I have always been somewhat surprised / perplexed by a number of women who convert to Islam and submit to their male counterpart in such a visible way. Growing up in that culture and living within it I understand, and perhaps if they are able to look at the West with the sexual exploitation of women the conclusion might be a way that it can be justified… but educated (and liberated) Western women converting? That I have not understood.
And beyond the above scenario the rise of a new ‘men need to be men’ emphasis (patriarchy and misogyny IMHO) and a number of women (not so many women as men) who advocate that the woman’s place is in the home is equally surprising. There is a movement to which is attached the adjective ‘Christian’ that is rooted in God is all powerful and the more powerful (bullying) a man can be the more that man is in the image of the all powerful god (cannot capitalise ‘god’ at this point as that definition of power does not relate to the God of Scripture)… take for example the critique in the book Jesus and John Wayne (author: Kristin Kobes du Mez). Jesus the tough man who crushes all opponents, so let us vote for those in positions of power who will be like that Jesus / John Wayne.
And into that setting come certain women who advocate men at the top as the divine order!
All forms of abusive power (Imperial spirit / Babylon) offer benefits to those who comply, and there will be certain benefits – safety, and in the words of Revelation ‘allowed to buy and to sell’. But the majority of (in this situation) women will not benefit at all – and just look at the statistics of women in the work place.
To the Bible for a mo…
The household codes that we find in Paul (wives submit to; children submit; slaves behave in this way… etc) are present for apologetic purposes. They follow the pattern that is recorded in the literature of the day, but Paul transforms the content. He moves them away from ‘you at the top (male husband, slave-owner, father) are the boss so keep everyone else in order’ and the most famous passage in Ephesians does not begin with ‘wives submit to your husbands’ but the verb is present in the preceding verse with ‘submit yourselves to one another in the fear / reverence of Christ’ (Ephes. 5:21 this is where the verb appears not in verse 22). That transforms everything, and all relationships. I don’t think it goes the whole way, no more than the NT comments on slavery go the whole way in the NT… but the gospel goes the whole way. There is in Christ, ‘no male and female’ (Gal. 3) – the change of language from neither… nor to ‘and not male and female’ indicates Paul is quoting Genesis 2. Make of what you want of the creation narratives but once we touch Jesus ALL hierarchy disappears, for all former categories are no longer relevant (Paul’s comments on ‘a new creation’ in 2 Cor. 5).
The challenge of Jesus is there to hit at all exploitation. Read the Proverbs and the male is warned over the seductive woman. Read Jesus and he hits the issue hard… ‘If a man looks at a women to lust after her’. Dress appropriately – for sure; seductiveness is an issue… but the blame game and therefore the need to control through legislation – no not the gospel.
Marriages need to work out how they partner together. Probably no one size fits all, but hierarchy, patriarchy, bullying – no, no, no.
Men need to be men. But the image is not John Wayne, but Jesus. Children, women, the marginalised – he came to lift them up… and far from being incarnated as male to show a superiority he is male as that is where the root of the issue lies. Scripture is consistent – it does not address the marginalised to rebel but the ones who abuse position to repent. And that is also why he comes as a Jew. No more at the top and let’s keep it that way, but emptying out power. ‘Being in the image of God he emptied himself’.
How far can we go along the trajectory of the gospel? One day the perfect will come – until then we are provoked to go further than yesterday… with no desire to restore a former era.