*cracks knuckles* Okay, here we go. Let’s start with the rebuttals, moving clockwise from the top left:
Context: Ephesians 5:21-33: “Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives, be subject to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of wife as Christ is the head of the Church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the Church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the Church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. Even so, husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the Church, because we are members of his body. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church; however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.”
Basically, St. Paul is not describing the ideal marriage as one in which the wife passively obeys a tyrannical husband, but as one in which the husband loves the wife completely and sacrificially, and the wife in turn is respectful and obedient towards him. Each spouse is expected to put the needs of the other before their own.
Consider also St. John Chrysostom’s (c. 349-407 AD) homily on this passage: “Thou hast seen the measure of obedience, hear also the measure of love. Wouldest thou have thy wife obedient unto thee, as the Church is to Christ? Take then thyself the same provident care for her, as Christ takes for the Church. Yea, even if it shall be needful for thee to give thy life for her, yea, and to be cut into pieces ten thousand times, yea, and to endure and undergo any suffering whatever,—refuse it not. […] A servant, indeed, one will be able, perhaps, to bind down by fear; nay not even him, for he will soon start away and be gone. But the partner of one’s life, the mother of one’s children, the foundation of one’s every joy, one ought never to chain down by fear and menaces, but with love and good temper. For what sort of union is that, where the wife trembles at her husband? And what sort of pleasure will the husband himself enjoy, if he dwells with his wife as with a slave, and not as with a free-woman? Yea, though thou shouldest suffer anything on her account, do not upbraid her; for neither did Christ do this.”
Elsewhere Chrysostom further explains: “When we speak about a wife obeying the husband, we normally think of obedience in military or political terms: the husband giving orders and the wife obeying them. But while this type of obedience may be appropriate in the army, it is ridiculous in the intimate relationship of marriage. The obedient wife does not wait for orders. Rather she tries to discern her husband’s needs and feelings and responds in love. When she sees her husband is weary, she encourages him to rest; when she sees him agitated, she soothes him; when he is ill, she nurses and comforts him; when he is happy and elated, she shares his joy. Yet such obedience should not be confined to the wife; the husband should be obedient in the same way… Thus a good marriage is not a matter of one partner obeying the other, but of both partners obeying each other.”
More recently, Pope John Paul II writes in Familiaris Consortio (1981): “Authentic conjugal love presupposes and requires that a man have a profound respect for the equal dignity of his wife: “You are not her master,” writes St. Ambrose, “but her husband; she was not given to you to be your slave, but your wife…. Reciprocate her attentiveness to you and be grateful to her for her love.””
“[Women should be] seen and not heard”
This phrase does not originate in the Bible, but in a 15th century homily which cites it as “an English saying”. It referred specifically to young women, not all women generally, leading to its later more common form: “Children should be seen and not heard.”
I’m not really going to defend this one; it’s not a noble sentiment whether aimed at women or children. But it’s hardly a tenant of Christianity, either.
“The woman shall be saved through child-bearing”
1 Timothy 2:15: “Yet the woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.”
This verse follows the distinction between Adam’s sin and Eve’s (see below). The point is not that childbearing is a woman’s only hope of salvation (or else the countless virgin saints who never bore children would not exist; more on that later), but rather that childbearing is a means of sanctification which is reserved to women.
This is a profound statement, really. In Genesis 3:16, after the fall, the pains of childbirth are presented as Eve’s punishment for her sin. But in the New Testament, after the coming of Christ, this very same uniquely female form of suffering becomes a cause for hope.
The title of a 19th century song about longing for the comforts of home, not remotely related to anything particularly Christian or religious, and I’m not even sure what the problem with this one is supposed to be? Moving right along…
“A woman’s place is in the home”
Sayings of this nature predate Christianity, with the first attested in the 5th century BC.
Proverbs 31:10-31 describes the duties of an ideal wife, which are domestic in nature but hardly keep her confined to the house. These include: procuring food for the household (ver. 14), buying land and working it (ver. 16), selling and delivering goods she has made (ver. 18 and 24), and distributing alms to the poor (ver. 20). Women are clearly expected to participate in commerce and society, not just cook and clean while their husbands take care of everything else. The domestic labor of women is not a degrading or secondary station, but an important role in society.
Turning to Familiaris Consortio again: “There is no doubt that the equal dignity and responsibility of men and women fully justifies women’s access to public functions. On the other hand the true advancement of women requires that clear recognition be given to the value of their maternal and family role, by comparison with all other public roles and all other professions. Furthermore, these roles and professions should be harmoniously combined, if we wish the evolution of society and culture to be truly and fully human. […] While it must be recognized that women have the same right as men to perform various public functions, society must be structured in such a way that wives and mothers are not in practice compelled to work outside the home, and that their families can live and prosper in a dignified way even when they themselves devote their full time to their own family. Furthermore, the mentality which honors women more for their work outside the home than for their work within the family must be overcome. This requires that men should truly esteem and love women with total respect for their personal dignity, and that society should create and develop conditions favoring work in the home.
In short, Christian women have every right to work outside the home, but why should whether or not they do so have any bearing on their perceived worth?
“As the weaker partner, and…”
1 Peter 3:7 in my NRSV-CE Bible reads: “Likewise, you husbands, live considerately with your wives, bestowing honor on the woman as the weaker sex, since you are joint heirs of the grace of life, in order that your prayers may not be hindered.”
