Man and woman as reflected in the original meaning of creation – complementarity and synergy in the salvation of the family in Christ

In the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Spirit Amen!

Your Eminence Your Grace Reverend Fathers Brothers and Sisters in Christ

Before we start discussing anything we have to recognize that there is a difference an enormous difference between the state of Creation before the Fall and after the Fall. We also have to acknowledge that we only know through our senses and through our rational knowledge the formal the fallen world. All we know about the state of the cosmos before the fall is through the glimpses of revelations given to the prophets and the Fathers. What we know now as the world however is not all there is and definitely not all that will come to be but in Christ we are awaiting for the entrance in the eschaton the Kingdom when we will finally know experientially empirically the fullness of the intent of the Creation by God.

Living in the current state however makes most of us blind to God’s original intent and we have to turn humbly and trusting to those who through their own experience have tasted the mystery of God. Their teachings that we sometimes call dogmas or theology are intended to guide us toward this mystery. They are not the ultimate truth but they are medications as Fr. John Romanides calls them towards the Truth. Ultimately the dogmas are an experience an experience of God that if applied properly in the Church have the important role to guide all of us to an experience of God. So all the body of the teachings of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is nothing else but a guide to a personal and collective experience of God.[1]

Why is this important in our discussion today? Because we can fall into the trap to think that the important subject we are discussing today of the essence of man’s existence could be tackled exclusively through fallen human rationality. The entire Western society has fallen into this trap promoting a theoretical pursuit of knowledge delinked from any empirical understanding of God and His mysteries.

Further if according to the prevailing cultural beliefs we consider man nothing else but another animal maybe a little more “evolved” (if I can permit myself a pun) an animal that came to be out of a random series of mutational events then all bets are off. There is no plan in creation there is no purpose of creation there is only today and how do I make the best of it what the kids nowadays name YOLO (you only live once). However I will not follow that path but I’ll try to go back to those luminaries of the Church who through their own tasting the mystery of God can also guide us to the same fountain that will quench our thirst for understanding.

 The Creation of Man

In the book of Genesis we find two accounts of the Creation of man.  In the first chapter of Genesis the creation of man follows immediately the creation of the Cosmos:

“And God said Let us make man in our image after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air and over the cattle and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them and God said unto them Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”(Gen 1:26-28)

 The second account is in the second chapter of Genesis:

“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” (Genesis 2:7)

“And the Lord God said It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle and to the fowl of the air and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he slept: and he took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib which the Lord God had taken from man made he a woman and brought her unto the man. And Adam said this is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman (ishshah in Hebrew) because she was taken out of Man (ish in Hebrew). Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked the man and his wife and were not ashamed. (Gen 2:18-25)

From these two accounts we see clearly that unlike everything else in Creation Man was created by a special act of God. All the other things the light the earth the water the plants the animals were brought to existence by a simple ”let there be… by God’s command they were brought fourth. They all obeyed God as a master and came into being.   With Man however we see an extraordinary intimacy in the act of creation a closeness between God and His greatest creature. We see God using His own hands in order to shape man out of earth. Man is the only creature that can be called “theoplaston that is made modeled by God Himself.[2]  No other creature enjoys this status to bear the image of God Himself. St. Basil the Great underlines the dignity and the superiority of man in relationship with all the other creatures:

“You will know that you are formed of earth but the work of Gods hands; much weaker than the brute but ordained to command beings without reason and soul; inferior as regards natural advantages but thanks to the privilege of reason capable of raising yourself to heaven.“[3]

Man enjoys this status specifically because it was created in God’s image and after God’s likeness. But the Fathers agree that there is a difference however between image and likeness. The image of God cannot be lost it is a gift embedded in the very fiber of man. The likeness on the other hand is obtained through a progress towards God’s mode of existence that is gifted and has to be earned in the same time through the cooperation between man and God until man becomes god in theosis.

