08 Christianity A GENERAL FACTS Origins As with Bu.docx

08 Christianity A
GENERAL FACTS
Origins
As with Buddhism, Christianity can be traced back to the life of
its founder. In this case
that is Jesus of Nazareth (c. 5BCE – 30CE). It may seem strange
that historians estimate
that Jesus was born several years “before Christ” but that is the
result of a small error
when the Roman system was converted to the new BC/AD
Christian system in the 6th
Century. Jesus was born into a Jewish family and was
thoroughly Jewish in background and
worldview. Thus, many consider Judaism as the mother religion
of Christianity in the same
way that Hinduism is the mother religion of Buddhism. We
know very little of his early
years except for stories about his conception and birth at the
start of the gospels of
Matthew and Luke. Both writers agree that he was born in
Bethlehem but grew up in
Nazareth; and that his biological mother was Mary but that he
had no human father.
Otherwise they provide very different perspectives on the
Christmas story. For example,
Luke focuses on Mary and mentions angelic appearances to her
as well as the shepherds in
the fields. In contrast, Matthew focuses on her husband, Joseph,
his dreams, as well as

the star, the wise men and King Herod’s attempts to kill the
child.
Jesus was probably a tradesman like his ‘father’, Joseph, but
something happened in his
early thirties that changed the direction of his life, much like
the four sights that Gautama
experienced. All gospels agree that it occurred at the Jordan
River where a prophet-like
character named John was inviting his fellow Jews to immerse
themselves in the waters
and renew their Jewish faith. Jesus was among the crowds but,
unlike the others, we are
told that he experienced an epiphany when he was baptised by
John. The voice of God
declared him to be “my beloved Son” and a dovelike image
hovered above him,
representing God’s Spirit. It is one of the rare occasions in the
gospels that the three
‘persons’ of the Trinity are mentioned together (Father, Son and
Spirit). As a result, Jesus
relinquished his trade and took up an itinerant lifestyle as a
religious teacher and healer,
moving from town to town throughout Israel (and rarely
beyond). He taught in synagogues
and in public places, attracting crowds, not only because of his
message but also because
of his reputation as a miraculous healer. The gospels mention
cures of all types of illnesses
as well as control over natural forces. In this respect he was not
unique in Jewish history.
For instance, Moses was said to have worked miracles in Egypt
and in the desert; and the
9th century BCE prophets Elijah and Elisha also had wondrous
powers. Indeed, many of
Jesus’ miracles resemble those of Elijah and Elisha.

Scholars generally agree that the key theme linking his teaching
and healings is the
‘Kingdom of God’, which is not so much a place or territory but
a new relationship
between Jewish people and their God. According to Jesus, God
is a gracious and loving
father in whose Kingdom repentant sinners are very welcome,
but where the self-righteous
and arrogant have no place. Many of his parables make this
point and he began to attract
followers as a result. He invited some of these to join him on
the road, while others
remained in their homes and offered hospitality and support in a
more general way. He
also began to create enemies, especially among the religious
and political leadership who
saw him as a potential threat, especially given that talk about a
Kingdom suggested that
Jesus thought of himself as a sort of King (messiah in Hebrew;
christos in Greek). Sadly,
after just two or three years in the public eye, he was betrayed
by a member of his inner
circle, arrested and put on trial. The gospels claim that there
was initially a religious
hearing by the Jewish Sanhedrin (the principal court of Jewish
leaders in Jerusalem) who
condemned Jesus as a false messiah. He was then taken to the
Roman prefect, Pontius
Pilate, who sentenced him to death by crucifixion. The gospels
suggest that Pilate’s hand
was forced by the Jewish leadership but history remembers
Pilate as a brutal ruler who
readily put down any form of insurrection or threat to the civil
order.

1
Jesus was crucified on a Friday and hurriedly buried before
sunset to avoid breaking the
Sabbath laws. In contrast to the calm death of Buddha Gautama
at a ripe old age
surrounded by his disciples, Jesus’ demise was bloody,
premature and lonely, as most of
his followers deserted him in fear. That might have been the end
of the story since his
movement was in profound crisis as a result, but the gospels
claim that two events
occurred within days of his burial. First, some of his female
followers found his tomb open
and empty on the Sunday morning (the “first day of the week”).
Second, his followers
began to report that Jesus had appeared to them in a glorious,
yet bodily, form although
he was not recognisable at first, except for the marks of
crucifixion. These two elements
combined to generate the kernel of a new faith that eventually
became Christianity:
namely that Jesus had been “raised from the dead”. Resurrection
was not a Christian
invention as it was already part of the Jewish tradition (the
Pharisee party believed that it
would happen at the end of the world). What was unique was
that one man had been
raised and the world did not end. This set Jesus apart from all
other figures of Israel’s past
and eventually led to the Christian claim that, not only was he
the long-awaited messiah
(christos) - hence his title Jesus “Christ” – but, more
importantly, that he was somehow

divine as well as human: an incarnation of the one God.
Jesus’ baptism Jesus teaching Jesus’ death
Main Subdivisions
Two thousand years later Christianity is the largest religion in
the world with about 2.3
billion members. Like most religions, it has not remained
unified and homogeneous in that
time. Basically, it can be subdivided into three main branches,
which are the results of
two splits: the first occurred in 1054 when Eastern Christianity
(centred on
Constantinople) and Western Christianity (centred on Rome)
separated. The second split
occurred in Western Christianity in the 16th Century when the
Protestant Reformers broke
from the Catholic Church.
a. Eastern Orthodox Churches
Eastern Christianity (sometimes called Greek Christianity)
consists of many national/
linguistic based churches such as the Greek Orthodox Church,
the Russian Orthodox
Church, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the Serbian Orthodox
Church, and so on. Most
Orthodox Christians live in Eastern Europe and the Middle East
(e.g. Turkey, Syria, Egypt,
Iraq, Armenia etc.) and many of them look to the Patriarch of
Constantinople (Istanbul) as
their symbolic leader or figurehead (he has no jurisdictional
power). The current
Patriarch, Bartholomew I, has been in that role since 1991.

Orthodox Christianity is
probably the most conservative form and, thus, loyalty to
tradition is paramount and
change comes slowly.
2
Bartholomew I
Patriarch of Constantinople
b. Catholic Church
The Catholic Church is the largest denomination of Christians
and is very much centred on
the bishop of Rome (the pope) who has real and extensive
jurisdictional power. Most
Catholics live in southern Europe (Spain, Portugal, Italy, France
plus other countries such
as Poland and Ireland) and Latin America (from Mexico to
Argentina). The current pope,
Francis, is from Argentina and is the first non-European pope
for 1300 years. Needless to
say, papal teachings (past and present) are very important in
Catholicism.
Pope Francis
c. Protestant Churches
The 16th Century saw many groups separate from Rome “in
protest”, hence the umbrella

term “Protestant” is often used to contrast them to “Catholic”.
Many prefer to call
themselves “Reform” since the intention was to clean up the
church and return to the
original ideals of New Testament period. Martin Luther is
considered to be the first to
break formally with Rome and those who follow his brand of
Christianity are known as
Lutherans. But other Protestant leaders shaped their own
versions of Christianity such as
Presbyterians, Anglicans, Baptists, Evangelicals and so on.
There are over 20,000 different
Protestant churches and, thus, there is quite a bit of diversity:
from churches with bishops
(eg. Anglicans) to churches with no clergy at all (eg. Quakers).
Most Protestant Christians
live in Northern Europe (Britain, Germany, Holland,
Scandinavia) and in former British
colonies such as the USA, Canada and Australia. One common
element among them is their
emphasis on scripture (the bible) as the ultimate source of
authority, rather than
“tradition” (usually meaning the teachings of popes and
councils of bishops).
Key Texts
The Christian Bible consists of two main sections: Old
Testament and New Testament. The
former is actually the Tanach (the Hebrew bible) but with the
books arranged in a slightly
different order. This is a remarkable overlap between two world
religions. It means that
the same texts are being read in a synagogue on Saturday and a
church on Sunday – but
each congregation is reading them through the lens of their own

Jewish or Christian faith.
Christians call it the “Old Testament” because they believe it is
a preamble or preparation
3
for what comes in the New Testament. Thus, Old Testament
(Tanach) passages still carry
great weight in Christianity since they are “scriptural”, even
though Christianity does not
think that all Old Testament laws still apply (only some).
The New Testament is a collection of 27 books all authored by
various Christians (not
Jesus) in the first century CE. Most of those books are either
gospels or letters. The term
‘gospel’ literally means “good news” but essentially it is a short
(partial) biography of
Jesus, written to demonstrate his importance to the believer.
Many gospels were written
but only four were included in the canon: Matthew, Mark, Luke
and John. The first three
are very similar in terms of content and order of events. As a
result, they are called the
Synoptic Gospels. Most scholars believe that Mark was the first
gospel to be written
(around 60CE) since his version is the shortest. It seems that
Matthew and Luke copied
Mark and added material from a hypothetical collection of
Jesus’ teachings known as the
“Q Source” (from the German word “quelle” which means
source), shaping their own
versions a few decades later. Incidentally, Luke also wrote a

“second volume” called Acts
of the Apostles, which narrates the story of the early Christian
community, focussing
mainly on Peter and Paul.
The fourth gospel, John, is the ‘odd man out’ not only in terms
of the contents and order
of events, but also in regard to the portrait of Jesus that it
presents. Whereas the
Synoptics paint a very human Jesus who speaks mainly about
the Kingdom of God, John
presents a distinctly divine Jesus who speaks mainly about his
true identity and his special
relationship to the Father.
The Four Gospel writers
symbolised by a man, lion, ox and eagle
Apart from the gospels, there are also 21 letters (“epistles”) in
the New Testament.
Thirteen of these are ascribed to Paul: a zealous Jew and enemy
of Christianity who
experienced a radical conversion and became one of the great
ambassadors of the new
faith. He never met Jesus during his life and, indeed, Paul’s
letters say little about Jesus’
public ministry, concentrating mainly on his death and
resurrection. The inclusion of so
many of Paul’s letters means that his influence is profound and
some historians argue that
you really have to say that Christianity was founded by both
Jesus and Paul. Many biblical
scholars think that Paul only wrote some of the letters ascribed
to him in the New

