According to several popular Skeptical sites, but so far as I can see, not any site that deals in original writings (earlychristianwritings.com, ccel.org), St Clement of Alexandria said, "....every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman".

"Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy (page 320)" is often cited as a source, and I will be looking at it in the next week if needed, but in the meantime, anyone out there want to tell me what ORIGINAL work of Clement this supposedly comes from? Some also cite his "The Tutor" as a source, but I have found nothing like it in the original on Peter's site.

Can someone give me a citation, at least?

Or is this another Pope Leo X fiasco?

Pg. 114 of Ellerbe, Helen. The Dark Side of Christian History. San Rafael, C.A. Morningstar Books. 1995 is also cited as a source...

Of course that's a a bibliography that also includes Pagels...

JPHOLDING:
According to several popular Skeptical sites, but so far as I can see, not any site that deals in original writings (earlychristianwritings.com, ccel.org), St Clement of Alexandria said, "....every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman".

"Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy (page 320)" is often cited as a source, and I will be looking at it in the next week if needed, but in the meantime, anyone out there want to tell me what ORIGINAL work of Clement this supposedly comes from? Some also cite his "The Tutor" as a source, but I have found nothing like it in the original on Peter's site.

Can someone give me a citation, at least?

Or is this another Pope Leo X fiasco?

POWELL:
Perhaps it was an inductive inference of what Clement believed by some skeptic rather than a direct quote of what he said that later skeptics misrepresented as the actual quotes of Clement.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...ata-book6.html

CLEMENT:
The Stromata, or Miscellanies
Book VI

. . .

CHAPTER II -- THE SUBJECT OF PLAGIARISMS RESUMED. THE GREEKS PLAGIARIZED FROM ONE ANOTHER.

. . .

Come, and let us adduce the Greeks as witnesses against themselves to the theft. For, inasmuch as they pilfer from one another, they establish the fact that they are thieves; and although against their will, they are detected, clandestinely appropriating to those of their own race the truth which belongs to us. For if they do not keep their hands from each other, they will hardly do it from our authors. I shall say nothing of philosophic dogmas, since the very persons who are the authors of the divisions into sects, confess in writing, so as not to be convicted of ingratitude, that they have received from Socrates the most important of their dogmas. But after availing myself of a few testimonies of men most talked of, and of repute among the Greeks, and exposing their plagiarizing style, and selecting them from various periods, I shall turn to what follows.

Orpheus, then, having composed the line: "Since nothing else is more shameless and wretched than woman,"

Homer plainly says: "Since nothing else is more dreadful and shameless than a woman."

POWELL:
Apparently, Clement used these texts to show plagiarism among the Greek writers, not necessarily to imply that he supported the bigoted idea itself.

Perhaps a skeptical reader concluded that because Clement used this example as part of his efforts to show that the Greeks stole ideas from the Christians without any denial that he supported the particular anti-woman view therefore Clement likely supported the view.

John Powell

Originally posted by jpholding

According to several popular Skeptical sites, but so far as I can see, not any site that deals in original writings (earlychristianwritings.com, ccel.org), St Clement of Alexandria said, "....every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman".

That reference sounds suspicious. I doubt Clement of Alexandria wrote that. His attitude towards women is that they are spiritually equal to men. He did express a view about a woman's role that is out of date with today's feminism, (cooking and cleaning), but his views clearly are not anywhere near as misogynistic as the views expressed in this mysterious quote.

"As far as respects human nature, the woman does not possess one nature, and the man exhibit another, but the same: so also with virtue. If, consequently, a self-restraint and righteousness, and whatever qualities are regarded as following them, is the virtue of the male, it belongs to the male alone to be virtuous, and to the woman to be licentious and unjust. But it is offensive even to say this. Accordingly woman is to practise self-restraint and righteousness, and every other virtue, as well as man, both bond and free; since it is a fit consequence that the same nature possesses one and the same virtue. We do not say that woman's nature is the same as man's, as she is woman. For undoubtedly it stands to reason that some difference should exist between each of them, in virtue of which one is male and the other female. Pregnancy and parturition, accordingly, we say belong to woman, as she is woman, and not as she is a human being. But if there were no difference between man and woman, both would do and suffer the same things. As then there is sameness, as far as respects the soul, she will attain to the same virtue; but as there is difference as respects the peculiar construction of the body, she is destined for child-bearing and housekeeping." - Stromata, Book 4, Chapter 8

Which "skeptical" sites make this claim? I have found it on several feminist sites, and some pagan sites, but only one site I would consider "skeptical." Can we have some documentation that it is a common "skeptic" problem?

