When it comes to the gender debate, we must always keep sight of the Biblical picture of leadership.  Egalitarians frequently argue that our focus should not be on claiming our rights to authority over others, and I couldn’t agree more.  They argue that we should focus on serving one another, and again I couldn’t agree more.  But something that egalitarians would do well to remember is that true Biblical leadership is nothing more than the ultimate form of servanthood. 

    Christ has all power and authority and dominion over all the earth, and yet He humbled himself more than any human being possibly could.  The same is true for those who are called to lead in Christ’s church.  The powerful description of the way in which a husband is to love his wife (Ephesians 5) does not reveal some sort of egalitarian model of marriage, rather it reinforces the Biblical picture of true, Christ-like leadership.  For a husband to take on the role of head of his wife is for him to give up his own desires for her sake.  It is for him to always put her first, to always think of her before himself, and ultimately to give up his whole life for her (figuratively as well as in reality).  This is not a command to “mutually submit.”  Far from it.  This is a command to be a true Christian leader, as Christ was, and is, and ever will be. 

This was posted on the CBMW blog last week, but it's important enough to highlight even if I'm a bit late...

"A pastor in Finland and two of his evangelical colleagues are suffering the consequences of obeying the Bible's injunction that forbids female pastors in an egregious violation of the separation of church and state.

A Finnish district court last week convicted and fined Ari Norro, a preacher in the Luther state church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland (ELCF), with criminal discrimination for refusing to conduct a worship service with a female pastor, according to a Christianity Today report. 

Norro was fined the equivalent of 20 days of his salary, according to CT. Acting vicar Tauno Tuominen and Pirkko Ojala, chairman of the Lutheran Evangelical Association of Finland, were also found guilty of similar charges and fined. All three men will now have a criminal record.

The case first unfolded in March when Norro was scheduled to preach at a Sunday morning communion service in southern Finland. Fifteen minutes before the service, female preacher Petra Pohjanraito arrived to serve at the altar. Norro offered to leave the church, but Pohjanraito chose to leave instead. A church council requested a police investigation into the matter, leading to charges against Norro, Tuominen and Ojala.

Finland's laws prohibit any discrimination either in the workplace or in public based on race, language, age, family ties, health, religion, political orientation, work, sexual orientation, or gender."

For the rest of the post, go here.

CBMW is an outstanding ministry, and donations count for double right now. After you're done buying everyone gift cards for Christmas (really, who wants anything else?), consider sending some money to CBMW during their matching grant opportunity:

Our goal at CBMW is to make high-quality Biblical resources available for free to persuade and encourage believers around the world. We are grateful to God for healthy churches and individuals who kindly donate to make this ministry possible."

My last post on motivation leads us to consider our methodology. We claim to seek adherence to Scripture, but how are we doing this? I’m afraid some split the Bible into “Egalitarian verses” and “Complementarian verses.” There is no such dichotomy in Scripture. The whole of Scripture teaches a complex, yet uniform view of how men and women can best live lives glorifying to God.

We must allow the Bible to inform our view, not form the Bible according to what we’d like it to teach. The Bible is our first and final authority for theology and practice. It is first in that we must begin with what it reveals to us before pursuing other sources of knowledge. It is final in that if it conflicts with any other source of knowledge, the Bible wins.

So, because the Bible is of such authority, we look to it for an explanation of the proper functions of men and women. The wrong way to answer this question would be to pick and choose verses that we are comfortable with, and conform the uncomfortable ones to them. Instead, we must look at the complete testimony of Scripture on the subject and discern guiding principles that we can apply to everyday life.

In doing this, we must begin with basic hermeneutical principles, such as:

1)      Scripture is a commentary unto itself.

2)      Scripture never contradicts itself.

3)      Clearer Scriptures should be used to interpret those that are less clear.

Especially in this case, we must also discern between didactic or exhortive passages and narrative or historical passages. Narrative passages do often have the intention of instruction, but they do not usually provide the explicit guiding principles that didactic passages do. So, in general, we look to didactic passages that provide guidelines that should be supported, or at least not conflicted, by narrative passages.

So here’s the method in action: The case we’ve made in previous posts is that the Bible provides specific roles for men and women in church and marriage. Here are a few:

•     Men and women, though unique in many ways, are of equal value because they are made in God’s image (Gen 1:27).

