Masculinity of God

[Snowcatpa]

[quote name='Semperviva' date='Jun 26 2005, 12:19 AM']Hahaha, shut up! I thought this was interesting, maybe irrrelevent- NO-its not, lol its shows PART of the reason feminism came about, cause PROTESTANT society IS ANTI-woman and distorts woman hood LITERALLY DISTORTS her, her body, her role, her child-bearing ability, her soul ( ie dung heap covered in snow, etc, lol) , everything!

[i][b]THE CORSETTE THEORY[/b][/i]
So something went wrong with feminism i suppose...LOL...we need to make it MARIAN FEMINISM I think.... that's all.....(BTW: i meant this as [b]JUST ONE [/b]Legitimate reason for feminists beginnings...look for more on the history of feminism segment of the link)
[right][snapback]623842[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[quote name='Semperviva' date='Jun 26 2005, 10:26 AM']LIke AVH said,   its [color=orange]Original Sin and Protestant ideologies[/color] that causes the subjugation of woman, not Catholic theological teaching of Christ as true God and true man, lol.
[right][snapback]624225[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
[color=purple]
stupid corsets.... The sad thing is that it's still so easy to wish we had them sometimes! (you would never have to smell of elderberries it in! the corset did it for you!) There are really good, Christ-Centered, Catholic feminist stuff out there, like Canticle Magazine, or ENDOW (Educating on the Nature and Dignity of Women) or Women for Faith and Family (WFF). They make me smile and help me along too
[/color]

[Semperviva]

[quote name='Snowcatpa' date='Jun 26 2005, 09:07 AM'][color=purple]
stupid corsets.... The sad thing is that it's still so easy to wish we had them sometimes! (you would never have to smell of elderberries it in! the corset did it for you!) There are really good, Christ-Centered, Catholic feminist stuff out there, like Canticle Magazine, or ENDOW (Educating on the Nature and Dignity of Women) or Women for Faith and Family (WFF). They make me smile and help me along too
[/color]
[right][snapback]624249[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Hahaha, I still want one, lol, just not one which distorts my body so I can't have kids!!! goodness...this is cool and has nothing to do with anything, except the fact that I like it, haha: [color=green]Rekhem, the Hebrew word for "uterus," comes from the same root as the word rakhamim, "compassion."[/color] Woohoo!
Coooool, I diden't know about Catholic ones like u mentioned!!!!! [i]Grazie![/i]

[philothea]

I like the Marian Feminsim idea.

IIRC, the girl in [i]Pirates of the Carribean[/i] was shown having corset trouble. She fainted, but only because the corset was so tight she couldn't breathe. It was a nice touch.

[Guest JeffCR07]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jun 25 2005, 09:39 PM']Asking questions is a good thing, but sometimes the answers will elude us, because the answers essentially transcends us.  We must not fall into rationalism and think that we can comprehend the incomprehensible.  The questions that Job asked of God are an example of this, and here are some of the Lord's answers to him, and Job's response:

