The Thread of Patriarchy: Part I—The Issue by Maree Sobolewski

Undoubtedly, the most persistent issue to emerge from the 2021–2024 Synod on Synodality was the role of women in the church. A working translation of the final document for the Synod states this unambiguously: “Inequality between men and women is not part of God’s design. . . . We bear witness to the Gospel when we seek to live in relationships that respect the equal dignity and reciprocity between men and women. The widely expressed pain and suffering on the part of many women from every region and continent, both lay and consecrated, during the synodal process, reveal how often we fail to live up to this vision” (§50). It goes on to articulate an image of equality rooted in the sacrament of baptism:

By virtue of Baptism, women and men have equal dignity as members of the People of God. However, women continue to encounter obstacles in obtaining a fuller recognition of their charisms, vocation and roles in all the various areas of the Church’s life. This is to the detriment of serving the Church’s shared mission. . . .

This Assembly asks for full implementation of all the opportunities already provided for in Canon Law with regard to the role of women, particularly in those places where they remain under-explored. There is no reason or impediment that should prevent women from carrying out leadership roles in the Church: what comes from the Holy Spirit cannot be stopped (§60).

In a statement following the release of the Synod’s final document, the Women’s Ordination Conference acknowledged that “the deeply theological text points to the fruits of a more collegial church” while critiquing the fact that “its overtures to the equality of women and equal gifts bestowed upon all God’s people through baptism ring hollow without clear steps for implementation.” This implementation, by directive of the final document, must now be taken up by the people of God in their local churches: “The local Churches are asked to continue their daily journey with a synodal methodology of consultation and discernment, identifying concrete ways and formation pathways to bring about a tangible synodal conversion in the various ecclesial contexts” (§9).

In light of this directive, and of the way the issue of women’s ministry invites continued response from the hearts of the faithful, we are pleased to present a multipart essay by “committed Catholic” Maree Sobolewski of Australia. Maree originally wrote this essay to share with Synod delegates as they prepared for the second session in October. “The essay I have written is with a sincere heart,” she states by way of introduction. “I wrote it over a three-month period with much prayer and deliberation.” Part I of her essay follows below; we will be sharing the remaining parts through the end of the year—Ed.

Community-minded Catholic women, inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit, wish to use their gift of agency to discern their own callings as any male might do—with, of course, the appropriate due processes. They want to serve the church in the capacity God calls them to, without prejudice, whether it is in their giftedness as laypeople or in ordained ministry, according to their charisms, in positions of leadership and decision-making. Responding to their call would be understood as responding to God’s will.

The historical and current hurtful marginalization of women, where a male hierarchy deprives them of their agency of choice and baptismal dignity, is perceived as abusive and a moral wrong, a “sin” against humankind and the Holy Spirit. These actions are contrary to the church’s own documents on discrimination and recognition of the importance of personal agency; actions contrary to the agency the male clergy accord themselves; actions against an inalienable respect for the human dignity of all; and, in the end, actions against grace. Grace builds upon nature. A holy agency has been accorded to the natures of both women and men. Marginalizing women has stood in the way of God’s graces that could bless all.

A reasoned review of various subject areas suggests the current subordinate position of women in the church, with their loss of true agency and opportunities, is not the work of the Holy Spirit. That it is the work of the repressive and oppressive patriarchal keys of men, rather than any revelation by God or any provable natural law. It has had repercussions that have afflicted all.

The word patriarchy, meaning “the rule of the father,” denotes the social-science concept of male dominance. Patriarchy evolved to become a system of hierarchical inequality. In this form it became the rule of “men over women” with the assumption that men were meant to rule. It bestowed primary power and privilege upon men, with women considered inferior and subordinate to their will.

“When patriarchy of any kind is enforced,” Ashley Easter has written, “women’s gifts and potential are squelched and their deciding power is stripped, and that in itself is abusive.” The church, as part of society, has absorbed patriarchy into its structures and practices. These seeds germinated a long time ago and still bear their “fruit” today.

The Early Church Fathers

While the early church fathers and reformers passed on many traditions for which we are grateful, they also passed on traditions steeped in assumptions about the inferiority of women. An overview of our Judeo-Christian tradition shows that the early church reformers and fathers, enmeshed in the ignorance and patriarchal prejudices of their time, perpetuated the exclusion of women from ministry and leadership. Therese Koturbash names three historical reasons for this exclusion: “Women were considered the source of sin and the fall (Eve); women were considered to be unclean at certain times (menstruation, child birth); and women were considered inferior to men in every way.”

