Michael, this was very good. Thank you! I’ve actually been digging pretty deep into the debates between egalitarians and complementarians (or whatever labels one might want to use). One thing that I’ve noticed is that the word “patriarchy” carries very negative connotations in today’s society. But the Bible refers to patriarchs and the concept (men leading in the home and church in a Christ-like, sacrificial way) is a God ordained and God honored structure. It doesn’t make men better than women. They just have different God ordained roles. As you noted, everyone is called to submit to authority in various spheres. That is not inherently bad. It is inherently good because God established it.
Really appreciated this, brother especially the emphasis on bounded, delegated authority and the way you push back on the “one‑man total state” version of fatherhood.
Curious how you think about the terminology, though: as an example given that “hyper‑Calvinism” actually denies key elements of Calvinism, do you think “hyper‑masculinity” (or perhaps “atomized patriarchy” / “lawless patriarchy”) better captures the problem you’re describing namely, a defective masculinity that ignores church and magistrate rather than suggesting the issue is too much patriarchy?
Without disputing that such a situation exists, I suspect it results from most people ascribing far too much authority to the state and sometimes the church. In pushing back against the encroachments on his own authority, some men may go too far. For most of church history, patriarchal authority within the home was recognized to a vastly greater extent than it is today.
It would be helpful if you included citations and evidential support for these positions and statements, and allowed that there is a lot of nuance in this issue. It's easy to make broad statements, but over-simplifying and stereotyping doesn't do anything but fuel the "us vs. them" mentality that so many of us are easily sucked into. You statements about egalitarianism, for instance, don't reflect the beliefs or feelings of anyone I know who would fall on that side of the argument.
Absolutely not. Quite the opposite. The authority being rightly exercised by a father, magistrate, church officer, etc was delegated to these men by God. You must obey God.
Michael, this was very good. Thank you! I’ve actually been digging pretty deep into the debates between egalitarians and complementarians (or whatever labels one might want to use). One thing that I’ve noticed is that the word “patriarchy” carries very negative connotations in today’s society. But the Bible refers to patriarchs and the concept (men leading in the home and church in a Christ-like, sacrificial way) is a God ordained and God honored structure. It doesn’t make men better than women. They just have different God ordained roles. As you noted, everyone is called to submit to authority in various spheres. That is not inherently bad. It is inherently good because God established it.
Really appreciated this, brother especially the emphasis on bounded, delegated authority and the way you push back on the “one‑man total state” version of fatherhood.
Curious how you think about the terminology, though: as an example given that “hyper‑Calvinism” actually denies key elements of Calvinism, do you think “hyper‑masculinity” (or perhaps “atomized patriarchy” / “lawless patriarchy”) better captures the problem you’re describing namely, a defective masculinity that ignores church and magistrate rather than suggesting the issue is too much patriarchy?
Without disputing that such a situation exists, I suspect it results from most people ascribing far too much authority to the state and sometimes the church. In pushing back against the encroachments on his own authority, some men may go too far. For most of church history, patriarchal authority within the home was recognized to a vastly greater extent than it is today.
It would be helpful if you included citations and evidential support for these positions and statements, and allowed that there is a lot of nuance in this issue. It's easy to make broad statements, but over-simplifying and stereotyping doesn't do anything but fuel the "us vs. them" mentality that so many of us are easily sucked into. You statements about egalitarianism, for instance, don't reflect the beliefs or feelings of anyone I know who would fall on that side of the argument.
The purpose of statements like this one isn't to frame an argument but to express a position.
I find there's a beautiful paradox: for many men, exercising their dominion in the church means submitting to and serving the church.
Great read 👍
Good comparison.
And as you teach aptly in GTBAM, androgyny is the end game. Feminism and Egalitarianism are the half way houses.
All authority is delegated. Is obedience optional?
Absolutely not. Quite the opposite. The authority being rightly exercised by a father, magistrate, church officer, etc was delegated to these men by God. You must obey God.
Yes sir!