☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
Women Bring Violence On Themselves: Priest
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Archived_member15" data-source="post: 177654" data-attributes="member: 17438"><p>Dear friends, </p><p> </p><p>I want to sincerely thank sister Ishna ji for highlighting this article and bringing it to my attention. I am naturally disturbed by this individual priest's atrocious words towards women who are victims of domestic violence. The outrage in wider Italian society would surely be echoed by any sane, rational individual with even one ounce of compassion. There is nothing in the New Testament or in the Sacred Tradition of the Church which would in any way lay the blame for a sexually abused woman on some alleged and groundless choice of clothing on her part.</p><p> </p><p>Quite a range of strong views have been expressed in this thread regarding Catholicism itself - rather than just this individual priest's words - and they are not without cause either. I feel compelled to answer everyone in kind because I am as far as I can tell the only active, practising Catholic on SPN and so really the only one able to provide some discussion/debate on a few points regarding my religion itself, rather than this priest's words which I am sure we are all on exacty the same page regarding. </p><p> </p><p>A few posters seem to be from a Catholic background or heritage, so I can sympathise fully with the rawness that this issue might hold on a personal level for those people, if something connected to this or a similar circumstance might have been a contributing factor in their conversion to another faith and way of life. </p><p> </p><p>I should say, first of all if it even needs to be said, that the words of this priest are in direct contravention to Catholic teachings. I can see that some, I would say especially our sister Akasha, would disagree with me and I welcome a fruitful dialogue on this front with her and I honestly hope that despite our obvious disagreements we can diverge from each other in a spirit of mutual respect and love. </p><p> </p><p>To begin, I would like her to read an official document of Venerable Pope Paul VI: </p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>If Chile or any other Catholic majority nation failed to implement the principles outlined above, then they are not acting in accordance with official church teaching, as I feel Akasha to be intimating, just as many in the Punjab do not adhere to the gurus teachings on gender equality. </p><p> </p><p>In 2009 Pope Benedict XVI wrote a letter to the bishops of Africa regarding the inferior status of and violence towards women in many African nations:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Our friend Akasha wrote: </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Dear sister Akasha ji,</p><p> </p><p>Thank you for your post, I have read over and reflected on it carefully.</p><p>You are correct that Catholicism would not accept reincarnation, and so I am glad that you had the courage to follow the dictates of your conscience and adhere to this belief in the face of church dogma which rejected it. </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>I would say first of all that official Catholic teaching does not suggest that the female gender is in any way inferior to men. We believe in the equality of human beings regardless of gender. The problem with the idea expressed above, is that the Early Church was most popular in its preaching amongst women:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Would it not be strange for women to flock to a new exotic religion which treated them with "misogynistic disdain"? Something about Christianity was particularly appealing to Roman women. What would you say it was Akasha? </p><p> </p><p>The records are there. Women were the most fervent of missionaries. Mary Magdalene was the first witness to the resurrection. Phoebe, the deacon, was renowned by Paul. Women read letters such as Paul's out to their communities. Saint Perpetua, the most famous martyr of the early church, was of course a woman - and a noble one at that. </p><p> </p><p>One of the ridicules that educated Christians received from Roman polemicists of the era, was that the church's central doctrine - the resurrection of the Christ (however understood literally or spiritually) was founded on the testimony of women. </p><p> </p><p>Celsus, a Greek philosopher who lived in the second century A.D., was highly antagonistic to Christianity and wrote a number of works listing arguments against it. One of the arguments he believed most telling went like this: Christianity can’t be true, because the written accounts of the resurrection are based on the testimony of women—and we all know women are hysterical. And many of Celsus’ readers agreed: For them, that was a major problem. In ancient societies, as you know, women were marginalized, and the testimony of women was never given much credence. </p><p> </p><p>Celsus wrote in part of Saint