| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Renee" |
| Date: |
31 Jul 2004 08:40:57 PM |
| Object: |
A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
The Vatican yesterday depicted what it claimed were women's characteristic
traits: 'Listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and waiting.'
In its most important statement on the role of women in almost a decade, the
Roman Catholic Church said these virtues of the Virgin Mary were ones that
women displayed 'with particular intensity and naturalness'.
The 37-page statement, published in full yesterday, was written by the
Pope's top theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a statement of official
doctrine, it would have been read, and very likely amended, by the Pope
himself before publication.
The document, which will prompt a fierce debate about the attributes of
women, added: 'Although a certain type of feminist rhetoric makes demands
"for ourselves", women preserve the deep intuition of the goodness in their
lives of those actions that elicit life, and contribute to the growth and
protection [of others]. This intuition is linked to women's physical
capacity to give life. Whether lived out or remaining potential, this
capacity is a reality that structures the female personality in a profound
way.'
In his 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of
Men and Women in the Church and in the World', Ratzinger takes aim at
'currents of thought that are often at variance with the authentic
advancement of women'. Chief among these is a tendency to 'emphasise
strongly, conditions of subordination in order to give rise to antagonism'.
It implied that 'women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves the
adversaries of men'. Such confrontational thinking was 'leading to harmful
confusion ... which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the
structure of the family'.
Gender war also encouraged a perilous blurring of the distinctions. 'To
avoid the domination of one sex or the other, their differences tend to be
denied, viewed as mere effects of historical and cultural conditioning.'
Such a view ignored qualities that arose from a woman's unique ability to
give birth. This 'allows her to acquire maturity very quickly, and gives a
sense of the seriousness of life and of its responsibilities. A sense and a
respect for what is concrete develop in her, opposed to abstractions which
are so often fatal for the existence of individuals and society,' says the
first high-level pronouncement on gender issues since the Pope's 1995
'Letter to Women'.
Ratzinger uses the document to argue that, because they have something
unique to contribute, 'women should be present in the world of work and in
the organisation of society'.
The comments drew a mixed reaction from feminists and women writers. Erin
Pizzey, founder of the international women's refuge movement, said: 'I don't
think the Catholic Church, whose priests and bishops cannot marry, is in a
position to make such statements. It is one of the most emotionally
illiterate organisations I know, and it needs to put its own house in order
first.'
But Catherine Pepinster, editor of Catholic paper The Tablet, said the
comments would resonate with many women. 'For feminists to rubbish it is a
knee-jerk response. It does make a distinction between the sexes, but it
also points out that women have a big role to play in society.'
Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said that the statement seemed to her a long-overdue
assessment of women's roles.
'For those of us involved in the women's movement of the Seventies, our aim
was to give us equal opportunities. It wasn't that we would become men.
Instead of civilising the world, what we have done is create a ladette
culture. It's true we have certain characteristics that we can bring to the
world that are valuable, and shouldn't be submerged.'
However, combining work and family has 'characteristics different from those
in the case of men', says the document, which argues for a 'just valuing of
the work of women within the family'. Ratzinger does not say how this is to
be done, but it is clear he sees it as a way of encouraging women to spend
as much time as possible in the home.
.
|
|
| User: "Lisbeth Andersson" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 01:26:59 PM |
|
|
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<JSXOc.60738$8_6.33852@attbi_s04>...
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
The Vatican yesterday depicted what it claimed were women's characteristic
traits: 'Listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and waiting.'
In its most important statement on the role of women in almost a decade, the
Roman Catholic Church said these virtues of the Virgin Mary were ones that
women displayed 'with particular intensity and naturalness'.
<mega-snip>
Have you noticed that the women the pope makes into saints do not have all
those "characteristic traits", especially they are not very good at waiting,
they see something they want and they go after it. Frequently they want their
own religious order (Sta Birgitta, mother Theresa) but saint Joan of Arc
wanted something rather different.
Lisbeth.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eunometic" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 08:56:26 PM |
|
|
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<JSXOc.60738$8_6.33852@attbi_s04>...
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
Funny. What the Vatican said and what you (and the observer)
screatched out about what they supposedly said seem to have nothing in
common.
That discredits you and the observer as well.
I'd read the vaticans statement myself.
The Vatican yesterday depicted what it claimed were women's characteristic
traits: 'Listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and waiting.'
In its most important statement on the role of women in almost a decade, the
Roman Catholic Church said these virtues of the Virgin Mary were ones that
women displayed 'with particular intensity and naturalness'.
The 37-page statement, published in full yesterday, was written by the
Pope's top theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a statement of official
doctrine, it would have been read, and very likely amended, by the Pope
himself before publication.
The document, which will prompt a fierce debate about the attributes of
women, added: 'Although a certain type of feminist rhetoric makes demands
"for ourselves", women preserve the deep intuition of the goodness in their
lives of those actions that elicit life, and contribute to the growth and
protection [of others]. This intuition is linked to women's physical
capacity to give life. Whether lived out or remaining potential, this
capacity is a reality that structures the female personality in a profound
way.'
In his 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of
Men and Women in the Church and in the World', Ratzinger takes aim at
'currents of thought that are often at variance with the authentic
advancement of women'. Chief among these is a tendency to 'emphasise
strongly, conditions of subordination in order to give rise to antagonism'.
It implied that 'women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves the
adversaries of men'. Such confrontational thinking was 'leading to harmful
confusion ... which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the
structure of the family'.
Gender war also encouraged a perilous blurring of the distinctions. 'To
avoid the domination of one sex or the other, their differences tend to be
denied, viewed as mere effects of historical and cultural conditioning.'
Such a view ignored qualities that arose from a woman's unique ability to
give birth. This 'allows her to acquire maturity very quickly, and gives a
sense of the seriousness of life and of its responsibilities. A sense and a
respect for what is concrete develop in her, opposed to abstractions which
are so often fatal for the existence of individuals and society,' says the
first high-level pronouncement on gender issues since the Pope's 1995
'Letter to Women'.
Ratzinger uses the document to argue that, because they have something
unique to contribute, 'women should be present in the world of work and in
the organisation of society'.
The comments drew a mixed reaction from feminists and women writers. Erin
Pizzey, founder of the international women's refuge movement, said: 'I don't
think the Catholic Church, whose priests and bishops cannot marry, is in a
position to make such statements. It is one of the most emotionally
illiterate organisations I know, and it needs to put its own house in order
first.'
But Catherine Pepinster, editor of Catholic paper The Tablet, said the
comments would resonate with many women. 'For feminists to rubbish it is a
knee-jerk response. It does make a distinction between the sexes, but it
also points out that women have a big role to play in society.'
Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said that the statement seemed to her a long-overdue
assessment of women's roles.
'For those of us involved in the women's movement of the Seventies, our aim
was to give us equal opportunities. It wasn't that we would become men.
Instead of civilising the world, what we have done is create a ladette
culture. It's true we have certain characteristics that we can bring to the
world that are valuable, and shouldn't be submerged.'
However, combining work and family has 'characteristics different from those
in the case of men', says the document, which argues for a 'just valuing of
the work of women within the family'. Ratzinger does not say how this is to
be done, but it is clear he sees it as a way of encouraging women to spend
as much time as possible in the home.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Renee" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 09:40:59 PM |
|
|
"Eunometic" <eunometic@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:e935396a.0408011756.325a0855@posting.google.com...
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<JSXOc.60738$8_6.33852@attbi_s04>...
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
Funny. What the Vatican said and what you (and the observer)
screatched out about what they supposedly said seem to have nothing in
common.
I just posted what "The Observer" printed.
