I’ll wait.
….
Done? Good. Onward!
The last paragraph struck me deeply: “So moderate people of faith, those of you who can endure the cognitive dissonance of espousing progressive politics while gleaning support in religious traditions that are thousands of years old -- I ask you to please speak up. There are many of us who need to hear your voices much more loudly.”
My heart went out to Samantha when I read that! This is me speaking up. I’m answering her call. There are a lot of great voices out there already, to be sure, and I can’t pretend to speak for every Christian (obviously). But I have something to say for her--specifically because she asked. I know many who are in her situation or a similar one. Many people who are led to believe that faith in Christ and gender equality (or any number of issues) are mutually exclusive. That idea is simply not true!
The main issue Samantha mentioned in her article was that of gender in the church, so that’s what I’ll focus on for this particular post. This has been an issue I’ve wrestled with for a while now. Like her, I have a hard time with the gender roles my childhood church was preaching.
The church I grew up in was not fundamentalist, but rather “complementarian.” What this meant was that while women weren’t necessarily looked down on or treated as second-class, they were not allowed in leadership positions over other men. This was based on the verses Samantha quoted in her article, 1 Tim. 2:11-12, where Paul states he would not permit a woman to have authority over a man.
As far as I knew, it wasn’t something that affected me as I grew up; in fact, I hardly even noticed it. I was a natural leader as a student, so I was always very involved in youth group and bible studies, but children tend to be treated with more equality when it comes to gender (at least, in this church they were). It wasn’t until around my freshman year of high school that I looked around and noticed there were no female pastors in our community. When I inquired about this, the above verses were quoted to me.
I personally never felt a calling or desire to be a pastor, so at first I only thought, well, I guess it doesn’t affect me anyways. I didn’t realize at the time, of course, how much I was missing out on because of it.
Still, the thought pricked at my conscience for a while. While I was in college, I really dove into studying it. I asked God about it. The more I studied, the more I asked him, the more I began to feel that my home church might have been missing the mark. Jesus, after all, treated the women of his day with an unusual amount of favor--many could argue that he was really the first feminist. He refused to punish the adulteress when all the religious leaders of the time wanted to stone her (John 8:1-11). He sat down and spoke with a Samaritan woman; he treated her with kindness, when most Jews of the time treated Samaritans (and especially the women) as second-class citizens (John 4:4-26). And the first person he appeared to when he rose from the dead was a woman (Mark 16:9). This last one is particularly significant because at the time, women could not testify in court (1). Their voices literally did not count in a court of law. Her testimony of what she saw and heard of the risen Lord would likely not have been counted as worth listening to by many leaders of the time. And yet Jesus appeared to her, spoke to her, comforted her, and gave her a message to send. He deemed her voice valuable.
On top of all this, there’s the issue of Phoebe, a woman who was clearly a leader of a house church, and a friend Paul valued dearly (Rom. 16:1-2). This fact suggests that Paul's statement barring women from authority over men was not a be-all, end-all rule; it was, perhaps, merely his specific instruction for the group he was addressing in that particular letter--Timothy’s church.
Lastly, we have to consider cultural differences. I know this argument especially irks fundamentalist Christians, but the reality is that the women Paul wrote about and to were very different than the women of today. They were not allowed to receive an education. They were constrained to manage a home, if that, and nothing more. Their only source of knowledge about social issues, politics, religion, etc, was their father or their husband. They certainly weren’t equipped to lead. How could they be? The rare women who were--like Phoebe--were recognized and appreciated by Paul. So it would seem that he didn’t refuse women leadership roles because of their gender, he refused them because the culture they lived in prevented them from getting the proper training (with occasional exceptions). So we have to assume that women today, if they indeed possess the skills, training, and education needed for leadership, would not be held back by Paul from doing so because of their gender.
