| 
Articles
Contacts
Forum
Home
Join Us
Links
F.R.O.
Readings
|
The purpose of this forum is to facilitate communication and mutual
support and edification among those who strive toward gender justice in
Churches of Christ. If you would like to join the forum, send an e-mail
(including your first and last name) from your primary address to forum@gal328.org.
Chad, You reminded me of the foundation Paul said he laid in Corinth. This is our hope, that we'll come through. It's a good thing we all have that flame retardant clothing in Christ that he spoke of in Galations 3.
1 Cor 3:12-15
12 If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work. 14 If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. 15 If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.
NIV
As for those of you with the swords, or hammers, at the ready, let me tell you where to aim. No! Not below the belt, no matter how many times they do! It just makes 'em mad.
Hit for the solar plexus. A blow there knocks the wind out of them and has been known to touch the heart.
Beverly
:::posted by Beverly on 8/31/2002 04:41:30 PM
Vic - I've never been afraid to admit that you are my sister, the part I may regret is the "older, wiser" part (or at least the wiser) because I know that YOU know that you never hammer alone! And when you feel you are alone - just look at your family - there and here (in our safe place).
Chad - Someone yesterday said they were typing through tears, as I am doing now, thank you for your insight. You were able to voice what [I'm sure] many of us think and feel. I think visually and your metaphor is awesome and really helped me. God did arm us with a sword, shield, and armor! While your chipping away at the bottom, I'll try to help from my end, and Vicki will be at her end, and on and on and none of us are alone!
Wiley - I wish I could have been there to hear Carmen in person. I did hear men's voices on the tapes and I applaud the men that listen to women speakers, with out mirrors or video tape. I know of men in our church that will listen to a women speak in business lecture, but would never dream of listening to the same women in a church setting! Is there any logic in that?
Lance - Thank you again for this "safe place."
Grace to you all!
Shelly
:::posted by Shelly on 8/31/2002 11:17:38 AM
Well, I started yesterday saying I was going to be a good listener, failed miserably and got …reprimanded. And, rightly so. So, thanks, Lance, for keeping us focused, for watching out for the whole, not just the few, for remembering the goal, and for caring about ALL of God's people! I, too, will put away my sword, but I'm taking my hammer with me tomorrow.
Side-by-Side,
-Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 8/31/2002 10:27:43 AM
Lance, I am so appreciative that you so carefully worded that post. It makes me feel taken care of. I could tell that you were concerned for each of us and where our words would take us and what light it would put us in with others. When I read your post to my husband...he said you must've been smiling when you typed the part about getting together for a game of basketball. You made me laugh with that statement.
Lance, I also know that from our brief internet encounters...I like you and respect the work that you are doing. It would be great to sit down and talk. I know that you "get it". Not many men do and that can be so frustrating. I think you are the right person to rein us in every now and then but I do know that you realize that we have been in battle for a long time and we easily take out our swords....we just need to be careful who we pull our swords on. I know that mine has been way too accessible for too many years. I will try to put in the attic for awhile. May the Spirit continue to guide you as I know it has. grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 8/31/2002 09:51:41 AM
Vicki speculates: “If the jokes had been at the expense of women instead of men...”
I didn’t feel threatened as a man by the joking. Honestly, in this context I just assume that such joking is at the expense of the offending parties in particular. In other words, I’m willing to grant that people in this forum have transcended categorical statements about gender.
As for your reminder about your work in the trenches with those who are always hanging on every word, looking for opportunities to be offended—I take it to heart. There is no point in comparing credentials, but I have some experience to draw on in sympathizing. I hope that at least in this context we can all practice a certain refreshing charity of interpretation with respect to each other’s comments.
For my part, I can only say that my one paragraph post was one hour in the drafting in hopes that it would—in the absence of body language and other subtleties—somehow manage to communicate:
1.) That I like and respect all of you.
2.) That I, too, have a sense of humor about all of this.
3.) That I have poured a lot of time into developing this site so that I can refer new searchers to it and—because my agenda is gender justice sooner rather than later—my strong preference is that we remove as many stumbling blocks as possible.
By the way, my guess is that Joe (forum moderator) would delete a post that made a joke at the expense of women.
:::posted by Lance on 8/31/2002 09:13:58 AM
Chad - "Because you don't hammer alone, no matter what you see right now, no matter what you can't see, you don't hammer alone." Thank you.
:::posted by Vicki on 8/30/2002 11:55:09 PM
Vicki,
That depends: where are you standing? how far is your reach? I have short legs, so I'll probably chip away at the bottom, telling the story about what a great new house it's gonna be once this mountain of a wall gets thrown into the sea, telling this tale over and over again until the wall comes crashing down. Listen for when someone yells, "Timber!" because that's your signal to duck. Maybe it's Katie, maybe it's Lance, maybe it's me--heck, maybe it's you! Because you don't hammer alone, no matter what you see right now, no matter what you can't see, you don't hammer alone. Faith sees with a different prescription, yes? Even when it looks like we're not making a crack.
Julie, the next installment of This Old Theological House will be coming soon to a Blogger near you. I need to get a life on Fridays.
:::posted by Chad on 8/30/2002 10:22:35 PM
Chad, I love you! Your images have brought me to thoughts and strength that I didn't think possible at this point. And I say yes that foundation will still be standing and yes the church will restructure (hopefully in a healthier way and in a way that brings everyone in out of the cold). I do want my children to know that Jesus meant for all to be included and that women shouldn't be only nursery attendants. I think they know that in the intellectual sense but I want them to experience church life this way. When is the next installment of This Old Theological House? There are some of us out here glad that you were bored enough to post.
Lance, I understand that this is public and I was a little concerned when I posted my story but also aware that those of us participating in this forum would appreciate this in a way that not many audiences would. Like I said in an earlier post, I have spent so much energy protecting others from my views. Here I feel that I can be myself and say how I feel and share funny stories and cry and laugh at others' funny stories and be appalled together about the injustices....I have begun to realize that even those who don't agree need to hear where we are and listen to the pain and possibly through our humor see the absurdity of what has been. I don't know how you other men feel about the last few posts but please say if it makes you uncomfortable. I want you to continue in this conversation because this has been precious to me and I know to others. I don't want it to end up just being women talking about this...then what's the point? We have talked with each other so much and now we need to branch out. May the Spirit guide us always. grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 8/30/2002 10:18:56 PM
OK, O Wise Chad,
I have but one hammer, and I hammer alone. So, where do I begin whacking? From the top down, the bottom up, or right smack-dab in the middle?
-v.
:::posted by Vicki on 8/30/2002 10:11:19 PM
To all hammer-weilders, velvet and otherwise,
The warnings to be careful where you swing and what you swing at are duly taken, so let me spin this image out a little further with a bit more theological and ethical umph (or fizzle??) and see what you all think. The event of the cross obliterated the previous House (or perhaps we should call it the Fallen Shack?) where humans dwelt. Jesus was God's Hammer, knocking out the bearing walls which in the House kept humans divided by gender, race, and class, swinging the final blow after a long line of repairpersons (i.e., prophets) had dismantled walls and windows here and there, being crushed himself through the collapsing of the old House. Thus, through Jesus, God poured a new foundation and provided a "blueprint" for a New House, a house of prayer for the nations, a home for all peoples, a better way--a more human way--of relating to God and to each other.
But we, thinking our architectural wisdom greater than that of the Master Builder, went ahead with our own ways, most often the old ways we knew well, of building on the foundation, reconstructing, among other things, the bearing walls of race, gender, and class division; separating us out into different rooms; locking some away in their rooms altogether; giving some bigger rooms than others. In other words, the bearing walls were of our own making and, to quote Pastor Dillard once again, "There is only one solution, which APPALLS you, but there it is. Knock it out." This is such an imposing wall, and we have such little, velvet hammers, that it takes time and effort to bring this wall down. And many swings from several angles.
And we should be very clear-eyed about the possibility that if the Human One was crushed in the rubble of the Old House he deconstructed, all similar constructions that come tumbling down might just crush us too, in spite of our best efforts to duck the debris. But maybe, just maybe, when the dust finally settles, we might, by grace, find ourselves still standing on the foundation. If not, then at least our children don't have to live in the prison we subjected ourselves to and maybe even helped create.
(This broadcast of This Old Theological House, starring Bob Villa the Allegorist, was brought to you by a grant from the local Friday Night Boredom Foundation. All rights reserved.)
Chad
:::posted by Chad on 8/30/2002 09:54:26 PM
Lance-
Humble apologies for offending anyone.
Having said that, I feel the need to remind you, and others, that we who deal with this issue on a daily basis are in the "offending business", so to speak. Others listen intently and hang on every word trying to find something in our words about which they can be offended. No one is more aware than we are of what is at stake. While our hides are tough on the outside, our hearts are tender on the inside. Our pain is deep. Forgive us a little comic relief. (I can’t help but wonder if the remarks had been at the expense of women, instead of men,…)
Many apologies,
-Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 8/30/2002 09:47:32 PM
I wish there were a way for privacy, moving the better posts to the public area. But, it's more honest this way.
For anyone who might be offended: we are women - we've changed diapers, unstuck zippers, and nursed men in bed. (I won't tell you about my training or daily work.)
Instead of Galations 5:12, I'll quote 6:15,16.