Job 38:1-41 and Job 40:1-5

[38:1] Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind:
[2] "Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
[3] Gird up your loins like a man,
I will question you, and you shall declare to me.
[4] "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding.
[5] Who determined its measurements -- surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
[6] On what were its bases sunk,
or who laid its cornerstone,
[7] when the morning stars sang together,
and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
[8] "Or who shut in the sea with doors,
when it burst forth from the womb;
[9] when I made clouds its garment,
and thick darkness its swaddling band,
[10] and prescribed bounds for it,
and set bars and doors,
[11] and said, `Thus far shall you come, and no farther,
and here shall your proud waves be stayed'?
[12] "Have you commanded the morning since your days began,
and caused the dawn to know its place,
[13] that it might take hold of the skirts of the earth,
and the wicked be shaken out of it?
[14] It is changed like clay under the seal,
and it is dyed like a garment.
[15] From the wicked their light is withheld,
and their uplifted arm is broken.
[16] "Have you entered into the springs of the sea,
or walked in the recesses of the deep?
[17] Have the gates of death been revealed to you,
or have you seen the gates of deep darkness?
[18] Have you comprehended the expanse of the earth?
Declare, if you know all this.
[19] "Where is the way to the dwelling of light,
and where is the place of darkness,
[20] that you may take it to its territory
and that you may discern the paths to its home?
[21] You know, for you were born then,
and the number of your days is great!
[22] "Have you entered the storehouses of the snow,
or have you seen the storehouses of the hail,
[23] which I have reserved for the time of trouble,
for the day of battle and war?
[24] What is the way to the place where the light is distributed,
or where the east wind is scattered upon the earth?
[25] "Who has cleft a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a way for the thunderbolt,
[26] to bring rain on a land where no man is,
on the desert in which there is no man;
[27] to satisfy the waste and desolate land,
and to make the ground put forth grass?
[28] "Has the rain a father,
or who has begotten the drops of dew?
[29] From whose womb did the ice come forth,
and who has given birth to the hoarfrost of heaven?
[30] The waters become hard like stone,
and the face of the deep is frozen.
[31] "Can you bind the chains of the Plei'ades,
or loose the cords of Orion?
[32] Can you lead forth the Maz'zaroth in their season,
or can you guide the Bear with its children?
[33] Do you know the ordinances of the heavens?
Can you establish their rule on the earth?
[34] "Can you lift up your voice to the clouds,
that a flood of waters may cover you?
[35] Can you send forth lightnings, that they may go
and say to you, `Here we are'?
[36] Who has put wisdom in the clouds,
or given understanding to the mists?
[37] Who can number the clouds by wisdom?
Or who can tilt the waterskins of the heavens,
[38] when the dust runs into a mass
and the clods cleave fast together?
[39] "Can you hunt the prey for the lion,
or satisfy the appetite of the young lions,
[40] when they crouch in their dens,
or lie in wait in their covert?
[41] Who provides for the raven its prey,
when its young ones cry to God,
and wander about for lack of food?

[. . .]

[40:1] And the LORD said to Job:
[2] "Shall a faultfinder contend with the Almighty?
He who argues with God, let him answer it."
[3] Then Job answered the LORD:
[4] "Behold, I am of small account; what shall I answer thee?
I lay my hand on my mouth.
[5] I have spoken once, and I will not answer;
twice, but I will proceed no further."
[right][snapback]623813[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


I think this scripture is extremely important for the typical Westerner, myself included. It is very easy to fall into the idea that, if we just put our mind to it, we can understand everything.

We westerners tend to have the mindset that all "mysteries" are things to be solved, rather than having the proper outlook, which is that something which is a true mystery is something unsolvable.

It is always good to remind ourselves that the mysteries of the Church are in Faith, rather than Reason. Faith and Reason [i]do[/i] work together, but that is because Reason proceeds from Faith. The fact that Reason has Faith as its origin means that we must admit (and indeed, it is only reasonable [i]to[/i] admit) that there must be some things which cannot be reasoned out - some things must transcend reason.

[Snowcatpa]

[color=purple]
[quote name='Socrates' date='Jun 25 2005, 11:28 PM']Sorry if this comes off as harsh, but have you encountered any genuine problems of women being mistreated because of the Church's teachings about God, or are you just listening to the rhetoric of radical feminists?

Exactly what abuses and degrading of women is caused by Church Teaching? 

In today's world, most of the abuse and degradation of women comes from those who are not Catholic (Muslims, Hindus, etc.) and those who act irreligiously (pornography, the abortion industry, the prostitution and sex trade, etc.)

Snowcatpa, have really encountered abuse of women caused by Catholic teaching, or are you just listening to the gripings of bitter nuns who want to be priests, worship a "Goddess" and the like?
[right][snapback]623797[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I didn’t really mean that there might be a theological problem with what the Church truly teaches. As I said before, that is divine truth and we use it to grow in love of Christ. I meant that in the real world, people who don’t always understand it all misinterpret the message, which has some really harmful effects…which are troubling to me. I agree that devoutly religious Catholics treat women with much more love and respect, but I wasn’t really referring to those. I also freely admit that before Christianty women were treated a lot worse.

I know you didn’t mean the comment about listening to the grippings of bitter nuns who want to be priests and goddess-worshipers insultingly…but…I’m really not like that… and I would never be asking you all these questions in an attempt to justify their positions. If anything, I want to know how to defend against them and am hurt by what I perceive your assumption about me to be: that I’m merely being deluded by fancy rhetoric and unorthodox rabble-rousers.