On studying and discovering all of these things, I came slowly but holistically to the conclusion that my wonderful God is indeed a feminist. He is for gender equality. It was not until after the fall, the ‘original sin,’ that God told Eve her husband “would rule over her” (Gen. 3:16). When he said that, contrary to many teachings, I believe what he was saying was descriptive, not prescriptive--that is, he wasn’t inventing the curse. The curse was the natural consequence of sin, much like breaking a leg is a natural consequence of jumping off a roof. God doesn’t say, “Well, you jumped off a roof, even though I told you not too--so I’m going to break your leg!” Nonetheless, the leg is broken because of what happened. Sin messes things up.
God's original intention for legs is wholeness. His original intention for gender is equality. If Christ came to restore us, doesn’t that mean we ought to pursue a restored life? Restored to what God originally intended? Restored to equality and love?
I first thought that the complementarian church ‘didn’t affect me,’ simply because I never wanted to be a pastor. What I didn’t realize was that the dearth of female role models in the church was and is detrimental to many young girls. We need women leaders, role models, teachers, pastors. While the pastors at my church were loving, wonderful men with the best of intentions, what they (and many complementarian pastors) might not realize is that keeping women from leadership sends a silent message to the children at their church: Women are lesser beings. It doesn’t matter what you say or teach, barring women from leadership teaches girls they’re not as good, and teaches boys that they are better. This alone contributes to a plethora of other problems in the church--but that might be for a different post.
The first time I heard a woman preach, I cried. It was so incredibly affirming to my very existence, I couldn’t help it. I’d never realized how much I missed what I’d never had. Thankfully the men and women in my life, especially my parents, are strong, wise people, who encouraged me to question and never felt threatened by those questions I raised. They talked with me through it and helped me learn. Unfortunately this isn’t the same for everyone--in many church communities, questions and curiosities are met with hostility and a “my-way-or-the-highway” attitude which can lead people to believe that faith and gender equality are mutually exclusive. I'll say it again: They are not!
Samantha spoke out to those who can “endure the cognitive dissonance of espousing progressive politics while gleaning support in religious traditions,” but I think the religious traditions are the problem. The dissonance comes when we trust and ask our religion instead of trusting and asking our God.
Religion is ridiculously messed up. If you’re looking for religion, it will eventually let you down. Churches and the people that make them up have problems. (This does not mean that we shouldn’t attend church gatherings--I think we should, but again, that’s for another post.) Look instead for God, the one who created you and adores you as his child. A lot of people are going to talk sh*t about him, and a lot of people are going to misrepresent him. Ignore those people, and go directly to him to see for yourself. I’m not saying it’s easy or simple; there’s a lot of stuff I still don’t understand. But God does not demand that we accept strange rules or ideas without curiosity or study. He only asks that we include him in the process. Talk to him and get to know him--spend time with him--ask him the hard questions, and see what happens.
As for that voice you asked for, I hope this helps. I am going to try and be that voice (or one small piece of it) more often with this blog. I’m not an expert, I don’t have a PhD, and I’m not going to get it right all the time. I’m just a progressive Christian who tends to question things, and I’m always trying to reconcile questions of Christ and culture. Let me know if you have any, or help me out by joining the discussion and adding your own thoughts, updates, and corrections. Thanks!
Reference:
(1) B.M. Metzger & M.D. Coogan, "The Oxford Companion to the Bible", Oxford University Press, New York, NY, (1993), P. 806 to 818
Done? Good. Onward!
The last paragraph struck me deeply: “So moderate people of faith, those of you who can endure the cognitive dissonance of espousing progressive politics while gleaning support in religious traditions that are thousands of years old -- I ask you to please speak up. There are many of us who need to hear your voices much more loudly.”
My heart went out to Samantha when I read that! This is me speaking up. I’m answering her call. There are a lot of great voices out there already, to be sure, and I can’t pretend to speak for every Christian (obviously). But I have something to say for her--specifically because she asked. I know many who are in her situation or a similar one. Many people who are led to believe that faith in Christ and gender equality (or any number of issues) are mutually exclusive. That idea is simply not true!
