. Categorically, participants appear to define an unholy man and an unholy woman in a very similar way. Both have Self-centered/Pride, Sexually Immoral, Selfish and Dominant as categories. However, in the next chapter I will discuss how complex these categories actually are and how the categories are not as similar as they appear.

94

To gauge participant’s understandings and opinions on holiness, I also asked participants about their role models for holiness. Question six asked, “Who are your top 3 male role models for holiness?” Question 10 asked, “Who are your top 3 female role models for holiness?” Answers are demonstrated in Chart O.

Chart O

# in line up Female # of # in line up Male Role # of Role participant Models participant Models s s

#1 Mother 31 #1 Pope, Pope 50 (Pope = Teresa Francis, JP2 5, Francis = 25, JP2 =20)

#2 Blessed 30 #2 Personal 29 Virgin relationship Mary with a priest

#3 Mom 29 #3 Dad/Father 20

#4 A friend 22 #4 Jesus Christ 12

#5 Grandma 11 #5 Grandpa 11

When participants thought about holy men, they overwhelmingly thought of a pope.

Specifically, 5 participants used the generic term ‘pope’ while 25 participants named Pope

Francis and 20 named Pope John Paul II. The most common female role model for holiness is Mother Teresa with 31 participants coming in a close second is the Blessed Virgin Mary with 30 participants.

When coding who participants picked as their top male and female role models for holiness I first created categories based on the role models’ name. For example, Pope

Francis was an individual category because he was mentioned 25 times and Pope John Paul

95

II was and individual category because he was mentioned 20 times. Then, I grouped both

Pope Francis and Pope John Paul II into one category called “Popes.”

As I was coding and making a variety of groupings, I noticed the answers to both

Question 6 and Question 10 could be categorized into two main categories - personal and

Non-personal. Personal role models are the people in the participant’s lives who are or were in the flesh and whom participants had a relationship with in their lives. For example, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, grandparents or friends. Non-personal role models are the people who participants can have as role models, but do not know on a personal, in- the-flesh level. For example, Popes, Saints, and famous Catholics. The personal to non- personal relationships are demonstrated in Chart P.

Chart P

Sex Personal Non- Skipped Other Personal answer

Men 102 130 14 0

Women 118 109 16 2

The data shows participants have more personal female role models of holiness then personal male role models of holiness. There is a margin of 20. Also, participants have more non-personal male role models of holiness than non-personal female role models of holiness by a margin of 10.

Besides wanting to know who participant’s role models were for holiness, I also wanted to know what participants thought made their role models holy. Question seven

96 asks, “What characteristics make these men holy?” Participant's answers are demonstrated in Chart Q,

Chart Q

# in line Female # of # in line Male Role # of up Role participa up model participa model nts Character nts Character istics istics

#1 Loving 35 #1 Loving 30

#2 Selfless 17 #2 Prayerful 22

#3 Sacrifice 16 #3 Faithful 18

#4 Faithful 15 #4 Humble 17

#5 Humble 14 #5 Caring 16

A few important observations are made. First, according to participants, holy male role models and holy female role models are Loving, Faithful and Humble. However, female role models are Selfless and Sacrifice while male role models are Prayerful and Caring.

Second, there is most consensus around characteristics of holy male role models than characteristics of holy female role models.

97

When looking at holiness it is important to look at data from various angles. I also compared the top characteristics participants named for female role models of holiness to participant’s top characteristics of a holy woman in Chart R.

Chart R

# in Female Role # of # in Holy Woman # of line up Model participan line Characteristic participa Characteristic ts up s nts

#1 Loving 35 #1 Loving 32

#2 Selfless 17 #2 Humble 21

#3 Sacrificial 16 #3 Caring/nuturing 19

#4 Faithful 15 #4 Compassionate 16

#5 Humble 14 #5 Prayerful 14

There are only two categories which participants use to describe for both female role models of holiness and a holy woman - loving and humble. Loving stayed the most common answer for both questions and was close in amount of participants. However, humble is the second most-common characteristic for a holy woman and the fifth most- common characteristic for female role models. Participants said Selfless, Sacrificial and

Faithful were top characteristics of female role models while Caring/Nurturing,

Compassionate and Prayerful were the top characteristics of holy women.

98

I also compared characteristics of male role models of holiness and characteristics of holy men as demonstrated in Chart S.

Chart S

#in Role Model # of #in line Holy Man # of line Characteri participant up Characteri participa up stic s stic nts

#1 Loving 30 #1 Loving 28

#2 Prayerful 22 #2 Humble 27

#3 Faithful 18 #3 Prayerful 26

#4 Humble 17 #4 Honest 20

#5 Caring 16 #5 Faithful 19

There are four categories which are the same for both characteristics of male role models of holiness and characteristics of holy men - Loving, Prayerful, Faithful and Humble. The difference is Caring was named as a characteristic for male role models of holiness and

Honest was named as a characteristics of holy men. There is also more consensus around the characteristics of a holy man then characteristics of male role models of holiness.

When comparing Chart R and Chart S a few important observations came to light.

Participants see holy men and their male role models of holiness with similar

99 characteristics, 4 out of the 5 top answers were the same. However, participants see holy women and their female role models of holiness with more different characteristics, 2 out of the 5 top answers were the same. There is also more consensus on what characteristics make up a male role model of holiness then what characteristics make up a female role model of holiness.

Question 15 began the demographic section of the survey. Question 15 asked if students were attending a Catholic University/College or a University of a Newman Center.

Answers are provided in Chart T. A majority of participants were attending a Catholic

University/College.

Chart T

Type of Institution Percentage Number of Participants

Catholic 62.96% 51 University/College

University with a 37.04% 30 Newman Center

Question 16 asked participants their age. There was a multiple choice question ranging from 18 years old to 24+ years old. 53.09% of participants who took the survey were 20 or 21 years old.

Chart U

Age Percentage Number of Participants

18 years old 7.41% 6

19 years old 18.52% 15

20 years old 23.46% 19

100

21 years old 29.63% 24

22 years old 12.35% 10

23 years old 0% 0

24 years old 8.64% 7

The last demographic question was question 17, “I identify as a...” and participants could check male or female. This was only to ensure I surveyed those who identify as female. 100% of participants identified as female.

101

CHAPTER 3

DATA ANALYSIS

In addition to stating what the data openly showed through numbers, I also analyzed participant’s responses to see what else the data had to show on Catholic college-aged women’s view on holiness. Through the analysis process I realized the following: (1) gendered holiness is not always about the actual answer given, but how participants spoke about the answer given, (2) there is little to no consensus about the proper role of women in the Church, (3) there is little to no consensus about what makes a holy woman, (4) there is more consensus around what makes a holy man than a holy woman, and (5) there is more consensus around what makes an unholy woman than a holy woman.

Catholic-ness is crucial to participant’s understanding of their own holiness. This is crucial to understand first because it sets up the framework for the rest of the analysis.

Catholic-ness is defined as any characteristic or action a participant described which made them specifically Catholic. For example, “My Catholic faith is extremely important and I make it a priority” “Participating in the Eucharist” and “Active participation of the faith.”

Chart B demonstrates being Catholic is crucial to participant's identity as a holy woman. In other words, participant see a correlation between their Catholic-ness and their holiness. This correlation is significant because the Church teaches gender-normative characteristics are holy through the feminine genius and complementarity theology. The

101

Catholic Church, an authoritative hierarchy composed of men, teach an androcentric interpretation of holiness and create the Holiness Standard. The data suggests participants are striving to reach the Holiness Standard. After analyzing the data, I believe the reverse is also true, what characteristics and behaviors Catholic Church teaches as unholy, participants also view as unholy and will likely avoid partaking in that behavior or possessing the characteristic. Participants personalization and self-identification of holiness being tightly correlated to the Catholic Church’s teachings shows what a crucial role the Church and Catholicism play in participants understanding of holiness.

Participants understanding holiness in gender-normative ways can be seen in their naming and explaining characteristics of holiness, even when the characteristics named seem liberated or non-gender-normative. Through analyzing the data, I observed gendered- holiness is not always determined by the actual answer given, but how participants explain the answer given. Many times participants named non-gender-normative characteristics, or even liberating characteristics to explain holiness or woman's proper role in the Church.

However, when participants explained how the characteristic plays-out in reality, the characteristic is actually limiting and gendered. A clear example is Chart C, which shows what participants said the proper role of women in the Church, Leadership. On the surface it appears this characteristic is non gender-normative. Leadership is a characteristic which actually appears to be progressive for women until the actual responses are analyzed.

When participants discussed Leadership as the proper role for women in the Church they used many qualifiers, which showed participants believe women have leadership roles in only certain areas and with people who had less authority or equal authority to them.

One participant wrote, “can lead families and others they encounter in holiness.” This

102 answer ties women to leadership in the home only and in holiness specifically. Another participant wrote, “To be leaders in the faith that are (not ordained) for their children and others in the community.” once again linking women’s leadership to the conditions of family life and to children, who are of less authority than adult women. This participant also makes it clear that women’s leadership in the faith is not ordained leadership, which once again qualifies women to lead in only certain areas of the faith. The last example I will use is the participant who wrote, “They should lead formation groups and lead prayer and reflection.” This statement demonstrates women, in their proper role, can lead activities in their parishes, but not in the Church as an institution. The Leadership category is not as liberating as I had hoped it would be.

Another example of gendered-holiness, not in the naming of a characteristic but the meaning behind the characteristic, is the category Role Models (also in Chart C). Like the previous example, participants said a woman's proper role in the Church is to be a role model. Being a role models sounds non-gendered at first, even liberating. However, once again there are qualifiers for women’s role as role model. According to participants, the proper role of women is to be role models to those who (once again) have less or equal authority than women - children, younger people or other women. One participant said,

“To be an example for other women.” Another wrote, “But also be ourselves, individualized role models, for other younger women.” And another participant said, “To be a role model for future generations.” Yet, the most interesting response was, “Women should act as older siblings.” which continues to show how participants believe woman's proper role in the Church is to be role models for those with lesser or equal authority.

102

Only one participant wrote, “Role models” for the proper role of women, which could or could not be I analyzed as role modeling for everyone. Two other participants wrote, “To be strong role models which is achieved by demonstrating a healthy relationship where God is at the center” and “To influence people to be good and loving.” These responses once again show participants see women as role models only in certain contexts, and those contexts are gendered which limit women’s role.

Additionally, there is little consensus around the proper role of women in the

Church. I coded the most common response given for woman's proper role in the Church as Equality, meaning participants mentioned equality between men and women in their answers. Within this category there was a great use of the word should. For example,

“Women should have opportunities equal to that of men in the Church.” The use of the word should means there is a need or obligation not being met or filled. Where there is a should there is an implication that there currently is not. The word should is only used to describe something that is currently not happening. For example, “I should bring an umbrella” means I do not currently have my umbrella. In the context of this question, the

Church is not meeting the needs of women who desire equality. To apply this back to the data “Women should have opportunities equal to that of men in the Church.” means women do not currently have opportunities equal to that of men in the Church.

The shoulds in context also suggest the Church has an obligation to uphold equality.

Participants are saying the Church is responsible for promoting equality between men and women. For example, “I think women should be offered a full, complex, whole role in the

Church.” The statement is suggesting the church is accountable to offering a full, complex and whole role for women.

103

Additionally, these shoulds also emphasise women having no authoritative or teaching power via their role in the Church. For example, “I think women should be allowed to be priests, deacons (we’re working on it), and basically hold any position a man is allowed to hold” and “If a woman feels called to be a member of the church, I think all roles should be open to her, including the option for priesthood.” It is important to note the shoulds do not only apply to ordination for female. For example,

I think women are equal to men in every way, shape and form. There should be no restrictions to their participation in the Church. However, I am not offended nor put off by having male-only priests. The role of males as priests is a tradition of the Church and I do not advocate to change it.

There is diversity in what equality for women and men in the Church means to participants.

Some believe equality means women need to become ordained, while others believe equality is men recognizing women more favorably in their current roles. In this way, the category of equality had a diverse range of opinions, but with a consistent commonality of needing more equality among women and men’s role in the Church.

The second greatest consensus among participants was Motherhood/Marriage,

Leadership, and Service. In the previous paragraphs, I discussed how Leadership, although appearing to be empowering for women at first glance, is actually described in gender- normative and limited ways. In Pope John Paul II’s Letter to Women he summarizes the roles of women from his apostolic letter Mulieris Dignitatem,

This subject came up frequently during the Marian year, and I myself dwelt on it at length in my apostolic letter "Mulieris Dignitatem" (1988). In addition, this year in the letter which I customarily send to priests for Holy Thursday, I invited them to reread "Mulieris Dignitatem" and reflect on the important roles which women have played in their lives as mothers, sisters and co-workers in the apostolate. This is another aspect —different from the conjugal aspect, but also important — of that "help" which women, according to the Book of Genesis, are called to give to men.240

240 Letter of Pope John Paul II to Women, sec. 10.

104

Participants second most common answer for the proper role of women in the Church fit directly into Pope John Paul II’s explanation of women’s role within the feminine genius and complementarity theology. There is a correlation between the magisterium's understanding of women’s role and participants understanding of women’s role, which makes sense because of how seriously Catholic-ness plays into women’s understanding of their holiness.

There is also a tremendous amount of dissatisfaction, confusion, and comparison about women’s role among participants. Many participants are unsettled, unhappy, or struggling to define the role of women. This can be seen in the lack of consensus surrounding the proper role of women in the Church, and in some participant's statements on a desire for more diverse roles in the Church. However, despite participant’s opinions on the proper role of women in the Church, there is an alignment between participants understanding of women’s role and the magisterium's understanding of women’s role as described in Saint John Paul’s Letter to Women, the feminine genius and complementarity theology. Women are taught the importance of being mothers, serving and leadership. I argue women are taught these characteristics and behaviors in limiting ways.

The importance of motherhood can be seen in Chapter 2 of Mulieris Dignitatem titled “Woman-Mother of God (Theotokos).” Pope John Paul II talks about the crucial role a woman played in salvation history because Mary, a woman, birthed Jesus into the world.

The salvific event is so significant, Mary was given the title of Theotókos241 which translates to Mother of God. In this chapter, Pope John Paul II also discusses how,

241 Mulieris Dignitatem, sec. 3.

105

the "fullness of time" manifests the extraordinary dignity of the "woman". On the one hand, this dignity consists in the supernatural elevation to union with God in Jesus Christ, which determines the ultimate finality of the existence of every person both on earth and in eternity. From this point of view, the "woman" is the representative and the archetype of the whole human race: she represents the humanity which belongs to all human beings, both men and women. On the other hand, however, the event at Nazareth highlights a form of union with the living God which can only belong to the "woman", Mary: the union between mother and son. The Virgin of Nazareth truly becomes the Mother of God.242

The passage emphasizes the importance of motherhood for women. On one hand, motherhood can be an amazing and fulling role in a woman’s life. There is no doubt motherhood is special, sacred and deserves more recognition and value in American culture! In section 4 of Saint John Paul’s Letter to Women he discusses how, “how the gift of motherhood is often penalized rather than rewarded.”243 But there is a huge issue within his statement, which is clearly seen in his explanation of feminine genius and complementarity theology - the gift of motherhood is overemphasized and reduces women to motherhood only.

