Conference turris::womannotes-v2

    There is no question that:
    
        1.  Mary Daly is a competent theologian and teacher.
    
        2.  Mary Daly's publications are highly respected.
    
        3.  Boston College has not accorded her the same respect and
    professional credit worthy of her work and peer esteem.
    
    
    
    
    The underlying reasons why B.C. acts the way it does are less clear.
    
    
    

    It's probably because she is widely known in the women's community,
    which by definition, doesn't 'count'.  Sigh.
    
    I find her work amazing, accessible, and though-provoking.  
    
    Holly

    To quote from the Globe:
    
    "At issue is BC's refusal to promote Daly from associate to full
    professor, disclosed in a letter to her that said a six member
    promotion committee had found her "undistinguished in every area,
    including teaching and publication."
    
    I think the real issue is the Vatican's attitude towards feminism in
    general and women in particular.
    
    Flame away.
    Mary

    Re .3
    
    What is the Vatican's attitude towards feminism in general and
    women in particular? And why?
    

    It may  be  that  academia  in many fields does not count books as
    scholarly  publications.  Has she published in referreed journals?
    In many fields, that's the definition of "publication".

    I'm not defending the College's position, as I don't know anything
    about  this  particular  case.  I'm only trying to give a possible
    rationale.

--David

    
    It is amazing to me that Mary has been involved in a battle with
    BC for about 15 years.  I wish I had the chronology that was shared
    at the WITCH lecture this past Tuesday. She's been fighting for
    various positions at BC for quite sometime.
    
    am

    in fact, the witch lectures started because mary daly went on leave one
    year and the college refused to hire a radical feminist scholar to
    replace her. so members of the community got together to create their
    own "course" and witch was born.
    
    liz

Since the question of the Vatican's position toward feminism has
arisen, let me refer people to a recent conference that took
place in Rome between 35 American Bishops and Roman curia
officials and the Pope.  Ostensibly, the meeting [ 2-3 weeks ago ]
was to convene a dialogue between officials in Rome and
representatives of the American Bishops on issues like:

                     Annulments, the priesthood,women in the church, etc.


Full texts from the conference have not yet been published.  However,
the following excerpts are pertinent.

" ...Teachers committed to radical feminism.. whether priests, religious,
or lay, are quite capable of distorting doctrine."  Cardinal O'Connor from
New York.



" ...Radical feminism is characterized by a ' hermeneutic of suspicion'
and a tendency to view all structures as essentially patriarchal
and thus to be held suspiciously...."    Cardinal Law of Boston.


The american bishops are uncomfortable with radical feminism.  Rome
definitely is of the mind that feminism in any form is unacceptable.



Elizabeth Schussler Fiorenza wrote a landmark book, 'In Memory of her',
in which the term " hermeneutic of suspicion " is coined.  Fiorenza
was on the faculty of Notre Dame, left to join the Episcopal Divinity
School, and is now at Harvard Divinity School.  Her husband, Francis
Fiorenza is also on the faculty of HDS, having left Catholic University
a few years ago.  The recent flap over Charles Curran and his
revoking of his theological faculties at CU is tied to people like
the Fiorenza's who now work at academic institutions that do not
fall under the jurisdiction of the Roman discipline.

Mary Daly is a ' victim ' of the internal discipline that quietly
is invoked from Rome.  She will end up elsewhere tha B.C.  Charles
Curran is now at a university in california.  Remember Hans Kung
circa 1976.. and his struggle with the Pope and subsequent
dismissal from Tubingen.  The list is long.

    I know I am going to bet blasted for my ignorance but I have to
    ask:
    	* What is a radical feminist?
    	* How does it differ from a feminist?
        * Is it the same thing as a seperatist?                 
    	                           
    Could someone please enlighten me.