Testament; the others were possibly written in his name by his
disciples or associates.
There are other letters included in the canon which bear the
names of members of the
Twelve (Jesus’ closest associates): John, Peter, James and Jude.
Again, it is debated
whether the Aramaic speaking disciples of Jesus actually wrote
these Greek texts or
4
whether they were written later in their name and with the
stamp of their authority in the
communities in which they lived.
Key Periods
There are many ways to divide up the two thousand years of
Christian history but for the
purposes of this course we will use five major periods. In
particular we will be looking for
prevalent attitudes and practices concerning the role of women
in each period.
a. New Testament (30-130CE)
The earliest period of Christianity corresponds to that time
during which the books of the
New Testament were being composed. For convenience sake we
are taking the first
hundred years after the death of Jesus, which covers most of the
1st Century and the early
2nd Century CE. At this early stage, Christianity was still being
worked out in practice and

the situation was very fluid and diverse. Christians were a tiny
minority in the Empire and
those of Jewish background still prayed in synagogues on the
Sabbath (Saturday). There
were no public churches yet and Christians gathered in private
homes (often owned by
wealthy women) for their services. There were also no set
guides for ritual, and worship
services tended to be spontaneous and charismatic, with Spirit
inspired activities such as
“prophesying” and “speaking in tongues.” Today’s Pentecostal
and Charismatic
movements are attempts to return to that form of prayer
meeting. Church authority was
also very inchoate; the roles of bishop, priest and deacon were
not yet defined and other
roles existed as well. We will need to investigate what the New
Testament authors actually
say about women in general, their appropriate roles at home and
in the church, and
whether the picture that we gain is consistent or not.
St Paul: was he really a misogynist?
b. The Patristic Period (130-800CE)
This refers to the long period extending from the end of New
Testament times to the
beginning of the Middle Ages. The term “Patristic” can be
translated as “Fathers” and it
reflects the fact that the most influential thinkers and writers in
Christianity were men:
male bishops to be exact. They either wrote on an individual
basis or they gathered in
“councils” and issued statements and decrees. Many of them

have been canonised as
saints in mainstream Christianity (both East and West). For
example, one of the most
famous and influential Fathers of Western Christianity was
Saint Augustine, who developed
key ideas about God as a Trinity as well as the “original sin” of
Adam and Eve and the way
it affects all humans. What is interesting is that Augustine and
many of his fellow Fathers
were quite happy to use the ideas of the ‘in vogue’ Greek
philosopher, Plato, to shape
their views of Christianity. We will need to examine why there
are no Mothers of the
Church, and what the Fathers say about the first woman, women
in general, and the roles
that women should play in the emerging organizational
structures of Christianity.
5
Alexis Schenker
Augustine: What did he say about Eve and women in general?
c. The Medieval Period (800-1500CE)
This also covers a long period from the end of the Patristic
times to the break-up of the
Western Church in the 16th Century. The key difference
between the Patristic and
medieval periods is that the key theologians who were thinking
and writing about

Christianity were no longer bishops but academic professors.
They taught theology in
schools and colleges and, hence, their style of theology was
called “scholastic”. This was
the age in which theology was “queen of the sciences” and one
of the most famous
theologians was Thomas Aquinas who lived in the 13th Century.
Just as Augustine had used
Plato for his theology, Aquinas turned to the recently
rediscovered works of that other
great ancient Greek thinker, Aristotle. It was also the time when
the Eastern and Western
churches separated and the authority of the Pope (both religious
and political) increased
dramatically in the West. One of the key developments in this
period was the
establishment of large, influential orders of nuns out of which
emerged some outstanding
individual women.
Thomas Aquinas: How did Aristotle influence his thinking on
women?
d. The Protestant Reformation (1500-1800CE)
As stated above, Western Christianity suffered major
fragmentation in the 16th Century,
when groups of Christians began to break away from the
authority of the Pope and
establish their own versions of the faith. The first figure to do
so was the German monk
and professor, Martin Luther, after whom the Lutheran branch
of Christianity is named. He
was quickly followed by others: John Calvin who established
the Reformed Churches; the

theological advisors of Henry VIII who established the Anglican
tradition; as well as
Baptists, Pentecostals, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah’s
Witnesses and so on. With so
many different forms of Christianity appearing, it is no wonder
that there is a
corresponding variety of structures. Some Protestant churches
kept bishops and priests as
roles of authority (e.g. Lutherans and Anglicans); others
preferred a body of elected elders
(Reformed or Presbyterian); others preferred complete
autonomy for local churches that
were run by their own congregations. We will need to
investigate whether or not these
new forms of church organization gave women greater access to
positions of authority.
6
Martin Luther:
Did he and his fellow Reformers rethink women’s roles in the
church?
e. The Modern Period (1800-now)
The fifth phase in the story of Christianity is marked by the
massive impact felt by the
Scientific Revolution, otherwise known as “The
Enlightenment”. It is often called the Age
of Reason in contrast to the preceding Age of Faith; the
transition from an essentially
religious view of reality to a scientific view. As the famous

poem by Alexander Pope
stated:
Nature and Nature’s laws lay hidden by night
God said “Let Newton be”; and all was light.
The new scientific knowledge often sat uneasily with, or even
flatly contradicted,
traditional religious interpretations, and names such as Galileo
and Darwin immediately
spring to mind. Many of these issues have been worked out as
theology and biblical studies
adapted the insights of science to redefine Christian belief,
although there are still
smouldering fires such as the issue of Creationism.
One of the key principles of the Enlightenment was the idea of
human equality: an idea
famously enshrined in the second sentence of the 1776 United
States Declaration of
Independence.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they
are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Looking back now, we might ask: what did it mean by “men”?
• Did it mean “(white) men”?
• Did it mean “men (not women)”?
• Did it mean “(heterosexual) men”?
• Did it mean “(adult) men”? and so on....
Indeed, despite the noble Enlightenment principle of human
equality, history shows that

its full implications are still being worked out today in many
contexts. But the principle of
equality did start social movements that sought to overcome
discrimination based on race,
sex, sexual preference and age. This is the context for the rise
of Christian feminism:
when Christians (women and men) began to examine the
Christian tradition and measure
it against the ideal that men and women are “created equal”. We
will need to see how
that played out in the 19th and 20th Centuries, and into today’s
world.
7
Alexis Schenker
Feminist theologian: Rosemary Reuther
How do she and her fellow theologians argue for women’s
equality?
THE GENDER OF GOD
Because Christianity incorporated the entire Jewish bible into
its own canon, renaming it
the Old Testament, it inherited much from its mother religion
regarding the nature of God.
Thus, on one hand, it agreed with Judaism that there is only one
Creator God and that this
Creator God is a transcendent being, beyond anything in
creation itself. Thus, it shares

with Judaism the idea that God has no physical body and, hence,
no biological sex. In
terms of God’s “gender” (namely whether God has masculine or
feminine traits), it also
inherited the dominant images of the Old Testament, which
were masculine, although it
also accepts as valid the (fewer) feminine images of God found
there as well.
Father
On the other hand, it also developed its own distinctive ideas
about God as a result of
Jesus and the New Testament writings. A critical ingredient in
the ‘new’ Christian thinking
about God was Jesus’ own preferred metaphor: “Father”. The
Greek word “pater”
appears over 20 times in the Q Source (the teachings of Jesus
found in Matthew and Luke)
and over 100 times in the gospel of John. The original Aramaic
term (the language actually
spoken by Jesus) was probably “abba”, which is less formal and
more endearing – probably
best translated as “dad”. Most of the time, Jesus distinguished
himself from his audience
by using the phrases “my heavenly Father” and “your heavenly
Father”. On the one
occasion he used the plural “our Father” it was given as an
example for his followers to
use when they pray as a group.
The teachings of Jesus overwhelmingly portray God as a kind,
forgiving father who is
willing to welcome back his stray children with open arms. So,
the question arises whether

the gospels contain any feminine imagery for God, as the Old
Testament does; and the
answer is: “very little”. In fact, there is only one explicit
occasion in Luke where Jesus
compares God seeking a sinner to a thrifty housewife frantically
seeking a lost coin.
What woman, having ten silver coins, if she loses one of them,
does not light a
lamp, sweep the house, and search carefully until she finds it?
When she has found
it, she calls together her friends and neighbours, saying,
“Rejoice with me, for I
8
have found the coin that I had lost”. Just so, I tell you, there is
joy in the presence
of the angels of God over one sinner who repents. (Lk 15:8-10)
This story sits between similar stories of a shepherd seeking a
lost sheep and the famous
parable of the “Prodigal Son”, which tells of a father waiting
for the return of his wayward
boy.
Commentators sometimes add another saying that refers to a
mother hen gathering in her
chicks:
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those
who are sent to you!
How often would I have gathered your children together as a

hen gathers her brood
under her wings, and you would not! (Matt 23:37; Lk 13:34)
However, Jesus is speaking of himself here rather than his
Father.
In John’s gospel most of the references are to both the Father
and the Son (identified as
Jesus). The addition of the Holy Spirit led to the distinctively
Christian idea that God is
one and three at the same time: a “tri-unity” or “Trinity”
consisting of Father, Son and
Holy Spirit.
The heavily masculine language used in the gospels has
influenced Christian art. Although
the Orthodox and Protestant churches avoid images of God the
Father, the Catholic
tradition has allowed artists to paint the first person of the
Trinity in the shape of an older
human male, typically with a white beard (a sort of
grandfatherly figure).
A Catholic painting of the Trinity
Moreover, Christian language follows the usual grammar rules
and, thus, the noun
“Father” naturally demands masculine pronouns (he, him, his)
for God, further
emphasising the masculine, rather than the feminine. While
accepting the reality that
“Father” is the dominant metaphor for God in Jesus’ teaching,
nevertheless Christian
feminists call for greater balance and usually request inclusive
language, i.e. using the

