GENDER PERSPECTIVES IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
Paul Galea
Long Essay presented to the Workers Participation Development Centre of the University of Malta
as partial requirement for the Diploma in social Studies (Gender and Development)
June 2004
ABSTRACT
PAUL GALEA
Gender Perspectives in the Catholic Church
What is the Position of Women in the Catholic Church?
The Bible shows that from the beginning woman was created equal to man in personal dignity. Jesus had a very positive attitude towards women. The Gospel illustrates several episodes in the life of Jesus whish demonstrate his respect to the dignity of woman. In Christian thought, man and woman have the same duties toward virtue. This is the position expounded by the Fathers of the Church.
The Church regretfully acknowledges that the impact of culture may at times have influenced the attitude of the Church. However, Pope John Paul II defends the dignity and vocation of women. The Maltese Diocesan Synod also recognizes the dignity of woman and makes suggestions for her development.
The teachings of John Paul II in respect of the identity and dignity of woman, indicates a shift in perspective, by showing that the equality of the sexes and their differences, is the key to mutuality.
The Catholic Church provided an orientation on such a delicate controversial subject as the question of women in contemporary society. It represents a voice in favour of the dignity of women in a society which in many ways shows discrimination towards them. It proposes Mary, whom God has chosen to be his mother, the mother of His Son, as the model for women.
The accusation which is often levelled at the Catholic Church that it treats women as second class citizen is not sustainable.
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank in particular my supervisor the Rev Dr. Anthony Abela, Lecturer in the Faculty of Theology, at the University of Malta for his useful advice and encouragement.
The Catholic Church is often accused of treating women as second class citizens. This essay will examine the effects of gender on the attitudes by and within the Catholic Church, with special reference to the Bible, the teachings of the Fathers of the Church, and of the Pope. It will test whether the hypothesis that “the Church considers women second class citizens in its teaching and in practice” is sustainable or not.
Chapter 1 expounds the Christian concept of the person and the position of women as it was created from the beginning, with special reference to the Bible.
Chapter 2 demonstrates the position held by women in the Early Church making reference to the writings of the Fathers of the Church. It also shows the attitude lf Jesus towards women. With reference to the Gospel it quotes some episodes in the life of Jesus in order to substantiate his attitude towards women.
Chapter 3 explores the contemporary position of the Catholic Church on the subject. It makes reference to the impact of culture which at certain times may have influenced the attitude of the church. Then it sets out to demonstrate the position taken by Pope John Paul II on the dignity and vocation of women. It also gives an indication of the position taken by the Church in Malta, as is expressed in the documents of the Diocesan Synod.
Chapter 4 examines more closely the teachings of John Paul II in respect of the identity and dignity of woman. It notices a shift in perspective, emphasizing the equality of the sexes although acknowledging their differences, which are the key to mutuality.
Chapter 5 shows the mission and task of women in society and in the Church. The model for women is Mary whom God has chosen to be his mother, the mother of His Son. The essay concludes by declaring that the hypothesis that “the Church treats women as second class citizens” is not sustainable.
