jottings from tertius

views of the world from my worldview window

"If there was no God, there would be no atheists." G.K. Chesterton


Tektonics Apologetics Ministry
The Adarwinist reader
Bede's Library: the Alliance of Faith and Reason
A Christian Thinktank
Doxa:Christian theology and apologetics
He Lives
Mike Gene Teleologic
Errant Skeptics Research Institute
Stephen Jones' CreationEvolutionDesign
Touchstone: a journal of mere Christianity: mere comments
The Secularist Critique: Deconstructing secularism I Wasn't Born Again Yesterday
imago veritatis by Alan Myatt
Solid Rock Ministries
The Internet Monk: a webjournal by Michael Spencer
The Sydney Line: the website of Keith Windschuttle
Miranda Devine's writings in the Sydney Morning Herald
David Horowitz frontpage magazine
Thoughts of a 21st century Christian Philosopher
Steven Lovell's philosophical themes from C.S.Lewis
Peter S. Williams Christian philosophy and apologetics
Shandon L. Guthrie
Clayton Cramer's Blog
Andrew Bolt columns
Ann Coulter columns


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Blogarama - The Blog Directory

Blogroll Me!

"These are the days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed except his own." G.K.Chesterton

"You cannot grow a beard in a moment of passion." G.K.Chesterton

"As you perhaps know, I haven't always been a Christian. I didn't go to religion to make me happy. I always knew a bottle of Port would do that."C. S. Lewis

"I blog, therefore I am." Anon

Sunday, October 10, 2004

Ms myths

Julia Baird writing in the Sydney Morning Herald hits the double jackpot of embarrassing goof-ups with this statement:

When the bishops at the Council of Macon were asked in the fourth century BC to decide whether women had immortal souls, they decided - by one vote - that they did.

Memo to Ms Baird: Bishops in the 4th century BC?

[Update: The BC goof has now been corrected to AD in the online edition.]

PS Ms Baird: Of course, you meant 4th century AD. The only problem is that there was no "Council of Macon" in the 4th century AD either. There was a small Council at Macon in the late 6th century AD but that it voted on the presence or otherwise of "immortal souls" in women is pure myth.

If the first casualty of war is the unwelcome truth, the first weapon of the discontented is the welcome lie.

Baird's statement is only the latest in a long line of similar careless slanders that does the rounds dressed up as historical fact. It is actually nothing more than an urban legend. Its roots lie with a hoax perpetuated at the time of the Reformation which was seized upon by anti-Catholic polemicists then and which has been seized upon ever since by self-declared libertines, rationalists, freethinkers, secularists, atheists, and anti-Christians - all the usual suspects in fact.

A quick check of the Internet finds the usual suspects merrily perpetuating this falsehood and dragging out the same tired old rhetoric, often repeated verbatim from one site to the next.

Thus Dave Silva of The Humanist Association of Orange County writes:
In the year 584, in Lyons, France, 43 Catholic bishops and 20 men representing other bishops held a debate at the Council of Macon to decide whether or not women soul and could be declared human. After many lengthy arguments a vote was taken. Women were declared human by a vote of 32 yes 31 no.

William Edelen, "Syndicated Columnist" at "the Flagstaff Tea Party: A community forum for the discussion of progressive ideas" pontificates:
Spiritual violence against women A longstanding Christian tradition

In the year 584 A.D. the Council of Macon met in Lyons, France. The subject for debate at that Council was this: "Are Women Human?" Finally, after days of debate, a vote was taken. Women were voted human by only one vote of the majority.

This from the "Freethinkers of Colorado Springs" who attempt to give us a brief history lesson despite not knowing the difference between history and their own prejudicial wish projections:
A brief history lesson:

In the year 584 C.E.. there was held the Council of Macon in Lyons, France. Sixty-three Catholic Bishops met to engage in a serious debate on this subject: "ARE WOMEN HUMAN?" When the vote was finally called for, thirty-two voted "yes," thirty-one voted "no." Women were declared "human" by only one vote!

From the home of those crazy non-historians at the jesus never existed site:
Foul Women?
c 500 AD Council of Macon votes on whether women have souls.

From the bright sparks at Positive Atheism quoting one of their favourite "historians", the lamentable Helen Ellerbe:
Bishops at the sixth century Council of Macon voted as to whether women had souls

At a British "religious education" site we read:
84 AD. Church Council of Macon, France debated 'Are women human?' The notion was carried by 32 to 31 votes. Many Christians at the time thought that women had no souls and were less holy than men.

From the atheists who miss the truth train at the Atheist Station:
Religion abuses Women

Year: 584
Place: Lyons, France
Attending: 43 Catholic bishops
23 men representing other bishops
Topic: "Are Women Human?"
Vote: Yes 32

No 31

This, along with screeds of anti-Christian polemic from the atheists off the rails at the station, is accompanied by the following breath-taking piece of self-serving hypocritical mumbo jumbo:
Paraphrasing Lincoln's words, we want to assure you that ATHEIST STATION wishes "malice toward none and charity for all." Please understand that this community, this nation, this planet, this universe is our church.

What does a real scholar have to say about the oft repeated "FACT" of the vote at the Council of Macon on whether women had souls?

