Dear Edith: Feminism and the Council of Trent

Dear Anonymous,

When trying to read to the heart of your letter, it seems like your ultimate question would read something like this: “What do we do when it seems that doctrine from various magisterial teachings in different times seem to conflict?”

This is a question I have puzzled over myself, given the Matt Fradd interview you referenced and other discussions that we see circulating about current events in the Church. I thought it was fitting that you raised these questions now, given the canonization of St. John Henry Newman last month. I think one of his signature works, “An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine,” provides us with some tools to make sense of instances like this, where we encounter Church teachings that are difficult to contextualize and/or seem opposed to other teachings.

Newman lays out the nature of how — and standards by which — the Church’s doctrine may develop over time, emphasizing that doctrine is not overturned or ruptured, nor is it simply handed down through years or generations. Rather — and this is his central thesis in the text — doctrine evolves over time in the manner of a living organism, since the Church is Herself a living organism: the Body of Christ. Newman writes:

“When some great enunciation ... is carried forward into the public throng of men and draws attention, then [doctrine] is not merely received passively in this or that form into many minds, but it becomes an active principle within them, leading them to an ever-new contemplation of itself, to an application of it in various directions, and a propagation of it on every side” (“An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine,” section 1).

In light of Newman’s insight that teachings and ideas are active and become more fulfilled through their analysis and application in interested minds, I believe that we can start to more clearly interpret Church teaching throughout history on women’s work outside the home from a perspective that carefully considers development of doctrine.

Teachings and ideas are active and become more fulfilled through their analysis and application in interested minds.

As you alluded to, in reviewing recent teachings on women’s work and roles in society from Church documents, we certainly can find some tension with the excerpt you referenced from the Council of Trent. In his 1995 Letter to Women, Pope St. John Paul II praises working mothers:

“Thank you, women who work! You are present and active in every area of life — social, economic, cultural, artistic and political. In this way you make an indispensable contribution to the growth of a culture which unites reason and feeling, to a model of life ever open to the sense of ‘mystery’, to the establishment of economic and political structures ever more worthy of humanity” (Letter to Women 2).

He later states:

“There is an urgent need to achieve real equality in every area: equal pay for equal work, protection for working mothers, fairness in career advancements, equality of spouses with regard to family rights and the recognition of everything that is part of the rights and duties of citizens in a democratic State” (Letter to Women 4).

Furthermore, in a 2004 letter to bishops by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), it is instructed that “women should be present in the world of work and in the organization of society, and that women should have access to positions of responsibility which allow them to inspire the policies of nations and to promote innovative solutions to economic and social problems” (emphasis added).

How do we make sense of these various Church documents and the seemingly opposing viewpoints professed by the Council of Trent? A careful examination of the context and principles of the teachings, along Newman’s hermeneutic, can help us see these differences as a development of doctrine surrounding the family, rather than a clash of ideas.

Let’s start by examining one of the Scripture passages referenced at the beginning of the excerpt from the Council of Trent, this one taken from the Letter to the Ephesians from St. Paul (as he is named in the passage you cited, the “Prince of the Apostles”):

“Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is head of his wife just as Christ is head of the church, he himself the savior of the body. As the church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her” (Ephesians 5:21-25).

I propose that what Newman would call the seed or bedrock of the doctrine flowing from this passage is not so much the particular ordering of family or societal roles in a given time but, rather, the subordination of vocation, work, and family relationships to the self-emptying love of Christ within the spousal relationship. While the noted excerpt from the Council of Trent outlines a structure for family life under this rubric that instructs women to remain at home (in the pre-industrial era, where cottage industry would have often been the norm), we can see signs of a legitimate development of this doctrine over the past few decades in instances such as the passages referenced above from the CDF and Pope St. John Paul II.

How do we determine whether a teaching represents a legitimate development of doctrine or a rupture from what has been taught in the past and departure from truth? Newman is also helpful here, as he lays out seven “notes,” or frameworks by which one may evaluate a development. I will attempt to briefly show that expressions of the feminine genius in broader society and in the workplace represent a positive development of the doctrine from the Council of Trent, examining its merits according to three of the notes.

Expressions of the feminine genius represent a positive development of the doctrine from the Council of Trent.

