What is the greatest historical champion of the rights of women? What institution in modern times has most fervently defended the dignity of women? If the Catholic Church did not immediately spring to mind, it may be that her detractors have obscured the real picture with their efforts to paint the Church as the oppressor of women.
Equality and Love Too!
But a brief look at the historical record easily vindicates the Catholic Church.
There are a number of areas where the Church has defended the dignity of women. For instance, the Church ended the practice of stoning women to death for committing adultery and other such offenses, which was the prescribed custom under the Mosaic Law. The Church followed the example of Jesus with the adulteress; He respected her as a human being and called her to repentance. Christianity has from the start received as a divine corrective to the prevailing culture the teaching that women were to be regarded as full human persons, and not as mere property to be used by selfish men.
Before the advent of Christianity, a woman held the role of an object in society — first owned by her parents, and then owned by her husband. But Christianity recognized a deeper and truer dimension to a woman's identity. For example, Christianity prescribed that husbands were not merely to “own” their wives, but had to love their wives “as they loved their own bodies,” and to lay down their lives for their wives, even as Christ loved and died for the Church (cf. Eph 5).
This was a revolutionary concept which simply did not exist before the time of Christianity; and it gave women rights, not only within the Church, but in society in general. And why? Because it declared that women were full persons toward whom men had an intrinsic moral obligation. From its very beginnings, the Church taught against the prevailing attitude that saw women as mere objects for a man's fulfillment. And indeed, as part of authentic emancipation, Christianity recognized that women had souls. Before the advent of Christianity, this was seriously debated in both Judaism and in Platonic Greek philosophy, the latter even having an influence on the Greek Christian fathers.
However, the weight of both the witness of Scripture (which depicts women as among the most faithful and courageous of Jesus's disciples) and that of St. Augustine (who argues brilliantly in defense of a woman's spiritual nature) combined to drive out of the mindset of the Church any lingering doubt that women had souls. They were acknowledged as full and equal human persons with men.
The Greatest Christian of All
The Catholic Church also recognizes that the greatest Christian, indeed the greatest human being, who ever lived, is not a man, but a woman — Jesus's mother Mary. Unlike any man (with the exception of Jesus, a divine Person possessing a human nature) she was free from the weakness and damage of original sin, and possessed mental and spiritual faculties that were superior to the rest of sinful humanity, including, suffice it to say, all men. Thus, Mary is our paragon and the model for all Christians, both women and men, to follow. She defines what being a Christian is. She is our example; and her example hammers home the fact that in Christianity, the proper spiritual approach of both women and men to Christ must be feminine: that is, a receptive and cooperative approach. This is why the Church is viewed as Jesus's bride. In this context the charge of Catholics being “oppressors” of women becomes comical. We believe that salvation (i.e. Jesus Christ) literally comes through a woman!
In addition to Mary, from its earliest days, Christianity also celebrated the heroic achievements of saintly women who testified to the truth of the Faith, and whose witness arguably out-performed and out-numbered that of common men. For example, in the list of martyred saints in the Roman Liturgy, we find the names of Felicity, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucy, Agnes, Cecilia, and Anastasia — all of whom were celebrated heroines of the early Church, and who enjoyed the devotion of both Christian men as well as women.
This tradition certainly did not stop with the ancient Church. Indeed, the Church continued to celebrate the witness of great female saints and to raise them up as examples for all Christians. Thus, we have a myriad of additional women saints: Catherine of Alexandria, Eudoxia, Monica, Sabina, Blandina, Clotilda, Bridget of Ireland, Ethelrieda, Dymphna, Winnefred, Clare of Assisi, Rita of Cascia, Catherine of Sienna, Clare of Montefalco, Teresa of Avila, Therese of Lisieux, Catherine Labore, Bernadette of Lourdes, Edith Stein. The list is seemingly endless.
This devotion and appreciation for the spiritual achievements of women does not stop there. Indeed, the Catholic Church has also formally proclaimed three female saints to be “Doctors of the Church” — a distinguished title held by only the most brilliant of spiritual thinkers. Doctors of the Church, of course, set the example for us in terms of explaining and clarifying aspects of Catholic theology. The female Catholic Doctors of the Church are Catherine of Sienna, Teresa of Avila, and Therese of Lisieux, all of whom produced works which are almost essential to modern Catholic spirituality. The Church recognizes and celebrates this fact.
Before our extolling of the Blessed Mother and female saints is dismissed by radical feminists as the Church merely “giving a gold star” to the “good little girls” in its ranks, consider if there are any comparable examples from other world religions? Where, for example, are all the celebrated names of saintly or spiritually advanced women in Judaism or Islam or Hinduism or Buddhism or any other religion anywhere? Indeed, one would be hard-pressed to name even four or five Jewish or Buddhist female saints, and totally unable to name any female spiritual geniuses. Once this is appreciated, the revolutionary nature of Catholic Christianity's approach to women can vividly be seen.
Another specific right for which modern women can thank the Catholic Church is the privilege of a woman having her own name. In Roman society, before the advent of Christianity, a woman simply did not possess a formal name of her own (a name that could be used on legal documents, etc.), but, in her early years, she merely held a female version of her father's name. Once she was married, she changed her formal name to a female version of her husband's name. Her personal identity, therefore, was always totally dependent on the primary male figure in her life. For example, if a Roman woman was the daughter of a man named “Julius,” her formal name (and that of all of her sisters, too) would be “Julia.” Then, if she married a man named “Marcus,” her named would be formally changed to “Marcia.” However, in Christian society, because a new name was always taken at Baptism by both men and women, women in the Church possessed their own names; and, once Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire, this practiced eventually carried over into the general scope of society. This is why women have their own exclusive names today, not being tied intrinsically to the identity of their fathers or husbands.