There are huge societal issues in the United States (and globally) surrounding motherhood. In his Letter to Women, Pope John Paul II discusses some of these obstacles which includes but is not limited to, employment discriminations, equal pay for equal work, and paid maternity leave. Motherhood should never be penalized. However, when motherhood viewed through an androcentric lens, as it does in Pope John Paul II’s Letter to Women, motherhood becomes something to “reward” women for. Mothers should not have to face any kind of injustice or discrimination. Providing women with equal pay for equal work, paid maternity leave, and protection from employment discrimination is not

242 Mulieris Dignitatem, sec. 4.

243 Letter to Women, sec. 4.

106 rewarding them; it is simply the right way to treat women who are the only givers of life on the planet. The issue comes into play when the Church rewards women for motherhood because it becomes the most emphasized role for women. Continuously highlighting motherhood as a holy role for women begins to absolutize motherhood as the most holy role for women, keeps women in the private sphere, affirms gendered-leadership roles in the Church (as discussed previously), and leaves single laywomen without a role.

When asked about the proper role of women in the Church, 11 participants wrote about motherhood and how mothers are the ones who, as one participant said, “...keep the faith in their family, between their marriage and instill the church’s teaching into their children.” Half of the participants who named motherhood as a role for women, correlated motherhood with morality and raising families to be moral and God-loving, which once again shows how women can be leaders, but only in certain contexts. In addition, other categories such as Leadership, participants discussed women leading their children twice, but were not counted toward the Motherhood/Marriage category.

The second issue which arises from the feminine genius and complementarity theologies’ heavy emphasis on the role of women as mothers, is it strictly leaves out single people and women who cannot have children. When asked about the proper role of women in the Church, one participant wrote, “Well obviously mothers that raise holy children.”

The key word here is “obviously.” It was so clear to this participant that motherhood would be the proper role for women in the Church, but should it be? How come women’s role as theologians or a ministers was not obvious? One reason is theologies on women, specifically the feminine genius and complementarity theology, do not emphasize the roles of theologian but instead focus on motherhood. Furthermore, a woman can be a mother

107 have hold other roles and identities as well. Complementarity theology and the feminine genius speak about motherhood as if it is the single role and identity a woman can have.

A third issue arises when main theologies about women’s holiness emphasize motherhood above all else, a man is still needed. To become a mother, the most holy and emphasized role for women, biologically, a woman needs a man.244 A woman needs a man to be part of Church's the most highlighted role. A mother could adopt a child and not need a man to do so, but that is the exception not the rule, and actually giving birth is emphasized within the feminine genius and complementarity theology as well.

From my data, it is clear the majority of participants views on their role and holiness aligns with the feminine genius and complementarity theology. Seven participants did not name the feminine genius, but spoke of it. Six of the seven participant used gender- normative terms to describe women’s role, for example, “Women are here to guide, nurture, provide counseling, and help spur change within ministry. We have so many gifts and talents that can be used in the Catholic church.” Other participants in this category used gendered-terms discussing women’s gifts. Specifically, they named relationally, building up others and inner strength (while comparing men’s strength to “protective armor”). If a person is nurturing, guiding, provides counseling, spurs change, has inner strength, and is relational- that is great. The problem is when the gifts mentioned above become women’s gifts simply because they are women, or worse, having these gifts become women’s only gifts. Both limit women, create the Holiness Standard. One participant said, “Women are equal to men, but not in the same. They can preach outside of Mass, and they can lead

244 Technically a woman can get pregnant through in vitro fertilization or artificial insemination. However, the Church believes both of these methods are immoral and is violent to human dignity.

108 various ministries.” The previous response shows how women see their roles in specific and limited ways.245 As I mentioned in Chapter 2, complementarity is not equality. It does not matter that the participant seems to be okay with women’s role being limited, the point is their role is still limited. In Saint John Paul’s Letter to Women he explains the complementarity relationship between men and women in the context of marriage and how he sees men and women’s roles as equal,

In their fruitful relationship as husband and wife, in their common task of exercising dominion over the earth, woman and man are marked neither by a static and undifferentiated equality nor by an irreconcilable and inexorably conflictual difference. Their most natural relationship, which corresponds to the plan of God, is the "unity of the two," a relational "uni-duality," which enables each to experience their interpersonal and reciprocal relationship as a gift which enriches and which confers responsibility.246

The statement above talks about equality, but only in the sense that men and women are different but equal. Separate gifts and natures, but equal. In the following paragraphs he continues to name gendered roles and characteristics women have which contribute to their side of this “unity of the two.” Pope John Paul II states,

Much more important [than technology or science as a sign of progress] is the social and ethical dimension, which deals with human relations and spiritual values. In this area, which often develops in an inconspicuous way beginning with the daily relationships between people, especially within the family, society certainly owes much to the "genius of women.”247

He continues with this sentiment by saying,

245 The participant might not see the limitedness as a negative. They might see their limited role as different but equal to men,but either way, they see their is defined, specific and finite.

246 Ibid. sec, 8.

247 Ibid. sec, 9.

109

expressing particular appreciation to those women who are involved in the various areas of education extending well beyond the family: nurseries, schools, universities, social service agencies, parishes, associations and movements. Wherever the work of education is called for, we can note that women are ever ready and willing to give themselves generously to others, especially in serving the weakest and most defenseless. In this work they exhibit a kind of affective, cultural and spiritual motherhood which has inestimable value for the development of individuals and the future of society.248

Does this sound familiar? It should because it was echoed in all the data so far. Saint John

Paul II’s statements are androcentric because only explains women’s role as caring positions.249 What about intellectual engagement? Where is his explanation on women’s role as intellectuals? He highlights the characteristics and roles of spiritual motherhood, selflessness and generosity. I want to repeat, these kinds of stereotypical characteristics are not bad. In fact, they are wonderful and Christ-like. The issue is they are the characteristics women are taught and repetitively told to embody. These qualities are not used as frequently (or at all) to inspire men. To be like Christ people have to embody as many of

Christ’s characteristics as they can. Jesus was kind, compassionate, selfless, generous and relational. Yet, these characteristics are emphasized for women more so than men.

Additionally, in our culture women are often discriminated against, abused and taken advantage of because these characteristics can be taken to the extreme. For example, women can see submission to discrimination, abuse, and violence as holy. Such as a woman who will not report sexual harassment at work because she thinks it would be unkind of her, or a woman who will not leave her abusive husband because she wants to self-sacrifice like Christ did.

248 Ibid.

249 Once again, there is nothing wrong with being a caring women or being in a caring position! The issue is the absolutization of these roles for women only.

110

Having a role is key to creating a strong identity, especially in something as important as faith. It is clear from the data, college-aged females who identify as Catholic do not have a unified understanding of the role of women in the Church. For example, two participants responded, “Don’t know” and “Not really sure.” In some cases, the data has shown participants are even unsatisfied with the proper role of women in the Church, for example, “...in the hierarchy of the church, a woman can only reach the second tier, religious sisterhood. That’s ridiculous.” How can women be at home in Catholicism and grow into strong Catholics if they do not know their role or are unsatisfied with the gendered-role options their Church has given them? Why would they stay Catholic?250

To make matters worse, Catholic college-aged women feel their voices are undervalued. Chart D shows participants answers for the question, “The Church values the voice of women.” 35.37% of participants believe the statement is somewhat true, somewhat untrue or untrue. This is a huge problem for the Catholic Church. As Christians, not valuing the voices of women, who are allegedly equal to men and are creations of God, is disgraceful. Not valuing the voice of women is contrary to the Gospel where Jesus valued everyone. For Catholic women to firmly root their identities in holiness and in the Catholic tradition, their voices need to be valued. Why would a woman stay in a faith where she thinks her voice is “somewhat” valued or not valued at all? Especially because in American culture, women have made huge progress in regards to being heard and valued in the workplace and in politics.251 I know the workplace and the political sphere operate very

250 Would you want to stay in a religion where you did not fully understand or feel fulfilled in your role?

251 There is still a LONG way to go, but over the years progress has been made in terms of women being taken seriously in the political and workplace realms.

111 differently from the faith sphere. To put it another way, if women feel their voices are valued in the secular sphere and not in their faith, why would they stay in their faith? If women do not feel their voices are valued in their faith, why would they feel valued as people?

Out of the participants who named the feminine genius or explained feminine genius ideology when discussing the proper role of women, 100% responded “very true” or “true” to the statement on the Church valuing women’s voices. Compared to 35.37% of young women do not feel their voices are valued or only somewhat valued, 44.8% expressed some kind of dissatisfaction with the role of women in the Church. Responses can be found in Appendix B. I determined dissatisfaction by the use of the word should

(as described above) and if participants discussed wanting their roles expanded, for example, participants who were pro-women's ordination.

I assert another reason for this feeling is participant’s gendered notions of holy characteristics. Catholic college-aged women have gender-normative ideas about what characteristics make women holy, even if they name the same characteristic to describe men. Chart F shows the top 5 characteristics participant’s said made a holy women -

Loving, Humble, Caring/Nurturing, Compassionate, and Prayerful. These characteristics were not surprising because they are gender-normative characteristics and greatly emphasized through the feminine genius and complementarity theology. Chart E shows the top 5 characteristics participant's said made a holy man - Loving, Humble, Prayerful,

Honest, and Faithful. I was a bit surprised by the characteristics for men because they were not gender-normative masculine characteristics such a strong, confident or brave. Upon reflection, I realized the characteristics named for men are frequently found throughout the

112

Christian tradition. However, once I analyzed the responses, I found the overlapping characteristics to be more gendered than I originally anticipated.

Loving was the top characteristic participants named for both men and women, but the way participants described Loving for men and women was different and aligned with the feminine genius and complementarity theology. When describing holy women as loving participants mentioned “love of God” “love of Eucharist” “loving God” “loves God with all her heart” “love of God and neighbor” “Loving relationships” “Loving heart and effort to love all of her brothers and sisters” “loving heart” “loves everyone” “sacrifices for those she loves” and “treats all people with love and respect.” For men, participants said,

“loves God first” “love God more than anyone” “loves Eucharist” “love for Jesus and

Mary” “Knows the love God has for him and uses that love to love and serve others”

“sacrifices for those he loves” and “an effort to love all of his brothers and sisters.” For women, the emphasis of love was described in terms of relationally. Loving others was mentioned seven times women and five times for men. Loving God was mentioned five times for women and seven times for men. This sentiment aligns with the feminine genius and complementarity theology and echoed in the shared characteristic of prayerfulness.

Participants used descriptive active-words six times to describe prayerfulness for men. Participants said, “Reads scripture” “spending time with Jesus” “Puts time and effort into his faith” “relationship with God” “strong relationship with the Lord” and “listening to God.” However, participants used descriptive active-words twice for women - “active prayer life” and “Commitment to prayer.” There are more action words to describe men as prayerful. There is also an emphasis on relationship building as needed for men to be considered prayerful, while women just have to pray and commit to prayer. I believe this

113 is because women are automatically considered to be relational by nature, a theme echoed in Saint John Paul II’s Letter to Women.

Pope John Paul II emphasizes women have strong relational characteristics. For example, in section two he states, “You help the church and all mankind to experience a

"spousal" relationship to God...”252 He even thanks women for being woman and ties their womanhood directly to relationally,

Thank you, every woman, for the simple fact of being a woman! Through the insight which is so much a part of your womanhood you enrich the world's understanding and help to make human relations more honest and authentic253

Pope John Paul II goes so far as to explicitly say this relationally is because of the “genius of women.”254

According to participants, holy women are Caring/Nurturing and Compassionate while holy men are Honest and Faithful. The easiest place to see the Holiness Standard is within these four differing characteristics. American culture and the Catholic Church emphasize gender-normative characteristics and roles which tell women to be

Caring/Nurturing and Compassionate, and men to be Honest and Faithful.

When analyzing the category of Caring/Nurturing participants drew direct connections to relationally and motherhood - two common ways the Church repeatedly states is the “feminine ideal.”255 Participants described Caring/Nurturing with gender- normative feminine descriptions, “Acts as a caregiver” “concerned with others’ well-

252 Letter to Women., sec. 2.

253 Ibid.

254 Letter to Women., sec. 9.

255 Mulieris Dignitatem., sec. 27.

114 being” “willing to help others” and “empathetic.” After analyzing the category of Faithful, for men, participants used gender-normative masculine descriptors, “faith driven”

“committed to God” “faithful, strong in his faith” and “has a strong faith in God.” Due to the gendered-notions of holiness, even within overlapping characteristics, it is not surprising there is more consensus around what makes a holy man then a holy woman.

Catholic college-aged women have more consensus around which characteristics make a holy man compared to a holy woman. This perspective is understandable considering participant's lack of a unified understanding and/or dissatisfaction with women’s role in the Church. If young women do not have a solid understanding on what makes a holy woman, how will they grow and become (strong and confident) holy women?

If these young women look to the Church, only find androcentric understandings of feminine holiness and find those understandings limiting, what will they do? Leave? Not try to be holy? Create their own definitions of holiness? Can the Catholic Church sit by while young women struggle to understand their holiness? Directing women who have these questions about female holiness to complimentary theology and the feminine genius is an unsatisfactory response because these theologies exemplify the issue. These theologies on women in the Catholic Church are creating problems for many young

Catholic women. Ironic? No; androcentric.

When comparing how participants defined the characteristics which made them holy, to how they defined characteristics which made a holy woman, there is little overlap.

Prayerful is the only common category. However, after holistically analyzing participant’s responses, two common themes which emerged for holy women and holy women’s role were relationally and selflessness; answers which match the Church’s ideology around the

115 feminine genius and complementarity theology. I believe this match-up occurs because the substance of the feminine genius and complementarity theology (if not the name) is emphasized and taught to Catholics; and because the Church’s androcentric view and teaching of history makes it more challenging for women to have liberated female role models to teach them about holiness.256

In my survey I asked participants to name their top 3 male and female role models for holiness. I did not create any kind of ranking system for the 3 role models, but viewed them all as equally important. The top 5 answers for male role models were Popes (Pope

Francis was named by 25 participants and Pope John Paul II was named by 20 participants),

Personal relationships with priests, Fathers, Jesus and Grandpas. The top 5 answers for female role models were Saint Mother Teresa, Blessed Virgin Mary, Mothers, Friends, and

Grandmas.

I defined non-personal role models as people participants do not have direct interactions with. For example, Saint Mother Teresa, Pope Francis, Saint Francis, and

Dorothy Day. Participants know of these people, but they do not know these people. The non-personal role models are usually made up of famous Catholics who are often popular speakers, writers or saints. I defined personal role models as people participants have direct interactions with. For example, mothers, fathers, sisters, grandma’s or friends.

After analyzing all of the categories I made two important observations. One,

College-aged Catholic females have 28 more non-personal male role models for holiness than personal male role models for holiness. Two, College-aged Catholic females have 9

256 To be defined later.

116 more personal female role models for holiness than non-personal role models for holiness.

These number were put into Chart V,

Chart V

Sex of Role Personal Non-Personal Difference Model

Male Role 102 130 28 more non- Models personal male role models than personal male role models

43.9% 56%

Female Role 118 109 9 more personal Models female role models than non- personal female role models

51.5% 47.5%

Participants have more personal relationships with the female role-models of holiness and more non-personal relationships for male role-models of holiness. 56% of participant’s male role models were non-personal, while 47.5% of participant’s female role models were non-personal. Compared to the 43.9% of personal male role models and 51.5% of female personal role models. There are many reasons why this imbalance occurs. First, as discussed in Chapter 1, there is more recognition and teaching about holy men than holy women. Thus, women look elsewhere to find holy female role models. Participants have found these holy female role models in the faithful women they actually interact with.

