Modernisation of Religion to be Equal to Women

[Vanadium 50]

*grumbles* Can't wait till religion fades away and dies out...

And if I were to say that I can't wait until atheism fades away and dies out, how would you feel? I think one needs to take some care when discussing a touchy area like religion to insure that all participants feel comfortable.

 

[Moridin]

And if I were to say that I can't wait until atheism fades away and dies out, how would you feel? I think one needs to take some care when discussing a touchy area like religion to insure that all participants feel comfortable.

Atheism is not some sort of counterpart to religion. Many deeply religious people are atheists and many theists reject organized religion, so I assume the person you are quoting prefers that their belief system also dies out. Naturally, your feelings are completely understandable. If I was a religious fanatic, and I am not claiming you are, I would look upon science and reason as dangerous enemies and see them as a terrible threat towards everything I hold dear.

"Reason is the Devil's greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil's appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom ... Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism... She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets."

"Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but -- more frequently than not -- struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God."

"Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God."

- Martin Luther

I also think you are confusing, as many people do, respect for people and the content of opinions (bad), with respect for the rights of people to express their opinions (good). Respecting people and the content of their opinions is actually horribly disrespectful, because it shows that one do not value their honesty and integrity enough to simply evaluate their claims and let them know what one has concluded.

 

[BobG]

I saw on a Sunday TV show 'The Big Questions' that the Church is the only institution that is still allowed to be sexist. Women are not allowed to be appointed as bishops. Surely the modernisation of religion is overdue in our secular society? I believe that the adoption of a total religious equality of women is the only way forward in healing the materialistic western way of life. A positive step in the right direction is desperately needed.

Society has no say over the rules of an organization that is entirely voluntary. If people don't like the way that religion works, then they can find another religion more appealing to them.

They could become Unitarians, for example. Not exactly a modern religion, since John Adams was a Unitarian, but it doesn't discriminate against women or homosexuals, for that matter.

If a religion isn't keeping itself relevant to the world it exists in, then it will pretty much fade away naturally as its membership dwindles. That's something for that religion to worry about without pressure from the outside world (barring a few exceptions such as child abuse, human sacrifice, etc).

 

[BobG]

The way I see it, this thread isn't specifically about getting the Government to impose restrictions on religion as more of a hypothetical discussion of what Religion could do to improve itself.

And if you ask me, I don't think Jefferson cared very much to protect organized religion from anything. He was more concerned about protecting the people from the discriminatory practices of a state endorsed religion. See, for instance, the Jefferson-Henry debates against/for using tax revenues to support the Church.

I think you're right about Thomas Jefferson, personally. Episcopalian (which basically came from Anglican, the state church of England) was the state church of Virginia. That's why every single one of the founding fathers from Virginia were Episcopalian regardless of their personal beliefs. Jefferson, and quite a few others, were as willing to rebel against England's church as they were against England's government.

The practical reason you had separation of church and state is that the different colonies had different state churches and some colonies had separation of church and state with no favored religion. If you tried to institute a national religion, you wouldn't have had a United States, since the colonies never would have agreed on which religion should be the national religion. And, by the way, the separation of church and state only applied to the federal government in the beginning. Several states continued to have state religions for quite a while. The usual reason for abolishing a state religion was because the majority of the state no longer belonged to that religion. As people voted with their feet, the government eventually followed.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Many deeply religious people are atheists

Huh? Can you give an example? I can't think of anyone who would claim to be both.

If I was a religious fanatic, and I am not claiming you are, I would look upon science and reason as dangerous enemies and see them as a terrible threat towards everything I hold dear.

Well, I am a religious person, but I don't consider myself a "religious fanatic". I also reject the notion that the former implies the latter. I also don't look upon "science and reason as dangerous enemies", and indeed I am a professional physicist whom some might regard as successful.

 

[mcknia07]

Many deeply religious people are atheists

That seems to be an oxymoron right there. How can one be religious and be atheist at the same time? Please give an example to suppost what you just said.

 

[Gokul43201]

Huh? Can you give an example? I can't think of anyone who would claim to be both.

No Buddhist friends?

 

[binzing]

And if I were to say that I can't wait until atheism fades away and dies out, how would you feel? I think one needs to take some care when discussing a touchy area like religion to insure that all participants feel comfortable.

I didn't mean it in that way, but really if you look at it, religions cause a lot of sexism, etc, that would not otherwise exist.

 

[binzing]

I don't plan on going any further with it.

 

[arunma]

Huh? Can you give an example? I can't think of anyone who would claim to be both.

I know that there are many Jews who practice their religion rather fervently, but who don't believe in God. I thought it was weird at first too. And then there's Buddhism, which is a non-theistic religion (you'll find both theists and atheists here). He might be referring to one of these groups.

