|
The Pope’s New Feminism
In the mid-l95Os, a
friend wrote to the American Catholic novelist Flannery O'Connor to complain
about the sexist statements of a now long-forgotten priest. The
letter-writer must have demanded an explanation of how one could belong to a
church that exhibited such attitudes, for O'Connor's reply was swift and
sharp: “Don't say the Church drags around this dead weight, just the Rev.
So&So drags it around, or many Rev. So&Sos. The Church would just as soon
canonize a woman as a man and I suppose has done more than any other force
in history to free women.”
O'Connor was
thinking, no doubt, of the many ways in which the advance of Christianity
had strengthened the position of women in the past. A remarkable
accomplishment of the early Church was to gain wide acceptance of the ideal
of permanent monogamy in cultures where polygamy was common and men were
permitted by custom to put aside their wives.
Later,
despite pressures from princes and merchants, the Council of Trent stood
firm against marriages arranged without the consent of the spouses. Later
still, continental European policies protecting mothers and children were
influenced heavily by Catholic social thought.
Perhaps the
novelist also had in mind Jesus' attitude toward women. When we read the
apostolic writings today, we easily can overlook how radically our Lord
departed from the culture of his time in his friendships with women,
including public sinners. It is striking how many important conversations
Jesus had with women, and how many of his most important teachings were
first confided to his women friends.
Still, one
might imagine the young letter-writer of the '50s impatiently replying, “All
right, but what has the Church done for us lately?” Not even Flannery
O'Connor guessed, in those preconciliar days, that the Catholic Church was
about to become one of the world's most energetic champions of the freedom
and dignity of women.
It was
Vatican II that signaled a new awakening to women's concerns with a few
cryptic statements, rich in implications. The Council spoke warmly of the
idea that political and economic orders should extend the benefits of
culture to everyone, aiding both women and men to develop their gifts in
accordance with their innate dignity (Gaudium et Spes, 1). In their
“Closing Message,” the Council fathers proclaimed: “The hour is coming, in
fact has come, when the vocation of women is being acknowledged in its
fullness, the hour in which women acquire in the world an influence, an
effect and a power never hitherto achieved.”
Contribution To Women
That the
Church would be no mere passive observer of women's progress in the secular
world became clear in the 197Os when she emerged as a vigorous proponent in
international settings for social and economic justice for women, especially
poor women. From the beginning, hers has been a distinctive voice in those
discussions. She has been a tireless advocate for those whose voices are
seldom heard in the corridors of power — refugee women, migrant women, and
mothers everywhere. Often she has stood practically alone in insisting that
there can be no authentic progress for women without respect for women's
roles in the family. That concern for women's family roles is in no way
inconsistent with her full support of women's aspirations for participation
in economic, social, and political life.
In the
1990s, the Holy Father embraced the cause of women's rights in specific
terms. His Apostolic Letter to Women prior to the 1995 Beijing
Women's Conference stated: “there is an urgent need to achieve real equality
in every area: equal pay for equal work, protection for working mothers,
fairness in career advancements, equality of spouses with regard to family
rights and the recognition of everything that is part of the rights and
duties of citizens in a democratic State.”
His support
was not limited to encouraging words. The pope was the first world leader to
make a concrete commitment toward the goals — equality, development, and
peace — of the 1995 UN women's conference. A few days before the Beijing
meeting, he committed all three hundred thousand Catholic educational,
health-care, and, relief organizations to a priority strategy for girls and
young women, especially the poorest, with a special emphasis on education.
He pointedly included a strategy on the education of boys “to a sense of
women's dignity and worth.” He made a special appeal to women of the Church
“to assume new forms of leadership in service... and to all institutions of
the Church to welcome this contribution of women.”
An Evident Love
By the
mid-1990s, it was clear that one of the great achievements of the papacy of
John Paul II has been to give greatly increased life and vigor to the Second
Vatican Council's fertile statements on women. In a remarkable series of
writings, he has meditated more deeply than any of his predecessors on the
roles of women and men in the light of the word of God. The vocabulary of
these writings came as a surprise to many. Not only did the pope align
himself with women's quest for freedom, but also he adopted much of the language of
the women's movement, even calling for a “new feminism” in Evangelium
Vitae. In his 1995 “World Day of Peace Message,” he observed that, “When
one looks at the great process of women's liberation,” one sees that the
journey has been a difficult one, with its “share of mistakes,” but headed
toward a better future for women. In Mulieris Dignitatem (1988),
which contains the main theological basis for his messages to women, he
labeled discrimination against women as sinful, and repeatedly emphasized
that there is no place in the Christian vision for oppression of women.