117

Second, the Church holds up a few token women who represent womanhood in its entirety (as if that was even possible). In other words, there are a few women who encompass what the Catholic Church conceptualizes as the “feminine ideal.”257 For the

Catholics, that woman is Mary, which explains why she is the second highest female role model for holiness on the survey (named by 30 participants). Within the feminine genius and complementarity theology the Blessed Mother is used as the pinnacle of womanhood, and these characteristics as well as a few others, are emphasized. Pope John Paul II explains, “The church sees in Mary the highest expression of the "feminine genius," and she finds in her “a source of constant inspiration.”258 The top three characteristics emphasized for Mary are motherhood, receptivity, virginity, and selflessness. This emphasis can be clearly seen in Chapter 2 of Mulieris Dignitatem titled, “Woman-mother of God (Theotókos)” and in Chapter 6 titled, “Motherhood-Virginity.” To explain the importance of Mary’s selflessness, Pope John Paul II uses Luke 1:38, he states,

Mary called herself the "handmaid of the Lord" (Lk 1:38). Through obedience to the word of God she accepted her lofty yet not easy vocation as wife and mother in the family of Nazareth. Putting herself at God's service, she also put herself at the service of others: a service of love. Precisely through this service Mary was able to experience in her life a mysterious, but authentic "reign." It is not by chance that she is invoked as "queen of heaven and earth." The entire community of believers thus invokes her; many nations and peoples call upon her as their "queen." For her, "to reign" is to serve! Her service is "to reign!"

These values are clearly echoed in the holy characteristics participants named for themselves. In the category of Selfless participants said they were, “Helpful” “Self-less”

“I am willing to die to myself and allow God’s grace to fill me...” “help others” “I constantly want to give to others...” “Selfless acts” “the giving I do for others” “putting

257 Mulieris Dignitatem., sec. 27.

258 Letter to Women., sec. 10.

118 others before my wants” These fit consistently into the Church’s ideology of the feminine genius, particularly in Mary’s expression of the feminine genius. Participants made direct connections to women’s role as a servant and Mary. One participant said, “I think the proper role is to be a servant for others, we look to Mary as our role model” and another said, “To serve and live like Mary.” However, there are more liberated ways to look at

Mary, even if they are written by theologians who do not have official promulgating or teaching authority in the Church.

If the Church could look at Mary through a liberated lens, as Mary Jo Weaver does, the token woman idea could be a useful model to assist young women in figuring out holiness. Weaver discusses Mary’s story through a liberated lens, and states what Mary’s story is

...not about a passively perfect young woman overwhelmed by divine duty, but can be interpreted as a story of a…poor woman who finds favor with God and is willing to cooperate with a wild plan of salvation, a woman strong enough to risk believing something incredible about herself259

Weaver also states,

Mary is the image of creativity without male intervention, who responded to God, not as a woman, but as a free person, ‘not bound by physical dependence upon man’s cooperation, nor by a social constraint to seek a man’s approval260

These two statements on Mary are extremely different compared to Saint John Paul II’s interpretation of Mary as “the highest expression of the feminine genius”261 - an obedient handmaid of the Lord who chooses to be a servant, wife and mother. I want to note both

Weaver and Pope John Paul II see Mary as a Jewish women and the Mother of God, the

259 Weaver, New Catholic Women, p. 205.

260 Weaver, New Catholic Women, 206.

261 Letter to Women., sec 10.

119 difference is the lens through which they chose to view her. Weaver’s conclusions about

Mary’s characteristics are not the same as Pope John Paul II, because Weaver interprets

Mary’s story through a liberated lens and Pope John Paul II through an androcentric lens.

Since the Church teaches the androcentric interpretation of Mary, I am slightly concerned with her being the second highest role model in this survey. The interpretation and presentation of holy role models matters. Three other female role models, Saint Maria

Goretti, Saint Gianna Beretta Molla, and Blessed Chiara Badano, also regularly appeared in the data. After researching these three women, I discovered they also fall in line with the

Church’s teaching of holiness.

In my data, Saint Maria Goretti was named 5 times as a female role model for holiness. Maria’s father died of malaria, so her mother had to work in the fields while

Maria cared for her sister and home.262 Alessandro Serenelli, a neighbor and farm hand, began harassing her and made several unwanted sexual advances.263 July 5, 1902, Serenelli attempted to rape Goretti, by dragging her from the front stoop into her home, she was not yet 12 years old.264 During his attack she began to fight and shouted, “No! It is a sin! God does not want it!” She vocally warmed Serenelli his actions would send him to hell.265 He began to choke her, and Maria declared she “would rather die than submit to this sin.”266

262 Online, Catholic. "St. Maria Goretti - Saints & Angels." Catholic Online. Accessed June 06, 2017. http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=78.

263 "St. Maria Goretti," Catholic News Agency, accessed June 6, 2017, http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/saint.php?n=530.

264 "St. Maria Goretti," Catholic News Agency, July 6, 2016.

265 Ibid.

266 Ibid.

120

Serenelli stabbed her 14 times. Before she died “she forgave Alessandro for the crime he had committed against her, saying, "Yes, for the love of Jesus I forgive him...and I want him to be with me in Paradise."267

It is difficult to write these next few thoughts, because I want to honor Maria’s story and those who feel a connection with her. However, I also feel the need to discuss how her story is used to promote the Holiness Standard in extremely unhealthy ways. I think it is crucial to bring to light how Maria’s holiness is discussed, and question if her story of holiness is used androcentricity, or is harmful to young women. The way Maria Goretti’s story is often told and remembered, emphasizes the characteristics of virginity, selflessness, self-sacrifice, and submission in all the wrong ways.

Franciscan Media is an organization which attempts to help readers understand and love the Gospel, and also provides readers with a “Saint of the Day.” Father Don Miller, writer and vocation director for the Province of St. John the Baptist, posted a reflection on

Maria Goretti on her feast day. Father Miller states millions of people have been “touched by the simple story of Maria Goretti.”268

First and foremost, Maria’s story is not simple. It is complex because her story is of poverty, violence toward females, the attempted rape and murder of a child, forgiveness for those who have killed, visions, and redemption. Nothing in Maria’s story is simple. To be frank, to say her story is simple shows a lack of understanding of Maria's story and women’s issues, which I think is an example of entrenched androcentric thinking.

267 Ibid.

268 Donald Miller, "Saint Maria Goretti," Franciscan Media, March 01, 2017, accessed June 07, 2017, https://www.franciscanmedia.org/saint-maria-goretti/.

121

Second, Miller discusses Maria was taken to the hospital. He states,

Her last hours were marked by the usual simple compassion of the good— concern about where her mother would sleep, forgiveness of her murderer (she had been in fear of him, but did not say anything lest she cause trouble to his family), and her devout welcoming of Viaticum, her last Holy Communion.269

It is remarkably and extraordinarily concerning to me that Maria is praised for her “simple compassion of the good”270 because the example used for this "simple compassion for good" is Maria not expressing her fear of Alessandro because she did not want to “cause trouble to his family.”271 It sickens me. Catholics in today’s world should know better than to call fearing predators and staying quiet about unwanted sexual advances or sexual violence, a “simple compassion of the good;" and then have the audacity to call that compassion holy.272 On the contrary, we should be teaching young Catholics that telling a trusted adult is the best course of action when they feel unsafe. The message given by the interpretation of her story is that it is better for a woman to die a virgin than to live after being raped and becoming impure. Her death was not a moral decision, it was an immoral and evil act of her perpetrator. Additionally, this kind of language and androcentric interpretation of Maria's story reinforces that a woman’s holiness lies in her virginity, her ability to quietly withstand abuse while thinking it is selflessness, love, or true self- sacrifice.

269Donald Miller, "Saint Maria Goretti," March 01, 2017.

270 Ibid.

271 Ibid.

272 Think about the women who have been raped and assaulted would understand this.

122

Third, the final section of “Saint of the Day” posts is a reflection. Maria’s reads,

Maria may have had trouble with catechism, but she had no trouble with faith. God’s will was holiness, decency, respect for one’s body, absolute obedience, total trust. In a complex world, her faith was simple: It is a privilege to be loved by God, and to love him—at any cost.273

This reflection sums up the reinforced gendered-qualities of women's holiness - virginity, obedience, and self-sacrifice - by the Church and Church teaching. These qualities are echoed in a message of John Paul II to Bishop of Albano for the centenary of the death of

St. Maria Goretti.

Pope John Paul II begins his message by reinforcing virginity and self-sacrifice as holy characteristics for young people. However, because Maria is a female and because virginity is emphasized for women in the Church, there one could interpret this as more emphasis on the female. He states, “St Maria Goretti was a girl whom God's Spirit endowed with the courage to stay faithful to her Christian vocation even to the point of making the supreme sacrifice of her life.”274 Pope John Paul II quotes Pope Pius XII's homily on the day Maria was canonized, and calls Maria “the sweet little martyr of purity' because she did not break God's commandment in spite of being threatened by death."275 Does this

273 Ibid.

274 Paul, John. Message of John Paul II to the Bishop of Albano for the Centenary of the Death of St. Maria Goretti, Vatican Website. July 6, 2002, accessed June 7, 2017, https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/2002/july/documents/hf_jp- ii_spe_20020708_santa-maria-goretti.html, sec 2.

275 Paul, John. Message of John Paul II to the Bishop of Albano for the Centenary of the Death of St. Maria Goretti, sec 3.

123 mean a girl who was raped but not murdered is impure? He then goes directly into using

Maria’s rape and murder as a positive example of purity for young people,

What a shining example for young people! The non-committal mindset of much of our society and culture today sometimes has a struggle to understand the beauty and value of chastity. A high and noble perception of dignity, her own and that of others emerges from the behavior of this young saint, was mirrored in her daily choices, giving them the fullness of human meaning. Is not there a very timely lesson in this? In a culture that idolizes the physical aspect of the relations between a man and a woman, the Church continues to defend and to champion the value of sexuality as a factor that involves every aspect of the person and must therefore be lived with an interior attitude of freedom and reciprocal respect, in the light of God's original plan. With this outlook, a person discovers he or she is being given a gift and is called, in turn, to be a gift to the other.276

A shining example for young people? Is the attempted rape, and murder of an 11-year-old truly convey this message of chastity to young people? I do not think so. Pope John Paul

II take this story of rape and compares it to society's sexualized culture. Rape is now about sex, it is about power and violence. What message are survivors of rape are getting? I believe they are getting the message that they are impure. I also want to point out in his message, Pope John Paul II does not mention the word "rape." He does not ever call attention to the horrors of rape, or how rape is an immoral and unholy act.

I am also unsure if virginity was 11-year-old Maria’s Christian vocation, or if she died for her virginity at all. Schima Fisher, blogger for Pathoes and National Catholic

Register makes the argument that Maria died in order to stop him from committing a sin and going to hell.277 Fisher explains,

276 Ibid., sec 3.

277 Simcha Fisher, "Maria Goretti didn’t die for her virginity," I have to Sit Down (web log), July 6, 2015, , accessed June 7, 2017, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/simchafisher/2015/07/06/maria-goretti-didnt-die-for-her- virginity/.

124

She didn’t say, “Please, please, spare my virginity!” She begged him to spare himself. This is what it looks like when someone is close to God: because they love God, they want to spare the person in front of them. They are in love with living human beings, not in love with virtue in the abstract.278

When comparing Fisher and Pope John Paul II’s ideas around Maria, it is clear what qualities each values for woman’s holiness. The Pope emphasizes her purity and self- sacrifice, two qualities also clearly seen in the data on what participants see makes a holy woman.

Blessed Chiara Bandano was named as a female role model for holiness three times in the data. She is blessed because she was part of the Foccolare Movement and was diagnosed with a painful bone cancer; through her pain and hospitalizations she would say,

"For you, Jesus. If you wish it, so do I!"279 She very willingly bore her own pain. Chiara also said she wanted to be "buried in a white dress, as a bride that goes to meet Jesus."280

This is a beautiful story of a young woman. Yet, it also emphasizes her virginity because of the attention given to her desire of being buried in a white dress and bride of Christ. Her story also emphasizes selflessness and self-sacrifice in dealing with pain - a message which can easily become warped into a harmful message as explained in previous chapters.

Saint Gianna Molla was named as a female role model of holiness two times in the data. Her story also highlights the characteristics of selflessness, and women's self-

278 Simcha Fisher, "Maria Goretti didn’t die for her virginity," I have to Sit Down (web log), July 6, 2015, , accessed June 7, 2017, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/simchafisher/2015/07/06/maria-goretti-didnt-die-for-her- virginity/. 279 Carmen Elena Villa, "Teenage Focolare Member, Chiara Badano, to be Beatified on Saturday in Rome - Living Faith - Home & Family - News," Catholic Online, http://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=38409.

280 Carmen Elena Villa, "Teenage Focolare Member, Chiara Badano" Catholic Online, http://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=38409.

125 sacrifice. However, instead of emphasizing virginity, she emphasizes motherhood. Gianna was a mother, wife, and doctor. I can see why young women in today's era would look to her as a role model - she is a working mom. However, Gianna is most known for giving up her life for her unborn child when complications arose after uterine tumors were removed.281 She is often referred to as the 'the pro-life saint.' Interestingly enough she was beatified by Pope John Paul II on May 16, 2004.282

It is not surprising that participants named popes as the number one male role model for holiness. Popes are the most visible and well-known people in the Catholic Church. I think there is a direct correlation between how strongly, and how many participants see popes as a holy figures and how seriously they take the Pope’s understanding of the feminine genius and complementarity theology without question. In other words, participants are more likely to believe the Pope’s ideas around their own holiness because they consider popes very holy men who also have supreme authority; which is why I think

Pope John Paul II’s ideology of the feminine genius and complementarity theology are taken seriously by women, which the data also suggests.

In Appendix B I looked specifically analyzed participants who either named the feminine genius, were against women’s ordination, spoke about but did not name complementarity theology as the proper role of women, spoke about but did not name the

281 Catholic Online, "St. Gianna Beretta Molla - Saints & Angels," Catholic Online, , accessed June 21, 2017, http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=6985.

282 Pope John Paul II, 16 May 2004: Canonization of six Blesseds | John Paul II, March 24, 2004, http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul- ii/en/homilies/2004/documents/hf_jp-ii_hom_20040516_canonizations.html.

126 feminine genius as the proper role of women, people of interest283, and who answered

“Somewhat true” “somewhat untrue” or “untrue” to the statement ‘the Catholic Church values the voices of women.’ For each individual participant who fit into one of these groups I analyzed their belief of the proper role of women in the Church, if they felt the

Catholic Church valued the voice of women, and if a pope was a male role model of holiness for them, and if so, which pope?

All three women who named the feminine genius also named Pope John Paul II in their list of role models for men. Pope John Paul II popularized the theology of the body, and the feminine genius and complimentary theology along with it. His charismatic character also helped make such a drastic impact on the population. Additionally, these three participants answered ‘Very True’ when asked about the statement ‘The Catholic

Church values the voice of women.’ It is unsurprising these three answers go hand-in-hand.