Based on Revelation, the Christian concept of the person allows us to see the human being according to the will of God the Creator. Thus we form our judgement, above all, according to what happens deep within the human heart, in the encounter with God and with other human persons. The human person is judged by the gift of truth, sought and received.[1]
The act of creation reveals the personal structure of woman and her essential vocation. God created man and woman as free, autonomous persons, in His likeness, and therefore not confined within the material and the temporal.[2] From the beginning woman is equal to man in personal dignity, but different to him in her femininity. Sexuality is a specific characteristic of the person; sexual diversity reveals the difference between the personality of man and woman within the same humanity. It is diversity that does not involve conflict; rather it makes possible a closer union. The difference between man and woman does not do away, with their equality but makes more evident the richness and the spousal character of the human being. From this richness and spousal character comes the diversity in what man and woman do. The exchange of values of femininity and those of masculinity is what constitutes interpersonal relations. This “collaboration” between, man and woman enriches the humanity of every person in a way that transcends our imagination but that satisfies the great desire of our heart.[3]
The creation of the woman puts an end to man’s solitude, and makes Adam exclaim: “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh”[4]. This relationship between man and woman is fundamental in the human world; it is the model for all other human relationships in which the one addresses the other as “thou”. Woman’s essential vocation is fulfilled, on the ontological and moral level, in the context of the interpersonal relations created by love. Woman brings man out of solitude, helps him to come out from “the circle binding him to himself”[5]. Through her femininity, woman helps man to understand himself, his masculinity.[6]
Woman makes known to man the other person who is lovable, she teaches him to love in a way worthy of man. She accepts him, receives him and gives herself; in this way she is fully herself. In love both bring their humanity to fulfilment. United in spousal love the man and the woman become a community of two persons inseparably bound together but, at the same time, different, free and autonomous. The “unity of the two”[7] is founded on the freedom and the subjectivity of the two persons, on their free, mutual self-giving according to the particular character of each. Within the communio personarum there is a continual self-giving and a continual receiving; it is not possible to praise the merits of one person without taking into account the contribution of the other, and one person may not be condemned without recognizing the other’s guilt.[8]
In Christian thought, man and woman have the same duties toward virtue. From, the ethical point of view also they are equal,[9] and this was in contrast with the prevalent notion that woman was inferior.[10]
Thus Christian pedagogy re-establishes in religion an equality created by nature itself.[11] Christianity makes oneness in faith and ethics correspond with the oneness in nature; hence in the natural and in the supernatural order, it purifies woman as well as man, and the slave with the free man, and makes them all, without distinction, “philosophers”. Consequently, external or social conditions can in no way limit either the dignity of the spiritual obligation of each individual, not even in the face of martyrdom. “For, it is beautiful for a man to die for virtue, for liberty and for himself, the same is true for a woman, because this is not a privilege of the masculine sex but a natural right of virtuous beings.” And a woman may be virtuous even against the will and in spite of the actions of her husband.[12] This means autonomy for woman which, in the second century, is still incomprehensible to the pagan mind.[13] It also constitutes a dignity which vests woman with and interior beauty that needs no artificial aids or adornments.[14]
The strict principles of Christian teachings re-established the institution of the family, the axis of which in so many respects is woman. The purity of her morals, her control over the bodily appetites, her chastity do not make her any less a person; they do mean that she is freed from the abuse to which she was so often subjected and which made her a tool for pleasure while she was young and for labour when she was old – the frequent object of exploitation. They mean a renewal of the charm of ideal beauty, which outlasts the decay of physical beauty. The only misogynist writings in Christian literature what springs from this ascetic and moral rehabilitation of woman either border on heresy or are outright heretical; they are due to a misunderstanding of moral obligations, characteristics of the crabbed and morbid rigorist and those who could not rise to a comprehension of the synthesis of all virtues.[15]
When it comes to setting women free from every kind of exploitation and domination, the Gospel contains an ever relevant message which goes back to the attitude of Jesus Christ himself. Transcending the established norms of his own culture, Jesus treated women with openness, respect, acceptance and tenderness. In this way he honoured the dignity which women have always possessed according to God’s plan and in his love. As we look to Christ at the end of this Second Millennium, it is natural to ask ourselves: how much of his message has been heard and acted upon?[16]
Man’s Redemption, foretold in Genesis, becomes a reality in the person and mission of Jesus Christ, in which he also recognize what the reality of the Redemption means for the dignity and the vocation of women. This meaning becomes clearer for us from Christ’s words and from his whole attitude towards women, an attitude which is extremely simple, and for this very reason extraordinary, if seen against the background of his time. It is an attitude marked by great clarity and depth. Various women appear along the path of the mission of Jesus of Nazareth, and his meeting with each of them is a confirmation of the evangelical “newness of life” already spoken of.[17]
