International Journal of Latin American Religions

https://doi.org/10.1007/s41603-023-00215-8

THEMATIC PAPERS

Written Interventions by Catholic Women: Reflections

on Religion and Gender in the Interwar Period

Laura Cabezas1,2

Received: 10 October 2023 / Accepted: 27 October 2023

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023

Abstract
The article proposes a journey that maps the written interventions of various Catho-
lic women in Argentina in the interwar period, with special emphasis on their state-
ments on the nexus between religion and gender. For this purpose, we will take into
consideration the lecture given by Delfina Bunge de Gálvez in 1922 called La mujer
y la vocación (Women and vocation) and then concentrate on the articles that she
and other women—with recognizable or anonymous names, from high society and
popular sectors—published in the cultural magazines of Catholicism, such as Noel,
Ichthys, and Criterio. Our hypothesis is that not only did the Church provide a space
of public legitimacy, but that Catholic women used Christian thought as an argu-
ment to defend equality and their own emancipation, and even the possibility of a
Catholic feminist agenda, within a religious context that would become masculin-
ized and invisibilize the role of women.

Keywords Catholicism · Gender · Delfina Bunge de Gálvez · Noel · Ichthys ·

Criterio

In August 1927, the militant Catholic writer—as she defined herself—Delfina

Bunge de Gálvez commented in the feminine (and also Catholic) magazine Ichthys
on the progress that, in terms of number of pages, content, and information, showed
the informative and bibliographic Circular informativa y bibliográfica de los Cursos
de Cultura Católica; attributing this achievement to the increasing interest of the
male youth in sacred subjects. This is how it was expressed:

* Laura Cabezas
[email protected]
1
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires,
Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina
2
CONICET (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas), Instituto de Literatura
Hispanoamericana, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 International Journal of Latin American Religions

Until now, in Buenos Aires, Catholic action seemed almost exclusively

reserved to priests and women. We see, then, with joy, this invaluable rein-
forcement: that of the male young people, who, at last, have understood that
to their enthusiasm, their intelligence, their virility and their strength, corre-
sponded a part of no small importance and efficacy in Catholic-social Action.
(1927: 312)1
While lauding the initiative of the male young people gathered around that study
and reflection group on the Catholic bibliographic legacy, the text makes it clear
that, in the field of the laity, it was women who preceded in the Christian intellectual
and apostolic work. They did it with their works of charity, but also with their maga-
zines, with their conferences and declarations, with their study groups. And also,
she herself with her own biography, since her role was fundamental for a feminine
Catholicism, which often flirted with feminism, in the first decades of the twentieth
century.
In this sense, what I am interested in pointing out here is that her clarification
(we, as women, were there before) is central to outline a cultural history of Catholi-
cism that does not forget the leading role that women played in the dissemination
not only of Christian doctrine, but also of its historical, social, and philosophical
assumptions. However, the recognition requested by Delfina Bunge will never come,
and when the following year the magazine Criterio is launched, also associated to
the C.C.C., that intellectual, masculine, lay, and catholic youth will begin to acquire
an increasingly greater prominence in the public scene, establishing a growing link
between religion and virility that will erase the trace of the nexus between women
and Catholic thought. Recovering this link is precisely one of the objectives of this
article.
As the Spanish historian Blasco Herranz (2005) has studied, throughout the
nineteenth century a “feminization of religion” became visible, which implied an
increase in the number of women in religious practices, at the same time as its
decrease in the case of men. This phenomenon was strictly related to the process of
secularization and the configuration of gender identities that allowed the exclusion
of women from political citizenship; since, as Blasco Herranz explains, “in Catho-
lic countries, knowledge about sexual difference was established more than on the
dichotomy between private/domestic (as well as), on the distinction between reli-
gion/attraction/tradition/femininity, and progress/science/masculinity” (130). How-
ever, the historian notes that this feminization of religion allowed, at the same time,
a massive public mobilization of women in the first half of the twentieth century, as
evidenced in the Catholic cultural magazines of interwar Argentina.
This article aims to investigate the link between Catholicism and gender, through
the voices of some women who expressed themselves in diverse ways and in dif-
ferent magazines of the period: Noel, Ichthys, and Criterio. We will begin, though,
with a section dedicated exclusively to the conference given by Delfina Bunge de
Gálvez in 1922, which was later published in a book under the title La mujer y la

1
All citations were translated by me throughout the article.

13
International Journal of Latin American Religions

vocación (Women and vocation), since it contains many issues that interact with
the proposals found in the magazines under more or less well-known authors—
throughout this paper, renowned women writers and women writers under pseudo-
nyms, women writers of the elite and the popular class, women writers with works,
and unpublished women writers will be combined. As the Italian historian Plebani
(2022) argues in her book El canon ignorado, “the history between the pen and the
female genre, so marked by the struggle between disciplining and transgression,
between crisscrossing prohibitions and suffocating spaces, leads to discouragement
and surrender” (15); however, it is possible to construct another narrative that gives
importance to the agency of women who write, elaborating a story that speaks of
“desires and ambitions” () and that values more “the will to write than the quality of
the writing” (16).
Following this proposal, we are interested in analyzing how in their texts they
gave prominence to women and combined the dictates of the Church with a femi-
nine agenda that, many times, approached the proclamations of feminism. The
hypothesis that is sustained affirms that the Catholic ideology functioned, surpris-
ingly, as a conceptual archive where to find arguments against sexual difference
and the inferiority of women. As Zanca (2015) argues, “beyond the maternalist dis-
course of Catholicism, in practice the church and its institutions promoted a process
of deprivatization that became a paradoxical resource for many women to enter the
public sphere” (73); and, therefore, the meeting places provided by Catholicism to
the ladies and young ladies of Buenos Aires society, together with its associated
publications, gave them a framework for action—limited but inclusive—where they
could express their ideas and opinions which, at times, came close to the profanation
of the sacred discourse.

Vocation as Emancipation: Delfina Bunge de Gálvez

Belonging to one of the most relevant families of the Argentine elite, Delfina Bunge
is the writer of Catholicism in the first half of the twentieth century. Although in her
beginnings she was inclined to the poetic genre (in French), later she published—
together with school reading books (with her sister Julia) and catechesis books (with
Sofía Pico) and travel chronicles—essays in which religious reflections are always
present; she also directed—at different periods—the Catholic magazine Ichthys and
the Centro de Estudios Superiores, assuming a personal and social commitment with
the Catholic religion. She was a writer from a very young age, at a time when her
own class did not look favorably upon her, and she managed to expand the limits
of what was allowed to women in the first decades of the twentieth century. And
that expansion and that rejection of the “ideology of domesticity” (Diz 2016) that
imposes a correct feminine behavior (finding a boyfriend, getting married, having
children) will be directly linked to a religious belief and militancy that, strikingly,
will often serve as an argument against the sexism of her time.
La mujer y la vocación, her most famous book, from 1922, is the best example,
since it uses mystical and religious figures, and their quotations, as argumentative
support for the emancipation of women. Undoubtedly, it is her most audacious work.