The main issue Samantha mentioned in her article was that of gender in the church, so that’s what I’ll focus on for this particular post. This has been an issue I’ve wrestled with for a while now. Like her, I have a hard time with the gender roles my childhood church was preaching.
The church I grew up in was not fundamentalist, but rather “complementarian.” What this meant was that while women weren’t necessarily looked down on or treated as second-class, they were not allowed in leadership positions over other men. This was based on the verses Samantha quoted in her article, 1 Tim. 2:11-12, where Paul states he would not permit a woman to have authority over a man.
As far as I knew, it wasn’t something that affected me as I grew up; in fact, I hardly even noticed it. I was a natural leader as a student, so I was always very involved in youth group and bible studies, but children tend to be treated with more equality when it comes to gender (at least, in this church they were). It wasn’t until around my freshman year of high school that I looked around and noticed there were no female pastors in our community. When I inquired about this, the above verses were quoted to me.
I personally never felt a calling or desire to be a pastor, so at first I only thought, well, I guess it doesn’t affect me anyways. I didn’t realize at the time, of course, how much I was missing out on because of it.
Still, the thought pricked at my conscience for a while. While I was in college, I really dove into studying it. I asked God about it. The more I studied, the more I asked him, the more I began to feel that my home church might have been missing the mark. Jesus, after all, treated the women of his day with an unusual amount of favor--many could argue that he was really the first feminist. He refused to punish the adulteress when all the religious leaders of the time wanted to stone her (John 8:1-11). He sat down and spoke with a Samaritan woman; he treated her with kindness, when most Jews of the time treated Samaritans (and especially the women) as second-class citizens (John 4:4-26). And the first person he appeared to when he rose from the dead was a woman (Mark 16:9). This last one is particularly significant because at the time, women could not testify in court (1). Their voices literally did not count in a court of law. Her testimony of what she saw and heard of the risen Lord would likely not have been counted as worth listening to by many leaders of the time. And yet Jesus appeared to her, spoke to her, comforted her, and gave her a message to send. He deemed her voice valuable.
On top of all this, there’s the issue of Phoebe, a woman who was clearly a leader of a house church, and a friend Paul valued dearly (Rom. 16:1-2). This fact suggests that Paul's statement barring women from authority over men was not a be-all, end-all rule; it was, perhaps, merely his specific instruction for the group he was addressing in that particular letter--Timothy’s church.
Lastly, we have to consider cultural differences. I know this argument especially irks fundamentalist Christians, but the reality is that the women Paul wrote about and to were very different than the women of today. They were not allowed to receive an education. They were constrained to manage a home, if that, and nothing more. Their only source of knowledge about social issues, politics, religion, etc, was their father or their husband. They certainly weren’t equipped to lead. How could they be? The rare women who were--like Phoebe--were recognized and appreciated by Paul. So it would seem that he didn’t refuse women leadership roles because of their gender, he refused them because the culture they lived in prevented them from getting the proper training (with occasional exceptions). So we have to assume that women today, if they indeed possess the skills, training, and education needed for leadership, would not be held back by Paul from doing so because of their gender.
On studying and discovering all of these things, I came slowly but holistically to the conclusion that my wonderful God is indeed a feminist. He is for gender equality. It was not until after the fall, the ‘original sin,’ that God told Eve her husband “would rule over her” (Gen. 3:16). When he said that, contrary to many teachings, I believe what he was saying was descriptive, not prescriptive--that is, he wasn’t inventing the curse. The curse was the natural consequence of sin, much like breaking a leg is a natural consequence of jumping off a roof. God doesn’t say, “Well, you jumped off a roof, even though I told you not too--so I’m going to break your leg!” Nonetheless, the leg is broken because of what happened. Sin messes things up.
God's original intention for legs is wholeness. His original intention for gender is equality. If Christ came to restore us, doesn’t that mean we ought to pursue a restored life? Restored to what God originally intended? Restored to equality and love?