If one views Pope John Paul II as a male role model for holiness, they are more likely to buy into his theology on women’s nature and role, and will believe women’s voice is valued in the Church.

Out of the 14 participants in the other groups (anti-women’s ordination, speaking about but not naming complementarity theology, or speaking about but not naming the feminine genius), six participants named Pope John Paul II as a male role model for holiness, two named Pope Francis, and six did not name a pope. The data suggests there is a correlation between what participants believe about woman's natural and proper role, and what pope is creating and leading the message about women’s natural and proper role. The

283 Participants who, in my opinion, had interesting answers about proper role of women in the Church.

127 same correlation easily plays into what women view as holy - what the pope pushes as holy, is considered holy.284

Interestingly, the correlation can also be seen with the 31 participants who answered

“Somewhat true” “somewhat untrue” or “untrue” to the statement ‘the Catholic Church values the voices of women.’ Pope Francis was named 11 times while Pope John Paul II was only named three times. Out of the three times Pope John Paul II was named only once without Pope Francis also being named by the same participant. The data suggests that women who do not feel their voices are valued or only somewhat valued, are looking to

Pope Francis as a role model for holiness. Pope Francis is known for inclusivity, simplicity, and love for the marginalized. It is not coincidence that women who do not feel their voices are valued (or completely valued) in the Church are looking to Pope Francis and not Pope

John Paul II. Additionally, out of the 31 participants 14 discussed wanting or needing equality between men and women’s role in the Church. Two participants discussed more non-ordained leadership, two others said women need to be doing justice work and creating change. Another two participants said they were unsure or did not know what woman's proper role in the Church was.

It is also clear from the data the highest male role models with whom participants had a personal relationship was a priest. The top two spots in the male role model category are men with ordained roles. Having the pope and priests as the top two spots for male role models of holiness shows participants either consciously or subconsciously connect

284 The pope is the leader of the Church, so what he says is holy is considered holy, is not necessarily a bad thing. For example, Pope Francis emphasizing holiness for those who are poor and who help the poor is positive, Gospel-centered, and moving. The issues comes into play when pope’s androcentric views are considered holy. Their influence and authority is a double-edged sword.

128 ordination with holiness. Priests and the pope actually beat-out Jesus for male role models of holiness. If you are thinking, “It’s not ordination, it’s because they are people with religious roles!” you are wrong. For female role models of holiness, religious sisters only came up 10 times. The imbalance could be due to the fact Catholics have more interactions with priests than sisters. Religious sisters are not as popularized mainstream,285 and are unnecessary to have mass (consecrate the Eucharist) whereas a priest is. However, I also think the Holiness Standard plays a part in participants understanding of holiness for sisters and male-ordained.

Another important note I want to convey is two participants stated did not have female religious role models growing up - a comment not made for male role models. One participant said, “I didn’t have many religious female role models growing up.” Yet, she named three male role models, 2 non-personal and 1 personal. Another participant said,

“Literally can only think of one [female role-model].” The participant named Mother

Teresa as her female role model. She was also able to name 3 non-personal male role models for holiness.

The data demonstrates that ordained males who have some form of Church authority are more commonly considered role-models for holiness. After analyzing characteristics for holiness and role models for holiness, I analyzed characteristics for unholiness. Characteristics for unholiness are also gendered once analyzed. At first it seems as if participant see unholy men and unholy women in the same un-gendered light because

4 out of 5 characteristics are the same. However just like for holiness, that is not the case.

285 For example, Father Mike Schmitz has an extremely popular YouTube channel for young people.

129

Chart W

# in Characteristic # of # in Characteristic # of line partici line up participants up pants

#1 Self- 39 #1 Dominance 39 centered/Prideful

#2 Dominance 29 #2 Self- 31 centered/Prideful

#3 Selfish 26 #3 Selfish 29

#4 Sexual 25 #4 Disrespectful 24 promiscuity

#5 Dishonest/untrut 17 #5 Lustful 17 hful/deceitful

Dominance comes up for both unholy men and women. For men, characteristics which created the category Dominance were “Abusive” “Violent” “Controlling”

“Overpowering” “Cruel” “Harming others” “Uses words and actions to tear others down”

“Abuse of power” “Anger” “Has a temper” “Forceful” “Destructive” “Authority”

“Malicious” ‘Hateful” and “Dominance.” Interestingly, “Hurting women” specifically came up twice. “Abuse” or “abusive” came up three times for men. Only once did participant #36 name “abusive” for men and “abusive/self-destructive” for women. These characteristics are gendered in terms of hyper-masculinity.

In the Dominance category for women, characteristics included were, “Abusive”

“Violent” “Aggressive” “Controlling” “Outspoken” “Anger” “Power hungry” “Hatred”

“Loathsome” “Antipathy” “Cruel” “Unkind” “Trying to tear others down” “Cold-hearted” and “Mean.” These characteristics are gendered in terms of femininity and what I call “non lady-like behavior.” For example, “Mean” came up 7 times for women, but did not come

130 up at all for men. Also, “Outspoken” was named for and unholy women. Why is being outspoken considered unholy? Why is a woman who candidly states her opinion unholy?

“Outspoken” was not named for men. Outspoken appearing as an unholy characteristic should raise some major red-flags for the Church. If a woman thinks it is unholy to speak her mind in a straightforward way, what does she think is holy? I believe this woman would think silence and passivity is holy instead. This answer also raises questions about the correlation between women’s voices being valued in the Church and outspokenness being considered unholy. If being outspoken is considered unholy, then it makes sense why

35.37% of participants do not feel female’s voices are valued.

It turns out participant #13 wrote named “Outspoken.” She also answered,

“Important” when asked how important the Catholic Church was to her, and “Untrue” when asked if the Catholic Church values the voices of women. Furthermore, she said the following about the proper role of women in the Church,

I think it needs to be bigger, it's still a very masculine Church. I don't have a lot of female role models within the Church who are widely recognized.

She was not kidding, because when asked about her female role models for holiness her answers were, “Mother Teresa” and, “I literally can only think of one.” How many young women are sitting in pews feeling like participant #13? Why should she stay in the Church?

Additionally, “Power hungry” was named as an unholy characteristic for women while “Abuse of Power” was used to describe men. Abusing power means a person who already has power, is using their power in a harmful way. I think this term was used only for men because in regards to holiness and the Church, men are the ones who are in power.

Being “Power hungry” means a person who does not have power is focused on getting power. Power hungry has a negative connotation, and often means a person is willing to be

131 aggressive and unethical in order to get power. “Power hungry” is used to describe women only. Has it been considered that women are power hungry because they have no power in the Church? Does the Church really think they can only give men power, and faithful and intelligent women will just sit back and be okay with it in 2017?

As mentioned in Chapter 1, the Congregation for the Doctrine of faith claims the first tendency which occurs when people approach women’s issues, is issues of power and aggression. In the CDF words,

A first tendency is to emphasize strongly conditions of subordination in order to give rise to antagonism: women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves the adversaries of men. Faced with the abuse of power, the answer for women is to seek power. This process leads to opposition between men and women, in which the identity and role of one are emphasized to the disadvantage of the other, leading to harmful confusion regarding the human person...286

I wonder if the CDF has ever questioned if there were actually legitimate reasons for this alleged opposition, adversary-attitude, and emphasizing the disadvantage women have.

Maybe after over two-thousands of years of being told and treated as inferior to men in the

Church, women are finally empowering and educated enough to speak up about it.

I also wonder what connotes a power hungry woman? Is a woman who strives for equal power with men considered power hungry? Would I, as a woman in the Church who wants women to have equal authority and power with men be considered power hungry?

If so, a woman striving to create equality of between men and women in terms of power is considered unholy. What does it mean for women in the Church if their attempts at equality are considered unholy?

286 Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of men and Women in the Church and in the World, sec. 1.

132

If women striving for equality in the form of obtaining the same authoritative power as men is considered being power hungry, and being power hungry is considered unholy,

Catholic women will be less likely to strive for equality in this way. I would define power hungry as someone who only cares about power, not the ethics of how they obtained power.

Women wanting equal power to men is not an example of being power hungry. However, if one looks at women wanting equal power to men with an androcentric lens, I can see how the perception is power hunger. Conveying the message to women, that it is unholy for them to strive for equality is a sad and sickening attempt to keep women in limited and subordinate positions, and says more about the fear of men losing power than it does about the women striving to have equal power.

The unholy characteristics, “Cold-hearted” and “Unkind” came up for women as well. Both of these characteristics reinforce feminine genius ideology that women naturally are, and should be, selfless and constantly kind to others. The Letter to the Bishops of the

Catholic Church on the collaboration of men and women, uses Mary to explain the Church has a better model of femininity compared to a “historically conditioned model of femininity.”287 The document explains,

Mary, with her dispositions of listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and waiting, places the Church in continuity with the spiritual history of Israel. In Jesus and through him, these attributes become the vocation of every baptized Christian. Regardless of conditions, states of life, different vocations with or without public responsibilities, they are an essential aspect of Christian life. While these traits should be characteristic of every baptized person, women in fact live them with particular intensity and naturalness. In this way, women play a role of maximum importance in the Church's life by recalling these dispositions to all the baptized and contributing in a unique way to showing the true face of the Church, spouse of Christ and mother of believers.

287 Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of men and Women in the Church and in the World, sec. 16.

133

In this perspective one understands how the reservation of priestly ordination solely to men does not hamper in any way women's access to the heart of Christian life. Women are called to be unique examples and witnesses for all Christians of how the Bride is to respond in love to the love of the Bridegroom288

This statement is yet another example of how the Church emphasize and absolutize certain characteristics for women. The statement does say listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and waiting are “the vocation of every baptized Christian.” But I wonder how genuine and truthful that sentiment is, because in the next sentence the

Church, once again, explains women have a “naturalness” to these qualities. Which is another way of saying men do not have a naturalness to these qualities. Instead of emphasizing the characteristics of a warm heart and kindness to others to women, they should be equally emphasized for every Christian with a disregard to how naturally it comes - that is an individual matter. Because to say women are “naturally” disposed to certain qualities is another way to say it is easy for women to have certain characteristics; which raises questions about how women and men relate to holiness, and the need for grace.

Self-centered/Prideful was named for both unholy men and women. For men, 31 participants named Self-centered/Prideful as an unholy characteristic. Responses included,

“Self centered” “self obsessiveness” “self absorbed” “conceited” “ego” “ego-centric”

“vanity” “narcissistic” “self impressive” “prideful” “prideful and alway talking about himself” “excessive pride” and “full of pride.” For women, 39 participants named Self- centered/Prideful as an unholy characteristic. Responses included, “Self centered” “self- serving” “self-invested” “vain/vanity” “narcissism” “self-obsession” “self-obsessiveness”

288 Ibid., sec, 16.

134

“self-absorbed” “ego” “self-importance” “Prideful” “Pride” “Proud” “excessive pride” and

“expressing smugness.” These two categories, although named the same, are gendered.

When participants explained men’s unholy characteristic of Self-Centered/Prideful, they used gender-normative words to described male behavior. For example, arrogance and conceited. The description was based around unholy men being outwardly, and in some ways loudly, all about themselves. I found this unholy characteristic category as gender- normative male confidence gone-too-far. This can been clearly seen in the comments,

“prideful and always talking about himself” and “conceited.” However, when it came to describing women’s unholy characteristic of Self-Centered/Prideful, participants used terms for gender-normative female behavior. For example, “Vanity” came up 9 times for women and 3 times for men. Vanity, or excessive pride in physical appearance, holds true to gender-stereotypes for women. The gendered descriptors can also be seen when comparing the words used to describe men and women as self-centered/prideful.

One participant said an unholy characteristic for women only was, “Self-serving.”

As discussed throughout this thesis, the expectation is holy women serve others. I am not surprised unholiness is considered a woman serving herself. Another response which appeared for women but not men was “Self-importance.” This phrasing is interesting and gendered. Women thinking, they are important is often considered self-centered...but is it?

Why should women believe they are unimportant in order to be holy? I understand that thinking oneself is more important than others can lead to sinful behavior. However, thinking oneself is important is not sinful, and is where a healthy humility actually comes begins.

135

The last response participants named for women but not men in the category Self- centered/Prideful, is “Self-invested.” I do not know what is unholy about women investing in themselves. I am aware a person can be so self-invested they do not care about others or invest in others which can lead to unholy behavior. But being self-invested is a positive characteristic! These three characteristics named for women’s unholiness also aligned as the opposite of the feminine genius. In other words, self-invested, self-important and vanity are all ways which contradict the giving, receptive, serving and relational nature the feminine genius tells women they should naturally have. There was one category in men’s unholiness which was named 3 more times for men than for women, and it truly stuck out to me - objectification.

Four times participants mentioned objectification as an unholy characteristic for men. Responses included, “One who objectifies women” “treats others as objects” “Treats people as objects” and “treats women as objects.” The category Objectification shows a theme among unholy men is objectifying others, particularly women. I do want to mention one participant wrote, “treats men as objects” for a characteristic of an unholy woman, but the same person wrote, “treats women as objects.” for a characteristic of an unholy man. I think having the same expectation for men and women around any characteristic is important because it shows equality.

Selfish is the third category to be created for both unholy men and women. For men, characteristics included were, “Selfish” “Selfishness” “Driven by selfish desires”

“Does things for own satisfaction” “uses people” and ‘inconsiderate.” For women, characteristics included were, “Selfish” “Selfish desires, and acting on them in harmful ways” “Selfishness” “Use of other people” and “Lack of service.” The responses around

136 men’s selfishness were more focused around men themselves being selfish and acting in such a way which they are the sole focus of their own lives. The only time other people were described in men’s selfishness was in the response “uses people.” However, for women, responses describe selfishness as women not serving others, harming others with their selfishness and also using others, which once again demonstrates unholiness for women is seen as directly going against the feminine genius ideologies which claim women are naturally kind, generous and relational.

The last category participants said made an unholy man and women is Sexual

Promiscuity. For men, characteristics included were, “Lust” “Lewdness” “Promiscuous”

“Sexual Promiscuity” “Sexually immoral” “Impure” “A fuck boi” “Cheat” “Infidelity” and

“Unchaste.” The words “fuck boi” “cheat” and “infidelity” were not used to describe women who were sexual promiscuous. For women, characteristics included were, “Sexual promiscuity” “Sexualized” “Sexually immoral” “Sexually promiscuous and impure”

Unchaste” “Unchaste and overt in sexuality” “Disregard to her call to chastity” “Does whatever she can to just attract the attention of men or end up with a hook up...” “Driven by sexual desires” “Is not prude” “uses her femininity for ill” “Lust” “Immodest”

“Immodesty” “Promiscuous” “Impure” and “Licentiousness.” When comparing this category as a whole between men and women, participants used inactive, descriptive words to describe men as sexually promiscuous. However, participants used more action words to describe women’s sexual promiscuity.

Participants used 8 different words or phrases used to describe the Sexual

Promiscuity category for men. There were 12 different words or phrases used to describe this category for women. Participants named Sexual Promiscuity 25 times for an unholy

137 woman, and 17 times for an unholy man. Both ways of looking at this category shows participants correlate women’s holiness to women’s purity in a greater way than they do for men. This correlation aligns with societal standards289 about women’s sexuality and the feminine genius and complementarity theology’s statements on female sexuality.