13
 International Journal of Latin American Religions

The beginning shows it: she presents herself as a woman who never limited her-
self with the phrase: “this I will not do” [esto no haré] and invites the audience, all
women, to follow her example and not to oppose barriers to their own present or
future action, encouraging them to accept all vocations to which, even without leav-
ing their family lives, they may be called. The main objective of her oral and written
intervention is to avoid the disillusionment and boredom that women suffer from
the age of thirty onwards and that are drawn on their faces through the grimace and
the yawn. Both gestures are the consequence of the same process of materialization
that women go through when going through the experiences of marriage and moth-
erhood, and which should be counteracted—according to the author—by keeping
the spirit afloat, giving each thing its true meaning and spiritual value. The battle is
waged against an excessive abnegation for family chores that places women at the
service of others, forgetting themselves. Thus, in a declamation that is transparent
in the writing, Delfina Bunge addresses her female audience in the following terms:
“we are never completely satisfied with being only spectators in life. It is, therefore,
to always be actors [actoras] that I would like to invite you” (1922: 17).
To be actors means to combat that domestic materialism that makes “exemplary
women” give themselves entirely to social interests and domestic occupations and,
as they grow older, devote themselves in an exaggerated way to other beings, their
husbands or children, neglecting themselves. Something inadmissible, which even
goes against the teachings bequeathed by the mystics, whom he cites as a source of
authority. And this is important to note because, although her dissertation included
religious references, such as sayings of St. Teresa and St. Francis, which accom-
panied what she said, it is only at this point that, for the first time, the archive of
Christianity is deployed as an argument in favor of the female cause. It is the mysti-
cal writers who teach, as Delfina Bunge explains, that absolute abnegation is only
admissible with God (never for a being of the earth) and teach the possibility of a
“wise selfishness”:
It is good to give ourselves to others, but there is the primordial duty to cul-
tivate our own exclusive garden, without which we will never be able to offer
healthy fruits to others. In the interest, then, of the very ones we love, that wise
selfishness is indispensable to us: that of reserving our own parts, which is also
God’s part. And nothing is more ours than that which we give to God. (1922:
21)
The choice is not random, the mystical experience supposes an “interior becom-
ing” (De Certeau 2006: 55), which teaches that spiritual progress lies in the “in
itself,” in “the itinerary of the subject towards its center” (idem). However, this cul-
tivation of the self exceeds the purely interior, since it is also seen in the exterior
life of the mystics. The search is for a balance between interiority and exteriority,
which allows women to have a rich interior life that can be translated socially into
the choice of an occupation, where to deposit a constant interest. In short, for Bunge,
those young women who, out of boredom or because they are filled with “duties of
society,” live in complete vagrancy of spirit and body, need to discover a vocation.
If, as Michel de Certeau argues, “all spirituality has an essentially historical
character” (51), the modern present would ask the assistants and readers to whom

13
International Journal of Latin American Religions

Delfina addresses herself to have humility, to look without contempt at the differ-
ent occupations in which they could be employed, and freedom of spirit, to choose
without prejudice a vocation that could even be tinged with feminism. In fact, taking
as an example different women who carry out different performances in the public
space—from the London suffragettes to herself speaking in front of an audience—
Bunge asks her audience that, although no one has the right to take them out of their
homes to force them to go out shouting in the streets, such inaction would not be a
reason for pride, nor a condition to have “in less” those women who do dare to leave
the private space. So, she clarifies that although she does not intend to defend femi-
nism, it is essential to respect the choices and skills of feminists, especially in their
struggle for women’s suffrage.
As is well-known, after World War I, the role of women was modified, adopting
a more active role in post-war society, economy, and politics. The 1920s witnessed
substantial changes in women’s customs, values, and consumption, as well as the
various groups that organized to demand egalitarian measures and the establishment
of women’s suffrage, which was instituted in several democratic countries. It should
not be thought, however, as Barrancos (2007) warns, that women’s rights advanced
harmoniously; some countries granted civil rights but took a long time to grant
political rights, and vice versa. In the case of Argentina, Barrancos states that “femi-
nists achieved in 1920 greater organization, constancy and breadth of membership
to obtain the guarantees that appeared in other latitudes” (135); from the actions of
some groups, such as the Partido Feminista Nacional, which Julieta Lanteri helped
to create, the Comité Pro Sufragio Femenino and the Unión Feminista Nacional,
promoted by Alicia Moreau, the Asociación Pro Derechos de la Mujer, presided
over by Elvira Rawson de Dellepiane, and the Partido Humanista of Adelia di Carlo.
Aware of this context, Delfina Bunge defends the London suffragettes and the
possibility of women’s participation in elections and the destinies of the State, but—
quoting St. Paul in a footnote—she distances herself from the “yearning for equal-
ity” and the “supremacy of women over men” (1922: 29) expressed by a certain
contemporary feminism. Neither equality nor supremacy, Delfina Bunge responds
as a Christian upholding male authority and, thus, clearing any misunderstanding.
In fact, she dissociates herself from any incitement to women to rebel against virile
authority. It is likely that this and other footnotes that, with a more conservative
tone, comment on certain statements of the conference have been added at the time
of publication.
The truth is that when one continues reading La mujer y la vocación, we under-
stand the reason for the inclusion of this note that asks not to forget her respect
for divine and human (patriarchal) hierarchies: at times, Delfina seems to suggest
equality between men and women, and even female superiority. The argument she
makes arises from the balance they develop between the cultivation of their spirit
and their daily manual labor. Thanks to this adaptability and flexibility, there is no
task that women cannot do, “from war to invention” (42), while, on the other hand,
“there is perhaps not a single man capable of doing what the majority of women do”
(42). And, once again, the religious datum creeps in in an unforeseeable way and
this vocational amplitude is justified in the words of St. Paul, who would not have
made a distinction between the gifts given to men and women. For this reason, she

13
 International Journal of Latin American Religions

concludes almost heretically, to forbid women to have any occupation would be tan-
tamount to opposing the Holy Spirit. And, moreover, whoever truncates their aspira-
tions will become socially an “anti-feminist a outrance” (89) and a heretic who does
not respect the precepts of his own religion.
Despite intending to avoid it, or to shade it, Catholicism and feminism cross con-
stantly in Delfina Bunge’s public statements and texts, especially those published in
the twenties. At the turn of the decade her discourse will take a more conservative
tone, accompanying the era and the foundation of the Argentine Catholic Action. In
this sense, as will be studied below, the Noelist experience accompanies the option
for a feminine Catholicism that is, at the same time, feminist.

