In Honor of National Women’s Day

In honor of National Women’s Day, I would like to praise all the women who forego the world’s call to false importance and choose to live God-honoring lives by staying home, raising their children, and submitting to their husbands as to the LORD.

These are the true women of importance. Instead of seeking their own glory, they seek to serve their children and husbands in all humility. This is what is pleasing to the LORD. They don’t protest. They don’t grandstand for false causes. They know that their true happiness is doing what God has called them to do in being mothers and wives. They know that the most important calling on a woman’s life is the family. They know that they are raising and shaping the minds of the next generation. They are not led astray by the false promises of the world. They know their Savior and follow His direction for their lives.

To these women: I salute you!

Advertisements

41 thoughts on “In Honor of National Women’s Day

  1. Pingback: In Honor of National Women’s Day — Theology That Matters | Unchain the tree

  2. Chris

    As a father and pastor I want to say that the main calling I have is also to my family, as well as to the church. I have seen too many ministers where the children grow up believing their dad has time and energy for all and everyone except them, so call on male ministers to put their families first – and if that means sometimes putting the church communities back up (as I once did by putting a long planned day out with my wife rather than attend a perceived urgent meeting, then so be it) but it isn’t simply a wordly view – highlighting fgm, rape including rape as a tool of war, and a keeping education from girls are all profound Christian issues.

    Like

  3. I know I am perhaps beating the proverbial ‘dead horse’ here (I hate that term, BTW: I love horses!). But where does this leave women like me, who are single and will probably never marry? (And I’m way past childbearing age.)

    It’s bad enough many in the church look down upon long-term singleness. Please don’t misunderstand me: yes, marriage and raising a family are very important in the church. But too many make ‘marriage and family’ into an idol, and leave singles with the idea that they are neither welcome, nor needed.

    Again, it’s only my two cents. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I’m sorry that you have the impression that many look down on long-term singleness. I have not seen that to be the case in my own experience.
    I’m not sure what you mean by making marriage and family an idol. Can you flesh that out a little bit more?

    Like

    1. Hello, Heidi–thanks for your reply.

      What I mean by ‘making marriage and family an idol’ is the thought that marriage and family are the ONLY thing that matters in the church. With the lack of marriageable men in a lot of churches (hence the ‘feminization’ of a lot of–not ALL–churches). That is: more women than men in the pews. And this is pretty true in a lot of mainline churches.

      A lot of single Christian women who WANT to be married probably will NOT marry. Not because of ‘something that’s wrong with them’, but because there aren’t enough men to go around. And it’s especially true for women my age (I am in my early 60s), or perhaps in their 40s or 50s.

      Many times, we are looked at by some wives in church as ‘husband-stealers’. Again: NOT ALL wives do that. But I’ve read too many blog posts and/or chat boards on the subject.

      And quite frankly: I’ve not been impressed with a lot of unmarried men in the churches I’ve been to. Many are either commitment-phobic, or not very masculine, in how they relate to women. When I say ‘masculine’, I don’t mean ‘macho’: I mean men who are secure in their masculinity, and not overly ‘touchy-feely’ in their conduct.

      Most churches have marriage seminars, etc., throughout the year, and preach on marriage often. There’s hardly any reference to singles, unless the ones being preached-to are teenagers, or college-age in their 20s. And heaven forbid you’re in your mid-30s or older, and not married. It would be good if pastors would say something, on how to handle being that ‘older’ single, who realizes that singlehood is a ‘permanent’ situation in their lives.

      I guess what I am trying to say is: can there be some sort of ‘balance’ regarding marriage and singleness in church. I know how important marriage is, especially in these days. But let’s have a bit of mercy shown to us ‘permanent and unwanted’ singles. That’s all I ask for.

      I hope I’ve not put you to sleep yet, Heidi. I’d like to hear your thoughts.

      Like

      1. I appreciate your thoughtful response, Patricia. I always enjoy our conversations.

        Commenting on your thoughts as I read them below.

        First of all, having more women in the pews than men is not what feminizes a church. Failing to follow Scriptural admonitions such as Paul outlines in 1 Timothy 2:8-15 and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is where the problem lies. It’s not about demographics, it’s about submission (by men and women) to what the word of God proclaims.

