Feminists claim submission is inherently abusive. It's important when dealing with such a claim to be able to both refute and reframe.
Refute:
If the Church submits to Christ, then submission is not inherently abusive
If Christ submits to the Father, then submission is not inherently abusive
If you submit to your boss at work, then submission is not inherently abusive
If you submit to a mission (sub mission), then submission is not inherently abusive
Reframe:
There is a need to reframe because if you are on defense and the question is framed as "is your belief abusive or not," then you are on your back foot defending and fighting on the enemy's terms on the enemy's strong ground.
We must reframe. Why is submission good? Well, because harmony, cooperation, love, peace, order, and mission inherently require submission.
So why are Feminists against love? Why are they against peace and in favor of conflict and strife? Why do they not want families to function well? Why do they support anarchy and conflict that make kids cry? Why do they support selfish policies that lead to divorce? Why are they against the commands of Scripture? Do they think Titus 2 and 1 Peter 3 are wrong? What about St. Paul? What about Collosians? Ephesians? Timothy? 1 Corinthians?
The military has a hierarchy. The Church has a hierarchy. Workplaces have a hierarchy. Families have a hierarchy between kids and parents.
Everything that works well has a hierarchy because it's ordered to a certain mission, has a certain telos and a certain goal.
Only things that don't work well don't have a hierarchy. Which is why Feminists don't want the family to have a marital hierarchy - because they're against family, against raising kids well, in favor of divorce, hateful towards and distrustful of men. Christ submits to the Father in a relationship of love that is a model for how a family should be. The Church submits to Christ, as an explicit model for Husbands and Wives. Why are Feminists against such obviously good things?

Comments