This gendered divergence was described by one nun this way: the Catholic church believes in the patrimony of God in Vatican Rome and conflicts with the religious nun’s beliefs that man and women are created equally. I guess this gendered constraint towards equality would be understandable being that if we were reading the scripture in the Christian bible; Complementarianism; which their view is "historic;" the "old testament" narrates in the very beginning, the female (Eve) was responsible for the weakness of disobeying God with tempting Adam to bite the apple of good and evil; and then mankind being subjected to the consequences. This also sets a tone for future writing judgments in Corinthians and Timothy where it's said a woman shouldn't teach or needs to submit to the man. If further researched and as it turns out in our studies, there a host of reasons historically why religion is masculine gendered.
Oddly and interestingly though, is that the traditional view of Judaism (also old testament), even though scripture writes both man and woman were created in the image of god, and man was created (built) in Genesis 1:27 with dual gender, and was separated into male and female. Most Judaism scholars suggest the idea that God has never been either male or female in gender; unlike most Christian views. At the same time, with my "somewhat of" a Christian upbringing, I can say my positive experiences and teachings were enveloped around women. The nuns were sweet hearts (although I have heard of nasty ones) but, the positive biblical figures of: Ruth, both Mary’s – mother of Jesus and his disciple, Rebecca, Sarah, Rachel and of course our modern day Mother Theresa, all were excellent role models of a spiritual Christian rhetoric.
Sadly, women aren’t allowed to be ordained in the Catholic because like stated in Kristy Maddux (2012) article; "The feminized Gospel" (supplementary art.), women don’t exhibit the same masculine gender as Jesus and therefor can’t represent the gospel. Hogwash I say; if noted in my earlier post when we were writing about family, I referred to the lord and I intentionally didn’t give the lord a masculine gender label even though the lord is written as a he and is referred to as he, and we assume a masculine gender but do we really know, especially if the lord supposedly never made any sexual orientations, that we know of.
Nevertheless, the Christian church is the major affiliated church in the United States and takes up a third of the world’s affiliation. For those reasons we have major influential gendered perspectives from those institutions and the like, and that of the other religions that might follow close behind. For example, Islam is not that different in the way they come into understanding of women and men’s roles, and have been coming together to slow progressive language, and to promote gendered roles. Meanwhile on a collective analysis level, according to writing by Fred Kniss suggestions in the book God, Science, Sex, Gender 2010, chapter 3; "We must attend to how groups (religions) define and prioritize various factors of human sexuality; how that might position them ideologically and philosophically; what ethical issues arise and what social consequences of conflict outcome might be." Or in addition, predict what the terms of debate are likely to be. Where potential allies or opponents might be found; how shifts in ideological or theological stances may affect relationships to other groups.
On an individualistic level, according to our studies, religion informs on not only peoples personal relationships with their god(s) but also peoples relationship with their gender/sex. Religious institutions communicate messages about gender and sex. So religion is an important institution to study on how to do gender and how to be sexed.
Egalitarians got it better in understanding in my opinion. They believe like Aimee Semple McPherson believed in the Maddux (2012) article, in that leadership and for that matter, higher spirituality is not determined, exercised, manifested and or dominated by gender but by the gifting and calling of the Holy Spirit, and that God calls all to submit to one another. So I must say, how’s that for real rhetoric? The Buddhist religion believes that we are all on this this earth for the sole purpose of helping others. Confucianism’s highest virtue is humanness toward others; to give you similar other perspectives.
Lastly, even the title of Muscular Christianity sounds too physical to have any spiritual diplomacy to me. In Maddux (2012), the analysis of McPherson’s innovative feminized personae as a preacher showed the strength against the masculine gendered culture of the time even though the a masculine preaching style would be the ideal because of the masculine gendered Jesus and a connotation to being manly or not emotional affected. When in reality, compassion is very much at the top of attributes of spiritual leadership and is very much intertwined with emotion and a compassionate responsability. Conversely, it is odd that the Puritan tradition in the mid-nineteenth century viewed muscular Christianity as an immoral waste of time. The justification of trying to win men back to church membership or any other phony rhetoric in regards to gender might explain some poor procedures and policies and sloppy Christian ideology in the church today.
Questions:
2) If the religious institution falls apart as it may if not supported, how do you think spirituality will be structured, practiced, exercised and carried on for our children?
3) Even though masculinity seemed to play some what of a negative role towards equality by gendering, masculine females and feminine males were the researched to be more the majority of church attendees, What might that suggest of the persons who seem to seek stronger spiritual structure or edification of a principle centered way of life?
1) I think it depends on how tightly knit the regulations remain. Society today is fast growing and changing-- it's hard to cast one particular ideology of faith out at a diverse mass populous and expect all to converge with and support. Gendered expectations are in transition and religious ideologies hold with it certain gendered disciplines. I think historically religion breaks down into different cultures around the world so the institution of faith in religious will remain however particular types should be inclusive and less commercial I think to adopt more followers in current and upcoming generations.
ReplyDelete2) Spirituality is about knowing oneself, being at peace with oneself, and being able to look beyond at the bigger picture and accept things for the good and the bad. I think good moral and can be taught to anyone regardless of claiming a religious denomination and also-- we need to teach our children to accept people for who they not, have good moral, and not exclude or aim to do wrong in the world. Spirituality comes in all different forms and being a good person in life doesn't always need to fall behind a religious institution. I think spirituality can come in all different forms, and is centered around being happy -- which is what we should carry on to our children.
3) I think this is looking at the appearance and physical attributes of followers and I'm not really sure how one would judge one's gender characteristics in terms of why they believe in a particular faith.