        Regarding Christian women who desire to marry but “there aren’t enough men to go around.” Yes, there are more women than men, granted, but as long as there are some men available, this reason for not marrying doesn’t really hold water. Have we set our standards for a mate so high that none can satisfy them? In this fallen world, there is no perfect mate. If a man is committed to Christ, and to leading and protecting his wife, the rest of his flaws (and the flaws of his partner) will be opportunities for the sanctification of both spouses.

        I must return to this later as Timothy and our boys need some breakfast!

        Hope to get back to my response this afternoon…

        Like

  5. Darlene

    Having once been an evangelical Christian, I can look outside the confined walls of that system to recognize many ways that women are squelched. And single women?…….fuhgeddaboudit! They’re barely a bleep on the radar. That’s because their worth is seen through being a wife and mother. Professions or careers be d_m_ed. I’m thankful for the strides that women have made in the medical field, law, education, finance, just to mention a few. Due to those advances, I can choose a woman physician. I can also seek a female lawyer should I ever need one. I can count on a jury of my peers instead of one limited to all while males. Oh, and let’s not forget nurses, who have mostly been women for the last century. I suppose all of them just abandoned their calling to stay at home in order to become Feminists.

    In the Fundamentalist, Evangelical World, all women would be relegated to the confines of house and home. Of course, where does that leave single women? Shamed and made to feel as though something is wrong with them that they aren’t married. Of course it’s an implicit, insidious shaming. News Flash: There are more women than men in our society. So inevitably some women won’t marry due to statistics alone.

    Like

    1. Darlene,
      Just curious, what about the fundamentalist, evangelical women who actually want to stay home and fulfill God’s calling on their lives by submitting to their husbands and raising children?
      Seems like you are the one that is being demeaning in all this. You have painted it as if they should be ashamed of doing what they feel is their calling?

      Also, your are making the assumption that it is the men forcing their wives to stay home. Bit of an assumption don’t you think?

      Like

    2. Darlene,

      Several points to address in your comment.

      1. You have successfully erected a straw man and eviscerated him. This post is written with regard to women who ARE wives and mothers and does not address the issue of unmarried women at all.
      2. To argue that wives and mothers should be praised for leaving their God-given calling to pursue a career (you can’t serve two masters according to Jesus’ words in Matthew 6) is to revile (criticize · censure · condemn · attack) the word of God, which states in Titus 2, “Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled.”
      3. Again, you make a straw man argument and commit the logical fallacy of hasty generalization in claiming that, “In the Fundamentalist, Evangelical World, all women would be relegated to the confines of house and home.” This is a demonstrably false statement, unsupported by any factual evidence, and is contrary to the examples of godly women portrayed in scripture (consider the Proverbs 31 woman; the women who ministered to Jesus during His earthly ministry; Aquila’s wife, Priscilla.)
      4. You make the claim that you once were “an evangelical Christian” but don’t acknowledge whether you have completely apostatized or not. If such is the case, and you no longer consider yourself to be Christian, the greater issue at stake here is how you will stand before a holy, righteous God when you die, for the author of Hebrews states clearly, “For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt. For land that has drunk the rain that often falls on it, and produces a crop useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed, and its end is to be burned.”

      I pray that the Holy Spirit will cause you to consider these things and restore you to faith in our LORD Jesus Christ.

      Like

      1. Darlene

        “You have successfully erected a straw man and eviscerated him. This post is written in regard to women who ARE wives and mothers and does not address the issue of unmarried women at all.”

        Heidi Ann: The fact that your husband doesn’t state single women anywhere in his article does not mean he isn’t including them in his diatribe against National Women’s Day. What he has done is praised all the women who have chosen to be wives and stay-at-home mothers, while denigrating all those other women – both married AND single – who have chosen not to be wives and stay-at-home mothers. Because the only other category for women who have not chosen to be wives and stay-at-home mothers is those women who have succumbed to the “world’s call to false importance.” That would include those single women who have abandoned their True Calling. It’s called an implicit insult.

        Further, elsewhere on this thread your husband has made it quite clear that he thinks women have one calling and one alone, and that would be to be wives and mothers. Quoting from your husband, he puts forth what he believes the purpose of females is: Their calling is distinctly unique to their sex and is the very reason why God made woman: to serve their husbands and to bear image bearers.” It’s rather obvious that he believes all women fit into this category. I’m quite familiar with Quiverful, Patriarchal beliefs which teach that females should always be under the authority of a male – first their father, and then transferred to the husband when they marry. So single women who choose to have a higher education and seek professions instead of getting married and having children (by either postponing marriage or never marrying) are abandoning God’s purpose for them – which is to marry and have babies.

        Look, I know what you folks believe and I know the blog article was meant to dis all women who don’t conform to your beliefs about gender roles – single and married.

        Like

      2. Darlene

        “You make the claim that you once were “an evangelical Christian” but don’t acknowledge whether you have completely apostatized or not. If such is the case, and you no longer consider yourself to be a Christian…..”

        And then you conclude…

        “I pray that the Holy Spirit will cause you to consider these thing and restore you to faith in our LORD Jesus Christ.

        Nice slight of hand there, Heidi Ann. There’s nothing like asking and then fast-forwarding to making a judgment call on someone’s relationship with Christ all within merely a breath from each other. Why feign asking when you’ve got me all figured out after reading a couple of comments on a blog post anyhow? Cyberspace discernment has fallen to a low bar these days.

        Like

  6. Chris

    I can’t pretend to address all the issues you raise but can simply say I admire your honesty and affirm you as a full and complete human being as you are and don’t forget there’s plenty of biblical examples and teaching about singleness and the original blog ignores this!

    Like

    1. Chris,

      1. The original post was written in support of MARRIED WOMEN who make the nobler choice of caring for husband and children. It doesn’t address singleness because that was not the topic!
      2. Please list at least 3 of the biblical examples and teaching about singleness that you allude to in your comment.
      3. Your affirmation that Patricia/Darlene(?) is a full and complete human being, along with $2.11, will buy her a tall cup of brewed coffee at Starbucks. “Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand” (Romans 14:4).

      Like

      1. Chris

        To address three comments in reverse – I was trying to affirm Patricia as a full human being in singleness – you don’t need a spouse. I suppose Jesus is the ultimate example but so was Paul and the single person isn’t worldly but the married are – 1Corinthians 7. And finally the blog didn’t say it was about married women but basically said any woman who didn’t devote themselves to family or home were worldly presumably including single women??

        Like

      2. Chris,

        <>

        The blog was written to/about “all the women who…[are] raising their children, and submitting to their husbands as to the LORD.” They are married, with children. Not single women without husbands and children. You have twisted the author’s words and imposed your own presumptions on what was said.

        You missed my point regarding your affirmation. Of what actual value is your estimation or affirmation to someone? You could affirm that Patricia was a polka-dotted penguin, but that wouldn’t make her one. What matters is what God says about Patricia, through His word. Let God be true and every man a liar (Romans 3:4).

        I appreciate the interchange.

        Like

  7. Lana Crow, Toronto

    What a bunch of Calvinist crap. This blog for real? Jeepers! Reformed trash. Your disrespect for women is appalling; it fits your man-made theology.

    Reformed Theology is Dying, Amen and amen!

    It can’t happen soon enough.

    Like

    1. Lana,

      If reformed theology is dying, and since all you can do is resort to name-calling, why do you even bother commenting?

      Darlene and Patricia put some thought into their comments. You’ve contributed nothing except vitriolic hot air.

      But, hey, thanks for letting us all know how you feel.

      Like

  8. Darlene

    “Just curious, what about the fundamentalist, evangelical women who actually want to stay home and fulfill God’s calling on their lives by submitting to their husbands and raising children?”

    More power to them. If that is what these women want to do, I’m all for them making that choice. Recently I visited a lovely stay-at-home mother who has seven children. That lady’s ability to multi-task is nothing short of amazing!. On top of it all, she teaches Greek to the children and adults at her local parish. However, what about the women who choose to have a profession in the medical field, or law, or education, or any number of other fields? What say you? Well, I needn’t ask because you’ve made it plain. They’re the women painted as being called to “false importance.” So, being called to be a physician, or scientist, or teacher, or nurse, or any number of other professions is, according to your words being “led astray by false promises of the world.” Gotcha. If you should ever be in a situation in an e.r. where a female doctor must save your life, I hope you rethink your philosophy. 😉 Or if you are being raced to the hospital in an ambulance where a female EMT is working to save your life, you just might do a double-think about your beliefs. Maybe, just maybe. I can hope, can’t I? 😉

    “Seems like you are the one being demeaning in all this. You have painted it as if they should be ashamed of doing what they feel is their calling.”

