The historical view of women

It’s time for our monthly chat about an issue related to women and theology, which maintains its status as one of my favorite topics of conversation. I’m constantly adding to my book list and making notes and forming arguments in my head. This is a place where we can work our way through some small conversations. 

A few months ago, I saw someone reference the historical aspect of complementarianism without giving any particulars. (1) It stopped me in my tracks because any position the church takes on women is new unless we are willing to say some not-great things about women. Many people who believe or teach that men are designed to be leaders insist that it is a historical position, but that is only half true. The vast majority of people who now hold that God designated men in some way to be leaders in the church and the home (and sometimes even in any public sphere) will also state that they believe that women and men are equal in essence, though unequal in role/responsibility. Believing that women and men are equal in any way is a new position. 

The historical position of the church has been that men are leaders because women are deficient compared to men. It’s actually quite an ugly history. Thomas Aquinas’ teacher was Albert the Great who summarized his position on women by saying, “A woman is nothing but a devil fashioned in human appearance” and “a woman is a flawed male.” (Icons of Christ, 23) (2) Thomas Aquinas went on to say that woman was made to help man “primarily for the purposes of sexual reproduction, since a man can be more efficiently helped by another man in most matters.” (24) Chrysostom can be summarized as believing that women are “less intelligent, emotionally unstable, more susceptible to temptation, and therefore are necessarily subordinate to and may not exercise authority over men.” This was not an argument about women’s ordination for Chrysostom; he was saying that women should not hold any non-domestic roles whatsoever. (23). Moving forward from the early church, Richard Hooker (1554-1600) said “the very imbecility of their nature and sex doth bind them, namely to be always directed, guided, and ordered by others.” (27). Women were believed to be ontologically inferior to men. That means their state of being as a woman was inferior to the state of being of a man. 

This does not mean that these men didn’t allow for exceptions for some women or did not occasionally also say things about women that are still acceptable. But as a whole, the world and the church held a view of women as being inferior. The church just backed it up with a layer of theology that the world did not always have. Here is an article by Marg Mowczko and another by Judy Wu Dominick that address these beliefs with scholarship and nuance. 

This means that any position the church holds that is not equivalent to the above characterization is new. Complementarianism is new. Egalitarianism is new. In affirming women being equal in essence, or nature, or being, to men, whether or not we believe that women can lead in the church or that men have authority in the home, we are making a statement that the historical church did not hold. I bring that up because it’s important to know. Everyone recognizes that egalitarianism or mutualism is new. We can see that throughout simply the history of America. But often, people cling to complementarianism insisting it’s the historical position of the church or they want to continue holding the positions that the church has always held instead of deviating into new paths. But chances are that they are already on a new path and just don’t know it. 

Church history can be overwhelming but knowing it helps us understand the world that we inhabit now. I’d love to hear your thoughts and what you have heard. Just hit reply and share them. 

Always,
Lisa

Links I Love: 

A state of the blog update instead of links today. In the next few weeks, I will be transitioning to Substack for this space. This means that you will be able to post comments and we can have conversations with one another and that you will be able to access the archives easily. You do not have to anything to continue to receive the newsletter. I do intend to also have additional content that will be available for paid subscribers a few weeks after that. Thank you for sharing this space with me! It is my favorite corner of the internet. 

(1) This was a person I actually conversed with via Instagram and email so I asked if they had space for a question. No one owes us responses to IG dms, right? However, when they said "sure" and I asked for clarification, none was offered. 
(2) These quotations come from Icons of Christ by William Witt. It's a phenomenal book.