Feminist Catholics in Noel

“Christianity, if the label (feminist) has not been applied to it, has not for that reason
ceased to have been intensely feminist from its foundation”; this sentence is found
in the first number of Noel, a magazine for young ladies, published on May 15,
1920 (Vilariño, 1920: 20).2 The reference should not come as a surprise if one is in
front of the publication, since in its pages the Noelistas,collaborators, and subscrib-
ers write and give their opinions freely on current issues, especially those related to
women’s issues. In this sense, as Lida (2013) argues, Noel constitutes a laboratory in
which to explore “the way in which the transformations of the 1920s had an impact
on the role of women, as well as the flexibility with which Catholicism responded to
these transformations” (141).The young Noelistas, Lida continues:
led an ordinary life (they studied, played sports and had friends with whom
they shared their leisure time); they were not militants nor did they fully
respond to any specific Catholic organization, beyond their respective self-
managed Noelista group of friends. These committees ended up forming the
Argentine Noelist Movement, which in 1931 became part of the Argentine
Catholic Action (141).
It is not by chance that Delfina Bunge de Gálvez will be a constant presence in its
pages. Although the magazine was endorsed by ecclesiastical authorities and even
directed by a priest—Edmundo Vanini—it was able to develop outside the strictly
confessional; as described by Néstor T. Auza: “with a light and agile appearance,
Noel contains texts stripped of theological formulations, although in the form of
stories, poems, questions of the day, commentaries, it makes explicit evangelical
truths” (2000, p. 334). Thus, while more traditional Catholic voices insist on pre-
serving the conservative role of women in the home, other younger voices criticize
this idea and propose the possibility of a feminist Catholicism.
This concern for feminism appears, as already noted, from the time of the mag-
azine’s appearance and under the signature of Father Vilariño. In his article, he

2
It was published from 1920 to December 1938. At the beginning, it was published fortnightly, then in
the thirties it became monthly.

13
International Journal of Latin American Religions

clarifies that feminism is neither a doctrine nor a philosophy, but a tendency that
aspires to favor the rights of women and their “luck,” due to the challenges imposed
by modern life and after the experience of the War, which brought a wide range
of jobs for women, but also a disbelief in piety. But the most important aspect of
her contribution is that it founds a dichotomy that will be maintained over the years
through different nomenclatures: the idea that there is a “true,” “legitimate,” or “cor-
rect” feminism and another insubordinate, “perverse,” “extravagant,” totally distant
from Catholic doctrine.
Several installments are published in the following editions, attempting to rec-
oncile feminism with Christianity through different strategies: on the one hand, by
integrating the feminist question within human and, therefore, Christian issues, in
relation to moral and social acts and evolutions; on the other hand, by sustaining the
presence of important statements about women in the Bible and sacred texts, which
feminism should not dispense with in its theoretical conformation. Thus, even if it is
accepted that the Church refused women rights in the past, in the present it will only
grant them benefits, as long as its “inferior” hierarchy in relation to men and its mis-
sion as mother is respected. In this regard, in the editorial “Feminism and real life,”
October 1920, the line of thought formulated by Noel is well condensed:
The extravagant feminism of the day pretends that woman should replace man
in everything in order to affirm the equality of the two sexes. An unfortunate
imitation wants to make of woman a lawyer, a coachman, a doctor, an avia-
tor, a mechanic, a deputy, etc., all functions that completely contradict the true
mission of the married woman. And if she is a widow? Read St. Paul; he gives
this strict order: “Let her learn to rule her own house.” (...) True feminism con-
sists in this: a woman’s soul, equal in everything to that of man, striving to
understand, to love, to help, to enlighten, with her charm and to realize the
ideal of a work between two, in which each one puts something of her own.
(“Feminismo y vida real”, 1920: 266-267)3
However, as we have already mentioned, feminism is a disputed significant
that allows for diverse and opposing opinions—either with the ecclesiastical dis-
course or among the Noelistas themselves. It is worth clarifying that the young
women contribute with their writings under pseudonyms, and this is not a minor
fact, as it undoubtedly contributes to them feeling freer to express their convic-
tions in the debates that are raised and also in the surveys proposed by the magazine
every 2 months, on a wide variety of topics, among others: consultations on social
works, graphology, women’s sports, intellectual education of women, circulation of
the magazine, and its adaptability to modern life. It is interesting to note that the
exchange permeates the texts of the Noelistas. When writing, they take into account
what other young women have already said, respond to the judgments expressed
by their peers, endorse, or confront them, generating a dialogue that often lasts for
months. Undoubtedly, feminism is a good example of this traffic of responses, which
takes the form of the missive.

3
Italics belong to me.

13
 International Journal of Latin American Religions

There are two moments in the history of the publication referring to the feminist
theme on which I will focus. The first occurs in the early months of 1921. It is a con-
frontation between Francisco Deella, “Scintilla” and “Hiedra del Monte” (Mountain
Ivy), to which other female authors join. Faced with the slogan that the latter main-
tains, against Deela, that feminism is a fact and that women’s suffrage will come to
the country, several responses follow one after the other, supporting dissimilar posi-
tions. On the more conservative side is “Charomo,” who defines herself as a Catho-
lic and not a feminist, and although she believes in equality with men, she thinks that
studying would take away her time to learn the housework and the knowledge about
being a good mother and wife. In her words, a “mother’s mission is greater than that
of a deputy or a president” (Charomo 1921: 139). Also, “Tilde” wonders who will
take care of the children if the mother argues in Parliament and denies the feminist
adjective attached to the epithet of Catholic woman. On the opposite side, “Caritas”
periodizes the place of women in the Church, placing the Middle Ages as the reign
of the “strong woman” that declines in the Renaissance when “she lost her attributes
to become a ‘doll’” (Caritas 1921: 174). To support her argument she refers to Éti-
enne Lamy and his book La Femme De Demain, which was already translated into
Spanish. A few lines later she recalls the edited lectures Feminisme et Christianisme
by Antonin Sertillanges, who proposed a Christian feminism that endorsed women’s
suffrage. For her part, she defends the presence of women in politics, who will be
inclined towards social legislation, in a more practical and realistic way than men.
Finally, she takes up a dichotomy that Deella had raised in her article on the gift that
God gave to some women to govern within the family or to exercise the apostolate,
and argues that Catholic feminism is the form of the apostolate today:
It is precisely to this second category [apostolate] that Catholic feminists
belong. Always, throughout the history of the Church, we see how the Aposto-
late has varied in form, adapting itself to the circumstances of its time. We also
see how all the initiators of new ways were branded as revolutionaries. What
a scandal when the first woman founded a convent without a cloister! (Caritas
1921: 175)
This idea of feminism as a Catholic apostolate will be repeated in other contribu-
tions, also expressing the support of the Church. Perhaps that is why a certain “Per-
ico de los Palotes” brings a conciliatory reading of the conflict as the editorial voice
of the magazine that admits the triumph of feminism in politics when it is concerned
with the welfare of women and the community—when she is a worker, the better—
but maintains that the most sacred and worthy mission of women is the home, since
“motherhood is more beautiful than politics” (Perico de los Palotes 1921: 238).
In 1926, when the debate resurfaces, this political question will be positioned as
the central issue for a feminism that may or may not be compatible with Catholi-
cism. In this new diatribe, it is “Viejecita” (Little Old Lady) who speaks the con-
servative voice, affirming her sympathy for a “legitimate feminist movement” (1926:
521), which would allow women to act in teaching, in the social field and in pro-
fessional careers not linked to political action; this conviction is accompanied by
opposition to women’s suffrage in Argentina, since she considers that there is a lack
of preparation among women. However, it later becomes clear that this is not the