It is universally admitted – even by people with a critical attitude towards the Christian message – that in the eyes of his contemporaries Christ became a promoter of women’s true dignity and of the vocation corresponding to this dignity. At times this caused wonder, surprise, often to the point of scandal: “They marvelled that he was talking with a woman,”[18] because this behaviour differed from that of his contemporaries. Even Christ’s own disciples “marvelled”. The Pharisee to whose house the sinful woman went to anoint Jesus’ feet with perfumed oil “said to himself, ‘if this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what sort of woman this is who is touching him, for she is a sinner.’”[19] Even greater dismay, or even “holy indignation”, must have filled the self-satisfied hearers of Christ’s words: “the tax collectors and the harlots go into the Kingdom of God before you.”[20]
By speaking and acting in this way, Jesus made it clear that “the mysteries of the Kingdom” were known to him in every detail. He also “knew what was in man”[21], in his innermost being, in his “heart”. He was a witness if God’s eternal plan for the human being, created in his own image and likeness as man and woman. He was also perfectly aware of the consequences of sin, “mystery of iniquity” working in human hearts as the bitter fruit of the obscuring of the divine image.
It is truly significant that in his important discussion about marriage and its indissolubility, in the presence of “the scribes”, who by profession were experts in the Law, Jesus makes reference to the “beginning”. The question asked concerns a man’s right “to divorce one’s wife for any cause”[22] and therefore also concerned the woman’s right, her rightful position in marriage, her dignity. The questioners think they have on their side the Mosaic legislation then followed by Israel: “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”[23]. Jesus answers: “for your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so”[24]. Jesus appeals to the “beginning”, to the creation of man as male and female and their ordering by God himself, which is based upon the fact that both were created “in his image and likeness”. Therefore, when “a man shall leave his father and mother and is joined to his wife, so that the two become one flesh”[25], there remains in force the law which comes from God himself: “What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder”[26].
The principle of this “ethos”, which from the beginning marks the reality of creation, is now confirmed by Christ in opposition to that tradition which discriminated against women. In this tradition the male “dominated”, without having proper regard for woman and for her dignity, which the “ethos” of creation made the basis of the mutual relationship of two people united in marriage. This “ethos” is recalled and confirmed by Christ’s words; it is the “ethos” of the Gospel and of Redemption.
Unfortunately we are heirs to a history which has conditioned us to a remarkable extent. In every time and place, this conditioning has been an obstacle to the progress of women. Women’s dignity has often been unacknowledged and their prerogatives misrepresented; they have often been relegated to the margins of society and even reduced to servitude. This has prevented women from truly being themselves and it has resulted in a spiritual impoverishment of humanity. Certainly it is no easy task to assign the blame for this, considering the many kinds of cultural conditioning which down the centuries have shaped ways of thinking and acting.[27] Cultural variations in sex differences are amply illustrated by the findings of anthropology and the history of our own society.[28] As cultural conditions change, sex roles and the psychological traits associated with them will change accordingly.[29]
The recently held Diocesan Synod of the Church in Malta recommends a vision of the Church as a sister who accompanies the people in their journey of their lives on this earth,[30] and helps in the fulfilment of the communion between the people themselves and with God.[31] It expressed the wish that inclusive language be used during the liturgy and in local Church documents.[32] It urges that “in the preparation of pastoral operators attention be given top the equality between the sexes”, and recommended that women be entrusted with spheres of responsibility in the Church [33] The Church will endeavour to support the efforts of Maltese women by speaking in their favour and asking the civil authorities to adopt policies and to create structures which help women and men, as is fitting, to embrace the family life, whilst at the same time they both contribute in the public life.[34]
“No discrimination exists on the level of participation in the Church’s life of grace and holiness.”[35] In an age in which the old image of women is rapidly being transformed and in which there is also an excessive social slowness in “granting” women the place that is rightly theirs, the Church emphasizes women’s dignity. And in so doing it accepts the challenge that is inevitably involved in this attitude. It is no coincidence that John Paul II has sought to place the subject of the role of women in the Church and in society among the post-conciliar questions “that have made themselves felt because of a certain ‘novelty’”.[36]
Preceding the Fourth world conference of Women, which was held in Beijing in September 1995, the Pope wrote a Message for the Conference, which he also forwarded to every Conference of Bishops so that it could be circulated as widely as possible. The message stated some basic points of the Church’s teaching with regard to women’s issues. It was concerned with a broader vision of the situation and problems of women in general, in an attempt to promote the cause of women in the Church and in today’s world.
