Müller, Yoder, marriage
- Müller on women's roles in the church ...
As far as women’s role in the Church is concerned, Müller said they could be given some high-ranking positions in the Vatican: not in the Congregations but in the Pontifical Councils, for example the Pontifical Council on the Family (which is led by Bishop Vincenzo Paglia) or for Health Care Workers. The Prefect clarified, however, that as it is ordained ministers that hold jurisdictional power, neither lay people nor women can become heads of Congregations, that is, the dicasteries that have the jurisdictional power to act on the Pope’s behalf. Other areas in which women could play a greater role are theological research and Caritas, although Müller is against the introduction of set quotas of women.
Oh yeah .... no one will even remember the women's ordination movement once they see these great new jog opportunities opening up for women in the church (NOT). Sigh :(
- The Woody Allen Problem: How Do We Read Pacifist Theologian (and Sexual Abuser) John Howard Yoder? ....
[...] Whenever these cases surface, they're accompanied by a discussion about whether or not we can or should appreciate the work of artists and writers who are accused of doing terrible things. It's a question without any satisfying categorical answer, which I suppose is why it generates so much copy. The nuances are endless: does it matter if the artist in question is alive or not? If he or she is dead, does it matter how long? Is there a difference between music that has words and music that doesn't? Between loving a movie made by an alleged sex offender and loving a work of theology written by one? How on earth do we weigh all of this? .....
I'm still not sure how people can appreciate without cringing the work of someone who has done "bad" things. It's not that I don't feel the tension between liking someone's work but disliking what they've done, and it's not just about wanting to take the high moral ground ... I really don't understand how something good (not just technically beautiful or elegantly clever) can be created by someone who is morally broken.
- Marriage: What’s love got to do with it? Historically, very little ...
“The Greeks thought lovesickness was a type of insanity, a view that was adopted by medieval commentators in Europe. In the Middle Ages, the French defined love as a ‘derangement of the mind’ that could be cured by sexual intercourse, either with the loved one or with a different partner,” Coontz writes in her 2005 book, “Marriage, A History: From Obedience to Intimacy, or How Love Conquered Marriage.” Couples wed to make political alliances, to raise capital, to expand the workforce and for a whole array of practical purposes.
I think one of the reasons the church is so out of touch with their stance on marriage .... divorce and remarriage, marriage equality, creepy Theology of the Body stuff, etc ... is that they are invested in marriage's history of commercial contract rather than seeing marriage as the result of romantic love.
As far as women’s role in the Church is concerned, Müller said they could be given some high-ranking positions in the Vatican: not in the Congregations but in the Pontifical Councils, for example the Pontifical Council on the Family (which is led by Bishop Vincenzo Paglia) or for Health Care Workers. The Prefect clarified, however, that as it is ordained ministers that hold jurisdictional power, neither lay people nor women can become heads of Congregations, that is, the dicasteries that have the jurisdictional power to act on the Pope’s behalf. Other areas in which women could play a greater role are theological research and Caritas, although Müller is against the introduction of set quotas of women.
Oh yeah .... no one will even remember the women's ordination movement once they see these great new jog opportunities opening up for women in the church (NOT). Sigh :(
- The Woody Allen Problem: How Do We Read Pacifist Theologian (and Sexual Abuser) John Howard Yoder? ....
[...] Whenever these cases surface, they're accompanied by a discussion about whether or not we can or should appreciate the work of artists and writers who are accused of doing terrible things. It's a question without any satisfying categorical answer, which I suppose is why it generates so much copy. The nuances are endless: does it matter if the artist in question is alive or not? If he or she is dead, does it matter how long? Is there a difference between music that has words and music that doesn't? Between loving a movie made by an alleged sex offender and loving a work of theology written by one? How on earth do we weigh all of this? .....
I'm still not sure how people can appreciate without cringing the work of someone who has done "bad" things. It's not that I don't feel the tension between liking someone's work but disliking what they've done, and it's not just about wanting to take the high moral ground ... I really don't understand how something good (not just technically beautiful or elegantly clever) can be created by someone who is morally broken.
- Marriage: What’s love got to do with it? Historically, very little ...
“The Greeks thought lovesickness was a type of insanity, a view that was adopted by medieval commentators in Europe. In the Middle Ages, the French defined love as a ‘derangement of the mind’ that could be cured by sexual intercourse, either with the loved one or with a different partner,” Coontz writes in her 2005 book, “Marriage, A History: From Obedience to Intimacy, or How Love Conquered Marriage.” Couples wed to make political alliances, to raise capital, to expand the workforce and for a whole array of practical purposes.
I think one of the reasons the church is so out of touch with their stance on marriage .... divorce and remarriage, marriage equality, creepy Theology of the Body stuff, etc ... is that they are invested in marriage's history of commercial contract rather than seeing marriage as the result of romantic love.
posted by crystal | 1:35 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home