The tone of
all these writings is dialogical. Their author invites women to reflect and
meditate with him about the quest for equality, freedom, and dignity in the
light of the faith and in the context of a changing society where the Church
and the faithful are faced with new and complex challenges. No one who reads
these messages can fail to be impressed by the evident love, empathy, and
respect John Paul II holds for womankind, nowhere more manifest than in his
compassionate words to unwed mothers and women who have had abortions. The
image that comes through is of a man who is comfortable with women, and who
listens attentively to their deepest concerns. After meeting with the pope
prior to the
Beijing
conference, Secretary-General Gertrude Mongella told reporters, “If everyone
thought as he does, perhaps we wouldn't need a women's conference.”
New Roles For Women
Where
women's changing roles are concerned, the pope's writings contain no trace
of the dogmatism that often characterizes the rhetoric of organized feminism
and cultural conservatives alike. He affirms the importance of biological
sexual identity, but gives no comfort to those who believe men's and women's
roles are forever fixed in a static pattern. On the contrary, he has
applauded the assumption of new roles by women, and stressed the degree to
which cultural conditioning has been an obstacle to women's advancement.
Despite the
pope's statements, and the Church's unquestioned but often unappreciated
role as a defender of women's interests in society, many women have felt
that the Church has been slow to examine her own structures and the behavior
of her own representatives in the light of the Holy Father's meditations. A
glance at recent developments, however, shows that striking changes have
occurred under his leadership. More importantly for the long run, he has
provided a powerful set of guidelines for further and deeper
transformations. Neither has the pope failed to confront past injustices and
all the Rev. So&Sos throughout history: “And if objective blame [for
obstacles to women's progress], especially in particular historical
contexts, has belonged to not just a few members of the Church, for this I
am truly sorry. May this regret be transformed, on the part of the whole
Church into a renewed commitment of fidelity to the Gospel vision.”
Modeling
this rededication to the Gospel vision in his own sphere, John Paul II has
taken historic steps to raise the level of participation of religious and
laywomen at all levels of the Church. In 1995 he appealed in strong terms to
“all men in the Church to undergo, where necessary, a change of heart and to
implement, as a demand of their faith, a positive vision of women. I ask
them to become more and more aware of the disadvantages to which women, and
especially girls, have been exposed and to see where the attitude of men,
their lack of sensitivity or lack of responsibility may be at the root.” He
himself has made an unprecedented number of appointments of lay and
religious women to pontifical councils and academies, providing an example
for cardinals, bishops, and other priests throughout the world.
Obviously
one cannot expect the entire Church to be brought into conformity with the
Gospel vision one year after the
Beijing
conference, or even thirty years after Vatican II. Cultural attitudes,
custom, and sin are more stubborn than that. Progress will no doubt take
place at different rates in different parts of the Church and her far-flung
institutions. The journey will have its ups and downs, its false starts and
blind alleys. Institutional change, after all, requires changes of mind and
heart within individuals. As Pope Paul VI once said of the Roman curia, “It
does no good to change faces if we don't change hearts.” But it is already
plain that a historic transformation is under way.
Those who
take a legalistic, formal approach to the study of institutions easily can
underestimate the profundity of this process of change. An organization's
formal rules often give a misleading picture of the actual status of women
within the group. (One need only think of the United Nations as an example
of an organization whose practice has fallen far short of its official
commitment to sexual equality!) In the Catholic Church, a certain formal
diversity in roles has in practice been accompanied by an extraordinary
increase in female participation in the life of the Church since Vatican II.
All over the world, lay and religious women currently are serving in many
roles that were once confined mainly or exclusively to priests, men, and
boys. Women are performing a variety of pastoral duties in parishes. They
are swelling the ranks of missionaries. Perhaps not since the first century
A.D. have women been so actively and visibly involved in the life of the
people called together by Jesus Christ.
As
for leadership roles, the Church's health-care system, the second
largest in the world, is managed almost entirely by Catholic women
executives. Catholic women, religious and lay, are superintendents,
principals and trustees in the world's largest provider of private
elementary and secondary education. (The Catholic Church long
ago pioneered women's education, opening up opportunities for
young women in countries where others paid little or no attention
to girls' intellectual development.)The Catholic Church has no
comparative need to apologize in this regard.
Church
agencies also compare favorably, where progress for women is concerned, to
large secular institutions such as corporations, governmental bureaucracies,
universities, and the United Nations. These remain slow in welcoming the
contributions of women, especially at higher levels. Unlike many secular
institutions, moreover, the Church does not expect laywomen to sacrifice
their family lives. When Dr. Jane Matlary, a member of the Holy See's
Beijing delegation, announced she had to return to Norway before the end of
the conference in order to deal with a family crisis, she left with
blessings and good wishes. Many a woman's progress in the business world has
been permanently impaired by resolving such a conflict in favor of her
family. But the Church takes a different view. John Paul II subsequently
appointed Dr. Matlary to the Pontifical Council on Justice and Peace.