13
International Journal of Latin American Religions

only reason, as she states: “it seems to me that the desire to elect and be part of the
government, we will have failed in our true mission to become nothing more than
a ridiculous and crude counterfeit of man” (522). What is being discussed is, once
again, the habitable and circulable spaces for women in society, that is to say: the
limits of the public for women and the need for them to choose the private. Nei-
ther voters nor candidates, these feminist claims deform the character of women and
masculinize them. “Una joven feminista” (A young feminist) and “Otra joven femi-
nista” (Another young feminist) respond to “Viejecita” by defending women’s abil-
ity to study, hold any position and excel in any enterprise, and therefore, the think it
is fair that all women should be able to vote and be elected. In fact, in an exchange
of letters between them, “Una joven feminista” tells “Otra joven feminista” that she
hopes to see her wishes come true and that perhaps one day they will both be able
to sit together in Congress. Five years passed from the previous debate in Noel, and
although the claims and concerns coincide for the most part, in 1926 a new variable
appears: the social class. It is “Otra joven feminista” who intersectionally places the
class question alongside the gender question:
We are Argentine by the mere fact of having been born in this noble home-
land. After that, nothing; neither voice nor vote: slaves of what will they say!!?
[¿¡¡qué dirán!!?] (...).
There are, undoubtedly, very honorable exceptions: women full of courage,
energy and gallantry who face all difficulties, and overcome them. Modern
Amazons!
But who are they? Those of the middle class (...)
Let’s say it frankly and without fear: those of the “upper” class have done
nothing but figure socially, and - from time to time - charitably. (1926: 584)
The intervention of “Otra joven feminista” brings the popular side of the mag-
azine that competes with other illustrated publications of the time, also dedicated
to these middle-class “Amazons.” An editorial of April 1923 mentions, without
naming them, certain magazines “in vogue,” which bring social novelties, “more
or less tasty” news, which “flatter certain feminine inclinations” (La Conferencia
panamericana 1923: 230), but which are not concerned with the spirit. And while
expressing the desire to give readers a more abundant recreational section, it is made
clear that the aim of the magazine is to be the engine of a social reconstruction
that has as its basis the family and, therefore, women. “This is Noel’s feminism,”
it is categorically stated, “and we recognize no other” (idem). The following year,
the criticism becomes more explicit. 1924 opens with the response of “Gallia” to
Veritas,” accompanying its affirmation of the necessity of considering Noel as an
“elite” whose mission is social regeneration. It is precisely this elitist condition that
will allow the differentiation with those other magazines dedicated to the feminine
world. This is how “Gallia” explains it:
Noel is an elite... (...)
And do you know, Veritas, what for me is the supreme argument in favor of
this statement? It is the fact that many girls prefer Atlantida, Hogar, Para Ti,
etc. etc. etc.

13
 International Journal of Latin American Religions

Of course! For gray, undefined, banal, unrelieved souls, I understand that

this reading is enough for them. (Gallia 1924: 1)
The instruction given, in religious terms, the comments on morals, the news
on world events, the standards of criteria, the possibility of giving opinions in
surveys and collaborating in other sections, the distraction of the published fic-
tion and the indications for manual and culinary work, are proof—according
to the author—of how the magazine configures a small elite of women with an
intellectual profile, which contrasts with the massiveness of the female read-
ers of the popular women’s magazines—Atlantida, Hogar, Para Ti, etc. But the
argument does not end here; there is another fact to consider in the elitization of
Noel, according to “Gallia”: “But there is something else; something where the
whole vital force of NOEL lies. And it is the formation of those small nuclei,
if you will, but immensely strong and united, which are called the Committees.
They constitute the ‘elite’ within the ‘elite’”. (1).
Noel is not only a magazine, but also a movement, which became known as
the Movimiento Noelista Argentino, which was nurtured by parish committees
organized by young women. These committees, as Miranda Lida describes,
“were articulated around a double task: cultural, recreational and sociability, on
the one hand; charity, catechesis and social action, on the other” (2013: 153).
Many of those attending the committees, moreover, participated in the courses
of the Centro de Estudios Religiosos and/or the magazine Ichthys. In fact, the
same “Gallia,” a few lines later, clarifies that Noel teaches but cannot do with
“the breadth and dedication needed to form a conscious and prepared ‘elite’”;
for that, there is the Centro de Estudios Religiosos. For this reason, she con-
cludes, the “true ‘elite’” will only be achieved by intimately “twinning” these
two works, Noel (as a magazine and movement) and the Centro de Estudios.
Popular and elite, Noel maintains at the time a dichotomy that is difficult to
conjugate. If, on the one hand, the design and illustrated cover, the inclusion of
fiction, the possibility of collaborating with literary, artistic and opinion com-
ments, the current news, the religious articles (not very specialized), the cooking
recipes, and the handicrafts section brought the magazine closer to the universe
of popular women’s publications; on the other hand, it was very clear that its
purpose was not only to entertain, but fundamentally to educate, and educate
the readers in a spiritually way. They could democratically become “writers”
and express themselves freely, because—or in spite of—not revealing their own
name. In this sense, the debate on feminism was the best example. There was a
bet for an elite religious female education, as the collaborator “Gallia” affirmed,
which gave a great protagonism to women in the cultural field of Catholicism.
The Center for Religious Studies and the magazine Ichthys complemented this
panorama in a more rigorous way, since, as will be seen in the next section, they
offer an institutionally regulated formation and the possibility of writing about
the Center’s classes and activities, and also—although to a lesser extent than in
Noel—giving their opinions on the topics that challenge them as women.