Mary Magdalene: </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Elsewhere he dismissed the resurrection as the result of "womanish fantasies". </p><p> </p><p>Compare this to how the Early Christian Church viewed it women heroines, in this case Junia a female Apostle referred to by Paul and Mary Magdalene, the Apostle to the Apostles: </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 10px">I highly doubt that a religion which responds to Roman pagans ridiculing its women as "hysterical females" with the idea that they have the spirits of "lions" should be dismissed so easily as misogynistic. </span></p><p> </p><p><strong>Lion-like women do not strike me as submissive sterotypes. These were strong, courageous women like Saint Joan of Arc much later on the middle ages, she who was the greatest of all catholic soldier-saints, of which there were many but of whose number she is undoubtefly the queen and empress of them all. </strong></p><p> </p><p>You see Christianity was so popular amongst women and its early days were peopled with heroines who outshone the men because its often railed against Roman sexism towards women. </p><p> </p><p>The Church influenced the status of women in various ways in the Roman Empire: condemning the <span style="color: black">infanticide of girls (rife in the Empire because they could not earn money or prestige for the family)</span><span style="color: black">, </span><span style="color: black">divorce (women could be dispensed rather easily)</span><span style="color: black">, </span><span style="color: black">incest</span><span style="color: black">, </span><span style="color: black">polygamy</span><span style="color: black"> and counting the </span><span style="color: black">marital infidelity</span> of men as equally sinful to that of women. That last point particularly enraged the early church and endeared women to it. </p><p> </p><p>In the <span style="color: black">Roman Empire</span>, husbands were allowed to leave their wife. Wives were denied a reciprocal right. <span style="color: black">Early Church Fathers pointed to the Gospel of Mark, which describes Jesus labelling men or women who divorced and remarried as adulterers. In Rome men were allowed to have multiple lovers whilst women often ended up dead as punishment for their adulterous affairs. <span style="color: black">In the early </span><span style="color: black">Roman Law</span><span style="color: black"> the <em>jus tori</em> belonged to the husband. There was, therefore, no such thing as the crime of <!--k23-->adultery on the part of a husband towards his wife</span>. Saint Gregory of Nazianzus</span> wrote vehemently against the practice of punishing women who committed adultery while overlooking the same acts by men. </p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In Roman marriages, after a period of 12 months, the husband assumed Manus (that is ownership) over his wife, as he would over any other of his moveable property. Marriages were often arranged between families for social benefit. Divorce was also incredibly easy, straightforward and common for men while woman were no consulted ar all. The Early Christians, alternatively, taught that marriage was an equal bond of love between a man and a woman that reflected the love between Christ and his Church. Saint Paul tells us that in a Christian marriage the wife owns the husband's body and he owns her body; that is a mutual ownership that completely runs counter to Roman understandings of marriage, and indeed Roman Law which stipulated the ownership only of the husband over the wife: </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Quote:</p><p><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset" class=alt2>"...For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife..." </p><p> </p><p><strong><em>- Corinthians 7:4</em></strong> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></p><p> </p><p>In many ways therefore, Christianity opposed the sexism of Roman law thus attracting women to en masse, such that Romans often derided it as a "religion of women, cripples and slaves" (partly true since Jesus was particularly close to the outcasts of society and some early popes had been former slaves). </p><p>Read this from the current pope: </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Consider also this medeival picture from the St Albans Psalter (created in the 12th century): </p><p> </p><p><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_G582MF1mjzQ/S7s3yYd78tI/AAAAAAAAApo/W5_1CnlTmes/s1600/Mary_Magdalen_announcing_the_resurrection.