The achievement of the likeness of God however does not mean confusion with God; God remains God and man remains man. As man advances in the likeness of God the differences endure to eternity despite the progress in the likeness and this guarantees an infinite progression and wonder. In the same way although man and woman are alike by sharing the same human nature this does not mean confusion of the two and abolition of their differences. Man and woman enjoy in their relationship the love for what is different and yet familiar in each one of them without the eradication of differences.[4]

Male And Female He Created Them

The image of God in man continues to be a mystery even for the holy fathers of the Church. They agree however that man is made in image of the Holy Trinity. The entire Trinity takes part in the creation of man as we can see from the plural of the account of creation “Let us make man in our image according with our likeness” (Gen. 1.26). This means that the relational life of the Trinity of Persons Father Son and Holy Spirit is also transmitted to Man through this special act of Creation. This is why in the first account of Creation we hear: “So God created man in his own image in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them”. So according to God’s image which is personal and relational also mankind is personal and relational This is why man was created together with a woman peer a “helper fir for him”.

This is a very important aspect because it shows that both the male and the female coexisted in God’s creative act and discovered themselves as persons by reflecting in each other’s distinctions. “And Adam said this is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman (ishshah in Hebrew) because she was taken out of Man (ish in Hebrew)”. Adam was not aware of his manhood until God created woman from his side and he reflected himself in her and Eve was made aware of her womanhood when she reflected herself in her man. There is a beautiful complementarity between the man and the women expressed very nicely by the Hebrew play of words ish-man and ishshah-woman which coincidentally is also found in the man-woman of the English language.

We can conclude then that the full image of God as a Trinity of love is expressed beautifully by the loving relationship between man and woman a true reflection oikona image of the Holy Trinity. The likeness therefore lies in the potential success of this relationship. Man and woman both hold in them as image the potential of this beautiful love and by acting on it appropriately they can advance in the likeness of the Trinity. Of course they can also choose to reject it and the likeness could diminish in them and be lost.

Both man and woman however hold this possibility both are called to act on this mutual love with their common traits as humans but also with their specific characteristics which make them distinct as male and female. Both have access to what the fathers call askesis or podvig or struggle. Both are called to struggle but they May do it in different ways.

Sex and Sexuality

At the time of his creation the name Adam was used as a generic name and was not meant to designate any specific sex but only describing the matter from which is was taken. (See the word play in Hebrew between ? (Adam) and ? (adamah) earth.)  The concept of sex/gender appears when he contemplates his “helper” in front of him. Man as we already agreed was created as a consequence of the triune love of God and bearing God’s image he cannot be fully expressed other than in a relationship of love with the other creature that is equal to him and in the same way as him the image of God[5].

There is however a dissonance between God Who is an asexual being and Man who is defined as male and female. There is a division in Man which has to be explained in order to understand the full extent of the relationship between male and female and their creation in God’s image.  St. Gregory of Nyssa in his work “On the making of man that continues the homilies on the Hexaemeron of his brother St. Basil the Great acknowledges this apparent inconsistency and resolves it as follows:

“We must then examine the words carefully: for we find if we do so that that which was made in the image is one thing and that which is now manifested in wretchedness is another. God created man it says; in the image of God created He him (Genesis 1:27). There is an end of the creation of that which was made in the image: then it makes a resumption of the account of creation and says male and female created He them. I presume that every one knows that this is a departure from the Prototype: for in Christ Jesus as the apostle says there is neither male nor female.  Yet the phrase declares that man is thus divided.”[6]

He continues:

“I think that by these words Holy Scripture conveys to us a great and lofty doctrine; and the doctrine is this. While two natures— the Divine and incorporeal nature and the irrational life of brutes — are separated from each other as extremes human nature is the mean between them: for in the compound nature of man we May behold a part of each of the natures I have mentioned — of the Divine the rational and intelligent element which does not admit the distinction of male and female; of the irrational our bodily form and structure divided into male and female: for each of these elements is certainly to be found in all that partakes of human life.”[7]

According to St. Gregory man appears to be in the same time divine through the rationality and intellect that is bestowed upon him by God but also irrational by the likeness of his body with the bodies of the animals. Man becomes therefore a bridge between the rational and the irrational.

Why is this important? The man and the woman indeed possessed before the Fall just like the animals to which they resemble do the respective anatomical features that make them different and complimentary to one another including the sexual organs. However after St. Gregory marriage that is to say the sexual intercourse was not needed before the Fall and if man would not have trespassed the commandment the matter of the multiplication would not have been sexual but the same or similar of that of the angels.