But it does say:
The 37-page statement, published in full yesterday, was written by the
Pope's top theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a statement of
official
doctrine, it would have been read, and very likely amended, by the Pope
himself before publication.
If you have a problem with that then take it up with the Pope.
Renee
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jani" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
02 Aug 2004 03:31:20 AM |
|
|
No, he has a problem with the Observer not knowing the difference between
official policy and a discussion document. I'd have a problem with that too.
Maybe they'll be quoting memos from Tony Blair's desk as statute law, next.
Jani
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%QhPc.197026$%_6.37659@attbi_s01...
"Eunometic" <eunometic@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:e935396a.0408011756.325a0855@posting.google.com...
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<JSXOc.60738$8_6.33852@attbi_s04>...
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
Funny. What the Vatican said and what you (and the observer)
screatched out about what they supposedly said seem to have nothing in
common.
I just posted what "The Observer" printed.
But it does say:
The 37-page statement, published in full yesterday, was written by the
Pope's top theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a statement of
official
doctrine, it would have been read, and very likely amended, by the Pope
himself before publication.
If you have a problem with that then take it up with the Pope.
Renee
.
|
|
|
| User: "Renee" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
02 Aug 2004 11:47:53 AM |
|
|
I guess that you are saying that the "Observer" is wrong in reporting that
the policy is a statement of official doctrine.
Where can I find the definition that it is only a discussion document?
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n6c8nFt0dsbU1@uni-berlin.de...
No, he has a problem with the Observer not knowing the difference between
official policy and a discussion document. I'd have a problem with that
too.
Maybe they'll be quoting memos from Tony Blair's desk as statute law,
next.
Jani
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jani" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
02 Aug 2004 01:42:17 PM |
|
|
If you look at the document itself -
"After a brief presentation and critical evaluation of some current
conceptions of human nature, this document will offer reflections - inspired
by the doctrinal elements of the biblical vision of the human person that
are indispensable for safeguarding his or her identity - on some of the
essentials of a correct understanding of active collaboration, in
recognition of the difference between men and women in the Church and in the
world. These reflections are meant as a starting point for further
examination in the Church, as well as an impetus for dialogue with all men
and women of good will, in a sincere search for the truth and in a common
commitment to the development of ever more authentic relationships."
"starting point for further examination .... impetus for dialogue". *Not*
official policy. There was a similar misconception about RCC policy on
interfaith, only the other week, because a discussion document had been
cited as doctrine.
Jani
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ZeuPc.216992$JR4.195025@attbi_s54...
I guess that you are saying that the "Observer" is wrong in reporting that
the policy is a statement of official doctrine.
Where can I find the definition that it is only a discussion document?
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n6c8nFt0dsbU1@uni-berlin.de...
No, he has a problem with the Observer not knowing the difference
between
official policy and a discussion document. I'd have a problem with that
too.
Maybe they'll be quoting memos from Tony Blair's desk as statute law,
next.
Jani
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Qolon" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 09:17:35 PM |
|
|
It seems from my reading of articipation on 'soc.german.culture' newsgroup
and your defence of Mel Gibson's film 'The Passion' which attempts to give
tangibility to Roman Catholic Mysticism: "He misrepresents much and is
ignorant of much. This is a change from some of the the more histrionic,
ethnocentric and ethnophobic Jews doing the same in regards to 'The
Passion'" [Eunometic (eunometic@yahoo.com.au ) 2004-04-22 18:49:40 PST]
That you have a particular dogmatic bias to exclude your own intangible and
insubstantial claim to Christianity from being responsible for millennia of
genocide and censorship as treason against autonomy.
- dolf
"Eunometic" <eunometic@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:e935396a.0408011756.325a0855@posting.google.com...
Funny. What the Vatican said and what you (and the observer)
screatched out about what they supposedly said seem to have nothing in
common.
That discredits you and the observer as well.
I'd read the vaticans statement myself.
QOLON NOTE:
The consideration that religious belief, thought and conscience as an
autonomous {autos / one's true self, the soul + nomos / Torah} values
expression consistently understood by Seventh-day Adventists as Christian
community of faith, being established upon the transcendent and
chronological principle of Nature known as the 7th day Sabbath of the
Decalogue, are somehow antagonistic to the natural, regulative and
metempirical principles of good governance as 'certain powers, functions,
and authorities' declared to be vested within 'the office of Governor
General and Commander in chief over Our said Commonwealth of Australia', may
be considered absurd. Historically within Australia, there was not
opposition to the inclusion of a specific religious clause as expression of
liberty that was adopted as Section 116 of the Australian Constitution of
1901 as the foundational document conveying the Principles of Natural and
Regulative Philosophy articulated by the Letters Patent to said Australian
Constitution of 1901:
"Both the Catholic Cardinal Moran and the Anglican Archbishop, Saumarez
Smith, were in favor of Section 116 of the Constitution, which prevented
Sabbatarian {ie. Saturday} legislation, and ensured that the
governor-general could not proclaim days of humiliation and thanksgiving."
(#2)
As a mechanism for [#51, #66, #77, #37 - Non-Deeming Action/ Administration
of Government/ #73, #9], it draws its impetus from the principles of
individual accountability expressed by 'obedience, aiding and assisting to
the Governor General' and the notion of 'Administration of Government'
conveyed by Paragraph 8 of the Letters Patent to the Australian
Constitution. Being that it is an autonomous values and ethical based
architecture for hosting belief systems--which underpins the regulative and
natural philosophy as the letter patent to our Australian Constitution of
1901.
This retort as 'a priori' based teleological argument transcends and negates
any rational and un-substantiated claim to religious and corporate belief,
which the Christian Church can institutionally make, having traditionally
obtained its rules of Biblical interpretation from hermetic mysticism as
philosophy or theology of the magians. [Acts 19:19:28] An aberration of
reality derived from symbolic taxonomical associations as a system of
natural, regulative and encyclical governance which evolved as the result of
the impress of Egyptian, Chaldean, Zoroastrian, Roman and Greek theological
intellectualizations with their relationship to a geo-metric and partial
cosmology comprised of the seven visible planetary orbs as astrological
rather than chronological associations.
This mechanism of autonomous and democratic governance also stands in
contrast to the mythical Ariosophy promulgated by the German 3rd Reich,
which recognized the doctrine of cosmic hierarchy, was not at all unlike the
ecclesiastical (Chi-Rho) hierarchy associated with Egyptian/Chaldean
mystical and symbolic astrology:
#1 - Seraphim (male - Aleph),
#2 - Cherubim (female - Final Mem, Shin),
#3 - Thrones,
#4 - Dominions,
#5 - Virtues,
#6 - Powers,
#7 - Principalities,
#8 - Arch-angels,
#9 - Angels.
