Here is the first section of my paper, exploring the two-fold nature of woman according to John Paul II, Edith Stein (or St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross), and Gertrude von le Fort.
Introduction
The
world is seeped in many vague images that attempt to define the ideal woman,
yet many of these ideas appear irreconcilable in our minds: how can we
reconcile an authoritative Catherine of Sienna with the obedient fiat of Mother Mary? Judith, from the
Old Testament,[1]
represents woman as strong, commanding, and unyielding; but the woman of
Proverbs 31 represents woman as humble, caring, and merciful[2]. It
is on account of these seemingly incompatible images that the nature of woman
presents a Paradox to the World.
How
are we to understand woman’s relation to reality, and the role that she plays
therein, and where can we find a key to unlock this great mystery? Woman is a mystery: she is not simply a submissive
creature, created to bow to man’s whims, but neither is she a man, created to
function as he does in the world. She does share with him a common humanity,
but ultimately, she is her own unique sex, distinct from man in the attitude by which she lives her life. Attitude,
as I use it here, is a mental and spiritual orientation toward a particular
invisible reality.
Woman
today is active in every sphere of public life, and the common understanding of
her is that the professional world is her proper sphere. The world regards the
home and family life as taking second place to the woman’s role as an
independent, autonomous individual, who finds her fulfillment by realizing her
creative energies in a realm that is purposefully separated from her home,
children, and husband.
Is the public/professional sphere a
proper sphere for woman in light of her true dignity? We will explore this
question in relation to woman’s dignity as a person, then as regards her unique
nature as a woman, and finally, we will be able to answer the question with
which this thesis is primarily concerned – whether woman ought to participate
in the professionally competitive world. It is in compiling the writings of Pope
John Paul II, Gertrude von le Fort, and Edith Stein on the subject of women
that we can come to an understanding of the two-fold nature of woman: first, of
her call to give of herself for others; and second, for her to actively receive
love. When woman maintains an attitude of her feminine nature toward life, then
no matter what sphere (professional or familial) in which she participates, she
will bring the gift of her feminine charism to the world.
The final section of this thesis
deals with a commonly discarded image of woman: the veil. It is an image that
most properly demonstrates her nature and which, when properly understood,
allows woman to best live out her nature in this life.
The ultimate goal of this thesis is
to lead the reader to a more complete understanding of who woman is, why she is
such, and how we are to embrace her
unique nature which is so universally misunderstood. It is not a question that
offers a ready answer, but one that, when answered, opens multiple horizons for
exploration and invites the questioner to continue searching it out, in all its
nuances.
Chapter 1 – The Nature of Woman
Woman
is not a distinct species from man. On the contrary, “God created man in his
own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”[3]
What is proper to man’s nature is proper to the nature of woman. John Paul II, in his pastoral letter Mulieris Dignitatem, says that “only a
person can love, and only a person can be loved in return.”[4] Woman,
as a human person, is an ‘I’, an entity created for her own sake to be loved
and to love in return. John Paul II says that “from the very beginning, both
are persons . . . The woman is another
“I” in a common humanity.”[5] Therefore,
as a person, she can only find herself through a sincere gift of herself.[6] It
is through this gift that she comes to know and understand herself, and thus
finds fulfillment and happiness in this life.[7]
“The
woman is created by God ‘from the rib’ of the man and is placed at his side as
another ‘I’, as the companion of the man, who is alone in the surrounding world
of living creatures and who finds in none of them a ‘helper’ suitable for
himself.”[8] The
purpose and dignity of the person lies in the fact that he is created in the
image and likeness of God and the woman is in no lesser sense a reflection of
this image. She is rational, self-aware, and free to choose to do good; she is
just as capable of creativity, management, and intellectual pursuit. All these
qualities raise her alongside man above the “living creatures,”[9]
and bequeath her a station apart. Man, as male and female, participates in this
common human dignity through which he exemplifies and portrays God. Each sex is
created with a complementary nature toward the other, and it is ultimately in woman’s relation to
others, and especially in relation to man, that she realizes her full potential.
Edith Stein says that “the complementary relationship of man and woman
appears clearly in the original order of nature.”[10] Man
and woman benefit each other and are mutual helpmates on the road of life. The
complementarity of their relationship is most clearly seen in marriage:
Man’s primary
vocation appears to be that of ruler and the paternal vocation secondary (not
subordinate to his vocation as ruler but an integral part of it); woman’s
primary vocation is maternal: her role as ruler is secondary and included in a
certain way in her maternal vocation.[11]
She goes on to
say that “the husband will find that she can give him invaluable advice in
guiding the lives of the children as well as of themselves.”[12]
Thus, men and women are mutual helpmates, mirroring in their relationship the
sacramental nature of God to his Creation; both are called to give of
themselves, but in a manner unique to their own sex. Woman’s dignity and
vocation as a self-aware person lies in making of herself a “sincere gift of
self”[13]
through the filter of her own unique and separate dignity. We will presently
discuss this unique nature of woman more fully, but first, it is important to
fully understand the concept of exaltation.
