<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1027" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Keely,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>I’ve interspersed
my comments to your insightful challenge:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Keely Writes: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>…But I am gifted
with a fairly extensive array of basic social skills, and so I'd like to make a
couple of basic comments, particularly in response to his "first
date" analogy. If my friend Doris and I were going to have lunch, and I
wanted to go to the Breakfast Club while she wanted to go to Mikey's, I imagine
both of us would go hungry before we'd insist on going to the place of our own
choice. I'd say to Doris that Mikey's is fine; <st1:place w:st="on">Doris</st1:place>
would assure me that BC is just peachy with her. We'd go to either one, or
find something else. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Me: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>This is a good
illustration of an informal outing with a friend, but it looses everything
important to my scenario of a “high school date”. I’m trying
to get at traditional intuitions with respect to “leadership” and
how a woman might naturally respond to a man in a situation as common as dating.
I’m till genuinely interested as to what folks’ intuitions are
regarding mail leadership within the traditional sociology of dating. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Keely Writes: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>We would all agree that
if Doris made me go to Mikey's -- insisted on it, both as a condition of our
relationship and of fidelity to Christian doctrine (<st1:place w:st="on">Doris</st1:place>
being a member of my Bible study group) -- then she would be an oaf, a jerk,
and, as pertains to her Christian maturity, a rather difficult toddler in the
faith.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Me: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Yes, but this is
consistent with the view of submission I have put forward.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Keely Writes: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>….we are to submit
to one another, and not on the basis of gender, to mirror not only the love
Jesus shows the church but also the fidelity the church shows Jesus. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Me: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Agreed: not on the basis
of gender, generally speaking; the relationship between a “husband and
wife” is something very specific. Paul says that this relationship
mirrors the relationship between Jesus and Church, which is a relationship of
submission; and in this context Paul tells women to submit to their husbands. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Keely Writes: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>A study of the word
"head" -- kephalo -- would just as easily argue that "man is the
head of the woman" means "source," as in the Creation story,
just as "God is the head of Christ" means that, as the Apostle's
Creed affirms, that Jesus "proceeds from the Father." Orthodox
Christian doctrine denies that Jesus is now eternally submissive to the Father
and should deny, but often doesn't, that that has to do with gender relations
today -- relations whose only proper expression, they assert, is the eternal
submission of wives to husbands and the "ontological leadership role"
of men over women in church, home, and society.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Me: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>I’m fine with the
“source” interpretation, but I’m not sure that Jesus is not
in any way eternally submissive to the Father. He was while here on earth; and
even if he is no longer after glorification, he was eternally before
glorification (e.g. at the time of creation). Even if the relationship has
“changed,” he is still the Son to the Father, which implies some
sort of “role” distinction. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Keely Writes: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Jesus did it differently
and gives us a radical new view of how women and men can and should work
together in His original intent for creation. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Me: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Correct; but what Jesus
did not do is teach a current liberal social theory. Jesus did not set aside
the social assumption that a woman submits to her husband. Jesus instead
revolutionized what this was to mean and how it was to function. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Keely Writes: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>…a more penetrating
analysis of Pauline pronouncements on gender for a few "easy" verses
that seem to suggest that rigid roles for men and for women are what God
intended. They would deny that prooftexting is an appropriate way to
understand and expound on Scripture, but it works well for them and, to be
generous, follows the pattern of church and society over the years.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Me: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>I don’t like
proof-texting either; but when you have statements as simple and direct as
“wives, submit to your husbands,” I’m not sure what is wrong
referencing them with weight. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Keely Writes: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>…but many men will
take it as a mandate to exercise power and privilege in the home. Some, we
know, will take it to mean that violence and degradation are OK, too -- the
human heart has no limits in how it can sin, and men hardly need
"orders" to exercise power over those portrayed as ontologically
submissive, weaker, and powerless. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The preacher, then, may
not be accountable for the abuse that results, but surely is responsible for
opening the door through which abuse rushes.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Me: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Correct; but this is true
of any institution. Precisely because an institution protects its members from
harm, it can also hurt them. This point was made recently in a Harvard
publication I quoted from that you can link to here: <a
href="http://poohsthink.com/?p=192">http://poohsthink.com/?p=192</a> . In the
same way you want to hold a minister accountable, we can hold the husband
accountable. Submission within a marriage is far more mitigated, flexible,
light-weight, intimate, and playful than we find it in other areas of life; so what
I don’t understand is how a social liberal can be content with submission
in political, legal, and military spheres, yet objects in the one sphere where
it has less edge and is backed better by Custom. If an employee should submit
to his employer, a soldier to his officer, a criminal to a judicial decision,
and a citizen to a police officer in very strict terms, then why can we have no
form of submission at all within the institution of traditional marriage? We
have the threat of oppression and harm in all the other institutions, but this
does not cause us to abandon them. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Keely Writes: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>It will be a great day
when a Christ Church man stays home with the kids and cherishes his physician,
teacher, engineer or fighter pilot wife who works outside of the home -- and
not to make any point other than this: we are all richly gifted, ought to be
blessed with the option of glorifying God in many beautiful and diverse ways,
and should affirm that the Gospel of Jesus Christ demands no less, whatever
else the men who proclaim it insist.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Me: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>First, <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City
w:st="on">Wilson</st1:City></st1:place> does not object to women fighter
pilots because he does not want women to have the freedom to pursue rigorous
careers; Nancy Wilson has always championed women medical doctors. The point
about fighter pilots is a point about women warriors, a very specific aesthetic
and moral issue regarding beauty, femininity, and appropriate warfare methods.
In other words: pick any career you like, but that of a bloody warrior. Second,
I would like to think that women are better at “mothering” than
men, generally speaking. (Anyone have statistics on the successes of lesbian
mothers over homosexual fathers?) I think my wife is cut out more for staying
home all day long with my young children than I am, which is partly because she
is a woman and I am not. And there seems to be prima facie reason to suppose
that this is grounded in part on biology since the controlling role of biology
in conception, birth, and weaning is expansive. In sum, this is an example of a
woman having a greater strength; this is one reason I do not think we should go
against the grain and encourage men, at least generally, staying home with
children so that their wives can further a full time career. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Thanks!<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Michael Metzler<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>