Thomas Aquinas (1224-1275 CE) quoted the angelic hierarchy publicized by the
non-Christian and neo-Platonist Dionysius some 1,700 times, which simply
would not have happened if only the great Scholastic had known that the
author had written five centuries after the Hebrew Torah Scholar, Greek
Philosopher and Christian Apostle Paul had converted the as-it-were original
Dionysius the Areopagite. It was not unto 1457 CE, almost two centuries
after the death of Aquinas, that the scholar Lorenzo Valla exposed the
forgery, but by then the false Areopagite had shaped the Catholic hierarchy
of the angels with rare permanence." [© 1996 Harold Bloom, Omens of the
Millennium, p 58-59]
Which Ariosophy adopted from theosophy, as the true central element of these
ideologies: it is transferred upon nature and man, the latter being the
basis of the specific Ariosophical racialism. Let us remember that the
Ariosophs present us an ideal society - in their opinion - which is at least
a caste system, graded according to racist criteria; a theocracy they call a
democracy. Since all racialism is an ideology of superiority and
inferiority, it easily builds a network with forms of racism derived from
other sources. The political dimension cannot be overlooked: authoritarian
and totalitarian systems are propagated on the basis of this cosmic
hierarchy. (#3)
Liebenfels (1874-1954) was a former Roman Catholic Cistercian monk from 1893
and who after adopting radical dogmas, was subsequently dismissed from the
order in 1899 due to 'carnal love', and later becoming one of Ariosophy's
principle architects. It was Liebenfels with whom Hitler met in 1909 and it
is suggested was the originator of many of his ideas, on the basis that he
subscribed to the right-wing magazine Ostara, in which Liebenfels published
anti-Semitic and racialist theories (cf: Wilfred Daim, Viennese
psychologist). The various titles of his works give credibility to a claim
that mysticism, dynastic astrology, apocalyptic and biblical justification
was the substantiation for his mythical racial claims:
a. Katholizismus wider Jesuitismus ('Catholicism versus Jesuitism'),
Frankfurt, 1903
b. Zur Theologie der gotischen Bibel ('Regarding the Theology of the Gothic
Bible') in Vjschr. fr Bibelkunde 1, 1903 /1904
c. Grundriss der ariosophischen Geheimlehre ('Outline of the Ariosophic
Secret Teachings'), Oestrich, 1925
d. Bibliomystikon oder die Geheimbibel der Eingeweihten ('Biblical Mysticism
or the Secret Bible of the Initiated'), 10 volumes, Pforzheim and elsewhere,
1929 -1934
e. Praktisch-empirisches Handbuch der ariosophischen Astrologie
('Practical-Empirical Handbook of Ariosophical Astrology'), Düsseldorf,
1926 -1934
One particular title which appears noteworthy in formulating the 3rd Reich's
foundational doctrines on Ariosophic racialism and a claim to Divine
imperative, was the book, 'Theozoologie oder die Kunde von den
Sodoms-fflingen und dem Gotter-Elektron', Vienna (1905). As a philosophical
work on evolutionary human development which encompasses human sexuality and
dynastic zodiacal astrology, 'Theozoologie, or the account of the apes of
Sodom {their secret; their cement} and the divine election'-claimed the
prerogative in being an introduction into the earliest and the most modern
world philosophy and a justification for the orders of princes and the
aristocracy. (#4) And advocated sterilization of the sick and the 'lower
races' as well as forced labor for 'castrated chandals' (ie. a caste term
meaning untouchables) as 'untermenschen', and glorified the 'aryan race' as
'Gottmenschen' ('god men'). (#5)
Hitler saw in Protestantism, the seat and opportunity for a neo-pagan
Christian renaissance. Whilst assisted ably by the adoption of the
Jewish/Greek Kabbalah, it nevertheless remained the purveyor and defender of
all that was German: 'Protestantism will always stand up for the advancement
of all Germanism as such, as long as matters of inner purity or national
depending ('Nationale Vertiefung') as well as German freedom are involved,
since all these things have a firm foundation in its own being; but it
combats with the greatest hostility any attempt to rescue the nation from
the embrace of its most mortal enemy, since its attitude towards the Jews
just happens to be more or less dogmatically established. Yet here we are
facing the question without whose solution all other attempts as a German
reawakening or resurrection are and remain absolutely senseless and
impossible.'" (#6)
Although commenting specifically on the American Fundamentalist phenomena
and their relationship to Theology, Paul Tillich gives cause for
understanding the lack of progress amongst Christians to foster human rights
as religious rights for those attributed by 'gender and sexuality identity'
as the basis for an American heresy: The combination of the Right-Calvinists
(eg. Biblicism) and the charismatic Calvinist Left (eg. Pentecostals), that
results in the evangelical movement known as 'borne again Christians' or
'Jews for Jesus', with charismatic leader personalities, who are neither
controlled by theology nor by the community of adherents. This heresy
remains more consistent to the system of fascism than the German organized
Protestantism, that could be incorporated by Hitler as 'Deutsche Christen'
due to it's blindness against the state:
'...afraid of missing the eternal truth, they identify it with some previous
theological work, with traditional conceptions and solutions, and try to
impose these on a new, different situation. They confuse eternal truth with
a temporal expression of this truth. This is evident in European theological
orthodoxy, which in America is known as fundamentalism.
When fundamentalism is combined with an anti-theological bias, as it is, for
instance, in its biblicistic-evangelical form, the theological truth of
yesterday is defended as an unchangeable message against the theological
truth of today and tomorrow. Fundamentalism fails to make contact with the
present situation, not because it speaks from beyond every situation, but
because it speaks from the situation of the past. It elevates something
finite and transitory [such as personality], to infinite and eternal
validity. In this respect fundamentalism has demonic traits. It destroys the
humble honesty of the search for truth, it splits the conscience of its
thoughtful adherents, and it makes them fanatical because they are forced to
suppress elements of truth of which they are dimly aware.' (#7)
That the Roman languages and religious nomenclature as the Great Chain of
Being, body to mind to soul to spirit or cosmic hierarchy (#8), had
traditionally, in accordance with a Chaldean or Pythagorean 'Onomantick kind
of Arithmentick as natural divination conceptions', named the days of the
week after the visible planet dominating the first hour of each day and
symbolically assigned them to the notion of seven double letters, in
accordance with the Kabbalistic geometric paradigm and philosophical
consideration of Number (Sefirot), demonstrates that the 10 Commandments as
Decalogue, may in addition to their superficial rendering as universal
societal ethical constructs, be viewed as a micro/macro Chronological
conception.
Theodore de Bry in 1582 CE, as his supposed depiction of the astronomer and
scientist Tycho Brahe's (1546-1601 CE) Perpetual Calendar of Natural Magic,
represents each in a tabular form given as the 'Calendarium Naturale Magicum
Perpetuum Profunissimam Rerum Secretissimarum Contemplationem Complectens of
Tycho' as follows:
#3 / Saturday (sum = 15) - Saturn {Beth}
#4 / Sunday (sum = 34) - Jupiter {Gimel}
#5 / Monday (sum = 65) - Mars {Daleth}
#6 / Tuesday (sum = 111) - Sun {Kaf}
#7 / Wednesday (sum = 175) - Venus {Pe}
#8 / Thursday (sum = 260) - Mercury {Resh}
#9 / Friday (sum = 369) - Lunar {Tau}
To further explore this point of astrological and symbolic associations
being the basis for much of Christian theology, we regard as significant, th
e work published in January 1615 CE by the Carmelite friar Paolo Antonio
Foscarini. He argues in his 'Letter concerning the Opinion of the
Pythagoreans and Copernicus about the Mobility of the Earth and Stability of
the Sun, and about the New Pythagorean System of the World', that the
heliocentric model of the solar system as cosmology was not incompatible
with the Bible. Foscarini, who in 1615 CE was also the author of a 'Treatise
on Natural Cosmological Divination', did not introduce any new principles of
biblical interpretation in his analysis; rather, he sets out and applies the
Roman Catholic Church's traditional rules of Biblical interpretation, which
he identifies as symbolic:
"When Holy Scripture attributes something to God or to any other creature
which would otherwise be improper and incommensurate, then it should be
interpreted and explained in one or more of the following ways. It is said:
1) To pertain metaphorically and proportionately, or by similitude.
2) According to our mode of consideration, apprehension, understanding,
knowing, etc.