•     Husbands are the head (authority) of their wives (1 Corinthians 11:3)

•     Husbands are ultimately responsible for their families (Gen 3:9)

•     Wives are to submit to their husbands (Eph 5:22)

•     Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church (Eph 5:25)

•     Women are not to perform the role of elder, which includes teaching the Bible in the assembled church (1 Timothy 2:11-15)

•     Elders should be men with no more than one wife (1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6)

What about the narrative passages that give us examples of women functioning with God’s blessing? We believe none of these passages conflict with the above biblical principles that make up the Complementarian position…

Judges 5:4-5- Deborah was a judge with the gift of prophecy appointed by God whom the people of Israel sought for wisdom. Many people believe this passage attributes political authority to Deborah, I think that’s unclear. Regardless, I’ve seen no biblical principle restricting women from having political authority, so this does not conflict with women not teaching in the assembled church, nor them having ruling authority in the church (eldership). Neither is there any restriction on women regarding the possession of spiritual gifts. The Bible teaches that women can have (and have had) the gift of prophecy as well as men (1 Corinthians 11:2-16). So there is nothing in this example that conflicts with the Complementarian understanding of Scripture.

Romans 16:1-2- Phoebe is described as a deaconess or minister. Without getting too far off track, the office of deacon is not a ruling office of the church; it is distinct from elder. I believe the Bible is rather clear that women are restricted from the office of elder, but I see no restriction against the office of deacon. Complementarians differ on this matter, but I find Andreas Kostenberger’s reasoning compelling. (I’m not sure what Grudem’s position is yet.)

We’ve only covered the first two chapters of Grudem’s book. Chapters 3-13 will offer defenses of the Complementarian position against Egalitarian objections, so I don’t want to go too far down that road at this point. However, I hope that these examples are enough to show the Complementarian methodology (at least how I understand it) as a sound paradigm for understanding the complete testimony of Scripture on this matter.

Thus far we’ve provided a positive case for the Complementarian view of biblical manhood and womanhood through summarizing Wayne Grudem’s arguments in Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth. Over the course of the past five posts, some questions have been raised as to Grudem’s (and, in general, complementarians’) motivations for making these arguments. Specifically, he has been charged with being “power-hungry” and “politically manipulative;” as well as “divisive and coercive.”

This is a common liberal strategy for dismissing arguments instead of thinking critically about them: label someone or their view with derogatory terms and it is then no longer necessary to deal their arguments. (Not that conservatives do not occasionally use this strategy, but it is far more common from the liberal side.) Along those lines, most accusations about power grabs betray a postmodern/liberal worldview.

Beyond being a dismissive rhetorical strategy, these sorts of accusations reflect moral deficiency. As Christians, we are called to love each other (John 13:34-35) and be reconciled to one another (2 Corinthians 5:20), but accusations such as these reflect neither love nor a concern for unity within the Body of Christ. Some time ago I posted some guidelines for discussing the emerging church. These standards ought really apply to every conversation between Christians, especially this one.

So what are Grudem’s motivations? What are we complementarians really up to? The clearest motivation is for men and women to find joy and harmony by living in adherence to Scripture. Take these quotes for example:

“I hope this book will enable women to rejoice once again that God has made them women, and men to rejoice once again that God has made them men. I hope that we will be able to look at each other once again as brothers and sisters in God’s family and feel something of the joy that God felt just after He first created us male and female (Gen 1:31)” Grudem in EFBT, page 19.

“We want to help Christians recover a noble vision of manhood and womanhood as God created them to be…

We hope that thousands of Christian women who read this book will come away feeling affirmed and encourage to participate much more actively in many ministries, and to contribute their wisdom and insight to the family and the church. We hope they feel fully equal to men in status before God, and in importance to the family and the church. We pray that, at the same time, this vision of equality and complementarity will enable Christian women to give wholehearted affirmation to Biblically balanced male leadership in the home and in the church…

If that happens, then perhaps the path will be opened for clearing away much confusion, for diffusing much frustration over male-female relationships, and for healing many of the heartaches that smolder deep without direction on how to understand our wonderful gift of sexual complementarity.” Grudem & Piper in Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, page xiv. The entire page is worth reading (it is the first book listed).