The Pope also wrote a Letter to Women,[37] emphasizing that he was writing to “each one” “as a sign of solidarity and gratitude”. He said that the Church desires to speak “directly to the heart and mind of every woman. First he thanked God, for ‘the mystery of woman’ and for every woman – for all that constitutes the eternal measure of her feminine dignity, for the ‘great works of God’, which throughout human history have been accomplished in and through her”.[38] Then he showed his appreciation for the contribution which every category of women give to humanity.[39] Finally he thanked every woman, for the simple fact of being a woman, stating that through the insight which is so much part of their womanhood they enrich the world’s understanding and help to make human relations more honest and authentic.[40]
The Pope expressed his sincere sorrow “if objective blame, especially in particular historical contexts, has belonged to not just a few members of the Church”. He also expressed his wish that this regret be transformed, on the part of the Church, into a renewed commitment of fidelity to the Gospel vision.[41]
The teaching of John Paul II on the dignity and vocation of women is amply outlined: in Redemptoris Mater (25 March 1987), in the Apostolic Letter or meditation Mulieris Dignitatem (15 August 1988), and in the Apostolic Exhortation Christifidelis Laici (31 December 1988). These three documents develop various aspects of the single line of thinking with admirable consistency and complimentarity. All three must be borne in mind in order to understand the Holy Father’s teaching on the personal dignity, vocation and mission of women in the Church and in society.
John Paul II lays the foundation for a decisive shift in the way of dealing with the subject of women today. Before considering the range of things that women can do, and their tasks and roles, he focuses on the question of feminine identity, and identity that will undoubtedly throw a fundamental light on their mission. John Paul II first focuses on the question in Mulieris Dignitatem, finding a basis in biblical anthropology. The letter has given us a clear anthropological-theological reflection on the subject, in the form of a penetrating examination of the feminine being, which is a vital precondition for any reflection on tasks and services, inasmuch as this being is both a commitment for a mission to be lived out with determination and also a hope.
Here we have a shift in perspective, springing from an effort to gain further and deeper insights and it should lay the groundwork for new pastoral developments. After this letter and the Post-Synodal Exhortation, things cannot remain as they were either in society or in the Church.
This anthropological-theological view upholds the essence and lays the groundwork for contributions from the human sciences. This is even explicitly pointed out by Christifideles Laici when it calls on scholars in the human and theological sciences “to pursue … a critical study to better and more deeply understand the values and specific gifts of femininity and masculinity, not only in the surroundings of social living but also and above all in living Christians and as members of the Church”.[42]
Chapter V of the Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem is a central reference as concerns women’s identity and the recovery of their dignity. Some commentators see this as the central point of the whole letter. It is a very beautiful meditation and contains the seeds for many possible developments, always along the same line of reinforcing the dignity of women as person and as woman. This chapter dealt with Jesus’ attitude towards women. In the face of his contemporaries, he promoted the dignity of women, and indeed he went even further and made them an evangelical subject and a motive of redemption. For the memory of the faith the Gospels give us the dialogues in which women were given back the best of what they have: their deep being, their truth. And this entails the rediscovery of their capacity to proclaim what they have seen and heard so as to become living subjects of the proclamation of the “great work that God does”; in other words, they are evangelizers, or proclaimers of the good news, like those first female witnesses who proclaimed the glad tidings of the resurrection of Jesus. And the Church must always place itself within this framework if it is to remain faithful to the Master. Christ speaks with these women about the things of God, creating an authentic echo in mind and heart, and thus opening up the response of faith in a developing pilgrimage that encompasses the normal human stages.