The First Career Women
Lest our detractors insist that the Church “chained” women to the matrimonial bond, note that it was the Church that supplied women with the choice to either marry or not. Indeed, from its earliest days, the Church gave any woman in its society the option to live a celibate life; and, since they would not have a husband, the Church financially supported these women if they chose to live such celibate lives. This eventually developed into the female monastic tradition, whereby women were free to devote their lives to both spiritual and intellectual pursuits — something that they would otherwise be unable to do within the normal scope of society, where women were expected to marry, keep homes, and raise children. In short, the Church was responsible for creating the first “career women.” In these monastic “islands” in an otherwise male-dominated society, women were permitted and encouraged to become theologians, philosophers, chemists, and physicians. Where else in the world, during ancient times or throughout the Middle Ages, could a woman pursue such things?
Within the context of monastic life, some women became abbesses; that is, heads of both local and international religious communities. As such, they were responsible for not only maintaining the spiritual rule of their society, but for controlling and managing vast estates and other property that was literally worth millions in terms of modern dollars. In this, as early as the 6th century, women wielded administrative and institutional authority comparable to that of a modern CEO of a Fortune 500 company! Again, where else, aside from the Catholic Church at the time, do we see women holding such levels of power and influence in society? Perhaps if one were a secular queen or duchess, this could be achieved, but that, of course, was based on inheritance or marriage, whereas an abbess or Mother Superior might even come from the lower classes, and attained her position based on personal ability and intelligence, not on her family's wealth or her desirability as a mate.
When it came to unwed mothers, the Church also provided unprecedented advantages for women in terms of social care. Before the days of Christianity, an unwed mother was completely on her own. However, the Church would care for such women and their children, giving them financial support. In fact, Christian society also considered the idea of bastard children disgraceful, and so it basically obliged a man to either marry his mistress (thereby giving her legitimacy and social rights) or, at the very least, to acknowledge and financially support his illegitimate children. We would have no modern sense of “child support” without the influence and moral leadership of the Catholic Church.
In the Middle East, Christian bishops forbade native communities (such as the Nabathaean Arabs) from circumcising their daughters, seeing it as an unnecessary and inhumane thing to do. The custom, of course, was later resurrected under Islam. However, in Arab and African countries where female circumcision (actually a kind of sexual mutilation) is practiced today, it is still rejected and condemned by the ancient Christian communities there (e.g. the Copts of Egypt, the Abbyssian Christians of Ethiopia, etc.). It is from the Church that abuse of women in any intentional form came to be regarded as cowardly and disgraceful; men were no longer permitted to strike their wives or daughters or to verbally abuse them. Men who did would receive condemnation from the Church and from society in general — another revolutionary concept which is still a driving factor in the defense of women's rights today.
The Christian Church was also responsible for the creation of chivalry, which is the origin of Western society's respect for, and deference to, women. The contrast with Islam could hardly be more pronounced. Bernard Lewis, the great Middle East scholar, once remarked that the status of women is the single most profound difference between Christian and Muslim civilization. He noted that early Muslim visitors to Europe spoke with astonishment, often with horror of the incredible freedom and deference shown to Western women. In 1665, for instance, right at the peak of Muslim conquest in Europe, a Turkish writer and diplomat, Evliya Celebi, visited Vienna. In his report, he wrote:
In this country I saw a most extraordinary spectacle. Whenever the emperor meets a woman in the street, if he is riding, he brings his horse to a standstill and lets her pass. If the emperor is on foot and meets a woman, he stands in a posture of politeness. The woman greets the emperor, who then takes his hat off his head to show respect for the woman. After the woman has passed, the emperor continues on his way. In this country and in general in the land of the [Christians], women have the main say. They are honored and respected out of love for Mother Mary.
Answering Attacks and Distortions
The Vatican document On the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church in the World was precipitated by the attacks and distortions of radical feminism which has sought to erase differences between men and women, and to introduce distrust and division between the two sexes. The document says of the errors of radical feminism:
Its first tendency is to emphasize strongly conditions of subordination in order to give rise to antagonism: women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves the adversaries of men…. Every outlook which presents itself as a conflict between the sexes is only an illusion and a danger: it would end in segregation and competition between men and women, and would promote a solipsism nourished by a false conception of freedom.
The document also served as a sobering warning to our culture, reminding us that this destructive ideology further seeks to erode and manipulate the traditional family through its promotion of same-sex unions:
This theory of the human person, intended to promote prospects for equality of women through liberation from biological determinism, has in reality inspired ideologies which, for example, call into question the family, in its natural two-parent structure of mother and father, and make homosexuality and heterosexuality virtually equivalent, in a new model of polymorphous sexuality.
As the aforementioned historical examples conclusively show, it is clear that the Catholic Church is not the oppressor of women, but rather their authentic liberator. It has been the Church, and the Church alone, which has witnessed and promoted the great heroism of women. This heroism is extolled once again in On the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church in the World:
It is women, in the end, who even in very desperate situations, as attested by history past and present, possess a singular capacity to persevere in adversity, to keep life going even in extreme situations, to hold tenaciously to the future, and finally to remember with tears the value of every human life.
Now and in the future, the Church and her children must be vigilant and militant in defending the Church against the calumny of radical feminism and its push to destroy the authentic advancement of femininity and legitimate social progress.
© Copyright 2004 Catholic Exchange
Mark Bonocore is a film producer and a Catholic apologist who writes from Philadelphia, PA. He writes Catholic-Legate.com, a Canadian lay apostolate of Catholic apologetics.)