Tertullian (160–240 AD), John Chrysostom (349–407 AD), Augustine of Hippo (354–430 AD), and Thomas Aquinas (1224/25–1274), were among the church fathers who left this deposit of faith. In book I of “On the Apparel of Women,” Tertullian wrote, “You are the devil’s gateway . . . you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack: you destroyed so easily God’s image, man. On account of your dessert—that is death—even the Son of God had to die.” This literal misuse of Scripture is not uncommon among the church fathers.

John Chrysostom, using texts from 1 Timothy, 1 Corinthians, and Genesis 3, argued in his ninth homily that female subordination was a direct result of Eve’s sin, as was the restriction on women teaching men: “The woman taught once, and ruined all. On this account therefore he says, ‘let her not teach.’”

Augustine considered women to be inferior to men. While seeing both man and woman as responsible for the fall, he appears to assign the greater responsibility to Eve as the seducer, believing it was through her that man became guilty of transgression. He also believed the rational Adam had, in Judy Wu Dominick’s reading, an “inherent inability to be deceived.”

In a “Literal Commentary on Genesis,” Augustine wrote that “woman was given to man, woman who was of small intelligence and who perhaps still lives more in accordance with the promptings of the inferior flesh than by the superior reason.” He stated that he could not think of any other reason for woman as man’s helper, other than “for the production of children.” And in his commentary “On the Trinity,” he expressed the view that a woman could only image God through marriage to a man. Women were of lesser worth spiritually and intellectually. Humanity contributed to their likeness to God, but not their gender.

Thomas Aquinas

Thomas Aquinas was highly influenced by Aristotle, an advocate of human hierarchy who taught that women were inferior or deformed men. Aquinas set about to expound this theory in an ecclesial context, justifying women’s lower position in the church, including their exclusion from the priesthood. He determined that women were defective males (due to some aberration in the generative process) who contributed nothing to the innate humanness of the fetus.

Aquinas believed that a woman’s only contribution to procreation was the womb and the nutrition to grow the male seed that contains the future child, including its soul. Women provided an “incubator” and nourishment, but no more. As part of the created order, women were socially inferior and subject by nature to man, who had superior human reason. Further, women were created as dependent on men, as men were created first.

For Aquinas, women were forbidden to teach in church or have authority over men, who he saw as in the image of God in a special sense. A man, he maintained, naturally commands authority. He signifies eminence in human nature. As the perfect human, man is the sacramental sign of Christ. Aquinas’s stand is a rejection of woman’s authority. Clearly Aquinas’s Aristotelian bias, together with tendinous exegeses of Scriptures including Genesis and Pauline texts, had undermined his reasoning, despite his conclusion that women may be saved. A saint and Doctor of the Church, revered by a succession of pontiffs, Aquinas remains indelibly enshrined in canon law as the standard theological and philosophical role model for today.

Interestingly, the vision Aquinas had before he died saw him devalue his own work: “The end of my labors has come. All that I have written seems to me like straw compared with what has been revealed to me.” Aquinas’s personal encounter with God suggests his scholastic theology could not bridge the depth, length, and breadth of God’s wisdom and love. God’s absolute power ultimately transcends any principles of logic.

Conclusion: The “Word” on Women

Finally, certain Jewish practices based on Genesis 3 that implicitly denigrated women were accepted and practiced by the church. The belief “that a woman’s uncleanness makes her unworthy of the divine cult was not superseded by Christianity,” Gertrud Heinzelmann observed in Commonweal in 1965; “it flowered repeatedly throughout the long centuries from the early middle ages to the threshold of modern times. It spawned the idea that women are not worthy to enter the sanctuary or touch the sacred vessels.” At various points in the history of the church, women earlier had to cover their “unclean” hands with a cloth before receiving the Eucharist.

The teachings of these men, and others not mentioned, where women are utilitarianly compartmentalized, were used by the church to justify male dominance. The weaker sex is protected, saved, and redeemed by its submission to men. This “word” on women is embedded in the church and continues to influence it today. ♦

Maree Sobolewski is a committed Catholic from Australia. She holds a master of arts in theology and spirituality and is a team member of Catholic Church Reform International. She has worked as an educator, a retreat leader and seminar facilitator, and a school chaplain, and has served as a missionary in Tasmania and the Northwest Territories of Canada. Maree has been actively involved in her parish for most of her adult life. She has served as a board member, prayer group leader, and international event coordinator, among other roles.

Image: Martha leading Mary Magdalene up a flight of stairs to Christ who is seated at right at the entrance to a temple, Marcantonio Raimondi, ca. 1520–25