The abuses and degrading of women that I was thinking about that could (not be caused exactly, more like…resulting from misinterpretation and not full comprehension) harm women is, like I was talking about before, that superficially, since God is a man… and not a woman… this elevates the status of men and provides justification for the lower status of women. Maybe this then has to do with male God of Islam being used to confine and abuse women (also not in the realm of true Islam), hiding them, not allowing them to be the women that they are, no voting, hiding in burqas, genital mutilation because it’s not a women’s purpose… That even in irreligious communities that small thing, that God is male and thus this is a man's place to lead...can keep women from getting the health care they need (not abortion! like medicine)...or from receiving equal pay. These are obviously examples stretched out but it can rooted in the different valuation of the sexes – that one is better than the other. That is not what Christianity teaches, I know, but those can be some of its implications when misunderstood.

Even when Christianity is properly understood, this teaching about the masculinity of God, while divinely true and ultimately freeing, not limiting, can provide a much more difficult context with which to grasp God. I am an ingrate… a pitiful nothing…for I have had a lot harder time understanding God because of his masculinity [i]to the exclusion of the feminine[/i]… the comparisons reflective of his divine nature in relation to our feminine acceptance help… but it’s really hard for me. I still see that as reflecting in the world as women submitting to what men decide to give them… and men aren’t God… it doesn’t always come out nicely that way… I think of women silently suffering under abusive husbands who are supposed to be the Godly leaders of their lives, or being ignored in classrooms and discussions because they’re submitting to the outward leadership of their male counterparts. These are little examples…but that’s what a lot of life is… the little ways beautiful ideal comparisons and hypostatic relationships don’t always translate well into the real world. (sidenote – I’m actually quite optimistic)

In a personal way, what degrading of women is caused by Catholic teaching? Women are fulfilled in Catholic teaching, but that doesn’t mean that isn’t an insulting and crazy journey to understand that. Maybe you don’t see it as such, but it can come across that way in parts of one’s spiritual development. It did for me. I look at my brother and think, he’s more reflective of God than I am…than I’ll ever be… granted…. I’m an insignificant nothing. I know it and I accept it and pray for God’s grace and love… but what makes him so great that he is more reflective of God’s nature than I could ever hope to be? I know that sounds absolutely terrible…but …I want to be honest...I thought it. I get to be completely fulfilled in who I am as a woman….a wonderful amazing thing…but men are God’s role? And I’m not? I'll never be Godly and men get to be... all because God's role is masculine and I'm a girl? God relates to us in maternal ways too... those I can relate too...but they're seemingly not Godly enough because God's role towards us is a Masculine one, never referred to as feminine. I guess I’m just the more passive, submissive one….ok….I must learn to humble myself and be that, and in doing so fulfill my vocation….but… always? And why?

A couple of you, in all of Christ's good intentions, have told me that I shouldn't be focusing on that… that there are some things that you just can’t know….I know that… I know that there are some things that you just can’t know…but….phatmassers and scholars can receive lengthy explanations and debate for pages on God’s nature, or the Eucharist, and that’s ok… but the understanding of our own vocations and the role gender plays in so much of our faith is just something to see the mystery in and move on from? because it's caused too many people to depart from church teachings and lead to more harm? It’s far too shaking for me to just let go without truly trying to understand, and meditate on, as far as God sees fit. [/color]

Edited June 27, 2005 by Snowcatpa

[Semperviva]

40:1] And the LORD said to Job:
[2] "[b]Shall a faultfinder contend[/b] with the Almighty?
He who argues with God, let him answer it."

.........it seems the key word in the scripture is [i]contend[/i], not question. one implies pride, the other implies pursuit of knowledge or wisdom. no-one here has decidedly found fault with God. to [i]accept[/i] the truth and then seek to find out why is faith from which comes will come true reason........if one says [i]"Lord, I believe. Help my unbelief." [/i] this is not contention nor is it finding fault with God. The I believe comes first and this is exactly what has taken place...then the understanding will follow...