word “God” instead of “he”, “him” or “his” whenever possible.
Incarnate Son
It is not only the dominant “Father” metaphor that profoundly
influences the way
Christians think of and speak about God. A second, central
element of Christian faith
further reinforces the sense that divinity is masculine. This is
the notion that Jesus of
9
Nazareth is an incarnation of God. We met this idea in
Hinduism where it is believed that
Vishnu comes down to earth in animal or human form on a
number of occasions to save the
world. These are the avatars of Vishnu and the traditional list
has 10 names, including
Rama and Krishna (7th and 8th). Christianity also believes that
God has “descended” to
earth in worldly form in order to save humanity, but the key
difference is that, for
Christians, this occurs only once in all of history. So, Jesus is
the one unique incarnation of
God in human form for all time. Moreover, Christianity
professes that this incarnation was
not temporary. Jesus did not rise from the dead and shed his
humanity, returning to his
former purely divine status as eternal Son. Mainstream
Christianity claims that the
incarnation is a permanent state. God has taken on a human
form forever, thus linking
divinity and humanity in a most profound sense. Needless to
say, this raises some real

difficulties for the Christian feminist. The fact that there is only
one divine incarnation,
but that there are two human sexes, means that God had to
choose one sex and the
choice was male. The traditional explanation is that God became
“human/male” in order
to save all persons: men and women. Moreover, it is argued that
God had to become a man
given the cultural and social norms of the day. In other words,
if he had become a woman
in first century Palestine no-one would have taken him
seriously. Of course, that raises the
next question “why that particular time in history”?
Byzantine icon of the male Christ
For some thinkers, the fact that God has a resurrected male
body and has experienced
human life in male form, implies that he is “closer” or more
intimately linked to maleness
than femaleness, forever. Paul called Jesus “the image of the
invisible God” (Col 1:15) and
that image is a human, male face. The implications for Christian
language and art are less
ambiguous than the Father (who is not incarnate). Jesus is
naturally referred to as “he”
and is naturally depicted as a human male, usually with long
hair and beard (especially
since the Byzantine era where beards symbolised masculine
strength).
The Holy Spirit
So, the dominant “Father” image in Jesus’ teaching and the
Christian belief that (the

male) Jesus is the unique incarnation of God in history,
reinforce the masculinity of God to
a degree greater than in Hinduism, Judaism and (as we shall
see) Islam. But what about
the third ‘person’ of the Christian Trinity: the Holy Spirit?
The fact that the Spirit is usually depicted in Christian art as a
dove is based on the gospel
episode of Jesus’ baptism in the Jordan. All four gospels state
that the Spirit descended on
Jesus “like a dove” (Mark 1:11; Luke adds “in bodily form” -
Luke 3:22). This is somewhat
reminiscent of the animal avatars of Vishnu, but Christianity
makes no claim that the
Spirit is incarnate, least of all as a small bird. In fact, the
dominant images of the Spirit in
both the Old and New Testaments are more ethereal: wind,
breath, fire. In other words,
there is less connection with human masculinity and more with
neuter, natural forces.
10
Images of the Holy Spirit: dove and fire-wind
Indeed, the gender of the nouns used for Spirit in different
languages is interesting. In
Latin “spiritus” is a masculine noun and it is not uncommon for
Christians to refer to the
Spirit as a “he”. In Greek the word is “pneuma” (from which we
derive pneumonia and
pneumatic tyres – suggesting air) and it is a neuter noun. Thus,
Christians also use the

pronoun “it” when speaking of the Spirit. However, in the
original Hebrew, as we noted
earlier, the word is “ruah” and this is a feminine noun. Thus,
feminists argue that there is
as much justification to refer to the Spirit as “she” as there is to
use “he” or “it”.
It is worth noting that in Gnostic Christianity (an early form of
Christianity that was
rejected as heretical) the Spirit was depicted as Mother
alongside the Father and Son,
creating a sort of divine family. Some also point out that the
“we” used by God in the
Genesis 1 creation account can be interpreted as the masculine-
feminine balance within
God (Father-Mother) who creates humankind “male and female,
in OUR likeness” (Genesis
1:26).
The Cult of Mary
Some think that the dominance of masculine imagery for the
Christian God (Father, Son
and Spirit) was the reason that Christians looked elsewhere
within their religion for
feminine forms of divinity, much like the ancient Israelites
turned to Astarte and Hindus
turn to the Mother Goddess. Given that Jesus had no wife or
daughters, the person in
whom they found divine maternity, to balance the divine
paternity, was naturally his
mother: Mary (Miriam in the original Aramaic).
The portrait of Mary varies quite significantly across the four
gospels. In Mark and

Matthew, she plays only a very minor role and is possibly
included among his relatives who
thought Jesus was “out of his mind” and needed to be restrained
in some way. In response
Jesus seems to disown his own kin, calling his disciples his
‘true’ family (Mark 3:21,
31-35). In contrast, Luke depicts Mary as a key person in God’s
plan. The angel Gabriel
greets her as “highly favoured” (traditionally “full of grace”);
she ponders carefully what
God is doing in her life; and she is mentioned with the Twelve
in Jerusalem after Jesus’
resurrection. Similarly, John gives Mary two key appearances at
the start and end of his
gospel. The first is when Jesus works his first public miracle
(turning water into wine at
the wedding at Cana), precisely as a result of her request. The
second is at the foot of the
cross where a dying Jesus gives her to his favourite (unnamed)
disciple to be in a mother-
son relationship.
11
Gabriel appears to Mary (Luke) Mary at the foot of the
cross (John)
Her apotheosis continued after the New Testament period,
especially in the Catholic and
Orthodox traditions (Protestants have always been worried
about elevating saints to the
same level as Christ). At the Council of Ephesus in 431CE,
Mary was officially proclaimed

“Mother of God” (literally
“Theotokos” or God-bearer). Although this was actually a way
of confirming that her son
was both divine and human, the effect was to elevate her to a
quasi-divine status in
popular thinking.
Prayers and devotion to Mary grew over the centuries as
Christians preferred her feminine
compassion to the masculine sternness of Christ and the
mysterious remoteness of the
Father. She was considered a mediatrix and intercessor
alongside her son. Indeed,
Michelangelo’s Last Judgment aptly captures these sentiments;
Christ stands in the centre
as dispenser of divine justice while Mary pleads with him for
clemency upon the world’s
sinners.
Mary as Theotokos Michelangelo’s Last Judgment
The Catholic rosary was one of the most popular prayer forms
and its main unit was the
“Hail Mary” (“Ave Maria” in Latin). There were feast days for
her on the calendar and
claims of apparitions of Mary to children in Lourdes (1858),
Fatima (1917) and Medjurgorie
(1980s). A famous hymn sung for centuries reflects this need
for a maternal celestial
being:
Hail, Queen of heaven, the ocean star,
Guide of the wanderer here below,
Thrown on life's surge, we claim thy
care,

Save us from peril and from woe.
Mother of Christ, Star of the sea
Pray for the wanderer, pray for me.
O gentle, chaste, and spotless Maid,
We sinners make our prayers through
thee;
Remind thy Son that He has paid
The price of our iniquity.
Virgin most pure, Star of the sea,
Pray for the sinner, pray for me.
12
Orthodox and Catholic Christians believe that her body was
taken to heaven in a way
similar to her son, although it is called her Assumption rather
than her Ascension. This was
declared a dogma of the Catholic Church in 1950. A century
earlier, in 1854, the Catholic
Church also declared that she was conceived without original
sin and given the title
“Immaculate Conception”. This term is often erroneously used
to refer to the claim that
Jesus was conceived without a human father; technically that is
called the “virginal
conception” of Jesus.
Today, feminists appreciate the need for Christians to
rediscover the softer, maternal side
of God, but they recommend that these need to be traits of the
Christian God who is not
just Father but also Mother. Moreover, elevated ideas about

Mary need to be toned down
and the historical, human Miriam of Nazareth needs to be
rediscovered as a down-to-earth
realistic model for women.
JESUS AND WOMEN
Given the importance of the founder in any religious tradition,
we now need to look at
Jesus’ teachings and practice in terms of women. We have
already seen how Buddha
Gautama admitted women into the monastic life despite his
initial reluctance. So, what
were Jesus’ attitudes to women and how did he relate to the
actual women in his life?
A celibate Jesus
The first thing we need to note is that the Christian tradition
believes that Jesus never
married. There have been claims down through the ages that
Jesus did have a wife, and
possibly children, the most recent example being Dan Brown’s
novel, The Da Vinci Code.
The most common hypothesis (adopted by Brown also) is that
Jesus married Mary
Magdalene or at least had a special affection for her (see also
the musical Jesus Christ
Superstar). This idea is based on a few verses in later Gnostic
gospels, where Mary
Magdalene is portrayed as the foremost of Christ’s disciples,
even greater than Peter. In
particular, one verse from the Gospel of Philip states:
And the companion of [the saviour was Mar]y Ma[gda]lene.
[Christ loved] M[ary] more

than [all] the disci[ples, and used to] kiss her [often] on her
[mouth].
The text is badly fragmented with many missing characters [see
brackets] and goes on to
portray Mary Magdalene as “barren” and “angelic”. So, it is
difficult to know whether
these later writings, which elevate Mary Magdalene as the
premier disciple in a rather
Platonic sense, point to an actual historical relationship with
Jesus before his death.
Apart from these verses, there is no reference anywhere else
that Jesus had a wife. If the
mainstream tradition is correct and Jesus was celibate, then it
would have been a rather
unusual state for a man of his age, especially one who was a
religious leader or rabbi.
There were Jewish groups that practised celibacy, the best
known of which was the
Qumran community that lived on the shores of the Dead Sea.
Their writings were
rediscovered in the 1940s and are famously known as the Dead
Sea Scrolls. Their celibacy
seems to have been a deliberate choice based on their belief that
the world was coming to
an end. Many early Christians, including St Paul, also chose a
celibate lifestyle since they
13
were convinced that the end was nigh. This may also have been
a major factor in Jesus’

decision and he gives a hint of this in one of his sayings:
For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there
are eunuchs who have
been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have
made themselves
eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone
accept this who can.
(Matthew 19:12)
In other words, for Jesus it seems that the imminent, yet
mysterious, Kingdom took
priority over all things, including spouse and children. This
echoes the decision of
Gautama to leave his family for the higher spiritual road of
celibacy and indeed for much
of Christian history the life of a celibate monk, nun or priest
was seen as a more powerful
imitation of the founder and an anticipation of heaven.
However, unlike Buddhism,
Christian marriage was still seen as a holy institution. In the
Catholic and Orthodox
churches, marriage is listed as one of the seven sacraments
(special rituals that allegedly
were established by Jesus). St Paul even adapted Hosea’s
analogy of marriage from Israel
as God’s bride to the Church as Christ’s bride (see Ephesians
5). Moreover, Christianity sees
children – sons and daughters - as a blessing from God, not a
shackle holding one back
from heaven. In fact, for many churches today, a Christian
couple must declare that they
are at least open to having children for the marriage to be valid.
Jesus’ teachings

