03 November 2022
Jack addresses the question: Do women possess moral agency? Almost immediately, thedeti responds with a distinct "yes". I'll let that whole discussion play out, as it's the theme for Jack this whole month of November.
But it raises a tangent I want to address: In our fallen mortal form, humans have only limited moral agency in the first place. Not every moral issue we might grasp is within our control. For example, we did not choose to be born as fallen fleshly beings. We had no control over the Fall as individuals, yet we bear the Curse of the Fall.
Further, I contend that we do not have moral agency to choose eternal life. Romans 8 and 9 squash that idea. It's portrayed as asking the wrong question. The right question is whether you will embrace what God offers you while in this life. The debate rages and I'm not interested in defending my position in debate forums. This is a matter of conviction, not intellect.
It becomes necessary to address this because western minds tend to view things in binary, or in false dichotomies. Moral agency is not a matter of either/or. It's not absolute. It has distinct limits, and our duty before God in our current condition is to seize the opportunities within the limits God offered them.
Now that we have that laid out in clear view, the fundamental question behind Jack's topic for this month would better be: Just how much agency did God grant females, particularly in the context of God's distinctly patriarchal revelation? The comment I linked to from thedeti goes on at length about things we might do to limit women.
If women do not have moral agency, then they are little better than children. They cannot be trusted to make any decisions on their own and must always live under the authority of a man: First her father, then her husband, then her son(s). They must never be allowed to handle money, own any property of any consequence, operate any machinery, vote, or have any voice in public affairs. They most certainly must not be allowed even to speak in church, much less have "ministries." They can work to earn money, but only at menial tasks and only if her father or husband allow it.
All of her earnings are the property of the male authority in her life, whether that be her father, her husband, or her son(s).
Women must always be chaperoned in public. All of her interactions with non-relatives must be under her father's watchful eye. Women must never be allowed in the company of men unchaperoned until they are married. Women cannot be trusted to select their husbands -- the men of her family must pick her husband or at least approve of her choice; and her husband will have absolute authority over all aspects of her life. She may not divorce him, but he can divorce her ("put her away"). College? No way. Live on her own or with other women? No. She will live at home with her parents until she is married. She does not need any education at all beyond high school and her mother’s training to be a wife.
I'm not sure if this is part sarcasm, but he outlines the Covenant restrictions on women. But again, it's not a question of whether women have moral agency, but how much. And a biblical covenant would assume that women are better off being restricted to protect them from themselves. Yes, God granted women some moral agency; He does hold them accountable for their sins. Yet He has tasked His Covenant people with building an atmosphere to account for the differences between female moral agency and that of males. God holds men accountable on a different level.
The Bible says women are not morally interchangeable with men. The Bible also rejects the notion that discrimination -- the habit, custom or policy of treating people different based on various identity factors -- is wrong. Indeed, God commands us to discriminate between men and women. He also commands us to discriminate between folks inside and outside the Covenant. Further, He demands that we discriminate between folks who hold to the different cultures and traditions. That this last discrimination carries a high correlation with ethnic identity is not really the point, but it's certainly something we have to accept, lest we defy the God who made us.
If the God of the Bible commands it, and both government and society call it a sin, what does that suggest about how much separation we should seek from them?
This document is public domain; spread the message.