                                                                
    Kate
    

    in re Kate,
    
    I'm sorry, but your first sentence really bothered me...do
    you honestly feel that asking a simple question in the file
    about an area you are ignorant about will get you 'blasted'?
    I know that feelings get strong in here at times, but I 
    personally don't see it being that extreme.
    
    just wondering
    
    Bonnie

    
    Kate, 
    
    I believe there's a whole topic devoted to answering just the questions
    you asked. Sorry I don't know where it is but maybe try some
    dir/titles. Or maybe someone else has a better idea.
    
    Roberta

    Feminism and related discussions can be found (in addition to the
    note previously referred to in this topic) in
    
    Womannotes-V1:
    Topic 369 - who is not a feminist
    Topic 750 - feminism??? help       (only the first third or so of
    					the discussion pertains... but
    					doesn't discuss too directly)
    
    Womannotes-V2:
    Topic 475 - men as feminsts

    -Jody
    

    Boston College			The Pope

    Boston College is a Roman Catholic college. The Pope is the
    head of the Roman Catholic church. Unless Boston College wished
    to become a secular school then they ultimately have to acceed
    to the dictates of the Pope in matters of theology.
    
    Bonnie

    That indeed came to me as a shock.  Does Vatican pay for the major
    portion of Boston College?
    
    Since we are on the subject, I would like to know what other institutes
    are affiliated or supported by the Vatican in the Greater Maynard Area.
    If the Boston College had called itself Boston Christian College, I
    would have at least guessed the relationship.  I also understand that
    it will be next to impossible not to support RC at least indirectly,
    considering that as a corporation it would be the largest in the world.
    Nevertheless, I would at least like to try. 
    
- Vikas

    Vikas,
    
    I don't know how much the Vatican contributes to the running of
    the college.  The point is that it is a Roman Catholic college
    and must teach and abide by Roman Catholic theology as set by
    Rome. Similarly an Episcopal theology school should be teaching
    theology from the point of view of the Episcopal church, a southern
    Baptist college would teach it's religion courses from the point
    of view of their theological outlook on the world etc. It has
    never been any secret in Boston that Boston college is a private
    Roman Catholic college, many of the professors are priests or members
    of religious orders. Perhaps the name confused you and you thought
    it was a city or state school rather than a private religious
    college?
    
    and Boston College isn't exactly in the greater Maynard area :-).
    
    Bonnie

    If Daly's views are so threatening to the Vatican, how is it that
    she has been able to remain at BC all this time?
    

    
    She gets to stay because she is good at what she does but BC doesn't
    think she's good enough to be a full professor.
    
    The Society of Jesus (Jesuits) run BC and they are accountable thru
    their Father General (or whatever the title is these days) to the
    Pope.
    
    am

    re .11 
    
    Mike,
    
    It isn't just "radical" feminism the church is against, its feminism
    period.  I don't have the article here so I can't quote directly, but
    in the Boston Globe's coverage of the Conference of American Bishops
    it stated that the church felt that feminism was detrimental to the
    family and was unacceptable.
    
    Mary

    RE:  a few comments on Boston College as a " catholic " college.
    
    Boston College ia a private liberal arts school, administered by
    the Jesuit order, operated as an academic institution awarding
    bachelor, master's, and doctoral degrees in a  variety of
    disciplines - one of which is theology.  Students attend BC
    for many reasons, including the opportunity to participate in
    competitive sports at a ranking level.  One's prior faith or 
    relgious background is not a fcator in being admitted,
    matriculating, and earning a degree.
    
    Also, faculty at the college may or not be Roman Catholic in
    their religious situation.  Faculty may or may not practicing
    christians.  In the theology department, Mary Daly is
    a preeminent scholar with a reputation for doing excellent work
    in the feminist theology domain.  Lisa Sowle Cahill is an excellent
    ethician with a fine reputation for doing sound theology in
    the field of sexual ethics.  Mary Boys is another theologian
    of proven skill and talent and reputation at the school.  Pheme
    Perkins is renowned for her work in biblical scholarship.
    