13
International Journal of Latin American Religions

From Female Education to the Reign of the Home: the Centro de

Estudios Religiosos and the Magazine Ichthys

Founded in 1919, the Centro de Estudios Religiosos was an institution dedicated

to instructing young women in the knowledge of Christian culture, through dif-
ferent courses—such as Dogma, Morals, Liturgy, Church History, Liturgy, Natu-
ral Law, Psychology, and Philosophy, among others—taught by priest professors.
The course lasted three years and at the end they were awarded a diploma. Under
the auspices of the Liga de Damas Católicas, the Centro de Estudios was, as
defined by Monsignor Fortunato Devoto (1922)—advisor of the center—“the first
female school of perfect Christian philosophical initiation” (126). And 5 years
after its birth, Delfina Bunge de Gálvez celebrates the Center, commenting on the
consequences it had on its students:
Catholic women will no longer be those poor shameful women, timid in
their faith, always supposing in the unbelievers a terrible wisdom, trembling
before the word “science,” as if it were synonymous with atheism, and cov-
ering their ears before the most puerile objections. Those poor shameful
ones, I say, trying to hide or dissimulate the difficulties that Religion offers
to intelligence, and believing that the science of “the others” is all light and
clarity... crushing clarity for our leftovers. (Bunge de Gálvez, 1934: 206)
Science and women, the phrase brings together two conflicting terms for the
epoch, especially if what we are talking about is Catholic women. In fact, some
men of Buenos Aires society and culture were concerned about the ideas that the
“señoritas” (ladies) received. For example, in the July 1923 issue of the maga-
zine Ichthys, Devoto defends the Centro against the opinion of Enrique B. Prack,
director of “Patria y Hogar,” who had spoken out against the “señoritas” reading
“pagan teachers and philosophers,” such as Plato, who held “unacceptable errors
and doctrines, which the unprepared mind of a woman usually does not distin-
guish” (Devoto 1923: 345). What the advisor explains to the frightened princi-
pal is that he is unaware of the teaching there, which is centered on Christian
philosophy and especially St. Thomas Aquinas. In his defense, Ichthys, a maga-
zine created to make the Center’s activities visible, also publishes in its pages the
summaries made by the students themselves on the classes they attended. And
these summaries, in turn, coexisted with notes on international visits, biblical
commentaries and news on various Catholic issues in Argentina and the world,
which sometimes made reference to feminism and the role of women in Catholic
and social action.
Perhaps the most belligerent article found in the history of the magazine
belongs to Margarita Abella Caprile, poet and also a student of the Centro de
Estudios Religiosos. Taking a stand against the enemies of women’s suffrage, the
author asks them: “Do you agree with me that women are capable of having their
own ideas, that they are capable of knowing what is best? If so, why deny her the
right to vote, if, after all, it is no more than the right to give an opinion?” (Abella
Caprile, 1926: 14). As the text progresses, however, it becomes clear that it is not

13
 International Journal of Latin American Religions

only the giving of an opinion that is sought, but the need for a female point of
view in politics; as far as legislation concerning their own lives and the lives of
children is concerned. In this sense, she considers that this explains the “unjust”
errors contained in the Civil Codes, and asks another question: “Wouldn’t they be
avoided if there were someone who, with exact knowledge of the cause, because
she was a woman, spoke for other women?” (14). And she adds that the advance-
ment of a country is measured by the greater or lesser consideration with which
women are treated. And also with the prejudices that circulate, from “the woman
must take care of her home” to “the woman with political attributions will lose
her ‘femininity’” (15), to which she responds: “Ten, twenty women deputies (and
I speak with exaggeration) does not mean that all the homes of the nation are
neglected” (idem). With conviction and mocking irony, Abella Caprile’s text dis-
mantles the chauvinistic arguments that deny not only the right to vote to women
but, much more importantly, the superiority of age: “it is not essential that the
vote be compulsory; the main thing is that the sanction of our inferiority be
erased from the books with which we govern” (16). Certainly, inferiority was a
heated topic at the time. Let us remember that this article was published in the
May 1926 edition, and 4 months later (on September 14), the Law 11.357 on the
civil rights of women was sanctioned, which reformed the Civil Code and recog-
nized all women of legal age, regardless of their status, the exercise of their civil
rights and functions. Thus, when Caprile wrote her article, women still had the
same rights as children. In the end, she humorously concludes: “I will be very
happy the day I know that as many poor in spirit as I meet on my way are not
legally superior to me because they wear pants” (16).
Margarita Abella Caprile’s article is part of a new chapter of the Ichthys which,
since 1926, has Delfina Bunge de Gálvez as director. In this change of era, the
magazine changes its format and opens to more national and international collabo-
rations—among others: Manuel Gálvez, Martínez Zuviría, Jorge Max Rhode, Julio
Irazusta, René Bazin, Max Jacob, René Schwob—to more news about Catholicism
in the world and more book reviews—where we find, for example, the signature of
María Rosa Oliver—besides, special dossiers are published, for example, one dedi-
cated to Fray Mamerto Esquiú and another one to Saint Francis of Assisi. Unlike
Noel, in Ichthys, there are not so many opinions or debates among the collabora-
tors—the text by Caprile is an exception due to its tone and composition. In rela-
tion to the women’s issue, what is prioritized is information on female education
at the Centro and the initiatives of its students, and also highlights news on the
International Women’s Congresses and a section, Catholic Action abroad, focusing
especially on the “Catholic Action of Women” in Spain. The word feminism hardly
appears in the magazine, and the women’s apostolate, little by little, is restricted to
catechism and/or the evangelizing mission within the home.
This gradual withdrawal to the private space is clearly perceived in an article
published by Delfina Bunge de Gálvez in October 1929, called “The Triumph of
the Church.” Under the pretext of celebrating the creation of the Vatican City, a
retrospective view is traced which does not stop at the history of that institution,
but at the path of the author herself who went from a generation where “atheism
reigned” (377) to a time of spiritual resurgence which, from Europe, oriented the