    Here’s the thing, I’m not about marginalizing anyone for the choices they make as you have done in your post. Because for you, it’s those women who choose not to be only wives and mothers with whom you have a problem. They are the ones you have painted as being called to “false importance.” So who is the one demeaning and shaming here? What I take issue with is that according to your view, and by extension those within your Evangelical, Fundamentalist circle, all women should have the same attitudes and ideas about their calling that you put forth. For you and your ilk, the women to be demeaned and shamed are those who don’t fit your mold – who choose to have professions and work outside the home. For you and your ilk, the stay-at-home wives and mothers are the only “true women of importance.” So again, who is doing the demeaning here anyway? Me thinks you’ve got some projection going on there.

    “Also, your are making the same assumption that it is the men forcing their wives to stay home. Bit of an assumption, don’t you think?”

    Forcing would not be the suitable word. I would say that within certain camps of Evangelicalism, there resides a peer pressure on women to conform to *only* one model: that of wife and stay-at-home mother. For those single women who have a desire to seek a profession and not marry, or put off marriage for a season, or Heaven Forbid marry AND have a profession – those women are relegated to the fringes. In such a religious environment, women who go outside of the role of wife and stay-at-home mother are supposed to feel ashamed and their desires are considered ungodly – very much the way your article describes them. Peer pressure has a unique way of making people stay in line.

    Like

    1. Darlene,
      The real issue here is that you seem to place great value in women becoming lawyers, doctor’s etc., when they are missing their true calling from God: motherhood and being helpmates to their husbands. There is no more noble calling for a woman: period. Why? Because in being a mother, and a godly wife, she is bringing eternal beings into the world that bear the image of God. Yes, they can be doctors, and even find a cure for aids, but there is no more grand calling that that of bearing children who bear God’s precious image. After all, men can serve as doctor’s and lawyers, and even do so for women. They have done so for hundreds of years. It’s a fallacious argument to assume that only a woman doctor can cure a woman patient. But alas, no man can bear children. Only women can do that. This is why their calling as mothers and wives far outweighs whatever role she may serve in the world. Their calling is distinctly unique to their sex and is the very reason why God made woman: to serve their husbands and to bear image bearers.

      The world tells them that they are important in being lawyers. But really, do we need more lawyers? There are plenty of men to serve in that role. We need godly mothers and wives.

      Yes, I know, there will always be single women because of those statistics you referred to earlier. But alas, let those who CAN serve as mothers, in the most vital role given to them by our Creator, as they have the opportunity to do so.

      The other sad reality is your perceived coercion of such activity. The truth is, the women who don’t want to serve in the role of motherhood, don’t. We don’t live in a patriarchal society. So your misrepresentation of such a society is only in your head. There is not real basis for it.

      Like

      1. Nancy2

        What does the Bible say about Deborah and Jael? Were they praised for their child rearing and submission to their husbands? Where were the husbands and children of Mary and Martha mentioned?

        Like

      2. So you take an example of a fool and prop that up to say, what exactly?

        And the absence of Mary and Martha’s children being mentioned… means what?

        Like

  9. Darlene

    “The real issue here is that you seem to place great value in women becoming lawyers, doctor’s., when they are missing their true calling from God: motherhood and being helpmates to their husbands.”

    Herein lies the difference in our thinking. Yours is an either/or – black or white proposition. I believe women can be doctors, lawyers, architects, teachers (like myself), nurses, journalists. etc. AND wives/mothers. My husband and I both raised our young children together while I attended university. We didn’t have babysitters or take them to day care, although I don’t criticize those families that do, because each circumstance is different. Furthermore, throughout much of my married life, I have had to work outside of the home because of the high cost of living in the areas in which we lived. My husband even encouraged me to work outside the home. By the way, he was much better as a parent in certain areas than I, so it proved advantageous for us to share in this responsibility. He has cooked some of the best meals in our household, although he may say the same of me. Laundry and cleaning, on the other hand, are my specialties in the home. 😉

    There is no more noble calling for a woman: period.”

    I will have to remind the women – my daughter being one of them – who are not married and have not had children. Her less-than-noble calling is one of working with students who have disabilities. A blessed calling indeed. Out of curiosity, what do you think is the most noble calling of a man? I have contended for some time now that Evangelicalism has made an idol of marriage. Singles within your circle become like second class citizens, not fulfilling the role God intended for them until they marry and have children.

    “After all, men can serve as doctors and lawyers, and even do so for women. They have done so for hundreds of years.