“The subtitle of this little book is ‘Manhood and Womanhood Defined According to the Bible.’ What this means is that I have made every effort to bring the thinking of this book into accord with what the Bible teaches.” Piper in What’s the Difference? Page 14.

In EFBT, Grudem stresses that this is an issue of obedience to the Bible: “In this generation, one of those tests is whether we will be faithful to God in the teaching of His Word on matters of manhood and womanhood… Today, by the controversy over manhood and womanhood, God is testing all of His people, all of His churches. The egalitarian alternative would be easy to adopt in today’s culture, and it can appear on the surface to make so little difference. But will we remain faithful to the Word of God?” Grudem in EFBT, page 56.

In a sense, this is about power. The Complementarian view is an attempt to submit to the powerful authority of God’s Word. We see ourselves recognizing God’s standards over our culture’s. Wise wives are called to live in submission to responsible husbands who love their wives just as Christ loved the church. Neither role is easy, but that is God’s standard for us.

I was going to continue by explaining Complementarian methodology, but I’ve taken up enough space as it is. So that will be my next post…

Chapter 1 Summary: The Complementarian Position (Roger)
Chapter 2.1 Summary: Men and Women in the Church (Roger)
An Argument for Hierarchy (Amy)
Biblical Hierarchy in Marriage (Amy)

For those who don’t know, this book (Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth) is available for free online in PDF form. It would be particularly helpful for this post to read Grudem’s actual text (Chapter 2 Section 8) since he provides lists I’ll be referring to but not reproducing.

In my summary of the first half of the chapter, I quoted Grudem noting different dispositions between men and women in relation to logical analysis and nurturing (see discussion of 1 Timothy 2:11-15). One commenter went on a rant that women are “less rational than men” (a gross mischaracterization of what Grudem claimed).  I’d like to reply with another quote to clarify Grudem’s position (as well as mine). “To say this is not to say that men are better than women or that women are inferior to men. That would be contrary to the entire biblical testimony. But if in fact God has created us to be different, then it is inevitable that women will be better at some things (in general) and men will be better at other things (in general).” (72).

Section 8 asks the question, “But what should women do in the church?” To help answer the question Grudem distinguishes between three areas of church ministry: governing authority, Bible teaching, and public recognition or visibility. Under each heading he provides a list of possible functions that should either be restricted to men or should be open to both men and women. These functions are ranked quantitatively. For example, under governing authority “President of a denomination” is ranked higher than “Church treasurer.” Grudem gives a word of caution” “These lists are not rankings of value or importance to the church! Paul tells us that all members of the body are needed and that ‘the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow greater honor’ (1 Corinthians 12:22-23)” (85)

Applying the principles discerned from Scripture earlier in the book, Grudem sees that being the head of regional and local groups (denominations/churches) ought to be restricted to men. However, being a chairperson on a local committee and anything of lesser authority should be open to both genders. For him, women should not be permanent leaders of fellowship groups meeting homes, but they can moderate “a Bible discussion in a home Bible study group.” (94) Certainly a thin line there!

In application of Bible teaching Grudem draws the line between teaching adults (restricted beginning at college age) and teaching children (open through high school). He sees women as restricted from “teaching Bible or theology” at seminary or Christian college, but not at secular institutions. According to Grudem, women ought not be restricted from writing or editing study Bibles, biblical commentaries and notes, or books on theology. This appears to me to be blatantly inconsistent. What authoritative or instructive difference is there really between teaching Bible at a Christian college and writing the commentary that’s used in the college? In my opinion, it should all be open or all be restricted in order to be consistant (I lean toward open).

Only one function under public visibility should be restricted to men, according to Grudem- the ordaining of a pastor. He believes women ought to be able to perform baptisms, serve the Lord’s Supper, take offering, and read Scripture publicly.

I’ve specifically chosen examples that would be more controversial among complementarians. It’s important to note that in most of these cases, the Bible does not make a clear statement either way. We must infer the right decision based on the broad principles it does establish. Due to this circumstance, we often find disagreements on these particular issues among those of us who agree with the broader principles. We’re all still complementarians, though we apply the principles differently.

Often, when people think of the word "hierarchy," they immediately visualize a military chain of command where one person barks out his unquestioned orders and is immediately obeyed.  It's no wonder, then, that people are confused--or even angry--when complementarian Christians say they believe that a "hierarchy" wherein the husband is the leader is the right way to structure a marriage.  Even worse, when those who do believe in a husband's leadership have an unbiblical idea of what hierarchy entails, the result can be misery--especially for women.

