Patriarchal but not Sexist

Apology:

Gentle reader, the author was sick and tired of slanders perpetrated upon a personal hero. Moreover, the author tired of hearing the term Patriarch used as a synonymn for Sexist. So, he inquired into the matter and presents the facts discovered here.


Thesis:

A Sexist is one who thinks girls are inferior to boys, or vice versa. Surely differences exist, but different is not superior/inferior. And the differences have proved a source of great joy in my life.

A Patriarch is a man who rules his household. He doesn't rule the neighbor lady. He doesn't rule his co-worker. Outside the scope of the Patriarch's household, he has NO authority over any woman. (Or womon if you're demented that way.) Whenever a man lawfully asserts authority over a woman, it is in the context of an institution of our society. I am interested specifically the family, because that's where I am a Patriarch.

A Patriarch may be Sexist, if he's a boorish lout. A Patriarch may not be Sexist and follow True Christianity.


Rationale:

Man is the Image Bearer of God. I've ridden that hobby-horse in another rant you can read. (Oh, by the way, when I say Man, i mean HUman, or Person, or some equally lame substitute, unless the context is obviously to the contrary.)

Man as the Image Bearer of God is the closest analog of God in the created realm.

What does that mean? It means that members of the human race are as similar to God as one be and still be a created being.

A woman is an image bearer of God. She derives her meaning, her significance, her value, and her identify from the God she depicts. This puts her value as high as one can have in creation.

What about us boys? We can rise no higher than the top. It's a dead heat. By theological argument from fundamentalist Christianity, men and women are equals.

Don't take my word for it. Check out that mysogynist apostle Paul in Galatians 3:28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Being one doesn't sound very sexist.

We share equally in the Human Essence.

God is a Trinity. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are One, not Three. (a paradox, that i don't understand.) Each Person is distinct. Each shares Equally in the Divine Essence. Jesus isn't a second-class diety with the Father lording it over Him. Same for the Holy Spirit. They are equals.

Equals like man and wife and children.

Equality of essense is not equality of economy. (that was theological jargon.) Phil 2:6-8 talks about Jesus, "...being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; But he made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." Bottom line: Jesus took orders from Father.

Divine Equals in the Trinity organize themselves hierarchically.

Any woman reading this would have to join my housefold for me to have authority over her. Equals in my home organize ourselves hierarchally. I don't lord it over anyone as if I am better. As i rule, i must obey God and humble myself under His rule. I love everyone i'm responsible (to Him) for.

This is sexism? Have I not asserted the Ontological basis for the equality of the sexes as Image Bearers of God. What then can sexism mean if not this?

This is mysogyny? It is certainly no hatred of women. More a Love of God, and how better to manifest that love than by loving his female representations. Ladies, i honor you.

Is Honor hatred?

Methinks the definitions of words fit the axe thou dost wish to grind.

This Patriarch pleads innocent to the charge of Sexism.


Appendix:

Here's my overpromised treatise on the significance of sex as it relates to the Trinity.

We know that the Trinity is a marvelous thing. Three Persons are One God. But what is Man but God's Image Bearer? How does this central reality of God manifest itself in humanity?

Why, when Two become One flesh, gentle reader. The act of coitus depicts the Holy Trinity.

But 2=1 is not 3=1! Sorry, no analogy is perfect. But consider the conception of children. At that time, the newly conceived child is the Third. At that point, creation manages 3=1 and this event in realtime is honored with an Eternal Significance. The newly conceived child is a Living Soul who will exist forever thereafter. (For after death there IS a resurrection to an eternal state of judgement or grace.) At one time, I was not a Father. I am one now. I will be one for the rest of eternity.

For these reasons, we must be very careful that we depict God lawfully. In all our acts we state to the rest of Creation, "This is what God's like." The depiction of God in sex has a special significance for the above reasons.

Rape is a terrible thing. The persons of the Trinity do not co-exist in horror and fear or rage and predation. God will judge this slander of Himself.

My great complaint with same-sex relations is here: The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is not the Father. Same-sex relations are not true to this. Maybe that's why Unitarians are more gay friendly.

The Holy Trinity is permanent. It is Eternal, immutable, unchanging. Not exactly a one-night stand, eh? That's why I think sex should only be within the vows of marriage. God grant that our Faith be as strong as our Hormones.

The persons of the Trinity exist in perfect mutual love and harmony. Isn't sex best when just before, the two of you are closest outside the bedroom?


Comments? Suggestions? Indictments from some Ecclesiastical court? sdp@iserv.net Feel free, I don't bite. I just nibble a bit.