:::posted by Beverly on 8/30/2002 09:06:44 PM
The community that is forming in this forum is just what I had hoped. However, I worry that the intimacy of our "Safe Place" may carry the implicit illusion of privacy. Nothing could be further from the truth. As the only person able to view site traffic statistics, I feel obligated to point out that every day our forum conversation is being overheard by scores of people. Most of them are sympathetic to our purpose. A few are hostile. Some are in the process of deciding. Let's make sure that those who take offense are offended for all the right reasons.
In my opinion, some of our recent joking is better suited to a private setting. Maybe we can all get together for a game of basketball one of these days...
:::posted by Lance on 8/30/2002 06:23:27 PM
Shel - Don't you know by now that it is not always wise to admit in public that I'm your sister!?!
LYLAS!!!
:::posted by Vicki on 8/30/2002 04:43:19 PM
Shelly,
Not that I'm bragging or gloating or anything like that-----but I was in two of Carmen's classes at ACU Lectureship and they were some of the better classes I attended that week. I would love to do it again!!!
Wiley Clarkson
:::posted by Wiley on 8/30/2002 04:23:08 PM
Indie, you crack me up!
Please come to the Zoe Conference so we can all laugh out loud together!
Luvya!
Ann
:::posted by Ann on 8/30/2002 03:40:39 PM
Indie-
At the expense of the men in my life, whom I dearly love, I am laughing so hard I cannot stop! Your thoughts give me a new visual when someone screams, "It isn't my body that's the problem, it's your brain!"
LOL!!!!
-Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 8/30/2002 03:30:15 PM
Can I tell you a funny story that happened at a summer camp near us? I won't name any names but those who know the story will remember. The church camp where we work has a tradition that every night after dinner the male staff members have a basketball game. Usually it is the more athletic type of males but when they need players they will recruit another male staff member who may not be as good a player as the others. One year the recreation director was a young female college student. She is an excellent athlete and wanted to play basketball with them after dinner. They wouldn't allow it because she was a woman. She asked the same question about missing a certain body part. They told her that yes that was the problem and there was nothing she could do about it. Well, she did do something about it. She and another male staff member fashioned one( you know what I am talking about it) out of that dough that feels sort of like styrofoam. They strapped it on her and she went out to play basketball. They still didn't let her play but I admired her guts. Sometimes I want to do that myself and then ask if it is okay if I serve communion now. ( I truly don't have trouble saying the p word...I am a labor and delivery nurse...but I don't want to offend)
Beverly, I feel your pain. I have been there and have wanted to leave but my husband is the youth minister. He has told me that if I need to worship somewhere else...he is okay with that but right now he doesn't feel like he can step away from the church we are with. I don't want to worship without him. I love him and I understand his convictions but I still don't always feel like I am in the right place. I will pray with you this week about our decisions and especially that the Spirit guide us to the place we need to be...even if that is the place that we are already. only by grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 8/30/2002 03:18:51 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: it gets tiring always being the stronger brother.
I've been in a crisis all week, since I figured out what was really going on in between the "opening prayer and the closing prayer." I've been struggling with how to leave. I've been way past "whether." It would tear my husband up, and he's avoided any steps toward doing so, even teaching a class Wednesday night.So, I know his heart's not in it. We've been praying and crying about the decision.
Then, last night, I was answering a post to someone who was speaking about his own crisis about the hard questions. I was about to hit send, when I read what I had said.
I told him not to give up on God or God's children just because of his lack of knowledge and understanding and that of his fellow siblings in Christ. Those of us who love God and believe in Jesus are God's children. God loves us, so who are we to argue with Him?
I might as well have been talking to myself, and maybe I was. (Is it too much to say that I think it was the Holy Spirit talking to me?)
So, now, I'm trying to figure out how to stay.
Beverly
:::posted by Beverly on 8/30/2002 02:51:12 PM
That's the Vicki I know and love - watch out world! I too delighted when a guest speaker (Gary Collier) recently made some of our leadership cringe. He told to the core Wednesday evening crowd, in class - as the teacher that, "women Elders or a women preacher would not hinder him in his worship and we would all be greatly surprised at the insight a women can bring." Must be in the blood - I said "amen" out loud and got a few looks myself.
Ann - thank you for your compassion regarding my daughter. As her mother, I wanted to tear him limb from limb!! She is doing better, and actually told me that I was overboard on it. You are a blessing, Ann. Thank you! Also, I can understand why you feel like you need to be apologize because you "like to preach." God CALLED you to preach, gave you a special GIFT, who would you be apologizing to if you didn't use this wonderful gift????? My 10-year old niece will love to preach (already does) and she is very proud of it!
Chad - We feel your pain, it's why we keep coming beck to this "safe place." Be careful where you swing that hammer. I agree with the "velvet hammer mainly because I'd be the one to pull a "three stooges act" and hit myself with it!
Carmen - I've been listening to you lectures (on tape) from the ACU Lectures (2002). You are truly a blessing and prove Gary's point about the insight of a women!
Grace!
Shelly
:::posted by Shelly on 8/30/2002 02:34:46 PM
Ann-
Your question, "If our spirits are equal, then what part of my body is the problem? " is right on target, and a hammer clothed in velvet. It's simple, direct, demands thought, and requests an answer. With an attitude? Of course! It's a question posed out of extreme frustration. A cold hammer would scream, "It isn't my body that's the problem, it's your brain!" And the opposing spirits continue glaring face-to-face, not ever attempting to stand side-by-side gazing together toward heaven.
Having had a hyserectomy (WAY more than any of you want to know!), does that mean, in their minds, that I'm "qualified" to serve, yea, even FREE to do so? There is a little bit of a mean streak in mean that is dying to pose the question to them. (I confess that I delight in watching men in leadership squirm under pressure. Not that they shouldn't squirm, but that I shouldn't delight in it!)
I think I'll be quiet the rest of the day and try to be a good listener.
- Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 8/30/2002 10:31:20 AM
Mirrors? Really? Wow! I just can't imagine that any normal, intelligent human being could not scoff at that? It is stunning to me that anyone would go along with that! That's just downright silly. It sure doesn't fall under the "expedient" category, does it?
The first time I taught in a class of men & women, I co-taught with my father. I was kinda duped into co-teaching, but decided to take the small step anyway - even though my legs were twitching to take a bigger step. Anyway, my father and I do make a good teaching team and have since gone on to co-teach two more classes. But when I was asked at first, I was asked to teach the class. Once I agreed, the elder said I would be co-teaching with my dad. I took a deep breath and said OK. But as the class approached, I saw the "ad" in the bulletin didn't list my name as a teacher. When I asked about this I was told that I had to quit "demanding to have my name up in lights." Then I was also asked to teach without standing up. The sad thing is that I agreed. Since then, whenever I stand in a class that I teach, I feel it is a subtle act of defiance. I can't quite shake that feeling - even though as a high school teacher for 10 years I usually stood to teach. - Oh, and by the way, my father just changed the sign outside the class so that my name was listed too. Since then, I and other women have taught adult classes without a male co-teacher or supervisor.
I have heard men tell me that the subordination of women does not equal spiritual inferiority. That Galatians 3:28 applies to our spirits - but not to our present day auditoriums. The following sarcastic rhetorical question always pops into my mind - and sometimes out of my mouth at this thinking:
If our spirits are equal, then what part of my body is the problem? If I have a radical hysterectomy, could I then serve communion? or would I also have to have a double mastectomy? Don't the scriptures teach us to cut off the offending part of the body?
I know the attitude of that question isn't a "velvet hammer," so I don't often verbalize it. I was thinking you guys could handle it.
Thanks for being my Safe Place.
In Christ - body and spirit
Ann
:::posted by Ann on 8/30/2002 09:04:31 AM
Katie, I have a similar story from my daughter. When she was three she would always sing in the backseat of the car while we ran errands. (she is now 9) There is that old song we used to sing at camp..God is Love..."At night as I lay on my pillow, I think of the Father above, I know that He cares for me all through the night for I am a child of His love." She thought through all the words and very slowly changed the words to her liking. " At night as I lay on my pillow, I think of the Grandma above, I know that She cares for me all through the night for I am a girl of her love." I said, "You go girl" She giggled and she had made my day. grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 8/29/2002 11:38:31 PM
Friends, I've been keeping up with the discussion but not entering in for a while due to the pile-up of work in my world. How does that happen? When will it end? I like coming back to this conversation each evening to see what all of you are thinking.
Wiley, I've seen that surprise on people's faces, the "Wow! I never thought of that before!" look. Sometimes it's a good surprise, sometimes not. Lance remembers feeling sick to his stomach the first time he sat in a congregation on Sunday morning while I preached. I had done it countless times in seminary classes, but it's different somehow on Sunday morning. He was all for it, in his head -- but his bowels were taken by surprise. (Sorry, honey, to discuss your innards in public. I feel like that lady on the constipation medicine commercial.) But just last Sunday, a local couple visited our church for the first time, and when the woman saw my name in the program after "Sermon," she brightened with a look of delighted surprise. I think they'll be back.
And yeah, Carmen, I really LIKE to preach...but it feels weird to admit it sometimes. There is still the sickening tendency to apologize for being who God has called me to be. I'm grateful for the opportunity to do it, knowing that people all around me have paid a price for it to be possible -- and for me to have a paycheck! -- and I struggle to walk the line between grateful and ingratiated. No answers here, just a confession.
