tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post8117962215306066942..comments2023-10-25T09:45:40.318-04:00Comments on The Politics of the Cross Resurrected: Robert Hart on the Inclusive Language AgendaCraig Carterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10209954891388905090noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-83880157892767269132009-09-01T11:06:43.505-04:002009-09-01T11:06:43.505-04:00David,
Sorry to be unclear; no of course I didn...David,<br />Sorry to be unclear; no of course I didn't mean to say that the Father is in submission to the Son and Spirit any more than I would want to say that their roles are all the same. Thanks for catching me up on that.<br /><br />I like the line: "It strikes me that the problem is at once intensely political (i.e. because it involves power relations between people) and utterly beyond the reach of politics to resolve." That seems exactly right and it explains why Paul was not concerned about abolishing slavery and women's liberation as his first priority. <br /><br />The Haustafeln show a mind preoccupied with the Gospel and the transforming grace of the Spirit in human relationships that is the only real hope. Political problems are not susceptible of political solutions: that is precisely our dilemma! And only the Gospel of grace and faith can be good news - not any sort of social justice agenda. The problem with liberal Protestantism is that it believes that politics can solve political problems.Craig Carterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10209954891388905090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-15971407428146956472009-09-01T09:36:59.571-04:002009-09-01T09:36:59.571-04:00You're right. There is nothing sinful about p...You're right. There is nothing sinful about patriarchy or hierarchy per se, merely the abuse to which men and women have put them; and of course, hierarchy and patriarchy are foundational to understanding the Trinity, without which it looks more like a Holy Committee rather than a loving community. <br />It really does seem like an ethical plate-spinning act, acknowledging that hierarchy is what we are born into, that it is natural to us as humans, and yet living our the sinful consequences of that because ourselves and others do not relate lovingly one to another. It strikes me that the problem is at once intensely political (i.e. because it involves power relations between people) and utterly beyond the reach of politics to resolve, because it is only through a right understanding of the Trinity that we can see how deviant virtually all forms of human relations are.<br />One thing I wouldn't agree on with you though is the idea of the Father being in loving submission to either the Spirit or the Son: whatever His relationship to them is, it isn't that. Unless I misunderstood you.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02062143956776898176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-14717781258072563972009-09-01T08:00:36.555-04:002009-09-01T08:00:36.555-04:00David,
Interesting thoughts. I would agree that t...David,<br />Interesting thoughts. I would agree that there is something sinful in patriarchy, but I think it is important to say that the evil stems, not from patriarchy itself, but from the effects of the Fall. The curse in Gen. 3 seems to me to the root of all oppression of women by men. <br /><br />The reason I make this distinction between unfallen, good patriarchy and fallen, bad patriarchy is that patriarchy itself is simply one form of hierarchy and hierarchy appears to be built into the universe by a Creator whose internal Trinitarian life is characterized by a kind of loving hierarchy. <br /><br />We fallen humans have never actually experienced pure, holy, and perfect hierarchial love in action so we distrust hierarchy (although if we have had loving parents we don't distrust it as much as others might). Hierarchy was characteristic of Medieval Christendom, but modernity is a revolt against all forms of hierarchy (eg. monarchy, patriarchy, aristocracy) and the exaltation of egalitarianism. <br /><br />I don't think egalitarianism is the answer to hierarchy. We are still fallen sinners and we can't completely escape this condition in this world. <br /><br />Does this mean I'm against democracy? Not necessarily, but it is not the be all and end all. Many democracies are very unjust and many non-democracies have been very just. But in the modern world, it is probably a good thing on balance, as long as it is leavened by respect for natural aristocracy. Representative democracy is superior to direct democracy and political power should be dispersed rather than concentrated.<br /><br />As for the Trinity, the relationships of Father, Son and Spirit involve loving submission that does not destroy equality in being. Surely that means that humans can have differing roles without being ontologically unequal. <br /><br />Anyway, I think Feminism is a revolt against all hierarchy in the name of an individualist egalitarianism that defines human inter-relationships in terms of power instead of love. It is the ideology of the Enlightenment applied to male-female relations. As such it is just another manifestation of the Fall.Craig Carterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10209954891388905090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-923254213210780932009-09-01T04:53:20.792-04:002009-09-01T04:53:20.792-04:00Re-reading my comment what I meant to say on lines...Re-reading my comment what I meant to say on lines 14-16 is that there is much about human patriarchy which is evil, not the feminist critique of it, and it is a Trinitarian critique which should redress the balance.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02062143956776898176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-19955282856724133542009-09-01T04:50:33.962-04:002009-09-01T04:50:33.962-04:00Yes, I agree. I don't think that this represe...Yes, I agree. I don't think that this represents a concerted conspiracy to worship demons in the church; rather, it is more like the frog in the pan example: put a frog in a boiling pan of water and it'll leap out, but put the same frog in a pan of tepid water and slowly bring to the boil and it'll stay warm and cosy until it boils to death. <br />The trouble is that it can make orthodox Christians edgy about any and everything, hardening a position (such as male headship in marriage - for example) until it no longer bears the loving, self-sacrificial stamp of Christ. <br />I think that we need to look at the feminist critique of patriarchy and agree that there is much about it that is distorted and frankly evil; but, I believe, this can only be genuinely countered by a Trinitarian critique of human patriarchy. It is only by looking at how love and power are organised in the Trinity that we can see how perverse human displays of power and love actually are.<br />Sorry to go off on a tangent, but I see this debate about inclusive language and the suppression of the Father as being fundamentally an attack on human power relationships being transposed onto God in the hope that if we change our conception of God our conception of man (oops! I mean an abstract, neutered humanity) will also change. Ultimately, even if the feminist critique is valid at certain points, it is actually quite atheistic because it assumes that God is determined by our human concepts.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02062143956776898176noreply@blogger.com