In the paragraphs that the Post-Synodal Exhortation devotes to the identity of women, John Paul II refers back to the biblical anthropology[43] developed in Mulieris Dignitatem, summarizing its basic features.
A decisive element among those highlighted in connection with the dignity of women is the foundation laid for constructive approach to the polarity of equality and difference between the sexes. The substantial equality is emphasized in the affirmation of the original richness of femininity and masculinity, and also in the condemnation of the history of subordination and domination that has characterized a social dynamics in which women have been the object of unacceptable discrimination. Many women today are still offended in their personal dignity and demoted to the category of objects. In this situation we can see the importance of this statement of position, which takes the radical affirmation of the common human dignity as a starting-point in order to go to consider the differences that restore to every human being, whether man or woman, the wealth of his or her own originality, in the face of attitudes that sacrifice such differences at a high price for women and for humanity,.
In this perspective, the question of the equality of the sexes is considered on the basis of biblical revelation as the source of Christian anthropology: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female the created them”.[44] This is the unquestionable basis of equality between men and women. The biblical reflection leads us to the truth on the personal characteristic of human beings: whether they are men or women they are equally persons; both man and woman are human beings to an equal degree, both are created in God’s image”.[45] The biblical text of Genesis provides the basis for a recognition of the essential equality between man and woman from the viewpoint of their humanity. “The woman is another ‘I’ in a common humanity”.[46] “Man and woman … in their common humanity are called to live in a communion of love, and in this way to mirror within the world the communion of love that is in God, through which the Three Persons love each other in the intimate mystery of the one divine life.”[47]
Mulieris Dignitatem faces the facts of the difference by distinguishing between original differences and differences acquired in the course of history. The original difference of the sexes was willed by God and diversifies the fundamental unity of the human being by qualifying it. The Apostolic Letter uses some beautiful expressions to indicate the richness of woman’s originality, and the style and tone put one in mind if the biblical description: “ … words of admiration and enchantment, words which fill the whole history of man on earth”[48]. Further on it states: “ … A woman represents a particular value by the fact that she is a human person, and, at the same time, this particular person, by the fact of her femininity”[49]. This goes far beyond normal commonplace on feminine sensitivity, and we find ourselves viewing the originality of woman’s being. “:A woman’s dignity is closely connected with the love which she … gives in return. The truth about the person and about love is thus confirmed … woman can only find herself by giving love to others.”[50]
Women do not therefore have a monopoly on certain human values, but a significant dose of humanity that springs from their original being. The special prophetism of femininity which was referred to in this letter was happily expressed in close connection with the order of love,[51] recognising a capacity for the total gift of self for the sake of love which accompanies women in all their life-choices. In this connection we should also note the pages devoted to motherhood and virginity.
However, other differences – those springing from subordination and domination – are not in keeping with the plan of God, and in this awareness Mulieris Dignitatem reconsiders certain biblical texts. This is a salvific reinterpretation and demands of us a conversion in outlook. If it were fully assimilated and put into effect in our social and ecclesial situation, this reinterpretation would lead to a qualitative change in many human relations.