There are a couple of interesting articles in CBE's Mutuality magazine this quarter (Fall 2002). "Should I Stay or Should I Go" looks at two women's decisions to stay in, or leave, churches that don't affirm biblical equality for women and men. "Why Our Family Chose a Traditional Church" is a man's account of his family's odd choice given their strong commitment to gender justice.
And finally: My sister in Texas came for our Vacation Bible School a few weeks ago. Her 3-year-old son attended VBS with my daughter and had a blast. She sends this anecdote to cheer you on your way:
"Yesterday, Isaac wanted me to help him sing a song. He sang part of it, and I knew the song. I said I could help him, and I started with, "Father Abraham had many sons, and many sons had Father Abraham..." Isaac quickly interrupted to inform me, "Mom, not sons... him have many children." So now we sing it the correct way -- now that's gender justice! Put that on your Forum!"
peace -- Katie
:::posted by Katie on 8/29/2002 05:55:06 PM
Lance,
Mentoring is a blessing! and I'll bet you're good at it! And to be honest, I too, would be a bit intimidated by anyone -- man or woman -- who does not want to be mentored. As Julie says we need to name those things that trigger feelings and there is always a positive intent to every feeling. The positive intent of the feeling of intimidation could be caution ... discernment. I'd be in the front row if women were invited to attend the "Men's Leadership Class." Men and women teach in academic institutions all of the time and I have never heard a student of the opposite sex complain that the instructor came off as maternal or paternal even if the teacher was a bit intimidating. But I can see how a man tutoring a woman about spiritual work in a church setting might feel paternal or patronising to some women even if the male instructor is emotionally and spiritually healthy. I think this feeling should clue us in that real reconcilliation is still in the distance. Widening roles for women is just the mundane part of the task of knocking down walls. Widening roles is only the beginning ... it is, at most, agreeing to go out together and shop: "And which do you think we should buy dear, the sledgehammer or the bulldozer?" Widening roles is the expression of the desire to work out a lasting, not only symbolic reconcilliation. Lisa's retreat experience is telling, too, that many women are just not as prepared for service as they think they are. What a thing to say!?! I really shouldn't judge, but if I had been an open minded man attending that retreat, I might have felt insulted by her inferance that she is only up there because I am such a spiritual and evanglistic loser ... a failure of a "God's Man." Why feel the need to scapegoat men to justify your desire to preach? Why is it dangerous for women to admit that they preach because they like to do it? because they feel called to preach? Why must they put out disclaimers and political signals that pretend they do not want to be up there? Where does this pressure to explain why they preach come from? women? men? My guess is that the pressure comes more directly from their community of women. Honesty and openness are at least as important as widened roles to begin the process of real heart-felt reconcilliation.
Beverly's experience with the videotaped witnesses demonstrates the lengths and depths we are able to go in our determination to not be open and honest with ourselves and in community. Obviously, a woman speaking was not the problem. The problem was the presence of a woman in the Holy of Holies. The debate over women serving the Lord's Supper has always been a clue that women speaking is not the problem. The unspeakable shame is the fear of unclean woman-flesh and woman-blood serving the Lord's body and blood. Are we equipped to approach this topic with honesty and openness? I think it will be a while before we grow up enough to "go there." I heard another story about a non Church of Christ family wanting to watch their daughter deliver a talk at an all girls "Lads to Leaders and Leaderettes" (by the way, WHAT in the world is a "leaderette"!!?!!) devotional. The problem was solved with mirrors. They got ahold of some big ol' mirrors and put them at an angle outside the door so that the male members of the family could watch the purified version of the presentation as it was actually happening. The mirror and the camera, in these cases, were invested with spiritual power to neutralise or purify unclean woman-flesh. That amazing bit of alchemy demonstrates once again that women keeping silence is just a smokescreen for the deeper issue of Sinful Woman. I appreciate and agree with Wiley's observations about the novelty factor, but the truth be faced, we aren't short on novelties and innovations in our quest to purify the presence of women in the worship by making them as invisible as possible. With that history and expertise behind us, it seems to me that we should be able to adapt to almost anything new!
By the way, Lance. Your essay about the Samaritan woman is wonderful! Thanks for that! Tell me, how did you manage it in under 1,000 words?
:::posted by Carmen on 8/29/2002 01:46:31 PM
Well, sometimes God does the hand-slapping. In response to my concerns about "utter chaos", He sent me a message this morning, a quote, via e-mail:
There is no situation so chaotic that God cannot from that
situation create something that is surpassingly good. He did it
at the creation. He did it at the cross. He is doing it today.
-- Bishop Handley Moule
I think I will use a velvet hammer.
- Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 8/29/2002 10:26:43 AM
Wow Chad, you have me typing through tears. I have spent so much time protecting others from my views of women's role in the church and have forgotten to protect myself. That wall is coming down but sometimes I think that it is coming down on me. Will those around me protect me as I have them? Thank you for the powerful image.
So many elders and leaders worry about the safety of those who won't come along in the journey that they forget or don't notice that those who are journeying beside them are being wounded.
What can we do to change that? grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 8/28/2002 09:14:19 PM
Good morning, Chad, and Welcome to Safe Place (although at times one feels ones hands slapped for being so utterly stupid!)
Questions: If everyone goes in and starts swinging a hammer at a bearing wall, what will happen? Is it not true that when a bearing wall comes down, not all present are swinging hammers? Does not serious thought go into such an endeavor? Are not some there with a replacement support so that the entire structure doesn't collapse on everyone? And are not some present to lend support, some up close and physical, some from afar to guide with a visual perception that no one up close can see for the protection of everyone under that ceiling?
I, too, want the wall to come down, but not in the midst of utter chaos and death. How, then, does that wall come down? How is justice put in its place without such devastation and destruction? I think that maybe I need for God to swing the first blow. It is His house, after all.
The wheels in my pea brain will spin all morning on your thoughts, Chad. Thanks for sharing!
-Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 8/28/2002 10:57:22 AM
Welcome Chad!
Thank you for stepping out with those encouraging words. We all look forward to hearing more from you.
I sometimes feel like Sisyphus too, but maybe if we all band together, we can get this rock up the hill.
In Christ,
Ann
:::posted by Ann on 8/28/2002 09:42:56 AM
Friends,
This is my first post, but I've been reading for some time and feeling very thankful that this site exists. Ann's post reminded me of something that has inspired me to stay up a little later than I should and step out of the e-shadows and into the dialogue. In answer to Ann's question about what time it is, I remembered these words from Annie Dillard in _The Writing Life_: "You hammer against the walls of your house. You tap the walls, lightly, everywhere. After giving many years' attention to these things, you know what to listen for. Some of the walls are bearing walls; they have to stay, or everything will fall down. Other walls can go with impunity; you can hear the difference. Unfortunately, it is often a bearing wall that has to go. It cannot be helped. There is only one solution, which appalls you, but there it is. Knock it out. Duck. Courage utterly opposes the bold hope that this is such fine stuff the work needs it, or the world." I think it's about time to knock out some walls. Any takers?
It seems to me that part of knocking out the wall of gender injustice means making sure we all have hammers to swing. And those "hammers" come through stories, the stories of the victims who have the courage to take the first swings at the wall. What I want to know is, will those stories continue to remain unspoken in our churches?
Blessings to all the others here who sometimes feel like Sisyphus,
Chad Smith
:::posted by Chad on 8/28/2002 12:01:44 AM
Hi Friends,
I have had to be out of town for a few days. So I've had some catching up to do here. It's good to be "home."
Beverly, again, congratulations. God has big plans for you. I think many will benefit from your efforts.
Shelly, what a frustrating and sad experience for you and your daughter. So far, those moments have only happened to me, not my daughters. I have been able to endure it for myself, but I don't know how I could stand risking my daughter's joy. I'm sorry because I think I should be saying things to encourage you to stay, but I sure couldn't blame you for seeking higher ground. But maybe, if you have connected with other frustrated Christians in your congregation, there was a purpose to that wall you hit. Maybe if you keep banging into it, that wall might just topple down.
Carmen, your comment on being overprepared for our traditional roles is exactly right. Our congregation has recently been allowing women to teach Sunday school to men and women. I was definitely noisy in helping to knock down that wall. I know some people thought it was just me, but I think there are many people surprised at how many other women have volunteered to teach classes to men & women - women who had never volunteered to teach in the "Ladies" class. There are many gifted women just poised and waiting for opportunies to used their gifts. So Shelly, don't give up.
Wiley, I appreciate what you said about the novelty factor. I think many Christians just simply haven't thought about it because they haven't seen it. We just have to find people committed to expanding their view.
I don't remember who asked if we should just stop the struggle and let the "battle belong to the Lord." (I'm afraid if I go back one screen to look, I'll lose my post!) Isaiah 40:31 tells us that while we are waiting on the Lord, we are walking, running, and flying - not sitting silently. The battle does belong to the Lord, but that doesn't mean you are off the hook. Listen to Mordecai's words to Esther (4:13-14)
"Do not think in your heart that you will escape in the king's palace any more than all the other Jews. For if you remain completely silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father's house will perish. Yet who knows whether you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this?"
There is a time for everything, my friends. Don't give up! You may need a retreat like Jesus took from the stress of his ministry. That's OK. This is not an easy struggle. There is "a time to gain, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to throw away; a time to tear, and a time to sew; a time to keep silent, and a time to speak..." (Ecc 3:6-7)
What time is it for you?