Interestingly, out of the five participants who named Maria Goretti as a female role model of holiness, four contributed to the sexual promiscuity category for both men and women. A chart of their answers can found in Chart X.

Chart X

Participant Characteristic Characteristic What makes of Unholy Man of Unholy this role model Woman holy?

#45 Cheating Lustful Forgiveness

#67 Promiscuous Promiscuous Dedication to faith and innocence

#68 - - Forgive murderer

#18 - Disregard to her Dedicated to the call to chastity faith, merciful, valued her call to chastity

#31 Lust Lust Purity, chastity and boldness

289 Which are often double standards by the way. Men want virgin brides, but are not virgins themselves. Another example of this double standard is a man who has many sexual partners is a “real man” or a “stud” while a woman with many sexual partners is a slut. But a virgin woman is a pure “good girl” while a virgin man is considered a “fag” “loser” or “not a real man.”

138

Out of the five participants, three said her purity, chastity, and innocence were what made her holy. Those same three participants contributed to the sexually promiscuous category for both men and women. Participant #18 even uses the same phrasing, “call to chastity”, to describe what makes Maria holy and a woman unholy; of course, the holiness is dependent on how a woman follows or does not follow her call to chastity.

I argue there is an explicit and direct correlation between women’s holiness and virginity which is disproportionately emphasized for women and not men, which is easily seen in Chapter 6 of Mulieris Dignitatem titled “Motherhood-Virginity.” The first subheading is titled, “Two dimensions of women’s vocation.” Pope John Paul II begins this chapter by stating,

We must now focus our meditation on virginity and motherhood as two particular dimensions of the fulfillment of the female personality. In the light of the Gospel, they acquire their full meaning and value in Mary, who as a Virgin became the Mother of the Son of God. These two dimensions of the female vocation were united in her in an exceptional manner, in such a way that one did not exclude the other but wonderfully complemented it.290

This quarter of a paragraph is already entirely flavored with androcentric seasoning. First, having Mary be the pinnacle of the feminine genius, as explained in this research and explicitly stated many times in various Church documents, is in a way of setting women up for holiness failure. As Pope John Paul II says, “This "prophetic" character of women in their femininity finds its highest expression in the Virgin Mother of God.”291 Because

Mary was given Jesus to grow in her womb, by God, without a man, she was able to be a mother and a virgin. However, no other woman has had, or can can have it both ways. Yet,

Mary is continuously held up in an androcentric manner which emphasizes her ability to

290 Mulieris Dignitatem., sec, 17.

291 Letter to Women., sec. 27.

139 be both mother and virgin. There is no recognition that every other woman cannot have it both ways.

I want to note I am not blaming Mary for the androcentricity projected upon her.

Of course it is easy to see the perfection of holy womanhood through a sinless woman who was alive over 2,000 years ago. The beauty, holiness and richness which comes from

Mary’s motherhood and virginity is lost when explained androcentrically. What makes

Mary a remarkable expression of the feminine is much more than being a virgin. It was her trust in God and her belief that God could work through her mind, body and soul. What makes Mary amazing is she believed that she could bear the son of God; she raised him, and she walked with him all the way to the cross. Why is her virginity emphasized disproportionately to these other factors?

Second, from this chapter in Mulieris Dignitatem it is clear there are two dimensions for women’s vocation, but no other vocational tract is spoken of. Naming virginity and motherhood as “two particular paths” but not explaining any other kind of vocational path, clearly shows the Church sees virginity and motherhood as the two most holy paths to take.

The emphasis is clear; a woman can be a mother or virgin. Both of these dimensions, come down to sex. I had a personal conversation with a middle-aged woman who went to Catholic school and grew up a Catholic, but she walked away from the

Catholic Church as a young adult. When I asked her why she said, “I could be Mary the virgin or Mary the whore. And Mary the whore seemed to have more fun.” I know her story is much more complex than this sentence, but her statement is significant nonetheless.

Women’s vocation is much more complicated, rich and beautiful than these two particular

140 paths. If there are more vocational paths for women (which I know there are), Saint John

Paul II does not describe them in anyway in this document on the Dignity and Vocation of women.

Conveying to women their vocation can only be on one of these two paths is grossly problematic. It excludes women who have differing life experiences and differing sexual experiences, whether that be by their choice or by another's. What about women who have been sexually assaulted? Imagine a woman who wants to become Catholic, but has had various sexual partners and is no longer a virgin. Will these women feel they have a place in the Church? From this kind of rhetoric, I do not think so. Also, emphasizing only two vocational tracts limits women to two paths as if life were easy, planned out perfectly and one directional. Life is messy, cannot be planned out, and mistakes and sin are part of the journey. The message given to women says her vocation is tied to her vagina, or what men do to her vagina, and displays a true lack of understanding of women’s sexuality - it does not get more androcentric then this.

After analyzing the characteristics of holy and unholy women, there is more consensus around what makes a woman unholy woman than what makes a woman holy.

Chart M demonstrates the top 5 characteristics participants named for holy and unholy woman.

141

Chart Y

# in Unholy # of # in Characterist # of line Characteristic participa line ic participan up nts up ts

#1 Self- 39 #1 Humble 21 centered/Prideful

#2 Dominance 29 #2 Caring/Nurtu 19 Selfish ring

#3 Selfish 26 #3 Compassiona 16 te

#4 Sexual 25 #4 Prayerful 14 promiscuity

#5 Dishonest/untrut 17 #5 Loving 12 hful/ deceitful

I think there is more consensus around the characteristics of an unholy woman then a holy woman because the nature of women is interpreted in a limited way. Because the nature of women is interpreted in a limited way, what a woman is called to do vocationally and what characteristic a woman can and should embody are also limited. This limitation is explained through the feminine genius and complementarity theology. The feminine genius and complementarity theology are the products of the male-only magisterium interpreting women’s nature through their androcentric lens. The effects of these teachings vary on the person. However, from my data it is clear ideas around the characteristics, behaviors and nature of women surrounding the feminine genius and complimentary theology are not creating a satisfactory consensus around women’s holiness.

It is apparent something has to be done about the androcentric interpretations and teachings on women’s holiness. It is unacceptable that young Catholic college-aged females have a stronger consensus around what makes men holy than women, their own

142 gender, holy. It is also unacceptable and exceedingly sad that participants had a greater understanding of what it means to be an unholy woman then a holy woman. To be honest, our Church is failing women by putting limits on what a holy woman can do and be;

Especially those who do not fit into the feminine genius and complementarity theology.

These limitations are creating boxes for women to fit into. Limiting women is limiting the goodness which comes from them. Women need be encouraged and empowered to discover the God within themselves and reach their fullness, a fullness God is calling them to.

143

CHAPTER 4

WHAT NOW?

“We cannot live in a world that is not our own, in a world that is interpreted for us by others. An interpreted world is not a home. Part of the terror is to take back our own listening, to use our own voice, to see our own light.” - Hildegard of Bingen292

After analyzing the data, it is clear something has to be done in order for young

Catholic college-aged women to grow in fullness to become strong and faith-filled women of God. The feminine genius and complementarity theology limit women by essentializing what they should do and who they should be in order to be holy. Catholic college-aged females do not have a strong consensus about what makes a holy woman. A majority of their ideas surrounding the characteristics of a holy woman are gender-normative, which demonstrates how limited their ideas are on female holiness. To address this issue, the

Catholic Church needs to encourage women to grow in fullness to reach God’s call for their holiness on a personal and systemic level.

For women, growing in fullness means they are free to fulfill whatever God is calling them to do and be, no matter what gender-normative expectations are set for them.

292Hildegard Of Bingen , "Hildegard von Bingen's Mystical Visions: Translated from Scivias," AbeBooks, January 01, 1995, https://www.abebooks.com/book- search/title/scivias/author/hildegard-bingen/.

144142

For women, growing in fullness means they can develop and express all of their God-given qualities without those qualities being labeled masculine or feminine or right or wrong for them to possess.293 Instead of having theologies which limit women and place them into narrowly defined boxes and create the Holiness Standard, I suggest getting rid of the boxes entirely, which would also eliminate the Holiness Standard.

To remove the box androcentric interpretations of doctrine and androcentric teachings of the nature of women and women’s holiness, I first suggest the Catholic Church reevaluate and revise the ways which they are interpreting doctrine and the theologies surrounding women and women’s nature in order to help women grow in fullness. To help women, specifically Catholic college-aged women (and other Catholic women as well) grow in fullness, I have some practical suggestions. Some suggestions will realistically take time to come to fruition, while others are an immediate call to action.

First, women need to have authority in conversations and decisions on the teaching and interpretation of doctrine and in the creation of various theologies within the hierarchy, just like men do. Women should not have to be invited to provide advice, opinions or counsel to the Pope and the magisterium - women’s presence should be equally built into the hierarchical system. If the Church is going to guide men and women, the Church needs women to have as much authority as men. It is as simple as that. Too long has the Church accepted androcentric interpretations as the standard and as truth. Additionally, the Church cannot only put women in these authoritative positions who agree with their views.

Androcentric views are male-centered, but can be held by both sexes. It is key that there is no intentional or unintentional system which places women who hold the same views as

293Mulieris Dignitatem, sec, 10.

145 the Church in authoritative positions, while keeping women who do not hold the same views as the Church in unauthoritative positions.

With women in positions of power, especially women who are looking beyond the limits of the feminine genius and complementarity theology, the interpretations of doctrine surrounding women would change. My hope is these interpretive changes would liberate women from the androcentric Holiness Standard and allow women to embrace the fullness of who God made them to be.

Second, helping Catholic women understand and reach their fullness in God requires the surrounding community to foster, cultivate and positively reinforce women’s individual characteristics and gifts, no matter what they are. For example, if a little girl likes to take charge, do not call her bossy and tell her to stop. Instead, foster and cultivate her gift of leadership - call out her gifts and nurture her into her fullness as leader! Another example is if a little girl who loves baby dolls and plays “mommy” all the time, foster that too! Explain to her being a mom is a wonderful choice for her to make in adulthood, and help her develop the skills to be a kind and strong future-mom. Reminder her a stay-at- home-mom is a fulltime job too! Cultivating, fostering and positively reinforcing female’s individual characteristics and gifts, no matter they are, also applies to young women as well as little girls.

As a campus minister I work with many young women on retreat leadership teams.

To help these young women achieve their fullness in God, I strive to call out and help nurture their individual skills. For example, I have some young women who are wonderful at logistics, taking charge and getting tasks done, while others are skilled at building relationships, small group discussion and planning prayer.... or have any combination of

146 skills (people are not dichotomous beings)! Youth ministers, music ministers, Catholic school teachers, ordained ministers, or anyone who works specifically with young

Catholics are in a unique position to assist in encouraging women in their fullness because they are often the people young Catholic women looked up to.294 Anyone interacts with young women, especially in a faith setting, should empower them to confidently own their

God-given characteristics and skills, and push them to try new experiences to discover non gender-normative tasks. For example, a priest could ask a female to do a reflection295 at mass in order to help balance the voices being heard at the pulpit, and the gender seen on the alter.

In addition to helping Catholic women achieve their fullness in God, is also important to express to young Catholic women why they should develop into their fullness and confidently owning their unique and true-selves. One reasons is because God made women in God’s image and likeness. God created and crafted each woman uniquely with certain gifts and talents. Theologies or cultural standards which limit women limit God’s work. Teaching young Catholic women that by limiting themselves they are limiting God’s work is one way to continue to empower women to embrace and grow into fullness. The second reason is our world and our communities need to experience God - God’s peace, love, joy, truth- women who know who they are in God, and can embrace and develop their

294 We can see that in the data!

295 A reflection can be done after the homily. However, I would also encourage priests and the Church to allow women to preach at the pulpit.

147 characteristics and skills, can effectively build God’s kingdom.296 If women are limited,

God’s kingdom is weakened.

Third, to grow in fullness, young Catholic women need strong and consistent

Catholic female role models who hold various roles, have various characteristics, and strive to be who God is calling them to be. I will call these role models, “liberated role models.”

Liberated role models can be women who are mothers, theologians, saints, leaders, religious sisters, and lay women. Liberated roles can have the gift of preaching, be theologically intelligent, participate in leadership roles, exhibit true kindness, and are outspoken. I have two suggestions to help provide young Catholic women with liberated role models.

One, adult Catholics have to be these role models. What a call to action and reflection! It is key for adult Catholics who have relationships with young Catholic women in the lives to be asking themselves questions such as these: “Am I limiting her with said or unsaid expectations? Am I limiting myself with said or unsaid expectations? What characteristics do I emphasize for her to exhibit? What characteristics of hers should I foster and cultivate more? Who is God calling her to be? Who is God calling me to be for her? Am I educated on liberated role models? Do I have liberated role models? " The next step is to act, and use the answers to these reflection questions to make oneself a stronger and more present liberated role model.

Two, young women need liberated role models who are officially recognized by the Church. As discussed in Chapter 1, due to androcentric interpretations and telling of

296 God can use everyone, no matter what, to build up God’s kingdom. However, those who know God and can own their own identity will most likely have an easier time and will intentionally build up the kingdom of God.

148 history, women are often left out of historical Church narratives - which is why these officially recognized liberated role models need to be intentionally and visibly placed in the lives of young Catholic females. Placing liberated role models into the lives of young

Catholic women is not as hard as one might think. For example, a Christening gift could be a few children’s books on St. Teresa of Avila, Saint Hildegard von Bingen, Clare of

Assisi, Saint Catherine of Siena and Joan of Arc. For older girls, as they begin to seek advice on various issues, provide them with the advice of amazing women of our Catholic tradition! For example, if a girl approaches a youth leader about the stresses of school, a good piece of advice would be to name and pull a prayer from Saint Julian of Norwich who said, “All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well.” with an short explanation of who Julian of Norwich is. In addition, all Catholic curriculums - from Sunday schools, to Catholic elementary school and high schools, to Catholic universities, to seminaries- should equally teach about women and men in the Church - specifically, about women who do not necessarily fit the ideals of the feminine genius. The standard should be Catholic students, on all levels of education, learn about Catholic men and women equally. Since learning about men and women equally is not the case in the current Catholic education system, changing the curriculum to include more women would be a great place to start making a systemic change which would provide Catholic women with more liberated role models.

Fourth, helping women achieve their fullness in God requires the help of men!

Without men, specifically ordained men, who also want to bring women to their fullness in God in a way which does not take into account gender-normative expectations, nothing will improve for women. Men are the ones in power in the Catholic Church. Men in power

149 need to begin advocating for women to follow God’s call into their fullness, no matter what roles or characteristics God leads women to possess. To create systemic change and for women to be valued for acting outside the feminine genius, laymen and ordained men have to be supportive.

For those men who are not supportive of such change, I would ask a few actions of them. First, I ask them to deeply reflect on their honest motives and reasoning’s for wanting to keep women in specific and non-authoritative places. Second, I ask those men to be informed on the effects of the feminine genius and complementarity theology for women today. I would ask them to read about the negative effects of the feminine genius and complementarity theology specifically, while also seeking out and truly hearing women who do not identify with the Church anymore because of the inequality within it. Lastly, I call their attention of the spiritual works of mercy, and what it means to humbly be on the receiving side of them. In particular, instructing the ignorant, admonishing the sinner, forging injuries and bearing wrongs patiently. By humbly accepting they could be on the receiving side of these spiritual works of mercy297 I would hope they would see they harm of androcentric theologies, the benefits of non-androcentric theologies. At the very least, I hope they would hold their views while not hindering or the fullness of women.

