Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    I volunteer to be a Corinthian Women Prophet.
    
    Collis, I nominate you to play Paul.  In your "indeed" I hear Paul's
    "Don't you Know"
    
    Richard, How about Apollos.  
    
    Anyone want to play Timothy?
    
    It's too bad Mike Valenza is not here.  He would do a superb job with
    Chapter five.
    
    Ron, How about Cephas?
    
    
    Actually this idea of this notes file being the Church in Corinth was 
    breakthrough thinking for me in understanding the letter.  Paul is very
    concerned with establishing a very precise definition of Christianity.
    In his opinion, that definition has been ordained by God and all people
    in the church need to do is accept the Good News.  Paul meets lots of 
    people in the Church of Corinth who do not interpret the Good news
    exactly the way he does.   
    
    Are we reliving the Church of Corinth here.  Thanks be to God, I am
    very comfortable with the role of the Corinthian Women Prophet.
    
    P.S.  Corinthian Women Prophet is the name of a Feminist Theological
    Reconstruction of Paul's letter by Elizabeth? Wire.
    
    Patricia
    
    
    
    
    Any other volunteers or nominations?

>    Richard, How about Apollos[?].  
    
I am naturally flattered by the nomination.  At the same time, I would hope
that I'm pointing to the Most Holy and away from myself.  Those who would
follow me are following a fallible mortal.

It is an interesting concept though; creating a mock Corinthian church.

I'd be glad to help out where I can.

Peace,
Richard

    Gee; just ordained yesterday and already taking on the role of Peter! 
    Moving up wouldn't you say?
    
    Shalom,
    
    RR
    
    ps: I'll get more serious in my next response.
    ms��
    
    

So, Patricia, what do you think Paul was trying to accomplish with his letter
to you and the women of the church in Corinth?

I don't get the impression that Paul was being deliberately insensitive
towards women, do you?  You know, of course, that your region has quite a
reputation.  Corinth is regarded a hotbed of religious zeal.  Paul may have
felt he had his hands full just keeping the church from tearing loose from
the reins of orderliness.

And you know, Paul cannot escape entirely the influence of his own upbringing
and background.

Peace,
Richard

    My impression was that Paul was distinguishing the roles of the
    genders, not that women lacked the ability to perform the roles not
    allowed.  Isn't that correct?
    
    -Jack

    .5  The old 'separate but equal' argument, eh?
    
    Paul did make some breakthroughs, especially when contrasted against
    the Hebrew texts and teachings of his time.  In spite of this, Paul
    still generally relegated women to "roles" or positions less prestigious
    and less powerful than men; the basis of which was not in giftedness or
    ability, but in gender.
    
    Peace,
    Richard

    Patricia,
    
    	Has it been discussed in your class why Paul might have thought the
    women of the Corinthian church were "uppity"?
    
    Peace,
    Richard
    

    THe women in Corinth believed that in Christ there was not Male or
    Female, Slave or Free, Jew, or Gentile.  The women in Corinth believed
    that they were New Creation in Christ.  That Christ was available to
    them, within them.  Therefore all things were lawful to them.  Paul
    believed the same thing but significantly limited the expression.  
    
    Paul was a man of his time.  An upper class Roman Citizen type Male. 
    He had much to gain from the hierarchy as it was.  Paul was pretty
    arrogant.  He felt that He had "The Revelation of CHrist".  The chain
    of command went from God to Christ to Paul to Timothy and Stepanus to
    the Men to the Women.  The women and others believed that Christ had
    revealed himself/herself to each of them directly.  The women refused
    to submit to Paul's sense of hierarchy.  Not only that, but the women
    were fed up with being possessions of men and begun to refuse to have
    sex with men.  They were both opting not to Marry and even some Married
    women were saying "no".  Intellectually Paul believed that Celebacy was
    better than sexual activity, but to let women make this choice for
    themselves was just a little more than Paul could handle.  Plus this
    threatened the order of society as he knew it.  Some of the men were
    actually visiting Pagan prostitutes and Paul blamed it on the women
    because they were denying the men sex.  Do all things in the spirit of
    love he warned.  Keep your men happy and undefiled.
    
    Do you know, one night the women decided to celebrate a wonderful pot
    luck supper followed by the "Lords Feast".  They invited Paul and
    Stephanus, but Paul had a prior engagement and would be there late.
    