Thanks to each of you for being so much of a support to me.
In Christ,
Ann
:::posted by Ann on 8/27/2002 10:52:22 PM
Well, I just noticed a typo in my last post. My apologies to "Katie" for my "Kathie" typing. I think it must be a "dad" thing since I have a beautiful daughter who is a senior at ACU named "Kathie" and my fingers just got carried away! :>)
BTW, Katie, I mentioned your name the other day to my oldest daughter (the children's minister) and she told me she has talked to you in the past (when she was job hunting!). Her name is Shannon Clarkson Rains (don't think I've ever given her name before). Don't know if that will jog any memories or not but thought it was interesting when she told me. The world just keeps growing smaller.
God bless,
Wiley Clarkson
:::posted by Wiley on 8/27/2002 01:07:25 PM
Lance and Wiley, I am so encouraged to hear your words. There are many of us out here who have been working for gender justice for what seems like eternity. You are both so honest and that is what I think many of us have been looking for. We need to name those things that trigger feelings. Feelings are neither right or wrong. They only help move through life. If we ignore our feelings in regards this kind of change and only try to move through it from an intellectual level we will go painfully slow. In order for our churches to get to the other side of this issue we need to dwell in those feelings and process them. Lance, thank you for honestly speaking. We need more of that. Let the Spirit guide our discussion and we will go to places we never even imagined. grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 8/27/2002 11:45:25 AM
Carmen and Ann,
I agree with what you have said, but I also think there is another factor involved (speaking from a male's view point).
The "novelty factor" for the men who have not experienced the equality factor in the worship and the work in the church but are ready to consider it is going to be a major step back point, IMO. It's not that so many men are against female participation or are going to take a "well we will just let them do it" attitdue but that the first several times a woman participates on an equal status in the worship seems to bring a "raised eyebrow" type of experience and a "I have to consider this" thought process. This is, IMO, where we are/will be getting alot "of step back and let's see" attitude. I have personally found alot of private support among men for the idea of gender justice but they haven't yet made a firm decision because they haven't experienced it. There is still a "novelty factor" involved at the present time. I wonder if Kathie has noticed this type of reaction among males? It is a very typical male reaction to something new that they have not yet experienced or made any absolute decisions about.
Carmen. isn't it interesting where that word, IRONY, seems to fit :>) I agree with this observation 100%!
Wiley Clarkson
Walnut Springs, TX
:::posted by Wiley on 8/27/2002 09:52:58 AM
862, but who's counting?
Carmen is right. I have seen it both ways (women ready to go, women needing tutelage) and I grudgingly confess that I found the latter arrangement more satisfying. This probably suggests that I found the former a bit threatening. It’s no use trying not to feel what we feel; but it helps to name things and then try to “push through.”
:::posted by Lance on 8/27/2002 08:50:37 AM
Ann,
Your post about the men holding back and giving women the floor in group discussions ... I think is a very deep and multi-faceted problem. Sure we can push past the question of why it is a problem by enforcing group rules of mandatory participation in order to get to the desired result ... but isn't that the sort of intellectual dishonesty that got us into the whole gender-injustice thing to begin with?
I believe that the truth will set you free. When men and women begin to push through (not push back) the pain and discuss together what causes us to emotionally and intellectually shut down before one another, we can move on toward real reconcilliation. I am a bit of an idealist, but do believe Christ has equipped Christians of all people to begin this process. I'll try to give it a start here.
Of course gender-justice is a worthwhile goal, but I think it is an end -- or a response to -- real heart-felt reconcilliation. That is why so often -- when we put the cart in front of the horse -- we even lose supporters. But as I said, the problem, I think, is a blend of issues, the primary one being that each of us has our own mental picture of what gender-justice is. I know one man who once spoke out forcefully in favor of gender-justice, but found it no problem to go back to his old ground-zero misogyny when a woman challenged his resolve that gender-justice stopped at the eldership. His father was an elder and he has sons he longs to raise into the eldership. He just couldn't "picture it."
Also, I think some men and women in churches that are opening up areas of service to women -- areas traditionally assigned to men -- are a bit stunned when they find that many women are actually poised and prepared ... dressed-up and ready to go. I suspect that most leaderships moving toward egalitarianism underestimate the readiness of the women in the congregation and had "pictured" themselves as mentors with a job ahead of them, training the women for service. This might lend to some dissapointment and subtle resentment similar to the kind I experienced when I went out and bought my first car without consulting my dad! With the illumination of 30 years of hindsight I can see that my dad assumed that I knew that a father traditionally enjoyed the opportunity to shop with his daughter for her first car -- but I was clueless about this. Also, I assumed that my parents would be pleased to see that I had the ability to successfully conduct such an important piece of business on my own. They were, but understandably, they felt the need to be consulted. Another example was when my husband sold his business. Even though consultation fees had been negotiated into the deal, he was never consulted. He was a bit hurt by this. He had planned to have a longer period closure with his "baby." He was concerned that his customers were not getting the right kind of attention. I know ... the men are not our fathers and we are not dealing with the transferrance of a business to new owners! ... but the dynamics of expanding the roles of women in the church can feel that way to many men, even if it is handled with sensitivity. Surrender is hard. The importance of even the small things are magnified when you have invested all with love and are faced with the prospect of releasing it into the care of others, or -- worse yet -- into its own.
Another facet of the problem might be the blend of two lies: Lie #1) an ability to communicate well implies leadership and, Lie #2) groups need leaders "out front" making decisions and, Lie #3) all leaders should aspire to that "position." If we really believe this, then it naturally follows that a rising community of articulate women will come off as threatening and authoritarian to many men. This conglomerate lie is further aggrevated when the church growth and leadership materials that churches currently depend on to tutor leaders are outdated concepts based on archaic and authoritarian leadership models which are no longer valuable in most business communities. The successful modern business strategy is egalitarian, equitable and collaborative. When Christian lecturers and leadership seminars catch up to this very secular but Christlike strategy for growth, churches will naturally catch up to it.
The irony of our situation is that the church of Christ, by encouraging the seeker to a high level of education and spiritual growth through an indepenent study of the Word, has over-prepared women for the tasks traditionally available to us and at the same time under-prepared men to discover and "realize" our abilities as they open the way for gender-justice.
It is just going to take some time to sort it all out.
Ok, that's all for now. I'm REALLY looking forward to the word count!
By the way! Congratulations Beverly! He has lifted you up and placed you in a seat of honor beside princes. And all is right with the world ... (Hannah, 1 Samuel 2)
:::posted by Carmen on 8/26/2002 08:14:39 PM
Thank you all for your prayers and congratulations. (And Wiley for telling - I just felt that I don't want to be distracting from the work here.We're always getting distracted over on Grace Centered Magazine.) I'm so blessed that I was raised to believe that Christians don't hurt each other, and that families should love one another, not hurt one another. I was also taught that we all fall short of the glory of God, but that is no excuse for sin! And the blessings God has given me in my husband, the opportunity to return to college and then med school and now this sort of opportunity - WOW!
Shelly, I'll pray for you and your daughter. We need to pray for all of our daughters. I was raised Landmark Missionary Baptist. In our church, at least as far as I knew, the only jobs denied women were preacher and deacon (we didn't really have elders - that's what we called the retired preachers.) There were a few preachers who emphasized "subjection" and "modesty" on the part of women, but they were not the rule (or the rulers). After all, we each had an equal vote in our local congregation, even when it came to hiring and firing preachers.
Lisa, we could hope that the speaker meant men who were willing to "to be used in this way" - in the same way she was "using" her husband and her pastor.
I am constantly surprised by the rules and regulations in the "Church of Christ."
Our church recently had a series of lessons on "40 days of Prayer." Our preacher wanted to have some of the members testify. Well, you can imagine the problem when 2 of the witnesses were women. Believe it or not, the delemma was "solved" by videotaping the speakers. And some still complained! Evidently, it wouldn't have been so bad if the women had been shown *after the closing prayer.*
This is so far from my belief and experience. Women testified from the front of the congregation, and, in fact were expected to when they first came forward for baptism and when they wished to re-dedicate their lives or repent of some problem. We prayed in the assembly and even led singing, although the song leader was usually male. I thank God for the opportunity to sing "specials" when I was growing up.
Enough from me.
For we are a new creation in Christ,
Beverly
:::posted by Beverly on 8/25/2002 03:47:53 AM
Any and all,
I have just returned from a Friday evening and Saturday morning non-denominational retreat where there were almost 12,000 (yes, twelve thousand) people - probably 90% women - in attendence. The speaker is well-known female with incredible preaching skills and affiliated with a conservative denomination. It was an awesome time of worship, praise, and preaching!
There was one item that I found to be .......I guess, baffling. Toward the beginning of her presentation last night, she specifically addressed the men in the room and in a nutshell stated this: " Brothers,I am not here to have authority over you. I am here under the authority of my pastor. I am here under the authority of my husband. I pray that God will raise up men to be used in this way and we can all take our roles in serving God." (I'm parapharsing.) I was disappointed, but tried not to judge. I'm sure the following generated by her teaching has been controversial on the male/female role thing within her life and ministry. I would guess opposition and "know your place" type statements have been made. I am choosing to believe that this preemptive statement is meant to maintain unity and support rather than as a put down to women or a woman's calling. And, yet, I still wonder.......If God did raise up a man who generated a similiar movement among believers, would she stop her ministry? Would they bar men from entering her events because of their gender? Would there be a gender check prior to viewing one of her tapes and reading one of her books? Would she say to herself, "Whew! Now I can take my place!"? Would God say, thank you, now go home? Is it right to plead for God to have a man take a woman's place because of gender? Hundreds of questions plow through my mind! But thinking about these questions hurts! If I stay focused on the positive, I feel so much more uplifted. And yet.........