For we shall be giving a fit answer to one who raises the question how man would have been without marriage if we say as the angels are without marriage; for the fact that man was in a like condition with them before the transgression is shown by the restoration to that state.”[8]

St. Gregory refers to the account of Luke on the dispute with the Sadducees about the woman with many husbands. Christ maintains there that in the resurrection “They neither marry nor are given in marriage; neither can they die any more for they are equal to the angels and are the children of God being the children of the resurrection” (Luke 20:35-36).  St. Gregory concludes therefore:

Now the resurrection promises us nothing else than the restoration of the fallen to their ancient state; for the grace we look for is a certain return to the first life bringing back again to Paradise him who was cast out from it. If then the life of those restored is closely related to that of the angels it is clear that the life before the transgression was a kind of angelic life and hence also our return to the ancient condition of our life is compared to the angels.”[9]

St. Gregory does not regard man as an asexual being as he acknowledges the anatomical and physiological difference between sexes. He further asserts however that in the final restoration of man man will be restored to the state before the fall when although there were already man and woman they were living like angels without marriage. So in the Kingdom the differences between sexes will not disappear only the function of the sexual instinct because it will not be needed anymore as it was not needed before the fall. Man and woman will keep their anatomical differences but the functions of their physiology will be adapted to the new situation. Of course only God knows what was before the fall and what will be in the Kingdom[10].

St. Gregory is not alone in his teachings; St. John Chrysostom follows him in the same direction as well as St. Maximus the Confessor and St. John Damaskinos amongst others. This is not to say however that there was no intimacy between Adam and Eve in paradise; there was as they were called to discover love and attach to each other but it was not of a sexual nature. This is something that in our oversexualized society cannot be even conceived but we have to remember that man was created for a loftier goal than just acting on animal instincts. Man was created as male and female to recreate between them the icon of the loving bond of the Holy Trinity that has nothing to do with the sexual instinct.

In the same time however it is not to say that sexuality as we know it is completely devoid of any redeeming power. The union in the flesh between man and women is something that God has given us not only to procreate which is a primary goal but also to teach us through the desire of the flesh of a higher desire the ultimate union with Christ that transcends all flesh. Thorough all aspects of marriage Christ is ultimately leading us to another wedding a chaste one with the Him the Bridegroom of the Church.

“Sex is not evil; it is a gift from our God. But it can become a hindrance to someone who desires to devote all his strength to a life of prayer…Concerning sex we must strive for self-control. St. Paul tells us to seek peace and sanctification without which it is impossible to see the Lord. Let us pursue holiness then in order to attain the Kingdom of Heaven.” (St. John Chrysostom)

We might draw the conclusion that sexuality as we know it after the fall emerged as a consequence of the fall the loss of the angelic life and the appearing of death. It is something necessary and useful in the current state of man for the perpetuation of mankind and the completion of the union between man and women but is not the ideal state. Sexuality has to eventually be transcended in Christ for the restoration of man to be complete.

Christ And The Tranfiguration Of Sexuality

Christ the new Adam is the embodiment of the fulfillment of the potential of the original Adam. Christ is in fact the original Adam the complete Adam in Who’s image Adam was created in the first place. In Him we see the way of life of the Kingdom. He comes to mend the division between male and female one of the five divisions of St. Maximus the Confessor[11] but not by coming into the world as a genderless person. Christ chooses a female the new Eve Mary to become incarnate from her and takes the hypostasis of a male the new Adam.

The new Adam is born now from the new Eve showing that woman as well contains the full of humanity in her.  He is born without conception through a virgin birth affirming the participation of both sexes in the salvation of mankind thus transcending sexuality and solving the division between male and female

The incarnation of Christ in a male body shows Him as a full man having all that a man has doing all that a man does except for acting on His sexuality. Christ eliminates the need for reproduction by proclaiming that “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” and in the Kingdom there will be no reproduction anymore but angelic life with no marriage.

The emphasis of Christ mission is not on marriage nor sexuality but on our relationship with Him. He shows us that if we want to have a relationship with God we should have first a relationship with Him. “If a man love me he will keep my words: and my Father will love him and we will come unto him and make our abode with him.” (John 14:2) Christ is the cornerstone of man’s union with God so if we are to follow the path of theosis we should define ourselves by this relationship by how much we have become Christ like by how much we have adorned the image in which we have been created with His likeness and not by how we use or abuse the fallen sexuality.

Christ shows that although everlasting life will be granted after the resurrection it can be pre-tasted here on earth. Man is called to participate in this anticipation by his second asexual birth through the water of baptism by means of which man passes from a mere existence to a good existence that is the life in Christ[12]. This new existence leaves behind the animal instincts and replaces them with the divine eros that draws man towards God in a perpetual motion of transformation.