3) According to vulgar opinion and the common way of speaking." (#9)
FOOTNOTES
#2 Ian Breward © 2001, A History of the Churches in Australia, Oxford
University Press, ISBN 0-19-826356-2, p 220
#3 © 1997 Hans Schumacher, Annotations on the Issue of Myth
#4 D. Cameron Watt, Stevenson Professor of International History,
University of London, Introduction to Mein (My) Kampf (Struggle) by Adolf
Hitler, p xxxvi
#5 The Wikipedia Free Encyclopedia, 22 April 2004 edition.
#6 © 1943 Adolph Hitler, (Mein) My (Kampf) Struggle, Houghton Mifflin &
Co, p 103
#7 © 1951 Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology - Reason & Revelation, Being
and God, University of Chicago, p 3
#8 Referenced by Neo-Platonist pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (c. 533
CE); Pope Gregory the Great (540-604 CE) in Homilies 34 (c. 600 CE); Thomas
Aquinas (1224-1275 CE); Cornelius Agrippa (1486-1535 CE) in Philosophy of
Natural Magic.
#9 © 1999 Alister E. McGrath, Science & Religion - An Introduction, p
12-13
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brenda G. Kent" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
31 Jul 2004 11:23:28 PM |
|
|
Isn't that a dog's place?
Bren
--
********************************************************
"Knowledge without wisdom is like stacking books
on the back of an *****"
Old Japanese saying.
Come visit my webpage at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/~wt211
*********************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 09:44:22 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 21:23:28 -0700, Brenda G. Kent wrote:
Isn't that a dog's place?
Umm....no. According to the superstition industry
a dog's place is one, two, or three steps above.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jani" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 10:27:59 AM |
|
|
It's not a "statement of official doctrine". It's a discussion document,
approved for publication as a *letter to the Bishops*, not a policy
statement.
I'm rather disappointed in the Observer's inaccuracy, there.
Jani
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:JSXOc.60738$8_6.33852@attbi_s04...
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
The Vatican yesterday depicted what it claimed were women's characteristic
traits: 'Listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and
waiting.'
In its most important statement on the role of women in almost a decade,
the
Roman Catholic Church said these virtues of the Virgin Mary were ones that
women displayed 'with particular intensity and naturalness'.
The 37-page statement, published in full yesterday, was written by the
Pope's top theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a statement of
official
doctrine, it would have been read, and very likely amended, by the Pope
himself before publication.
The document, which will prompt a fierce debate about the attributes of
women, added: 'Although a certain type of feminist rhetoric makes demands
"for ourselves", women preserve the deep intuition of the goodness in
their
lives of those actions that elicit life, and contribute to the growth and
protection [of others]. This intuition is linked to women's physical
capacity to give life. Whether lived out or remaining potential, this
capacity is a reality that structures the female personality in a profound
way.'
In his 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration
of
Men and Women in the Church and in the World', Ratzinger takes aim at
'currents of thought that are often at variance with the authentic
advancement of women'. Chief among these is a tendency to 'emphasise
strongly, conditions of subordination in order to give rise to
antagonism'.
It implied that 'women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves
the
adversaries of men'. Such confrontational thinking was 'leading to harmful
confusion ... which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the
structure of the family'.
Gender war also encouraged a perilous blurring of the distinctions. 'To
avoid the domination of one sex or the other, their differences tend to be
denied, viewed as mere effects of historical and cultural conditioning.'
Such a view ignored qualities that arose from a woman's unique ability to
give birth. This 'allows her to acquire maturity very quickly, and gives a
sense of the seriousness of life and of its responsibilities. A sense and
a
respect for what is concrete develop in her, opposed to abstractions which
are so often fatal for the existence of individuals and society,' says the
first high-level pronouncement on gender issues since the Pope's 1995
'Letter to Women'.
Ratzinger uses the document to argue that, because they have something
unique to contribute, 'women should be present in the world of work and in
the organisation of society'.
The comments drew a mixed reaction from feminists and women writers. Erin
Pizzey, founder of the international women's refuge movement, said: 'I
don't
think the Catholic Church, whose priests and bishops cannot marry, is in a
position to make such statements. It is one of the most emotionally
illiterate organisations I know, and it needs to put its own house in
order
first.'
But Catherine Pepinster, editor of Catholic paper The Tablet, said the
comments would resonate with many women. 'For feminists to rubbish it is a
knee-jerk response. It does make a distinction between the sexes, but it
also points out that women have a big role to play in society.'
Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said that the statement seemed to her a
long-overdue
assessment of women's roles.
'For those of us involved in the women's movement of the Seventies, our
aim
was to give us equal opportunities. It wasn't that we would become men.
Instead of civilising the world, what we have done is create a ladette
culture. It's true we have certain characteristics that we can bring to
the
world that are valuable, and shouldn't be submerged.'
However, combining work and family has 'characteristics different from
those
in the case of men', says the document, which argues for a 'just valuing
of
the work of women within the family'. Ratzinger does not say how this is
to
be done, but it is clear he sees it as a way of encouraging women to spend
as much time as possible in the home.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cindy" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 02:16:48 PM |
|
|
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n4g9uFrs8tsU2@uni-berlin.de...
It's not a "statement of official doctrine". It's a discussion document,
approved for publication as a *letter to the Bishops*, not a policy
statement.
I'm rather disappointed in the Observer's inaccuracy, there.
Jani
The Pope blessed it!
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:JSXOc.60738$8_6.33852@attbi_s04...
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
The Vatican yesterday depicted what it claimed were women's
characteristic
traits: 'Listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and
waiting.'
In its most important statement on the role of women in almost a decade,
the
Roman Catholic Church said these virtues of the Virgin Mary were ones
that
women displayed 'with particular intensity and naturalness'.
The 37-page statement, published in full yesterday, was written by the
Pope's top theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a statement of
official
doctrine, it would have been read, and very likely amended, by the Pope
himself before publication.
The document, which will prompt a fierce debate about the attributes of
women, added: 'Although a certain type of feminist rhetoric makes demands
"for ourselves", women preserve the deep intuition of the goodness in
their
lives of those actions that elicit life, and contribute to the growth and
protection [of others]. This intuition is linked to women's physical
capacity to give life. Whether lived out or remaining potential, this
capacity is a reality that structures the female personality in a
profound
way.'
In his 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration
of
Men and Women in the Church and in the World', Ratzinger takes aim at
'currents of thought that are often at variance with the authentic
advancement of women'. Chief among these is a tendency to 'emphasise
strongly, conditions of subordination in order to give rise to
antagonism'.
It implied that 'women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves
the
adversaries of men'. Such confrontational thinking was 'leading to
harmful
confusion ... which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the
structure of the family'.
Gender war also encouraged a perilous blurring of the distinctions. 'To
avoid the domination of one sex or the other, their differences tend to
be
denied, viewed as mere effects of historical and cultural conditioning.'
Such a view ignored qualities that arose from a woman's unique ability to
give birth. This 'allows her to acquire maturity very quickly, and gives
a
sense of the seriousness of life and of its responsibilities. A sense and
a
respect for what is concrete develop in her, opposed to abstractions
which
are so often fatal for the existence of individuals and society,' says
the
first high-level pronouncement on gender issues since the Pope's 1995
'Letter to Women'.
Ratzinger uses the document to argue that, because they have something
unique to contribute, 'women should be present in the world of work and
in
the organisation of society'.
The comments drew a mixed reaction from feminists and women writers. Erin
Pizzey, founder of the international women's refuge movement, said: 'I
don't
think the Catholic Church, whose priests and bishops cannot marry, is in
a
position to make such statements. It is one of the most emotionally
illiterate organisations I know, and it needs to put its own house in
order
first.'
