I am a democrat [believer in democracy] because I believe in the Fall of Man. I think most people are democrats for the opposite reason. A great deal of democratic enthusiasm descends from the ideas of people like Rousseau, who believed in democracy because they thought mankind so wise and good that every one deserved a share in the government. The danger of defending democracy on those grounds is that they're not true. . . . I find that they're not true without looking further than myself. I don't deserve a share in governing a hen-roost. Much less a nation. . . . The real reason for democracy is just the reverse. Mankind is so fallen that no man can be trusted with unchecked power over his fellows. Aristotle said that some people were only fit to be slaves. I do not contradict him. But I reject slavery because I see no men fit to be masters. ("Equality," in C. S. Lewis: Essay Collection and Other Short Pieces, ed. by Lesley Walmsley [London: HarperCollins Publishers, 2000,] p. 666). Cited by John Piper.I had recently been reading about how Psalm 68 was song by the Parliamentary army during the English civil war. Men have had no qualms in understanding that God was on their side when they rebelled against the established church, or against the tyranny of a non-elected gov't. Slaves finally attained freedom and legal parity in western society, unions established fair bargaining with employers.
But women are not to have any part in this freedom. Each one is still to remain under the authority of their husband. Is this the way that men treat women as they themselves would like to be treated?
I am pondering two or three different options. Possibly many people are completely unaware that "Love your neighbour as yourself" is in the Bible. They think it comes on tea towels and is just one more liberal fuzzy wuzzy expression or non-Christian "nice saying". With the level of Biblical literacy out and about I would not be surprised.
Another thought is that in some circles men have clear in their head that a woman is not their neighbour. This could be corrected by someone pointing out that in the original languages, it says "Love your next one as yourself." And who is your next one?
But all I can think is that for those who teach unilateral submission of woman to man, they really think that there is a hierarchy of scripture texts and this one comes at the bottom.
1 comment:
But women are not to have any part in this freedom. Each one is still to remain under the authority of their husband. Is this the way that men treat women as they themselves would like to be treated?
Great points and a most important question.
On C.S. Lewis and his view and treatment of women, have you read Candice Fredrick's and Sam McBride's Women Among the Inklings? They say Lewis "did not practice the model for Christian marriage he espoused" (p.83) and that he "presumes, even after his tentative embrace of the ‘feminine’ quality of emotion, that being called ‘masculine’ is a compliment to either gender, whereas being called ‘feminine’ is uncomplimentary to men" (p.85). We can hope that Lewis, like other most other Christian men, was however slowly and ever more fully reforming his views of "Equality."
Post a Comment