Nowadays however we see a redefinition of man taking as central point his sexual orientation. Heterosexuality homosexuality trans-sexuality bi-sexuality all these define man according to his intercourse preferences. But sexuality appeared as we already saw only after the fall when because the original mode of multiplication was lost man fell to the level of the sexual reproduction of the irrational animals.

Even if we recognize the positive aspects of sexuality man should be defined by his advancement in the likeness of Christ not toward the likeness of the animal reign that cannot control their sexuality. By defining himself by the expression of his sexual instincts man is not anymore distinct from animals. But man has a higher potential: through man the entire Creation is called to be lifted to God and not lowered at the level of the earth.

Christianity affirms the difference between the sexes blesses sexuality within the Christian marriage yet ultimately leads us to discover chastity in the expectation of the Kingdom. Acknowledging this goal the Holy Apostle Paul affirms: “Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless to avoid fornication let every man have his own wife and let every woman have her own husband.” (1Cor 7:1-2) The marriage is viewed as lesser than chastity only because of the height of the ideal level of the Kingdom set by Christ. But the marriage is sacred and is chaste and even as a lower form as we saw  brings man and woman in a union that resembles and if lived correctly leads to the final union with Christ our chaste Bridegroom.

All matters of sexuality ought to be thus confined to the monogamous heterosexual God blessed union between a husband and a wife with the dual purpose of procreation and union of the two into one flesh. “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24 Ephesian 5:31) Anything that falls out of this well-defined context misses the mark and therefore is sin. A sexuality that is devoid of the context of marriage and its salvific end goal as defined by the Church is sinful not because it breaks some arbitrary rules but because it goes against the fulfillment of the potential of man and the restoration of the kingdom. This is why the Church does not differentiate between the various sexual sins but sees them all against one’s salvation. The Church is not an umpire of the rules nor a judge but as St. John Chrysostom affirms is a hospital for the sick. Therefore it is in Her duty to teach and affirm what is profitable for the soul and advise against what is harmful.

The fall is the consequence of the man’s actions according to instinct like a non-rational being. So why would we now repeat the same mistake and continue to act instinctually rather than resisting to instinct and sinful impulses and rise above the condition of the “garments of skin”? In instincts stirred by Satan as of old there is death and in the virtues according to Christ there is life and the fulfillment of Man’s potentiality.

The Passions And The Justification Of Sin

Fr. Dumitru Staniloae asserts that at the foundation of passions are natural affects and instincts that initially support life.

“In this animal characteristics we find both their lack of guilt and their inferiority because just like the animals are not guilty of the instinctual manifestation of their organisms in the same way man is not guilty as long as these affects remain within their boundaries serving the biological existence.” [13]

Through man’s decision and the exercise of free will however the natural boundaries of these instincts can be trespassed transforming them in passions. This is the case of sexual instincts that are serving a biological role of reproduction but by concentrating on their “side effects the pursuit of pleasure in more and more perverse ways sexuality is deprived of its original biological function and is transformed in a passion or more so an addiction.

According to Fr. Staniloae the pursuit of passions it is intimately related with the abandonment of the pursuit of God. Through the passions the focus has been moved from heavens to the earth. Rather than using his knowledge to pursue God man re-orients them towards creation and toward himself. The root of all these being self-love: egocentrism and egotism.

The pursuits of these natural instincts outside of their boundaries become directed action patterns that are now rationally justified by our conscience. In this way what was natural and now has been transformed in un-natural and perverse is justified by the perverted conscience and becomes the new norm.  Therefore if the natural pursuit of animal instincts are guiltless the pursuit of passions by man is diabolical because is a premeditated and wanted exaggeration of them. [14]

St. Anthony has said it already in the 4th century: “A time is coming when men will go mad and when they see someone who is not mad they will attack him saying ‘You are mad; you are not like us.’” [15] The slogan of our times seems to be the alleged words of Alfred Kinsey the founder of modern “sexology”: “Everybody’s sin is nobody’s sin”. But shall we all accept this change as unavoidable? After all Exodus 2:2 asserts: “Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil….”. The question is therefore can we keep up the struggles and resist this new normal?

