Friday, April 29, 2005

It's Friday...

I seem to have developed a Tuesday-Friday posting pattern. I'll see if I can break that up this weekend with some pictures.

The people who commented on my last post all seemed to agree: the nipple fuzzing on Dr. 90210 was weirdly inconsistent, but, as one commenter pointed out, this is America, and we're weird about sex in America. We're obsessed with getting it, having it, wanting it, needing it, and damn well making sure that kids are completely clueless about it until they get married. But hey, what you don't know can't hurt you, right?

[Okay, I had a really bitter rant here about the dismal state of sex education in this country, but then I decided I wouldn't be saying anything that can't be read in a newspaper, so I deleted it. If you really want to know what I think, leave a comment.]

Anyway, the real point of my post today was not to sound off about Conservative Christians and their frigidity, but this article by Anna Quindlen in Newsweek. (Go read it, I'll wait.)

This article really reminded me of a series of essays I had to read for a class by several Catholic femenist theologians. The overarching question of the essays was: Could Jesus, as a man, really serve as a salvific figure for women? There was a biblical quote (which I can't remember now) that supported their main thesis, which was that the Catholic church's intense focus on the masculinity of Jesus essentially excluded women from being included in Jesus' sacrifice for "humanity."

To me, this is all academic; I'm not even a Christian. But it seems obvious to me that the church's intense emphasis on an all-male hierarchy and priesthood really does prevent women from receiving the spirtual guidance and connection that might otherwise be achieved with female spiritual advisor. I'm not saying that women are incapable of being spiritually guided by men, but I'm sure there are times where a female Catholic would prefer to talk to another woman (even if she's called to celibacy) about sex, rather than a celibate man. Sometimes, it's just a comfort thing.

Look at the Episocopal/Anglican church - they have gay priests, married priests, and female priests. They haven't fallen to the dogs yet (and they also seem to be lacking in sex scandals). I'm not trying to suggest that all Catholics should convert to Episcopalianism, or even that Catholics should immediately embrace married or female clergy (although that day will come, I'm sure). I'm merely saying that now is the time to embrace a previously ignored set of voices, and engage in a dialogue with all believers by talking to those who spiritually resemble Jesus, even if not physically.

(I'm sorry - did you come here looking for knitting? I think that's the blog next door...)


Post a Comment

<< Home