I first thought that the complementarian church ‘didn’t affect me,’ simply because I never wanted to be a pastor. What I didn’t realize was that the dearth of female role models in the church was and is detrimental to many young girls. We need women leaders, role models, teachers, pastors. While the pastors at my church were loving, wonderful men with the best of intentions, what they (and many complementarian pastors) might not realize is that keeping women from leadership sends a silent message to the children at their church: Women are lesser beings. It doesn’t matter what you say or teach, barring women from leadership teaches girls they’re not as good, and teaches boys that they are better. This alone contributes to a plethora of other problems in the church--but that might be for a different post.
The first time I heard a woman preach, I cried. It was so incredibly affirming to my very existence, I couldn’t help it. I’d never realized how much I missed what I’d never had. Thankfully the men and women in my life, especially my parents, are strong, wise people, who encouraged me to question and never felt threatened by those questions I raised. They talked with me through it and helped me learn. Unfortunately this isn’t the same for everyone--in many church communities, questions and curiosities are met with hostility and a “my-way-or-the-highway” attitude which can lead people to believe that faith and gender equality are mutually exclusive. I'll say it again: They are not!
Samantha spoke out to those who can “endure the cognitive dissonance of espousing progressive politics while gleaning support in religious traditions,” but I think the religious traditions are the problem. The dissonance comes when we trust and ask our religion instead of trusting and asking our God.
Religion is ridiculously messed up. If you’re looking for religion, it will eventually let you down. Churches and the people that make them up have problems. (This does not mean that we shouldn’t attend church gatherings--I think we should, but again, that’s for another post.) Look instead for God, the one who created you and adores you as his child. A lot of people are going to talk sh*t about him, and a lot of people are going to misrepresent him. Ignore those people, and go directly to him to see for yourself. I’m not saying it’s easy or simple; there’s a lot of stuff I still don’t understand. But God does not demand that we accept strange rules or ideas without curiosity or study. He only asks that we include him in the process. Talk to him and get to know him--spend time with him--ask him the hard questions, and see what happens.
As for that voice you asked for, I hope this helps. I am going to try and be that voice (or one small piece of it) more often with this blog. I’m not an expert, I don’t have a PhD, and I’m not going to get it right all the time. I’m just a progressive Christian who tends to question things, and I’m always trying to reconcile questions of Christ and culture. Let me know if you have any, or help me out by joining the discussion and adding your own thoughts, updates, and corrections. Thanks!
Reference:
(1) B.M. Metzger & M.D. Coogan, "The Oxford Companion to the Bible", Oxford University Press, New York, NY, (1993), P. 806 to 818
Hey Heather!
ReplyDeleteExcellent work on this post! I found it especially interesting because of our shared background.
I'm also for gender equality (in church and elsewhere), it's really exciting to see your passion for spreading it.
As I was reading I found myself asking two questions:
1. What is a good definition for 'feminist'? I find myself having a negative view of the word (probably thinking of pro-choice vs. life or "Never open the door for me" attitudes) but I do care deeply for women's rights and gender equality.
2. How does this view on gender equality in the church interact with God's design for wives and husbands in marriage?
I'm pretty sure we disagree on some things but that doesn't matter to me. I'm interested in your views and would like to learn more. I carry some complementarian beliefs which are completely subject to Jesus and Scripture and will hopefully do nothing but adjust and conform to His.
My first take is that we (my current church) are far less traditional on this issue than where you and I grew up. We emphasize women in leadership in an effort to demonstrate God's intentions for gender equality and His calling on the lives of women but we believe the role of elder/pastor is reserved for men. I currently lead a small group with a 75 year old lady who spent her life preaching, teaching, writing and counseling. She's amazing!
I've been studying Acts and I can't study Acts without studying Luke and it's been really cool to learn more about Jesus' interactions with women (a ton occur in Luke).
Anyways, we miss you guys! I hope some day soon God aligns our path with yours.
In Christ,
Jimmy