Perhaps not surprisingly, we do not find an explicit policy on
women’s rights in the
teachings of Jesus, but scholars note that his key idea of the
Kingdom had certain
implications for women. The Kingdom of God, as described by
Jesus, is a state in which a
merciful God welcomes home those who are marginalized by
society. The God of Jesus
does not keep a strict account of wrongdoings but, rather,
forgives and forgets, perhaps
too easily for some. One of Jesus’ sayings, addressed precisely
to the self-righteous
religious leaders, captures this dangerous, unsettling idea: “Tax
collectors and prostitutes
are entering before you.” (Matt 21:31). Feminist Christians
often note that not only
prostitutes but women in general would have welcomed such a
message since most women
would have found themselves marginalized and victimized by
the socio-religious culture of
the day.
A specific issue brings out the point more clearly. When asked
for his opinion on divorce,
Jesus took a surprisingly firm position. Quoting both Genesis
creation stories, he stated:
Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning
“made them male
and female”, and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his
father and mother and be
joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh”? So,
they are no longer two,
but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, let no
one separate.’ They
said to him, ‘Why then did Moses command us to give a

certificate of dismissal and to
divorce her?’ He said to them, ‘It was because you were so
hard-hearted that Moses
allowed you to divorce your wives, but at the beginning it was
not so. And I say to you,
whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries
another commits
adultery. (Mark 10:2-12).
Jesus’ answer seems unusually strict given his liberal attitude to
many traditional laws and
regulations. However, scholars point out that such a stance
would have favoured the wife
since, according to the Law of Moses, she had no right to
initiate divorce, whereas her
husband could dispense with her by simply writing up a divorce
notice for which no
grounds were required. He also seems to be revising the one-
sided Torah definition of
adultery by stating that it applies to the husband as much as the
wife.
Despite Jesus’ firm teaching, most churches today accept the
reality of marriage
breakdown and allow divorce and remarriage for pastoral
reasons. In general, either party
may initiate the proceedings and, thus, it is not really a gender
issue in Christianity. The
14
Orthodox tradition permits remarriage a second and even a third
time, but it is no longer
considered a sacrament and the ceremony is more restrained.

The Protestant tradition
likewise stresses the ideal of permanence but allows for divorce
and remarriage within the
Church. Even the Catholic Church, which is strictest in its
interpretation of the
permanence of marriage, has developed a process of
“annulment” whereby a Catholic may
remarry within the Church if it can be established that an
element was lacking in the
original marriage that prevented it from being considered a
sacrament: for example,
psychological maturity or the willingness to have children.
Otherwise, Catholics who
remarry “outside the Church” may not participate in Holy
Communion until the situation is
rectified.
Jesus’ actions
If Jesus’ attitude and teachings were favourable to women in
theory, how did he treat
them in practice? The common response to this question is to
cite four episodes in the
gospels that seem to indicate that Jesus did practice what he
preached. The first incident
is related in John 4, where Jesus has a long conversation with a
woman at a well. There
are three taboos that he disregards: he was alone with a strange
woman in public; she was
a Samaritan (a neighbouring people greatly despised by Jews);
and she was living in an
adulterous relationship. Despite the triple taboo, Jesus spends
considerable time speaking
to her about spiritual matters and what constitutes true “water”
(the setting is a well).

The second episode concerns a woman who has suffered from a
chronic haemorrhage
(presumably menstrual) for 12 years. She has heard about Jesus’
reputation as healer and
so, despite the jostling crowd, she reaches out and touches his
cloak. As a result, she finds
herself cured but Jesus notices something has happened and
asks: “who touched me?”
Petrified that she would be reprimanded, she nevertheless comes
forward and owns up,
but Jesus simply replies: ‘Daughter, your faith has made you
well; go in peace and be
healed of your disease.’ (Mark 5:34). Again, Jesus does not
seem to be concerned about
the menstrual taboo and the spiritual contamination that would
have occurred when she
touched him. As a result, most Christian churches do not view
menstruation as a time of
impurity requiring separation and a spiritual bath. This is also
reflected in the very non-
Jewish understanding of the Christian communion service where
the wine, which is
consumed by participants, is believed to be the blood of Christ.
Nevertheless, a degree of
fear about menstrual impurity persisted in Christian theology
and law until modern times
and even today some Orthodox churches instruct female
members to avoid receiving
communion during their menstrual cycles (see
http://www.womenpriests.org/traditio/
unclean.asp).
The woman at the well. The woman with the
haemorrhage.

The third incident is when a woman, accused of adultery, is
brought to Jesus.
Commentators note that the gospel writer gives no explanation
as to where her male
partner is, even though we are told that she was “caught in the
act”. According to the
Torah, the woman (and the missing man) faces death by stoning
(Deut 22:22) but Jesus
utters his famous reply: “Let anyone among you who is without
sin be the first to throw a
stone at her” and the crowd sheepishly disperses. Jesus then
sends her home, effectively
saving her life.
15
http://www.womenpriests.org/traditio/unclean.asp
The fourth incident is when Jesus is guest at a dinner and a
woman enters the room and
anoints his head and feet with expensive oil. She also washes
his feet with her tears and
dries them with her hair. Despite the inappropriateness of a
woman touching him in this
way and the apparent “waste” of expensive ointment (both of
which prompt protests from
others present), Jesus supports her actions. The woman’s
identity is unclear and has led to
much confusion over the centuries. In Mark she is unnamed but
the gospel writer says that
the story will always be told “in her memory”. In Luke, she is
also unnamed but he adds
that she is a “sinner”, presumably a prostitute; later tradition
erroneously identifies her
as Mary Magdalene. In John’s gospel she is named as Mary of

Bethany, sister of Martha, and
a very close friend and disciple of Jesus (see below).
The woman caught in adultery A woman anoints Jesus
Female Disciples
Mention of Mary Magdalene and Mary of Bethany raises the
question of female disciples.
What was the status of the women who followed Jesus and were
they subordinate or equal
to the men?
The first point we should note is that there were two types of
disciple: those who stayed
at home and those who travelled with Jesus on the road. The
first type was the majority,
since most people who recognised Jesus as a prophet or rabbi or
miracle worker (or
possibly even ‘messiah’) did not abandon their families and
careers. There were men and
women in the crowds that listened to Jesus preach in public and
in the synagogue. There
were men and women who came to Jesus seeking healing for
themselves or loved ones.
Some of these persons are named and among the most
significant were the three siblings
who lived in Bethany: Lazarus, Martha and Mary. These were
not only disciples but close
friends of Jesus, whom “he loved” (John 11:5). The sisters
Martha and Mary feature in the
third and fourth gospels. In Luke, there is a scene where Jesus
visits their home.
Now as they went on their way, he entered a certain village,

where a woman named
Martha welcomed him into her home. She had a sister named
Mary, who sat at the
Lord’s feet and listened to what he was saying. But Martha was
distracted by her many
tasks; so, she came to him and asked, ‘Lord, do you not care
that my sister has left me
to do all the work by myself? Tell her then to help me.’ But the
Lord answered her,
‘Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many
things; there is need of only
one thing. Mary has chosen the better part, which will not be
taken away from
her.’ (Luke 10:38-42)
16
Mary and Martha
Martha’s frustration and jealousy are understandable given that
she is endeavouring to
show hospitality to the guests. However, Jesus’ reply is
significant, not just for the two
sisters, but women in general. Basically, he is saying that the
“better part”, or proper
place for a woman, is not in the kitchen but in the sitting room
with the men who are
discussing Torah.
In John’s gospel both Mary and Martha appear in critical
scenes. We have seen above how,
according to John, it was Mary who anointed Jesus’ feet. The
same gospel has Martha

make the inspired proclamation that Jesus is the Messiah (John
11:27). In the Synoptic
gospels, this breakthrough recognition and announcement is
made by Simon, which
prompts Jesus to rename him Peter (from the Greek petros
meaning “rock”) and appoint
him to a position of leadership within the group (Matthew
16:13-19) – this is a key basis for
the Pope’s authority in Catholicism. So, in one sense, the
“Peter” of John’s gospel is really
Martha. In fact, in John’s gospel it is usually the women, rather
than the men, who truly
understand who Jesus is and what he is about.
There were also disciples who travelled with Jesus from town to
town, joining him in the
mission of preaching and healing. Some of these were women
and names are provided by
the gospel writers.
Soon afterwards he went on through cities and villages,
proclaiming and bringing the
good news of the kingdom of God. The twelve were with him,
as well as some women
who had been cured of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called
Magdalene, from whom
seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Herod’s
steward Chuza, and
Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their
resources (Luke 8:1-3)
Clearly the itinerant group were a mix of men and women,
which would have created a
degree of scandal since they, apparently, were not married
couples. Moreover, the women
seemed to have organized the much-needed material assistance

such as food, clothing and
accommodation. Some are named - Mary Magdalene, Joanna,
Susanna – but there were
apparently “many others” who must have been women of means
to be able to provide
such logistical support.
Later in the gospel, several of these very women are identified
as the ones who witness
the execution and burial of Jesus (the male disciples fled in
fear) and who, on the Sunday
morning (the day after Sabbath), found the tomb empty and
encountered the risen Jesus.
In other words, according to the gospels, the eye-witnesses to
the key events at the end of
the founder’s life were women. For this reason, the Christian
tradition has described Mary
Magdalene and her colleagues as “apostola apostolorum” –
apostle to the apostles. It was
women who narrated the first stories to the men and, in this
sense, Mary Magdalene and
her female friends are aptly called the “first Christians”.
Moreover, the fact that Jewish
law did not recognise a woman as an official witness in court
leads some scholars to posit
that these stories were not fabricated (otherwise male characters
would have been
chosen).
17
Christ appears to Mary Magdalene

