Al Mohler's Rightly Ordered Family
According to Reason magazine, by 2017 women college graduates will outnumber male college graduates by a ratio of 3-to-2. Female students already outnumber male students on college and university campuses across America. But Al Mohler is not happy. Instead of applauding women who have made a decision to get that diploma, Al asks: Is Matriarchy the Shape of the Future?
Read the article here. Below is a snippet:
Christians committed to a biblical model of marriage and gender relations must look to this social revolution with a deeper level of concern. The most significant concern must be the long-term consequences of a new matriarchal world order. While Christians support the cause of higher education, the biblical worldview puts a higher priority upon the rightly ordered family and church. This dramatic social change will only serve to subvert that purpose.This paragraph says it all. Not only is Al opposed to women-in-ministry but he's essentially opposed to women in the workplace. Rightly ordered family? What does that mean? Keeping the women barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen? And to think, Time Magazine considers Al to be the "reigning intellectual of the evangelical movement in the U.S."
For those who still claim the tag Southern Baptist - Al Mohler represents the future of the Southern Baptist Convention. And in less than 6 months, Al Mohler will be the new face of the Southern Baptist Convention....
Labels: Al Mohler
posted by Big Daddy Weave at 11:36 AM
11 Comments:
Thanks for bringing light to the latest piece of insight coming out of Mohler's blog. I was about to blog on it myself, but held back because I was afraid I might write something I regret.
It is sad when religious leaders refuse to celebrate one of the greatest realities of our time - the possibility of an egalitarian society. I gain some relief in knowing that the women's movement will continue to push forward despite all powers that attempt to keep it at bay.
12:36 PM
I'm concerned that Dr. Mohler and others are so concerned that women are getting an education, something that has been going on for a few decades now, that he thinks it is a threat to the family. I alway thought it was the man leaving or cheating on his wife that was a greater threat to the family.
4:37 PM
Aaron,
I find it unfortunate that you allow your distain for your brother in Christ to affect how you portray him, especially when you resort to spinning statements in such a biased manner.
What I find most unfortunate is that many of your readers will read into this article, possibly missing the two paragraphs surrounding the one you quoted. Here they are:
Some will undoubtedly celebrate these trends. Ideological feminism can only applaud this reversal of history. Yet, truth be known, even many social liberals must find the trend worrisome. Their concern is not the fact that young women are going to college, but that young men are not. What about their own sons?
...
What about our own sons? Are they being encouraged toward education and leadership in the home, the church, and the culture? If not, we will surely reap what we sow. If you talk to the young women on college campuses, you will find that many are asking the same question. Where are the young men?
More than anything else, Mohler is here (as he has done elsewhere) decrying the failure of men to step up, lead, and provide in the home. This failure has in many ways forced women to take roles that they don't necessarily desire.
And whether feminists want to admit it or not, women have unique gifts endowed by their Creator that make them necessary components to the health and well being of their children. Men do not naturally have those abilities and when men drop the ball in taking care of their families, they force women to neglect this essential role in the home.
There are plenty of other sociological reasons why a society where men refuse to grow up is problematic, but it is certainly disheartening when one of gender refuses to pull their weight.
Now, from a Christian perspective, men are indeed called to be leaders in the home and church. There are certainly women who are capable of fulfilling leadership roles, but the Bible seems to teach that while the genders are equal in regard to worth and likeness to Christ, there are clear distinctions made in role. Now, you are free to debate that idea, keeping in mind that the majority of Christendom disagrees with you (especially in those countries outside of the "enlightened" Western world), - and I would be willing to do so with you if you want - but implying that Mohler is stupid for holding that there is a clear Biblical mandate for marriage and the family doesn't prove a thing.
8:04 PM
Why does Mohler think he has the right to tell me what God has called me to do?
8:23 AM
DR said:
Now, from a Christian perspective, men are indeed called to be leaders in the home and church.
When what he meant, of course, is from HIS (DR's) perspective. Jesus never painted anything but a Kingdom come of equality, where there are No Men and No Women, but a community of Christ.
Jesus called for men AND women to be leaders in the home and church.
Let's not confuse one's own position with God's.
I won't. That's MY interpretation of Jesus' teachings, which I think is pretty clear. And yet, I realize some of my brothers and sisters like DR and Mohler disagree with me. That's fine.
I'd just ask that they don't presume please that their position speaks for God's position, but rather, God's Way, as THEY understand it.
Big difference.