Well, I am a religious person, but I don't consider myself a "religious fanatic". I also reject the notion that the former implies the latter. I also don't look upon "science and reason as dangerous enemies", and indeed I am a professional physicist whom some might regard as successful.

Some people in my department refer to me as a religious fanatic, since I believe in God, am active in a church, etc. And who knows, maybe they're right? But I too am a physicist (not successful yet, since I'm still working on my PhD), so obviously I'm fully in favor of science and reason. I'm not sure why many people, even in popular media, pit religion against science and reason. I've met stupid people who were religious, as well as who were atheists, and I don't see much of a correlation.

 

[mgb_phys]

Many deeply religious people are atheists

it's a typo - many deeply religious people are athorists - they don't believe in the Norse god of thunder

 

[Proton Soup]

I saw on a Sunday TV show 'The Big Questions' that the Church is the only institution that is still allowed to be sexist. Women are not allowed to be appointed as bishops. Surely the modernisation of religion is overdue in our secular society? I believe that the adoption of a total religious equality of women is the only way forward in healing the materialistic western way of life. A positive step in the right direction is desperately needed.

do you think maybe there should also be government quotas on the number of male and female comedians allowed, or do you think maybe there are fewer females here because women just aren't that funny?

 

[arunma]

do you think maybe there should also be government quotas on the number of male and female comedians allowed, or do you think maybe there are fewer females here because women just aren't that funny?

And this should bring to mind the fact that physics is also heavily male-dominated. Should we have gender quotas too?

 

[turbo]

In my Freshman class in Engineering, there were 5 females and 300 males.

 

[mgb_phys]

It's not quite the same as saying there can't be any women comedians or physicists because God says so.

Depending on the country and the status of the church it could be an issue, if for instance the church receives state funding.
There has been an attempt at a challenge in the UK against the law that prevents a catholic marrying anyone in line to the throne - since the UK signed the European human rights act which stops religious discrimination in law.

 

[TVP45]

I suppose this is as good a time as any to mention separation of church and state. As I understand the history of that term and how it found its way to Thomas Jefferson's pen, the original intent of separation of church and state was to protect the church from the state. And it was probably with things such as these in mind. As long as we all believe in the Constitution, it would be both a bad idea and illegal to enforce the sorts of rules that are being suggested here. Religious organizations are protected under American law to have whatever rules they want, and the state can't enforce its own policies on these organizations.

Remember that we live in a country where the KKK is permitted to put its views into practice within the confines of its own membership. So it seems to me that this discussion about "adoption of a total religious equality" is moot.

Not exactly. The Virginia Statue for Religous Freedom was written to disestablish the Anglican Church. Much of the actual effect of this had already been accomplished by the Revolution as the Church Wardens who had formed the county government had become Justices (Magistrates) who formed the county government. And, many ministers were ordained by both the Anglican Church and another (perhaps Baptist or Lutheran) and could already perform the Sacraments. The main beneficiaries of the Statute were Quakers and Mennonites (and the half dozen or so Jews and Muslims that somehow had managed to immigrate into Virginia). The Anglican Church lost it's mandatory income, but was no longer responsible for the poorhouse and the support of widows and the insane and such.

 

[Proton Soup]

It's not quite the same as saying there can't be any women comedians or physicists because God says so.

Depending on the country and the status of the church it could be an issue, if for instance the church receives state funding.
There has been an attempt at a challenge in the UK against the law that prevents a catholic marrying anyone in line to the throne - since the UK signed the European human rights act which stops religious discrimination in law.

if you want funding to be the deciderer, then note that in UK, gov't controls broadcasting, which provides a stage for comedians to ply their craft. so it's simply a matter of fair labour to ensure that both genders are represented equally here. i suspect the government also funds a good share of the physicists and mathematicians. if you don't take action, then you're just letting the religionists win by catering to the biases they've inflicted upon society, no?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

if you want funding to be the deciderer, then note that in UK, gov't controls broadcasting, which provides a stage for comedians to ply their craft. so it's simply a matter of fair labour to ensure that both genders are represented equally here. i suspect the government also funds a good share of the physicists and mathematicians. if you don't take action, then you're just letting the religionists win by catering to the biases they've inflicted upon society, no?

I would think that the origins of traditional male/female roles predate religion. It probably has a lot more to do with muscle mass... not to mention mammary glands, etc.

 

[Gokul43201]

if you want funding to be the deciderer, then note that in UK, gov't controls broadcasting, which provides a stage for comedians to ply their craft. so it's simply a matter of fair labour to ensure that both genders are represented equally here.

Women have all the rights that men do as far as performing on the BBC is concerned. There is no discrimination involved there.