    I don't intend to run down the whole list; but offer some
    examples of wonderful people in theology at BC.  However,
    Cardinal Law may not alway agree with the particular content
    of a particular course or article of teaching style in
    theology at BC.  In Boston, this is a local concern.  In the
    church universal, the Pope has more to say about what is taught
    in schools like Catholic University in Washington, D.C., where
    the school does take direction from Rome as far as faculty and
    the degrees are concerned.
    
    Rome is wrestling with guidelines re: private colleges and their
    theology and faculty and student body etc.  So, Mary Daly and
    her issue of standing on the fcaulty at B.C. for now is between
    her and B.C., unlike the celebrated Curran case at CU.
      Mike
    

	
	Mary was turned down for full professor by BC for being substandard in 
	three areas: classroom teaching, committee work and scholarly work.
	Mary Daly's reputation as a theologian is internationally renowned.
	300 letters and recommendations were submitted to the promotion 
	committe on Mary's behalf from well-known theologians and other 
	disciplines around the world citing Mary's contributions to theology
	and feminism.  
	Classroom teaching: Students come from around the world to study with
	Mary.  Her students evaluations have been outstanding.  
	Committee work: Mary teachs at BC one year and then takes one to two 
	years off in order to write her books.  She has been on committees
	in the past and has had her opinions and work ignored.  
	Scholarly work:  Mary has written 5 books.  Each book references and
	contains alot of research (both primary and secondary work).  BC has
	stated that Mary has not published in scholarly "publications".  BC
	has ignored her books' contribution to the field of theology.
	What BC has been doing to Mary Daly for the last ten years is 
	slowly starve her out.  She has been given little to no raises for so 
	long that her salary is equal to the average assistant professor's 
	salary (one level below her).
	
	There will be a demonstration in support of Mary this Friday at noon.
	BC tried to fire Mary in 1975. In reponse there were demonstrations 
	of support (which numbered in the range of 2500 people).  BC 
	reversed their 1975 ruling and Mary was re-instated.  It is hoped that
	a show of support will make a difference and that BC will promote
	Mary Daly to the rank of full professor with salary commiserate to
	a full professor.  The head of BC is currently evaluating Mary's 
	promotion (or lack of). The numbers of people who turn up on Friday
	will determine how easy, or if it is possible, for BC to ignore
	and deny a full professorship to Mary Daly.

    re .25
    
    Oh dear. Who will stick up for the poor clergymen? (Why are they so afraid
    of women anyway?) 

    Margery Eagan in the Boston Herald writes about the controversy
    and includes laudatory comments from Harvey Cox of HDS, Margaret Miles of
    HDS, and John Cobb of Claremont School of Theology.  When asked
    by Eagan what the problem with her is, Daly said: " ..I'm a
    radical feminist ."  Will BC ever promote her?
    
    " I don't know," she says, " But I will not give up."
    
    
     

    re: .26
    
    As for the 'poor' clergymen...well I don't know about poor, many
    of them do quite well, financially...you know, lots of gifts from
    devout catholic fans...  Priests, unlike sisters/nuns, do not take
    vows of poverty.  They do, however, take vows of celibacy which
    many of them do not take seriously.  But they do seem to stick together
    and stick up for themselves quite well.  This is certainly fueled
    by the wave of ultra conservatism going on in the rc church, Pope
    J.P II, Bernie Law, etc.
    
    As for their fear of women?  Well, perhaps they think that this
    radical thinker (Mary Daly) will defrock them :-)...poor dears...
    

    re. 28
    
    I'm pretty sure priests DO take vows of "poverty"
    

re: .29

Diocesan priests are different from religious orders (like the Jesuits, 
Dominicans, etc).  They don't take the standard vows of poverty,
obedience, and celibacy (and in the case of some cloistered orders,
stability).  In fact, they don't take any vows in the technical sense.
They are ruled by the dictates of their bishop, and of course, the Pope.
If, for example, the Vatican were to allow priests to marry or women to 
be ordained, such permission would only apply to diocesan
priests.  Members of religious orders would still be bound by their vows 
and the rule of their order. 