Wedding As Restoration Of Humanity

The fact that the woman was taken from man shows that woman and man are part of the same creation that they share the same nature; yet they are ontologically different in ways that make them complementary to each other. The union between a man and a woman restores therefore in a way the fullness of humanity.[16]

Marriage in the Christian understanding as monogamous heterosexual and blessed by God is part of the good existence that St. Maximus speaks about. St. Maximus does not deny the value of marriage because he sees it as the way instituted by God for human procreation that we cannot reject.[17] However marriage has to be regarded in the context of the working of the virtues. Marriage has to retain its salvific purpose and not be degraded to a union of pleasure convenience social status or anything else that might pervert its spiritual purpose.

The union in the flesh between husband and a wife united in Holy Matrimony transcends sexuality in its animal non-rational form. It is a form of chastity as the marital bed is undefiled. Christ performed His first miracle at a wedding transforming what is common water into something special the good wine showing how the union between a man and a woman can lead to something better than living alone. We see thus how even through the use of those things that are lower like sexuality once they are positively transformed through the fulfillment of their God intended purpose they support us in our communion with God. Their perversion however into increasingly degraded forms has the opposite effect of alienation from God and missing the mark of the likeness of God.

Man and woman icon and vocation synergy and complementarity

In the light of the current ripples in the understanding of human anthropology created by the sexual redefinition of man we have to make sure that we maintain an understanding of the male-female antinomy that is both grounded in the ancient Holy Tradition yet capable to address the challenges of the postmodern and post-Christian world.

Both man and woman are icons of Christ and although there are differences between them: genetical anatomical hormonal psychological behavioral etc. none of these are impediments for the fulfillment of one’s life in Christ. This is why the holy apostle Paul says “There is neither Jew nor Greek there is neither bond nor free there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28) The access to the likeness of God through the ascetic struggle is opened to both men and women. The differences that God put between them on the other hand May lead to slightly different ways of going about accessing what is equally available to all.

After the Fall on their way out of paradise man and woman are presented with two different pathways to the restoration of their union with God:

“Unto the woman he said I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband and he shall rule over thee.

 And unto Adam he said Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife and hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee saying Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return. And Adam called his wifes name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” (Gen 3:16-20)

 In the epistle of the Holy Apostle Paul[18] and Peter[19] we have several passages that address the relationship between man and woman that would lead to a spiritual union and restoration of the fullness of man through marriage. These passages are read during the sacraments of crowning and are meant as guides to the new couple that enters a life of communion. It is unfortunate though that a superficial reading of these scriptural accounts could lead someone to the wrong conclusion that there is some plot against women a sort of patriarchal ploy meant to undermine women and lead them into unquestioning submission. But if we believe the Scriptures to be true and we are not ashamed of their teaching and find ourselves ready to follow them we have to read them carefully and meditate upon their meaning with the help of the Fathers.

St. John Chrysostom says it all in a simple phrase: “Let us take as our fundamental position then that the husband occupies the place of the ‘head’ and the wife the place of the ‘body’ “[20]. This pretty much sums up the opinion of all the Fathers who uphold that man and woman share the same nature both physical and spiritual and that there is an ordered relationship in which man takes precedence. We can affirm then that vocationally based on the order and purpose of Creation the husband is called to be the head and lead his wife that is called to be the body and that the two should be united in Christ.

The vocation of man to be a head in relation with the woman the body is not intended as tyrannical autocracy but to be an icon of the relationship between Christ the Head and the Church His Body. Christ’s relationship with the Church is a sacrificial one not one of exploitation. He gives first sacrificially not expecting anything in return. On the other hand the woman should respond to the impulse of love coming from man with a similar love keeping the concord between the various parts of the body and advancing the unity in Christ.

The truth is that both man and woman are called to carry a cross the cross May be different but none is lighter but to each is demanded as much as it was given according to their abilities. Husbands and wives share the burden of their marital union by fulfilling their vocational roles. It does not mean that one is better than the other but only that they have different roles that have to be respected for the completion of the union. These roles complete one another and through the synergy of their efforts the two advance much faster towards God. However if the vocation is refused and the roles confused the marriage moves in circles and ceases to fulfill it’s salvific purpose.