Despite the stories of Mary Magdalene and the other women
being first witnesses to the
founder’s resurrection, the tradition eventually left them out of
the official list, which
Paul provides in his first letter to the Corinthians:
For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had
received: that Christ
died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he
was buried, and that
he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures,
and that he appeared
to Cephas (Peter), then to the Twelve. Then he appeared to more
than five hundred
brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive,
though some have died.
Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all,
as to someone
untimely born, he appeared also to me. (1 Cor 15:3-8)
So, who are “the Twelve” that are mentioned here by Paul and
were there any women in
that group? According to the gospels, Jesus created an inner
circle of twelve persons
personally selected from his larger group of followers. We are
told that the Twelve were
given authority to preach and power to heal. We are also given
the list of the membership:
So, he appointed the twelve: Simon (to whom he gave the name
Peter); James son of
Zebedee and John the brother of James (to whom he gave the
name Boanerges, that
is, Sons of Thunder); and Andrew, and Philip, and
Bartholomew, and Matthew, and
Thomas, and James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon

the Cananaean, and
Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him. (Mark 3:16)
The exclusion of women from the Twelve is one of the main
arguments still used today by
the Catholic Church for not allowing women to be ordained as
priests. The reasoning is
that if Jesus had wanted women to be priests he would have
included women among the
Twelve, who are seen as the first “priests” of his new religion.
Allegedly only the Twelve
were present at his last supper when he commanded them to
remember him in the
breaking of the bread and the drinking of the wine. Biblical
scholars tend to take a
different line, suggesting that the numeral “12” is the key to the
meaning of this group.
Israel consisted of twelve tribes which can be traced back to the
twelve sons of Jacob
(with a minor adjustment). So, the number twelve symbolises
“all of Israel”, and the
establishment of the Twelve by Jesus is a symbol of his aim to
establish a new Israel. More
importantly, it is pointed out that he could not have included a
woman in the group
without breaking the symbolism (the twelve sons of Jacob). It is
also interesting that the
institution of Twelve male leaders disappeared from early
Christianity within a couple of
decades of Jesus’ death.
18

The Last Supper by Leonardo da Vinci The Twelve Tribes of
Israel
In conclusion, it seems fair to say that, like Buddha Gautama,
Jesus was not a 21st Century
feminist thinker. He was a man of his time but, within that
context, he comes across as
one who is sensitive to women’s concerns. He interpreted the
Torah in favour of women;
he advocated that women should study it along with men; he
was not concerned about
socio-religious taboos that pertained to women; women were
among his closest friends
and even among his itinerant band of disciples providing much
needed support; and it is
quite likely that the title of the “first Christian” properly
belongs to a woman.
Video : Handmaids of the Lord (Bettany Hughes)
https://unsw.kanopy.com/video/handmaids-gods
(available via Kanopy in UNSW Library)
Watch from 25:00 until end.
Listen for
• Paul and Thecla
• Role of women in the early spread of Christianity
• Fr Scott Brodeur’s comments about Phoebe
• Augustine’s influence
• Council of Nicea
19
https://unsw.kanopy.com/video/handmaids-gods

11 Islam B
In this topic we continue our exploration of women in Islam
with a focus on their roles as
wives and mothers. We also look at female leadership issues.
MARRIAGE
Spiritual Meaning
Like Judaism, Islam has never endorsed religious celibacy as a
worthwhile path to follow.
One reason is the influence of the founder. Just as the celibacy
of Buddha Gautama and
Jesus grounded its importance in their respective traditions, the
fact that Muhammad was
a married man with children carried similar impact. The Qur’an
also refers to the fact that
the prophets before Muhammad were husbands and fathers:
And certainly We sent apostles before you and gave them wives
and children
(13:38).
In one hadith, some companions of Muhammad decided to
relinquish the world, forsake
their wives and live like monks. Muhammad responded:
People before you perished because of their asceticism. They
made excessive
demands on themselves until Allah brought hardships on them;
you can still see a
few of them remaining in monasteries and temples. Worship
Allah and do not
associate anything with Him, perform the pilgrimage, be

righteous, and all affairs
will be set right for you. (Ibn Jarir, Abdur-Razzaq and Ibn al-
Mundhir).
Thus, you do not find an Islamic tradition of monks and nuns as
you would in Buddhism and
Christianity. There are times when sexual abstinence is
required, such as during the
daylight hours of Ramadan, but there is no tradition of lifelong
celibacy as a religious
vocation. There is no talk of abstaining from sexual activity in
order to channel energy
into the mind, or of giving up the idea of family so as to be
more available for apostolic
work. One might expect that celibacy would have been valued
among the Sufis (the
prayerful mystics of Islam), but even there, among the
brotherhoods and sisterhoods, most
Sufis were married. There were some rare exceptions such as
Rabia of Basra (717-801CE).
As a young woman, she lived in the desert as a hermit,
possessing very little and spending
most of her time in prayer. As her reputation spread, many
people came to seek her
spiritual advice. She stressed love of God above all else and her
famous statement was:
O God! If I worship You for fear of Hell, burn me in Hell,
and if I worship You in hope of Paradise, exclude me from
Paradise.
But if I worship You for Your Own sake, grudge me not Your
everlasting Beauty.
Despite many offers of marriage, she remained celibate until her
death.

Rabia of Basra
Given the preference for marriage over celibacy, it is not
surprising to find that marriage
is seen as an important part of God’s plan for humankind.
Muhammad is quoted as saying
1
that when a person marries, they fulfil “half of their religious
obligations” (Tirmidhi 3096).
This is not to be taken literally of course, but the hyperbole
does underline the
significance of the married state in this religion. As with the
Jewish tradition, Islam sees
one of the aims of marriage as companionship. In a manner
reminiscent of Genesis 2
(where Adam is only complete when Eve is created) the Qur’an
describes the importance
of the special partnership that should exist between husband and
wife:
One of His signs is that He created mates for you from
yourselves that you may find
rest in them, and He put between you love and compassion
(30:21)
A man should find happiness in his wife and children:
They say: O our Lord! grant us in our wives and our offspring
the joy of our eyes
(25.74)

Thus, Islamic theology paints marriage as a divinely willed
institution that is strongly
recommended over celibacy and that should bring completeness
and happiness to the
spouses. That is the theory but, as in all religions, there are
practical dimensions, some of
which raise concerns about gender equality.
Practical Issues
1. Consent
The first issue that is often discussed in the context of Islamic
marriage is the question of
consent. As with many cultures, Islamic marriages are often
arranged by the families
involved and there is no legal impediment to this. However,
there is a real difference
between an arranged marriage and a forced marriage, which is
prohibited by law. The
former involves the influence of other parties, often the parents
or guardians, but with
the free consent of the couple. The latter is a marriage where
the free consent of at least
one of the spouses was absent. The problem that arises concerns
the role of the guardian
or ‘wali’. Usually the groom does not require a wali unless he is
mentally incapacitated in
some way. However, a young bride must have a wali since he is
the one who signs the
contract on her behalf. The wali is usually the bride’s father or
paternal grandfather but it
could also be a male relative. So two questions arise:
i. Can a woman marry without the consent of her wali?
It depends on the law school. The Hanafi school says that she

can, provided she has
reached the age of puberty. In contrast, the Shafi’i, Maliki and
Hanbali schools say that
she cannot.
ii. Can a wali sign a contract without the explicit consent of the
bride?
Islamic law says that the bride’s consent is required, but the
technicality is that a bride’s
silence is interpreted as affirmative. Thus, critics are worried
that a young girl who did
not explicitly object to the marriage, perhaps out of fear of her
wali, would be seen as
giving her consent in the eyes the law.
2. Age
Mention of a young girl under the care of her wali raises the
second issue often debated in
this context: the legal age. Most Islamic countries specify 15
years old with parental
consent for the girl, which is also the case in most European
countries as well (note:
Catholic Canon Law stipulates 14 as the minimum age for
girls). The main concern
expressed by critics is that shariah law does not specify a
minimum age for marriage and
this is indeed the situation in Saudi Arabia and Yemen. There is
an underlying presumption
in shariah that one must wait for the onset of puberty, which
usually occurs around 11-12
years for girls but can commence as early as 7 years old. Thus,
critics are concerned that
2

girls so young may be showing signs of physiological maturity
but are in no position
psychologically to enter the married state and take on
responsibilities of parenthood. A
key element in the debate is the case of Aisha mentioned
earlier. The hadith claims that
she was betrothed to Muhammad when she was 7 and that the
marriage was consummated
when she was 9, presumably at the start of puberty. The
example of the Prophet is a
powerful argument for conservative Muslims who wish to retain
a low marriage age,
especially for girls. For example, in 2011, Saudi cleric Dr Salih
bin Fawzan attracted
worldwide attention when he defended the shariah, and the
Saudi Arabian legal position,
stressing that the Qur’an and the hadith provide no minimum
age for marriage. UNICEF
has no clear data on child marriage rates in Saudi Arabia but
reports that 12% of girls are
married before 15 years of age in Yemen. Other Muslim
commentators are more open to
admit that the historical-cultural context of 7th Century Arabia
is different to today’s
world and this must be taken into account.
UNICEF: Percentage of women aged 20–24 who were married
or in union before age 18 (1987–2006)
Media images of Muslim husbands with very young brides
3. Partner’s faith