Suppose some men harbor a basic fear/envy of women's sexuality -- its power and
mystery, its superior capacity, its life-creating aspect, its harmony with
the moon. Suppose further that the entire Judeo-Christian tradition is
built on some men's need to control what they've feared/envied, from their
initial suppression of goddess worship (in which women's sexuality was
paramount) and their assertion that the divinity was male, all down the
millennia to the present-day continued suppression/denial/distortion of
women's sexuality by some men -- in the media, in the dominant religions, in
pornography. 

What then for Mary Daly?

                                                

>    ...... Suppose further that the entire Judeo-Christian tradition is
>built on some men's need to control what they've feared/envied, from their
>initial suppression of goddess worship (in which women's sexuality was
>paramount) and their assertion that the divinity was male, .....
    
    Does the Judeo-Christian tradition assert that God is male?  I don't
    think the concepts of male and female make sense in isolation, and
    therefore postulating a single deity makes the point moot, doesn't
    it?  I always considered the references to God as "he" being due
    to the gender-bias of language, rather than reflecting any assertion
    of the "maleness" of God.

re .32

	Doesn't the Old Testament say that God created man in his
	image, and then created woman from man? That would support
	a tradition of considering God as a male entity.

	Then, again, I suppose that it is possible that this could 
	be gender-bias on the part of the writer, too.

				Tom_K

    john,
    
    you make a good point -- that the assumption about god being male
    might be due to gender-bias in our language. at the same time, i
    think that the language begets assumptions sometimes. if we go around
    saying that god is male, after a while, it's not too hard to start
    thinking about god as male, and then to think of god as "not female".
    i imagine one could develop a whole theory about men being the superior
    gender just from this one thought.
    
    liz

Judaism does not assign "humanity" or sexuality to the Creator.
of the Universe.  The term "in his image" refers to spirituality,
not physical reality.

Martin.

    Mary Daly  wrote to the president of B.C., and asked why her request
    for promotion had been denied.  Last night, she read his response.
    
    It began by saying that mere assistant professors were not entitled
    to written explanations of "negative promotion decisions".  (I found
    that phrase archtypical; I had to write it down.)  He then went
    on to explain that the three factors used in making these judgments
    were 1. scholarship, 2. teaching, and 3. service.
    
    Service means attending faculty meetings and being on committees.
    Ah!  Naughty Mary Daly has not done this sort of thing since 1975.
    Coincidentally, 1975 was the last time Mary Daly was refused a full
    professorship.
    
    This was the reason the president stressed.  He also felt that,
    although she has three doctorates, and although she has produced five
    critically acclaimed books, and although people come from all over
    the world to attend her classes, she has "not demonstrated
    achievement beyond the ordinary".
    
    Interestingly enough, when she was denied the promotion in 1975,
    the claim was *then* that _Beyond_God_the_Father_ did not represent
    scholarship.  It does now -- when she is no longer serving on
    committees.
    
    By the way, I looked at a copy of _Beyond_God_the_Father_ last
    Friday, when I saw it in a bookstore.  In the first endnote, I
    counted five refereed journals of theology in which she had published
    items.  (Someone earlier in this note had mentioned/questioned her
    presence in such.)
    
    						Ann B.

    Re: .33
    
    There's a passage I recall in Genesis about the creation along the
    lines of "male and female he created them."  As I remember it, the
    passage pertains to the creation of Adam in the image of God.  Anybody
    want to look it up?

    re .36
    
    Is she currently an assistant professor or an associate professor?
    Usually the quantum jumps in academia go from assistant prof. to
    associate prof. to full prof.                      
    
    As for whether the deity is construed as male or female, do we need to 
    look any further than the opening phrase of the lord's prayer for
    an answer to that one? Or am I missing something? 
    

I forget who said it and where (somewhere in this conference, I think), but the
viewpoint was something like 'using DECwindows terms, God is like a top-level
widget; everyone inherts some, but not all, of God's attributes.'  I like that
viewpoint.  (Also note that it's general-purpose in that it can be applied to
attributes other than [often-considered-to-be-]gender-related attributes.)

