Lady Looks Like a Dude, by Ember

So, I was looking up this passage on what are commonly referred to as male or female traits. Many people seem to have prejudice according to the way they are, or prefer to operate, and want to say that either the male, or the female traits are not as good as the other, rather than to say they are both good and necessary and create a harmonious balance together as is symbolized by the Taoist taijitu, yin/yang.  

Fourth, traditional ethics overrates culturally masculine traits like “independence, autonomy, intellect, will, wariness, hierarchy, domination, culture, transcendence, product, asceticism, war, and death,” while it underrates culturally feminine traits like “interdependence, community, connection, sharing, emotion, body, trust, absence of hierarchy, nature, immanence, process, joy, peace, and life.” Fifth, and finally, it favors “male” ways of moral reasoning that emphasize rules, rights, universality, and impartiality over “female” ways of moral reasoning that emphasize relationships, responsibilities, particularity, and partiality (Jaggar, “Feminist Ethics,” 1992). - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-ethics/ 12/30/11

If you look at all the male vs. female traits it seems that Jesus emphasized the feminine traits in his life and teachings. He, "whom God made our wisdom" (1 Cor 1:30) Wasn't he being the perfect example of the "good shepherd"? I can't imagine Jesus treating people the way that the shepherds of the Church, as a whole, treat their flock (there are good examples like St. Francis of Assisi. And remember many of the first apostles gave up their lives for their faith). But, as a whole, what wisdom are they following in doing what they do, this hierarchy? Would Jesus advocate burning at the stake?  Would a woman?  Would a mother? It seems to be very masculine based traits that are employed above the feminine. Why? By whose example? I just said the example of Jesus was to employ the feminine traits. The world was already filled with the masculine to the point of imbalance. Why go the way of dominance? The impartiality in setting down rules and regulations; "They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger." (Mt 23:4), above personal responsibility. This seems to be the way of man and the wisdom of man, not of God.  

What kind of "bride" is the Church preparing for Christ, the bridegroom? They themselves say that the Church is the bride. Yet they are making her out to be some sort of feminist gone wrong, if she is a woman. Or, what? Are we to think that the bride of Christ is male? If she is a woman they are making her abandon her femininity in favor of masculinity, which is feminism gone wrong, or "she" is really a "he" and that makes Christ a homosexual if he were to marry him. Which the church obviously says is wrong! If you think feminism is so wrong, if you think homosexuality is so wrong, then why are you making the Church out to be that kind of relationship? Hypocrites! Lady looks like a dude! There is no balance in the Church right now that is the problem. Femininity has not been respected even though Christ himself showed us this was the way to perfection; balance. God created them male and female. You are imbalanced if you deny one side (rib, in Heb tsela) in either the microcosm (individual person) or the macrocosm (relationships). Christ was physically male (the Word) to the world, but he balanced his personal spiritual masculinity (word) and femininity (wisdom)  and gave us the example of what the world could be in balance; Love. Word and Wisdom united as "one flesh", heiros gamos, the holy marriage, i.e., the image of God.

   

What is the Gospel of Christ? by Ember

I would like to propose a question. Who is Paul refering to in Galatians when he says, "we"?

"But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gosple contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed." (Gal 1:8)

Because it seems that we, who are drawn to the gospel of Christ and believe and receive the Spirit because of it, need to always be vigilant in determing that the gospel we receive is not perverted. We have the right and obligation to point out ways in which we are taught to turn aside from the gospel of Christ by those who are in positions of authority. If we are being troubled by the authority for living the gospel, why should we submit to any yoke other than to the yoke of Jesus Christ which we first received?

"For freedom Christ has set us free; stand fast therefore, and do not submit again to the yoke of slavery."  (Gal 5:1)

And what is the gospel of Christ that we first received? Wasn't it to be servants of one another in love and not to bind under the law?

"For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'" (Gal 5:14)

When the law hinders me in loving my neighbor, I think there is a flaw in the interpretation of the law. Just like the early Christians were persecuting the Gentiles because they were not circumcised.  They were letting a law get in the way of loving their neighbor. Paul even had to repremand Peter for not standing up for the Gentiles and their right to remain uncircumcised (Gal 2:11-16)

"Are you so foolish?  Having begun with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh?"  (Gal 3:3)

I wonder why so many Christians think it is OK to act in unloving ways to people whom they judge to be sinners when our only concern should be love.

"Owe one another nothing, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law." (Rom 13:8)

And while I believe it is right to discuss what is good and what is bad, no man should be bound by another's scruples.

"For why should my liberty be determined by another man's scruples? If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?"  (Gal 10:29-30)

Now I am speaking as if to adults, for all children are obligated to follow the will of their parents and not determine for themselves. But honoring parents is different when one becomes an adult. With respect you listen, but you act according to your own conscience.

". . . for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child.  But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their faculties trained by practice to distinguish good from evil.  Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrines of Christ and go on to maturity, not again laying the foundation from dead works and of faith toward God, with instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment." (Heb 5:14-6:1-2)

I don't know about you, but I don't feel as if I need to be breastfed anymore, yuk!  I respectfully decline because I am an adult.

You are Anointed, by Ember

Boy do I owe you an apology, Querci! 


Remember back when we were talking about  "What's in a name"?  Well, I said I wanted to take you seriously "regardless of your other qualifications", as if you may not have had any.  I should have backed you up better than that.  I still believe that we should listen to everyone, personally.  But that being said, you do have qualifications as regards the Catholic Church.  I know you received the sacrament of Confirmation.  It is your qualification.  During confirmation a person is anointed with oil (chrism) and,

 By this anointing the confirmed receives the "mark," the seal of the Holy Spirit. (CCC 1295)  

And this anointing most assuredly is a qualification of great value.  Listen to what the Catechism states next,

This "character" perfects the common priesthood of the faithful, received in Baptism, and "the confirmed person receives the power to profess faith in Christ publicly and as it were officially (quasi ex officio)." St. Thomas, CCC 1305 

OFFICIALLY, uh huh, you heard me! Given this It would seem that, not only are you well qualified to speak about your faith, you even have the duty, because of what you have received, to speak on behalf of your faith and the church you belong to. 


 Let us all listen to one another and learn from one another.


Ember

The Rich Man, by Ember

And as he was setting on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, 'Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments: 'Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.' And he said to him, "Teacher, all these things I have observed from my youth." And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said to him, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me." At that saying his countenance fell, and he went away sorrowful; for he had great possessions. (Mk 10:17-22)

I wonder, Querci, will you believe that I mean no disrespect when I say this? What would the Catholic Church do if Jesus said this to us? I mean to Rome, the Vatican. What happened to, "Take nothing for your journey, no staff, nor bag, nor bread, nor money; and do not have two tunics"? (Lk 9:3)

Ember