The first note stipulates that any development of doctrine must maintain a “preservation of type.” In other words, the central identity or form of the doctrine must remain intact. I argue that while the explicit instruction or practice of women remaining at home changes from the Council of Trent to the teachings under Pope John Paul II, the central aspect of family life’s subordination in all ways to Christ is preserved, especially given the point that much of industry and craftsmanship would have been run out of the home during this time in history. The key is that discernment of family vocation must take place under the umbrella of discipleship, with a careful assessment of how work and home commitments for members of the family contribute to the proclamation and living out of the Gospel.

A family with a mother working outside the home is, therefore, not out of step with the vision of a family on the path of discipleship. Rather, the specifics of a family’s needs and gifts will guide how it embodies this vision, and the activities of both mother and father outside the home can be an important part of a family’s discipleship through the contribution of the mother’s gifts and service to the community and culture, while not obscuring the time and love a mother devotes to the home and her family. Therefore, the fundamental type of St. Paul’s teaching and that of the Council of Trent is preserved.

Newman’s second note explains that a legitimate development of doctrine must also display a “continuity of principles,” or the perpetuation of the fundamental practices and ideas that undergird the teaching. We can say that the acknowledgment that Christian wives and mothers work outside the home affirms numerous principles present in St. Paul’s exhortation echoed in the Council of Trent. However, here, I will attempt to describe two theological principles I see at work.

First, as the subordination of the family and individual to Christ amplifies the dignity of all men and women, so the dignity of wives and mothers is affirmed in their service and endeavors outside the home. As both men and women are imbued with will, intellect, creativity, and a desire to bring about good, the ability of both men and women to pursue work outside the home affirms these gifts and their exercise in service of God.

The ability of both men and women to pursue work outside the home affirms their gifts and their exercise in service of God.

Second, subordination to Christ individually and in the home points toward His incarnation and the divine grace that flows from it, and we can then understand our desire to participate in the true, good, and beautiful as responses to the gift of grace. Newman names this principle of grace as one of the fundamental and essential aspects of Christianity and reminds us that grace is “not only holy but sanctifying.” Divine grace is most certainly active in the life of the Christian home, and mothers and wives participate and respond to grace in their work and service at home. Their activities outside the home, if so discerned, allow for ever greater manifestation of Christ’s grace in the world.

Finally, Newman’s third note states that a true development of doctrine must display “assimilative power,” possessing the ability to absorb and adapt to the details of different eras and environments while not losing its core identity and principles. An examination of the doctrine in question reveals its power to take on the best aspects of societal changes while resisting elements that are in conflict with the Gospel. Technological advancements and changes in the nature of professional labor have created conditions that not only allow for greater participation in the workplace by women but also ask for their participation for optimal flourishing of the professional enterprises.

This doctrine does not, however, instruct that it is necessary for all wives and mothers to contribute to the professional arena or that they should sacrifice the interest of the family for such endeavors; it maintains that care for children and the home is of great importance. Pope St. John Paul II highlights the need for this prioritization, lamenting “how the gift of motherhood is often penalized rather than rewarded” in social and professional life and that “much remains to be done to prevent discrimination against those who have chosen to be wives and mothers” (“Letter to Women” 4). The Church’s teaching on women’s contributions outside the home has shown appropriate and effective assimilation to changes in society, recognizing the opportunity and need for women to practice their gifts outside the home, while asserting that such opportunities must not detract from care for the family.

Under the rubrics offered by St. John Henry Newman, we can see that the Church’s teaching on women’s work and social participation outside the home continues to emphasize that family and individual discernment must be subordinated to Christ and that it does not represent a rupture from the Council of Trent but, rather, displays lively and appropriate development of doctrine.

Family and individual discernment must be subordinated to Christ.

In conclusion, we can say an enthusiastic “yes” to the words and witness of Pope St. John Paul II, St. Elizabeth Ann Seton, and St. Gianna Molla, as well as to the teachings of St. Paul and the Council of Trent. Newman’s work has helped me in my own journey of understanding doctrine. I hope that my words offer some help and understanding of how you, too, can read the Church’s teaching on women across history.