I have heard recently a beautiful comparison between the role of a woman in the family and the various wonderworking icons of the Theotokos. We have first the Theotokos as Guidance (Hodgitria) as the woman is the guide of her children showing them the path to God. Then she is Quick To Hear (Gorgopikoos) as a mother is always quick to listen to all the problems in a household. She is also The Unexpected Joy as women are capable to create the most sublime and unexpected joy in one’s marriage. She is also the Sweet Kiss (Glycophyloussa) expressing the tenderness that only a woman can show. We also have her as the Most Caring (Paramythia) because a mother’s heart can understand and soothe the pain like no one else.  Having the Teotokos as a guide and model women can fulfill their vocation as wives and lead a life of sanctity and alignment with their husbands and ultimately with Christ. [21]

Husbands as well are called to be an icon of Christ to lead their wives and their households toward God and to do this is a gentle and understanding way taking into consideration all the needs of the body so the body will willingly obey without coercion. Man cannot act selfishly but only sacrificially as they provide for and protect the household with the price of their own lives renouncing their petty interests and serving the overarching purpose of the marital union.

A marriage however is not complete in itself but the home is the small church linked intrinsically with the Greater Church of Christ. Marriage is overall communion communion that has to be continually strengthened by working together as a unit the pillars of faith:  prayer fasting and almsgiving. Man and woman begin to transcend the differences between male and female by the fulfillment of their respective vocations through the sacrificial exchange demanded by their respective roles completing more and more in themselves the icon of Christ.

Talk given at the AROLA Conference in Allegan Michigan on June 16 2018

 

[1] Fr. John Romanides Empirical Dogmatics vol 1

[2] Marius Telea Antropologia Sfintilor Parinti Capadocieni p. 159

[3] St. Basil the Great Homilies to Hexaemeron VI http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/32016.htm

[4] Fr. Mar-Antoanie Costa de Beauregard Teologia sexualitatii heterosexualitatea si homosexualitatea Ed. Christiana Bucuresti 2004 pp 2-24

[5] Marius Telea op. cit. p 170

[6] St. Gregory of Nyssa On the Creation of man http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2914.htm

[7] St. Gregory of Nyssa op. cit.

[8] St. Gregory of Nyssa op. cit.

[9] St. Gregory of Nyssa op. cit.

[10] Marius Telea op. cit. p 171

[11] St. Maximus writes of five divisions in which man participates and is called to overcome in the process of theosis: created and uncreated intelligible and sensible heaven and earth paradise and universe male and female. Ambiguum 41 also in Quaest. ad. Thal. 48 6.

[12] Lars Thunberg Antropologia Sfantului Maxim Marturisitorul pp 416-417

[13] Fr. Dumitru Staniloae Ascetica si mistica crestina Ed. S. Frunza Cluj 199 p 62

[14] Fr. Dumitru Staniloae Ascetica si mistica crestina Ed. S. Frunza Cluj 199 p 79

[15] St. Anthony the Great The Sayings of the Desert Fathers: The Alphabetical Collection http://www.orthodoxchurchquotes.com/201/07/1/st-anthony-the-great-a-time-is-coming-when-men-will-go-mad/

[16] Fr. Mar-Antoanie Costa de Beauregard Teologia sexualitatii heterosexualitatea si homosexualitatea Ed. Christiana Bucuresti 2004 pp 2-24

[17] Lars Thunberg op. cit p 417

[18] “Wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands love your wives even as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word That he might present it to himself a glorious church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall be joined unto his wife and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.” (Ephesians 5:2-3)

[19] “Likewise ye wives be in subjection to your own husbands; that if any obey not the word they also May without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair and of wearing of gold or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart in that which is not corruptible even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also who trusted in God adorned themselves being in subjection unto their own husbands: Even as Sara obeyed Abraham calling him lord: whose daughters ye are as long as ye do well and are not afraid with any amazement.  Likewise ye husbands dwell with them according to knowledge giving honor unto the wife as unto the weaker vessel and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.” (1 Peter 3:1-7)

[20] St. John Chrysostom Homily 20 on Ephesians found in Patrick Mitchell The Scandal of Gender  Regina Orthodox Press 1998 p19

[21] From an interview with Fr. Gheorge Holbea https://viatalatara.wordpress.com/2008/10/09/maica-domnului-si-femeia-moderna/

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
Man and woman as reflected in the original meaning of creation - complementarity and synergy in the salvation of the family in Christ 5.0 out of 5 based on 2 ratings

One Reply to “Man and woman as reflected in the original meaning of creation – complementarity and synergy in the salvation of the family in Christ”

  1. God made humanity male and female but Sam Colt made them equal.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *