Post by glenngk on Jul 26, 2018 17:09:34 GMT
"For a man should not have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God. But the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man. 9 Neither was man created for the sake of woman, but woman for man. 10 For this reason a woman should have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
11 In any case, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12 For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman. But all things come from God." St. Paul - The New English Bible
Most modern women, except for those who are committed to Christian fundamentalism, are offended for good reasons by the above famous passage from Paul's letter 1 Corinthians 11.7-10. And many men such as myself have rejected such views throughout their whole lifes as well. It is rejected because it violates a basic idea often viewed as modern that human beings both men and women are in a deep way fundamentally of one nature and equal. And even Paul the author of this writing in verse 11 seems to suspect that he is going to far in a religion, which in Genesis states that 'God created humankind in his image male and female created he them.'
And yet the Traditionalist and Feminine Essentialist positions within Deanism insist that men and women are supposed to accept a doctrine which differs from the above statement only in the exchange of the roles of who is on the bottom and who is on the top. Within their form of Deanism it is women who are in the form of Dea and men are well, they are so inferior, that they do not even to exist within the spiritually superior world of Chelouranya. And within Tellaria, our world, they are certainly to be subordinated as they are in the fictionalized societies of Rheinish Matriarchy.
Now I have heard many justifications for the idea that men need to be subordinated to women within Deanism. While most Deanic thinkers like to base their thoughts on their perception of "supposedly guaranteed" Divine principles first and then work down to the lowly level of earthly fact, they often do use these earthly facts to develop their theological arguments. Thus I have heard it argued that men and women in general do behave differently in many ways. And that women are more identified with the so called "feminine virtues" of humility, caring, patience, love, compassion, etc. Men on the other hand are more often collectively perceived to inhabit the vices of arrogance, pride, anger, vainglory, hatred, violence, etc. And lets assume that the stereotypes represent some truth. Let say that on an average women are morally and spiritually superior to men. However even assuming that to be a fact it in fact says nothing of the reasons for this supposed superiority. There could be other causal factors involved in this situation other than a supposed theological fact that the female represents spirit while the male represents matter.
Furthermore, even if on the average any one group, class, or sex does excel in certain fields of behavior such as in spiritual devotion, science, or mathematics that says nothing about any one individuals capacities or character. There are persons who are superior in the vast majority of persons within all groups in many fields of endeaver. Thus there have been brilliant women within the political field, scientific, and literary field in spite of the fact that women on the average have not played a dominant role in these fields. There are persons in both genders in all forms of human endeavor. And the fact that one group as whole may excel in certian activities, certainly should not disqualify those in other groups who in spite of being in the lower achieving group are still superior to almost all members within each group. Now to take this argument to the issue of priest or priestesshood within Deanism, while is where the bias against men really shows itself within Independent Deanism. Even if the majority of qualified persons within the religion are women, it would still make perfect sense permit all qualified men to be priests even if those are few in number. However lest persons misunderstand me. I am not all that interested in the issue of priesthood in itself. Personally I have really doubts about the principle of priest or priestesshood in general. And certainly the attempt to establish a hieriachal priesthoom within a religion which does not even have organized communities on the ground has little value.
Now to deal with a final argument, which I do believe will be utilized my position. I will call it the Roman Catholic priesthood argument. Many Roman Catholic church leaders who support the ban on women priests within the Church will admit that women are in all ways equal if not superior spiritually to men. But the ban of women in the priesthood must still be enforced anyway. Why? Because Jesus was a man and the priest uniquely represents Jesus within the Church. Therefore the since the God-Man Jesus was not a women then that settles it. I suspect that within Deanism those who want to see within it the subordination of men to women will ultimately default to this type of purely theological and purely unprovable idea. Well I can't prove it wrong any more that anyone can prove it right. This just shows that there is an unbridgeable gap between us. You go your way and I mine. That is it.
Note. I am perfectly aware that this will be viewed as an antagonistic article for several members. And for those who want just to enjoy a state of sweetness in which everyone is just so nice and inoffensive to everyone else it no doubt is offensive in itself. Well I am writing it to give testimony to what I believe. Thus I will risk being offensive if persons wish to see it that way. However I have a policy once I have said what I want to say as effectively as I can say it, I try to go onto other things. So in general I do not plan to wast anyone's time telling them things repeatedly that they do not want to hear. So people need not fear that this is the beginning of any kind of endless repetition. Enough for now.