As I look back on the data, I do not simply see numbers, I see the women of God behind the numbers. The data is one way to hear their voices. It is apparent to me that these women are struggling to understand their own holiness and role. It is crucial to the future of our Church to encourage and support women in their fullness - the fullness of their potential for equally and leadership. Historically, women attend church more than men,

297 Because we have all been on the receiving side at one point or another.

150 however, in 2012 the gap between men and women attending Church was the smallest it had ever been.298 Women are leaving the Church, often identifying in a rapidly growing group titled the “nones.”299 It is important to note Catholics make up 28% of nones, which is “the largest portion of nones exiting a religion.”300Journalist and author, Patricia Miller, interprets a Pew Research article301 on the gender gap in the church attendance in the

United States. She debunks the myths that women are not attending Church due to education or work, and answers the question, “Why have women stopped going to church?

It isn’t because they’re too busy or too well educated. Maybe they stopped going when conservative politics took over the pulpit.”302 She also explains the effect Pope Benedict

XVI’s Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and women in the Church and in the World.” Miller states,

And in 2004, the Catholic Church released a controversial document by soon-to-be Pope Benedict that was critical of feminism and said women’s characteristics were “Listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and waiting.” The following years of Benedict’s papacy were particularly unwelcoming to progressive women in the church303

298Patricia Miller,"Women Are Leaving Church, And the Reason Seems Clear," Religion Dispatche,. May 31, 2016, Accessed May 5, 2017, http://religiondispatches.org/women-are-leaving-church-and-the-reason-seems-clear/.

299 Miller, “Women Are Leaving,” 2017.

300 Ibid.

301David McClendon, "Gender gap in religious service attendance has narrowed in U.S.," Pew Research Center, May 13, 2016, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact- tank/2016/05/13/gender-gap-in-religious-service-attendance-has-narrowed-in-u-s/.

302 Ibid.

303Miller, “Women Are Leaving,” 2017.

151

These are not just statistics or comments on random, never-known, un-real figures. These are Catholic sisters in Christ, who are leaving their Catholic faith. And one of the reasons they are leaving is because the Church has put limits on women and kept them in a box where progressive women, or women who want to liberate Church from traditional and gender-normative characteristics, behavioral standards and interpretations, are unwelcomed. Catholics have to advocate for a liberated interpretation of doctrine.

Catholics have to advocate for women to those with interpretive and teaching authority and who have the power to make systemic changes; because God and the Gospel call every person to be just. God and the Gospel call every person on earth to live for God in the fullness of their created-selves and within the fullness of their vocation.

Conclusion

It is clear from the data that Catholic college-aged females have gender-normative notions of holiness. In my research, I have tied participant's gender-normative understanding of holiness with the androcentric doctrinal interpretations and teaching of those with interpretive and teaching authority. There is more consensus around what characteristics makes a holy man than a holy woman and more consensus around what characteristics make a unholy woman than a holy woman. Additionally, participants have minimal consensus around the proper role of women in the Church, and many are unsatisfied with the current role of women in the Church.

To be frank, I do not think it takes a brilliant theologian to fully understand why limiting women through the feminine genius and complementarity thology is a problem

152 and contrary to the Gospel. When I was little, my mom sang me a lullaby every single night. The lyrics went,

You are very special there’s no one quite like you. Created by the Master, God made you to be you. You are very special exclusively designed. You are very special and I’m so glad you're mine. You were handmade by God. He fashioned your heart. You were handmade by God. Unique in all your ways. You were handmade, by God. He knew you from the start.304

After hearing that song every night by one of the strongest Catholic women I know, the message stuck. I was repetitively told the message so many girls are not - I am handmade

-as I am, with all my characteristics - by God. Each and every person on earth was handmade by God. God fashioned every person’s mind, body, heart, and soul - that includes all characteristics which make us holy. Every person is unique in all their ways because they were designed by the Creator, the Master of the Universe. Any kind of limitation which stifles God’s human creations is unacceptable, damaging, contrary to the

Gospel, and contrary to the nature of God.

304 Baloche, Rita . Handmade by God. Integrity Media, 1992, Cassette.

153

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ammermann, Nancy. 2003. Religious Identities and Religious Institutions. Chap. 16 in Handbook of the Sociology of Religion, ed. By Michele Dillon. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Anderson, Mary Joe. "Feminine Genius." CatholicCulture.org. July/August 2005. Accessed December 2, 2016. https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6709. androcentrism. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/androcentrism (accessed: November 2, 2016).

"Author: Mary Beth Bonacci." CatholicMatch Institute Posts by Mary Beth Bonacci. Accessed December 12, 2016. https://www.catholicmatch.com/institute/author/mbbonacci/.

Babbie, Earl. ˜Theœ Practice of Social Research. 8th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth Publication, 1998.

Baloche, Rita. Handmade by God. Integrity Media, 1992, Cassette.

"BibleGateway." 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 ESV, 1 Peter 2:13-3:7 ESV, Colossians 3:18-4:1 ESV, Ephesians 5:22-6:9 ESV - - Bible Gateway. Accessed June 09, 2017. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%2BCorinthians%2B11%3A2- 16&version=ESV.

Bonacci, Marth Beth. "The Feminine Genius." Catholic Exchange. July 27, 2006. Accessed December 3, 2016. http://catholicexchange.com/the-feminine-genius

154

Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. The cost of Discipleship. London: SCM Press, 2015.

Brekus, Catherine A. The Religious History of American Women: Reimagining the past. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007.

Bryrne, Maura. "Feminine Genius - Made in His Image." Made in His Image. Accessed December 1, 2016. http://madeinhisimage.org/fashionandthefemininegenius/.

Cady, Linell Elizabeth. Horizons in Feminist Theology: Identity, Tradition, and Norms. Edited by Rebecca S. Chopp and Sheila Greeve. Davaney. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1997.

Case, Mary Anne. "The Gender Agenda." The Tablet, September 08, 2016. September 08, 2016. Accessed October 13, 2016. http://www.thetablet.co.uk/features/2/8911/the-gender-agenda.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. Accessed April 20, 2017, http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1.htm

Chittister, Joan. Called to question: a spiritual memoir. Lanham, MD: Sheed & Ward, 2004.

Chittister, Joan. The friendship of women: the hidden tradition of the Bible. Toronto: Novalis, 2006.

Chittister, Joan. Womanstrength: modern church, modern women. Kansas City, MO: Sheed & Ward, 1990.

Chopp. Rebecca and Sheila Devaney, eds. 1997. Horizons in Feminist Theology. (select chapters on Identity). Minneapolis, MN: Fortress.

155

Cummings, Kathleen Sprows. New Women of the Old Faith: Gender and American Catholicism in the Progressive Era. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009.

Daley, Mary. Beyond God the Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women's Liberation. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1985.

"Department of Black Studies - UC Santa Barbara." George Lipsitz | Department of Black Studies - UC Santa Barbara. Accessed December 07, 2016. http://www.blackstudies.ucsb.edu/people/george-lipsitz.

Dreyer, Elizabeth. Accidental theologians: four women who shaped Christianity. Cincinnati, OH: Franciscan Media, 2014.

Fisher, Simcha. "Maria Goretti didn’t die for her virginity." I have to Sit Down (web log), July 6, 2015. Accessed June 7, 2017. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/simchafisher/2015/07/06/maria-goretti-didnt-die- for-her-virginity/.

Fulkerseon, Mary McClintock. Horizons in Feminist Theology: Identity, Tradition, and Norms. Edited by Rebecca S. Chopp and Sheila Greeve. Davaney. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997. gynocentric . Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/androcentrism (accessed: November 2, 2016).

Harris, Elise. "Pope: The 'feminine Genius' Takes on Theology's Uncharted Territory." Catholic News Agency, December 5, 2014. Accessed December 1, 2016. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-the-feminine-genius-takes-on- theologys-uncharted-territory-93597/.

Henold, Mary J. Catholic and feminist: the surprising history of the American Catholic feminist movement. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2008.

156

Hildegard von Bingen, "Hildegard von Bingen's Mystical Visions: Translated from Scivias." AbeBooks. January 01, 1995. Accessed June 20, 2017. https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/title/scivias/author/hildegard-bingen/.

"History." Medical Mission Sisters. Accessed December 06, 2016. http://www.medicalmissionsisters.org/history/.

Kugel, James L. How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture, Then and Now. New York, NY: Free Press, 2008.

Lacugna, Catherine Mowry. "Catholic Women As Ministers and Theologians." America, October 10, 1992, 238-48.

"Leadership." Leadership. Accessed November 03, 2016. http://www.usccb.org/about/leadership/index.cfm.

Lomas, Rick. "How does Google decide who is on the first page?" LinkResearchTools. October 04, 2016. Accessed May 14, 2017. http://www.linkresearchtools.com/case-studies/ways-to-improve-your-google- rankings/.

Manson, Jamie. "It's Time to Be Honest about Pope Francis and Women." National Catholic Reporter, May 19, 2016. Accessed November 22, 2016. https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/its-time-be-honest-about-pope- francis-and-women.

McClendon, David. "Gender Gap In Religious Service Attendance Has Narrowed In U.S.". Pew Research Center. N.p., 2017. Web. 7 Mar. 2017.

McGuire, Meredith. Chapters 5 & 7 Lived Religion: Faith, Practice in Everyday Life. NY: Oxford University Press, 2008.

McGuire, Meredith B. Lived Religion: Faith and Practice in Everyday Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.

157

Miller, Donald. "Saint Maria Goretti." Franciscan Media. March 01, 2017. Accessed June 07, 2017. https://www.franciscanmedia.org/saint-maria-goretti/.

Miller, Patricia. "Women Are Leaving Church, And the Reason Seems Clear." Religion Dispatches. May 31, 2016. Accessed May 5, 2017. http://religiondispatches.org/women-are-leaving-church-and-the-reason-seems- clear/.

"Mrs. Margaret Buchanan Sullivan, the Chicago Journalist. (From a Photograph by Fassett, Chicago)." NYPL Digital Collections. 2016. Accessed December 06, 2016. http://lizard.digital.nypl.org/items/1acbea70-510e-0130-bfb9- 58d385a7bbd0.

Newsom, Jennifer Siebel., et al. Miss Representation. 90 min. version; customized educational footage. [Sausalito, Calif.] : [San Francisco, Calif.]: Ro*co Films Educational ; Girls Club Entertainment, 2011.

Oakes, Edward T. Infinity Dwindled to Infancy: A Catholic and Evangelical Christology. Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 2011.

Online, Catholic. "St. Gianna Beretta Molla - Saints & Angels." Catholic Online. Accessed June 21, 2017. http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=6985.

Online, Catholic. "St. Maria Goretti - Saints & Angels." Catholic Online. Accessed June 06, 2017. http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=78

Paul John. 16 May 2004: Canonization of six Blesseds, John Paul II. March 24, 2004. Accessed June 21, 2017. http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul- ii/en/homilies/2004/documents/hf_jp-ii_hom_20040516_canonizations.html.

Paul, John. Letter of Pope John Paul II to Women. Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1995.

Paul, John. Message of John Paul II to the Bishop of Albano for the Centenary of the Death of St. Maria Goretti, Vatican Website. July 6, 2002, accessed June 7, 2017, https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-

158

ii/en/speeches/2002/july/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20020708_santa-maria- goretti.html

Paul, John. Mulieris Dignitatem, Vatican Website. August 15, 1988, accessed December 7, 2016, https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul- ii/en/apost_letters/1988/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_19880815_mulieris- dignitatem.html.

"Pope Backs Male Priesthood, Urges 'feminine Genius' in Church." Catholic News Agency, November 26, 2013. Accessed November 12, 2016. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-backs-male-priesthood-urges- feminine-genius-in-church/.

Pope Francis, Evangelli gaudium, Vatican Website, June 29, 2007, accessed January 2, 2017, http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa- francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html

Reid, Barbara E. Taking up the Cross: New Testament Interpretations through Latina and Feminist Eyes. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007.

Ruether, Rosemary Radford. Sexism and God-talk: toward a feminist theology. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1983.

Schwiegershausen, Erica. "What Activist Nuns Really Think About the Pope." The Cut, September 25, 2015. Accessed November 13, 2016. http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/09/what-activist-nuns-really-think-about-the- pope.html.

"St. Maria Goretti." Catholic News Agency, July 6, 2016. Accessed June 6, 2017. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/saint.php?n=530.

Streete, Gail Corrington. Redeemed Bodies: Women Martyrs in Early Christianity. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009.

159

Suh, Michael. "Questionnaire design." Pew Research Center. January 29, 2015. Accessed February 22, 2017. http://www.pewresearch.org/methodology/u-s-survey- research/questionnaire-design/.

Sullivan, Francis A. Magisterium: teaching authority in the Catholic Church. Ramsey, NJ: Paulist Press, 1983.

Trible, Phyllis. Eve and Adam: Genesis 2-3 Reread. Rochester, NY: Women's Ordination Conference, 1983.

Villa, Carmen Elena. "Teenage Focolare Member, Chiara Badano, to be Beatified on Saturday in Rome - Living Faith - Home & Family - News." Catholic Online. Accessed June 21, 2017. http://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=38409.

Weaver, Mary Jo. New Catholic Women: A Contemporary Challenge to Traditional Religious Authority. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985.

Wiley, C.R. "New Testament Household Codes: Embarrassing or Enlightening?" Pater Familias Today (web log), September 29, 2016. Accessed June 9, 2017. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/gloryseed/2016/09/household-codes-embarrassing- or-enlightening/

160

APPENDIX A

MALE AND FEMALE ROLE MODELS OF HOLINESS

Participant #1

Male Role Model 1 Nick Racchi Female Role Model #1My grandmother

Male Role Model 2 Mike Bennett Female role Model #2 TM!!!