    Here’s where I think you are a bit out of touch. Many things were done for hundreds of years that weren’t quite peachy. Slavery is one of those things. Lousy medical practices, such as bleeding out with leeches and abusing people with mental illnesses (insane asylums of old) was also done for hundreds of years. The Good Old Days or things were better back then is a myth. Every generation has its foibles.

    Further, the fact that I have the choice to go to a woman gynecologist is an improvement as far as I’m concerned – your high five to male doctors notwithstanding. Last year I went for a mammography where a female nurse took me through the procedure. She informed me that only female nurses are hired for this position. On the very basest level, that’s called being considerate. But in your world, the fact that things used to be done differently back in the day means women aren’t really needed in that professional capacity.

    “It’s a fallacious argument to assume that only a woman doctor can cure a woman patient.”

    The operative word in your statement is only. The one who is being fallacious is you, because I never alluded to such a thing. However, in your provincial society women doctors would be non-existent.

    “The world tells them that they are important in being lawyers. But really, do we need more lawyers? There are plenty of men to serve that role.”

    So, what does the world tell those men who want to be lawyers? Again, in your world if a woman wants to be a lawyer, it must be some evil lie from the world out to deceive her. Some lie from the Evil One telling her to seek her own glory. Believe me, there are times when I would want a female lawyer. You can read between the lines on that one and arrive at some sinister motive, no doubt.

    “The other sad reality is your perceived coercion of such activity. The truth is, the women who don’t want to serve in the role of motherhood, don’t. We don’t live in a patriarchal society. So your misrepresentation of such a society is only in your head.”

    Are you purposely being misleading here? I was specifically speaking about the ethos of the Evangelical subculture in which you live – specifically the society which you wish existed within Christianity. I was not speaking of the greater society at large. Your words about coercion reveal an unawareness and naivete when it comes to the dynamics of peer pressure within certain religious circles. Having once been a member of a strict, Fundamentalist, Evangelical cult, I can tell you that peer pressure can cause people to do things that they very likely would not do had they not been in that group.

    Like

    1. Darlene, you lost me when you played the slavery card.
      The real issue here is what does Scripture say and what does Christ esteem. Does He esteem the worldliness you exalt, or the humility and submissiveness found in God’s word concerning the role of women in the family and the body of Christ?

      Like

      1. Darlene

        “Darlene, you lost me when you played the slavery card.”

        Then I’ll spell it out for you. You made an appeal to antiquity, i.e. – “After all, men can serve as doctors and lawyers, and even do so for women. They have done so for hundreds of years.”, – as your reason and basis for why women don’t need to seek those professions. Because, after all, everybody just got along fine before women entered those fields. Yes, I interjected a bit of snark there. 😉 Your appeal to antiquity is meant to bolster your belief that women don’t belong out in the work force doing those things like being doctors or lawyers, because men did these things for “hundreds of years” without the help of any women….thank-you-very-much. So…get back in your place womenfolk. We don’t need you to be doctors or lawyers or educators or nurses or any other thing that will detract from your calling as wife and mother. Implicit in your statement is this: The way folks did things in antiquity is far better than the way we do things now. Only, that argument doesn’t hold water. Just because things were done a certain way for hundreds of years” doesn’t prove that things were done better back then. And the institution of slavery proves my point.” The institution of slavery existed for “hundreds of years” just like men dominated the professions of law and medicine for “hundreds of years.” Appealing to antiquity as proof that things were much better back then is flawed argumentation, because there are a myriad of examples that prove otherwise, slavery being one of them.

        “Does He esteem the worldliness you exalt?”,/i>

        And what worldliness would that be? Women being doctors and lawyers? I think your idea of worldliness is shaped and defined by your rigid views and interpretations of gender roles. I do get it. I’ve been there and done that in my former Evangelical, Christian cult. We were made to believe that the world was a dark and scary place that would cause us to backslide. Looking back, I wonder why we didn’t think through to consider that the only way to minister to the world is to rub elbows with those folks. It has been through my experiences by working in secular society that I’ve been challenged to draw closer to Christ. Wherever I have worked, I have been able to be a testimony to the love and mercy of God. So no, I don’t think it’s worldliness for a woman, such as myself, to work outside the home.

        Like

    2. Serving Kids in Japan

      Herein lies the difference in our thinking. Yours is an either/or – black or white proposition. I believe women can be doctors, lawyers, architects, teachers (like myself), nurses, journalists. etc. AND wives/mothers.