Domination involves the loss of the fundamental equality that man and woman posses in the unity of the two. “It was not like this at the beginning.” Only the equality that springs from the dignity of both as persons could imbue their mutual relationship with the character of an authentic communion of persons. The break in this communion is seen a consequence of sin.[52]
The words of Genesis as applied directly to marriage can also be applied to those situation in which women find themselves at a disadvantage or discriminated against through the very fact of being women, “injurious and unjust situations which certain and express the inheritance of the sin which all human beings bear within themselves”.[53]
There is a third aspect that can be included among those highlighted in relation to identity, and this is the fact that the two sexes are called to exist reciprocally. This call to interpersonal communion is endorsed by biblical texts carefully collected in the Apostolic Letter, and is binding. In Mulieris Dignitatem the subject of relations between the sexes is based on the category of mutuality between persons. “I will make him a helper for him.”[54] It is a question of mutual aid. This is how John Paul II sees it, and he expresses it by saying that “the woman must help the man – and in his turn he must help her”.[55] The woman was entrusted to the man, but the Creator also entrusted the man as human being to the woman in a special way, above all because of her femininity. “A woman is strong because of her awareness of this entrusting, strong because of the fact that God ‘entrusts the human being to her’, always and in every way, even in the situation of social discrimination in which she may find herself”.[56]
A complementarity in which each person remains in his of her own role is not enough, for mutuality calls us to another order of relations and means that the two parts must recognize each other as equal in their dignity. The Exhortation Christifidelis Laici takes this as the starting-point for a reflection on the joint presence of men and women in society and in the Church, and in this connection we can maybe recall the category developed by Martin Buber: “any authentic living is encounter.” According to this important key of mutuality, men and women must be something that goes beyond themselves and are called to have the daring to assume responsibility for the future of humanity. They must look together to the mission to which they are called and bring about the growth of a new humanity. A mature feminism has its place here in this process of humanization in which men and women must both have their say.
John Paul II describes as a categorically urgent historical need “of carrying out a discernment”.[57] “Only through openly acknowledging the personal dignity of women is the first step taken to promote the full participation of women in the Church life as well as in social and public life.”[58] The dimensions proper to their being as women cannot be reduced simply to roles.
There is a “growing need for participation regarding women …, not only in areas of family and academic life, but also in cultural, economic, social and political areas. To be leading characters in this development, in some way to be creators of a new, more human culture”.[59] “It can be said that the problems of today’s world … must witness the presence and commitment of women with their irreplaceable and customary contributions.”[60] It is perhaps for this reason that the French thinker Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881 – 1955) expressed the view that on women ‘life has laid the charge of advancing to the highest possible degree the spiritualization of the earth’.[61]
The fact that at the present historical moment the Catholic Church should have provided an orientation on such a delicate and controversial subject as the question of women in contemporary society is significant and represents a voice in favour of the dignity of women in a society which in many ways shows discrimination towards them[62]. It can be safely concluded that the accusation which is often levelled at the Catholic Church that it treats women as second class citizens is not sustainable.
John Paul II writes clearly that “The most radical and elevating affirmation of the value of every human being was made by the Son of God in his becoming man in the womb of a woman”[63]. ‘Redemptoris Mater’, the great Encyclical on Our Lady, is the fundamental basis of successive documents on women. “This Marian dimension of Christian life takes special importance in relation to women and their status. In fact, femininity has a unique relationship with the Mother of the Redeemer. The figure of Mary of Nazareth sheds light in womanhood as such by the very fact that God, in the sublime event of the Incarnation of his Son, entrusted himself to the ministry, the free and active ministry of a woman. It can be said that women, by looking to Mary, find in her the secret of living their femininity with dignity and achieving their own true advancement. In the light of Mary, the Church sees in the face of women the reflection of a beauty which mirrors the loftiest sentiments of which the human heart is capable: the self-offering totality and tireless devotion to work; the ability to combine penetrating intuition with words of support and encouragement.”[64]
Aguado, Aranazu, “Women’s Contribution to the Life of the Church”, in Christifideles Laici: Comments and Reflections, Vatican City, (1989 – 1990).
Anastasi, Anne, differential Psychology, (3rd ed.), (1958) Macmillan, New York.
Arċidjoċesi ta’ Malta, Dokument tas-Sinodu Djoċesan, Kultura - Soċjta – Knisja.
