What is the nature of woman?

I've had some interesting conversations lately about the nature or essence of a woman.

And now I just have more and more questions about it.

It seems clear that the church wants to distinguish between men and women in order to (1) say that women cannot be ordained and (2) outline particular roles of men and women in society, especially marriage.

I have some issues with this, but my primary issue has to do with the fact that women are considered so different from men. We're not so different. There is much about the human person that is pretty universal.

But I think we also know that there is something that is different between men and women. So, what is it?

This all has to do with theological anthropology--how Christians view the nature of humanity, particularly in relationship with God.

Back to the question: what is it about a woman that makes her a woman?

I think the answer lies in a relational attitude. Unfortunately, this is usually simplified to a mother-child relationship. What about women who never become mothers? My identity as a single Catholic woman is not bound up in my ability to bear children--though I would never deny that that is part of who I am. There is more to me than a womb!

So, my partially formed conclusions so far are that being a woman is uniquely relational, that women are more attuned to human relationships (generally) than men are. This is reflected in motherhood, but also in a tendency to put the needs of others above her own in other circumstances. Does a woman have a greater capacity for unconditional love than a man?

Anyone have any insights? I would love to hear them, either in the comments or by email. This issue is (I believe) fundamental to the church's conception of the human person, and a tad bit neglected (or misrepresented) in theological discussions and church documents.

And so we begin once again.

Well, enough about the kitties.

Life is full and busy. The semester started, and my classes are going well. I have a wide assortment of students, anything from those who are well educated in the subjects I teach to those who have never had a theology course in their life.

I will be making a clear distinction between "catechesis" and "theology." I do not teach catechesis to graduate students--you may read your own copy of the Catechism if you need that background. I will be assuming that my students understand generally the basic tenets of the faith, so that we can delve into theological explanations.

On another note, my application is moving through the RSCJ. I just set up my first interview for the beginning of October. Pray for me!

Love and the Law

Maybe I have been reading too much of the mystics lately, but it’s hard for me to understand such a focus on the law as is in today’s readings. Not to devalue the law, but I get the sense sometimes that we place so much emphasis on doing things “right” that we forget why we do them in the first place. And the reason we do them: Jesus' law of love… which (it seems to me) is not so much a law that is followed like other laws, but a way of living and being in relationship with other people.

I was thinking about this issue last night with regards to the liturgy. I have been to parishes that place such great emphasis on doing the liturgy right that they neglect other aspects of human life. They might have the proper incense and half a dozen servers, but the homily will be unprepared or out of touch with their congregation. I have heard many a homily on the necessity of going to confession… not that it's wrong to discuss confession, but how about a little guidance on how to live life in such a way that there is less to confess? (And how about calling that sacrament “reconciliation” like the contemporary documents do? Even that word change alters the significance of the sacrament, into a sacrament of mended relationships rather than a sacrament simply of guilt and penance.)

The world of theology is not so different either. Theologians have to question the way things are—that is part of their job. If no one questions things, then nothing can change. (This isn't the right place for a digression, but the dynamism of creating is an integral part of God's being... so change among the created world is good, and change in the church is guided by the Holy Spirit--even better!) Yet there are some people in this world who are so opposed to change that they become militant at any intimation that theology can be expressed somehow other than the Catechism or Thomas Aquinas expressed it. Again, not to devalue the Catechism or Thomas, but the brilliance of being Christian is in knowing that God is greater than any one person’s conception of God…or even any one catechism’s conception of God. The history of theology shows us that—each theologian throughout history has taken a different approach to understanding the divine, and most of those approaches are not heretical! So what is God like if each of these expressions is different? God is all of them combined, and yet more than we can possibly imagine. That’s the great mystery, and also a great reason to be open to the ideas of those around us. Our neighbors and those we disagree with might see something of God that we cannot see.

My Discernment Story

I have been considering religious life seriously for over a year, since I went on a retreat in July 2006. When I first thought about it, it came as a total surprise--I have graduate degrees in theology, and I had spent years adamantly telling people that I was not going to be a nun! That seems to be the question people ask when they find out you are studying theology. Then that July, a few months after I finally graduated, I knew I had to really think about that question. Am I called to religious life?

I looked at a few religious orders, but I soon had a pretty clear idea of what I wanted. Habits hold some fascination, but the orders that wear habits are generally too "obedient" for me--too focused on the dictates of Rome, not willing to ask the questions that I want to ask (I am a theologian, after all). I'm happy to follow the Church's rules, but I need the freedom to ask "why" and to speak my mind when I think the reasons for something are insufficient.

The religious order that I ended up getting to know was the Society of the Sacred Heart, founded in 1800 by St. Madeleine Sophie Barat, who modeled the formation process after the Jesuit formation process. Lovely! The history fascinates me, and I can relate to the emphasis on education, especially an education that is transformative. And I love the Jesuits, their spirituality, and their educational systems.

The RSCJ women I have met are amazing--they welcomed me from the beginning almost as one of them. Above all, I see in them fantastic women who make a difference in the world because they love everyone with the love of the heart of Christ. I think I will always be in awe of the way they live and share their lives with the world.

I'll have to finish this story later! It's getting near bedtime!