 

For this "Gender Friday" installment, then, I'm going to clarify what I mean by the term "hierarchy" so there's no misunderstanding about what I'm actually promoting.  To begin with, instead of a military image, I would like to offer two, more appropriate models from everyday life that I think far more accurately illustrate different aspects of biblical hierarchy within a marriage.  After that, I'll briefly summarize the counter-cultural, biblical context for all Christian leadership, within which a marital hierarchy must be viewed.

 

First, I think it's helpful to look at how hierarchy works in a healthy place of business.  Most of us are familiar with the qualities of an excellent boss.  He or she manages, motivates, and brings people together in a way that encourages the greatest unity, growth, creativity, productivity, and satisfaction among the employees for the good of the company as a whole.  We know what it means to accept and even respect and submit to a good leader in the business arena.  On the other hand, a bad boss tries to do everything himself (even if there's an employee who's more qualified), or he micromanages every detail of his employees' work, or he intimidates his employees into becoming useless yes-men. 

 

You've most likely also seen a well-functioning hierarchy in your experiences with friends.  We've all been in groups of friends where one person will emerge as the leader--not in that he gives orders to everyone or demands they pay homage to him, he just takes on the responsibility for the group.  His leadership is natural, not oppressive; he doesn't call attention to his position, but simply ensures the unity of the group.  He sees that decisions are made, he keeps things moving, he makes sure the others are enjoying themselves, and they look to him to resolve things.  In short, he is serving them (not himself) by leading.

 

Grudem describes this same key idea of responsibility in his discussion of hierarchy.  The husband is to take on this role of overseer for the family with the idea that the buck stops with him.  Whatever decisions are made that affect the family as a whole, he bears the responsibility as the representative of the family before God.  Just as the good leader of a business will empower and encourage the other employees to flourish with creativity and skill to the best of their ability (especially in the areas where they are more skilled than the leader) and yet still bear the weight of responsibility for the working body as a whole, so the husband is to do the same with the members of his family.

 

In addition to the idea of responsibility, no hierarchy within a marriage is biblical if the leader is not himself directed by the three central ideas of...   more »

It's Friday again and time to discuss Wayne Grudem's book, Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth.  Since Grudem's first two chapters describe the foundational thinking behind the rest of the book, I don't want to move past them too quickly.  Too often people begin and end their arguments with "the Bible says," and that's the end of the matter.  Now don't get me wrong--the Bible does teach the truth and is perfectly authoritative, and in the sense of truth and authority, it is the end of the matter, but that doesn't mean the discussion about that truth ought to end there.  For an emotionally charged subject such as this one, a stark command ("women can't be pastors") that doesn't include a rounded explanation of the goodness of that command can be confusing and difficult to swallow.  Even women (and men) who desire to submit to the teachings of the Bible could submit with their actions but still be in pain and perhaps even misunderstand the character of God if those actions don't make sense to them. 

 

I've changed my perspective on these things quite dramatically over the past 10 years, and I still have not settled my understanding of all the details.  At first the change came in submission to biblical truth, but from that moment to this, my life experiences have consistently proven its wisdom and strengthened my complementarian view.  I've come to see male leadership as being a result of the positive qualities of women rather than a consequence of women's lack of masculine qualities.  (I'll explain more of what I mean by this as we go.)  I haven't heard this perspective much, but I think if we could start thinking of this subject in these positive terms, the entire tone of the discussion could change.  Some of that may sound cryptic for now, but I will flesh it out in the coming weeks.

 

So for my first post on this book, I want to start at the beginning and defend the very notion of hierarchy and submission as positive and necessary for members of a body who are working together towards a common goal.  First, consider this chart from Chapter One which deals specifically with the organization of the family:

 

 

Leaving behind the issue of husbands and wives for a moment, I can give you an illustration--one that is not so emotionally charged--of a beautiful hierarchy and submission in another kind of organized group I've been involved with for years, and in which I've seen these same errors and ideals lived out at various times...   more »

Click here for the first post in this series Chapter two looks at what roles Scripture states men and women ought to perform in the church. This week, we’ll look at the theoretical case now, and then next week we’ll look at the second half of the chapter’s practical application.

