Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 03-21-2010, 06:50 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rd4f1

Quote:

Historian of the ancient world Bettany Hughes uses the latest scholarship to take us back to the 2nd century AD, as pagan Europe began to embrace Christianity. What emerged out of this crucible of religious change marked the beginning of the end for women as religious leaders for a millennium and half. Common wisdom would have it that women went from goddesses to flower arrangers in just over a century. But why - and was it that straightforward?

Bettany finds that the history of women in the early church is written more in the fragments of stone left behind than in the scriptures. She visits Rome and traces the activities of women in the early church as they fought hand in hand with men to see their faith survive. Things got more difficult after Christianity became the recognised religion of the Roman Empire and beyond. But this is not just a tale of capitulation and annihilation; women fought doggedly for their positions. From Nicea to Northumbria, Bettany follows the decline - but not quite fall - of women in the early church.

PRESENTER BETTANY HUGHES

Very interesting discussion, but based on mainstream assumptions about the history of xianity.

ApostateAbe · 03-21-2010, 07:12 AM

Maybe not mainstream. There is no mainstream position that women had especially greater potential to be high-ranking members of society before Christianity. It seems to be believed among feminist scholars, who may go as far as to claim that many ancient pre-Christian societies were matriarchal instead of patriarchal. Not likely, but special interests will believe weird things about history (just because they can given the ambiguity and lack of information), and feminists are no exception.

Toto · 03-21-2010, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Maybe not mainstream. There is no mainstream position that women had especially greater potential to be high-ranking members of society before Christianity. It seems to be believed among feminist scholars, who may go as far as to claim that many ancient pre-Christian societies were matriarchal instead of patriarchal. Not likely, but special interests will believe weird things about history (just because they can given the ambiguity and lack of information), and feminists are no exception.

The program is no longer available at Clive's link but it might be here. I can't listen to it now, but it seems clear that Hughes discussed women's role in religions, not society at large. The feminist theories of early matriarchies are controversial (e.g. Marija Gimbutas' work (or via: amazon.co.uk)), but the idea that Christianity removed women from leadership is quite commonplace and not at all controversial. Women were prominent in some pagan cults and in the early Christian church as prophetesses and preachers, and then the official church confined its leadership roles to men.

Abe needs to get over labeling ideas as "mainstream" or not.

Clivedurdle · 03-21-2010, 01:46 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priscilla_and_Aquila

Quote:

Priscilla and Aquila were a first century Christian missionary couple described in the New Testament. They became the honored and much-loved friends and ministry partners with the Apostle Paul. He was generous in his recognition and acknowledgment of his indebtedness for them. They have been called the most famous couple in the Bible since they are mentioned seven times and are always named as a couple. Of those seven times, five times Priscilla's name is mentioned first. They were tentmakers by trade.

(Acts 18)

Banishing Eve uses this as evidence of the importance of women in early xianity.

But what does this mean for the authenticiy of acts?

Toto · 03-21-2010, 02:07 PM

I just listened to the program. This is a different Priscilla.

Priscilla's catacomb

Quote:

The Catacomb of Priscilla on the Via Salaria in Rome, Italy, is situated in what was a quarry in Roman times. This quarry was used for Christian burials from the late second century through the fourth century. Some of the walls and ceilings display fine decorations illustrating Biblical scenes. The Catacombs of Priscilla are believed to be named after Priscilla, a member of the gens Acilia and who was probably the wife of the Consul Acilius who became a Christian and was killed on the orders of Domitian.

If any remains of the putatively first century Priscilla, coworker of Paul, were recovered, this would be headline news. Evidence of Christian burials in the late second century or the third century should be of especial interest to Pete.

Clivedurdle · 03-21-2010, 02:30 PM

Quote:

After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth. 2There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome

Acts 18

Or is it the same one transported back in time?

Clivedurdle · 03-21-2010, 02:32 PM

I thought the point about the early catacombs is that they are asserted to be xian, but good shepherds...

Clivedurdle · 03-21-2010, 02:46 PM

Interesting that their husbands have the same name...

http://persona.rin.ru/eng/view/f/0/3...-acilius-gaius

Toto · 03-21-2010, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Quote:

After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth. 2There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome

Acts 18

Or is it the same one transported back in time?

Interesting possibility. It seems a lot of sources do confuse the two, or assume a connection.

Church of Rome in the First Century by Edmonds refers to the bodies of Prisca and Aquila (possibly an alternate spelling of Acila) in the catacombs. Also

"M’ Acilius Glabrio, the consul of 91 A.D., ... was put to death by Domitian accused of following ‘Jewish manners and strange superstitions’ and of being ‘an inciter of innovations."

mountainman · 03-21-2010, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Priscilla's catacomb

If any remains of the putatively first century Priscilla, coworker of Paul, were recovered, this would be headline news. Evidence of Christian burials in the late second century or the third century should be of especial interest to Pete.

The caption says:

The world's oldest-known image of Mary depicts her nursing the Infant Jesus. 2nd century, Catacomb of Priscilla, Rome.

We all immediately recognise Mary - dont we! Yes, yes, yes - of course. And everyone immediately recognises the infact Jesus Henry - dont we! Yes, yes, yes - of course everyone does! Utter BS.

No C14. No archaeological reports. What sort of evidence is this? It looks like the usual type of evidence - the qualified assertions of Vatican Tour Guides - designed to increase the tourist trade.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-21-2010, 07:12 AM	#2
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	Maybe not mainstream. There is no mainstream position that women had especially greater potential to be high-ranking members of society before Christianity. It seems to be believed among feminist scholars, who may go as far as to claim that many ancient pre-Christian societies were matriarchal instead of patriarchal. Not likely, but special interests will believe weird things about history (just because they can given the ambiguity and lack of information), and feminists are no exception.

03-21-2010, 02:32 PM	#7
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	I thought the point about the early catacombs is that they are asserted to be xian, but good shepherds...

03-21-2010, 02:46 PM	#8
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Interesting that their husbands have the same name... http://persona.rin.ru/eng/view/f/0/3...-acilius-gaius

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.