      Hear, hear, Darlene! My mother is a doctor, and did a fine job of raising me and my siblings to adulthood. She has her flaws, and she made some mistakes. But anyone who wants to try and condemn her simply for being both a physician and mom is not going to be my friend. Especially if he also tries to paint God as condemning her for the same reason.

      Like

      1. You, along with Darlene, are reading into what I wrote. I’m not condemning any woman for their roles in society, I’m exalting those who chose to stay home and take care of their children and family instead of pursuing worldly endeavors.

        Please, either one of you, support your position from Scripture. We have supported ours from Scripture.

        Like

  10. Darlene

    *Up thread – I was specifically referring to the society that you wish existed in *all* of the Christian church. I make this conclusion from some of the posts I have read on your blog, not from a blind shot in the dark. The fact that some churches don’t believe the way you do about gender roles is, i have no doubt, disturbing to you.

    Like

    1. Darlene,

      You might want to do a **careful** bible study of gender roles.

      We are bound completely, and only, by what God’s word has to say on the matter. What other people or churches believe about gender roles is of no moment. Indeed, let God be true, and every man a liar (Roman 4).

      Are you willing to be informed by, and conformed to, His word?

      Like

      1. Darlene

        “You might want to do a **careful** bible study of gender roles.”

        You assume I haven’t. I’m already familiar with the gender roles belief system, through:

        CBMW – Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
        Bill Gothard’s Institute for Basic Life Principles
        Quiverful Theology – The Duggar Family, et al

        Listening to:
        Elizabeth Elliot
        Mary Kassian
        Nancy DeMoss Wolgemuth
        Paige Patterson
        Bob Jones Sr., former President of BJU

        Reading the writings of:
        The Gospel Coalition
        Douglas Wilson – pastor of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho
        Nancy Wilson – wife of Douglas Wilson
        The popular Neo-Calvinists of the day:
        John Piper
        Matt Chandler
        Jonathan Leeman
        Mark Dever
        Al Mohler
        Tim Challies
        Russell Moore
        John MacArthur
        Tony Miano
        J.D. Hall
        The three amigos at the Pyromaniacs Blog
        Paul Washer
        Voddie Baucham

        In addition to the teachings of my former Evangelical Christian Cult, that warned women to be constantly on the outlook for the Eve Spirit at work within in order to manipulate men. Belly button theology on steroids.

        Note, this is not a complete list. 🙂

        Like

      2. Serving Kids in Japan

        Dear Heidi,

        Just because we’re outside the “biblical gender roles” camp, doesn’t mean we’re ignorant. Thanks to the Internet, I know all about the CBMW and their allies, their talking points and what they say the Bible teaches about men and women.

        However, thanks to other bloggers and the media, I’m also aware of the hypocrisies and egregious failures of such groups, regarding the safety of women and children. It’s largely because of these facts that I cannot take their claims seriously. And after examining their doctrine, I find their conclusions on “gender roles” make no sense to me.

        Like

  11. Hi All,
    My post was written to commend the women on International Women’s Day, who were not being commended. The world was busy commending all the professional women that most of you seem to be commending. I was filling a gap. I was not covering all women in the body of Christ. Just those who are married, who are mothers, and who are submitting to their husbands as to the LORD. The Scripture supports that as the most noble calling for a woman. I base my beliefs and statements upon Scripture. Heidi has gone to the trouble to point these passages out to you. The fact is, you could care less what Scripture says. Therefore, we really cannot have a discussion since you think long-winded speeches trump what Scripture declares.

    This post is not about single women, not about slavery, not about your mother who served as a physician, none of that. It was about those who were not being honored on that day. That simple.

    Like

    1. Darlene

      Sir, respectfully, I think you are sorely lacking in self-awareness regarding the subject at hand. Your responses show you have little interest in a meaningful exchange with your interlocutors.

      You have deduced from Scripture that which satisfies your confirmation bias. In so doing, you – just like the world that you criticize, marginalize many women. Such marginalization places them outside the bounds of what you deem to be godly. That you refuse to acknowledge such does not mean it isn’t so. I’d posit that you can’t see the forest for the trees because you are so committed to what you believe is God’s will for women; and yes, I will include all women in that statement. I’d submit that your attempt to belittle those who disagree with you is your means of dismissing any veracity in what they have to say.

      That we have reached an impasse at this juncture is clear. It is that simple.

      Like

      1. You are correct. You cannot support your position from Scriptire, showing the weakness of your position. Unless, from Scripture, you can convince me that I’m wrong, here will I stand. Your many words are still empty and show your lack of confirmation bias or any other confirmation whatsoever.