But Catherine Pepinster, editor of Catholic paper The Tablet, said the
comments would resonate with many women. 'For feminists to rubbish it is
a
knee-jerk response. It does make a distinction between the sexes, but it
also points out that women have a big role to play in society.'
Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said that the statement seemed to her a
long-overdue
assessment of women's roles.
'For those of us involved in the women's movement of the Seventies, our
aim
was to give us equal opportunities. It wasn't that we would become men.
Instead of civilising the world, what we have done is create a ladette
culture. It's true we have certain characteristics that we can bring to
the
world that are valuable, and shouldn't be submerged.'
However, combining work and family has 'characteristics different from
those
in the case of men', says the document, which argues for a 'just valuing
of
the work of women within the family'. Ratzinger does not say how this is
to
be done, but it is clear he sees it as a way of encouraging women to
spend
as much time as possible in the home.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jani" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 03:27:39 PM |
|
|
"Cindy" <cindy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AkbPc.193182$a24.35747@attbi_s03...
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n4g9uFrs8tsU2@uni-berlin.de...
It's not a "statement of official doctrine". It's a discussion document,
approved for publication as a *letter to the Bishops*, not a policy
statement.
I'm rather disappointed in the Observer's inaccuracy, there.
Jani
The Pope blessed it!
The Pope frequently blesses small children presented to him, but they are
not transformed into statements of official doctrine as a result; they
remain small children :)
Jani
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:JSXOc.60738$8_6.33852@attbi_s04...
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
The Vatican yesterday depicted what it claimed were women's
characteristic
traits: 'Listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and
waiting.'
In its most important statement on the role of women in almost a
decade,
the
Roman Catholic Church said these virtues of the Virgin Mary were ones
that
women displayed 'with particular intensity and naturalness'.
The 37-page statement, published in full yesterday, was written by the
Pope's top theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a statement of
official
doctrine, it would have been read, and very likely amended, by the Pope
himself before publication.
The document, which will prompt a fierce debate about the attributes of
women, added: 'Although a certain type of feminist rhetoric makes
demands
"for ourselves", women preserve the deep intuition of the goodness in
their
lives of those actions that elicit life, and contribute to the growth
and
protection [of others]. This intuition is linked to women's physical
capacity to give life. Whether lived out or remaining potential, this
capacity is a reality that structures the female personality in a
profound
way.'
In his 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the
Collaboration
of
Men and Women in the Church and in the World', Ratzinger takes aim at
'currents of thought that are often at variance with the authentic
advancement of women'. Chief among these is a tendency to 'emphasise
strongly, conditions of subordination in order to give rise to
antagonism'.
It implied that 'women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves
the
adversaries of men'. Such confrontational thinking was 'leading to
harmful
confusion ... which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the
structure of the family'.
Gender war also encouraged a perilous blurring of the distinctions. 'To
avoid the domination of one sex or the other, their differences tend to
be
denied, viewed as mere effects of historical and cultural
conditioning.'
Such a view ignored qualities that arose from a woman's unique ability
to
give birth. This 'allows her to acquire maturity very quickly, and
gives
a
sense of the seriousness of life and of its responsibilities. A sense
and
a
respect for what is concrete develop in her, opposed to abstractions
which
are so often fatal for the existence of individuals and society,' says
the
first high-level pronouncement on gender issues since the Pope's 1995
'Letter to Women'.
Ratzinger uses the document to argue that, because they have something
unique to contribute, 'women should be present in the world of work and
in
the organisation of society'.
The comments drew a mixed reaction from feminists and women writers.
Erin
Pizzey, founder of the international women's refuge movement, said: 'I
don't
think the Catholic Church, whose priests and bishops cannot marry, is
in
a
position to make such statements. It is one of the most emotionally
illiterate organisations I know, and it needs to put its own house in
order
first.'
But Catherine Pepinster, editor of Catholic paper The Tablet, said the
comments would resonate with many women. 'For feminists to rubbish it
is
a
knee-jerk response. It does make a distinction between the sexes, but
it
also points out that women have a big role to play in society.'
Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said that the statement seemed to her a
long-overdue
assessment of women's roles.
'For those of us involved in the women's movement of the Seventies, our
aim
was to give us equal opportunities. It wasn't that we would become men.
Instead of civilising the world, what we have done is create a ladette
culture. It's true we have certain characteristics that we can bring to
the
world that are valuable, and shouldn't be submerged.'
However, combining work and family has 'characteristics different from
those
in the case of men', says the document, which argues for a 'just
valuing
of
the work of women within the family'. Ratzinger does not say how this
is
to
be done, but it is clear he sees it as a way of encouraging women to
spend
as much time as possible in the home.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Anthony Boyda" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 04:29:13 PM |
|
|
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n51rqFt5asgU1@uni-berlin.de...
"Cindy" <cindy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AkbPc.193182$a24.35747@attbi_s03...
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n4g9uFrs8tsU2@uni-berlin.de...
It's not a "statement of official doctrine". It's a discussion
document,
approved for publication as a *letter to the Bishops*, not a policy
statement.
I'm rather disappointed in the Observer's inaccuracy, there.
Jani
The Pope blessed it!
The Pope frequently blesses small children presented to him, but they are
not transformed into statements of official doctrine as a result; they
remain small children :)
Jani
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:JSXOc.60738$8_6.33852@attbi_s04...
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
The Vatican yesterday depicted what it claimed were women's
characteristic
traits: 'Listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and
waiting.'
In its most important statement on the role of women in almost a
decade,
the
Roman Catholic Church said these virtues of the Virgin Mary were ones
that
women displayed 'with particular intensity and naturalness'.
The 37-page statement, published in full yesterday, was written by
the
Pope's top theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a statement of
official
doctrine, it would have been read, and very likely amended, by the
Pope
himself before publication.
The document, which will prompt a fierce debate about the attributes
of
women, added: 'Although a certain type of feminist rhetoric makes
demands
"for ourselves", women preserve the deep intuition of the goodness in
their
lives of those actions that elicit life, and contribute to the growth
and
protection [of others]. This intuition is linked to women's physical
capacity to give life. Whether lived out or remaining potential, this
capacity is a reality that structures the female personality in a
profound
way.'
In his 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the
Collaboration
of
Men and Women in the Church and in the World', Ratzinger takes aim at
'currents of thought that are often at variance with the authentic
advancement of women'. Chief among these is a tendency to 'emphasise
strongly, conditions of subordination in order to give rise to
antagonism'.
It implied that 'women, in order to be themselves, must make
themselves
the
adversaries of men'. Such confrontational thinking was 'leading to
harmful
confusion ... which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the
structure of the family'.
Gender war also encouraged a perilous blurring of the distinctions.
'To
avoid the domination of one sex or the other, their differences tend
to
be
denied, viewed as mere effects of historical and cultural
conditioning.'
Such a view ignored qualities that arose from a woman's unique
ability
to
give birth. This 'allows her to acquire maturity very quickly, and
gives
a
sense of the seriousness of life and of its responsibilities. A sense
and
a
respect for what is concrete develop in her, opposed to abstractions
which
are so often fatal for the existence of individuals and society,'
says
the
first high-level pronouncement on gender issues since the Pope's 1995
'Letter to Women'.
Ratzinger uses the document to argue that, because they have
something
unique to contribute, 'women should be present in the world of work
and
in
the organisation of society'.
The comments drew a mixed reaction from feminists and women writers.
Erin
Pizzey, founder of the international women's refuge movement, said:
'I
don't
think the Catholic Church, whose priests and bishops cannot marry, is
in
a
position to make such statements. It is one of the most emotionally
illiterate organisations I know, and it needs to put its own house in
order
first.'
