[Magdalen] Epiphany

[James Oppenheimer-Crawford]

I agree. I used to be very aware of what an anti-female guy Paul was, right
up to the time I read his letters in seminary.

A friend of mine who is a priest and a member of the Jesus Seminar is at
least as well read in that department as I am, and he still views Paul
negatively.  I guess it's one of those things that could go either way, but
his really positive comments toward women he sometimes names as people who
he values highly puts enormous weight on the other side.  That and the
probability that some texts attributed to him now seem to be later
insertions. And no, he never refers to them in any condescending way.

The letter where he tells how to deal with some confusion that is
disrupting the services is especially intriguing, because he would not be
writing it if the leaders had treated women as chattel; he seems to be
writing it because some women have caused disruption in the services, and
the leaders do not know what to do, and have to ask Paul. When you think
about it, in those times, that is a profoundly revolutionary thing.  The
leaders obviously do not feel that it is an option for them to tell the
women to keep silent. Paul is pragmatic. The men have the Torah training;
the women don't.  Okay, let the men teach their women at home to bring them
up to speed.  Thus, I don't see any effort to subjugate women in that
passage at all.  Not even close.

I know opinions vary, but if one reads all of Paul, I'm not sure how he
comes off anti-female.




James W. Oppenheimer-Crawford
*“If you have a chance to accomplish something that will make things better
for people coming behind you, and you don’t do it, you're wasting your time
on this Earth.”  -- *Roberto Clemente

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Ann Markle <ann.markle at aya.yale.edu> wrote:

> Feel bad for folks who don't understand Paul.
>
> Staunch feminist,
>
> Ann
>
> The Rev. Ann Markle
> Buffalo, NY
> ann.markle at aya.yale.edu
> blog:  www.onewildandpreciouslife.typepad.com
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:06 PM, M J [Mike] Logsdon <mjl at ix.netcom.com>
> wrote:
>
> > >>>I sometimes wonder how some, if not almost all, of Paul got into the
> > canon.
> > But that's me.<<<
> >
> > Lee Hays of the Weavers once said that whenever Paul came into a town he
> > instantly set sex back 20 years.
> >
>