Arċidjoċesi ta’ Malta, Dokument tas-Sinodu Djoċesan, Lajċi Nsara.
Arċidjoċesi ta’ Malta, Dokument tas-Sinodu Djoċesan, Viżjoni ta’ Knisja Komunjoni.
Barry, H., III, Bacon, Margaret K., & Child, I.L., ‘A cross-cultural survey of some sex differences in socialization’, in J. abnorm. Soc. Psychol., 1957, 55.
Beir, William C.S.J. (ed), Women in Modern Life, (1968) Fordham University Press, New York.
Good News Bible, translation by American Bible Societies, Thomas Nelson, (1978) New York.
Grygiel, Ludmilla, “Women’s Identity and the Feminine Character of the Church”, in Christifideles Laici: Comments and Reflections, Vatican City, (1989 – 1990).
John Paul II, Christifideles Laici, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, translation by Catholic Truth society, (1989) London.
John Paul II, Letter of Pope John Paul II to Women, translation by Pauline Publications, (1995) Bombay.
John Paul II, Mulieris Dignitatem, Apostolic Letter, translation by Catholic Truth Society, (1988) London.
John Paul II, Redemptoris Mater, Encyclical Letter, translation by Catholic Truth society, (1987) London.
Teilhard de chardin, Pierre, Toward the Future, (1975) Collins, London.
Wojtyla, Karol, Raggi di paternità, Ed. Libreria Vaticana, (1977) Vatican City.
[1] Grygiel, Ludmila, “Women’s Identity and the Feminine Character of the Church”, in Christifideles Laici: Comments and Reflections, Vatican City, (1989 – 1990).
[2] Wis. 2, 23 (“God created man for incorruption, and made him in the image of his own eternity”).
[3] Grygiel, Ludmila, op. cit.
[4] Gen. 2, 23.
[5] Wojtyla, Karol, Raggi di paternità, Ed. Libreria Vaticana, (1977), Vatican City, p. 177.
[6] Grygiel, Ludmila, op. cit.
[7] John Paul II, Apostilic Letter, Mulieris Dignitatem, 18.
[8] Grygiel, Ludmila, op. cit.
[9] Clem. Of Alex., Paed., 1,4; “One only is God of both, one the Instructor and one the Church; theirs is the same temperance and modesty, the same food and the same monogamous marriage; one and the same is their breathing, their sight, their hearing, their knowledge, their hope, their obedience, their love, everything. As life and grace and salvation are common to both, so are love and education. For in this life only is the female different from the male”.
[10] In Greek thought, man’s kingdom was the “city” the world, and woman’s kingdom was the gynaeceum (women’s quarters in the house); the relation between them was considered in the command, “Rule over the woman” (Inscription in the gymnasium of Miletopolis: γυναιχός άοχε).
[11] Strom., IV, 8. : “Nature is the same in each individual, and each is capable of the same virtue. Woman does not have one human nature and man another. They both possess the same nature and the same virtue. If we said that prudence, justice and similar virtues are masculine, we should have to conclude that only man must be virtuous and that woman should be intemperate and unjust; but this it would be disgraceful even to say. Woman, like man, must cultivate prudence and justice and all the other virtues, whether she is free or a slave, since there is one identical virtue in their one identical nature”.
[12] Strom., IV, 8.
[13] Plutarch, Coniug. Praecept., XIX.: “Just as the wife must have no friends but her husband’s, so she must have (and venerate) no gods but her husband’s, and so she must shun foreign superstitions: “for secret sacrifices offered by a woman are not pleasing to any god”.