Male Role Model 3Dom Sanfilippo Female Role model #3 Mother Theresa

Participant # 2

Male Role Model 1Jesus Female Role Model #1Mary

Male Role Model 2St. Paul Female role Model #2St Lucy

Male Role Model 3 Pope Francis Female Role model #3St Teresa of Calcutta

161

Participant #3

Male Role Model 1My best friends Female Role Model #1My best friends father mother

Male Role Model 2St. John Paul II Female role Model #2Emily Wilson

Skipped Female Role model #3Sr. Maryanne

Participant # 4

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1Mother Teresa

Male Role Model 2 Father Francis Female role Model #2 Joan of Arc Tandoh

Male Role Model 3 Father Tom Petry Female Role model #3Sister Dorothy Stang

Participant # 5

Skipped3 Female Role Model #1Mother Theresa

Skipped Female role Model #2Blessed Mary

Skipped Female Role model #3 Joan of Arc

162

Participant #6

Male Role Model 1Saint Maximilian Female Role Model #1 Saint Clare Kolbe

Male Role Model 2 Mark Hart Female role Model #2Jackie Francois

Male Role Model 3 Paul J Kim Female Role model #3Emily Wilson

Participant #7

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1 Cheryl Hall

Male Role Model 2 Fr. Robert Shola Female role Model #2 Kay Lee

Male Role Model 3Ghandhi Female Role model #3Mother Teresa

Participant #8

Male Role Model 1Someone in my Female Role Model #1My mom community

Male Role Model 2Someone else in Female role Model #2 Someone in my my community community

Male Role Model 3My dad Female Role model #3 Someone else in my community

Participant # 9 Skipped this question

163

Participant #10

Male Role Model 1Brandon Gauvin Female Role Model #1Mom (music director from home parish)

Male Role Model 2Grandpa Female role Model #2Rachel (best friend)

Male Role Model 3Dad Female Role model #3Allison (best friend)

Participant #11

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Skipped

Male Role Model 2 Father Steven Skipped Borillo

Male Role Model 3Decon John (used to Skipped work at Saint Isaac Jogues church in Hinsdale, IL)

Participant #12

Male Role Model 1the pope Female Role Model # 1Mary mother of Jesus

Male Role Model 2buddha Female role Model #2mother teresa

Skipped Skipped

164

Participant #13

Male Role Model 1 Martin Luther Female Role Model #1Mother Teresa King, Jr

Male Role Model 2 Fr. Gabriel Female role Model #2I literally can only Richard think of one...

Male Role Model 3 Pope Francis Skipped

Participant #14

Male Role Model 1My father Female Role Model #1My church's youth minister

Male Role Model 2My little brother Female role Model #2My friend, Diana

Male Role Model 3 Father Damien Skipped

Participant #15

Male Role Model 1 Joseph Female Role Model #1my grandma

Male Role Model 2 St. Francis Female role Model #2my mother

Male Role Model 3 the priest at my Female Role model #3Mary home parish

165

Participant #16

Male Role Model 1 Pope Female Role Model #1Mary Clark-Keiser (Director of Campus Ministry)

Male Role Model 2Fr. Stan - on Female role Model #2Emma (My Best campus chaplin Friend)

Male Role Model 3My Grandfather Female Role model #3Dr. Patterson

Participant #17

Male Role Model 1My boyfriend Female Role Model #1Mom

Male Role Model 2My grandfather Female role Model #2Grandma

Male Role Model 3An elderly gentleman at Female Role model #3Friend my church

Participant #18

Male Role Model 1St John Paul II Female Role Model #1Mother Teresa

Male Role Model 2St Joseph Female role Model #2St Maria Goretti

Skipped Skipped

166

Participant #19

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1Mother Teresa

Male Role Model 2Father Mike (home Female role Model #2Mary Clark Kaiser parish) (former Aquinas campus minister, social justice advocate)

Male Role Model 3Steve Agrisano Female Role model #3 Sister Damien (musician)

Participant #20

Male Role Model 1St. Joseph Female Role Model #1the Virgin Mary

Male Role Model 2JP2 Female role Model #2St. Elizabeth of Hungary

Male Role Model 3my high school youth Skipped minister

Participant #21

Male Role Model 1St. Francis of Assisi Female Role Model #1Mother Teresa

Male Role Model 2 Shane Claiborne Female role Model #2Dorothy Day

Male Role Model 3Pope Francis Female Role model #3St. Catherine of Sienna

Participant #22 skipped this question

167

Participant #23

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1Saint Teresa of Calcuta

Male Role Model 2 Fr. Arrupe Female role Model #2my mother

Male Role Model 3St. Augustine Female Role model #3Colleen (my service office director)

Participant #24

Male Role Model 1 Fr. Seamus Female Role Model #1 Lauren Schwer Murphy

Male Role Model 2 Fr. John Female role Model # 2 Laura Snow Gaulik Murphy

Male Role Model 3 Fr. Dennis Female Role model #3I didn't have many religious Kriz female role models growing up

Participant #25

Male Role Model 1St. Pope John Female Role Model #1Blessed Virgin Mary, Paul II Mother of God

Male Role Model 2Pope Francis Female role Model #2St. Mother Theresa

Male Role Model 3St. Francis of Female Role model #3St. Therese of Lieseux Assissi

168

Participant #26

Male Role Model 1The Pope Female Role Model #1My confirmation sponsor, Gabbi

Male Role Model 2My father Female role Model #2My mother

Male Role Model 3Mark Hart Female Role model #3My grandmother

Participant #27

Male Role Model 1Jesus Christ Female Role Model #1St. Bernadette of Lourdes

Male Role Model 2St. Pope John Paul Female role Model #2St. Mother Theresa II

Male Role Model 3St. Maximillian Female Role model #3St. Katharine Drexel Kolbe

Participant #28

Male Role Model 1My dad Female Role Model #1My grandma

Male Role Model 2Priests Female role Model #2Mother Teresa (& all the saints)

Male Role Model 3JPII Female Role model #3Older sister

169

Participant #29

Male Role Model 1boyfriend Female Role Model #1Sister Jean (nun at school)

Male Role Model 2grandfather Female role Model #2 grandmother

Male Role Model 3Pope Francis Female Role model #3mother Theresa

Participant #30

Male Role Model 1Pope Female Role Model #1Mary Francis

Male Role Model 2Jesus Female role Model #2St. Therese the Little flower

Male Role Model 3Friend Female Role model #3 Leah Darrow Patrick

Participant #31

Male Role Model 1St. Joseph Female Role Model #1Virgin Mary

Male Role Model 2St. Paul Female role Model #2St. Maria Goretti

Male Role Model 3St. John Paul II Female Role model #3Bl. Chiara Luce Badano

170

Participant #32

Male Role Model 1Saint Francis of Female Role Model #1The Blessed Virgin Assisi Mary

Male Role Model 2Saint Ignatius of Female role Model #2Saint Veronica Loyola

Male Role Model 3King Saint Louis Female Role model #3Saint Elizabeth of the IX Hungary

Participant #33

Male Role Model 1Priest Female Role Model #1Mary

Male Role Model 2saints Female role Model #2 Campus minister

Male Role Model 3my grandfather Female Role model #3 my sister

Participant #34

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1Saint Mother Theresa

Male Role Model 2Brother Ray Female role Model #2Sister Mary Ellen (UD) (childhood teacher)

Male Role Model 3My priest from Female Role model #3My mom home

171

Participant #35

Male Role Model 1Marianist Female Role Model #1Catholic Saints Brothers

Male Role Model 2Saints Female role Model #2Marianist Sisters

Male Role Model 3 Preists Female Role model #3Campus Ministers

Participant #36

Male Role Model 1my dad Female Role Model #1my mom

Male Role Model 2Saint Michael Female role Model #2Mother Theresa

Male Role Model 3the pope Female Role model #3Saint Joan of Arc

Participant #37

Male Role Model 1A cousin Female Role Model #1godmother

Male Role Model 2Teacher from high Female role Model #2Sister Ginny (teacher school from high school)

Male Role Model 3Godfather Female Role model #3Godsister/best friend

172

Participant #38

Male Role Model 1My dad Female Role Model #1My mom

Male Role Model 2My high school campus Female role Model #2College campus minister minister

Male Role Model 3College campus Female Role model #3High school minister theology teacher

Participant #39

Male Role Model 1Jesus Christ Female Role Model #1The Virgin Mary

Male Role Model 2My grandfather Female role Model #2My grandmother

Male Role Model 3My father Female Role model #3Sister Sharon

Participant #40

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1Mother Teresa

Male Role Model 2My grandpa Female role Model #2My Grandma

Male Role Model 3A friend Female Role model #3My mom

173

Participant #41

Male Role Model 1St. Joseph the Female Role Model #1Mother Mary Chaste

Male Role Model 2Padre Pio Female role Model #2St. Monica

Male Role Model 3Pope Francis Female Role model #3Lisa Manley (Family Friend)

Participant #42

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1Blessed Chiara Badano

Male Role Model 2Saint Peter Female role Model #2Dorothy Day

Male Role Model 3JPII Female Role model #3Saint (Mother) Teresa of Calcutta

Participant #43

Male Role Model 1St. JP II Female Role Model #1My friends

Male Role Model 2My youth minister Female role Model #2St. Catherine of Sienna

Male Role Model 3My friend Female Role model #3My little sister

174

Participant #44

Male Role Model 1Jesus Female Role Model #1Mary the Virgin Mother

Male Role Model 2My grandfather Female role Model #2Sister Jessica

Male Role Model 3 Father Lally Female Role model #3 Colleen O'Brien

Participant #45

Male Role Model 1Jesus Female Role Model #1Virgin Mary

Male Role Model 2Joseph, spouse of Female role Model #2Maria Goretti Mary

Male Role Model 3Pope Francis Female Role model #3Mother Teresa

Participant #46

Male Role Model 1My father Female Role Model #1My mom

Male Role Model 2My good friend Female role Model #2My grandma Nick

Male Role Model 3Priest from back Female Role model #3My good friend home Maggie

175

Participant #47

Male Role Model 1St. Pope John Paul II Female Role Model #1Mary, Mother of God

Male Role Model 2Blessed Pier Giorgio Female role Model #2St. Mother Frassati Theresa

Male Role Model 3St. Augustine Female Role model #3St. Therese of Lisieux

Participant #48

Male Role Model 1Father Thomas Female Role Model #1Ellen Degeneres Montanaro LC (a family friend who is a priest in the Vatican)

Male Role Model 2Rocco Gargiulo (high Female role Model #2My Aunt Allison school teacher) Huizenga

Male Role Model 3Pope Francis Female Role model #3 Laverne Cox

Participant #49

Male Role Model 1John Nagy (my Female Role Model #1Sr. Immaculata (my older uncle) sister)

Male Role Model 2St. Maximillian Female role Model #2Our Lady Kolbe

Male Role Model 3St. Francis of Female Role model #3St. Theresa of Avila Assisi

176

Participant #50

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1TinaMarie

Male Role Model 2Father Ted Female role Model #2 Sr. Jenny Cassidy

Male Role Model 3My friend, Female Role model #3My friend, Abby Charlie

Participant #51

Male Role Model 1Jesus Female Role Model #1The Blessed Mother

Male Role Model 2St. Ignatius Female role Model #2St. Therese de Lisieux

Male Role Model 3My campus minister Female Role model #3My Spiritual Director

Participant #52

Male Role Model 1St. Joseph Female Role Model #1Mary, mother of God

Male Role Model 2St. Augustine Female role Model #2St. Mary Magdalen

Male Role Model 3St. John Paul II Female Role model #3Mother Teresa

177

Participant #53

Male Role Model 1St. Joseph Female Role Model #1Mother Teresa

Male Role Model 2My father Female role Model #2My youth minister from high school

Male Role Model 3Pope Female Role model #3Mary Francis

Participant #54

Male Role Model 1Father Dave (my Female Role Model #1Grace Reesewood ( priest from home) my boss)

Male Role Model 2Hoover (my cross Female role Model #2My mom country coach)

Male Role Model 3Ben Daleiden (my Female Role model #3Beth Clark (my best boss) friend)

Participant #55

Male Role Model 1Grandpa Female Role Model #1Grandma

Male Role Model 2Dad Female role Model #2Mom

Male Role Model 3Monseiner Female Role model #3Aunt

178

Participant #56

Male Role Model 1Jesus (though that Female Role Model #1Mary might be too obvious...) (again...maybe too obvious...)

Male Role Model 2St. John Paul II Female role Model #2St. Mother Teresa

Male Role Model 3Rev. Msgr. Patrick Female Role model #3Jeanne Head Brankin

Participant #57

Male Role Model 1My Father Female Role Model #1Mary the Mother of God

Male Role Model 2My Grandfather Female role Model #2My Mother

Skipped Skipped

Participant #58

Male Role Model 1Jesus Female Role Model #1Mother Theresa

Male Role Model 2Saint Peter Female role Model #2Mary- mother of God

Male Role Model 3Pope Francis Female Role model #3My mother

179

Participant #59

Male Role Model 1St Ignatius of Female Role Model #1Terese of Liseu Loyola

Male Role Model 2JP2 Female role Model #2St Bernadette

Male Role Model 3St Maximilion Female Role model #3Mary Kolbe

Participant #60

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1Nuns at St. John's

Male Role Model 2Priests at St. John's Female role Model #2Sister

Male Role Model 3Grandpa Female Role model #3Friends

Participant #61

Male Role Model 1My priest Female Role Model #1Housing minister/ friend

Male Role Model 2My dad Female role Model #2Mom

Male Role Model 3My boyfriend Female Role model #3Mother Teresa

Participant #62

Male Role Model 1St. JP2 Female Role Model #1St. Claire of Assisi

Male Role Model 2St. Padre Pio Female role Model #2St. Theresa Little Flower

Male Role Model 3St. John Bosco Female Role model #3Mother Mary

180

Participant #63

Male Role Model 1Father Female Role Model #1Mother

Male Role Model 2Priest Female role Model #2Employer

Male Role Model 3Boyfriend Female Role model #3Friend

Participant #64

Male Role Model 1John Wood Female Role Model #1my mom

Male Role Model 2 Father Tim Female role Model #2Mary

Male Role Model 3Pope Francis Female Role model #3St. Germaine

Participant #65

Male Role Model 1St. John Paul II Female Role Model #1My mom

Male Role Model 2 Bobby Angel Female role Model #2 Jackie Francois-Angel

Male Role Model 3Matt Fradd Female Role model #3St. Gianna Molla

Participant #66

Male Role Model 1Jesus Female Role Model #1Mary

Male Role Model 2My dad Female role Model #2Sr. Teresita

Male Role Model 3My significant other Female Role model #3Grandma

181

Participant #67

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1Mother Theresa

Male Role Model 2St. Maximillian Female role Model #2St. Therese of Kolbe Liseux

Male Role Model 3Pope Emeritus Female Role model #3St. Maria Benedict XVI Goretti

Participant #68

Male Role Model 1St. John Paul Female Role Model #1St. Therese of II Lisieux

Male Role Model 2Bl. Pier Female role Model #2Bl. Chiara Georgio Frassati Badano

Male Role Model 3Fr. Mike Female Role model #3St. Maria Schmitz Goretti

Participant #69

Male Role Model 1Jesus Christ Female Role Model #1The Virgin Mary

Male Role Model 2Pope Female role Model #2St. Brigid of Ireland

Male Role Model 3St. Joseph Female Role model #3 Mrs. Kruczek

Participant #70

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1former youth minister

Male Role Model 2my father Female role Model #2a college friend

Male Role Model 3my former religion Female Role model #3campus minister teacher

182

Participant #71

Male Role Model 1My older Female Role Model #1My mom brother

Male Role Model 2Pope Francis Female role Model #2St Mother Theresa

Male Role Model 3St Pope John Female Role model #3My campus minister Paul II

Participant #72

Male Role Model 1St. John Paul II Female Role Model #1Mother Mary

Male Role Model 2C.S. Lewis Female role Model #2Mother Teresa

Male Role Model 3A close friend Female Role model #3Sisters of Life

Participant #73

Male Role Model 1Pope John Paul II Female Role Model #1Mary (as in Jesus's mom)

Male Role Model 2St. Francis of Assisi Female role Model #2St. Teresa of Calcutta

Male Role Model 3My father Female Role model #3My mom

183

Participant #74

Male Role Model 1Jesus Female Role Model #1One of the missionaries on campus

Male Role Model 2John the Female role Model #2St. Gianna Mole Apostle

Male Role Model 3Peter the Female Role model #3One of my very good Apostle friends