A third area of alleged gender inequality concerns Islamic rules
about interfaith marriages
– in other words, marriage between a Muslim and a non-
Muslim. According to shariah law,
a Muslim woman must marry a Muslim or someone who
converts to Islam. Conversely, a
Muslim man must marry a Muslim woman or someone who
converts to Islam or a woman
from the People of the Book who does not have to convert. The
“People of the Book”
usually refers to non-Muslim monotheists such as Jews and
Christians. The relevant
Quranic verse is:
This day all good things are made lawful for you; and the food
of those who have been
given the Book is lawful for you and your food is lawful for
them; and the chaste
women from among the believers and the chaste women from
among those who have
been given the Book before you are lawful for you. (Qur’an 5:5)
There are restrictions on both the groom and bride, but the third
option for the man is not
available to the woman. How does the tradition justify these
different positions for men
3
Alexis Schenker
and women? The key issue here is the faith of the children. As

with most religions, Islam is
concerned that the children of an interfaith marriage might be
raised in the other faith
and, thus, be lost to Islam. In contrast to Judaism, the Islamic
tradition presumes that
faith is passed on via the father and, hence, it is imperative that
a woman be married to a
Muslim or someone willing to convert to Islam. For the same
reason, it is not as imperative
that the wife be Muslim. However, Islam acknowledges the
powerful influence of mothers
in the early years of life, thus the women must at least be a
believer in the one God. In
practice, many Muslim scholars and leaders argue against the
idea of marrying a woman of
the Book, especially outside of an Islamic community where
other cultural influences have
a serious impact.
4. Polygyny
The fourth marriage issue that is usually raised in the context of
women’s rights is that of
polygyny. We should start by clarifying the difference between
several technical terms:
polygamy = having more than one spouse (husband or wife)
polygyny = having more than one wife
polyandry = having more than one husband
Polyandry is very rare whereas polygyny was very common in
the ancient world and,
indeed, was the cultural norm in 7th Century Arabia. Islamic
law prohibits polyandry but

allows a limited form of polygyny. The Qur’an itself sets the
maximum at four:
And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans,
then marry such
women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you
fear that you will
not do justice between them, then marry only one. (4:3)
Thus, a Muslim man may legally have up to four wives
concurrently (we are not talking
about remarrying after a divorce or the death of a spouse). At
first, this sounds like Islam
is encouraging men to take more than one wife but, in fact, the
tone of the Qur’an is the
opposite. It adds a condition for polygyny: “if you fear that you
will not do justice
between them”. This is understood to mean that the husband
must treat all of his wives
equally in every area of the marriage relationship: money, gifts,
time, sexual activity etc.
Some commentators also note that the Qur’an declares that this
will not be an easy thing
to achieve. It states elsewhere:
You have it not in your power to do justice between wives, even
though you may
wish it. (4:129)
So the Qur’an is quite possibly discouraging, rather than
encouraging, polygyny. In this
case, it falls into the same category as divorce: something
permissible but not
recommended.
We should also be aware of the original context of this

revelation about polygyny.
For anyone accustomed to a monogamous society, the right to
take up to four wives seems
to favour men – but the reality was the opposite. In pre-Islamic
Arabia, there was no cap
on how many wives a man could have at the same time. So the
Qur’an was actually placing
a serious restriction on what was a carte-blanche situation for
the men. In other words,
the original revelation was geared towards the rights and well-
being of the women. A
4
woman may share a husband with three other women, but not
with dozens. Yet it didn’t
ban polygyny altogether since the practice also provided
important support for the many
widows of Arabian society.
We noted earlier that Muhammad himself had up to 11 wives
during the Medina phase of
his public life (in fact, it was 10 when he married Maria, since
one had died). So how is
this possible if the Qur’an explicitly limits the number of wives
to four? There are two
explanations often given by Islamic commentators. The first is
that when the revelation
was communicated, Muhammad did not marry again (which
would presume that it was a
very late revelation in his career) but he did not divorce any of
the existing wives to
reduce the number. Such action would have put those affected at
a distinct disadvantage

since the Qur’an also states that the wives of the Prophet are not
to marry another man:
It does not behove you that you should give trouble to the
Apostle of Allah, nor that
you should marry his wives after him ever; surely this is
grievous in the sight of
Allah. (33:53)
The second explanation is that Muhammad had a special role as
the final prophet and,
thus, God gave him special rights in this case. He is the
exception that proves the rule.
O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives
whom you have given
their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses out of
those whom Allah
has given to you as prisoners of war (33:50)
Rates of polygyny vary enormously from country to country,
and within them from region
to region, with the highest percentages in African societies.
What is noticeable from the
graph below is that there is not a strong connection between
Islam and polygyny. There
are some Muslim majority countries with high polygyny rates
(Guinea, Mali, Niger, Senegal)
but there are also Muslim majority countries with lower
polygyny rates (Jordon, Morocco,
Pakistan, Yemen) and there are non-Muslim countries with high
polygyny rates (Benin,
Togo, Cameroon).
Most Muslim countries permit polygyny (Turkey and Tunisia

are notable exceptions). In
places such as Iran, Bangladesh, Algeria, Lebanon, Morocco,
Jordan, and Kuwait, women
are allowed to include a clause prohibiting polygyny in their
marriage contract. In places
such as Pakistan and Malaysia a man must obtain permission
from his first wife to take a
second wife.
5
Black: Polygyny permitted
Light blue: Polygyny not permitted but practised
Blue: banned
5. Mahr
Another important issue that is often discussed in feminist
studies of Islam is the question
of dowry. We saw in Hinduism how the tradition of a dowry (a
gift given by the bride’s
family to the groom’s family) has sadly led to abuse and
eventual outlawing. Islamic
marriage law also requires a gift to be given but, in this case,
from the husband to the
wife. It is known as the ‘mahr’, and without it the marriage
contract is not binding. The
mahr can be an amount of money or some asset of value and it
is usually part of the
negotiations between the two parties prior to the wedding.
Feminist writers often note
the direction of the gift is in favour of the wife and unlike a
“bride-price” (where the

groom pays an amount to the bride’s father “for her hand”), the
mahr is given to the bride
personally and not to her family. According to law, it is her
property and she may use it for
whatever purpose she chooses. The mahr is mentioned in the
Qur’an:
And give women their dowries as a free gift, but if they of
themselves be pleased
to give up to you a portion of it, then eat it with enjoyment and
with wholesome
result. (4:4)
6. Divorce
Like Judaism, Islam acknowledges the reality of marriage
breakdown and allows for
divorce between spouses. It should only be a last resort after
serious attempts have been
made to effect reconciliation between spouses. From the
perspective of gender equality,
there are some concerns that access to divorce is not the same
for men and women. When
divorce is initiated by the husband it is known as ‘talaq’. This is
the most frequent form
and one of the main reasons is that it is very easy in terms of
the official process.
According to Islamic law, a husband only needs to communicate
three times to his wife
that he intends to divorce her. No grounds are necessary but the
legal tradition usually
requires him to wait one month between each of the three
declarations. Clearly, the
reason is to create a ‘cooling off period’ in case the declaration
was made in anger or
haste.

According to the law, a wife may also initiate the divorce but,
unlike her husband, she
must provide grounds and present these to an Islamic marriage
tribunal. This option is
sometimes called ‘fasakh’. Valid grounds include desertion,
abuse, lack of maintenance
and insanity. In some traditions she also has the legal option of
returning the mahr to her
husband and acquiring a “no fault” divorce, called ‘khul’. The
use of the mahr as a sort of
leverage for the woman is also reflected in the practice of the
husband paying her only a
6
portion of the mahr at the wedding. The understanding here is
that he would have to pay
the balance if he seeks a divorce later on. Similar to the Jewish
ketubah, this arrangement
works as a disincentive for the husband and protection for the
wife.
A woman seeks divorce via a Muslim tribunal
7. Adultery
We occasionally see media stories about persons convicted (or
even merely accused) of
adultery being sentenced to death (or actually executed) by
stoning. For example, just
recently:

Pakistani couple stoned to death for adultery
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/17/us-pakistan-couple-
stoned-
idUSBREA1G18F20140217
Brunei to introduce stoning for adultery
http://www.smh.com.au/world/brunei-introduces-islamic-sharia-
penalties-
including-death-by-stoning-for-adultery-20140502-zr2y1.html
Often these are cases where shariah law is either in effect or
used as justification by
perpetrators of the killing. The map indicates countries where
stoning is a legal form of
capital punishment.
What is the official position of Islam on adultery and its
appropriate punishment? First,
Islam is certainly clear that adultery is a serious sin against
one’s married partner. Unlike
Judaism, if either husband or wife sleeps with a person other
than their spouse, they have
committed adultery in the eyes of Islam. But in terms of
punishment, there is no
reference to stoning in the Qur’an. There is a verse that
recommends 100 lashes for those
convicted of ‘zina’:
As for the fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them, a
hundred stripes, and
let not pity for them detain you in the matter of obedience to
Allah (24:2)
7

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/17/us-pakistan-couple-
stoned-idUSBREA1G18F20140217
http://www.smh.com.au/world/brunei-introduces-islamic-sharia-
penalties-including-death-by-stoning-for-adultery-20140502-
zr2y1.html
Zina usually refers to sexual intercourse outside of marriage but
the Qur’an does not
distinguish between pre-marital (the parties are unmarried) and
extra-marital (one or
both of the parties is/are married).
However, there are a number of hadith stating that Muhammad
condoned the stoning of
men and women adulterers:
In the case of married persons there is a punishment of one
hundred lashes and then
stoning to death. And in case of unmarried persons, the
punishment is one hundred
lashes and exile for one year. (Muslim 4191, 4192, 4196, 4206,
4209)
Moreover, one hadith reports that the second caliph, Umar,
claimed that an explicit
revelation regarding stoning was delivered to Muhammad but
was, for an unstated reason,
omitted from the Qur’an:
Umar said: Verily Allah sent Muhammad (may peace be upon
him) with truth and He
sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was
included in what was
sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and

understood it.
Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) awarded the
punishment of stoning to
death to the married adulterer and adulteress and, after him, we
also awarded the
punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time,
the people may
forget it and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning
in the Book of
Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by
Allah. Stoning is a
duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women
who commit adultery
when proof is established, or if there is pregnancy, or a
confession. (Muslim 4194)
It is probable that questions were being asked about the practice
at the time, with people
pointing out that there was no explicit Quranic basis, but Umar
insisted that it is in
accordance with God’s will. Although the issue of adultery
being a crime that attracts
capital punishment (indeed a particularly brutal form) is highly
controversial today, at this
point it is not a gender issue. What makes it relevant to our
course is the last line of
Umar’s statement above concerning proof of guilt: when proof
is established, or if there is
pregnancy, or a confession. Traditionally Islamic law makes it
difficult to prove guilt since
most law schools (Hanbali, Shafi’i and Hanafi) require four
witnesses to the act itself!
Moreover, the Qur’an also specifies 80 lashes for anyone who
falsely accuses someone of
committing adultery:

And those who accuse free women then do not bring four
witnesses, flog them,
giving eighty stripes, and do not admit any evidence from them
ever; and these it is
that are the transgressors (24:4)
This revelation is linked to an episode in the life of Muhammad
when his wife Aisha was
accidentally left behind by her caravan in the desert. She was
found sometime later by a
soldier who brought her back to the camp, but this generated
rumours that the two were
having an affair. This distressed Muhammad greatly, especially
given his particular
fondness for Aisha. Eventually he received the revelation that
confirmed her innocence
and imposed the penalty for slander quoted above.
The other element in Umar’s list is “pregnancy” and, of course,
this affects only the
woman, putting her in a more vulnerable position than the man.
Of course, pregnancy is
not necessarily evidence of adultery if a woman is married since
she could claim it is her
husband’s child; and it is not evidence of adultery for an
unmarried girl since she has
‘only’ committed fornication and, thus, would be liable to
flogging as stipulated in the
Qur’an. But some Islamic leaders believe that a divorced woman
who has not remarried
and falls pregnant (not to her ex-husband) is guilty of adultery
and not fornication. Thus,
they argue that she should be stoned to death after the birth of
the child. See the 2009
case of a Somalian woman:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8366197.stm.

