Basilisa Marie Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 Don't jump the gun, now. She was saying Hildebrand's writings on femininity were masculine, not Hildebrand herself. Major difference. She also never implied or insinuated that Hildebrand was "less of a woman" because she isn't a feminist. It's honestly probably offensive for you to say that when Basilisa never said or touched upon anything of the sort. That's why I said that even though her writings don't do it for me, I'm still intelligent enough to recognize how important she is to the conversation about theology of womanhood and women in the Church. By "masculine" I meant that they strike me as looking at femininity from the outside, in (hence they're pretty much the same as what a lot of male theologians say about women). It's not about trying to promote my personal brand of feminism. It's about trying to get some different perspectives going so that maybe we can come up with something a little more nuanced. My personal feelings about Hildebrand aren't relevant, but Nihil asked me about them. And doing things like working on our theology of men and women will help us do a better job of explaining and defending Church teachings, and maybe help people accept them more easily.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now