Originally posted by QuantaFille
View Post
There are roles open only to women, and ones open only to men. The relationship between them in marriage should mirror the one between Christ and his church.
The logical conclusion of your position is that the church can overrule Jesus if she sees fit. Do you honestly believe she can?
My point in asking about bearing children is that God made men with certain abilities and roles, and women with others. That the one can't do what the other can doesn't make that one less valuable as a person. That a man cannot get pregnant does not make him worthless as a human being. That a man cannot have the church leadership role of children's minister does not make him worthless. That a woman cannot "wear the pants" at home doesn't make her worthless, either.
As Celebrian pointed out, decisions have to be made together.
In a complementarian model, the man doesn't *have to* ask his wife for her input (but "should" if you are a nice complementarian). In a complementarian model the man gets the "final say" in any and all matters, even if his wife disagrees (though he "should" be very nice about it while he does it). In a complementarian marriage the man has to decide and enforce what is best for his wife, even if she doesn't agree, though he "should" be sensitive to her while he takes this authority over her. Just softening up the language doesn't negate the facts. In a complementarian marriage the husband decides for the wife, even if she disagrees, but he "should" do this with grace, love, etc.
You seem to think that if we were really practising complementarians, we stupid women wouldn't give any input to our amazing husbands when it comes to making decisions.
And, I am also sorry that you somehow think that egalitarians wouldn't give any input to our amazing spouses. We would, and do. It is the complementarians who think men should-but-don't-have-to allow their wives to give input. Egals are all about equal input and working things out. Comps are about one gender being in ultimate control over the other even tho they "should" (but don't have to) allow input from the other. But I am glad that in your particular complementarian marriage that you function more like egalitarians. That's so important to your well-being as a woman.
For instance, I'm better with money than my husband is. When it comes to that, we discuss our options together. He gives a great deal of weight to my words because I have more experience there, but he is responsible for the final decision. The vast majority of the time, he agrees we should do what I suggest.
But I truly am sorry that both you and he believe that though you are the one better with money and have more experience that he still gets the "final say" because of his superior rank as husband in your complementarian marriage. He bears this ultimate responsibility because of his biological function or the order of man's creation?
You mentioned several times that we must believe that we have to have a husband to be our "king and priest". This is false. I haven't met a complementarian yet who didn't believe in the priesthood of the believer, except Mormons (they are a different story altogether though).
As for how all of this makes me feel, I feel like I am what God intended me to be. He gave me certain gifts and qualities and I should use those in his service, to the best of my ability. How that fact could cause depression is beyond me.
I have never, ever ever ever been taught in church that I am "inferior" to men.
The fact that you keep using that word tells me that you do not at all understand our position.
All are the same in Christ; there is neither male nor female. We are valued equally, that is all. We have different roles, and women do not have to answer to God the same way men do. Men carry the greater burden there, and I for one do not want it myself. One gender is not better than the other. It seems like all you really want is to have input in decision making, and I tell you, we have that here.
Why do men need to carry the greater burden? Are you not capable enough to share equally in carrying the burden? Do you need men to carry this for you instead of carrying equally together? I believe women are just as capable as men to share the burden of leadership. In fact, its part of our original commission. No "final say", no "greater burden of responsibility".
The extreme version of this is practised by some groups, true, but they should be corrected to practise it the way it was intended, not be persuaded to give it up entirely (as I suspect is your motive, if I've read between the lines correctly).
Comment