The first point, as it ought be, is that the church should recognize the equal value and dignity of men and women. “Both men and women are in God’s image, and we share that status equally. We are equally valuable to God and equally important to God’s work in the world and in the church. In the New Testament, the Holy Spirit is poured out in a new kind of fullness on both men and women.” (62) However, equal value does not mean equal function.

With Scripture as our foundation, we should consider where the lines in church practice should be drawn. “We should not make rules that the Bible does not support, and we should not add restrictions to ministry positions when the Bible does not justify these restrictions. Where the Bible allows freedom, we should encourage ministries by women as well as men.” (63)

1 Timothy 2:11-15
            This passage is discussing the role of women within the assembled church. When Paul said he did not permit a woman to teach, he was referring to Bible teaching. “The conclusion is that Paul did not allow women to do Bible teaching or have governing authority over the assembled church.” (66)

            Many have claimed that this was Paul’s personal impression, or a temporary command for the social situation. However, “Paul’s words do not at all give the appearance of a temporary command for a specific situation, for he grounds his instructions in the situation of Adam and Even before the Fall.” (66) This command “applies to men and women as they were created by God at the beginning, and it is not due to any distortion brought on by sin or the Fall.” (69)

The second reason Paul presented is that “God gave men, in general, a disposition that is better suited to teaching and governing in the church, a disposition that inclines more to the rational, logical analysis of doctrine and a desire to protect the doctrinal purity of the church, and God gave women, in general, a disposition that inclines more toward a relational, nurturing emphasis that places a higher value on unity and community in the church (v14)” (72)

In regards to “women being saved by child-bearing:” “The point of 1 Timothy 2:15 is that women are not eternally lost because of Eve’s sin, but they will be saved and will experience the outworking of their salvation throughout their Christian lives if they follow the roles God has given to them and continue in faith and obedience.” (74)

Acts 18:26
            The Bible shows us, though, that women can perform other sorts of teaching. Acts 18:26 is an example of this. “This passage gives warrant for women and men to talk together about the meaning of biblical passages and to ‘teach’ one another in such settings.” (75) Grudem claims this also allows for the writing of books on the Bible by women.

(For the sake of space I’m skipping a couple of passages Grudem examines that makes points similar to others being made here.)

John 4:28-30 and Matthew 28:5-10
            These passages are examples of women involved in evangelism with the blessing of Jesus. “In speaking to non-Christians, [women] are not having the kind of teaching or governing authority over the church that Paul prohibits in 1 Timothy 2, because the unbelievers who hear the gospel message are not a congregation of assembled believers.” (77). Grudem claims this also allows women to give personal testimony, read Scripture, sing, act or whatever else “goes on in the assembled church other than what is explicitly prohibited by Scripture (Bible teaching and governing over the congregation of God’s people).” (78)

1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6
            Paul taught in these verses that elders ought to be husbands of one wife. This restricts elders to being male and restricts these males to having no more than one wife. One the subject of elders, Paul also stated that for a man to be eligible for the position of elder he must manage his household well. 1 Timothy 3:4-5 and 5:1-2 indicate, “male leadership in the home and in the church are closely tied together, and that in today’s controversy, male leadership in the home and in the church will likely stand or fall together.” (81)

Gender Friday is now back from its summer hiatus. Once again, every Friday we’ll be blogging on gender issues in the church and culture. For the next few months, Amy and I will be tag-teaming through a book by Wayne Grudem, Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth: An Analysis of More Than 100 Disputed Questions. Our goal is to blog on a chapter a week, though we may deviate from that when necessary. So that it’s clear from the beginning what our bias is: We agree with Grudem that men and women are of equal value but were created with different responsibilities in family and church.

The first two chapters provide a description and positive case for the Complementarian view. Following that foundation, Grudem analyzes Egalitarian arguments and objections through eleven chapters, with a concluding chapter summarizing the current controversy in evangelical circles. The following is a summary of chapter 1: A Biblical Vision of Manhood and Womanhood as Created by God, which explains six key issues revolving around creation and marriage.

 Key Issue #1: Men and Women Are Equal in Value and Dignity

            All discussions of gender should start here since this is where the Bible starts (Gen 1:27)

Key Issue #2: Men and Women Have Different Roles in Marriage as Part of the Created Order

            Grudem puts forward ten arguments from Scripture (some stronger than others) that there was male headship prior to the Fall; thus distinct roles from creation.