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Read: </p><p><span style="font-size: 15px">"...The St. Albans Psalter, probably commissioned by the anchoress and then prioress Christina of Markyate, depicts Mary authoritatively proclaiming the resurrection to the eleven remaining apostles. This illumination invites viewers to imagine Mary as the twelfth apostle....A column divides the scene into unequal parts, with Mary Magdalen in profile isolated commandingly in her own rectangle while the eleven apostles crowd together under an arch. Mary is telling the disciples that she has seen the risen Lord (John 20:18). The apostles look amazed, clutching books and raising their hands...Mary’s authoritative role as ‘apostle to the apostles’ derives from her witness of Christ’s risen body in the previous scene..." </span></p><p> </p><p>Now consider this painting in light of this from <span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-size: 10px">Pope John Paul II (1920-2005):</span> </span></span></p><p> <span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Archived_member15, post: 177654, member: 17438"] Dear friends, I want to sincerely thank sister Ishna ji for highlighting this article and bringing it to my attention. I am naturally disturbed by this individual priest's atrocious words towards women who are victims of domestic violence. The outrage in wider Italian society would surely be echoed by any sane, rational individual with even one ounce of compassion. There is nothing in the New Testament or in the Sacred Tradition of the Church which would in any way lay the blame for a sexually abused woman on some alleged and groundless choice of clothing on her part. Quite a range of strong views have been expressed in this thread regarding Catholicism itself - rather than just this individual priest's words - and they are not without cause either. I feel compelled to answer everyone in kind because I am as far as I can tell the only active, practising Catholic on SPN and so really the only one able to provide some discussion/debate on a few points regarding my religion itself, rather than this priest's words which I am sure we are all on exacty the same page regarding. A few posters seem to be from a Catholic background or heritage, so I can sympathise fully with the rawness that this issue might hold on a personal level for those people, if something connected to this or a similar circumstance might have been a contributing factor in their conversion to another faith and way of life. I should say, first of all if it even needs to be said, that the words of this priest are in direct contravention to Catholic teachings. I can see that some, I would say especially our sister Akasha, would disagree with me and I welcome a fruitful dialogue on this front with her and I honestly hope that despite our obvious disagreements we can diverge from each other in a spirit of mutual respect and love. To begin, I would like her to read an official document of Venerable Pope Paul VI: If Chile or any other Catholic majority nation failed to implement the principles outlined above, then they are not acting in accordance with official church teaching, as I feel Akasha to be intimating, just as many in the Punjab do not adhere to the gurus teachings on gender equality. In 2009 Pope Benedict XVI wrote a letter to the bishops of Africa regarding the inferior status of and violence towards women in many African nations: Our friend Akasha wrote: Dear sister Akasha ji, Thank you for your post, I have read over and reflected on it carefully. You are correct that Catholicism would not accept reincarnation, and so I am glad that you had the courage to follow the dictates of your conscience and adhere to this belief in the face of church dogma which rejected it. I would say first of all that official Catholic teaching does not suggest that the female gender is in any way inferior to men. We believe in the equality of human beings regardless of gender. The problem with the idea expressed above, is that the Early Church was most popular in its preaching amongst women: Would it not be strange for women to flock to a new exotic religion which treated them with "misogynistic disdain"? Something about Christianity was particularly appealing to Roman women. What would you say it was Akasha? The records are there. Women were the most fervent of missionaries. Mary Magdalene was the first witness to the resurrection. Phoebe, the deacon, was renowned by Paul. Women read letters such as Paul's out to their communities. Saint Perpetua, the most famous martyr of the early church, was of course a woman - and a noble one at that. One of the ridicules that educated Christians received from Roman polemicists of the era, was that the church's central doctrine - the resurrection of the Christ (however understood literally or spiritually) was founded on the testimony of women. Celsus, a Greek philosopher who lived in the second century A.D., was highly antagonistic to Christianity and wrote a number of works listing arguments against it. One of the arguments he believed most telling went like this: Christianity can’t be true, because the written accounts of the resurrection are based on the testimony of women—and we all know women are hysterical. And many of Celsus’ readers agreed: For them, that was a major problem. In ancient societies, as you know, women were marginalized, and the testimony of women was never given much credence. Celsus wrote in part of