Originally posted by jpholding

According to several popular Skeptical sites, but so far as I can see, not any site that deals in original writings (earlychristianwritings.com, ccel.org), St Clement of Alexandria said, "....every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman".

"Lea, History of Sacerdotal Celibacy (page 320)" is often cited as a source, and I will be looking at it in the next week if needed, but in the meantime, anyone out there want to tell me what ORIGINAL work of Clement this supposedly comes from? Some also cite his "The Tutor" as a source, but I have found nothing like it in the original on Peter's site.

Can someone give me a citation, at least?

Or is this another Pope Leo X fiasco?

Its ascription to Clement (The Instructor) is apparently by Tama Starr, The Natural Inferiority of Women: Outrageous Pronouncements
by Misguided Males (New York: Poseidon Press, 1991) p. 45.

It is a feminist publication, not a skeptical publication.

Hmmmmm. Helen Ellerbe, The Dark Side of Christianity (Orlando: Morningstar, 1995) then quotes Starr in Chapter 8 of Ellerbe's book. This is a skeptical publication. I wonder if she checked the source?

Clement believed that the nature of woman was inferior to man's. But I couldn't find that particular quote in The Instructor at all.

Originally posted by Vorkosigan

Which "skeptical" sites make this claim? I have found it on several feminist sites, and some pagan sites, but only one site I would consider "skeptical." Can we have some documentation that it is a common "skeptic" problem?

Buckcash.com, using "Christian Crimeline".
Positive Atheism
Heresy House ("ATHEIST OWNED AND OPERATED SINCE 1999")
First Church of Common Sense
Sacramento Freethought

Use Google to search for the saying.

John Powell, I think you may have the right idea. I'll see what Lea's books says before I make any final decision, though.

<sarcasm>Wow! Two whole pages of hits in google! That's really a tour of the skeptic world.</sarcasm>

Like I thought. A minor problem, JP. Why not notify the site owners, and be done with it?

In any case, it does look like a misreading of the quotes instanced above. Also, did you check the Anti-Nicene fathers to see if it was someone else quoting Clement? I doubt Tamara Starr made it up; she's much too late. Probably got it from somewhere else.

Vorkosigan

Originally posted by Vorkosigan

<sarcasm>Wow! Two whole pages of hits in google! That's really a tour of the skeptic world.</sarcasm>

And this is what JP said:

According to several popular Skeptical sites

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren

And this is what JP said:

Then perhaps he should explain how he knows "Christian Crimes" amd "Sacramento Freethought" and the others are "popular" websites. It is unsurprising that Positive Atheism, which has a huge quote collection, should have a few bogus quotes; others have spotted them there as well.

Vorkosigan

Originally posted by Vorkosigan

Then perhaps he should explain how he knows "Christian Crimes" amd "Sacramento Freethought" and the others are "popular" websites. It is unsurprising that Positive Atheism, which has a huge quote collection, should have a few bogus quotes; others have spotted them there as well.

Vorkosigan

Perhaps you should explain why you are picking such a nit?

JPHOLDING:
John Powell, I think you may have the right idea. I'll see what Lea's books says before I make any final decision, though.

POWELL:
I just checked the Tutor / Instructor / Paedagogus more carefully, which is given as the source by some websites, but didn't find anything better.

Perhaps these are the words of a different church father (I now see that Vorkosigan suggested that already).

Looking again at Clement's words, I was thinking it odd that Clement would use the misogynistic statement as the first example in his list of Greeks plagiarizing other Greeks if he didn't think the idea itself was a good one. His claim is that the Greeks stole ideas from the Christians, presumably good ideas. Although we often focus on the point of "original" ideas being stolen, usually the point of plagiarism being bad is that the plagiarizer steals GOOD ideas from others. To make a big deal about someone stealing BAD ideas would be like making a big deal about someone being a thief because they stole WORTHLESS things like loose rocks from other people's property.