Participant #75

Male Role Model 1Dad Female Role Model #1Mom

Male Role Model 2Youth helper Female role Model #2 Sister Kateri Rose

Male Role Model 3Youth minister Female Role model #3confirmation sponsor

Participant #76

Male Role Model 1My significant other Female Role Model #1A friend/mother

Male Role Model 2 Monsignor James Female role Model #2Another Shea friend/mother

Male Role Model 3 Monsignor Thomas Female Role model #3A friend/mother Richter

Participant #77

Male Role Model 1 Jesus Female Role Model #1Mary Immaculate

Male Role Model 2 JPII Female role Model #2Best friend (Maria)

Male Role Model 3 Good friend of mine Female Role model #3Friend (Emily) (Luke)

184

Participant #78

Male Role Model 1Jesus Female Role Model #1Youth minister

Male Role Model 2My priest Female role Model #2Cousin

Male Role Model 3The seminarian Female Role model #3Aunt who helped with my youth group

Participant #79

Male Role Model 1Brother Tom Female Role Model #1My mom Pieper

Male Role Model 2Brother Mark Female role Model #2My best friend Motz

Male Role Model 3My dad Female Role model #3My high school religion teacher

Participant #80

Male Role Model 1campus minister Female Role Model #1mother/ aunts

Male Role Model 2priest Female role Model #2campus ministers

Skipped Skipped

Participant #81

Male Role Model 1Pope Francis Female Role Model #1Mother Theresa

Male Role Model 2My Brother Female role Model #2Saint Bernadette

Male Role Model 3My Father Female Role model #3My Mom

185

Participant #82

Male Role Model 1 My dad Female Role Model #1 Dorothy Day

Male Role Model 2 Bro. Brandon Female role Model #2 my mom

Male Role Model 3 Bro. Ray Female Role model #3 Judy Keyes

Male Role Models of Holiness

Total = 232 Personal Non-Personal

Amount of times 102 130 named

Percentage (%) 43.9% 56%

Female Role Models of Holiness

Total = 229 Personal Non-Personal Other

Amount of 118 109 2 times named

Percentage (%) 51.5% 47.5% 0.008%

186

APPENDIX B

WOMEN’S ROLE IN THE CHURCH

Participant #3

Proper Role of Women To serve the church through their love. God created us with a feminine genius, it is our job to use it. The Catholic Church Very true values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role JP2 model for holiness?

Participant #68

Proper Role of I believe the proper role of women in the church is as Women JPII wrote about the feminine genius. The women, even though not in the vocation of priesthood, are an integral part of the church through their many roles and bringing in gentleness and receptivity. The Catholic Very true Church values the voice of women Is a Pope a male St. John Paul II role model for holiness?

187

Participant #56

Proper Role of Pope John Paul II speaks highly of the Women feminine genius and it's importance in the Church, as does Pope Francis, who recently stated the Church itself is feminine, having both its Petrine dimension and its Marian dimension. It could not exist without this female dimension. That being said, I think the proper role of women in the church is to be faithful Catholics in their daily lives, but also to take up leadership positions where possible. The issue of women priests is probably the first thought many have when asked about the "role" of women in the church, as this is really one of the only defined "roles" someone can have as part of the official Church structure. However, I do not think women "need" to be priests. The priesthood was designed by God to be masculine, and that does not detract in any way from female presence within the life of the Church. One of the things I find most beautiful about the Catholic faith is that it doesn't really have "gender roles" as such, but rather a much more nuanced understanding of masculinity and femininity as a part of God's design. There is too much to write on that here, but it is enough to say that women are called to be as active participants and leaders in the Church as men are, albeit sometime in different forms. The Catholic Very true Church values the voice of women Is a Pope a male Saint John Paul II role model for holiness?

188

Participant #43

Proper Role of To strive to be in relationship with Christ. I Women think that there is a reason that men are priests and women can't be and that it should stay that way. The church knows what She is doing. She hasn't changed for thousands of years. The Catholic Very true Church values the voice of women Is a Pope a male St. JP II role model for holiness?

Participant #53

Proper Role of While I am in agreement with the decision to not Women have women become priests, I think women should be encouraged to be active members in their parishes. God calls both men and women to be His disciples, and women should be lectors, Eucharistic Ministers, etc. They should lead formation groups and lead prayer and reflection. They should discern religious vocation.

The Catholic True Church values the voice of women Is a Pope a male Pope Francis role model for holiness?

189

Participant #61

Proper Role of I believe women are called to be loved and to love Women others. They are to serve in anyway they can including but not limited to raising a family with Catholic values. They are to set an example for others and live out their faith by their words and actions every day of their lives. The Catholic Very true Church values the voice of women Is a Pope a male No popes role model for holiness?

Participant #6

Proper Role of To be a role model to future generations and Women uphold the dignity of each person. To utilize our gifts as women to build up the Body of Christ.

The Catholic Church True values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role No popes model for holiness?

190

Participant #20

Proper Role of Women Women are equal to men, but not the same. They can preach outside of Mass, and they can lead various ministries. The Catholic Church values the voice True of women Is a Pope a male role model for JP2 holiness?

Participant #28

Proper Role of Women I don't really see any problem with the role of women in the Church right now. I think that sometimes, people need to be more aware of those roles though, and the roles that God has given each of us.

The Catholic Church values the True voice of women

Is a Pope a male role model for St. John Paul II holiness?

191

Participant #30

Proper Role of Women The role of women in the church is as leaders. When women take action towards good people notice. Women have a distinct capacity to love that is seen in the way we serve others. Women are called to use this love to serve the church as both laity and in religious life. The Catholic Church values the Very true voice of women Is a Pope a male role model for Pope Francis holiness?

Participant #47

Proper Role of Women To strive to be in relationship with Christ. I think that there is a reason that men are priests and women can't be and that it should stay that way. The church knows what She is doing. She hasn't changed for thousands of years. The Catholic Church values the voice True of women Is a Pope a male role model for St. Pope John Paul II holiness?

192

Participant #49

Proper Role of Women Women should be active participants in all aspects of the Church. I do believe that women as a whole have a special charism demonstrating the deeply relational aspect of God Himself and that this is usually expressed in a particular interest in relationships (family, friends, the needy, etc) with others. However, women ought not to be restricted by expectations and do not have a "proper role" apart from the charity and holiness all humanity is called to. The Catholic Church values True the voice of women

Is a Pope a male role model No popes for holiness?

Participant #51

Proper Role of Women Women are leaders and role models in the Church. They have unique gifts to bring, especially the role of mother whether it be in married life with children, religious life in ministry or single life in devotion to service.

The Catholic Church values True the voice of women

Is a Pope a male role model No Popes for holiness?

193

Participant #52

Proper Role of Women Women, and all Christians for that matter, are to follow the example of Mary: "Be it done unto me according to thy word." But I think that women are particularly called to spiritual motherhood -- to use gifts like empathy and compassion to give birth to Christ in the world around us every day. The Catholic Church Very true values the voice of women

Is a Pope a male role model St. John Paul II for holiness?

Participant #62

Proper Role of Women Women are here to guide, nurture, provide counseling, and help spur change within ministry. We have so many gifts and talents that can be used in the Catholic church.

The Catholic Church values True the voice of women

Is a Pope a male role model St. JP2 for holiness?

194

Participant #66

Proper Role of Women To live out our Catholic faith similarly to other female role models in the Catholic Church, but also be ourselves, individualized role models, for other young women. Also, showing others strength. I'd like to think masculine strength as wearing God as a protective armor, but feminine strength as inner strength within themselves. The Catholic Church values the True voice of women Is a Pope a male role model for No pope holiness?

Participant #74

Proper Role of Women Well obviously mothers that raise holy children, sisters and nuns who spread the word of God, and women can evangelize to other women in way that is unique from men. Also women need to all the generic Christian things: feed the poor, instruct the ignorant, follow the teachings of Christ, etc. The Catholic Church values Very True the voice of women Is a Pope a male role model No popes for holiness?

195

Participant #2

Proper Role of Women Women should have more leadership roles, but I understand why the priest and above is reserved for men. The Catholic Church Somewhat true values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role Pope Francis model for holiness?

Participant #4

Proper Role of Women I don't think there's a proper role per say specifically for women. I think as followers of Christ, our role is the same, which is to be servants of God. The Catholic Church values Somewhat true the voice of women Is a Pope a male role model Pope Francis for holiness?

Participant #5

Proper Role of Women Skipped this question

The Catholic Church values the voice of women Somewhat true

Is a Pope a male role model for holiness? Skipped this question

196

Participant #7

Proper Role of Women Doing anything a man can do The Catholic Church values the voice of Somewhat untrue women Is a Pope a male role model for holiness? Pope Francis

Participant #9

Proper Role of Women to help educate other women and children about the church

The Catholic Church values the Somewhat true voice of women

Is a Pope a male role model for Skipped this question holiness?

Participant #10

Proper Role of Women Anything that they feel God is calling them to: a parishioner, choir member, deacon, or even a priest. The Catholic Church Somewhat true values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role No pope model for holiness?

197

Participant #11

Proper Role of Women women should do their best to live with grace and dignity pray to mary and mother Teresa for help

The Catholic Church Somewhat untrue values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role Pope Francis model for holiness?

Participant #12

Proper Role of Women to be active in all capacities

The Catholic Church values the voice of women Somewhat true

Is a Pope a male role model for holiness? The pope

Participant #13

Proper Role of Women I think it needs to be bigger, it's still a very masculine Church. I don't have a lot of female role models within the Church who are widely recognized. The Catholic Church values the Untrue voice of women

Is a Pope a male role model for Pope Francis holiness?

198

Participant #16

Proper Role of My undergrad college is founded by Women the Dominican Sisters and I just see them as such bad ass female leadership. They are strong willed and engaged in the community. The are active in social change. I think the proper role of women in the church is the same as a males position in a church. To preach through actions, engage the community, and be change agents. The Catholic Church Somewhat untrue values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role Pope model for holiness?

Participant #18

Proper Role of Women Skipped Question

The Catholic Church values the voice of Somewhat true women Is a Pope a male role model for St. John Paul II holiness?

Participant #19

Proper Role of Women Leader, active participant, one who stands for justice and social reform

The Catholic Church values Somewhat untrue the voice of women Is a Pope a male role model Pope Francis for holiness?

199

Participant #21

Proper Role of Women Work for justice, challenge The Catholic Church values the voice of Somewhat untrue women Is a Pope a male role model for holiness? Pope Francis

Participant #22

Proper Role of Women I'm not really sure. They should be loving, caring, and do what they need to do. The Catholic Church Somewhat true values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role Skipped Question model for holiness?

Participant # 18

Proper Role I think we have a long way to go when it comes to of Women women's role in the church. I think our goal needs to be to ordain women as priests and deacons. As a sacristan I consider myself a leader in the church, unfortunately there are still some church's that would not allow me to be a sacristan or even an altar server and this must change! The Catholic Somewhat untrue Church values the voice of women Is a Pope a No popes male role model for holiness?

200

Participant #25

Proper Role of Serving any and all capacities, I'm even for female Women priests if that happens. Women and men are equals in the Church. The Catholic Somewhat untrue Church values the voice of women Is a Pope a male St. Pope John Paul II AND Pope Francis role model for holiness?

Participant #26

Proper Role of Women I believe women make up over half of the Church and therefore are the heart of the faith. They should be given equal status to their limitless worth!! The Catholic Church Untrue values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role The Pope model for holiness?

201

Participant #34

Proper Role of If a woman feels called to be a member of the church, I Women think all roles should be open to her, including the option for priesthood. The Catholic Somewhat untrue Church values the voice of women

Is a Pope a male Pope Francis role model for holiness?

Participant #35

Proper Role of Traditionally, women haven't had much of a role in Women the church. I believe that this is wrong because although it is never explicitly stated, women's roles throughout history are equally as important if not more than mens. This needs to be recognized. The Catholic Church Untrue values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role No popes model for holiness?

Participant #37

Proper Role of Women To be leaders in faith that are not ordained for their children and others in the community

The Catholic Church · Somewhat true values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role No popes model for holiness?

202

Participant #39

Proper Role of Women I would like to see women involved as much as possible. Though I recognize it is not currently possible, I would love to work as deacon someday.

The Catholic Church · Somewhat true values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role No popes model for holiness?

Participant #42

Proper Role of I believe that women should have every right and Women responsibility in the Church that men do. However, I think this is a change that needs to be made by the official church and its dangerous when sections of women break off and form their own female churches. Its very essential that women's voices are recognized in the church. The Catholic Somewhat true Church values the voice of women Is a Pope a male JPII AND Pope Francis role model for holiness?

203

Participant #54

Proper Role of Women Women I feel like are the ones who keep the faith in their family, between their marriage and instill the church's teaching into their children. The Catholic Church values the voice Somewhat true of women

Is a Pope a male role model for No popes holiness?

Participant #55

Proper Role of Women Don’t know

The Catholic Church values the voice Somewhat true of women

Is a Pope a male role model for No popes holiness?

Participant #57

Proper Role of Women I think that they should be able to participate in the celebration of mass. For instance serving as EMHC's, lectors, etc. The Catholic Church values the voice Somewhat true of women

Is a Pope a male role model for No popes holiness?

204

Participant #63

Proper Role of Women To embody the life of Christ and be his disciples here on earth

The Catholic Church values Somewhat true the voice of women

Is a Pope a male role model No popes for holiness?

Participant #70

Proper Role of to seek Christ in everything, to be an example Women for other women, to reach out to other women, to be equally as supportive and loving to men, to lead and love The Catholic Somewhat true Church values the voice of women

Is a Pope a male Pope Francis role model for holiness?

Participant #79

Proper Role of Women I think that women should be offered a full, complex, whole role in the Church. The Catholic Church Somewhat true values the voice of women Is a Pope a male role No popes model for holiness?

205

Participant #82

Proper Role of Women should have opportunities equal to that Women of men in the Church. If women cannot be priests then there needs to be less clericalism in the Church because the role of priest is servant anyway. The hierarchy of the Church puts women at the very bottom so women have to scream to be heard at the top. There needs to be more women involved in conversations in the Church and more women in leadership roles to truly create a more inclusive community within our Church. The Catholic Somewhat true Church values the voice of women

Is a Pope a male No popes role model for holiness?

Participant #67

Proper Role of To be supporters. Women are not meant to be Women priests, deacons, or hold offices like that. They are however able to hold high pastoral offices which support the roles of men. The Catholic Very true Church values the voice of women

Is a Pope a male Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI AND Pope Francis role model for holiness?

206

Participant #72

Proper Role of I think the role of women in the Church is Women to be obedient to the Church's teachings, to live the Gospel in all things, and to share the love of Christ with everyone. The proper role of women is wherever she can help, just as it is for men. The Catholic Church True values the voice of women

Is a Pope a male role St. John Paul II model for holiness?

Participant #31

Proper Role of Women To serve and live like Mary

The Catholic Church values the voice of True women

Is a Pope a male role model for holiness? St. John Paul II

207

Participant #60

Proper Role of Women I think the proper role is to be a servant for others. We look to Mary as the role model.

The Catholic Church values the True voice of women

Is a Pope a male role model for Pope Francis holiness?

208