But Catherine Pepinster, editor of Catholic paper The Tablet, said
the
comments would resonate with many women. 'For feminists to rubbish it
is
a
knee-jerk response. It does make a distinction between the sexes, but
it
also points out that women have a big role to play in society.'
Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said that the statement seemed to her a
long-overdue
assessment of women's roles.
'For those of us involved in the women's movement of the Seventies,
our
aim
was to give us equal opportunities. It wasn't that we would become
men.
Instead of civilising the world, what we have done is create a
ladette
culture. It's true we have certain characteristics that we can bring
to
the
world that are valuable, and shouldn't be submerged.'
However, combining work and family has 'characteristics different
from
those
in the case of men', says the document, which argues for a 'just
valuing
of
the work of women within the family'. Ratzinger does not say how this
is
to
be done, but it is clear he sees it as a way of encouraging women to
spend
as much time as possible in the home.
Try and remove any aspect of "rights" and just consider what the world would
be like if we lived according to the bible. If a mother and father raised
their children instead of day care, schools, TV, etc. If God and family were
the focus and the reward instead of cars, homes, and other status symbols.
Makes the Pope sound pretty smart.
Tony (not Catholic)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jani" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 06:18:48 PM |
|
|
"Anthony Boyda" <boydafamily@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:JgdPc.4153$QA5.1011@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
[]
Try and remove any aspect of "rights" and just consider what the world
would
be like if we lived according to the bible. If a mother and father raised
their children instead of day care, schools, TV, etc. If God and family
were
the focus and the reward instead of cars, homes, and other status symbols.
Personally, I would very much welcome a shift in focus away from the
acquisition of material goods as a priority, and towards human-to-human
interaction within family groups. I don't think that necessarily means a
heterosexual monogamous family structure, though. There are various
different set-ups which work well, but what they all tend to have in common
is that the *people* are the important thing, not the desperate struggle to
have a fancier house, car, set of kitchen gadgets, etc.
Makes the Pope sound pretty smart.
Heh, well, Catholics don't get it wrong *all* the time, you know.
Tony (not Catholic)
Jani (not any flavour of Christian)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Qolon" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 06:23:55 PM |
|
|
Jani is another individual whose pretension to piety has yet to explain why
their ideology as claimed but insubstantial Christianity is no different to
Fascism--treason against autonomous rights of others.
- dolf
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n5bsnFt1b0iU1@uni-berlin.de...
Personally, I would very much welcome a shift in focus away from the
acquisition of material goods as a priority, and towards human-to-human
interaction within family groups. I don't think that necessarily means a
heterosexual monogamous family structure, though. There are various
different set-ups which work well, but what they all tend to have in common
is that the *people* are the important thing, not the desperate struggle to
have a fancier house, car, set of kitchen gadgets, etc.
Makes the Pope sound pretty smart.
Heh, well, Catholics don't get it wrong *all* the time, you know.
Tony (not Catholic)
Jani (not any flavour of Christian)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
04 Aug 2004 05:28:57 PM |
|
|
Jani wrote:
"Anthony Boyda" <boydafamily@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:JgdPc.4153$QA5.1011@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
[]
Try and remove any aspect of "rights" and just consider what the
world
would
be like if we lived according to the bible. If a mother and father
raised their children instead of day care, schools, TV, etc. If God
and family
were
the focus and the reward instead of cars, homes, and other status
symbols.
Personally, I would very much welcome a shift in focus away from the
acquisition of material goods as a priority, and towards
human-to-human interaction within family groups. I don't think that
necessarily means a heterosexual monogamous family structure, though.
There are various different set-ups which work well, but what they all
tend to have in common is that the *people* are the important thing,
not the desperate struggle to have a fancier house, car, set of
kitchen gadgets, etc.
Exactly!
A group marriage can be very supportive and stable.
[]
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cindy" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 09:00:51 PM |
|
|
"Anthony Boyda" <boydafamily@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:JgdPc.4153$QA5.1011@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
Try and remove any aspect of "rights" and just consider what the world
would
be like if we lived according to the bible. If a mother and father raised
their children instead of day care, schools, TV, etc. If God and family
were
the focus and the reward instead of cars, homes, and other status symbols.
Makes the Pope sound pretty smart.
Tony (not Catholic)
If a person would follow, today, the teachings of the Old Testament, he
would be a criminal. If he would follow strictly the teachings of the New,
he would be insane. ~Robert G. Ingersoll
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Qolon" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 04:36:33 PM |
|
|
Your empathy probably from comes from the reality that your ideology as
claimed but insubstantial Christianity is no different to Fascism--treason
against autonomous rights of others.
- dolf
"Anthony Boyda" <boydafamily@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:JgdPc.4153$QA5.1011@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
Try and remove any aspect of "rights" and just consider what the world would
be like if we lived according to the bible. If a mother and father raised
their children instead of day care, schools, TV, etc. If God and family were
the focus and the reward instead of cars, homes, and other status symbols.
Makes the Pope sound pretty smart.
Tony (not Catholic)
QOLON NOTE:
However without an accompanying justification which substantiates the
ecclesiastical language Latin as proof of God and Apostolic Authority, being
related to a heuristic attributed to a chronological based hermeneutic as a
priori to the natural, regulative and metempirical principles underlying the
language taxonomy such as Hebrew, Greek and English as teleological
argument, one can assume the document is little more than the wishful
thinking of a diseased mind by a religious / policital entity which seeks to
transgress the boundaries in treasonably interfering in the autonomy of
others such as sovereign states, government, institutional practice and that
of individuals.
Typical of lack of biblical authority, the Papal document makes appeal to a
mythical argument, based on 'signs, symbolism and metaphor' as vulgar
opinion of mystical identity--The Papal Authority over the religious /
political province known as the Vatican State of Rome appears to be
decidedly out of touch with reality.
Little appears to have changed since Carmelite friar Paolo Antonio
Foscarini, argued in his 'Letter concerning the Opinion of the Pythagoreans
and Copernicus about the Mobility of the Earth and Stability of the Sun, and
about the New Pythagorean System of the World', that the heliocentric model
of the solar system as cosmology was not incompatible with the Bible.
Foscarini, who in 1615 CE was also the author of a 'Treatise on Natural
Cosmological Divination', did not introduce any new principles of biblical
interpretation in his analysis; rather, he sets out and applies the Roman
Catholic Church's traditional rules of Biblical interpretation, which he
identifies as symbolic:
"When Holy Scripture attributes something to God or to any other creature
which would otherwise be improper and incommensurate, then it should be
interpreted and explained in one or more of the following ways. It is said:
1) To pertain metaphorically and proportionately, or by similitude.
2) According to our mode of consideration, apprehension, understanding,
knowing, etc.
3) According to vulgar opinion and the common way of speaking."
- dolf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cindy" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 09:02:41 PM |
|
|
"Qolon" <telos@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:BndPc.28037$K53.11739@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Your empathy probably from comes from the reality that your ideology as
claimed but insubstantial Christianity is no different to Fascism--treason
against autonomous rights of others.
- dolf
Morality is of the highest importance - but for us, not for God. ~Albert
Einstein
"Anthony Boyda" <boydafamily@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:JgdPc.4153$QA5.1011@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
Try and remove any aspect of "rights" and just consider what the world
would
be like if we lived according to the bible. If a mother and father raised
their children instead of day care, schools, TV, etc. If God and family
were
the focus and the reward instead of cars, homes, and other status symbols.
Makes the Pope sound pretty smart.
