Radical Womanhood: Chapters 2 and 3

So my plan was to only cover one chapter per post. But since I asked a gal to read Radical Womanhood with me, and to my pleasant surprise, she’s pretty snappy about reading, I’m reading faster than I expected. And I guess since it’s my blog, I’ll do what I want. Hehee. So, here we go with chapter 2 and 3:

Chapter 2: Men Aren’t the Problem

This chapter was in many ways convicting for me. I don’t consider myself a feminist, but that’s not to say I’ve never struggled with a feminist argument here and there. McCulley hits on a few temptations that are common to women, and I am no exception. However, with limited time and space, I want to simply discuss her overall point for chapter two. That is, that men are not the problem. Sin is. Her closing arguments are as follows:

This passage (Gen. 3:1-6) teaches us that women do have a problem. But it’s not men. It’s sin. Sin warps everything, including the good that God has designed in being a man or a woman. Women sin against men and men sin against women, and everyone sins against God and falls short of His standard of holiness and perfection. Sin is the reason men have oppressed women and women have usurped men. Sin is the reason for the jealousy, selfish ambition, disorder, and every vile practice that characterizes false wisdom. Sin is the reason we need a Savior.

As a movement, feminism arose because women were being sinned against. I think that is a fair argument. But feminism also arose because women were sinning in response. That’s a classic human problem: Sinners tend to sin in response to being sinned against.

McCulley then goes on to state in the closing two paragraphs that the Gospel is the solution and where women (and men) will find true liberation.

I love that she points us ultimately toward the Savior, and acknowledges that both men and women have sin issues. I think it’s easy to get into a blame game when it comes to the problem of feminism, but the facts are, as she said, that both women and men are at fault. I’m not sure I’ve ever read a book on Biblical Womanhood that admits that, so I’m just encouraged that she was brave and truthful enough to do so. It’s a well rounded view that serves to keep me turning the pages.

Chapter 3: Did God Really Say?

In this chapter, the author builds on the idea that feminism stems from both male and female sin issues by going one step further to note that we do not wrestle against flesh and blood. She quotes Andreas Kostenberger, who said “Just as Satan reasoned with Eve as to why she should disobey God in the Garden, it is people’s thought life that is the arena in which our spiritual battles are won or lost.” She then follows up with a momentous concept: Spiritual battles are won or lost in the day-to-day thoughts we harbor: Ideas matter!

So if we don’t wrestle against flesh and blood, and spiritual battles are won and lost in our thought life, then that leaves us with a lot of work to do. Mainly the work of becoming imitators of God. To do so, our first step would be to make His thoughts our thoughts. The Bible says His thoughts are not our thoughts, which is to say that it’s not natural to think like He thinks. But we have to start somewhere, right? And McCulley gives us something Biblical to start thinking about in the next few paragraphs by stating that submission is part of the divine character of the Trinity.

Yeah, really! Here’s are some notes on submission and the Trinity from theologian Wayne Grudem:

Never does Scripture say that the Son sends the Father into the world, or that the Holy Spirit sends the Father or the Son into the world, or that the Father obeys the commands of the Son or of the Holy Spirit. Never does Scripture say that the Son predestines us to be conformed to the image of the Father. The role of planning, directing, sending, and commanding the Son belongs to the Father only …

The Father has eternally had a leadership role, an authority to initiate and direct, that the Son does not have. Similarly, the Holy Spirit is subject to both the Father and the Son and plays yet a different role in Creation and in the work of salvation.

When did the idea of headship and submission begin, then? The idea of headship and submission never began! It has always existed in the eternal nature of God Himself. And in this most basic of all authority relationships, authority is not based on gifts or ability (for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are equal in attributes and perfections). It is just there. Authority belongs to the Father, not because He is wiser or because He is a more skillful leader, but just because He is the Father.

McCulley comments that feminists put a lot of emphasis on roles because they equate roles with inherent worth. But that is not a Biblical concept.

Have you ever thought of submission in the context of how the Trinity operates? I have at a surface level, but Grudem’s thoughts really brought the concept home for me. Women get so tied up in whether men and women are equal, and yet, that’s really not the issue. Of course we are equal. It’s not a matter of equality. It’s a matter of functionality. No wonder feminists get their undies in a wad. They feel their very worth is questioned and diminished, and that is bound to make anyone a big grump!

Not that being a big grump is an appropriate, justified response to what they’re feeling (see above comments about sinners responding to sin in sinful ways). I’m just saying it’s an understandable reaction.

I am not a proponent of the self-esteem movement, although we do have a basic, human need to feel valued and loved and useful. But remember. We aren’t so much discussing what the masculine issues are or how men have failed in treating women appropriately. So the question is: how can we as women better view our roles?

I think a great first step is to try out this new(ish) idea that our role is not subservient.

It’s just different.