On the other hand, perhaps the virtue of the statements was irrelevant to Clement's purpose. The only point he wanted to make was that ideas (whether good or bad) were being plagiarized by Greeks stolen from other Greeks. Clement may have used this example first because it was especially similar in the two sources, yet it was unique enough to be considered an original thought by the original writer.

Consequently, one should look at other things Clement said about women to see if it's in-line with this particular misogynistic statement. Apparently, not. Chsalvia quoted one passage. I found another statement that tends to exonerate Clement.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...tor-book2.html

CLEMENT:
THE INSTRUCTOR

BOOK II.

. . .

CHAP. VI.--ON FILTHY SPEAKING.

. . .

For neither are knee and leg, and such other members, nor are the names applied to them, and the activity put forth by them, obscene. And even the pudenda are to be regarded as objects suggestive of modesty, not shame. It is their unlawful activity that is shameful, and deserving ignominy, and reproach, and punishment. For the only thing that is in reality shameful is wickedness, and what is done through it.

POWELL:
This suggests that Clement did not think that merely BEING a woman was shameful, but that shame would come from the wicked things a specific woman might do.

John Powell

Originally posted by Vorkosigan

<sarcasm>Wow! Two whole pages of hits in google! That's really a tour of the skeptic world.</sarcasm>

I said "several skeptical sites," Vorky. I named "several". You're the one blowing the matter out of proportion because your poor ego is wounded and on its last legs.

Incidentally:

pop·u·lar adj.

1. Widely liked or appreciated: a popular resort.
2. Liked by acquaintances; sought after for company: “Beware of over-great pleasure in being popular or even beloved” (Margaret Fuller).
3. Of, representing, or carried on by the people at large: the popular vote...
6. Suited to or within the means of ordinary people: popular prices.
7. Originating among the people: popular legend.

It seems to me that these sites were all "popular" in the senses bolded above. My primary meaning was for elements of 3, 6 and 7. (Certainly Cliff Walker thinks so of himself in the first case as well, but that's another story.)

Like I thought. A minor problem, JP. Why not notify the site owners, and be done with it?

I'm sure that is helpful. Like Brooks Trubee telling me that he'll still believe the Pope Leo X quote may be valid in spite of the evidence.

did you check the Anti-Nicene fathers to see if it was someone else quoting Clement?

If it were than the search parameters would bring them up as well on sites like Peter's.

John Powell: My own idea would be that it was simply the most convenient thing Clement had on hand to remember. But your contribution has been most helpful and I plan to link to this thread from my (eventual) article.

"...to embrace a woman is to embrace a sack of manure".

This sounds like it may have been said by Odo of Deep Space 9 (given that his changeling species may actually have bodies like a sack of manure at times), but it's attributed out there to Odo of Cluny, c1049 AD.

Some sites credit "Joan Smith, Misogynies (New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1989), p. 61." This happened to be in a library a few blocks from me so I checked it. Smith references not an original source, but Karen Armstrong's Gospel According to Woman, p. 23. I checked that today; a later edition has it on page 26, but with no citation at all. Dead end.

Any ideas on this one?

Originally posted by jpholding

I said "several skeptical sites," Vorky. I named "several". You're the one blowing the matter out of proportion because your poor ego is wounded and on its last legs.

-----------------------------------
I have written to the editor of 'Positive Atheism', as follows

Your quote , attributed to Clement, of '..."....every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman.' is a bogus quote.

The correct quote can be found in http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...tor-book3.html where Clement writes 'The Instructor orders them to go forth "in becoming apparel, and adorn themselves with shamefacedness and sobriety,"......'

Best wishes,
Steven Carr
---------------------------

I wonder how many Christian woman today adorn themselves with shamefacedness. I can't imagine our Dee Dee being that shamefaced, although I can easily imagine her to be a sober person.

JP I challenge you to a one on one debate. Not for one minute does any reasonable Christian view you as a scholar and your conclusions to have authority and be flawless (as you think they are). Answer this question tough guy: Other than your dinky little library science degree what degree (s) do you have in any of the "specialized knowledge" areas that you talk about in that "why bible critics do not deserve the benefit of the doubt" article you wrote? Hmm, I guess NONE. This would mean that all you do is sift through bookshelves and come to your OWN personal views after reading something. That would be fine if you didnt try to pass your views that you came to by yourself as objective truths. You lack the discipline and knowledge of a true scholar and because of that you have diarrhea of the mouth to compensate for your insecurities.