I feel in this caught spot. It was an incredible retreat and I deliberately choose to believe that the "authority statement" was made prayerfully to further the ministry and ministry opportunities. And yet.............
I hate to ask this, but here it is: Should we stop this struggle and say, "The battle belongs to the Lord"?
Why do I feel defeated and uplifted all at the same time?
Lisa
:::posted by Lisa on 8/24/2002 04:50:52 PM
Beverly, that is a calling. I grew up in a home where abuse occurred and have volunteered in a shelter for battered women and their children and now work in a hospital where we see domestic violence often.
We talk so much about the role of women in worship and we need to realize that a change of heart has to occur in all areas of life in order for true change to happen in the church.
Wow Beverly, that is a big responsibility. We will pray. grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 8/23/2002 10:22:39 PM
Let me add my congratulations, Beverly. Important work -- a calling, even. Go with God. peace -- Katie Hays
:::posted by Katie on 8/23/2002 10:07:42 PM
Congratulations, Beverly!
Having someone with your convictions on the National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women is wonderful! You will be in my prayers, Praise God!
I read what is here almost daily. I have a great interest in the role (or non-role) of women in our churches, not only for myself, but also for my sister, Vicki Cox (not only in Jesus - she is my sister) and my 15 year-old daughter, 15 year-old step-daughter, and two teenage sons that I assume will someday have wives, and I also assume that they will have daughters of their own and I don't want prejudice / legalism to knock them around.
A few months ago my 15-1/2 y.o. daughter was helping with attendance during worship. She was stopped by one of our elders and when I found her after church she was in tears because he told her that it was not a women’s job (to count?) and she wasn't to do it any more. Our teens had been doing this for months (even in the ultra-conservative congregation I grew up in a women counted for attendance). When I confronted him, he said that “attendance” is used as leadership training for our boys. I asked him where the leadership training was for our girls because we need strong female leaders in our fellowship and he looked at me as if I was nuts! I didn't think I would ever get Crystal to go back with me, but she did . . . reluctantly at first.
Since then, and partially because of this incident, I have found several in our congregation that don't agree with the traditional role of women in the CofC and this gives me hope that, as Vicki (my older, wiser sister) says, "First, we talked it, then we teach it, eventually we see it."
By Grace!
Shelly
:::posted by Shelly on 8/23/2002 07:56:12 PM
Everyone,
I don't know if Beverly is planning to announce this over here or not but I am going to toot her horn for her for just a minute.
This morning she gave us (on GCForum) the following info:
"I'm being appointed to the National Advisory Committee on
Violence Against Women, which is a joint committee under the US Department of
Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services."
I think that is definitely something we should all be proud of her for and keep her in our prayers.
Wiley Clarkson
:::posted by Wiley on 8/23/2002 04:35:26 PM
I think there's a simple answer to your question, Ann. And the men keep telling us what it is: they're afraid we'll dominate them. Or take over.
(I'm sorry if that sounds mean, but, how many times have we heard exactly that?)
Part of the problem is human nature that causes us to look for ways that we are superior to someone or someone else is inferior to us. Every one wants to be in the "In" crowd, and we sure don't want to be associated with the "nerds," or "loosers," and the boys don't want the girls in their club. Unfortunately, even Christian men and women are soaked in the idea that men are superior to women, from our creation, by our Creator.
I pray that God will truly bring us together as one in Jesus Christ. In Him, none of us is superior to the other, and we should actually work to make our brothers and sisters greater than us, and ourselves less. We certainly are not supposed to look at each other in wordly terms, but are told to look for the Good News in each other.
Beverly Nuckols
:::posted by Beverly on 8/23/2002 12:37:17 AM
Ann,
This theory about the expanding role of women deterring the participation of men is complex and certainly deserves some attention.
I wonder, however, if what you are describing might be as simple as a change in group dynamics. Research shows that certain individuals who will participate by speaking up in a smaller group (say, 6-8 people) may not be willing to do so in a larger group (say, 12-15 people). If the women are allowed to be heard as well as seen, the number of people effectively "present" in a study, discussion, or prayer circle suddenly increases dramatically.
Your story reminds me that when I was an undergrad at ACU I preached for a very small rural congregation that had only one man who consistently attended. He was and is a good soul, but he said more in church than he did the rest of the week put together. I assure you that if there had been anyone else to do the talking (prayers, communion talks, announcements) he would have been more than content to learn in silence. It would be an understatement to say that speaking roles were not his gift; they were, in fact, his burden. He stood up front and waved his arm during songs as well. Thankfully we had a strong soprano who actually lead the singing (from the 4th row).
I have heard it argued that women’s more sophisticated spiritual and relational sensibilities are intimidating to men and that this is part of God’s mysterious wisdom in designating public worship roles for men. There are so many things wrong with this thinking that I would need more than 1600 words to address them all--and then Carmen would undoubtedly give me a hard time. The most obvious point is that this is exactly the opposite of the thinking we see in the pastorals wherein women were prohibited from teaching (or at least “usurping authority by teaching”) because it was assumed (within that particular cultural context) that they were spiritually immature, scripturally and philosophically ignorant, and therefore particularly susceptible to being mislead by false teaching.
But, to bring things full circle, I would not be astounded to learn that within the current North American context Pauline mail to certain churches might well include an injunction against men teaching or having authority—so far have we come from a world in which the women are the spiritual and theological light-weights. This may not be true, but it is closer to true than the assertion that women ought not speak because they are more articulate in their spirituality.
:::posted by Lance on 8/22/2002 10:16:31 PM
Your friend seems to assume that saying more is always better. Quantity and quality are not the same thing. Maybe your men just happen to be introverts. They don't seem to have a problem with saying less so it seems to be a non-issue. If the guys feel like they don't think fast enough, it would be a good idea to give them advance warning that they will be asked to participate so that they can think about it ahead of time and prepare. This might mean giving the agenda, verses for Bible study or whatever out a few days in advance so that they will have their thoughts prepared. Or if it is a group prayer, tell them at the beginning of the meeting that there will be a prayer at the end so that they can jot down prayer requests, praises, etc.
:::posted by Indie on 8/22/2002 06:18:36 PM
Last Sunday night in my small group, one member shared an observation during dinner. She said that she had noticed that as women felt more freedom to speak and participate in small group, the men seemed to be saying less.
Of course, I had a million responses, but I did my best to bide my time and see what the rest of the group had to say. One man said that in open prayers, when someone else prays the thoughts of his heart, he does not feel compelled to say it again. Another man just observed that men (in general of course) take longer to compose their thoughts than women - so in group prayers, there have been more women praying than men. My friend who brought up the point seemed concerned that women were crowding men out. The men seemed nonplussed about it.
Although I hesitated to add something more to the discussion than was there, I did say that I have heard that if women increase the use/display of their spiritual gifts, men will stop participating; therefore, women should be silent. I tried to calmly explain the obvious flaws in that thinking.
My question for you is, how do you handle discussions like this calmly? Do you have any wise phrases that smoothly make people go, "hmmm... I never thought of that." What discussions have you heard about this argument, that women overpower men in their spirituality and jeopardize their very souls?
Thanks!
Ann
:::posted by Ann on 8/21/2002 10:26:02 PM
Carmen,
Your post of the 16th, about the lie of entitlement and privilege - and its consequences - really hit home. It parallels what I've been thinking the last 2 days.
I've been doing research on violence against women. I'm a little "l" libertarian, vote Republican, and have a bumper sticker that says, "Proud member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy." I was all set to argue with the report published in 1999 by the National Advisory Council on Violence Against Women, especially since that Council was appointed by and under the direction of, that man, Mr. Clinton. (Not to mention that it was chaired by Donna Shalala and Janet Reno) I'm not a victim, and I tire of the "victimization" of so many in this country. But, you know, when I thought about it, I couldn't ignore that, indeed, as you say, so much of the violence and discrimination comes straight from the fundamentalist position that women were created to serve men and be subordinate to them.
If one is subordinate, the other must be dominant. That's a given. But, try to get your average Baptist or COC spokes(man) to agree, in 50 words or less. And to explain that difference that means that a woman can't stand in front of the congregation without bringing up what sounds like female "original sin." (Just where in God's words to Eve in Genesis 3 did He say "and your female offspring, until the end time" and how did He wave that subordination rule for Deborah?)
The last few day's posts reinforce the thought that I've been mulling that too many of our God fearing people are just as confused about the meaning of sexual immorality vs. sex and gender as some of the most "liberal" secular spokespeople. The role we take on in life as vocation or avocation is not synonymous with our sex lives. Sex outside of marriage (fornication, adultery and/or homosexuality) is not synonymous with women having equality in opportunity in what were formerly male jobs and positions. Teen girls don't wear bikinis to church parties because their mothers work outside the home. And the Lord knows that men were looking for the next female to conquer, even before women took off their headcoverings - or before they started wearing them, unless Lamech's wives had that tradition.