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Semperviva' date='Jun 27 2005, 08:49 AM']40:1] And the LORD said to Job:
[2] "[b]Shall a faultfinder contend[/b] with the Almighty?
He who argues with God, let him answer it."

.........it seems the key word in the scripture is [i]contend[/i], not question.  one implies pride, the other implies pursuit of knowledge or wisdom.  no-one here has decidedly found fault with God.  to [i]accept[/i] the truth and then seek to find out why is faith from which comes will come true reason........if one says [i]"Lord, I believe. Help my unbelief." [/i] this is not contention nor is it finding fault with God.  The I believe comes first and this is exactly what has taken place...then the understanding will follow...
[right][snapback]625237[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
That is how the English translator translated the text.

The fact remains, both in the case of Job and in the case of all other men, that one cannot define or conceptualize God. Theology must always be apophatic, even when one uses cataphatic theology he must always negate what he says positively.

It is not possible to know God's essence, and not simply because the human intellect is finite, but because God transcends all things. In fact as Fr. Maloney said in his book on Palamism, "God for us is [i]Theos[/i] whereas God in Himself is [i]Hyper-Theos[/i]." [Fr. George Maloney, [u]A Theology of Uncreated Energies[/u], page 74] In other words, God in His essence is beyond anything man can comprehend, because He is beyond being, in fact, God is beyond God.

[Semperviva]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jun 27 2005, 11:42 AM']That is how the English translator translated the text. 

The fact remains, both in the case of Job and in the case of all other men, that one cannot define or conceptualize God.  Theology must always be apophatic, even when one uses cataphatic theology he must always negate what he says positively. 

It is not possible to know God's essence, and not simply because the human intellect is finite, but because God transcends all things.  In fact as Fr. Maloney said in his book on Palamism, "God for us is [i]Theos[/i] whereas God in Himself is [i]Hyper-Theos[/i]." [Fr. George Maloney, [u]A Theology of Uncreated Energies[/u], page 74]  In other words, God in His essence is beyond anything man can comprehend, because He is beyond being, in fact, God is beyond God.
[right][snapback]625278[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Yes, we can never know God's essence. I said there is a differnce between contending and seeking Him more. As God is infinite and the One Supreme Reality we must continually be coming to a greater awareness of that reality, and asking questions can help our greater and greater awareness of Him which comes [i]first[/i] through the aid of the Holy Spirit and the gift of faith. I never said you can comprehend God's mystery by asking why.

However, by telling me the verb "to contend" and "to find fault with" are merely the subjective and insufficient words of the English translator which never fully get at God's essence, you will only bring into question whether or not I can really know or say anything of God, which I am fully aware of, in the sense you speak of.

I think you are wrong [i]if[/i] you are implying we cannot learn more by examining scripture more closely and studying its language. it seems perfectly self-evident in the text that the words choosen throught the inspiration of the Holy Spirit are argue, contend, and find-fault, all of which imply arrogance and pride. Consider the difference between Zechariah and Mary's questioning. Both questioned, one with arrogance and doubt, one with humility.

"You will seek me and find me, [i]when[/i] you seek me with all of your heart" Jeremiah 29:13

Edited June 27, 2005 by Semperviva

[Guest JeffCR07]

It seems to me that this argument is fairly unnecessary. Not because the point that Apotheoun is making is incorrect or even simply a matter of semantics - it is not.

Rather, I think this argument is unnecessary because, ultimately, you both know what the other is [i]trying[/i] to say, but simply wording poorly.

The quest for knowledge is a good thing, and understanding is something that we should always seek, insofar as we are able. There comes a point, however, in our discussion of the Almighty where our understanding comes to an end, where our power of reason runs out and is unable to go further. The desire to run as far as our reason will take us is a noble and holy inspiration, but it is foolish to think that we can run forever.

Our reason itself shows this to us: If we were able to perfectly contain every aspect of God within our understanding, he would not be god - for God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived. Now I can conceive of two things. First, a God whose Essence is able to be perfectly contained by human reason, and second, a God whose Essence is such that it Transcends human reason. The second is greater than the first, for the first is contained within the limited bounds of human reason while the second trandscends those bounds. Thus reason itself causes us to admit that God's Essence transcends reason.

