I’ve decided that it’s time for me
to embark on the whole chivalry topic again. I’ll be specifically addressing
this in the context of men opening doors for women since that seems to be the
discussion that generally develops from this type of topic. But, before I get
into things I want to say this: if there is something in here that you really
disagree with, or you believe that I am somehow putting down women, or men for
that matter, please, comment below. It is not my intention at all to do
anything but give women the respect that they are due. If that is not what you
get out of this article than I’d love to have a discussion about it. Now, onto
the meat of the issue
First off, we need to make a distinction here. What do we mean by equal? This may not seem important, but it's actually the root of a lot of disagreements that go on in these discussions. In the sense that man and women were both created in the image and likeness of God, yes, they are equal. But, in the sense that men and woman are different, they are not and cannot be equal. *queue le tomato storm* Now, let me be clear, I do not think that men are better than women, nor that women are better than men. I simply believe that we are. We are each and every one of us unique. To say that men and women are equal, is like saying that all creatures were created by God. Great, that's true, but it doesn't mean anything in this context. When we're talking about physical attributes and psychological tendencies, it is clear that we are just simply not equal. Men excel in the areas of physical excursion, whilst women clearly have superior psychological strength and an uncanny aptitude for understanding the human emotion. We are not equal in the sense that we are not the same. The only way that you can really say that we are equal is, as I said before, that we are made in the image and likeness of God.
Let’s take a step back for a second, I can feel the rage boiling in you. Allow me to qualm your anger with another distinction. We are not talking about math here. This is not a binary comparison. To say that one thing is not equal to another does not mean that one therefore must be greater than another. It's like saying marriage and the spiritual life are not equal. This is true, objectively speaking the spiritual life is a higher calling. But subjectively speaking we are each called to do something different and as such Marriage may be better for me, whilst the spiritual life might be better for someone else.
The one place that we can clearly see that men and women are not equal is when we look to the family. I'm not talking about how dads always seem to be in charge, stop jumping to conclusions. I want to direct your thoughts to what happens when a child grows up without one of their parents. Many of them turn out to be fine, yes, but children (especially boys) that grow up without a father are more likely to end up insubordinates (and have a higher likelihood of ending up in jail), and children who grow up without a mother tend to have difficulties with social interactions. If men and women were, as so many of you are saying, "equal" than this would not be the case. A child raised without a father or a mother would be no different than a child raised with both, but this is clearly not the case. Men and women each have characteristics that compliment each other, and in that we are also unequal.
With that out of the way, I'll move on to chivalry and why men have more of an obligation to uphold the dignity of a women. To start things off, it's not because women are physically weaker than men in most cases, and I don't believe anyone really believes that. The reason is actually much deeper than that. First, I direct you to the Creation Story, Genesis.
In the Genesis story we see that God created man and placed him in the garden to "care for it and keep it". Part of this "caring and keeping" is naming the animals that God created trying to find him a "helper". Eventually, he makes woman, who is then named "Eve" by Adam. Signifying that, just like all of the other animals, Adam is to care and keep Eve. Now, it is interesting to note that the exact wording used in the english translation of the bible is that God was going to make a "helper fit for [adam]". If we look to the actual Hebrew words, ezer is the word used for helper. This word is actually used with reference to God many times so we can be sure that God didn't mean that Eve was somehow a servant to Adam. If we look at the Hebrew word used for "fit" it all makes more sense. In this case, the word was kenegdo, which can be better translated as "according to the opposite of him." In other words, God was creating someone that was opposite of Adam. Someone who had all the characteristics that Adam lacked. This also rules out the idea that woman's primary purpose was to "care and keep" the garden and the animals in it along with Adam. That was clearly Adams job. So Eve was to be Adams "helper" in the sense that she created to complete Adam, she was to have the attributes that Adam did not have.
What does this mean? Well, it certainly doesn't mean that men are better than women - as I've said multiple times before, but it does indicate that men and woman do have different purposes in life. Women were not created to be identical to men, to be able to do everything men could, they were created to have the characteristics that men did not have. They were created to compliment men. Once again, I want to stress that by compliment I do not believe that men are somehow better than women, merely that God created man first, and that woman wes created to complete the design God created. So once again, we see that men and women are not equal, we were created to be different, we were created to be opposite.
With regards to men having a special duty to protect women and uphold their dignity, we look to the model family: The Holy Family. No one would deny that the Blessed Virgin is the most holy woman that ever lived. Thus, we can be sure that she would have acted in the way that God really designed women to act. We know less about her husband Joseph, but given how smart God is, we can be fairly certain that Joseph would have been nothing short of a stellar role model for what a real man should be and what he should do with regards to women.
What is the first thing that Joseph ever does in the Bible? He protects the dignity of Mary. He figures out that Mary is with child, and he knows that child she bears is not his. But, instead of tearing down her dignity and exposing her (which, according to the law, he had every right to do) he decided to divorce her quietly. Of course, when the angel appears to him, he obeys the command of God and takes her into his home. So we see that Josephs first action is to protect the dignity of a women.
First off, we need to make a distinction here. What do we mean by equal? This may not seem important, but it's actually the root of a lot of disagreements that go on in these discussions. In the sense that man and women were both created in the image and likeness of God, yes, they are equal. But, in the sense that men and woman are different, they are not and cannot be equal. *queue le tomato storm* Now, let me be clear, I do not think that men are better than women, nor that women are better than men. I simply believe that we are. We are each and every one of us unique. To say that men and women are equal, is like saying that all creatures were created by God. Great, that's true, but it doesn't mean anything in this context. When we're talking about physical attributes and psychological tendencies, it is clear that we are just simply not equal. Men excel in the areas of physical excursion, whilst women clearly have superior psychological strength and an uncanny aptitude for understanding the human emotion. We are not equal in the sense that we are not the same. The only way that you can really say that we are equal is, as I said before, that we are made in the image and likeness of God.