[14] Paed., II, 12; III, 1.: “Beauty and ugliness reside in the soul alone; only the virtuous man is beautiful and good, and only the good is also beautiful, according to the words of the poet: ‘It is virtue alone that shines in the beauty of the body.’ And it blossoms in the flesh; it bestows a pleasing aspect in inner temperance, when good morals shine radiant in the face. For the beauty of all beings, even of plants and animals, emanates from their virtue.” (see also Origen, C. Cels., I, XXXIX.: True beauty is “justice, temperance, fortitude and fear of the Lord”, the form of the Word, the resemblance to God, for beauty is altogether a perfect transformation in God.” Celsus did not understand this and asked, “Was the mother of Jesus, therefore, a beautiful woman and because she was beautiful did God espouse her, who by nature cannot be enamoured of a corruptible body? And was it truly proper that a God should be enamoured of her if she was neither rich nor of royal birth, and if no one knew her, not even her neighbours?”).
[15] Giordani, Igino, The Social Message of the Early Church Fathers, translated by Alba I. Zizzamia, St. Paul Editions, (1977), Boston, pp. 238 – 243.
[16] John Paul II, Letter to Women, 3.
[17] John Paul II, Apostolic Letter, Mulieris Dignitatem, V, 12.
[18] Jn. 4, 27.
[19] Lk. 7, 39.
[20] Mt. 21, 31.
[21] Jn. 2, 25.
[22] Mt. 19, 3.
[23] Mt. 19, 7.
[24] Mt. 19, 8.
[25] Mt. 19, 6.
[26] Mt. 19, 6.
[27] John Paul II, Letter to Women, 3.
[28] Anastasi Anne, Differential Psychology, (3rd ed.), (1958) Macmillan, New York, Ch. 14; (see also: Barry, H., III, Bacon, Margaret K., & Child, I.L., ‘A cross-cultural survey of some sex differences in socialization’, in J. abnorm. Soc. Psychol., 1957, 55, 327-332.)
[29] Anastasi Anne, Psychological Differences Between Men and Women, in Beir, William C.S.J. (ed), Women in Modern Life, (1968) Fordham University Press, New York, pp. 50-53.
[30] See Eucharistic Prayer V.
[31] Arċidjoċesi ta’ Malta, Dokument tas-Sinodu Djoċesan, Viżjoni ta’ Knisja Komunjoni, para. 8.
[32] Ibid., Viżjoni ta’ Knisja Komunjoni, para. 26.
[33] Ibid., Lajċi Nsara, para. 77.
[34] Ibid., Kultura – Soċjeta - Knisja, para. 38.
[35] John Paul II, Post Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Christifideles Laici, 50.
[36] Ibid., 2.
[37] John Paul II, Letter of John Paul II to Women, translation by Pauline Publications, (1955) Bombay.
[38] John Paul II, Apostolic Letter, Mulieris Dignitatem, 31.
[39] John Paul II, Letter to Women, 2: “women who are mothers, women who are wives, women who are daughters and women who are sisters, women who work, consecrated women.”
[40] Ibid., 2.
[41] Ibid., 2.
[42] John Paul II, Post Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Christifideles Laici, 50.
[43] Ibid., 50.
[44] Gen. 1, 27.
[45] John Paul II, Apostilic Letter, Mulieris Dignitatem, 6.
[46] Ibid., 6.
[47] Ibid., 7.
[48] Ibid., 10.
[49] Ibid., 29.
[50] Ibid., 30.
[51] Ibid., 29.
[52] Ibid., 10.
[53] Ibid., 10.
[54] Gen. 2, 18.
[55] John Paul II, Apostilic Letter, Mulieris Dignitatem, 7.
[56] Ibid., 30.
[57] John Paul II, Post Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Christifideles Laici, 51.
[58] Ibid., 49.
[59] Ibid., 5.
[60] Ibid., 51.
[61] Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre, Toward the Future, (1975) Collins, London, p. 84.
[62] Aguado, Aranazu, “Women’s Contribution to the Life of the Church”, in Christifideles Laici: Comments and Reflections, Vatican City, (1989 – 1990).
[63] John Paul II, Post Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Christifideles Laici, 37.
[64] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter, Redemptoris Mater, 46.