    Well the women actually started without Paul.  Boy was Paul Upset when
    he got there and they had actually begun the ritual without him.  And
    to make matters worse, poor Frederick had had just a little bit too
    much to drink and talked back at Paul when Paul scolded him.  By Paul's
    desciption in his letter, this wonderful spiritual meal was just chaos.
    
    Corinth was a wonderful passionate spiritual community.  And boy was it
    diverse.  The spirit of Christ filled the community and had the people
    celebrating and worshipping in diverse ways.  Sometimes they would get
    together and the energy would be so resounding.  In escasy they would
    be speaking in tongues and phophesizing.  You could feel the presence
    of God in the assembly.  Unfortunately, this was not what Paul had in
    mind for a respectable church.  He wanted rational self control.  One
    person talking, the rest listening.  
    
    
    Reconstructions can be fun.  It is impossible to know exactly what
    happened in Corinth but looking at it from a number of different
    perspectives is edifying.  Why sometimes I think Paul's reaction was
    what it would be if he walked into a UU church in the year 1993.
    
    Patricia, Corinth 55 C.E.

    If I recall my text, Pauls statement regarding marital intercourse was
    that the woman's body belongs to her husband and LIKEWISE, the husbands
    body belongs to his wife.  If women rebelled in this area, Pauls
    exhortation was directed at the couple, not just the wives.
    
    I imagine the family structure of today (55 C.E.) will prove alot more
    solid than...say...the family structure about 1,938 years from now.
    
    -Jack (Corinth Church member - 55 C.E.)
    
    P.S. Our beloved Corinthian Church may have excitement but I am still
         confused as to why even though the Spirit is strongly manifest in
         our services, we are still carnal, earthly.  At least thats what
         Paul accuses us of in his letter! :-( 

    As a women, I really don't understand why Paul is so hung up about
    sexuality(his and ours).  For us women it really is not a matter of
    sexuality but control over our own bodies and reproductive capability. 
    Do you know how many of our sisters die during childbirth?
    
    Our bodies are a temple of the Divine.  Our sexuality is a gift from
    the divine.  I don't understand where Paul is coming from on this one.
    In Christ we are free to express our sexuality or not express our
    sexuality.  In Christ all things are lawful.  I do agree with Paul though
    that all things are for building up as well.  It is just that Paul does
    not understand building up the community the same way we do.
    
    Patricia - Corinth 55 C.E.

    .8  Interesting!  The thrust of what you've said roughly matches
    my impression of the situation as well.
    
    The women of Corinth perceived they had been set free -- and not simply
    on some spiritual level, but genuinely liberated.  It can be very
    unnerving and upsetting to others when a suppressed group of people
    begin to act upon their new found freedom.  It can even be perceived
    as threatening.
    
    The UU services I've attended have been relatively sedate, even
    celebral.  I imagine the situation in Corinth to more closely parallel
    a now-defunct group called the Ranters, an off-shoot of the Quakers in
    England.
    
    Peace,
    Richard

>    The women of Corinth perceived they had been set free -- and not simply
>    on some spiritual level, but genuinely liberated.  It can be very
>    unnerving and upsetting to others when a suppressed group of people
>    begin to act upon their new found freedom.  It can even be perceived
>    as threatening.

    I'm sure glad that doesn't happen around here!  Thank
    goodness we're beyond that!
 
    Tom

    (and if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you.... :-)

    Tom,
    
    As long as its not a computer bridge, I'll take it. I mean how would I
    use a computer bridge in 55 C.E.
    
                     Patricia

    Patricia:
    
    When we make wedding vows, are we not relinquishing our freedom to one
    another as husband and wife.  We are bonding to another being,
    foresaking all others.  It is a Genesis principle.  In essence, we are
    sacrificing our freedom for the edification of our partner.  My wifes
    body is not her own in a Spiritual sense as mine is not my own.  This 
    overshadowsthe temporal freedoms we may think we have.
    
    Jack (55 C.E.)

    .14
    
    In principle, you are correct, dear brother.  In practice, however,
    one partner consistently sacrifices more freedom than does her spouse.
    This is partly because she isn't permitted all that much latitude to begin
    with.  Can you guess which gender she is?
    
    ;-}
    
    Peace,
    Richard (AD 55)