Michael Nolan, Professor Emeritus in the Maurice Kennedy Research Center at University College, Dublin demolishes the Myth of the Soulless Women:
Josh Billings remarked profoundly that "the trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much as ain't so." There are those who know John Chrysostom said that "the image of God is not found in Woman." (Actually, he said that "the image of God is not found in Man or Woman.") There are those who know that Thomas Aquinas said that a woman is a defective male. (Actually, he explicitly denies this no fewer than five times.) There are those who know that Aristotle said that a woman is a deficient male-a description based on an appalling mistranslation.

And there are those who know that an early council of bishops, held at Macon in Burgundy, France in a.d. 585 decreed that women do not have a soul. The bishops of course decreed no such thing, for if women do not have a soul how could they be baptized, how receive the Eucharist, how be venerated as martyrs in heaven? Yet it may be worthwhile to look at the story of this alleged decree, for one can see a myth in the making.

The story begins, innocently enough, in the late sixteenth century. A young scholar, Valentius Acidalius, was working as a teacher in Silesia, and, like many young scholars, he was short of money. He thought to turn an honest penny by publishing a "diverting" pamphlet. In Latin the word homo, like the word man in English, primarily means "a human being, male or female, young or old," but has the secondary meaning of "adult male." Valentius thought it would be fun to use this ambiguity to "show" that in the Bible only adult males have souls. If he thought the pamphlet would amuse, he was grievously wrong. Simon Geddicus, a Lutheran scholar, launched a mighty counter-pamphlet entitled A Defense of the Female Sex, in which he proposed "manfully" (he actually uses the word viriliter) to "destroy each and every one of the arguments put forward by Valentius," who, the reader will learn with regret or satisfaction as the case may be, took a seizure and died.

The pamphlet, however, often bound with the refutation by Simon Geddicus, survived, and it appears that it was published at Lyons in France in 1647. It was now in Italian, and was entitled Women do not have a soul and do not belong to the human race, as is shown by many passages of Holy Scripture. One gathers from a commentator that "the ladies of Italy took this system very differently. Some were vexed to have no souls. Others were pretty indifferent about the matter, and looking on themselves as mere machines, hoped to set their springs so well agoing as to make the men stark mad." Not all the ladies were silent, and the splendidly named Archangela Tarabotti wrote A Defense of Women. One way or another, the offending book caught the attention of Pope Innocent X, who put it on the Index of Prohibited Books (Decree of June 18, 1651). So much for the allegation that the Church holds that women do not have souls.

But the suggestion that women do not have souls was obviously in the air. It apparently came to the ears of Johannes Leyser, a Lutheran pastor from the region of Frankfurt in Germany, for he took up the idea and then sought confirmation for it in the doings of the Council of Macon, a small council of some forty-three bishops held in Burgundy in the year 585. Leyser had become a chaplain in the Danish army. The excitements, and no doubt opportunities, of military life seem to have sharpened his zest for feminine variety, for in 1676 he published a volume called The Triumph of Polygamy, in which he proclaimed the merits of a plurality of wives. Seeking support for his view that women are inferior, he decided to misquote the decrees of the Council of Macon. Leyser wrote: "Among the holy fathers [at the Council] there was one who insisted that women cannot, and should not, be called 'human beings' (homines). The matter was thought so important that it was discussed publicly and in the fear of God. Finally, after many arguments on this question, [the bishops] concluded that women are human after all."

Now this is wholly untrue. The acts of the Council of Macon contain no such discussion. They contain neither the word "woman" nor the word "soul." What Leyser did was to misinterpret a story told in The History of the Franks by St. Gregory of Tours. Gregory was bishop of that city in the sixth century and wrote a splendid history of the region. At one point he tells of a council that may, or may not, have been the Council of Macon. Gregory writes:

There came forward at this Council a certain bishop who maintained that woman could not be included under the term "man." However, he accepted the reasoning of the other bishops and did not press his case for the holy book of the Old Testament tells us that in the beginning, when God created man, "Male and female he created them and called their name Adam," which means earthly man; even so, he called the woman Eve, yet of both he used the word "man."

So what the bishops discussed was the meaning of a word, not the substantial issue of whether women have souls.

Leyser was inventing stories. His untruths were taken up by Pierre Bayle, a Dutch Calvinist with a marked distaste for the Catholicism to which he had once adhered. Bayle brought the matter further by writing in his Dictionnaire: "What I think yet more strange is to find that in a Council it has been gravely proposed as a question whether women were human creatures, and that it was determined affirmatively [only] after a long debate." Early in the nineteenth century a certain M. Aime-Martin wrote a touching book on The Education of Mothers in which he recorded sorrowfully that "people had gone so far as to doubt the existence of their souls." Politicians, as is their way, saw an opportunity, and the French National Assembly, no less, deplored the Church's insult to women. Later still the myth appeared in English in a journal titled John Bull, published by Horatio Bottomley, a fraudster Member of the British Parliament who would soon end in jail.

The myth was by now securely established, and will no doubt be retailed as confidently in the future as it has been in the past. If the first casualty of war is the unwelcome truth, the first weapon of the discontented is the welcome lie.

Especially in the war against the One who said I am the truth...

1:15:00 am