2:26 PM
Texas,
Let's put this into perspective. First, Mohler is saying the same thing that 2000 years of Christianity has said - and the majority of Christians today. It's not all that radical. Second, Mohler speaks his conviction regarding the gender roles he and others see in the Bible. How is that different from any other issue in the Bible?
What I mean is how can one proclaim anything they view as Biblical? If you say "what right" does he have to tell you something, then I ask "what right" do you have to tell anyone anything you believe to be Biblical truth? What right did Paul have to write to the Churches? What right did Peter have to preach the Gospel? And what right do we have to call men to repentence and faith in Christ? You see all proclamation begins with Truth and calls men to act.
Now I realize you don't believe that to be true, but atheists don't believe in Christ (yet we are still called to preach the Gospel to them), Muslim reject Christ (but again we are still called to point them to Christ), and finally Jews don't believe Christ was the Messiah (yet we are still responsible for showing them Christ).
I hope you see that the issue is not "what right" does someone have to tell you what the Bible teaches, but rather, DOES THE BIBLE INDEED TEACH SUCH? And if it does, then as a Christian, you and I are both called to obey.
4:35 PM
Dan,
Whether or not you view my view as a valid interpretation, I have a responsibility to Scripture and to Christ to proclaim it. If you honestly believe something to be true about God, then you should defend it against what you perceive to be error. But simply because it is an interpretation doesn't mean it has any less possibility of being true. After all, one of us is right and one is wrong. We can't both be correct. And the truth or error of our positions will inevitably affect our relationship with Christ and others and in the end we will face God's judgement regarding our faithfulness or lack thereof towards God's Word.
So there is much more at stake here than simply a matter of preference in interpretation.
4:42 PM
BDW,
Boy, is DR right. "This paragraph says it all," to quote you, is downright untrue. The one before and the one following say something too, and shed a different light.
Shame on you. Why don't you analyze Jimmy Carter's 2007 reported pluralist statements on Judaism and Mormonism, and leave Mohler alone--at least until the New Baptist Covenant Celebration is done?
8:13 PM
Why is Mohler so afraid of successful women? Just because boys are slackers doesn't mean girls shouldn't get a good education and succeed in life.
I'm a well educated, professional woman with letters after my name. Unlike my mother who did not have as many options, I don't need a husband to take care of me. I am married because I want to be, not because I have to be, or because Al Mohler said I should be.
Now that he's picked careers for women (homemaker), pretty soon Mohler will be calling for arranged marriages. Good thing I already have a job and husband.
Called by God, not by Al Mohler,
Tricia
11:57 AM
Tricia,
Like Big Daddy Weave, I think you have made some incorrect assumptions about Mohler's position as well. I hope you will go back and read those two paragraphs I cited in my previous comment; though I hope you will read Mohler's post in its entirety.
As I said, Mohler and others are worried about a world where women are forced to take on roles that limit their strengths in relation to the home & family.
And I have no clue where you get the idea that Mohler or anyone else states that you MUST be married or even that a woman must "be taken care of" by a man. Again I think you are making assumptions that don't truly reflect Mohler's position.
Finally, I am not sure it's helpful to the Body of Christ to place words or ideas sarcastically into the mouths of your brothers in Christ (as you did with the arranged marriage comment). Let's remember that Mohler is attempting to be faithful to the Word of God (and is well within the tradition and current majority view of the Church). If you disagree with Mohler and other complementarians, I suggest (as I did to BDW and others) that you engage them on an intellectual level regarding the relevant Scriptural passages.
2:16 PM
If BDW's read of Mohler is wrong or misrepresenting his position, then why is the title of Mohler's article "Is Matriarchy the Shape of the Future?" and not something about the failure of men to fulfill God's ordering of society?
First, does Mohler not understand than the egalitarian position does not replace one "authority" with another but rather argues for mutual submission and equality. His is the typical "either-or" argument "either patriarchy or matriarchy" -- there is an alternative to that in the egalitarian position.
Further, if the point is that males are not fulfilling their appointed roles, then why not say males are not fulfilling their roles and then avoid the criticism of the increasing participation of women in higher education. I think the elevated position in women is his problem and his point.
If Mohler is actually arguing what DR claims (I don't think he is), then he needs to work on his communication skills at least. If we need to read everything else he has written in order to understand what he writes in this column, he should at least provide a reading list for us or at least tell us that this piece doesn't stand on its own.
9:08 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home