Let’s take a step back for a second, I can feel the rage boiling in you. Allow me to qualm your anger with another distinction. We are not talking about math here. This is not a binary comparison. To say that one thing is not equal to another does not mean that one therefore must be greater than another. It's like saying marriage and the spiritual life are not equal. This is true, objectively speaking the spiritual life is a higher calling. But subjectively speaking we are each called to do something different and as such Marriage may be better for me, whilst the spiritual life might be better for someone else.
The one place that we can clearly see that men and women are not equal is when we look to the family. I'm not talking about how dads always seem to be in charge, stop jumping to conclusions. I want to direct your thoughts to what happens when a child grows up without one of their parents. Many of them turn out to be fine, yes, but children (especially boys) that grow up without a father are more likely to end up insubordinates (and have a higher likelihood of ending up in jail), and children who grow up without a mother tend to have difficulties with social interactions. If men and women were, as so many of you are saying, "equal" than this would not be the case. A child raised without a father or a mother would be no different than a child raised with both, but this is clearly not the case. Men and women each have characteristics that compliment each other, and in that we are also unequal.
With that out of the way, I'll move on to chivalry and why men have more of an obligation to uphold the dignity of a women. To start things off, it's not because women are physically weaker than men in most cases, and I don't believe anyone really believes that. The reason is actually much deeper than that. First, I direct you to the Creation Story, Genesis.
In the Genesis story we see that God created man and placed him in the garden to "care for it and keep it". Part of this "caring and keeping" is naming the animals that God created trying to find him a "helper". Eventually, he makes woman, who is then named "Eve" by Adam. Signifying that, just like all of the other animals, Adam is to care and keep Eve. Now, it is interesting to note that the exact wording used in the english translation of the bible is that God was going to make a "helper fit for [adam]". If we look to the actual Hebrew words, ezer is the word used for helper. This word is actually used with reference to God many times so we can be sure that God didn't mean that Eve was somehow a servant to Adam. If we look at the Hebrew word used for "fit" it all makes more sense. In this case, the word was kenegdo, which can be better translated as "according to the opposite of him." In other words, God was creating someone that was opposite of Adam. Someone who had all the characteristics that Adam lacked. This also rules out the idea that woman's primary purpose was to "care and keep" the garden and the animals in it along with Adam. That was clearly Adams job. So Eve was to be Adams "helper" in the sense that she created to complete Adam, she was to have the attributes that Adam did not have.
What does this mean? Well, it certainly doesn't mean that men are better than women - as I've said multiple times before, but it does indicate that men and woman do have different purposes in life. Women were not created to be identical to men, to be able to do everything men could, they were created to have the characteristics that men did not have. They were created to compliment men. Once again, I want to stress that by compliment I do not believe that men are somehow better than women, merely that God created man first, and that woman wes created to complete the design God created. So once again, we see that men and women are not equal, we were created to be different, we were created to be opposite.
With regards to men having a special duty to protect women and uphold their dignity, we look to the model family: The Holy Family. No one would deny that the Blessed Virgin is the most holy woman that ever lived. Thus, we can be sure that she would have acted in the way that God really designed women to act. We know less about her husband Joseph, but given how smart God is, we can be fairly certain that Joseph would have been nothing short of a stellar role model for what a real man should be and what he should do with regards to women.
What is the first thing that Joseph ever does in the Bible? He protects the dignity of Mary. He figures out that Mary is with child, and he knows that child she bears is not his. But, instead of tearing down her dignity and exposing her (which, according to the law, he had every right to do) he decided to divorce her quietly. Of course, when the angel appears to him, he obeys the command of God and takes her into his home. So we see that Josephs first action is to protect the dignity of a women.
What's the next thing we see Joseph doing? Protecting his family from Herod. The angel appears to him and warns him in a dream that he is not safe, that he must flee to Egypt, and - once again - follows the command of God. Joseph is never again mentioned in the bible. In other words, the only thing that the man that God chose as the foster father of His Son here on earth does in the bible is protect the dignity of Mary, and protect his family. That's it.
This is not to say that women are not capable of being protectors. Even in the Bible there are examples of great heroin’s who protected their families or countries (Judith for instance), but from God's interactions with Adam and Eve when they were created, and Mary and Joseph during the events surrounding the Nativity, it is clear that God intended man to be the protector. God could have just as easily sent an Angel to Mary to warn the Holy Family about Herod, and he could have given Mary the grace to convince Joseph of the reality of the situation, but he didn't. He chose a man who would protect he dignity of Mary, and he went to that same man when the Holy Family was in danger.
So, what does all of this have to do with chivalry? Well, simply put, men are the protectors. That's just the way it is, it's the way we were designed. What does that have to do with opening doors? Nothing really. In fact, I always wonder why we always get caught up on this little part instead of looking at the concept as a whole. The reason that men hold doors for women is not because we owe you something, it's not because we are stronger and think you can't open it yourself, it's because God designed us to care for the things in his garden, and that includes women.
Think about it this way. At a nice hotel, who opens the door? The bell boy. The servant (ignore the fact that he's getting paid for a second). When we open a door for a women, we are not saying, "You are weak, let me get that for you." We are saying, "Allow me to serve you, allow me to do the thing that God designed me to do." Now, this is not to say that women can't open doors for men. They do it all the time and it's perfectly fine, but you have to understand that something that God has placed in a man’s mind will always drive him to open that door for a women.
I'll finish with this hard truth. If you don't think that women have an inherent dignity that God has entrusted men to protect, then I'm sorry, but you're disagreeing with countless saints and church documents. So I'd encourage you to actually take a step back and go look into it on your own.
No comments:
Post a Comment