8
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8366197.stm
A related issue is the practice of ‘honour killing’, which
involves the murder of a person by
relatives who believe that her or his actions have brought shame
or dishonour to the
family. The “unacceptable” behaviour is usually of a romantic
or sexual nature and the
victim is more often the woman. This phenomena is found in
both Muslim and non-Muslim
communities. Sadly, like-minded authorities sometimes turn a
blind eye or impose only
light punishments on the offenders. Although Islam considers
pre-marital intercourse as a
serious sin, there is no basis for honour killing in the Qur’an,
the hadith or shariah law.
Protests against honour killing
Another related practice is a form of temporary marriage known
as mut’a (literally “joy”).
Although rejected by the Sunni tradition, mut’a is legal in
Shi’ite Islam. Basically it allows
a man and a woman to marry and, thus, engage in licit sexual
intercourse. The mut’a
marriage can be for a period ranging from 1 hour to 99 years.
The marriage must be
registered in court but does not require witnesses. Any children
born of the union are
legitimate and have full inheritance rights. Naturally, many
Sunnis and other critics

condemn the practice as a form of prostitution, especially since
a mahr must be given as
in a permanent marriage contract. Defenders of the practice
point out that it is no worse
than the prevalence of pre-marital relationships in Western
society, and, indeed, it
enables more liberal minded Muslims to have Western-style
relationships without
compromising their religion.
The Authority of Husband
We have noted in some religions how the husband is given
authority over his wife. There is
the concept of pativrata in Hinduism; the Genesis 3:16
statement about Adam “ruling”
over Eve in Judaism; and New Testament texts about husband as
“head” of the household
as Christ is “head” of the Church. Similarly, there are a number
of Quranic verses that
seem to imply some sort of authority of the husband over the
wife.
The first is the statement that “the men are a degree (daraja)
above them” (2:228). This
verse is often quoted as proof that, in some sense, men are
“above” women in terms of
degree or grade, even though the Qur’an speaks elsewhere of a
fundamental equality
between the sexes (see above). But what sort of degree or grade
does this verse mean?
Many Muslim commentators have taken it to mean that men
have authority over women in
all areas of life. However, others say that this differentiation of
degree between the sexes

9
has a specific context: one that is mentioned at the start of the
verse, namely divorce
proceedings. The full verse reads:
And the divorced women should keep themselves in waiting for
three courses; and it
is not lawful for them that they should conceal what Allah has
created in their
wombs, if they believe in Allah and the last day; and their
husbands have a better
right to take them back in the meanwhile if they wish for
reconciliation; and they
have rights similar to those against them in a just manner, and
the men are a
degree above them, and Allah is Mighty, Wise. (2:228)
The verse refers to a divorce process in which the wife is
pregnant. It states that this
should not be concealed and that a waiting period will confirm
the pregnancy. So some
authors argue that the claim that men are “a degree above”
women is actually referring
to the fact that the divorce process is easier (a degree above) for
men than women.
Indeed it is easier, as we noted earlier, because a man does not
require grounds (talaq)
whereas a woman does (fasakh).
The second verse that is often quoted to support the authority of
the husband comes from
chapter 4 of the Qur’an (the chapter is aptly named Women).

We should divide it into two
parts because there are two separate issues here. The first part
states:
Men are the maintainers (qawwam) of women because Allah has
preferred (faddala)
some of them over others, and because they spend out of their
property; the good
women are therefore obedient (qanitat), guarding the unseen as
Allah has guarded.
(4:34a)
Again, this verse is frequently cited to prove that men are
“preferred” over women by
God and that they are the “rulers” (qawwam) of women who
should be
“obedient” (qanitat) to their husbands. However, some
commentators argue that the term
qawwam is more properly translated as “guardian” or
“maintainer”, not in the sense of
ruling but in the sense of caring for and protecting. Indeed
Islamic law dictates that male
relatives are legally and financially responsible for the
wellbeing of their wives but this
legal obligation does not apply in the reverse. For example, we
have seen how a wife may
keep the mahr for her own personal use; she is not obligated to
spend it on her husband or
children.
The verse goes on to describe how men are “preferred”
(faddala) over others. For feminist
scholars such as Amina Wadud, this provides the key for a
correct interpretation of the
verse. It is not a general principle that men are rulers of women
and are preferred by God

over women in all things, which would undermine the basic
principle of gender equality.
Rather, the context here is inheritance and the fact that,
according to shariah law, male
relatives receive twice as much as their female equivalents,
precisely because the male is
financially responsible for the woman. This is how men are
“preferred” (faddala) - in the
inheritance model and because of their duty to care for their
women.
The final point identifies good women as “obedient” (qanitat)
and this is often taken to
mean obedient towards their husbands and maintainers.
However, Wadud points out that
the word qanitat usually means obedience to God and not to
another human being. The
term for the latter is ta’a. Thus, it could be argued that the
obedience referred to here is
not a conjugal one for wives towards husbands but a general
obedience by all towards
Allah.
The second part of the verse 34 is the notorious one that seems
to allow husbands to “hit”
their wives.
To those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and
leave them alone in
the sleeping-places, and strike (daraba) them; then if they obey
you, do not seek a
way against them. (4:34)
10

Again, it is a verse that has been taken by some Muslim leaders
to justify the authority of
husbands over wives even to the point of physical discipline.
However, Wadud argues that
the verse must again be placed in its proper context, which is a
crisis in the marital
relationship (“if you fear desertion”) and not ordinary daily life.
The verse does mention
“striking” (daraba) but it comes as the third (not first) item in a
list of graded responses to
the problem. The first step is to “admonish” the wife, which
presumably involves some
sort of verbal address. If that fails, the second step is physical
separation (“leave them
alone in their sleeping places”). If that fails, the third and final
step is apparently
permission to “strike” the wife. The word used is daraba, which
can mean to hit or slap
but it is different to the term darraba which means to use force
repeatedly. Thus, it could
refer to a symbolic slap or reprimand, not intended to injure or
harm the woman.
Furthermore, daraba could also mean to “strike out” or
“abandon”, which may make more
sense given that a more drastic form of separation (leaving the
house) is the next logical
step after a partial separation (separate bedrooms).
The Veil
The dress code for Muslim women is one of the most public
aspects of Islam, often
attracting criticism and generating much controversy in the
media. As with most socio-
religious issues, this issue is also complex. There are two

Quranic texts that are relevant
to the topic.
And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks
and guard their
modesty and do not display their beauty and ornaments except
what appears
thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings (khimar) over
their bosoms, and
not display their beauty except to their husbands or their
fathers, or the fathers of
their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or
their brothers, or
their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or
those whom their
right hands possess, or the male servants not having need (of
women), or the
children who have not attained knowledge of what is hidden of
women; and let
them not strike their feet so that what they hide of their
ornaments may be known.
(24:31)
Prophet! say to your wives and your daughters and the women
of the believers that
they let down upon them their over-garments (jilbab); this will
be more proper,
that they may be known, and thus they will not be given trouble;
and Allah is
Forgiving, Merciful. (33:59)
Both texts require women to cover themselves to a certain
degree, in certain
circumstances and for certain reasons. The first question is
whether there are similar
requirements of Muslim men. Indeed, the verse immediately

prior to the first text is
addressed to men with very similar language:
Say to the believing men that they cast down their looks and
guard their private
parts; that is purer for them; surely Allah is aware of what they
do. (24:30)
So, the bottom line is that both men and women are expected to
be modest in their dress,
which is nothing unusual. Every society has its basic dress
standards and draws a line
between modest and immodest apparel. In Islam the term is
“awrah” (nakedness) – the
parts of the body that must be covered. Most Sunni law schools
agree that men should at
least cover themselves between their navel and their knees.
However, much more detail
and attention is given to women’s dress.
The second question is whether all women are involved or only
some. Some commentators
think that the original revelation about veiling was directed at
the wives of Muhammad in
order to protect them and offer them some privacy from the
many male visitors who came
11
to see Muhammad (his office was in his own house). Another
verse echoes this original
concern and, in fact, uses the term “hijab” (curtain or screen):
And when you ask goods of his wives, ask of them from behind

a curtain (hijab); this
is purer for your hearts and (for) their hearts. (33:53)
The theme of protection is also indicated in the second quote
above; women who wear
their over-garments (jilbabs) in a certain way will “be known”
and will “not be given
trouble”. Indeed, a head-veil would have been a sign of status
within pre-Islamic Arabian
society rather than a sign of oppression. However, the
requirement of veiling was then
extended to all “women of the believers” who had reached the
age of puberty. Although
pre-pubescent girls may wear a veil, Islamic law does not
require it. In other words, the
veil applies to women who have reached sexual maturity and
indeed the entire custom is
about covering up a woman’s body to reduce sexual temptation.
This naturally leads to the third question, which is whether the
covering up is required at
all times. Clearly the first text above indicates that it applies
only when a woman is in the
company of certain males: namely adult men to whom she is not
related and whom she
could legally marry. In other words, she is not required to be
covered in the presence of
other women, children, her husband and other close male
relatives (whom she is not
allowed to marry).
The fourth, and arguably the most practical question, is what
precisely a woman must
cover in public. The two Quranic texts are not very helpful on
this question since they
speak rather vaguely about wearing their head-coverings