If anything, I do think that the preaching and practicing of the subordination of women and girls *promotes* sexual immorality. Look at David and Jonathan. Read Plato's views on true love. Unequal "partners" is an oxymoron. Equals are able to love, and to love in a way that is more unconditional. More like the Love that is God.
I hope that we are teaching our boys and girls differently.
Beverly Nuckols
:::posted by Beverly on 8/19/2002 12:52:13 AM
Thanks for your recent posts, Carmen. After I read Lance's post I was mulling over a response, but you wrote what I was thinking, only more elequently. I have found that what you are saying holds quite true with men in the church. For example, I had a guy friend at the Christian college I went to who would go up to female students (complete strangers) and tell them that they needed to dress more modestly because they were causing him to lust. Now, did I read the Bible verse wrong. Did Jesus really say, "Whoever causes a man to lust has already committed adultery with him in her heart." No, I think Jesus is focusing on the heart of the person who is doing the lusting, without regard to what the object of that lust happens to be wearing. It's quite sad that the majority of preachers preach about what a women should wear rather than how a man should maintain his heart.
Also, I noticed that some of you are talking about your sons and how you want to have them read the book Every Man's Battle. I wonder, if you all have daughters too, if you are going to talk to them or give them books (if they exist) about this same subject. I hope that its not a newsbreak to you all that women lust too. I remember sitting in a sunday school class when I was in high school and the preacher was teaching us about this subject. He said, "I guess women don't really have this problem." I wanted to say something but was a little too timid. Luckily, the only other girl in the class spoke up saying emphatically, "Yes, we do!" The idea that normal girls don't lust seems to be an insideous lie in the church that keeps our young women afraid of asking for help, because they feel like freaks. I know I did.
Point number three, and then I'll be finished. Someone (Carmen?) pointed out that if she covered up everything that her husband found attractive she would only have one mole showing on her whole body. The point here is important. It is often quite difficult to know what is going to turn someone on. I had a guy friend in college who lusted after just about any woman in grey cotton. You could have a giant baggy set of sweats on and if they were grey cotton chances are he would find it attractive. I'll use myself as another example. A guy can walk around in any sort of sexy outfit he wants or no outfit at all for that matter and its not going to do anything for me. But get a guy in a nice-fitting dress shirt and tie and you had better watch out for me. So should all the guys at my church have to stop wearing dress shirts and ties? Or should I be responsible for myself?
:::posted by Indie on 8/17/2002 08:40:13 PM
Vicki,
Hey! you call THAT rambling!? You'll know you're rambling when Lance posts your word count!
Your son sounds wonderful! I love the way to talk about him ... you beam! I'm not one to push home schooling or to attend conventions and rallys, but I have to say, I wouldn't have it any other way. The more I see my son grow up, the more I want to be with him. And I have never met a home schooling parent who was not fascinated and delighted with their child. A secondary effect of homeschooling I did not anticpate was my inability to hide from my son ... When you homeschool, they hear everything. He, too, has watched me and my husband struggle through the 'big stuff" -- the things that school helped my parents to protect me from. We live in a very small house with an "open door" rule. He hears every phone call, every conversation, every guest is his guest too.
Allowing your children to see you suffer rejection, betrayal and anger is a gift to them. When they see you overcome these huge obstacles in the love of God, it is a double blessing! Thanks for recommending Every Young Man's Battle. I will put it in my shopping cart.
:::posted by Carmen on 8/16/2002 05:49:00 PM
Sorry Lance,
I'll try to edit my posts down a few hundred words or so ...
I agree. Lines must be drawn. That the church will always have to set standards for modesty is a good functional argument for egalitarianism. It is confusing and damaging to all when rules of modesty are meted out from an exclusively male leadership through an exclusively male pulpit that transfers the unweildy burden of male sexual anxiety onto the women and girls of the church. Your account of the girl at the pool party is a good example of a "modesty alert" handled in egalitarian harmony: You and Katie went to her mother and father. The situation, apparently handled with balance and good psychology, probably awakened the girl to discern that cultural norms for modesty differ from place to place. This is a necessary and valuable lesson that some intelligences pick up subconciously and some, understandably, can't learn without instruction. ( I grew up in Italy where it was appropriate to be naked on the beach, but off the beach -- just a few yards away in the village -- shorts and even most slacks were taboo!) So, yes, it is possible, understandable and appropriate for you to say her two-piece suit was immodest in cultural terms (when in Rome ...) but was she actually being immodest in the eyes of God? This is a question that would not be a snap for me to answer. I live in a So Cal. neighborhood where people go around 1/2, 1/4 and even sometimes 1/10 dressed. I see kids having devotional camp-fires on the beach in classic California swim attire and I am not offended. Also, as a stage actor, I am always having to discern costumes. Is it really important that I take my dress off in The Diary of Anne Frank? (Boy! was I glad that the under-slip was not optional in the 1940's!) But when I watch television and see how the camera forces my eye on exposed skin, and the production values pushing an erotic context, I am shocked and angry. As I said earlier, I don't have a TV (Many reasons for this ... primarily, we are bored with media and commercialism) and from this lack of exposure, I experience quite a bit of culture shock when I watch it. I hope that I never see so much TV that I get used to it! The media and television's interpretive commentary of human sexuality is being masticated by our various cultures into one ugly chaw of sexual abuse and misogyny. I don't see it as a toss-up. If the popular culture has more responsibility in forsaking modesty altogether (and even with all of the objectification it hasn't forsaken modesty altogether ... yet!) then both fundamentalist religions and the popular culture cross-breed their seperate justifications to increase male entitlement to transfer the bulk -- if not all -- of the responsiblity of our society's moral decline onto women.
The language of clothing is a fascinating study! Yahweh invests quite a bit of time and deep spiritual meaning in the adornment of the temple, Isreal, the church .. and the metaphor is almost always the masculine adorning the feminine. Religious people do have a responsibility to awaken their children to the visual signals of cloth on the human body. The Amish, Mennonites, Catholics and Orthodox externalise some of these spiritual concepts in their dress and rituals while we Restorationists tend to intellectualise these images. Women are almost always the ones hurt and embarrassed by our below-the-surface protocol and subjective interpretations. I would like to see modesty and adornment approached more consciously by our movement, exploring the history, cultural evolutions and biblical symbolism. It seems to me that in light of our country's diversity it would be a very relevant topic to include in our discussions about modesty, especially to our young people who struggle mightily with self-conciousness vs. self-awareness -- and I think such a conversation can only be done well in an egalitarian construct. Lance, I hope you don't mind if I got a chuckle over your comment about the girl's top not being sized for comfort. Believe me, I have never met any kind of bra that met it's designers promises of comfort regardless of its size! The brassiere was designed to enhance the look of bosoms, not to conceal or comfort. The pennance of this immodest tool of lift and seperation is complete for women. Now, we are stuck with a drawer full of minor instruments of torture, and we'd better harness-up if we want to meet western Christian standards for modesty ... and I am closing in on the theory that the necktie is the transferrance of feminine anxiety over the bra and other traditions since, in my experience, it is mostly the ladies who threaten withdrawel of their weekly contributions if the men "up front" don't strap their necks in! Wouldn't it be something if all we needed to begin to loosen up and get down to what is truly important was a deep cleansing breath and a big pair of scissors? ... or should it be the other way around? :<)
:::posted by Carmen on 8/16/2002 05:15:01 PM
Wow, Carmen. So much to chew on. What I find is that both Carmen and Lance are right. It isn't an either/or.
I, also, have a 14 year old son. Also homeschooled, but, TV'd. His favorite TV program -- Sponge Bob. (OK, so he's not a perfect kid.) Part of homeschool is LifeSkills - cooking, laundry, housekeeping. He babysits. He thinks his 10 year old sister is going to preach when she grows up, and he’s going to follow her around and be her sound man. His best friend for the last 3 years happens to be a girl. They trade cards, play tennis, basketball, RISK, Nintendo, ride bikes, hang out etc. A friend. A buddy. That may change someday. Now 6 feet in height, his hormones began a great work on him a year ago. This summer I picked up a book for him that I highly recommend to ALL parents and their teen boys, EVERY YOUNG MAN'S BATTLE, by Stephen Arterburn and Fred Stoeker. (Parents should read it first.) I wrote a message to him in the front of the book and left it on his bed. I felt that if he was ready for it, he would read it. He did. Not only did he read it, he got it! He understands the message. He understands why there is a filter on our computer. He understands that this is something with which ALL men struggle. He is as God made him, a beautiful young man. It is my responsibility to protect, teach and prepare him for the world. (Do you know what 13 year old girls do to 14 year old boys in school bathrooms? That’s the world in which we live.)
My son also sees "a church" as only a preacher's kid can. The good, the bad, the ugly. He sees my struggles and frustrations with a leadership that chooses to look backwards, to see Scripture through their own terms. He sees that they are capable of ugliness, anger and blackmail. Yet, he sees how much I love these people, ALL of them, even when they are in their ugliest mode. He sees that I continue studying the Word looking for God's answers to people's questions, mostly my own. He sees that I hurt, that I have been hurt, but I know where to find peace and comfort through it all. (In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord…Isa. 6:1. My version: On the day my faith in leadership died, I saw the LORD. I finally saw only the LORD!) He sees that while I have stepped back for a while, I haven't given up. I press on…First, I talk it, then I teach it. Change will come…
I see change today. I watch our young families of today, and I see change. The roles of dads in their 40's are different from dad's in their 30's. The roles of dads in their 30's are different from dad's in their 20's. First, we talked it, then we taught it, now we see it. The same will happen in the church.