Glenn
11 In any case, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12 For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman. But all things come from God." St. Paul - The New English Bible
Most modern women, except for those who are committed to Christian fundamentalism, are offended for good reasons by the above famous passage from Paul's letter 1 Corinthians 11.7-10. And many men such as myself have rejected such views throughout their whole lifes as well. It is rejected because it violates a basic idea often viewed as modern that human beings both men and women are in a deep way fundamentally of one nature and equal. And even Paul the author of this writing in verse 11 seems to suspect that he is going to far in a religion, which in Genesis states that 'God created humankind in his image male and female created he them.'
And yet the Traditionalist and Feminine Essentialist positions within Deanism insist that men and women are supposed to accept a doctrine which differs from the above statement only in the exchange of the roles of who is on the bottom and who is on the top. Within their form of Deanism it is women who are in the form of Dea and men are well, they are so inferior, that they do not even to exist within the spiritually superior world of Chelouranya. And within Tellaria, our world, they are certainly to be subordinated as they are in the fictionalized societies of Rheinish Matriarchy.
Now I have heard many justifications for the idea that men need to be subordinated to women within Deanism. While most Deanic thinkers like to base their thoughts on their perception of "supposedly guaranteed" Divine principles first and then work down to the lowly level of earthly fact, they often do use these earthly facts to develop their theological arguments. Thus I have heard it argued that men and women in general do behave differently in many ways. And that women are more identified with the so called "feminine virtues" of humility, caring, patience, love, compassion, etc. Men on the other hand are more often collectively perceived to inhabit the vices of arrogance, pride, anger, vainglory, hatred, violence, etc. And lets assume that the stereotypes represent some truth. Let say that on an average women are morally and spiritually superior to men. However even assuming that to be a fact it in fact says nothing of the reasons for this supposed superiority. There could be other causal factors involved in this situation other than a supposed theological fact that the female represents spirit while the male represents matter.
Furthermore, even if on the average any one group, class, or sex does excel in certain fields of behavior such as in spiritual devotion, science, or mathematics that says nothing about any one individuals capacities or character. There are persons who are superior in the vast majority of persons within all groups in many fields of endeaver. Thus there have been brilliant women within the political field, scientific, and literary field in spite of the fact that women on the average have not played a dominant role in these fields. There are persons in both genders in all forms of human endeavor. And the fact that one group as whole may excel in certian activities, certainly should not disqualify those in other groups who in spite of being in the lower achieving group are still superior to almost all members within each group. Now to take this argument to the issue of priest or priestesshood within Deanism, while is where the bias against men really shows itself within Independent Deanism. Even if the majority of qualified persons within the religion are women, it would still make perfect sense permit all qualified men to be priests even if those are few in number. However lest persons misunderstand me. I am not all that interested in the issue of priesthood in itself. Personally I have really doubts about the principle of priest or priestesshood in general. And certainly the attempt to establish a hieriachal priesthoom within a religion which does not even have organized communities on the ground has little value.
Now to deal with a final argument, which I do believe will be utilized my position. I will call it the Roman Catholic priesthood argument. Many Roman Catholic church leaders who support the ban on women priests within the Church will admit that women are in all ways equal if not superior spiritually to men. But the ban of women in the priesthood must still be enforced anyway. Why? Because Jesus was a man and the priest uniquely represents Jesus within the Church. Therefore the since the God-Man Jesus was not a women then that settles it. I suspect that within Deanism those who want to see within it the subordination of men to women will ultimately default to this type of purely theological and purely unprovable idea. Well I can't prove it wrong any more that anyone can prove it right. This just shows that there is an unbridgeable gap between us. You go your way and I mine. That is it.
Note. I am perfectly aware that this will be viewed as an antagonistic article for several members. And for those who want just to enjoy a state of sweetness in which everyone is just so nice and inoffensive to everyone else it no doubt is offensive in itself. Well I am writing it to give testimony to what I believe. Thus I will risk being offensive if persons wish to see it that way. However I have a policy once I have said what I want to say as effectively as I can say it, I try to go onto other things. So in general I do not plan to wast anyone's time telling them things repeatedly that they do not want to hear. So people need not fear that this is the beginning of any kind of endless repetition. Enough for now.
Glenn