It is the balking at this limitation and the refusal to admit the utter Transcendence of God's Essence which Apotheoun is criticizing, while it is the righteous desire to use our reason as far as it is able to take us which Semperviva is advocating.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Semperviva' date='Jun 27 2005, 10:11 AM']Yes, we can never know God's essence.  I said there is a differnce between contending and seeking Him more.  As God is infinite and the One Supreme Reality we must continually be coming to a greater awareness of that reality, and asking questions can help our greater and greater awareness of Him which comes [i]first[/i] through the aid of the Holy Spirit and the gift of faith.  I never said you can comprehend God's mystery by asking why.

However, by telling me the verb "to contend" and "to find fault with" are merely the subjective and insufficient words of the English translator which never fully get at God's essence, you will only bring into question whether or not I can really know or say anything of God, which I am fully aware of, in the sense you speak of.

I think you are wrong [i]if[/i] you are implying we cannot learn more by examining scripture more closely and studying its language.  it seems perfectly self-evident in the text that the words choosen throught the inspiration of the Holy Spirit are argue, contend, and find-fault, all of which imply arrogance and pride.  Consider the difference between Zechariah and Mary's questioning.  Both questioned, one with arrogance and doubt, one with humility.

"You will seek me and find me, [i]when[/i] you seek me with all of your heart" Jeremiah 29:13
[right][snapback]625295[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
God is the supreme reality and God is not the supreme reality. God as Maximus says is "infinitely beyond the infinite." In the Byzantine tradition the scriptural statements about knowing God are seen as referring to experience, that is, to hypostatic experience, and not to any kind of intellectual or definitional knowledge. Thus, it is speaking of an experience which transcends both intellect and body, because it is the eternal and uncreated gift of deification itself, which deifies man and which makes him uncreated at the level of energy.

There is within your approach a Western desire, and I would even say a modern desire, to "know" through the formation of intellectual concepts, and that is what I see as a problem.

In my comments about the English translation, my point was simply that the Hebrew original has other connotations of meaning, which includes questioning, and in a rather contentious manner, but questioning nonetheless.

The only thing you can know about God is that He is beyond comprehension, but even then apophasis enters in, because in grasping His incomprehensibility one is not grasping Him, because He is even beyond that.

[Semperviva]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jun 27 2005, 01:30 PM']

There is within your approach a Western desire, and I would even say a modern desire, to "know" through the formation of intellectual concepts, and that is what I see as a problem.

In my comments about the English translation, my point was simply that the Hebrew original has other connotations of meaning, which includes questioning, and in a rather contentious manner, but questioning nonetheless.

[right][snapback]625360[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Please do not tell me what my desires consist of. I am not questioning why God came as a man, I am simply trying to defend non-contentious questioning of this truth. You and I have a misunderstanding of the text. It most definetely does [i]not[/i] rule out all questioning, or else Mary, as well as Zechariah woul have been struck dumb. She also received an answer.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Semperviva' date='Jun 27 2005, 11:43 AM']Please do not tell me what my desires consist of.  I am not questioning why God came as a man, I am simply trying to defend non-contentious questioning of this truth.  You and I have a misunderstanding of the text.  It most definetely does [i]not[/i] rule out all questioning, or else Mary, as well as Zechariah woul have been struck dumb.  She also received an answer.
[right][snapback]625367[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I think -- in this thread -- which is about God's masculinity, you are applying analogies that simply don't work in relation to God.

God is Father, but He is not father if by that one is applying human conceptions of man's own fatherhood. God the Father is hetero-essential to all that exists in the world.

I'm simply pointing out that you need to focus more on apophasis, which, to be honest, seems to have been completely neglected in this conversation.

[Semperviva]

If you recall I admitted fully that my analogies failed on practically every level.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Semperviva' date='Jun 27 2005, 11:51 AM']If you recall I admitted fully that my analogies failed on practically every level.
[right][snapback]625376[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Yeah I know, but you're Eastern right?

You are aware that the East denies the [i]analogia entis[/i].

[Semperviva]

I love the Eastern rite, esp. Melkite and Greek Orthodox, but I study in the Western tradition.

Edited June 27, 2005 by Semperviva