I apologize for rambling on so. (I won't count the words!) I feel so out of my league with all of you!
--Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 8/16/2002 12:23:02 PM
Carmen,
It seems that one woman’s voice will be heard in spite of all obstacles—even if she must circumvent the (male) editor by publishing a 1600 word article on the forum! ;) You have raised such an interesting point that I can’t help throwing in my two cents (417 words to be exact):
I find much to agree with in your reflections on “modesty” as a category of oppression. I wonder, however, whether it is accurate that fundamentalist religions/cultures have done more damage to women with male-defined standards of modesty than popular culture has done by forsaking the category of modesty altogether. I see it as a toss-up. Fundamentalisms have nurtured a climate of illicit sexual abuse (across a broad spectrum including everything from spouse rape to pedophilia). On the other hand, popular culture, unfettered by modesty as a meaningful moral category, has nurtured a climate of explicit sexual abuse in the form of pornography—most of which is consumed as mainstream advertising. And this explicit objectification has in turn spawned new forms of illicit abuse (date rape drugs are one bizarre and disturbing example). There is more than one way to unmake the humanity of one made in God’s image--plenty of exploitation to go around.
Modesty can be yet another tool of oppression, but this is not the same as saying that standards of modesty must always and necessarily be understood as a form of exploitation.
Once upon a time (in our former lives as youth ministers), Katie and I had the unenviable job of meeting with the parents of a girl to ask that she wear a different swimsuit to future pool parties. Is it possible for me to say that her two-piece was immodest without being instantly labeled an exploitative fundamentalist? Her swimsuit top could not have been sized for comfort. What, then, was the point? What if I told you that she came to a church function topless? Could we then agree that by some reasonable standard of modesty she had crossed an important line? So the lines do exist. The question is, who defines them? Not the men because the burden of responsibility for men’s sexual purity would then rest squarely on women—your point about the gross injustice of entitlement. But also not any individual alone because the apostle’s saying is sure: “we do not live unto ourselves.”
In a community of mutual love, respect, and accountability (i.e. an egalitarian community) it is possible for adult women and men to agree together on standards of conduct that promote the common good. These standards should in turn be taught to the children of the community. Dress is a kind of language that we all use. Inevitably the language of clothing changes and so must standards of modesty. The point is that whatever the current lingo, we have a responsibility to teach our children what to “say.”
:::posted by Lance on 8/16/2002 12:17:46 PM
Carmen, thanks for responding to my first post. You have given us all so much to think about. I have just returned home from taking our second son to college. I am now waiting for laundry to finish so I can go to bed. I have to get up early to go to Women of Faith in the morning.
Mike, I will share with you where my image came from...if you are ready for it. It came from a dream I had that is kind of out there but was very powerful to me when I awoke in the morning and realized what I had dreamed. I have had many dreams that I know are related to women and their roles in the church of Christ. I will share them with the board if anyone out there is willing to listen. I don't know how any of you feel about dreams. Let me know. grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 8/16/2002 01:12:16 AM
Ann (not Julie ... sorry!),
Thanks so much for embracing me from afar ... it comforts me to know you -- and Julie -- are there too!
:::posted by Carmen on 8/15/2002 05:33:28 PM
Mike,
From our home schooling, no TV household, I have seen firsthand how the camera trains the eye to perceive the world. I must sound like a naive parent to suggest that my son was introduced to lust at church, but I don’t think I’m too far off since legos not legs are still the desire of his heart. He’s a pretty bookish teenager. As one of the girl choristers exclaimed in frustration at a choir rehearsal “Don’t you ever think of anything other than aircraft?” He gave her a shrewd, “you gotta be kidding me” look and said, “Like what?” But this summer -- his fourteenth -- he’s just awakening to the idea that girls don’t have to subscribe to Air and Space and Submarine Digest to be good company. He’s their summer project. A no-TV, home school boy is a bit like Tarzan to their Jane impulse to tutor him in the finer points of teen language and culture, taking care not to sabotage his primal purity. He beams with the aura of their enlightenment!
Not only was he introduced to the idea of lust at church through sermons, announcements and invitations to promote True Love Waits, he was introduced to that whole “lie of entitlement” thing that authorizes men to tell women how they should dress and behave in order to keep the men’s thoughts and lives pure. Women lack the inherent priviledge to rebut this idea. If we did, we might ask some hard questions about why our bodies are such a hindrance to some men's spiritual lives? Why, if women’s modesty enhances the spiritual life of men, do women in fundamentalist cultures suffer more physical and sexual abuse? The leaders in my church are good people. One, whom I have known for almost thirty years, is the finest humanitarian I have ever known. They certainly are not villains or misogynists. But, still they are privileged men with good intentions that happen to have a bad effect on the women of the church.
Kathleen Carlin, founder of Men Stopping Violence explains, The Principle of Intentions versus Effects -- what gives actions their moral value, is not necessarily my intentions, but rather their effects on others - specifically, those people who are disenfranchised by my privilege, those marginalized by my sense of entitlement. She goes on to say that those who suffer under this oppressive system – the women – are the ones to name those effects. But how would the men respond if the women explained how their entitlement to express sexual frustration over our feminine presence in the worship feeds a culture of violence against women and girls? The fear of confrontation feeds the silent lie of inherent entitlement or what many in the church identify as the biblical doctrine of Male Spiritual Leadership/Headship.
The privilege of men in the church is largely invisible to men. The sense of entitlement insulates and isolates men even from the threat of acknowledging their privilege and hearing the truth about it.
The challenges for men are to learn to recognize their subtle attempts to control: Why do men shield decisions in men’s meetings, keeping the women walking on eggshells, focused on well … the men… what “the men” might be thinking? Why do men appear to store up disappointment in women about the Fall in the Garden and the Equal Rights Amendment and Roe vs. Wade and N. O. W. and Hillary Clinton for its ambush potential when discussions about women’s roles come up? Are these things really that painful for them? Why do men present themselves as an emotional enigma that women must try to figure out? For example, men – especially since Sept. 11 – warm up with emotion and gratitude that we “worship in freedom, unmolested …” but cool down when women express that they are not and never have worshiped in freedom and are very aware that if they expressed this by taking the podium during the assembly to pray about it they probably would be molested! Why does being direct with women make men feel so vulnerable and out of control? Why is it so important to men that women meet their standards of modesty? And which man’s standard? And what is modesty anyway? If I cover the parts of my body that turn on my husband there would be nothing left to the sun but a mole over the left side of my lip that my HMO won’t authorize to remove … and, come to think of it, my husband is even starting to say that’s cute! History and science and even the Bible have proven that men are capable of being stimulated by absolutely anyone or anything, anytime, anywhere. We women are really good with fabric, but we can’t veil the world for you guys! And why do men pout and withdraw when they are presented with good, rational arguments against inherent entitlement? Why do men praise and exalt women who agree with the terms of inherent entitlement or Male Spiritual Leadership and diminish the influence and public acknowledgement of women who do not agree to the terms of a subordinate and dominate caste? And what constitutes consent? In other words, if we acknowledge our tradition of Male Spiritual Headship – it follows that the unconscious psychological manipulative values would be replaced with conscious, spoken and/or written rules of conduct. If Male Spiritual Headship entitles men to describe and enforce the reality of women in the church then what, precisely, would that reality be? And what punitive actions would result when one challenges it?
These questions are not a joke. Women need to know the answers. But patriarchy is entrenched in the silent lie of entitlement. It is the silent lie, not the spoken lie we hear in Bible Class and special lectures on Women’s Role in The Church. For if the lie were spoken, it would challenge the culture of male dominance in the church. If we name the lie, we risk acknowledging that we cannot know the reality of the women subordinated by a culture of values that entitles men exclusively. It would be a fatal fracture in the system.
Of course, the men who speak the lie will be cast as betrayers and sent off to keep company with the women. But the truth will set you free. As one breaks ranks, then will come another and another … Can we? In our wildest dreams see how one man stepping forth and not backing down can begin the transformation to one of respect and dignity for women in the church? But how can I ask that of a man knowing what it will cost him if he speaks out loud? I guess it is because I have seen so much needless waste … so many men and women leave the church to go to churches where the lie is at least spoken rather than be the first to speak it.
Men and women perpetuate the lie of entitlement by denying it and remaining silent about the principal vs. effect details on women’s lives. By exalting it as legacy to the point of idolatry, we practice human (female) sacrifice. We can stop the lie of inherent superiority by ceasing to behave as if it is not true. Of course this is difficult! The insidiousness of privilege is that it acts on its own terms; privilege is not required to acknowledge privilege. So the process of egalitarianism begins with men – putting their influence on the line – saying aloud that the standards of gender identity are contrived to accommodate privilege. Traditional roles for men and women in the church are based on minor arguments of scripture which we have used to exploit our biological differences to promote the idea of oppositeness. This idea is promoted by Christians of all people and celebrated in the world. No matter how cute we pack the Mars/Venus philosophy the real product is “opposites”. Opposites oppose, they do not compliment. Our young people are taught the lie of opposites when they are taught that God’s Man is a rational, sagacious, intelligent leader and God’s woman is an emotive, mercurial, but intelligent and modest follower of God’s Man. We double jeopardy “intelligence” with the “modesty” clause. If she is truly intelligent, then she will exercise modesty and not embarrass the men with it … Neither men nor women are served by this idea of oppositeness. And as we deify the masculine, we necessarily vilify, even satanise, women. This promotes a culture where it is not only permissible, but a moral imperative – especially in cases of sexual misconduct and even violence – to give the male the benefit of the doubt over a woman.