Tony (not Catholic)
QOLON NOTE:
However without an accompanying justification which substantiates the
ecclesiastical language Latin as proof of God and Apostolic Authority,
being
related to a heuristic attributed to a chronological based hermeneutic as
a
priori to the natural, regulative and metempirical principles underlying
the
language taxonomy such as Hebrew, Greek and English as teleological
argument, one can assume the document is little more than the wishful
thinking of a diseased mind by a religious / policital entity which seeks
to
transgress the boundaries in treasonably interfering in the autonomy of
others such as sovereign states, government, institutional practice and
that
of individuals.
Typical of lack of biblical authority, the Papal document makes appeal to
a
mythical argument, based on 'signs, symbolism and metaphor' as vulgar
opinion of mystical identity--The Papal Authority over the religious /
political province known as the Vatican State of Rome appears to be
decidedly out of touch with reality.
Little appears to have changed since Carmelite friar Paolo Antonio
Foscarini, argued in his 'Letter concerning the Opinion of the
Pythagoreans
and Copernicus about the Mobility of the Earth and Stability of the Sun,
and
about the New Pythagorean System of the World', that the heliocentric
model
of the solar system as cosmology was not incompatible with the Bible.
Foscarini, who in 1615 CE was also the author of a 'Treatise on Natural
Cosmological Divination', did not introduce any new principles of biblical
interpretation in his analysis; rather, he sets out and applies the Roman
Catholic Church's traditional rules of Biblical interpretation, which he
identifies as symbolic:
"When Holy Scripture attributes something to God or to any other creature
which would otherwise be improper and incommensurate, then it should be
interpreted and explained in one or more of the following ways. It is
said:
1) To pertain metaphorically and proportionately, or by similitude.
2) According to our mode of consideration, apprehension, understanding,
knowing, etc.
3) According to vulgar opinion and the common way of speaking."
- dolf
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cindy" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 04:25:24 PM |
|
|
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n51rqFt5asgU1@uni-berlin.de...
"Cindy" <cindy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AkbPc.193182$a24.35747@attbi_s03...
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n4g9uFrs8tsU2@uni-berlin.de...
It's not a "statement of official doctrine". It's a discussion
document,
approved for publication as a *letter to the Bishops*, not a policy
statement.
I'm rather disappointed in the Observer's inaccuracy, there.
Jani
The Pope blessed it!
The Pope frequently blesses small children presented to him, but they are
not transformed into statements of official doctrine as a result; they
remain small children :)
Yeah but in English if you say someone "blessed" something it means that
they approved it. :)
Cindy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jani" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 06:06:15 PM |
|
|
"Cindy" <cindy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:8ddPc.196190$%_6.40775@attbi_s01...
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n51rqFt5asgU1@uni-berlin.de...
"Cindy" <cindy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AkbPc.193182$a24.35747@attbi_s03...
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n4g9uFrs8tsU2@uni-berlin.de...
It's not a "statement of official doctrine". It's a discussion
document,
approved for publication as a *letter to the Bishops*, not a policy
statement.
I'm rather disappointed in the Observer's inaccuracy, there.
Jani
The Pope blessed it!
The Pope frequently blesses small children presented to him, but they
are
not transformed into statements of official doctrine as a result; they
remain small children :)
Yeah but in English if you say someone "blessed" something it means that
they approved it. :)
Bit of a semantic stretch, that :) But seriously, it isn't an official
policy document. The only papal approval it has, is for publication (both to
the Bishops, and generally). The Pope might agree with what it says, but he
could equally well agree with this morning's Dilbert. It still doesn't make
it a statement of doctrine.
Jani
.
|
|
|
| User: "Qolon" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 06:20:07 PM |
|
|
Actually the semantic stretch is the appeal made to a mythical argument,
based on 'signs, symbolism and metaphor' as vulgar opinion of mystical
identity.
When do you think we'll see the justification which substantiates the
ecclesiastical language Latin as proof of God and Apostolic Authority, being
related to a heuristic attributed to a chronological based hermeneutic as a
priori to the natural, regulative and metempirical principles underlying the
language taxonomy such as we presently have of the Hebrew, Greek and English
stoicheion as teleological argument?
I know that symbolic and specious examples exist at attempt to profer
argumentation, but nothing heretofore notionally in actuality, plausibility
and rationality.
- dolf
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n5b56Fsv4htU1@uni-berlin.de...
Yeah but in English if you say someone "blessed" something it means that
they approved it. :)
Bit of a semantic stretch, that :) But seriously, it isn't an official
policy document. The only papal approval it has, is for publication (both to
the Bishops, and generally). The Pope might agree with what it says, but he
could equally well agree with this morning's Dilbert. It still doesn't make
it a statement of doctrine.
Jani
QOLON NOTE:
Your empathy probably from comes from the reality that your ideology as
claimed but insubstantial Christianity is no different to Fascism--treason
against autonomous rights of others.
- dolf
"Anthony Boyda" <boydafamily@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:JgdPc.4153$QA5.1011@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
Try and remove any aspect of "rights" and just consider what the world would
be like if we lived according to the bible. If a mother and father raised
their children instead of day care, schools, TV, etc. If God and family were
the focus and the reward instead of cars, homes, and other status symbols.
Makes the Pope sound pretty smart.
Tony (not Catholic)
QOLON NOTE:
However without an accompanying justification which substantiates the
ecclesiastical language Latin as proof of God and Apostolic Authority, being
related to a heuristic attributed to a chronological based hermeneutic as a
priori to the natural, regulative and metempirical principles underlying the
language taxonomy such as Hebrew, Greek and English as teleological
argument, one can assume the document is little more than the wishful
thinking of a diseased mind by a religious / policital entity which seeks to
transgress the boundaries in treasonably interfering in the autonomy of
others such as sovereign states, government, institutional practice and that
of individuals.
Typical of lack of biblical authority, the Papal document makes appeal to a
mythical argument, based on 'signs, symbolism and metaphor' as vulgar
opinion of mystical identity--The Papal Authority over the religious /
political province known as the Vatican State of Rome appears to be
decidedly out of touch with reality.
Little appears to have changed since Carmelite friar Paolo Antonio
Foscarini, argued in his 'Letter concerning the Opinion of the Pythagoreans
and Copernicus about the Mobility of the Earth and Stability of the Sun, and
about the New Pythagorean System of the World', that the heliocentric model
of the solar system as cosmology was not incompatible with the Bible.
Foscarini, who in 1615 CE was also the author of a 'Treatise on Natural
Cosmological Divination', did not introduce any new principles of biblical
interpretation in his analysis; rather, he sets out and applies the Roman
Catholic Church's traditional rules of Biblical interpretation, which he
identifies as symbolic:
"When Holy Scripture attributes something to God or to any other creature
which would otherwise be improper and incommensurate, then it should be
interpreted and explained in one or more of the following ways. It is said:
1) To pertain metaphorically and proportionately, or by similitude.
2) According to our mode of consideration, apprehension, understanding,
knowing, etc.
3) According to vulgar opinion and the common way of speaking."
- dolf
.
|
|
|
|
| User: ";+D" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
02 Aug 2004 12:40:01 PM |
|
|
In article <2n5b56Fsv4htU1@uni-berlin.de>, sez the=20
following stuff in this here li'l ole news'froup...!
=20
"Cindy" <cindy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:8ddPc.196190$%_6.40775@attbi_s01...
"Jani" < > wrote in message
news:2n51rqFt5asgU1@uni-berlin.de...
"Cindy" <cindy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AkbPc.193182$a24.35747@attbi_s03...
"Jani" < > wrote in message
news:2n4g9uFrs8tsU2@uni-berlin.de...
It's not a "statement of official doctrine". It's a discussion
document,
approved for publication as a *letter to the Bishops*, not a polic=
y
statement.
I'm rather disappointed in the Observer's inaccuracy, there.
