These kind of posts are never a big hit with traditional women. It comes off a bit demeaning, as if women have nothing intrinsically good to offer. Only subjection and dependence? Denying them to be an image of God is akin to Aristotle saying; "Women are just deformed men." Sometimes it sounds like you advocate for women to be doormats for their husbands. A doormat wouldn't make a for good teacher and mother. It's a trait many narcissistic Tate followers would enjoy to take advantage of.
If that's all women have to offer it comes off demeaning. I'd like to hear you talk about the other positive values women bring that aren't just dependence and submission. Dogs submit, yet I still do without one.
I did not say that. I agree that submission is an attribute of women. I ask in the future, can you mention the specific values women bring besides what you said in this article? Motherhood, teaching, tenderness, hygiene, ect.
not everyone believes in your god. not everyone even believes in a god. not everyone uses a book to dictate their life like you do. You are allowed to have your own opinions, that's fine, but you are not allowed to bring down other people because of your opinions. Also, not every woman wants to be a wife. Not every woman wants to marry a man and have kids. And that's perfectly okay. If a woman wants to marry and "submit" to their husband, that is fine. But she should not be forced to. It should be left up to her and her alone, not a book that she might not even follow. Women are their own people. They have their own opinions, beliefs, values, brains, and knowledge. They are their own. They are not less than a man, and they never will be. Men and Women have their differences, and they each have their own weaknesses and strengths. That includes you. It is an elementary perspective to believe that women are supposed to blindly follow and submit to a man. If you view yourself as an intelligent individual, you should make your own opinions and deductions based on yourself and your experiences and observations. You should not blindly follow a book or religion. Use it as a guide, but don't let it dictate your life and opinions.
The proper relation between man and wife is God through Christ. Not woman through man. Ephesians 5:21 says to submit to each other in reverence of Christ. The marriage is over either of the two in aholy union by God through Christ. If we promoted patriarchy then you only get half of ephesians 5 or any biblical standard of marriage and half of Christ is not Christ at all. If we want functioning relationships we should not promote patriarchy, nor any other created thing that is in trend in the negation, but Christ.
The woman was not formed from the feet of the man as a servant, nor from the head as lording it over her husband, but from the side as a companion, as it says in Genesis (2:21).
Christian feminism is a contradiction in terms. Christianity is masculine-oriented, masculine-led, and patriarchal. 'Christian feminism' is 'dry water'.
It appears they believe women must cater to male’s interests. Yeah I don’t think any women are interested in that or be abuse by men which is inherent in patriarchy.
I'm genuinely confused by this. How would you explain this concept, given that many people don't believe in the same God as you? Or how there are many people who simply aren't religious. What about lesbian women? Are they still meant to serve a man? Do you seriously think that this God that you worship, who is supposed to be all good and shit, would agree with what you have written? Did you find any data or quotes that offer a different perspective, or did you simply cherry pick your information to fit your sexist beliefs?
It should be clear that in paradise (where there is no male or female, and men will be *just as subject* to God as will women), the score will be evened and men will have to get used to the subject state.
"And that consuming fire of love is our destined Husband, according to His own promise. Sex in Heaven? Indeed, and no pale, abstract, merely mental shadow of it either. Earthly sex is the shadow, and our lives are a process of thickening so that we can share in the substance, becoming Heavenly fire so that we can endure and rejoice in the Heavenly fire."
These kind of posts are never a big hit with traditional women. It comes off a bit demeaning, as if women have nothing intrinsically good to offer. Only subjection and dependence? Denying them to be an image of God is akin to Aristotle saying; "Women are just deformed men." Sometimes it sounds like you advocate for women to be doormats for their husbands. A doormat wouldn't make a for good teacher and mother. It's a trait many narcissistic Tate followers would enjoy to take advantage of.
Why do you think subjection and dependence are demeaning? That's a feminist attitude.