Saint Mary Magdalene: [SIZE=3][/SIZE] Elsewhere he dismissed the resurrection as the result of "womanish fantasies". Compare this to how the Early Christian Church viewed it women heroines, in this case Junia a female Apostle referred to by Paul and Mary Magdalene, the Apostle to the Apostles: [SIZE=2]I highly doubt that a religion which responds to Roman pagans ridiculing its women as "hysterical females" with the idea that they have the spirits of "lions" should be dismissed so easily as misogynistic. [/SIZE] [B]Lion-like women do not strike me as submissive sterotypes. These were strong, courageous women like Saint Joan of Arc much later on the middle ages, she who was the greatest of all catholic soldier-saints, of which there were many but of whose number she is undoubtefly the queen and empress of them all. [/B] You see Christianity was so popular amongst women and its early days were peopled with heroines who outshone the men because its often railed against Roman sexism towards women. The Church influenced the status of women in various ways in the Roman Empire: condemning the [COLOR=black]infanticide of girls (rife in the Empire because they could not earn money or prestige for the family)[/COLOR][COLOR=black], [/COLOR][COLOR=black]divorce (women could be dispensed rather easily)[/COLOR][COLOR=black], [/COLOR][COLOR=black]incest[/COLOR][COLOR=black], [/COLOR][COLOR=black]polygamy[/COLOR][COLOR=black] and counting the [/COLOR][COLOR=black]marital infidelity[/COLOR] of men as equally sinful to that of women. That last point particularly enraged the early church and endeared women to it. In the [COLOR=black]Roman Empire[/COLOR], husbands were allowed to leave their wife. Wives were denied a reciprocal right. [COLOR=black]Early Church Fathers pointed to the Gospel of Mark, which describes Jesus labelling men or women who divorced and remarried as adulterers. In Rome men were allowed to have multiple lovers whilst women often ended up dead as punishment for their adulterous affairs. [COLOR=black]In the early [/COLOR][COLOR=black]Roman Law[/COLOR][COLOR=black] the [I]jus tori[/I] belonged to the husband. There was, therefore, no such thing as the crime of <!--k23-->adultery on the part of a husband towards his wife[/COLOR]. Saint Gregory of Nazianzus[/COLOR] wrote vehemently against the practice of punishing women who committed adultery while overlooking the same acts by men. In Roman marriages, after a period of 12 months, the husband assumed Manus (that is ownership) over his wife, as he would over any other of his moveable property. Marriages were often arranged between families for social benefit. Divorce was also incredibly easy, straightforward and common for men while woman were no consulted ar all. The Early Christians, alternatively, taught that marriage was an equal bond of love between a man and a woman that reflected the love between Christ and his Church. Saint Paul tells us that in a Christian marriage the wife owns the husband's body and he owns her body; that is a mutual ownership that completely runs counter to Roman understandings of marriage, and indeed Roman Law which stipulated the ownership only of the husband over the wife: Quote: <TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset" class=alt2>"...For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife..." [B][I]- Corinthians 7:4[/I][/B] </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE> In many ways therefore, Christianity opposed the sexism of Roman law thus attracting women to en masse, such that Romans often derided it as a "religion of women, cripples and slaves" (partly true since Jesus was particularly close to the outcasts of society and some early popes had been former slaves). Read this from the current pope: Consider also this medeival picture from the St Albans Psalter (created in the 12th century): [IMG]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_G582MF1mjzQ/S7s3yYd78tI/AAAAAAAAApo/W5_1CnlTmes/s1600/Mary_Magdalen_announcing_the_resurrection.jpg[/IMG] Read: [SIZE=4]"...The St. Albans Psalter, probably commissioned by the anchoress and then prioress Christina of Markyate, depicts Mary authoritatively proclaiming the resurrection to the eleven remaining apostles. This illumination invites viewers to imagine Mary as the twelfth apostle....A column divides the scene into unequal parts, with Mary Magdalen in profile isolated commandingly in her own rectangle while the eleven apostles crowd together under an arch. Mary is telling the disciples that she has seen the risen Lord (John 20:18). The apostles look amazed, clutching books and raising their hands...Mary’s authoritative role as ‘apostle to the apostles’ derives from her witness of Christ’s risen body in the previous scene..." [/SIZE] Now consider this painting in light of this from [SIZE=5][SIZE=3][SIZE=2]Pope John Paul II (1920-2005):[/SIZE] [/SIZE][/SIZE] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
Women Bring Violence On Themselves: Priest
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top