Jani
The Pope blessed it!
The Pope frequently blesses small children presented to him, but they
are
not transformed into statements of official doctrine as a result; the=
y
remain small children :)
Yeah but in English if you say someone "blessed" something it means tha=
t
they approved it. :)
=20
Bit of a semantic stretch, that :) But seriously, it isn't an official
policy document. The only papal approval it has, is for publication (both=
to
the Bishops, and generally). The Pope might agree with what it says, but =
he
could equally well agree with this morning's Dilbert. It still doesn't ma=
ke
it a statement of doctrine.
=20
Jani
=20
=20
=20
Well said, Jani.
--=20
WARNING:
La religione Cattolica maledica la vostra anima=20
da falso insegnamento. Fuga mentre dio ancora vi=20
d=E0 il tempo.
______________________________________________
Please visit my website at http://www.romath.com
and sign the Guest Book!! AND-- send in YOUR=20
encouraging TRUE stories to 'encouragement@romath.com'
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Qolon" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 03:46:19 PM |
|
|
When our Prime Minister, in a moment of congeniality, touched the Papal
Authority of the religious / political province known as the Vatican State
of Rome, he looked around to his ecclesiastical colleagues as though a
diseased man had condescended to defile him.
- dolf
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n51rqFt5asgU1@uni-berlin.de...
"Cindy" <cindy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AkbPc.193182$a24.35747@attbi_s03...
"Jani" <jani@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2n4g9uFrs8tsU2@uni-berlin.de...
It's not a "statement of official doctrine". It's a discussion document,
approved for publication as a *letter to the Bishops*, not a policy
statement.
I'm rather disappointed in the Observer's inaccuracy, there.
Jani
The Pope blessed it!
The Pope frequently blesses small children presented to him, but they are
not transformed into statements of official doctrine as a result; they
remain small children :)
Jani
"Renee" <renee@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:JSXOc.60738$8_6.33852@attbi_s04...
John Hooper in Rome and Jo Revill
Sunday August 1, 2004
The Observer
The Vatican yesterday depicted what it claimed were women's
characteristic
traits: 'Listening, welcoming, humility, faithfulness, praise and
waiting.'
In its most important statement on the role of women in almost a
decade,
the
Roman Catholic Church said these virtues of the Virgin Mary were ones
that
women displayed 'with particular intensity and naturalness'.
The 37-page statement, published in full yesterday, was written by the
Pope's top theologian, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a statement of
official
doctrine, it would have been read, and very likely amended, by the Pope
himself before publication.
The document, which will prompt a fierce debate about the attributes of
women, added: 'Although a certain type of feminist rhetoric makes
demands
"for ourselves", women preserve the deep intuition of the goodness in
their
lives of those actions that elicit life, and contribute to the growth
and
protection [of others]. This intuition is linked to women's physical
capacity to give life. Whether lived out or remaining potential, this
capacity is a reality that structures the female personality in a
profound
way.'
In his 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the
Collaboration
of
Men and Women in the Church and in the World', Ratzinger takes aim at
'currents of thought that are often at variance with the authentic
advancement of women'. Chief among these is a tendency to 'emphasise
strongly, conditions of subordination in order to give rise to
antagonism'.
It implied that 'women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves
the
adversaries of men'. Such confrontational thinking was 'leading to
harmful
confusion ... which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the
structure of the family'.
Gender war also encouraged a perilous blurring of the distinctions. 'To
avoid the domination of one sex or the other, their differences tend to
be
denied, viewed as mere effects of historical and cultural
conditioning.'
Such a view ignored qualities that arose from a woman's unique ability
to
give birth. This 'allows her to acquire maturity very quickly, and
gives
a
sense of the seriousness of life and of its responsibilities. A sense
and
a
respect for what is concrete develop in her, opposed to abstractions
which
are so often fatal for the existence of individuals and society,' says
the
first high-level pronouncement on gender issues since the Pope's 1995
'Letter to Women'.
Ratzinger uses the document to argue that, because they have something
unique to contribute, 'women should be present in the world of work and
in
the organisation of society'.
The comments drew a mixed reaction from feminists and women writers.
Erin
Pizzey, founder of the international women's refuge movement, said: 'I
don't
think the Catholic Church, whose priests and bishops cannot marry, is
in
a
position to make such statements. It is one of the most emotionally
illiterate organisations I know, and it needs to put its own house in
order
first.'
But Catherine Pepinster, editor of Catholic paper The Tablet, said the
comments would resonate with many women. 'For feminists to rubbish it
is
a
knee-jerk response. It does make a distinction between the sexes, but
it
also points out that women have a big role to play in society.'
Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said that the statement seemed to her a
long-overdue
assessment of women's roles.
'For those of us involved in the women's movement of the Seventies, our
aim
was to give us equal opportunities. It wasn't that we would become men.
Instead of civilising the world, what we have done is create a ladette
culture. It's true we have certain characteristics that we can bring to
the
world that are valuable, and shouldn't be submerged.'
However, combining work and family has 'characteristics different from
those
in the case of men', says the document, which argues for a 'just
valuing
of
the work of women within the family'. Ratzinger does not say how this
is
to
be done, but it is clear he sees it as a way of encouraging women to
spend
as much time as possible in the home.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Qolon" |
|
| Title: Re: A Woman's Place is to Wait & Listen, Vatican |
01 Aug 2004 06:43:22 PM |
|
|
Concerning the burning of a supermarket in the capitol city of Asuncion {Our
Lady of Assumption; ie Mary}, Paraguay which was dominated by the Spanish in
1537 CE, do you think it a natural disaster, act of God, instutional
decadence and neglect, or malicious intent?
When someone in Brisbane committed religious fraud by smattering Rose oil
over a statute of Mary, you ought to have seem the the parishoners from the
Roman Catholic community, thinking it an act of Divine Providence as
spontaneous bleeding, fawning themselves over it to the point of hysteria!
- dolf
"Cindy" <cindy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AkbPc.193182$a24.35747@attbi_s03...
The Pope blessed it!
QOLON NOTE:
Thanks Renee,
The document is produced below.
However without an accompanying justification which substantiates the
ecclesiastical language Latin as proof of God and Apostolic Authority, being
related to a heuristic attributed to a chronological based hermeneutic as a
priori to the natural, regulative and metempirical principles underlying the
language taxonomy such as Hebrew, Greek and English as teleological
argument, one can assume the document is little more than the wishful
thinking of a diseased mind by a religious / policital entity which seeks to
transgress the boundaries in treasonably interfering in the autonomy of
others such as sovereign states, government, institutional practice and that
of individuals.
Typical of lack of biblical authority, the Papal document makes appeal to a
mythical argument, based on 'signs, symbolism and metaphor' as vulgar
opinion of mystical identity--The Papal Authority over the religious /
political province known as the Vatican State of Rome appears to be
decidedly out of touch with reality.
Little appears to have changed since Carmelite friar Paolo Antonio
Foscarini, argued in his 'Letter concerning the Opinion of the Pythagoreans
and Copernicus about the Mobility of the Earth and Stability of the Sun, and
about the New Pythagorean System of the World', that the heliocentric model
of the solar system as cosmology was not incompatible with the Bible.
Foscarini, who in 1615 CE was also the author of a 'Treatise on Natural
Cosmological Divination', did not introduce any new principles of biblical
interpretation in his analysis; rather, he sets out and applies the Roman
Catholic Church's traditional rules of Biblical interpretation, which he
identifies as symbolic:
"When Holy Scripture attributes something to God or to any other creature
which would otherwise be improper and incommensurate, then it should be
interpreted and explained in one or more of the following | | | |
