# Hypothetical Missionaries to matriarchal society



## arapahoepark (Aug 23, 2012)

I was wondering this today in my class American Colonial history when the professor said that the Iroquois Confederation was matrilineal and matriarchal to a large extent. How would a missionary to a matriarchal culture, like some in Africa and elsewhere, go about such things like what the Bible says about male leadership in the church and that man is the head? In some sense I think it is fine to preserve a culture, or parts of it so long as it does not interfere with the Bible. For instance, the Spanish had the men do the farming in the Southwest (where the Pueblos were), which in that culture was the women's job and led to rather harsh things, however it did challenge their animist culture, ya know?
So anyway, what are your thoughts on this?


----------



## Tim (Aug 23, 2012)

I think that cultures need to change wherever they are in conflict with the Bible. I would reject what some of you might know as "the prime directive" from Star Trek. Many people seem to hold to this in general society, as if the worst thing you can do to a certain culture is change it. I think missionaries should change cultures wherever some aspect is against Biblical teaching. 

This may include:

Male/female roles;
Views of creation;
Music, stories, festival practices that have demonic or pagan roots;
Adulthood initiation;
Death practices;
Immodest dress;
Medicine that is based on witchcraft/shamanism
etc.

Now, this is actually a lot, if you think about it. What I have listed can comprise a large portion of what is considered "our culture" by a given people. I would even go so far as to say that very little in a given culture is actually "neutral."

So, when someone says that missionaries went to the XYZ people, but doesn't want to change their culture, I don't really get that.


----------



## arapahoepark (Aug 23, 2012)

Tim said:


> I think that cultures need to change wherever they are in conflict with the Bible. I would reject what some of you might know as "the prime directive" from Star Trek. Many people seem to hold to this in general society, as if the worst thing you can do to a certain culture is change it. I think missionaries should change cultures wherever some aspect is against Biblical teaching.
> 
> This may include:
> 
> ...



I understand you. What I was getting at in regards to culture, is like things unique, for instance the Native Americans had this gift giving of sorts, it was a huge deal, and surely that isn't in conflict. And it was far different than our modern gift giving, I suppose it's similar to Japan's. Also the previously mentioned thing about the Spanish and the Pueblos, the Spanish imposed their cultural norms, like men farming (as it was a man's job in their country), while it was the woman's job in the Pueblos (yet she was still around the home),but things like that is what I was getting at.


----------



## Tim (Aug 23, 2012)

arap said:


> Also the previously mentioned thing about the Spanish and the Pueblos, the Spanish imposed their cultural norms, like men farming (as it was a man's job in their country), while it was the woman's job in the Pueblos (yet she was still around the home),but things like that is what I was getting at.



Is it a cultural norm to have men be the primary doers of physical labor, or is it a Biblical precept?


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Aug 23, 2012)

Trent:

For every sort of point they've sought to make, liberals have drafted the Iroquois Confederation into their service. I see they're still at it! Takes me back!

I would recommend for your serious perusal a couple of books by sociologist Steven Goldberg: _Why Men Rule _and the book whose name says it all, _The Inevitability of Patriarchy_. With respect to the latter, Goldberg argues that matriarchy is a myth and has never been demonstrated to exist anywhere (except in certain liberal churches and households). The claim of matriarchy mistakes the social organization of the given culture, subsequent study always showing that whatever males did in those societies was what that culture valued most. There are cultures in which women do what we regard as man's work and vice-versa, but this does not mean that women rule in those cultures and are actually likely to be the most subservient to men (virtually if not actually serving as their slaves). 

When a professor in a classroom, whether male or female, talks about matriarchy, they have an agenda against the natural order, keen to show that what we in the West consider natural and regard as taboo is purely socially-constructed and there are a plethora of societies more enlightened than ours that are organized along matriarchal lines. And it just ain't so. It's what Goldberg (who is not at all Christian but a mainstream sociologist) calls "the myth of the Amazon."

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Jack K (Aug 23, 2012)

The question isn't hypothetical. Many missionaries have planted churches in matriarchal cultures. My dad is one of them. He was a missionary to the Navajo for 33 years.

What do you do? You insist on following Scripture where Scripture is clear. And where Scripture isn't, you refrain from imposing your cultural values on the other culture. It isn't always easy to find the dividing line. For instance, my dad insisted on male leadership in the church while allowing the cultural tradition of a family living with the wife's relatives to continue. He might have tried to speak against the living-with-the-wife's-relatives thing based on "a woman shall leave her father and mother..." but he didn't feel Scripture was as clear on that issue as it was on male leadership in the church.

Also, we have to realize that a culture labelled "matriarchal" is not likely to be the opposite of our "patriarchal" one in all respects. Some roles may be different while others remain the same, causing it to look "matriarchal" only from some angles. You have to evaluate each on its own merits.


----------



## arapahoepark (Aug 24, 2012)

Ah! Thanks for your input! And I will check those out Dr. Strange!


----------