Exaltation
is the raising of an individual above the other creatures of the cosmos and a
recognition, thereby, of the great nature of the elevated individual. In a way that
will be seen more clearly in a moment (when we discuss the unique nature of
woman), it is a perversion of woman’s nature for her to exalt herself. Self-exaltation
cannot lead to fulfillment, since it reflects back only into the self: the self
desires intrinsically to move outward, to find meaning in ‘other’, in the
recognition of the dignity of the human person. Self-exaltation cannot reveal
that dignity. Woman’s dignity finds true exaltation when she gives of herself
to God, and He elevates her on account of her gift to Him.
 |
| Gertrude von le Fort |
Woman’s
nature is two-fold, and the second aspect, her unique dignity, is separate from
the common nature she shares with man. Woman, qua female, is separate from man qua male. Man, in respect to the cosmos, represents the Creator as
the active lover: he who offers love first and anticipates the reception of his
beloved of the love he offers. As creation awaits with joyous expectation the
love that is poured forth upon it from God, so woman stands in relation to man,
to actively receive the love that he gives and then offer it back again. However,
woman’s ability to love is not dependent on any mortal’s gift, but upon her receptivity
to the love of God; her relationship with man is simply a mirror of all
mankind’s relationship with God. This receptivity to both God and man is her fiat:
her openness to Love, and her willingness to receive and respond to it.[14] Gertrude
von le Fort, a woman with deep insight into woman’s dignity, says that “for his
redemption, man [as mankind, who stands in relation to the creator] has nothing
to contribute to God other than the readiness of unconditional surrender. The
passive acceptance inherent in woman . . . appears in the Christian order of
grace as the positively decisive factor.”[15] Le
Fort is saying here that woman represents the receptive nature of creation: she
is a symbol of creation’s cosmic openness to God’s life-giving love.
Symbol is a key-word. Symbols highlight invisible realities represented by
visible signs, as Gertrude von le Fort says, “symbols are therefore the
language of an invisible reality becoming articulate in the realm of the
visible.”[16] Without symbols the invisible reality would
disappear in favor of the corporeal, physical reality that mankind participates
in on a day-to-day basis. But a knowledge of the invisible reality remains in
the visible world because “this concept of the symbol springs from the
conviction that in all beings and things there is an intelligent order that,
through these very beings and things, reveals itself as a divine order by means
of the language of its symbols.”[17]
Even when visible realities deny their symbolic relationship with the divine order,
the relationship remains. The relationship may not be perceived as clearly as
when it is acknowledged, but it remains nonetheless. Le Fort stresses this:
the individual carrier, therefore, has an obligation
toward his symbols, which remain above and beyond him, inviolate and
inviolable, even when he no longer recognizes their meaning, or when he has
gone so far as to reject or deny them....The bearer may fall away from his
symbol, but the symbol remains.[18]
When mankind recognizes his symbols,
and maintains an attitude in accord with them, then he is most fully living in
participation with his full human dignity.
In
summary, woman has a two-fold nature: to give of herself, and to actively
receive love. The first, her self-gift, must be acted on in accordance with her
second, that of her receptive nature. When she maintains an attitude in accord
with this two-fold nature, then she participates in the symbolic nature of her
sex and lives out her unique dignity to its most perfect extent.
[1] Judith
8-13
[2] Proverbs
31 10-31
[3] Genesis
1:27
[4] Pope John Paul II, On the Dignity and Vocation of Woman (Boston
[5] Ibid,
part 6
[6] Gaudium et Spes, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/
documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html, access date
3/31/16, part 24
[7] By
fulfillment and happiness, I mean that degree of beatitude that mankind, when
living in accordance with God’s will, can attain on earth in anticipation of
Heavenly Happiness.
[8] Pope
John Paul II, part 23
[9] Ibid,
part 23
[10] Edith
Stein, Essays on Woman (Washington
D.C.: ICS Publications, 1996) pg. 74
[11] Ibid pg.
74
[12] Ibid
pg. 78
[13] Gaudium
et Spes, part 24
[14] This is
not to say that man is incapable of practicing ‘womanly’ virtues, or that he
ought not to do so. For our current purposes, let it suffice to say that woman
is a ‘symbol’ of her particular charisms, and has a duty to manifest those
charisms specific to her nature, and self-abnegation is a particularly feminine
virtue. This does not mean that woman is not called to participate in manly
virtues, or that men are not called to embrace womanly virtues.
[15] Le
Fort, pg. 9
[16] Ibid,
pg. 3
[17] Ibid,
pg. 3
[18] Ibid,
pg. 3
No comments:
Post a Comment