tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14410967.post115066365265134605..comments2024-03-25T19:00:40.046-06:00Comments on The Constructive Curmudgeon: "Feminism Goes to Seed" by Rebecca Merrill GroothuisDouglas Groothuis, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08766692378954258034noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14410967.post-1151496516309500062006-06-28T06:08:00.000-06:002006-06-28T06:08:00.000-06:00I'm curious if you think Dr. Laura Schlessinger's ...I'm curious if you think Dr. Laura Schlessinger's book <I>The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands</I> is part of this postfeminism that you're critiquing or whether you think it's consistent with the biblical picture. I suggest <A HREF="http://www.moralhealth.com/blog/_archives/2006/6/1/1998300.html" REL="nofollow">Laurence Thomas' defense of her book</A>, which I've commented on <A HREF="http://parablemania.ektopos.com/archives/2006/06/proper_care.html" REL="nofollow">here</A> with respect to Paul's statements in I Cor 7 for some background in case you're unfamiliar with the book.Jeremy Piercehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03441308872350317672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14410967.post-1150942284180230212006-06-21T20:11:00.000-06:002006-06-21T20:11:00.000-06:00Mrs. Groothuis,Thank you for your very thoughtful ...Mrs. Groothuis,<BR/><BR/>Thank you for your very thoughtful and kind response to me.Julia Gwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03474605353981446859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14410967.post-1150938170628747332006-06-21T19:02:00.000-06:002006-06-21T19:02:00.000-06:00From RebeccaEven if the husband is given greater r...From Rebecca<BR/><BR/>Even if the husband is given greater responsibility (which I don’t think is a conclusion that can be derived from this text), responsibility does not necessarily entail authority—especially not in the sense of spiritual authority to make final decisions about God’s will on behalf of the whole family (and such spiritual authority is the point at issue in the gender debate). Ephesians 5:21-33 does describe husband and wife differently: the man is to serve as her provider and protector and she is to submit to his ministry of provision and protection (just as the church submits to Christ’s ministry to his Body). This text also expects the wife to conform her behavior to the Greco-Roman household code, whereby she is to be under the civil authority of her husband, per Roman law. <BR/><BR/>This text is double-layered. On one level, Paul is setting forth household role assignments that were compatible with the social norms and structures of the day (but he adapted them to fit Christian ethics: whereas the secular household codes of the day told men to rule their wives, Paul does not, but rather exhorts men to lay down their lives for their wives). On another level, Paul is going beyond the culturally specific behaviors and is setting forth universal truths with respect to how the husband and wife relationship reflects certain aspects of the relationship of Christ to the church. And this head-body relationship of integral connectedness, love and respect is to characterize marriage regardless of the cultural norms of the day; thus it is applicable to us today, as well as to Christians in ancient Greco-Roman cultures. <BR/><BR/>So it is evident that not only is woman to serve her husband (as Genesis 2 indicates) but also the man is to serve his wife (as is very clear from Eph 5). The man’s service to the wife is not explicitly stated in Gen 2—after all, when the man was created there was no woman for him to serve, so how could that have been his stated role at that time? But there was a Garden that needed tending, so that was the job assigned to him. It is reasonable to suppose that the woman then joined him in the task of cultivating the Garden, thus helping him in this and other ways.<BR/><BR/>So then, biblically, it cannot be claimed that the woman’s central, essential life work is to serve the man while the man’s essential life work is to rule the creation and the woman. This is a cultural convention, not a biblical teaching. Rather, biblically, both are called to do both. Man as well as woman is to serve, and woman as well as man is to rule (see Gen 1:27-28).<BR/><BR/>Please see my website article summarizing Ephesians 5:21-33 and other New Testament texts, titled “The Bible and Gender Equality,” available at RebeccaMerrillGroothuis.com<BR/> <BR/>6/21/06Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08766692378954258034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14410967.post-1150842395720572472006-06-20T16:26:00.000-06:002006-06-20T16:26:00.000-06:00I have not yet formed a deep conviction about the ...I have not yet formed a deep conviction about the traditionalist / egalitarian positions, but continue to read articles on both sides and compare it with scripture.<BR/><BR/>Mrs. Groothuis says, “Modern feminism…had at least one legitimate concept…the notion that women, as well as men, should have the opportunity to aspire to be all that they can be; it should not be assumed that the fixed essence of femaleness is being in the service of a man.”<BR/><BR/>Eve was created to be Adam’s helpmeet. Could she have understood that her essence was not fixed in Adam’s service? Although I think the mystery of the Trinity is reflected in the creation of male and female, it is more than the candlepower of my mind to understand it. I believe all persons of the Trinity are equally God, and I believe scripture teaches that men and women are equal in the eyes of God. God seems to esteem service more than status, where we, in our flesh, value status and seek those positions which offer it.<BR/><BR/>If men, in response to female sexual power, use cultural subjugation and women respond by wielding sexual power in manipulative ways, then both men and women are equally wrong and both are being dishonest with each other. I think Mrs. Groothuis correctly identifies this as the frequent unhappy relationship of men and women.<BR/><BR/>I would much prefer to believe the egalitarian arguments, but it seems the traditionalist arguments have stronger scriptural support. If the egalitarian position is true, why is there not equal responsibility in the marriage relationship? Wives are to submit to, be subject to, and reverence their husbands as the church to Christ, but husbands are called (among other things) to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her (Ephesians 5). The wife is never called to die for her husband. Is the husband not given a greater responsibility?Julia Gwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03474605353981446859noreply@blogger.com