1. “The order: Adam was created first, then Eve (note the sequence in Genesis 2:7 and Genesis 2:18-23).” (p30) Paul saw this as important- 1 Timothy 2:12-13.
2. “The representation: Adam, not Eve, had a special role in representing the human race.” Eve sinned first, but Scripture says we fell in Adam- 1 Corinthians 15:22, 45-49)
3. “The naming of the woman: When God made the first woman and ‘brought her to the man,’” (31) Adam named her- Genesis 2:23. Naming is a function of authority- See God’s naming creation Genesis 1:5-2:20.
4. “The naming of the human race: God named the human race ‘Man,’ not ‘Woman.’ (34)- Genesis 5:1-2 “Does this make any difference? It does give a hint of male leadership, which God suggested in choosing this name. It is significant that God did call the human race ‘Woman.’” (35)
5. “The primary accountability: God spoke to Adam first after the Fall…. It indicated a primary responsibility for Adam in the conduct of his family.” (36) Genesis 3:9
6. “The purpose: Eve was created as a helper for Adam, not Adam as a helper for Eve.” (36) She was Adam’s helper by virtue of creation, not in certain situations, but in a normative sense. Genesis 2:18, 1 Corinthians 11:9
7. “The conflict: The curse brought a distortion of roles, not the new introduction of roles.” (37) Genesis 3:16 is not how the roles ought to be, but is how the created roles were distorted.
8. “The restoration: When we come to the New Testament, salvation in Christ reaffirms the creation order.” (40) In Christ the curse is reversed and the created roles are restored- Colossians 3:18-19.
9. “The mystery: Marriage from the beginning of Creation was a picture of the relationship between Christ and the church.” (41) Paul makes this point in Ephesians 5:31-32, and it is applied in 5:23.
10. “The parallel with the Trinity: The equality, differences, and unity between men and women reflect the quality, differences, and unity in the Trinity.” (42) See issue #3 below.

This Biblical model can only be worked out when husband and wife each avoid errors of distortion in either being too passive or too aggressive with their roles. Apart from headship, the man’s responsibility is to provide for and protect his family. Apart from support, the woman’s responsibility is to care for the home and nurture the children.

   more »

With the large number of books being published these days, one might think there are ample books already available on any given subject. The subject of the Gentleman may be a counter-example to that idea. Brad Miner’s book, The Compleat Gentleman, attempts to fill the void of books describing and defending the virtues of a gentleman. Most of the first chapter centers on the actions of the men onboard the sinking Titanic, both the hit motion picture and the true history. While watching the movie in the theater with his son, the laughter of some teenagers behind him at the words of a gentleman made him realize that what constituted chivalry in the early 1900s have been lost on the current culture. In this chapter he uses the men of the Titanic to define some elements of the gentleman and set up the rest of the book.

Chapter 2 begins Mr. Miner’s deep plunge into the history of chivalrous tradition. The natural starting point is Arthurian legend since “King Arthur is the lightning rod of the chivalric imagination.” Two threads are developed in this chapter that are often interwoven: the literary history of chivalrous tradition and historical information on the training and activities of knights. He not only discusses the chivalric elements of Arthurian legend but also the issues of historical reliability of the traditions. He continues on to training of the page, squire, and the knight, which leads historically to the Knights Templar.

The position of the knight faded away, but the code of chivalric conduct remained. “The model of the true knight was gradually supplanted by the beau ideal of the complete gentlemen, which—arguably—reached its zenith during the long reign of England’s Queen Victoria.” This transition is brought to bear in Chapter 3 in a discussion of the plethora of literature on gentlemen’s code of conduct in the midst of the Victorian era.

The first three chapters are the foundation for the next three. A set of values and characteristics being established historically, Mr. Miner defines three main categories essential to the gentleman: the warrior, the lover, and the monk. Chapter 4 focuses on the martial spirit of the gentleman. According to Mr. Miner’s analysis, honor is to be valued above, even at the expense of death and key to this is being prepared for anything. “The warrior’s way is the way of the dojo: he spars with death, brother against brother. When death wins, the gentleman graciously bows in defeat.” He colors his report with a bit of history and evidences from his own personal experiences.

   more »