The Homemaker Track at SWBTS
“Frankly, I don’t see what the big deal is. Universities and colleges have been offering courses in home economics for a very long time. My pastor’s wife, for instance, has a degree in home economics from the
The description for the concentration says:
“Preparing women to model the characteristics of a Godly woman as outlined in Scripture. This is done through instruction in homemaking skills, developing insights into home and family while continuing to equip women to understand and engage the culture of today. It is unique in that we recognize the need to challenge women both intellectually and practically. It is our mission to equip a woman to impact women and families for Christ.” (see the whole thing here).
You, in your blog, are doing something that the College at Southwestern is not doing, namely, equating a Home Economics degree with that of the Homemaking Concentration. One teaches life skills, while the other teaches that the ‘biblical’ role of a woman is to be a ‘Homemaker.’ You don’t even have to be egalitarian to disagree with this belief.
I don’t see how in scripture ‘Homemaker’ and ‘the gender role of the woman’ are synonymous.
You need to go read the description of the program. It only comprises about 20 or so hours of work for a four year degree (about 120 hours). All of these ladies still take Greek, Latin, and the rest of the Humanities core.
I understand that the women have to take the rest of the core humanities program… I was speaking to the claim of the concentration itself, not the whole of a humanities degree.
I don’t think that Titus 2:3-5 comprises the whole of a woman’s duty in the Kingdom. Titus is writing to the men, the women, and the bondslaves instructing them to act in such a way so that ‘the word of God would not be dishonored’(v5), so that others would have nothing ‘bad to say’ about them (v8), and so that others would ‘adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in every respect’ (v10).
Joel and Steve,
I saw a couple of things in common in your remarks. It looks like you both interpret this new program as saying that every woman should enroll in it. If you listen to the interview, it’s clear that is not SWBTS’s intention. Patterson affirms the freedom of female students to sign up for whatever program of study they choose.
Laying aside the argument of whether this degree is useful, as long as SWBTS does not endorse that women, because they are women, ought to enroll in this program then I don’t care.
My problem, however, is that the description in the concentration does seem to imply this (whether or not it contradicts Dr. Patterson’s remarks on the radio):
“Preparing women to model the characteristics of a Godly woman as outlined in Scripture. This is done through instruction in homemaking skills, developing insights into home and family…” etc.
So, according to this, if a woman is going to ‘model the characteristics of a Godly woman, as outlined in scripture’ then she needs to learn homemaking skills, etc.
Homemaker concentration: “Preparing women to model THE (unique/singular- see Russell’s Theory of Descriptions) characteristics of a Godly woman as outlined in Scripture…”