“Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving
honor unto the wife as unto the weaker vessel.” (1 Peter 3:7)
Since God created men and women to fill different,
yet complementary, roles in the home and in society, those roles are in
accord with our nature. Moreover, because He designed the relationship
of husband and wife to reflect the relationship of Christ to His
church, that relationship was intended to be an expression of kindness
and love, not oppression. God wants husbands and wives to work together
as a team, not compete with each other. That is why the men living in
Christian countries have traditionally taken upon themselves the
harder, dirtier, and more dangerous jobs, while allowing their women to
enjoy a less oppressive role that women in other lands could only envy.
At the time my grandfather was born, over ninety
percent of the population of this country lived on farms, and prior to
that time the percentage was even higher. Therefore, if the roles that
our society has traditionally assigned to men and women were really
designed to oppress women (as the feminists would have us believe) we
might expect to see all of the hard or unpleasant jobs assigned to the
women. However, the opposite is true! It was the men, not the women,
who chopped down trees, labored long hours under a hot sun, shoveled
manure out of the barns, cleaned out the outhouse, built cabins, and
dug wells. Does that sound like oppression to you? It certainly does
not sound like oppression to me, and I believe that any honest person
will admit that it was not oppression. Out of a kindness that was
rooted in Christian love, women were protected from danger and allowed
to take the lighter tasks.
During the same period of history, many of the
families living in town had their own family business. Again, there was
a distinction between the roles of men and women, and again it was men,
not women, who got the more difficult jobs. It was the role of men to
build the buildings, lift the heavy loads, and unload freight. Yet the
men were willing to shoulder the more difficult tasks and even got a
satisfaction out of doing it. At the same time, the women were not
locked away, but often worked along side of their husbands in the
family business, doing those tasks that were less oppressive than those
shouldered by the men. All in all, husbands and wives worked together
as a team as God intended.
I do not deny that there were some unfortunate women
who, because of circumstances beyond their control, wound up working
for meager pay in sweatshops and mills. The conditions under which they
worked amounted to little more than economic slavery. Yet, the same
feminists who condemn the traditional distinction between the roles of
men and women as oppressive are now claiming that those sweatshops and
mills actually “liberated” women. However, what they never say is that
most of the women who labored under those conditions longed to find a
husband, so that they could be liberated from the mills and sweatshops.
They also never mention how that women were often given preference over
the men. For example, when the British luxury liner Titanic sank, there
were not enough lifeboats for all of the passengers. Nevertheless,
instead of grabbing all of the boats for themselves, hundreds of men
went to a watery grave so that the women and children might live. In
contrast, not even one feminist was willing to die so that a man might
live.
In her book “Domestic Tranquility,” F. Carolyn
Graglia not only presents a well reasoned case against the “feminist
movement,” but also explains why that movement (contrary to its claims)
was really an attack on marriage and morality. Other sources trace the
roots of that attack on marriage back to a Luciferian organization that
was started in 1775 by Dr. Adam Weishaupt (professor of Canon Law in
the University of Ingolstadt).
After Dr. Weishaupt’s organization was discovered
and driven underground, some of its members set up the “League of the
Just [i.e. sinless]” – of which Karl Marx was a member, and from which
grew the “Communist Party.” In keeping with the original program
outlined by Adam Weishaupt, the “Communist Manifesto” (written in 1848)
called for the abolition of marriage and the family. In fact, one
former communist has been quoted as admitting that the real aim of
Communism was to destroy the family and Christianity. Communist
economic theories were simply used as a means to achieving that end.
[Note: Because growing immorality threatened Communist rule, during the
1930’s the Communists were forced to strengthen marital commitment in
the Soviet Union, even though they were subverting it elsewhere.]
In 1798, one of the leading scholars in
England, John Robison, published a book exposing Adam Weishaupt's
organization. The following quotations are from his book.
Adam Weishaupt obviously drew some of his ideas —
such as putting women into the military, using them to breed soldiers
for the state, and raising children in government indoctrination
centers — from Plato’s “Republic.” Moreover, Adolph Hitler, (a
left-wing socialist) sought to implement that plan by encouraging
members of the “League of German Maidens” (women chosen on the basis of
race) to breed with SS men (also chosen on the basis of race) in order
to produce soldiers for the state.
Far from helping women, the so-called “Women’s
liberation” movement has led to an increase in physical abuse, broken
homes and illegitimate children. The incidence of rape has soared more
than six hundred percent. In addition, many women are now doomed to
lives of tedious and boring work on an assembly line, while those
trying to support a family without a husband often live in poverty.
And, if that is not bad enough, the so-called advocates of women now
want to force them into combat.
The fact that the feminists care nothing about the
women who would be crippled, blinded, or disfigured by combat, should
tell you that what they really want is to destroy the family, not help
women. Moreover, their anti-family mentality is rooted in a hatred of
men that produces a twisted and distorted concept of womanhood, and
leads them to view the traditional role of a wife and mother as a curse
when they should see it as a blessing.
What God wants, is for husbands to shoulder
responsibility, act as His representative, and exercise spiritual
leadership in the home. At the same time, He wants wives to work with
their husbands in training the children, and guiding the household
according to God's Word (Titus 2:3-5). That means that parents have a
responsibility to study the Bible, know what it says, and apply it to
their lives. Because the spiritual education of the children is of
eternal importance, their instruction should never be left in the hands
of unsaved schoolteachers or anyone else whose thinking is not in
accord with Scripture.
Because God designed men and women to have
complimentary roles, and a relationship that reflects the relationship
of Christ to His church, He intended for those roles to be carried out
in a spirit of love, teamwork, and mutual support (Ephesians 5:23-26).
When that is done, women do not serve men; instead men and women serve
each other as an expression of Christ's love. The man serves the woman
by protecting her, while shouldering the responsibility to guide the
family and provide for its needs. Moreover, because he is allowing
Christ to live through him, it is not he who is doing those things, but
Christ. The woman then responds to that service of love, and shows her
love for Christ, by caring for her husband. The man provides the food;
the woman prepares it. The man provides the house; the woman makes it a
happy nest.
For further reading, I suggest:
“The Way Home” and “All The Way Home,” by Mary Pride, “Domestic
Tranquility” by F. Carolyn Graglia, and the books, “Earthly Images of
the Heavenly Bride (Women and the Church)”, and “He Her Honour and She
His Glory” by Vernon Grieger.