13
International Journal of Latin American Religions

thought towards Catholicism through some authors, such as Leon Bloy, Chesterton,
Papini, Maritain, Claudel, and others. In this regard, she affirms: “It will no longer
be alleged that our faith comes from the fact that ‘we do not know,’” she states, “but
it must be recognized that it is based on the fact that we know a little more…” (380).
However, with knowledge already conquered, the director of Ichthys wonders if it
is possible to speak of the triumph of Christianity at a time when priestly vocations
are scarce and cities are overflowing with paganism, a third “madness” that links
up with the old madness for science and the madness of world war. Against this
present-day paganism, which “is taking hold of people, who seem to pursue no other
goal than that of easy and small pleasures” (382), she maintains that it is women
who have the “necessary weapons” to confront it; this is how she puts it:
And I would almost say that this time we women are the strongest. For if the
battles of science and war were fought on the almost exclusive terrain of men,
in this new struggle, the terrain is ours. The main battlefield is our homes
where we are queens. Our homes from which we must banish, in our customs,
all hint of paganism. (382)
What is perceived is an adaptation to the precepts of Catholic action, which was
officially established as an institution in Argentina in 1931. In this way, conditioned
by the same ideals she defends, Bunge tries to give women a possible leadership—
moral—in a context in which the male presence of Catholicism at social and politi-
cal level is radicalized.
Then, as the change of the decade approached, the feminine performance would
be erased in tune with the disappearance of the magazines “for ladies and young
ladies.” While Noel will be coupled, since 1931, to the new institution of the Argen-
tine Catholic Action, Ichthys will cease to be published in 1930. And that is why,
as pointed out at the beginning of this paper, Delfina Bunge de Gálvez, in celebrat-
ing the progress of the informative and bibliographic Circular informativa y bib-
liográfica of the Cursos de Cultura Católica, and the imminent appearance of the
magazine Criterio, must make it clear that it was they, the women, and not them, the
young men, who began the intellectual work within Argentine Catholicism.

Equality and Genealogy of Women in Criterio

A quick look at the indexes of Criterio magazine from the late twenties and thir-
ties shows the very limited presence of women in its pages. At the beginning, there
are some sporadic exceptions, with recognized signatures such as those of Delfina
Bunge de Gálvez and Sofía Pico Molina, and poems by the converted María Raquel
Adler. This shows how the masculinization of religion in Criterio is a reality and a
central foundation of its proposal that seeks to form a male elite of young Catho-
lic laymen who can take charge of the political and spiritual direction of the coun-
try. “First experience of cosmopolitan high culture” (Devoto 2019, 27), the Catho-
lic magazine exhibits a corpus that unites tradition with renovating youth, which
will soon become unsustainable, the ecclesiastical hierarchy having to take over the
direction under the parameters of the Acción Católica Argentina created in 1931.

13
 International Journal of Latin American Religions

What we are interested in pointing out in this article is that, as Omar Acha has ana-
lyzed, the publication constructs a concept of morality that is religious and eternal,
but also rational and strictly masculine; in Acha’s words, “the equation between
masculinity and reason, and femininity and sensitivity, was part of widespread
generic attributions” that accompany the “natural” predisposition of women to be
mothers and “immovable rock of the home” (2001: 155).
Confined to the home or to controlled associations, such as the Liga de la Juven-
tud Femenina Católica (Catholic Action’s Catholic Women’s Youth League), the
“women of Criterio” write about their travels (Delfina Bunge de Gálvez, Sofía
Molina Pico, Nelly Merino Carvalho, Lucrecia Sáenz Quesada de Sáenz), publish
their poems (Raquel Adler, Maria Alicia Dominguez, Margot Guezúraga, Marga-
rita Abella Caprile, Rosario Beltrán, Sarah Bollo, Angelica Fuselli, among others),
refer to the activities of the A.C.A. (Josefina Molina y Anchorena, María Rosario L.
de García Fernández), reflect on education (Josefina Molina y Anchorena, Lucrecia
Sáenz Quesada de Sáenz, Manuela De Nevares), about religious aspects (Esther C.
de Cáceres), or about art and literature (Ana Maria Garasino, Margot Guezúraga,
Eva Tea, Cora Levy Durañona, Cornelia Groussac, Maria Raquel Adler, Josefina
Molina y Anchorena, Lucrecia Sáenz Quesada de Sáenz), expressing—some few—
points of view that equalize women with men. The names are repeated and, with a
few exceptions, they form a female community of the Argentine oligarchy.
Within the orchestra of male voices, their feminine voices are lost, they are shy,
but they are there. One has to look for them, but they are found. So are their ideas
of equality and emancipation. The vote, for example, is a topic that returns and finds
justification within the Juventud Femenina Católica Argentina (Argentine Catholic
Girls’ Youth) (J.F.C.A.). This is how Josefina Molina y Anchorena tells it in her
chronicle of the Catholic Action’s week of female culture, which took place in Sep-
tember 1932. After recounting the daily activities, the talks, the blessings of differ-
ent priests, the chronicler addresses the issue of women and the vote. In spite of the
anti-democratic climate in the country since the military coup d’état of José Félix
Uriburu in 1930, the leaders of the F.F.C.A. established that the members could not
oppose women’s suffrage for “religious reasons” (232), since within the Christian
tradition, the woman as head of the family, in the absence or death of the husband,
voted in the Middle Ages. Thus, although they recognize that “the woman’s mission
is above all in the home,” they maintain that “when the time comes, she will vote
with conscience, bearing in mind that, as far as the family is concerned, she is the
one who will best defend it” (idem). As can be seen, the argumentation is far from
the tone it used to have in previous magazines; however, here we are not dealing
with individual but institutional opinions and, therefore, the positioning in favor of
women’s suffrage becomes very relevant in a context in which the discourse against
democracy is becoming more radical among the dominant elites, the places where
these young women who participate in Catholic Action and write in Criterio.
As participants in a lay Catholic apostolate, or “brave soldiers,” as García Fernán-
dez (1932:138) calls the members of the A.C., the reference to the women of the
Gospels as a possible genealogy of strong female figures in pursuit of the Chris-
tianization of society becomes frequent. García Fernández expresses it in the fol-
lowing way: “Let us imitate the women of the Gospel who, when they understood