(I don't know if combining discussion of her &c. theological viewpoints with
discussion of her non-promotion is stretching this topic too far, or not...)

    
    Mary's an assoc. prof at BC.
    
    am

>     As for whether the deity is construed as male or female, do we need to 
>    look any further than the opening phrase of the lord's prayer for
>    an answer to that one? Or am I missing something? 

    You're missing something.  The point is that "male" and "female" only
    make sense when you're talking about members of a species, and allow
    you to partition that species into two classes.  Hence the concept of
    maleness or femaleness of a deity only make sense in a polytheistic
    universe;  It makes no sense to talk about maleness as a property of
    something unless there are other individuals of the same species that
    exhibit the corresponding female property.
    
    It doesn't make sense to have a male God without at least one female
    Godess to contrast with.

    I'd have thought that "Our Father" is used for two reasons:

        i) When the prayer was first designed, there was a far stronger
           gender-bias in society than exists today.  "Father" was where
    	   the power was vested, and hence "Mother" would have been
    	   an inappropriate way of talking about an omnipotent being.
        
    	ii) To say "Our Parent" doesn't carry the same emotional overtones-     
	   I can't think of a gender-neutral way of phrasing the thing
	   that carries the same imagery - which is just an example
	   of linguistic gender-bias.

    re .41
    
    What if now it were changed to "Our Mother"?
    

    My 19 year old son (a college sophomore) attended church with
    me this Easter Sunday. Throughout the service he changed the
    prayers to refer to Parent instead of Father, Child instead
    of Son and They or She instead of He. Made it kind of interesting
    to be standing next to him.
    
    Bonnie

    
    re:.41
    It seems to me that the fact that you (and by extension, many people)
    cannot easily come up with a term for the deity that is as emotionally
    compelling as 'Father' is the crux of the matter. Sure, we intellectual
    types can say, 'well, Father *really* means the deity which, of course,
    is genderless because gender is a merely human characteristic'. But
    when we enter the realm of *belief*, which is a non-rational way of
    using our brains, we are compelled by an old white man with a flowing
    beard. That is, in the realm of *belief* God is male for many if not
    most people. As I remarked elsewhere, the overwhelming majority of our
    religions are not interested in exploring beliefs, they are interested
    in conforming to already-determined beliefs. When the Church says, 'God
    the Father', they are not being lazy or using shorthand (a la the use
    of 'he' to mean 'all humans'). It is what they really *believe*.
    

    Why has Mary Daly stayed at BC when it is evident that she is not
    appreciated, valued or it seems, wanted?  Why has she not sought
    out a more supportive institution?
    
    

    re:.45
    
    Because if she leaves, "they" will win. Perhaps she feels that her
    contribution to the Cause is to stay and fight until she wins what
    is rightfully hers.
    
    --- jerry

    Does anyone know how the rally went last Friday? I didn't see anything
    about it in the newspaper.
    

	Due to the weather, rainy and cold, the turn out was not as good as 
expected.  About 50 people turned up.  The security was all around.  Detectives
in trench coats, and uniform policemen stationed at the administration building 
(to protect the dean).  The rally started at the main gate and marched to the
administration building where the supporters chanted slogans (the easiest to
chant was "witch trial - jesuit style").  As people marched in a circle others
strung yarn of bright colors around the front of the administartion building.
Weaving, spinning, etc. a really beautiful array of colors through trees, the
front entrance, and across the access road to the library.  There were some
speeches, most be other professors at BC.  One male professor in the
theology department spoke about going to the international conference this
summer and not knowing what to say to his colleagues about Mary's denial of
full professor. I believe the lack of coverage, channel 4 was there and filmed
some of the rally, was due to the lack of numbers.

    re .48
    
    Thanks for the update. Sounds disappointing on the whole. Do you
    know of any further efforts being planned on her behalf?