Different story with the Church.

 

[Proton Soup]

Women have all the rights that men do as far as performing on the BBC is concerned. There is no discrimination involved there.

Different story with the Church.

oh, yes, i completely forgot that women are forced to go to church.

 

[Proton Soup]

I would think that the origins of traditional male/female roles predate religion. It probably has a lot more to do with muscle mass... not to mention mammary glands, etc.

good heavens, let's not drag science into this

 

[mcknia07]

Women have all the rights that men do as far as performing on the BBC is concerned. There is no discrimination involved there.

Different story with the Church.

So, how is it different with church?

 

[Moridin]

Huh? Can you give an example? I can't think of anyone who would claim to be both.

Well, I am a religious person, but I don't consider myself a "religious fanatic". I also reject the notion that the former implies the latter. I also don't look upon "science and reason as dangerous enemies", and indeed I am a professional physicist whom some might regard as successful.

Any of the 500 million Buddhists in the world will do as an example. The current Dalai Lama is a prime example.

It may very well be the case that you are a brilliant physicist that has made important contributions to your field(s) of study, but every time you perform a measurement or experiment, you must presuppose that no supernatural entities are secretly altering the facts of reality, your equipment or their results because if they where, all of your work would of course be entirely meaningless and arbitrary because you could not be sure if you are actually seeing how things really are. Science presupposes the uniformity of nature (among other things), and if we allow the possibility of supernatural entities with the ability to secretly alter the facts of reality, the uniformity of nature does not obtain and science as we know it is impossible. With the very large progress science has shown during the last centuries, it is becoming increasingly less likely that the uniformity of nature does not obtain.

 

[Moridin]

good heavens, let's not drag science into this

I think it is a very interesting field of study and I agree. According to some, there is a very fascinating background story about the size of male and female germ cells.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Moridin, snark doesn't become you.

 

[Gokul43201]

So, how is it different with church?

There are no rules with the BBC saying a woman can not become the Chairman or the Director General. There are also no rules saying a woman will be in the good graces of the management if she is submissive to the men that work there and calls them her masters.

 

[BobG]

Women have all the rights that men do as far as performing on the BBC is concerned. There is no discrimination involved there.

Different story with the Church.

Which church?

Roman Catholic Church - The church has taught that when the People of God, the membership of the church, prayerfully and devoutly reach a consensus on a topic, that this is also the will of God. Numerous surveys have indicated a near consensus in North America and much of Europe in favor of female ordination. However, this does not extend elsewhere in the world, where the feminist movement has not been as influential. Hence, no female ordination.

Anglican and Episcopal - Most North American and European provinces allow female ordination. Most Far East provinces don't allow female ordination, plus a few North American and European provinces don't. They don't have the same strong central control the Catholic Church does, so there's variation.

Eastern Orthodox - "This priesthood is Christ's, not ours...And if the bearer, the icon and the fulfiller of that unique priesthood, is man and not woman, it is because Christ is man and not woman." Pretty much a statement of gender discrimination that will not change - ever.

Presbyterian - We affirm the Good News of Christ’s Gospel contained in the Old and New Testaments, authoritative and ever judging of human cultures, and hence liberating of all peoples from cultures of submission and gender inequality.

Other protestant religions - Most liberal and mainline Christian denominations (e.g. Congregationalists, some Lutherans, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the United Church of Canada, United Church of Christ, United Methodist Church, etc.) ordain women and give them access to other positions of power.

A study by the Hartford Seminary, 5 commented upon by the Boston Globe, 6 has examined the Christian denominations which do ordain women. The study shows that the number of clergywomen in 15 large Protestant denominations has skyrocketed over the past two decades. For example, between 1977 and 1997, female clergy:

in the American Baptist Church has increased from 157 to 712;
in the Episcopal Churches in the USA has increased from 94 to 1,394;
in the United Methodist Church has gone from 319 to 3,003.

Unitarian - According to Time magazine, the liberal Unitarian Universalist Association, has the highest percentage of female clergy -- over 50%. (The UUA is regarded by many as a non-Protestant, non-Christian denomination.)

Southern Baptist (the conservative branch of the Baptist Church) - No absolute central control, but a strong recommendation. "There is no biblical precedent for a woman in the pastorate, and the Bible teaches that women should not teach in authority over men... Far less than one percent of churches cooperating with the Southern Baptist Convention have ever called a woman as pastor."

Debate continues:
An unknown Methodist minister in Charlotte, NC concluded that the root cause of the SBC prohibition against ordaining women could be traced back to Genesis where Eve is said to have brought sin into the world. The minister said, with tongue solidly in cheek:

"Men can be ordained because Adam blamed Eve; however, women can also be ordained because Eve blamed the serpent; But under no circumstances should we ordain snakes."

