Introspective History Girl

[tanaise]

It's interesting how Christianity continues to appeal to the same groups it first was big with. When it first started, it appealed to the powerless--slaves, fishermen, farmers, all the people who *knew* they weren't going to amount to anything in this life. So when a religion came along promising that this life was just the warm up for the next one, they grabbed on with both hands. And it still holds true to some degree today, because if you notice, the people who become born again, or 'return to the church' are quite often people who life is abusing. This life, it is becoming quite clear, is not going to work out for them. So, I don't know, they decided the next life is better than nothing at all? and turn to Christianity again. This has an additional bonus: all that misery that's in your life right now? God testing you! Plus, and this relates mostly to men, but probably also to the S/M post the podling made or will make soon. Men are higher up in Christianity than women are. So even if they're the bottom of the ladder of life, they're still higher up than their wives. And if you're down that far, you'll take any power over someone else that you can get. Which doesn't explain to me why women convert voluntarily to a religion that takes away their power, but like I said, maybe that's related to the whole S/M thing. If you're powerless, then you're not responsible for any of your own choices. Someone else makes them for you, so you're not to blame if things go wrong.

If I go to grad school for history, I'll study women in the early Christian church. cause it's so interesting. I had a course in Early Christian society--all about the body and food and sex, basically. and between that and a couple of courses later in my college career, I just fell in love with the time.

Allow me to lecture briefly.
There's a whole range of spirit-to-body proportions. First off are angels, all spirit. Then men. Then women. Then demons, all body. So for a woman to become holy and all that, she has like this incredible climb behind her. So they're all cool because of that. And then remember that for a while, Christianity was all about celibacy. *all* about it. only 144,000 people were going to be save, remember, and wouldn't it just *suck* if you got saved, but not your kids. So they got more Christians by converting pagans because well, if they ended up at the end of the line, no big loss, after all. Now, at this time, the biggest killer of women was childbirth. I mean, they had to make it to 15 or so, but once they did, they were usually okay unless childbirth (or side effects, like the general drain repeated pregnancy can put on a not-all-that-well nourished body to begin with) killed them. So when you take pregnancy out of the equation, you have these women who just will not die. And remember that women generally live longer than men. So you get these really fancy holy women in the church--they're super cool because they over came all that body-inertia, and they're old, so they get the extra coolness that age brings. And they're out living the high ranking men, and people are starting to think they're just the shit. Which, the men knew, was a Bad Idea(tm). Luckily Tertullian came along, and found the perfect solution. Wives are subject to their husbands. And not just their husbands, but any of their husband's agents. So, what they did is they married the women to the church. They became brides of Christ, and as such, are subjects of their husband's agents on earth. Namely, priests. Woohoo! Score one for the guys. A close call indeed. :)

Comments

[eudaimonia.livejournal.com]

This is great, Celia. I've made the same observations over the years, myself. I think when push comes to shove, most people turn to some sort of spirituality when things look the worst. When I was in that position myself, I turned to Wicca (I'd lost faith in Christianity since I was a kid - probably never had it in the first place - and my father was a preacher). I can certainly see the appeal of Christianity and what it promised to a lot of people. Since then, my desire and belief has toned down ALOT. Philosphically and psychologically, I can certainly see the merits but I tend to look at it from an interested anthropological point of view now. I'm probably most a Humanist/U.U. at heart. It just makes the most sense. Do what you can do for others and yourself in this life, because it's all we really know. We are most accountable for what happens here and now.

I like your historical background, too. Very interesting !

[tikimama.livejournal.com]

I'm trying to remember a source, it might have been Josephus (in which case, we should be suspicious) talking about the really really early underground church. In that case, women were very powerful--being leaders of congregations, etc. Since Jesus was so pro-women, I guess they had a precedent.

As I mentioned to taniase on IM, I think it is just tragic that the people (the women) who were among Jesus' greatest followers, supporters, friends, were and are so badly treated by the Church(es).

Of course, after the Romans took over, the women lost that power. You know, I must say, I don't think the general attitude toward women has changed much since then. We get a lot more rights, etc., but the feelings are still the same.

My interest in Christianity is as a social institution, not as a spirital following. I'm sure that gives me a different perspective.

I think the LDS church really capitalizes on the population that wants to embrace powerlessness. It certainly is happy to perpetuate the whole men better than women thing, if they try to wrap it up nicely as a whole "everyone has their place" thing. (Yes, if we accept that a woman's place is under a man's heel, if he chooses).

I have LDS Issues. :)

[eudaimonia.livejournal.com]

Hee yeah. I do too. I was raised an RLDS (Reorganized). I always HATED the position it put women in. It always made me feel like I was a lesser being and could never be truly good because I was a girl. God was a man, Jesus was a man, all the apostles were men (subject to argument now, I believe). I was just a lowly girl. ICK. I didn't like it even when I was 8 years old.

[toratigris.livejournal.com]

I don't know that it's specifically s/m. I think the vast majority of humanity wants to be "somewhere in the middle". They don't want to be on top, because that requires responsibility and a lot of hard work and education (unless, of course, your daddy is G.H.W.Bush), and obviously they don't want to be on the bottom, because getting screwed by all and sundry isn't generally considered much fun. They want to be somewhere in the middle of the heirarchy, where they feel superior to someone else, and where they are told what to do most of the time and have someone else to blame with things go wrong.

Religion is one way of putting yourself in that position, because you're superior to everyone who isn't a member of your religion, and under the authority of the god/dess/es and all of their representatives. I think that's a major part of its appeal.

history

[wintersweet.livejournal.com]

I learned the most about history as practice and about reading sources in my so-called Early Medieval European History class, which was really "History of the Early Christian Church." I expected to hate it but the teacher was terrific, and also the only sane postmodernist I've ever met. I think you and Lynda Coon would get along really well. I wish I had any idea why she's teaching in Arkansas.