If that's all women have to offer it comes off demeaning. I'd like to hear you talk about the other positive values women bring that aren't just dependence and submission. Dogs submit, yet I still do without one.
Even the angels submit to and depend on God.
You’re talking like a silly feminist.
For an Aquinas guy you sure use alot of slander instead of charitable argument.
No slander here. Just accuracy. You think it's not intrinsically good for wives to submit. But God says it is.
I did not say that. I agree that submission is an attribute of women. I ask in the future, can you mention the specific values women bring besides what you said in this article? Motherhood, teaching, tenderness, hygiene, ect.
not everyone believes in your god. not everyone even believes in a god. not everyone uses a book to dictate their life like you do. You are allowed to have your own opinions, that's fine, but you are not allowed to bring down other people because of your opinions. Also, not every woman wants to be a wife. Not every woman wants to marry a man and have kids. And that's perfectly okay. If a woman wants to marry and "submit" to their husband, that is fine. But she should not be forced to. It should be left up to her and her alone, not a book that she might not even follow. Women are their own people. They have their own opinions, beliefs, values, brains, and knowledge. They are their own. They are not less than a man, and they never will be. Men and Women have their differences, and they each have their own weaknesses and strengths. That includes you. It is an elementary perspective to believe that women are supposed to blindly follow and submit to a man. If you view yourself as an intelligent individual, you should make your own opinions and deductions based on yourself and your experiences and observations. You should not blindly follow a book or religion. Use it as a guide, but don't let it dictate your life and opinions.
Ah. I thought this was going to be a criticism of Christian patriarchal values.
The proper relation between man and wife is God through Christ. Not woman through man. Ephesians 5:21 says to submit to each other in reverence of Christ. The marriage is over either of the two in aholy union by God through Christ. If we promoted patriarchy then you only get half of ephesians 5 or any biblical standard of marriage and half of Christ is not Christ at all. If we want functioning relationships we should not promote patriarchy, nor any other created thing that is in trend in the negation, but Christ.
Will, are you married, and if so, does your wife discuss these subjects publicly? I'd be interested to get her perspective.
I'm married with 7 kids. My wife doesn't work outside the home, and her perspective is the Catholic one explained in the article.
I'd like to hear her opinion from her directly.
Lol that would be funny to see.
The woman was not formed from the feet of the man as a servant, nor from the head as lording it over her husband, but from the side as a companion, as it says in Genesis (2:21).
Thomas Aquinas
Exactly - a helpmate. A wife isn't a slave, but she is subject to her husband.
The term “helpmate” may not be the correct translation
Christian feminism is a contradiction in terms. Christianity is masculine-oriented, masculine-led, and patriarchal. 'Christian feminism' is 'dry water'.
🙄
It appears they believe women must cater to male’s interests. Yeah I don’t think any women are interested in that or be abuse by men which is inherent in patriarchy.
Excellent article! It can be very difficult to lead at times.
I'm genuinely confused by this. How would you explain this concept, given that many people don't believe in the same God as you? Or how there are many people who simply aren't religious. What about lesbian women? Are they still meant to serve a man? Do you seriously think that this God that you worship, who is supposed to be all good and shit, would agree with what you have written? Did you find any data or quotes that offer a different perspective, or did you simply cherry pick your information to fit your sexist beliefs?
It should be clear that in paradise (where there is no male or female, and men will be *just as subject* to God as will women), the score will be evened and men will have to get used to the subject state.
Nonsensical comment. Men are subject to God right now.
In heaven, the hierarchy is based purely on holiness.
From Peter Kreeft's "Is there sex in heaven?"
"And that consuming fire of love is our destined Husband, according to His own promise. Sex in Heaven? Indeed, and no pale, abstract, merely mental shadow of it either. Earthly sex is the shadow, and our lives are a process of thickening so that we can share in the substance, becoming Heavenly fire so that we can endure and rejoice in the Heavenly fire."
Excellent exposition!
I was think of the same dynamics between husband and wife with the same biblical basis of conclusion.