        Like

      2. Marginalizing women is the way the world expresses disagreement with the truth of Scripture. It’s not a matter of being marginalized, but a matter of standing with the truth of God’s word, living holy, godly lives. Not acceptance from the world, but humility toward God and looking to His word for guidance, even when it doesn’t correspond to the fashions and wisdom of the day.

        Again, if from Scripture you can prove than I’m wrong, then I might think you have something to say. Otherwise, you are just blowing a lot of empty philosophies of men, captivated by every wind of doctrine that comes along. Good luck with that in the long run.

        Like

    2. Serving Kids in Japan

      Dear Timothy,

      I’m very much in support of honouring full-time mothers. I recall seeing some years ago an online video, in which motherhood was compared to paid professions. It made the point that mothers get no vacations or benefits, don’t have union representation, have no option to resign from their post and, above all, receive no salary for all their efforts. I don’t remember whether this video was made by a church or para-church group, but it drove home how hard-working and devoted stay-at-home mothers are. And yes, they should be honoured.

      But you could have done that without backhanded comments at those who aren’t stay-at-home mothers. In your original post, you contrasted full-time moms with those who “seek their own glory” and are “led astray by the false promises of the world”. Further, you contrasted them with some who “grandstand for false causes” (and without clarifying which causes are “false” are to you). I understand that stay-at-home mothers were the main point of your post. But you also mentioned those who aren’t stay-at-home mothers, in an indirect and very unflattering way. I think that’s why you’re getting so much pushback now.

      The Scripture supports that as the most noble calling for a woman.

      Sorry, brother, but I don’t see that spelled out anywhere in the Bible. I recognize that God cares about children and responsible parenting. He certainly values motherhood (and fatherhood, for that matter) and loves to give greater honour to the unsung. But nowhere does it proclaim explicitly that motherhood is “the most noble calling for a woman”, or even more noble than any other calling. Paul doesn’t even elevate marriage above singleness, so how can childrearing be more honouring to God than everything else?

      The fact is, you could care less what Scripture says.

      Minor point: You mean to say that we couldn’t care less what Scripture says. It’s a common error, I know.

      And you’re wrong about me. I care very much what the Bible teaches — I just don’t interpret it the same way you do. For me, it’s much simpler than trying to decipher what the “correct” roles are for each gender. Jesus taught us to do to others what we’d like to have done to ourselves. And I know that I would hate for anyone to accuse me of “seeking my own glory” or desiring “false importance” (your words), simply for putting my God-given talents and interests to work in the world, to benefit others and make a living. Since I’d hate for that to be done to me, I refuse to do it to women.

      Like

      1. Darlene

        “But nowhere does it proclaim explicitly that motherhood is “the most noble calling for a woman”, or even more noble than any other calling.”

        Serving Kids in Japan: This was the point I endeavored to make with much verbosity. That women have many choices – just as men do – is a good thing. Some women aren’t cut out to be wives and mothers. I’ve known a few. Some Christian women have a calling from God to be a missionary – Amy Carmichael comes to mind. Others have a calling to works of mercy in the medical field. Still others use their skills and abilities in all sorts of professions. There is not a One-Size-Fits-All for every woman, or every man for that matter. To suggest so is to disparage those women who don’t fit the mold. In one of the church’s that I attended, the pastor’s wife was a registered nurse AND a mother and wife. In that church, there were stay-at-home mothers, and there were women who worked in professions outside the home, some who were married and others who were not. All women were honored for their choices. And none of those women who worked outside the home were made to feel as though they weren’t living God’s best calling for them.

        As to your reference of Paul the Apostle, I find it an interesting observation that his view of not marrying as a preferred state is rarely, if at all, mentioned among many Conservative Evangelical Christians. Marriage, is more often than not, elevated above the single life. In this day and age, when more people are choosing to be single, or single for a longer period of time, church can be a place that relegates them to the fringes. In other cases, folks who aren’t married by the time they’re 30, are viewed with suspicion. I think Christians need to extend grace toward one another in this area. The Royal Law of Love (which you mentioned) should be the standard which guides us in all our dealings with others.

        Like

  12. Katy

    Thank you for this post! 🙂 I know I don’t need to be affirmed by man as I know I am living how the Lord wants me to as a wife, homemaker and homeschooling mother. 🙂 But it is still so nice to hear! 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s