Sincerely,

Ben

Ben is a recent convert to the Catholic Church who has greatly enjoyed learning about and becoming more immersed in the Church's rich intellectual and spiritual tradition. He is grateful for the contributions that FemCatholic makes to discussions in the Church! He works as a health care market researcher and also is passionate about music and sports, but moonlights as a discussion partner for his wife, Hope, who teaches high school theology.

Dear Anonymous,

About a week ago, I watched the interview between Matt Fradd and controversial Catholic personality Timothy Gordon. I confess I had been ignoring it because Gordon’s reputation seemed similar to other mouthy radio pundits who excuse themselves by saying, “I’m only telling it like it is.” As easy as it would have been to continue my blissful ignorance, too many good people I know seem to have been affected by the interview — some for better but more for worse.

Like his more secular hipster brothers who sometimes fall into the trap of idealizing a past time or way of living that they’ve never had to experience on a wide scale, Gordon seems to idealize the strictest interpretations of Church teaching and the oldest form of the Latin Mass he can find.

The idealization of any time or movement in the past reminds me of a kid’s interpretation of a visit to their grandparents’ house. Grandma and Grandpa seem like all hugs and kisses. The kids exclaim, “Man, wouldn’t it be cool if they were my parents instead of my own parents?” Maybe, but if you had grown up with Grandma and Grandpa, you would know their crazy side, and you’d perhaps be content to work through the dysfunction and disagreement you have with your true parents, here and now. Sixty years later, when your grandparents have had more time to mature and you only see them on certain weekends, they seem like perfect caregivers.

The lives of the saints attest to the diversity of holiness within religious orders and married life. Unfortunately, I didn’t see much respect for God’s personal call in Gordon’s interview when he made the blanket statement that all married woman should be an idealized Donna Reed type, “beautifying the home.”

The lives of the saints attest to the diversity of holiness within religious orders and married life.

During the interview, Fradd respectfully tried to balance out Gordon’s hasty statements, such as the assumption that any woman who Gordon hears snarking at her husband in a parking lot is a virulent feminist. Fradd observed that lots of women act out at their husbands not because they want to beat up on men but out of frustration due to a man’s lack of sacrifice and servant leadership. He pointed out that many men don’t know how to lead well because they themselves are acting from woundedness. He continued to say that we can’t definitively know why a woman might be in a foul mood based on a five-second observation in a parking lot, and maybe we shouldn’t tell a whole story about the state of society based on it.

There are many public speakers out there today, including Gordon, who assert that men should be the bosses of their lives and, by extension, of their wives. Fair enough; I think it would be awesome if men stepped up and lead more (and no, bullying doesn't count). But Gordon says that men can’t do this because feminists take away their mojo, a phenomenon that started with Eve back in the Garden of Eden.

At Mass last month, we heard the parable of the persistent widow (Luke 18:1-8). A judge failed in his duties, and a persistent woman had to badger him until he did the right thing. Is this feminism?

In the Old Testament, Abigail saved her unjust husband Nabal from being slaughtered by David (1 Samuel 25). In doing so, she not only protected her husband but also her household servants and children. Is this feminism?

In the New Testament, a mother persists in asking Jesus to heal her daughter even though she is not Jewish (Matthew 15:21-28). In her determination, she exclaims, “Please, Lord, for even the dogs eat the scraps that fall from the table of their masters,” and her daughter is healed. Is this feminism?

What do you call it when a woman can’t stand by and allow a vacuum of leadership to be filled with evil? What do we call it when she fills in the gap, advocating for herself and others?

The Bible is full of faithful women who fill in the gap to help their children and husbands grow in virtue. Today, I still see the need for these faithful women. While I’m not a feminist in the secular sense, I don’t know what else to call myself when I see bad situations resolved by excellent women.

Gordon is correct about two things: Church teaching is important, and Church Councils are important. At the same time, we cannot dismiss the importance of discerning one’s unique call through prayer, reception of the Sacraments, and a well-formed conscience. And we needn’t conform to an imperfect person’s image of what our life ought to look like.

We cannot dismiss the importance of discerning one’s unique call through prayer, reception of the Sacraments, and a well-formed conscience.

A.E. Ruggaber is a wife, mother, writer, friend, and philosopher of sorts.