13
International Journal of Latin American Religions

the doctrine of Jesus, were not content to assimilate it for themselves, but ran in
haste to bring the good news to others” (138). But it is not only a matter of imitating
them, but also of recognizing that from the New Testament a new type of woman
emerged, as Cáceres (1933) affirms in “Woman and Christianity,” by giving her a
prominent place and a “spiritual height” (176), either through the valorization of
the role of the mother, of other women like Mary and Martha, the Samaritan woman
and the sinner Mary Magdalene. About the last one she declares: “this figure of a
woman who crosses the formidable bridge, and overcomes herself, and breaks all
the closed chains of her flesh for the love of Christ, to free herself and look free to
heaven, this figure of a woman is new” (177). Then, from the Virgin Mary and the
other women who appear in the Gospels, who later became the subject of the art of
the great European painters, Cáceres concludes as follows: “Because Jesus is the
first to highlight and create these female figures, we can say that a new era begins for
women since Christianity. Because Christianity affirms the equality of all, according
to Christ all are equal before God” (177).
One of the issues that recurs in some of the interventions of the women who write
in the magazine is precisely this question of equality. Somehow, it is given as a fact,
as something irreversible that, nevertheless, could require caution. At least, this is
how it is expressed by Tordesillas (1935), who postulates that it can no longer be
denied that women work “the same as men” and that “all the fields of male activ-
ity” (84) have been opened to them, from the workshop, trade, or industry, to the
arts and politics. And this has caused, according to the author, that in her “eagerness
to equalize with men, women disdain domestic education” (idem). Although she
quickly clarifies that she does not mean that “women should be purely and exclu-
sively women devoted to the home” (idem), she does require “a domestic education
that places her at the level that every future wife or mother should occupy if des-
tiny calls her to it” (idem). The final clarification is key to understand those small
detours that women make in their texts within a publication that is not only sexist
but also at times misogynistic. The ambiguity of that last sentence leaves the doubt
as to whether destiny could also be a choice. Beyond that, it is clear that equality
is an earned “right.” In this sense, in a text on the publication of the first anthol-
ogy of women’s poetry in Argentina, Cora Levy Durañona (1931) begins by stating:
“God created woman to be man’s companion, that is to say, to be his equal, neither
superior nor inferior, only different in the infinite scale of nature. Free and thinking
beings, they are forces that complement and need each other in the costly march of
civilization.” (79).
The conjunction between poetry, life and women is a topic that is very present
at the time through the figure of women poets. In the pages of Criterio, as already
noted, as the 1930s progressed it was common to find more and more women sign-
ing the poems published; but there are also reflections on literature and art that
accompany these poetic publications. One of them is, precisely, the writing of Cora
Durañona (1931), who maintains that “poetry is undoubtedly one of the arts where
the woman’s soul vibrates with its own accent” (79). And this occurs because in
her writing always slips a little of her own life, since poetry would enter her own
domain: “sensitivity, modesty, veiled forces, essentially feminine attributes” (idem).
This literary belonging that awakens the publication in 1930 of the Antología de la

13
 International Journal of Latin American Religions

poesía femenina argentina, organized by José Carlos Maubé y Adolfo Capdevielle

(h), is also found in the review written by Adler (1930) in the magazine La Litera-
tura Argentina, where she asks the “men-poets”: “don’t you think that women have
taken over poetry too much, and that in some cases they tend to displace it com-
pletely?” (41). If the question were in the field of mystical poetry, she could answer
in the affirmative, since her participation in the pages of Criterio grew throughout
the 1930s, and her poems even took up double-page spreads. She also published an
article in 1935 entitled “Considerations on mystical poetry,” in which she defends
a lyrical, mystical, and religious expression that reaches the majority of the peo-
ple and becomes the genre of the present time, which is experiencing “a religious
renaissance in all orders of life” (Adler 1935: 62). In short, it is a matter of defend-
ing a “literary vocation in women,” as Margot Guezuraga (1931: 305) expresses it
well in a text that proposes to think of literature as an extension of the religious
vocation that made women have to renounce the world; this is how she expresses it:
Was not St. Teresa of Jesus, the divine Doctor, admirably endowed with a dou-
ble vocation? And Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz? These are examples that jump
at sight; but, how many pious feminine souls will have enjoyed the extrater-
restrial happiness of babbling in the silence of the cloister a sonnet of hers, a
romance or a lyre in the style of Fray Luis de León! (305)
Today it is no longer necessary to renounce the world to express their art, since
the horizon of their vocation has widened, according to the author, and women have
penetrated almost all economic activities, being “equal” to men in the academic
field. Through quotations that include Beatriz Forbes-Robertson Hale with Women
in Transition, Victor Francis Calverton with Sex and the Social Struggle, and E.
Duhren with Sexual Life in England, among others, Guezuraga sentences the literary
vocation as a fact that could be proven in the First Latin American Women’s Book
Exhibition in 1931. In the case of Argentina, she concludes, the production of “good
poetesses,” of an “admirable essayist: Delfina Bunge de Gálvez” and the expectation
of a “great novelist” (306).
Four years later, with a revisionist objective, Molina y Anchorena (1935) also
looks at the production of Argentine Catholic women writers. But, before doing so,
she makes it clear that it is not about Catholic women who write apologetic works,
but about any type of work in which a spiritual background is found. The author
assumes “that Christianity is a life” and that it can manifest itself “not only in what
is strictly religious, but in all the activities of the spirit” (355). Literature is one of
them, and Christianity would offer more possibilities to these writers than to those
closed to belief, and in this resides, she says, “the immense superiority of their
vision of the world over that of the non-Christian authors. They see nothing more
than the exterior of things: the former ones perceive their deep meaning” (idem).
Having established the frame of reference within which to include women writers,
Molina y Anchorena puts together an extensive list that begins with Delfina Bunge
de Gálvez—who had the merit of “opening the way and discarding the disastrous
prejudice that in order to become a great writer one must begin by divesting oneself
of Christianity” (356)—she continues with the publications of the Centro de Estu-
dios “Blanca de Castilla,” mentions the magazines Ichthys and Heroica, and finally

13
International Journal of Latin American Religions

Criterio, which she presents as “the magazine to which we owe the best produc-
tions of our women writers, and which has awakened and continues to encourage
innumerable writers’ vocations” (356). He then goes on to name a large number of
women writers:
I should tell you about the work of all of them; of those who distinguished
themselves in poetry, as well as those who excelled in biography, novels or
any other genre; of Mrs. Sara Montes de Oca, author of the hymn that we
sang during the days of the Eucharistic Congress under the radiant sky of
Palermo; María Raquel Adler, who made us relive those unforgettable days
in her sacramental play “Bread from Heaven,” staged on the occasion of the
Golden Jubilee of the Instituto de las Hermanas Adoratrices; Lucrecia Sáenz
Quesada de Sáenz, who made us know the admirable figure of the martyred
Chancellor, Thomas More, canonized this year; of María Magdalena Frague-
iro Olivera, de Angélica Fuselli, Sofia Molina Pico, Elena Isaac Boneo, María
Mercedes Señorans, Josefa Tordesillas, Susana Calandrelli, Sara Solá de Cas-
tellano, Rosa Bazán de Cámara, Emma Solá de Solá, Rosario Beltrán Núñez,
Wally Zenner, María Rosario Cipriota, Fryda Schultz Cazeneuve, María Elena
Fernández Madero, María Torres Frías, Rosa Graciela Valdés López de Miró,
Laura Piccini della Cárcova, Sofía and Esther Victorica, María Isabel Biedma
de Ungaro and many others. (357)
The listing is an important gesture in a context of increasing invisibility of
women in Catholic publications. Although she participates in Criterio with a certain
regularity, the minor place assigned to them should not go unnoticed. Perhaps that
is why she also appeals to the performance in the public space of some of them,
as for example the mention of Sara Montes de Oca singing at the XXXII Interna-
tional Eucharistic Congress, which had taken place in Buenos Aires a year earlier, in
October 1934, and meant the virile consecration of Catholicism. This phenomenon
would intensify in the following years with the outbreaks of war in Europe and the
establishment of fascism. So, naming them becomes fundamental, since it builds an
archive of Catholic women writers who will gradually be lost in the sands of history.
To name them is a political act, to show that they were and are there writing, more
or less committed to gender issues, making more or less obedient use of Catholic
dogma, but leaving a trace on paper, a legacy of emancipation in connection with
Christianity that traces a genealogy, more or less visible, that will unfold throughout
the twentieth century.

