THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE FEMALE MIND. 



45 



Then on pages 36 and 37 he speaks of the " servile " condition 

 of women who are dependent on their husbands, and says this is 

 due to " our false standards of conduct." 



But again, is this really so ? When we turn to Scripture, which 

 must be our ultimate guide in such matters, we find, according to 

 Gen. ii, 18, that Eve was made for Adam ; not Adam for Eve. 

 And again in 1 Cor. xi, 9, the man was not made for the woman, 

 but the woman for the man. Also in 1 Cor. xi, 3, The head of 

 every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man." 

 Hence in Titus ii, 5, married women are enjoined to be " obedient 

 to their own husbands." 



Now this is not derogatory to the true position of womanhood, 

 but on the contrary, for according to Eph. v, 22 and 24, where the 

 same teaching is emphasized, the beautiful truth is revealed that 

 the Christian wife is God's chosen type of His Church on earth ! 

 " Therefore, as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives 

 be to their own husbands in everything." 



And in the measure in which the wife fails to be in subjection 

 to her husband, in that measure she fails to carry out God's high 

 purposes of honour concerning her, in setting forth to the world 

 the true position and attitude of His beautiful Church. 



Then, as to Dr. Schofield's contention that it should be the woman 

 who should select the man in marriage, and not the man select 

 the woman, I will merely say this : — If the man represents Christ, 

 as the Scriptures show he does, and if the woman represents the 

 Church, as the Scriptures show she does, and if Christ said to His 

 disciples, as He did {see John xv, 16), " Ye have not chosen me, hut 

 I have chosen you,'' then the Scriptural order must surely be for 

 the man to choose the woman, and not the woman to choose the 

 man. 



Mrs. McCoRMiCK-GoODHART Sent the following : — " The address 

 which you so ably delivered this afternoon interested me intensely, 

 and I am fully in accord with all your views, and felt tempted to 

 say a few words on the subject. I am afraid I should not have been 

 so polite in some of my utterances. For example, the young lady 

 of a hundred years ago, whom you picturesquely described as ' the 

 early Victorian lady with a poke bonnet ' I should have called ' the 

 bovine lady of the past.' 