This passage from 1 Peter 3 is very similar to Ephesians 5 (see above), and the verse in question is telling husbands to treat their wives with respect, since Christian men and women alike are heirs to the promises of Christ.
Christian tradition has long held that women are in some ways weaker than men, but Christianity has never equated strength with dignity, or weakness with a lack thereof. Rather we are told, “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” (Matthew 5:5) Biblical references to women as the weaker sex are not intended as judgements of value or holiness.
“Do not let your beauty be external.”
1 Peter 3:3: “Let not yours be the outward adorning with braiding of hair, decoration of gold, and wearing of robes, but let it be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.”
This verse is part of the same passage as the previous one. St. Peter is telling wives to prioritize the state of their souls over the adornment of their bodies. Basically, focus on being a virtuous person and don’t get distracted by material vanity.
The Bible contains numerous condemnations of vanity of all kinds addressed to both men and women. Luke 20:46-47 is one example of male vanity being criticized: “Beware of the scribes, who like to go about in long robes, and love salutations in the market places and the best seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at feasts, who devour widows’ houses and for a pretense make long prayers. They will receive the greater condemnation.”
“It [was the] woman w[ho was] deceived.”
1 Timothy 2:14; “Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.”
St. John Chrysostom’s homily on this passage explains: “But how was Adam not deceived? If he was not deceived, he did not then transgress? Attend carefully. The woman said, “The serpent beguiled me.” But the man did not say, The woman deceived me, but, “she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” Now it is not the same thing to be deceived by a fellow-creature, one of the same kind, as by an inferior and subordinate animal. This is truly to be deceived. Compared therefore with the woman, he is spoken of as “not deceived.” For she was beguiled by an inferior and subject, he by an equal. Again, it is not said of the man, that he “saw the tree was good for food,” but of the woman, and that she “did eat, and gave it to her husband”: so that he transgressed, not captivated by appetite, but merely from the persuasion of his wife.”
Adam’s sin is not being excused or blamed on Eve, but Eve is being held accountable for trusting the word of the serpent, which Adam did not do, at least not directly.
“Charity begins at home.”
This is another phrase that does not come from the Bible, though the basic idea behind it - that caring for one’s family should be a priority - is expressed in 1 Timothy 5:8: “If any one does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his own family, he has disowned the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” Note that this verse is addressed towards men, and has nothing to do with women allegedly being confined in the home or any such nonsense.
“I do not permit a woman to teach.”
1 Timothy 2:12: “I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.”
This passage is specifically giving instructions for the liturgy/communal prayer, and St. Paul is writing to St. Timothy, the bishop of Ephesus. The following passages also deal with the qualifications for bishops and deacons. It therefore seems likely that St. Paul means that women can not perform the liturgical functions of the clergy, since they can not be ordained. (The whys and wherefores of that could be another post entirely; for a basic primer see here and here.)
Proverbs 31:26 includes among the qualities of the ideal wife: “She opens her mouth with wisdom, and the teaching of kindness is on her tongue.”
St. Mary Magdalene has long been called the “apostle to the apostles” because of her role in bringing the news of Christ’s resurrection to his male followers, and another ancient tradition says that Mary Magdalene went on to preach the Gospel to the Roman Emperor Tiberius.
A similar story surrounds St. Catherine of Alexandria, who was said to have won debates against the best pagan scholars of her day and brought many converts to the faith through her teaching.
So much for that then. Now, a few counterpoints to consider:
The Witness of the Virgin Saints
Christian women can and do achieve holiness without being married or bearing children. Consecrated virginity has been regarded as a sacred vocation since the earliest days of the Church, and there are numerous virgin saints throughout the centuries.
Many of the earliest virgin saints specifically rejected suitors or refused the marriages their families tried to arrange, including Saint Lucy, Saint Agnes, and Saint Agatha.
Later women who joined religious orders would become some of the most well-educated and prolific female scholars of their times, including St. Hildegard of Bingen, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Teresa of Avila, and St. Edith Stein.
This tradition is kept alive today by the numerous unmarried Christian women, whether they take religious vows or not, who devote their lives to prayer, works of charity, and scholarship.
The greatest of all the saints is a woman, Mary, the mother of God. Talk to Catholic or Orthodox Christians about their faith and you’ll quickly realize how important she is.
No woman will ever be pope, but no pope will ever surpass this woman.
Mary is the most perfect example of what it means to be a follower of Christ. All Christians, both male and female, are meant to follow her example.
Aside from the Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene, there are numerous other holy women found throughout scripture: Miriam, Deborah, Esther, Judith, Jael, Ruth, Elizabeth, Anna, Martha, Priscilla, Lydia, and Joanna, among others. None of them bear the slightest resemblance to the helpless victim of the patriarchy depicted above.
Galatians 3:27-28: “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” I’ve talked more about this verse here, but the relevant point is that all believers have equal dignity through their baptism in Christ, regardless of race, class, or gender.
Finally, some recommended further reading, written by people a lot smarter than me:
Cathechism of the Catholic Church 369-372: on the creation of man and woman
The Privilege of Being a Woman, by Alice von Hildebrand (2005)
Familiaris Consortio (On the Christian Family in the Modern World), by Pope John Paul II (1981)
Mulieris Dignitatem (On the Dignity and Vocation of Women), by Pope John Paul II (1988)
vaporwave
snowghoul
s-u-f-j-a-n-s-t-e-v-e-n-s
gracieabrams
