Patriarchy continued

Well I said I'd comment further and its been a week, so I'd better keep my promise now.

If you look at the gospel reading for that Sunday, you will notice that it is the one where Jesus asks, "Who do you say that I am?" As part of the sermon the preacher repeated the question for us to answer for ourselves. For me the answer is an echo of the apostle Thomas, he is my Lord and my God. "But," I asked myself, "what do I mean by Lord." This is where my thoughts first turned to Patriarchy, since both the term and the time in which it was written were very strongly shaped by the patriarchal world-view.

Briefly, the patriarchal world-view says something along the lines that men are inherently superior to women and should rule them and the man's families absolutely. Naturally this is painting in overly large brush strokes, I doubt there are many times and places in which this view was truly followed, although there have probably been many close variations on this theme. Let us return to the term "Lord." I believe that a Lord, especially someone like Caesar, was to be obeyed absolutely. This is certainly what I believe to be true of the faithfull's relationship with God, although the relationship is more like the one between a father and son in an aristocratic family. Still the family angle just adds the understanding that God cares very much for us without removing the importance of striving for obedience.

In other news, Bullfighting has payed Vana'diel a visit. It's really great fun to bounce off the Toros until it warps you away.

In Anglican news, charges have been brought against the Bishop of Connecticut because of his actions against one of the Connecticut 6. If he has truly violated the canons it will be good to deal with his error, but it looks like the trial will be very messy. It might even be made worse if there is a rush to finish with the case before next General Convention.