I don't care for the Bush administration or many of its policies. But I have to agree with them about President Chavez's speech in which he called President Bush "el diablo" - the devil. The devil is the ultimate purveyor of evil, the "lion who seeks whomever he may devour". Even Bush's most hateful opponents wouldn't give him that. Also, as the opposite number of St. Michael, the chief of the angelic armies, the devil would be strong and clever, a most formidable foe. Surely he'd never invade Iraq without some kind of exit strategy. It's just too silly for a serious response.
As for Chavez's other accusations, whether Bush is a "liar" or a "tyrant" is still being widely discussed. I have my own opinions, but for now I'll leave it up to others.
Friday, September 22, 2006
Friday, September 08, 2006
Saudis Consider Banning Women From Mecca Prayers
For awhile now I've been curious as to why a woman would ever become a Muslim. From what I've read on the internet and elsewhere, evidently it happens, even to intelligent women. But unless the woman involved was brainwashed or had absymal self-esteem, I've never been able to understand it. Items such as this one don't help.
It seems that officials in Saudi Arabia are considering banning women from saying prayers near Islam's most sacred shrine in Mecca. Some people say women are already being kept away. Women already have few rights in this country. They aren't allowed to drive. They have to get permission from a man just to get a job, travel or stay at a hotel. But the religious authorities behind this thing claim it's just an effort to ease chronic overcrowding, which causes dangerous riots.
If this is the case, why target just women? Since women are barely allowed to leave the house in this country, most of those making up the crowds must be men. So why not just set up remote prayer sites and allow no more than a certain number of the faithful to pray at each site? This could disperse the crowds over a larger area, perhaps for miles if necessary. Of course this would take them a distance from the Grand Mosque. But surely if the leading imams said this was okay that would be good enough for most pilgrims.
In the article it's implied that they want to do it because they're afraid that the sight of a woman praying will cause the men to riot. As one woman countered
So first we have the burqas, then restrictions, and now this. The implication seems to be that Arab men are such horney so-and-sos that the sight of a woman, any woman, drives them insane with lust. Maybe I'm naive, but I just don't believe that.
The authorities are saying that although the women's areas would be further back they would be much larger and have a better view of the shrine. When I read that I keep hearing in my mind "Why yes, we only let them ride in the back of the bus. But it's really nice there."
True, this is only in one country. But Saudi Arabia is an Islamic state, ruled by sharia. So it's a good example of the Islamic mindset. Historian Hatoon al-Fassi says it probably won't happen because the rest of the Muslim world should make the decision, not just Saudi Arabia. And a group of Muslim women writers are sponsoring a petition against it. So hopefully the more moderate will prevail.
Meanwhile my quest to find out why a woman would want to be a Muslim continues...
It seems that officials in Saudi Arabia are considering banning women from saying prayers near Islam's most sacred shrine in Mecca. Some people say women are already being kept away. Women already have few rights in this country. They aren't allowed to drive. They have to get permission from a man just to get a job, travel or stay at a hotel. But the religious authorities behind this thing claim it's just an effort to ease chronic overcrowding, which causes dangerous riots.
If this is the case, why target just women? Since women are barely allowed to leave the house in this country, most of those making up the crowds must be men. So why not just set up remote prayer sites and allow no more than a certain number of the faithful to pray at each site? This could disperse the crowds over a larger area, perhaps for miles if necessary. Of course this would take them a distance from the Grand Mosque. But surely if the leading imams said this was okay that would be good enough for most pilgrims.
In the article it's implied that they want to do it because they're afraid that the sight of a woman praying will cause the men to riot. As one woman countered
"Women are not all young beauties that rush to the mosque with an aim of seducing men," wrote one woman, Aziza al-Manie, in the country's Okaz daily.
"Among female visitors are the ill, the old, tormented widows, the handicapped and disabled, and the ones with problems desperately wanting God's help and mercy," she wrote, according to a translation in Arab News.
So first we have the burqas, then restrictions, and now this. The implication seems to be that Arab men are such horney so-and-sos that the sight of a woman, any woman, drives them insane with lust. Maybe I'm naive, but I just don't believe that.
The authorities are saying that although the women's areas would be further back they would be much larger and have a better view of the shrine. When I read that I keep hearing in my mind "Why yes, we only let them ride in the back of the bus. But it's really nice there."
True, this is only in one country. But Saudi Arabia is an Islamic state, ruled by sharia. So it's a good example of the Islamic mindset. Historian Hatoon al-Fassi says it probably won't happen because the rest of the Muslim world should make the decision, not just Saudi Arabia. And a group of Muslim women writers are sponsoring a petition against it. So hopefully the more moderate will prevail.
Meanwhile my quest to find out why a woman would want to be a Muslim continues...
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Musings on Women in the Pulpit
Yesterday a family friend invited us to a service at the church to which she belongs - the only Assembly of God church in town. We accepted. It was nothing definite, just "Sometime we'll try to go". I think we'll try to make an evening service some Sunday.