Given that
the Church is in a period of such great vitality for women (and the laity),
it is puzzling that some who purport to desire the advancement of women
within the Church have focused particularly on the male priesthood. In most
cases the explanation involves confusion about the nature of the Church and
the priesthood-leading to inapposite analogies from the secular realm. The
Church is neither a business corporation nor a government. Its province is
neither profit nor power, but the care of souls. Obviously, the Church
cannot be run on the same principles as General Motors or city hall.
Equal Call To Holiness
As for the
priesthood, it is not a job, but a calling from God. It is not about power,
but service. To be sure, this kind of calling is reserved to men, but the
call to holiness is universal. Who would claim that Mother Teresa's call to
holiness is inferior to, because it is different from, that of the
archbishop of Calcutta? Understanding of the ordination question has been
further clouded, moreover, by a widespread failure to distinguish between
the sacramental roles that are reserved to priests and the vastly broader
range of pastoral and ministerial roles that can be performed by
non-ordained persons. Pastoral and ministerial roles today are more open
than ever to women. Indeed, the Church in many places desperately needs and
seeks the contributions of lay men and women in these areas.
Given
that “the Church would just as soon canonize a woman as a man,”
and that so many crucial roles in the Church are not only open
to women but also going begging, why do some people continue to
feel aggrieved by the male priesthood? As just mentioned, good-faith
misunderstandings are regrettably common. In some cases, sad to
report, the preoccupation with ordination has a darker side. The
discussion at the 1995 conference of an American group founded
in the 197Os to promote the cause of women's ordination is illustrative.
It was painful to read in the New York Times that some
women at that meeting argued that the goal of ordination should
be abandoned, not because the Church had closed the question,
but because, in the words of one divinity school professor, “ordination
means sub-ordination to an elite, male-dominated, sacred, hierarchical
order of domination.” Others spoke in favor of persevering in
the group's original aim, but the tone of their remarks was more
anti-Church than pro-woman: “We need persons with chisels inside,”
said one religious sister, “chiseling away at that institution,
or it's never going to come down.” A professor of religious studies
chimed in: “To ordain women is to give this rotten totalitarian
system that the Roman Catholic Church has become the push into
the grave.” Needless to say, such sentiments are not shared by
the great majority of American Catholic women, but they are given
wide publicity by the media.
Has the
Church done enough to conform its own structures to the principle that men
and women are equal partners in the mystery of redemption? Of course not.
Once again, Flannery O'Connor had it right. Forty years ago, when her
proto-feminist friend railed against the Church's shortcomings, O'Connor
replied, “what you actually seem to demand is that the Church put the
kingdom of heaven on earth right here now.” She continued:
Christ was crucified
on earth and the Church is crucified by all of us, by her members most
particularly, because she is a church of sinners. Christ never said that the
Church would be operated in a sinless or intelligent way, but that it would
not teach error. This does not mean that each and every priest won't teach
error, but that the whole Church speaking through the Pope will not teach
errors in matters of faith. The Church is founded on Peter who denied Christ
three times and couldn't walk on the water by himself. You are expecting his
successors to walk on the water.
Four
decades after those wise words were written, a Catholic woman,
impatient with the pace of change, might consider asking herself:
Where in contemporary society do I feel most respected as a woman,
whatever my chosen path in life? What body of thought takes most
seriously my deepest concerns? What organization speaks most clearly
on behalf of all women, including those in poverty? Catholic mothers
might consider asking as well: Where do I feel most supported
and encouraged in the difficult task of raising children under
today's conditions? For my own part, I cannot think of any institution
that surpasses the Catholic Church in these respects.
Neither can
I think of any more fruitful principles to guide and promote further
progress for women than those contained in Scripture and the Church's social
teachings. In particular, the implications of combining John Paul II's
writings on women with his writings on the family, the laity, human work,
and social justice are truly revolutionary-and for the most part yet to be
explored. These great writings stand open to the future.
To a great
extent it will be up to the faithful, men and women as pilgrims together on
this earthly journey, to move beyond Beijing. As “partners in the mystery of
redemption,” women and men must join in applying the teachings “ever old and
ever new” to the task of building the “civilization of life and love.” We
must draw out the implications for modern feminism of a vision of the human
person that encompasses the unique individuality of each of us, our
solidarity with our fellow human beings, and our unity in the mystical body
of Christ.
Copyright ©
1997
Crisis
By Mary Ann Glendon.
A
vigorous proponent in international settings of social and economic justice
for women, especially poor women, the Catholic Church has been a tireless
voice for those whose voices are seldom heard in the corridors of power.
Without glossing over the criticisms, including the issue of women priests,
this article provides evidence of an enviable historical record of concern
for women by the Church. Certainly more needs to be done, but Ms. Glendon
finds herself hard-pressed to think of an organization in the world that
demonstrates as much respect, support, and consideration for women as does
the Catholic Church.
Return to Resources |