Saint John of Avila to be Declared a Doctor of the Church
#91
It's only "feminism" in the sense that the Church is no longer preventing a woman from having the title Doctor of the Church. If someone's writings are beneficial for the study of theology and spiritual growth, why bar them based on gender? 

If you use the argument that women shouldn't be teaching, then why did the Church publish and promote their writings to begin with? You'd think they would have been discouraged from writing at all! St. Teresa of Avila, for example, has always been held in highest regard -- a "theologian" of contemplative life and mental prayer. There should be nothing barring her from the title of Doctor.

From what I understand this honor of "Doctor" was first given by the Pope in the 1200s and there were only four: St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Jerome and Pope St. Gregory the Great. Subsequent popes added to the list. The Pope has the authority to do this and now he's not excluding women, that's all.

Also, Therese of Lisieux's "Little Way" is actually very profound in its simplicity and has revolutionized people's thinking about sainthood. It's groundbreaking in its claim that anyone can be a saint by doing the smallest things out of love for God, according to one's state in life. Yes, it's been said before but never in the way she presented it. Even she initially thought that one needed to be a great doctor of theology, or a missionary, or a monk, or a martyr in order to achieve the highest sanctity. She gave us her "Little Way" and opened the path to sainthood for ordinary people.
Reply
#92
(08-22-2011, 04:25 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 04:22 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 04:17 PM)Scriptorium Wrote: Catholic Encyclopedia:

The requisite conditions are enumerated as three: eminens doctrina, insignis vitae sanctitas, Ecclesiae declaratio (i.e. eminent learning, a high degree of sanctity, and proclamation by the Church).

Interesting that male is not one of the requirements here. Perhaps it was taken for granted. As for St. Therese, she certainly wasn't eminent learned, as she herself admitted. Hmmm ... maybe they're changing the rules.

But what is eminent learning?  You could make a good argument (IMHO) that St. Therese was eminently learned, even if not in the way the world thinks of it (no degrees).  It's not just her sancitity and example that make her a doctor, but her actual teaching, which she learned directly from Our Lord in her prayer and closeness to Him.

And yet the Traditional Church never bothered with declaring her a "Doctor."

I wonder if it was because of misogyny.

But St. Therese died so recently (I was speaking of the Little Flower).

Your comment does apply more to the non-declaration of St. Teresa of Avila.  Surely not misogyny, but that is only an argument if one supports the declaration of St. Teresa as a doctor to "fight misogyny."  I neither support it on those grounds nor oppose it on any grounds -- I just accept it.

My only point was about eminent learning - based on their writings I think all three doctors who are women were eminently learned.  The objection that they are virgins and not confessors is a good objection.  The objection that the title didn't apply to women and still should not is a good argument too, though it also doesn't convince me.

But the argument about learning seems too worldy to me.  What, if the Little Flower had mustered up a doctoral thesis then no one would oppose her being a Doctor?
Reply
#93
I really think it's silly to be worried that the Pope is encouraging people to read the writings of Saints Catherine of Sienna, Teresa of Avila, and Theresa the Little Flower.  It's not like reading them is going to make a woman want to wear pants! 
Reply
#94
(08-22-2011, 04:42 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: I really think it's silly to be worried that the Pope is encouraging people to read the writings of Saints Catherine of Sienna, Teresa of Avila, and Theresa the Little Flower.  It's not like reading them is going to make a woman want to wear pants! 

But I've seen pictures of St. Therese dressed as St. Joan of Arc.

And St. Joan of Arc ... wore ... pants!!!!
Reply
#95
(08-22-2011, 04:42 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: I really think it's silly to be worried that the Pope is encouraging people to read the writings of Saints Catherine of Sienna, Teresa of Avila, and Theresa the Little Flower.  It's not like reading them is going to make a woman want to wear pants! 

You have a particular way of missing the point, don't you?
Reply
#96
(08-22-2011, 01:09 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 12:49 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: However, it is in the liturgical offices that the practical consequences of the title of "Doctor" are most felt, hence the bizarreness of Doctor Virgins, for whom there is no place in the traditional Mass.
 

Right, because the 1962 missal has no rubric to cover them.  However, you also edited out the part where they said these women were clearly worthy of being Doctors of the Church. 

Sure they were worthy.  But they can't be Doctors.  Women can't be priests too.  Was Mary, the Mother of God, most worthy of all creation? Yes.  Was she ordained?  No.  Don't pull the "clearly worthy" argument because that is built on a house of straw
Reply
#97
(08-22-2011, 08:39 PM)acatholiclife Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 01:09 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 12:49 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: However, it is in the liturgical offices that the practical consequences of the title of "Doctor" are most felt, hence the bizarreness of Doctor Virgins, for whom there is no place in the traditional Mass.
 

Right, because the 1962 missal has no rubric to cover them.  However, you also edited out the part where they said these women were clearly worthy of being Doctors of the Church. 

Sure they were worthy.  But they can't be Doctors.  Women can't be priests too.  Was Mary, the Mother of God, most worthy of all creation? Yes.  Was she ordained?  No.  Don't pull the "clearly worthy" argument because that is built on a house of straw

They are doctors.

Scoreboard  ;D
Reply
#98
Maybe the next trad pope could call them doctrices and they would not have a special common, the Common of Virgins would still be used for them.  Only the doctores would have the Common of Doctors (Confessors who are Doctors) used.

That liturgical argument I think is extremely important -- don't mess around with the liturgy.  The liturgy is in a sense bigger than the Pope.

However the nature of the honor of Doctor of the Church has always been at the pleasure of the Pope ... so naming a doctor of the Church is not bigger than the Pope.
Reply
#99
(08-22-2011, 09:51 PM)Roger the Shrubber Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 08:39 PM)acatholiclife Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 01:09 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 12:49 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: However, it is in the liturgical offices that the practical consequences of the title of "Doctor" are most felt, hence the bizarreness of Doctor Virgins, for whom there is no place in the traditional Mass.
 

Right, because the 1962 missal has no rubric to cover them.  However, you also edited out the part where they said these women were clearly worthy of being Doctors of the Church. 

Sure they were worthy.  But they can't be Doctors.  Women can't be priests too.  Was Mary, the Mother of God, most worthy of all creation? Yes.  Was she ordained?  No.  Don't pull the "clearly worthy" argument because that is built on a house of straw

They are doctors.

Scoreboard  ;D

I double checked my missal.  Nope.  They are not.
Reply
(08-22-2011, 10:09 PM)acatholiclife Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 09:51 PM)Roger the Shrubber Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 08:39 PM)acatholiclife Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 01:09 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(08-22-2011, 12:49 PM)K3vinhood Wrote: However, it is in the liturgical offices that the practical consequences of the title of "Doctor" are most felt, hence the bizarreness of Doctor Virgins, for whom there is no place in the traditional Mass.
 

Right, because the 1962 missal has no rubric to cover them.  However, you also edited out the part where they said these women were clearly worthy of being Doctors of the Church. 

Sure they were worthy.  But they can't be Doctors.  Women can't be priests too.  Was Mary, the Mother of God, most worthy of all creation? Yes.  Was she ordained?  No.  Don't pull the "clearly worthy" argument because that is built on a house of straw

They are doctors.

Scoreboard  ;D

I double checked my missal.  Nope.  They are not.

Nice try ... the missal as we all know reflects those saints who had been named doctors at that time.

If we took a missal from hundreds of years ago that left out one of the male saints named a doctor afterwards, what would you make of that?  That missal would only reflect that time as well.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)