Our children are young and impressionable, so I had to make sure this church would be suitably in line with our family's beliefs. So as soon as I could I checked out the Assemblies of God website. What was most important? The views of the church on Scripture? A biggie, but I already had a pretty good idea of that, so I skipped it. The church's views on sexual morality? No. The first thing I looked at was the one great, make-or-break issue (well, almost): Do the Assemblies of God ordain women to the pastoral ministry?
Is womens' ordination really that important? Well, yes.
But it wasn't always this way. My mother, a devoted Catholic, was almost violently against the idea of women priests. Since Catholic doctrine teaches that the priest is alter Christi another Christ, a female priest was, to her, to make God into a goddess.
I really didn't care. I felt no calling to the ministry. I once told my mother, "I can't see why a woman would want to be a priest. Nor why a man would, either." With little human companionship and almost no time to himself, only parishioners who were never happy no matter what he did, a priest had to be an insatible masochist.
The young seminarians I met did not improve my view of the priesthood. Most were young gay men trying to escape their sexuality and be pleasing to God.
I loved the Catholic Church, and I read everything I could find. As I grew and learned, I came to see that as a Catholic woman I would always be a second-class citizen. I could teach canon law (if the Pope of the time would allow) but I could never write canon law. No matter how I studied or how much ability I possessed I would never be anything but a layperson, the lowest form of life in the Church. I could serve in an advisory capacity as a parish council member but the priest would always be the boss. Even a deacon has imput at the parish level. Even if God were to bless me with the blueprint to reform the Church, I could only pray that He would give this idea to a man.
Later I left the Catholic Church. My reasons were many but women's ordination wasn't one of them. For a time I attended an Episcopal church. This was the first time I actually saw a woman in the pulpit.
I recently read a blog in which the blogger wrote that he saw many women preachers, but seldom a good one. My experience was the opposite. The few times I saw a woman at the altar I expected something extraordinary, and I was never disappointed.
The Episcopal church is still my first love, and I miss it terribly. But I live in a small Texas town, and the nearest one is fifteen miles away, too far to afford the drive. The Methodist church is one of the few un-Southern-Baptist churches around, so we attend that. The minister is a man. The minister is a man. I've never seen a woman minister here. I'm not sure the most conservative members wouldn't stone her. But I can dream.
Most of all I want a church where my daughter won't feel silenced and unworthy, like some other women I've known. If she never feels a call to the ministry, that's fine. But if she should, I want her to be able to follow wherever God takes her. I want her to be a first-class citizen in the Kingdom of God.
Our children are young and impressionable, so I had to make sure this church would be suitably in line with our family's beliefs. So as soon as I could I checked out the Assemblies of God website. What was most important? The views of the church on Scripture? A biggie, but I already had a pretty good idea of that, so I skipped it. The church's views on sexual morality? No. The first thing I looked at was the one great, make-or-break issue (well, almost): Do the Assemblies of God ordain women to the pastoral ministry?
Is womens' ordination really that important? Well, yes.
But it wasn't always this way. My mother, a devoted Catholic, was almost violently against the idea of women priests. Since Catholic doctrine teaches that the priest is alter Christi another Christ, a female priest was, to her, to make God into a goddess.
I really didn't care. I felt no calling to the ministry. I once told my mother, "I can't see why a woman would want to be a priest. Nor why a man would, either." With little human companionship and almost no time to himself, only parishioners who were never happy no matter what he did, a priest had to be an insatible masochist.
The young seminarians I met did not improve my view of the priesthood. Most were young gay men trying to escape their sexuality and be pleasing to God.
I loved the Catholic Church, and I read everything I could find. As I grew and learned, I came to see that as a Catholic woman I would always be a second-class citizen. I could teach canon law (if the Pope of the time would allow) but I could never write canon law. No matter how I studied or how much ability I possessed I would never be anything but a layperson, the lowest form of life in the Church. I could serve in an advisory capacity as a parish council member but the priest would always be the boss. Even a deacon has imput at the parish level. Even if God were to bless me with the blueprint to reform the Church, I could only pray that He would give this idea to a man.
Later I left the Catholic Church. My reasons were many but women's ordination wasn't one of them. For a time I attended an Episcopal church. This was the first time I actually saw a woman in the pulpit.
I recently read a blog in which the blogger wrote that he saw many women preachers, but seldom a good one. My experience was the opposite. The few times I saw a woman at the altar I expected something extraordinary, and I was never disappointed.
The Episcopal church is still my first love, and I miss it terribly. But I live in a small Texas town, and the nearest one is fifteen miles away, too far to afford the drive. The Methodist church is one of the few un-Southern-Baptist churches around, so we attend that. The minister is a man. The minister is a man. I've never seen a woman minister here. I'm not sure the most conservative members wouldn't stone her. But I can dream.
Most of all I want a church where my daughter won't feel silenced and unworthy, like some other women I've known. If she never feels a call to the ministry, that's fine. But if she should, I want her to be able to follow wherever God takes her. I want her to be a first-class citizen in the Kingdom of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)