(khimars) over their breasts and
letting down their over-garments (jilbabs). Most Islamic law
schools agree that at least the
hair, torso, arms and legs should be covered in public. The most
disputed area is whether
a woman should also cover some or all of her face. The
different positions on this question
are reflected in the different types of garments used across the
Islamic world and the
different names given to them. The four principal ones are:
What does the hadith say on the matter of whether a woman’s
face should be covered?
Well there is one hadith that states that Muhammad allowed
women to have their face
uncovered:
Asma, daughter of Abu Bakr, entered upon the Apostle of Allah
wearing thin
clothes. The Apostle turned his attention from her. He said: O
Asma, when a woman
reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she
displays her parts of
body except this and this, and he pointed to her face and hands.
(Dawud 4092)
12
But there is also a hadith that states that Aisha and other women
interpreted the Quranic
revelation to mean that they should cover their faces:
Aisha used to say: When the Verse: "They should draw their

veils over their necks
and bosoms," was revealed, the ladies cut their waist sheets at
the edges and
covered their faces with the cut pieces. (Bukhari 60. 282)
At present there are a small number of countries or regions
where some form of head-
covering is compulsory according to the law: for example the
burqa under the Taliban in
Afghanistan; the niqab in Saudi Arabia; some sort of head-scarf
in Iran. On the other hand,
there are some countries where the niqab has been banned in
public (although the media
usually refers to it as a “burqa”), notably France and Belgium.
http://www.news.com.au/national/burqa-bans-already-in-place-
in-many-countries/story-
fncynjr2-1227078762996
Understandably, the veil in its various forms has become a
symbol of the debate over
women’s status in Islam, and it is a debate with many layers.
The three main arguments
against the veil are sexual discrimination, security and health.
The first is the most
widespread concern of critics, namely that the veil is
symptomatic of a fundamental
patriarchy in Islam that views women not only as sources of
sexual temptation for men
(rather than the man’s inability to control his lust) but as
second-class citizens, or worse,
objects that must be wrapped up. It is not only their public
visibility that is curtailed but
also their public involvement. The second issue of security
targets the niqab and burqa in

particular, likening them to the mask worn by criminals to
conceal identity. In an age when
many terrorist attacks are carried out by Islamic jihadists, calls
for “burqa bans” are
common (for example the aborted plan to ban the burqa in the
Australian Parliament in
September 2014). The third argument is based on alleged
evidence that vitamin D
deficiencies are widespread in Islamic communities where
women must cover themselves
most of the time and, thus, deprive themselves of much needed
sunshine for their physical
wellbeing. This is also supplemented by claims that these forms
of covering are extremely
uncomfortable in warmer climates. For example see this 2009
article from Scientific
American:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post/does-modest-
dress-among-arab-
americ-2009-02-16/?id=does-modest-dress-among-arab-americ-
2009-02-16
On the other side of the debate, there are voices that defend the
wearing of the veil on a
number of fronts. The main reply to the patriarchal accusation is
that most Muslim women
around the world wear their veil of their own accord. They
argue that it is not something
imposed upon them by patriarchal males in their family or in the
mosque or even in the
government, but rather something they embrace freely. Clearly
this argument does not
work in societies where veiling is a legal requirement; but it is a
powerful counter-
argument to Western governments who have banned certain

forms of face-coverings since
13
http://www.news.com.au/national/burqa-bans-already-in-place-
in-many-countries/story-fncynjr2-1227078762996
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post/does-modest-
dress-among-arab-americ-2009-02-16/?id=does-modest-dress-
among-arab-americ-2009-02-16
it, paradoxically, is an argument for women’s free choice. The
second approach is to point
out that these forms of dress actually enable women to leave
their homes (and their
domestic chores) and become involved in public life free of
harassment – after all, they
are only required to wear this dress when in public. Third, even
feminists sympathise with
the claim that the Islamic veil is a timely reminder to Western
women that they may not
be as free or as valued as they think. In highly sexualised
Western society, many women
are under tremendous pressure to look sexually attractive and
please the “male gaze”: in
danger of being enslaved by a shallow beauty cult. Aisha’s
comments on this would be
appreciated by many non-Muslim feminists:
“I wear the veil so that I can be valued not for my looks but for
who I am”.
http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/dl-opinion/the-
most-common-myths-about-
muslim-women-and-why-theyre-wrong-20140928-3gszu.html

Menstruation
Islam places great importance on motherhood, especially given
that there is no
established tradition of religious celibacy and procreation is
seen as one of the two key
aims of marriage. One hadith story relates how Muhammad was
asked the question “Whom
shall I honour most?” He answered “your mother”. The person
asked “Who else?” and the
Prophet again replied “your mother”. The person repeated the
question and for a third
time Muhammad said again “your mother”. The persistent
person asked yet again and, on
the fourth occasion, Muhammad finally said “your father”.
Moreover, some Islamic
traditions hold that a mother who dies in childbirth is a martyr
(sahid).
Yet the female reproductive cycle involves menstruation and, as
in Hinduism and Judaism,
Islam considers it to be a polluting time. The legal period can
vary from 3 to 10 days,
during which there are restrictions placed on the woman. One
important restriction is that
a menstruating woman may not “remain” in a mosque, which
usually includes a ban on
attending official prayers or the Friday noon sermon. However,
she is allowed to enter the
mosque briefly on an errand or if she is simply passing through
the building (see Bukhari
974 and Muslim 890). Other restrictions include touching a
Qur’an or engaging in sexual
intercourse with one’s husband. The period of menstruation
ends with a ritual bath

(ghusl), which is very similar to the Jewish mikveh. Indeed,
anyone (man or woman) who
has had sexual intercourse must take the ghusl bath before the
official daily prayer
whether that is in a mosque or not.
14
http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/dl-opinion/the-
most-common-myths-about-muslim-women-and-why-theyre-
wrong-20140928-3gszu.html
Ghusl – the Islamic ritual bath
Female Circumcision
Another issue that is frequently reported in the media and is
often linked to Islam is the
question of female circumcision. The World Health
Organisation prefers the term “female
genital mutilation” and defines it as such:
All procedures that involve partial or total removal of the
external female genitalia
or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical
reasons.
According to the WHO, there are four types:
Ia Removal of the prepuce (hood)
Ib Removal of the clitoris
II Removal of the inner labia
III Stitching of the outer labia
There are many cultures that practise forms of female

circumcision but most are found in
northern and central Africa as indicated by the map below. Most
of these cultures are
Muslim majority societies now, but the practice of female
circumcision seems to predate
the arrival of Islam.
15
Alexis Schenker
Prevalence of Female Genital Mutilation
The person who performs the operation is usually an older
woman of the tribe or
community. The age of the victim varies considerably: from
infancy to puberty. The
reasons provided by those who advocate the practice include:
• to ensure female chastity and virginity
• to enhance male sexual pleasure
• to reduce the girl’s sexual desire
• to clean the female genitalia, which are regarded as dirty
The key question is whether Islam requires or endorses the
practice. In fact, the Qur’an is
silent on the question of circumcision – both male and female
forms. There are a number
of hadith about male circumcision, which seems to be mainly
about grooming and hygiene
rather than a specifically religious sign as in Judaism. In terms
of female circumcision,

there are only two weak hadith from Abu Dawud:
A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet
said to her: Do not
cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for
a husband.
(Dawud 5251)
Aisha narrated that the Prophet said: "When a man sits between
the arms and legs
of his wife and the two circumcised parts meet, then ghusl
(bath) is
obligatory." (Dawud 5271)
The two quotes both seem to presume that female circumcision
was a common practice in
Arabian culture and that the early Muslims may have continued
the practice for hygienic
or other non-religious reasons. The first quote also implies that
the type of female
circumcision recommended by the Prophet was a mild one,
perhaps type Ia. The Shafi’i
law school considers female circumcision as obligatory whereas
the other three Sunni law
schools do not require it. However, there are modern Islamic
scholars who condemn the
practice including a 2006 statement from the Al Azhar
University (Cairo): http://
www.stopfgmmideast.org/fatwas-against-fgm/
See also this recent episode of Insight on the SBS:
http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/17428035977/insight-
clear-cut
RELIGIOUS LEADERS

Finally, we need to take a quick look at the degree to which
Islam has allowed women to
take up roles as religious teachers and prayer leaders.
In the early years of Islam, there is evidence that women played
important roles in
learning and teaching. For example, women were involved in
the memorisation, collection
and canonisation of the Qur’an. Aisha and other women
witnesses were key sources of
information for the hadith collections. And there is evidence
that women acted as
teachers of the faith, not only in their homes but also in
mosques and colleges. Some of
the most famous Sufi mystics were women, as with the case of
Rabia of Basra (see above).
However, the overwhelming majority of Islamic teachers and
prayer leaders down through
the centuries have been men. In some places, women’s access to
education is limited or
even banned as in the extreme case of the Taliban in
Afghanistan and the amazing courage
of young Malala Yousafzi who defied the ban and was shot as a
result. Yet there are many
Muslim nations where women are beginning to outnumber men
in some tertiary education
courses, including Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Algeria. British
Muslim scholar Myriam
Francois-Cerrah points out that the very first Quranic revelation
given to Muhammad was
“Read!” and this applies to men and women.
16

http://www.stopfgmmideast.org/fatwas-against-fgm/
http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/17428035977/insight-
clear-cut
In terms of religious leadership, the role of imam has
traditionally been reserved for men
only. The imam is not an ordained priest in the Christian sense,
but more like a Jewish
rabbi: someone who has expert knowledge of the Qur’an and is
able to lead the official
prayers and deliver the Friday noon sermon (nb. Only males are
obliged to attend mosque
at Friday noon). So there is nothing inherently “male” about the
role (the imam does not
represent Muhammad as some Christian priests represent Jesus).
As a result, most law
schools today agree that a woman can act as imam when only
women are present. The
tricky question is whether a woman can act as imam when men
are present (or at least
men who are not close male relatives). Most law schools teach
that this is not appropriate
and the main reason is the custom that women stand behind men
during official prayer;
whereas the imam stands in front of the congregation. The
reason for this custom is that
official prayers involve bowing and prostrating and it would be
considered immodest if a
female imam was bowing and prostrating in front of her fellow
male believers. It is very
similar to the requirement that women cover their hair with a
veil when in the presence
of men outside her immediate family circle.

08 Christianity A GENERAL FACTS Origins As with Bu.docx

08 Christianity A GENERAL FACTS Origins As with Bu.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 08 Christianity A GENERAL FACTS Origins As with Bu.docx

Similar to 08 Christianity A GENERAL FACTS Origins As with Bu.docx (8)

More from oswald1horne84988

More from oswald1horne84988 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

08 Christianity A GENERAL FACTS Origins As with Bu.docx