Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cbscc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbsck!cbscc!pmd
From: pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul M. Dubuc)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Sexism and Religion
Message-ID: <5998@cbscc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 27-Sep-85 13:10:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbscc.5998
Posted: Fri Sep 27 13:10:17 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 29-Sep-85 05:18:21 EDT
References: <560@k.cs.cmu.edu.ARPA> <1671@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul M. Dubuc)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories , Columbus
Lines: 23


In article <1671@umcp-cs.UUCP> mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) writes:
>...
>Let us consider Paul's letters to the ROmans and to the Corinthians (since
>these are essentially the only scriptural source of justification for
>suppessing women's voice in the church).  With the advent of less
>literal-minded examination of the moral implications of scripture, many
>churches have decided that Paul's writings must be read in light of the
>social situation of Paul's day, where the place of women was considerably
>more restricted ithan it is now.  When a woman can run for the vice
>presidency, and be taken seriously, the chruch believes that there is no
>reason why a woman cannot be a bishop, and be taken seriously.

I'm not exactly sure what Charley means by "a less literal-minded
examination", but the process of "deculturizing" Scripture, to which he
alludes, is not even necessary.  For example, Mary J. Evans has shown that
many of the passages used to assign a secondary place to women are interpreted
with presupposed notions of the meanings of certain terms which do
not necessarily correspond to the meaning indended by the biblical authors.
(See _Woman in the Bible_, by Mary J. Evans, InterVarsity Press 1983).
-- 

Paul Dubuc 	cbscc!pmd