To which Bernie Cochran of Pullen Memorial Baptist Church said:
"Especially, I would add, since they speak Hebrew with a forked tongue and tend to lisp -- terribly."

- from female clergy

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catholic and Eastern Orthodox definitely discriminate by gender, although the Catholic church allows that they may change their policy some time in the future.

Protestant religions have a lot of variation in their policies with gender discrimination fading just as it is in other aspects of our culture.

To say "different story with the Church", you really have to be more specific. 23.9% of Americans are Catholic and would know exactly what you're talking about. 51.3% are Prostestant and may or may not know what you're talking about.

 

[BobG]

Actually, when I was in Girl Scouts, we had a boy that used to sit in on a lot of our meetings. We just considered him as a brother tho, so none of us cared.

I was a groundbreaker. I was in the group of boys that were the first to legally camp out at the local Girl Scout camp (Camp Ledgewood).

We were a co-ed Explorer Post, though, not a Girl Scout troop. The local Boy Scout camp wouldn't allow us to camp on their grounds because we had females. Even the Girl Scout camp only allowed us to camp there in the winter when camping out was a lot less popular.

 

[Gokul43201]

To say "different story with the Church", you really have to be more specific. 23.9% of Americans are Catholic and would know exactly what you're talking about. 51.3% are Prostestant and may or may not know what you're talking about.

The OP was talking about a BBC show, so I figured this was about the Catholic Church (if I recall correctly the CoE finally agreed to allow female Bishops only a few months ago - it was a big deal, and all over the news).

I sort of disagree with the link you posted on the position of the Southern Baptist Church. I am pretty sure they explicitly do not permit female ordainment. I remember this came up last year when they pulled all copies of a Christian magazine that carried pictures of 5 female pastors on its cover from all the bookstores that they owned.

Edit: Found it - http://www.christianpost.com/Ministries/Culture/2008/09/s-baptist-bookstores-pull-magazine-featuring-female-pastors-20/index.html

Over 100 Christian bookstores run by the Southern Baptist Convention have pulled from their shelves this month's issue of Gospel Today Magazine, which features a cover story about female pastors.
...
The Southern Baptist Convention, the nation's second largest Christian denomination, officially opposes females serving as pastors. In 2000, the denomination overwhelmingly adopted a revised statement of faith that said the pastoral role should be restricted to men.
...

 

[drankin]

I'm curious why anyone in this forum really cares how religions handle gender issues. As long as we all have the freedom NOT to participate, what's the big deal?

 

[arunma]

I sort of disagree with the link you posted on the position of the Southern Baptist Church. I am pretty sure they explicitly do not permit female ordainment. I remember this came up last year when they pulled all copies of a Christian magazine that carried pictures of 5 female pastors on its cover from all the bookstores that they owned.

The SBC actually used to have many female pastors. I think it was back in the 60s and 70s that they decided to return to orthodox Biblical doctrine, and began removing theologically liberal seminary professors and pastors, including the female pastors. I don't know if there are any remnants, but probably not.

 

[Proton Soup]

The SBC actually used to have many female pastors. I think it was back in the 60s and 70s that they decided to return to orthodox Biblical doctrine, and began removing theologically liberal seminary professors and pastors, including the female pastors. I don't know if there are any remnants, but probably not.

as far as i know, they do not allow women in any church offices.

but if you want to make their heads spin, ask them about Phoebe.

 

[TVP45]

I'm curious why anyone in this forum really cares how religions handle gender issues. As long as we all have the freedom NOT to participate, what's the big deal?

Unfortunately, we do not have the freedom to not participate. Our rights to choose an abortion, birth control, morning after pills, marriage partners, adoption, euthanasia, treatment with stem cells, etc are all affected by religious beliefs, some based on a legitimate set of ethics, some based on personal prejudices. If the SBC wants to tell me how to live my life (and they do), then they better expect me to get right back in their faces.

 

[Proton Soup]

Which church?

hey now, don't forget muslims and jews. they're as deserving of our meddling as the rest.

 

[BobG]

The SBC actually used to have many female pastors. I think it was back in the 60s and 70s that they decided to return to orthodox Biblical doctrine, and began removing theologically liberal seminary professors and pastors, including the female pastors. I don't know if there are any remnants, but probably not.

Of course there are. Well under 1% is not 0%. I think the non-zero percentage is more reflective of the hierarchy of the SBC; not their policy on gender equality. In other words, the SBC can very strongly recommend individual churches take certain positions, but they don't have absolute control.

Edit: In other words, I don't think Gokul really disagreed with what I meant. I just think my trying to be technically accurate made the situation seem more cloudy than it was.