End of the Itinerary: the Anti‑fascist Catholics

Despite the differences in thinking and the different political positions that can be
found in the variety of women writing in Catholic magazines between the wars, there
is a postulate that remains as a cohesive element: the importance of the Church as
an institution that promoted the teaching of women and “redeemed” them from their
intellectual inferiority. As we have seen in the proposed itinerary, within the study
and entertainment groups, and the women’s cultural magazines of Catholicism,

13
 International Journal of Latin American Religions

women found ways to raise their voices in the public space by writing about top-
ics of general interest but also about political issues that had them as protagonists,
especially on the issue of social equality, women’s suffrage and the correct way of
understanding feminism.
Accompanying the time, while in the early twenties their positions were more
confrontational and disruptive; as the thirties arrived, the confrontation was attenu-
ated, as well as the public visibility that, not by chance, coincided with a strong
masculinization of religion that crossed the political and intellectual sphere of the
period. The European military confrontations, the Spanish Civil War, and the Sec-
ond World War consolidated the virility and a cultural framework in which women
and their problems had no place; however, many found a new agenda in the anti-
fascist militancy of the 1940s. As Zanca (2015) has studied, the women writers of
Christian humanism sustained a participation in the public-political sphere that was
scandalous for Argentine Catholicism. An “anti-fascist Catholic sensibility” (78)
was legitimized through the Gospel and also proposed a new way of understand-
ing feminism and of striving for the definition of a female religious citizenship.
Many of them had participated in the Noelista experience, in the Centro de Estudios
Religiosos and had written in Noel, Ichthys, and Criterio, or continued to do it in
the last publication. In these spaces, they had learned to intervene in the society of
their time, to dialogue with their peers, to respond to their detractors, to hold posi-
tions and achieve visibility, to weave emancipatory strategies that would give them a
social function inside and outside their homes. In short, not to remain silent.

Data Availability The data supporting the conclusions of this study are available in the library of the
Instituto de Cultura Religiosa Superior and in the periodical library of the Biblioteca Nacional “Mariano
Moreno” of the Argentine Republic.

Declarations
Ethical Approval Not applicable.

Informed Consent Not applicable.

Conflict of Interest The author declares no competing interests.

References
Abella Caprile M (1926) Algo sobre feminism. Ichthys 58:14–16
Acha O (2001) Las percepciones de género según el catolicismo argentino plasmadas en Criterio (1928–
1943). Signos Históricos 5:141–173
Adler MR (1930) Antología de poetisas argentinas, compilada por Maubé y Capdevielle. La Literatura
Argentina 26:41
Adler MR (1935) Consideraciones alrededor de la poesía mística. Criterio 394:62
Auza N (2000) Revistas culturales de orientación católica en el siglo XX en Argentina. Ahig 9:329–347
Barrancos D (2007) Mujeres en la sociedad argentina. Una historia de cinco siglos. Buenos Aires, Edito-
rial Sudamericana
Blasco Herranz I (2005) Género y religión: de la feminización de la religión a la movilización católica
femenina. Una revisión crítica. Historia Soc 53:119–136

13
International Journal of Latin American Religions

Bunge de Gálvez D (1922) Las mujeres y la vocación. Buenos Aires, Agencia de Librería y Publicaciones
Bunge de Gálvez D (1927) Circular informativa y bibliografíca de los Cursos de Cultura Católica. Ichthys
71:312
Bunge de Gálvez D (1934) El reino de Dios. Buenos Aires, Librería Santa Catalina
Bunge de gálvez D (1929) El triunfo de la Iglesia. Ichthys 93:377–382
Caritas (1921) Más sobre feminism. Noel 22:174–175
Charomo (1921) Lo del feminism. Noel 21:139
de Cáceres EC (1933) La mujer y el Cristianismo. Criterio 260:177–177
de García Fernández MRL (1932) La mujer ante la acción católica. Criterio. 245:138
De Certeau M (2006) La debilidad de creer. Buenos Aires, Katz
Devoto F (1922) Visita De Mons Baudrillart Ichthys 15:126–127
Devoto F (1923) A “Patria y Hogar”. En defensa del “Centro de Estudios Religiosos.” Ichthys 25:343–346
Devoto FJ (2019) Una vez más, acerca de los orígenes de Criterio y sus contextos. In: Lida, Miranda y
Fabris, Mariano (coord.) La revista Criterio y el siglo XX argentino. Religión, cultura y política.
Rosario, Prohistoria, pp 17–33
Diz T (2016) Roberto Arlt, el sexo y los monstruos. Mora 22:25–44
Feminismo y vida real (1920) Noel 11: 266–267
Gallia (1924) Contestando a “Veritas.” Noel 89:1–2
Guezuraga M (1931) La vocación literaria. Criterio 183:305–306
La Conferencia panamericana permanente de Noel (1923) Noel 72:230
Levy Durañona C (1931) Sobre una nueva antología de poetisas argentinas. Criterio 176:79
Lida M (2013) Dios no creó a la mujer para bibelot. Revistas católicas femeninas de la década de 1920.
In: Rodríguez, Ana M. (comp.) Estudios de historia religiosa, Rosario: Prohistoria, pp 139–161
Molina y Anchorena J (1932) Crónicas de Acción Católica. Semana de cultura femenina. Criterio.
236:231–233
Molina y Anchorena J (1935) El pensamiento católico en la literatura femenina argentina. Criterio
406:355–357
Otra joven feminista (1926) A Una Joven Feminista. Noel 155:584
Perico de los Palotes (1921) Más Sobre El Feminismo. Noel 24:238
Plebani T (2022) El canon ignorado. La escritura de las mujeres en Europa (s. XIII – XX). Buenos Aires,
Ampersand
Tordesillas J (1935) En torno a la mujer. Criterio 360:84–85
Viejecita (1926) Feminismo electoral. Noel 153:521-522
Vilariño SI (1920) El Feminismo. Noel 1:20
Zanca J (2015) Dios y libertad. Católicas antifascistas en la Argentina de entreguerras. Arenal
22(1):67–87

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under
a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and
applicable law.

13