When male privilege in the church is laid out in all of its ugliness, how can we remain silent? Jesus says the truth will set you free, and I believe that. But inherent priviledge demands that men tell it, not women. If men will break the silence and tell the truth, change will follow. Christ redeemed Woman from the tree on the tree. If the metaphor escapes us Paul spells it out: “there is no male and female in Christ Jesus”. Now it is in the hands of men to unburden the church of their claim on women and relinquish womankind to Christ … only then can Man and Woman be truly restored to one another. Only then can we be truly transformed from the world’s culture. Now THAT is what I call Male Spiritual Leadership!
:::posted by Carmen on 8/15/2002 05:20:32 PM
Hi Everyone,
I love coming here and am so uplifted by all of your stories and insights. This is a little haven of friends. Thank you so much. I'm hugging you all.
I wanted to share a story about Julie, my faithful friend who has propped me up so many times on this uphill journey.
About six years ago, our elders agreed to allow a study on women in the Bible, but on Thursday nights. Although we didn't even get to the big "silence" verses, the "study" got heated. People dropped out and the study dwindled. The last meeting (not planned as such, just a meeting to end all meetings) the only attendees were me and Julie, three elders and their wives. Even though there was agreement that Scriptures allowed more freedom than our church did, two of the three elders would not budge off of tradition. One of the last things said to me was said through clenched teeth with a palm in my face, "Can't you just be quiet!"
I knew I could no longer worship there. But the pleas of my parents and my dear friend Julie prompted me to stay. But I still couldn't worship there as if everything was OK. So the next Sunday, I just didn't go into the auditorium. I stood outside the foyer doors and watched and listened. I did sing, but my alto sounded pitiful all alone out there.
By the second song, Julie knew. She came to my side and sang. She has the voice of an angel. And she continues to add melody to my life. She knows what hurts, and she knows what helps. Carmen, I will cling to her for dear life. I pray that God brings you a Julie like mine.
Julie and I sing together on a praise team now. Our congregation is taking baby steps, but we are moving. The journey is long and uphill. I just hope that when I get to the top of this Mount Nebo and look into the promised land that my journey isn't over. One thing I know for sure, Julie will be with me.
I love you!
Ann
:::posted by Ann on 8/13/2002 10:28:47 PM
Hi Julie (and everyone)
You were talking about how various people react to you when you talk about women in the church or ask them to study about it. I do find it interesting how people react. I'm blessed to be going to an egalitarian church now for the first time in my life. At our last church, my husband and I started up a young adult ministry (we're young adults too). I would make up the lessons and he would attempt to teach them in order to put on the facade that a man was leading. So I devised these lessons in a way that people would start thinking about what in the Bible we already consider to be cultural, such as greeting with a holy kiss, women wearing head coverings, etc. I also planned to look at methods of biblical interpretation (something that we are generally quite lacking in in the CofC). I figured after a long time I would be able to get people to at least consider the role of women. To my surprise, one of the guys brought the subject up right away. Believe me, I was ready; I had studied it so much my self. All of the guys thought I was wrong (the women were quiet, but seemed interested). Anyway, only one of the guys was able to point to any biblical evidence for his viewpoint which I was easily able to rebut. In the end, he said, "I don't think I'm going to change my mind, but you've raised some questions that I can't answer." What really gets to me is that I don't think that he has really made an attempt to answers those questions. I can understand how a lot of people firmly believe that women's subordination is biblical. But it makes me mad that so many of them aren't even willing to examine those beliefs and test their validity.
:::posted by Indie on 8/13/2002 07:15:07 PM
Hello, Julie. Anne Lamott speaks my language. I think her chapter in TRAVELING MERCIES on grief ("Ladders") is a classic. ("Only grieving can heal grief . . . .") But I think the quote may have been from BIRD BY BIRD: "You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do." By the way, Julie, your description of your spiritual journey is very moving: "I feel as if I am climbing a very steep hill on my hands and knees and the end is not in sight." I want to think about that some more.
Carmen, loved your story about your son. He had to go to church to really understand about lust, huh?
:::posted by Mike on 8/13/2002 10:04:17 AM
Julie, I hear ya and I'm bloggin' for ya. I hope it's worth it.
I'm the Anne LaMott person ... and I'm embarrassed to say that I don't even remember the quote, I was just so flabbergasted to see Anne's ... or any woman's photo up there on the PowerPoint. I'm a very visual person and so I have a real hard time listening to sermons -- even great one's like Mike's. I look around too much ... especially if I am in a strange place. I prefer to read than to listen. I gave up on tapes because I have to listen to them several times before I actually hear them.
Julie, you say you are "climbing a very steep hill" and I find that encouraging. Hey! At least you are climbing! That's progress. Crying ... raging... that's progress too. Your "faithful friend" is a prize. Hold onto her. I don't want to sound pitiful, but I'm barren of a church of Christ woman friend that I can talk to about gender justice. They dropped away one by one. The woman friend who held the longest and offered me the most support changed in a moment with the words, "Carmen, once you were a very attractive woman, but since you have become so impassioned with this issue, your beauty is fading. In the Lord I say, 'let it go' before you are just another ugly feminist." My current best friend left the church of Christ because of this. She is very helpful and supportive but -- after ten years! -- still in a lot of pain, so I spare her the details.
No. From where I am, rage doesn't sound so bad. The silent treatment here is as consistant as the southern california sun. Over the years I have sent many letters to the elders and recieved no reply at all. The last letter I sent about a year ago, trying to encourage them to study ... to just do the reading. I offered my services to tailor the reading to their specific questions. Several months later they sent a delegate elder to tell me that there will be no changes. But one elder did read Osbornes Women In the Church. So that's a little progress, I suppose. Baby steps ...
In the meantime, our girls and boys are pulled into the rip current of injustice in the name of God. They don't know which way is up. So they give in to it. My fourteen year-old son is quite the leader. We homeschool him both academically and spiritually. I know that when he joins the youth group soon, he will not tolerate injustice toward women. He was stunned and amused recently to hear his first sermon on modesty. The preacher hit on the current style of short skirts. My son has been in the swim club at the local pool since he was five years-old and we live on the beach. He see's girls legs all day, but he had to learn at church that they were supposed to turn him on! He leans over in church and whispers "Mom, if men don't care about their legs, why should the girls worry about covering them?" I whispered back to him the words of Mohammad, "The true veil is in the eyes of the man." "Well, duuuh?" he says." "Amen, son. Amen."
Stay strong Julie! God bless you!
-- Carmen
:::posted by Carmen on 8/12/2002 11:36:36 PM
Chris,
Isn't amazing that some men may "get it" when their daughters go from being a daughter to being someone else's wife.?
I'm reading Gretchen Graebelin Hull's book , Equal to Serve (part of the membership benefits of membership in Christian and Biblical Equality). I'm heartbroken to read in her book, and on forums like this, that other women have had the same experiences that I have.
The most cutting is the reference to Eve. I know it's not relevant to Christians, and probably never was (there's no mention of "and your offspring" or 'and your daughters"), but down through the ages and as late as last week, God-fearing men believe that women are under a curse or suffering the consequences of Eve's deception and sin. Of course, these same men will protest that no one believes that women are more deceivable or sinful than men anymore. But that's how they act.
Beverly Nuckols
:::posted by Beverly on 8/12/2002 01:22:55 PM
Okay, I have worked very hard to be able to post on this forum. We need to get some lively discussion going to make this worth it. That's not to say that listening in on the conversation so far hasn't been great but this was so confusing.
I don't know where to begin to tell you where I am in regard to women's role in the church. I feel as if I am climbing a very steep hill on my hands and knees and the end is not in sight. I have been climbing for 15 years with an occasional friend to walk with me, a husband who sometimes gets it, elders who yell at me, fellow worshippers who are afraid of my thoughts, lost positions for trying to be inclusive, and one faithful friend who walks beside me and listens and sometimes props me up and sometimes the other way around. That one faithful friend has been beside me in battle and wept with me in pain. We are attempting to be faithful followers of our risen Lord and use the gifts that God has given us. I am attempting to remain joyful and full of passion for Jesus and the cross. I know the Spirit lives in me and I know that the Spirit has led to this point. I am sometimes so sure the Spirit is prompting me to speak...to bring this topic to the front of people's minds and yet so many times this topic evokes anger and a fury like no other topic can. I pray that this site can be a place of peace and shelter in the midst of the storm. "Master the tempest is raging..."
A little side note to Mike Cope...I just read something by Anne Lamott and someone mentioned that you had quoted her in a sermon. I would love to hear the sermon or at least what you quoted and why. I was so moved by her writing. My friend sent me her book preceded by an email that said,"I am sending you a book in the mail...because you will get it." I do get Anne Lamott...she talks about real life.
only by grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 8/12/2002 12:17:28 PM
Lisa,
Hooray for you and your husband for modeling gender justice in your marriage so that your kids can see what it means. I believe there is a connection between the way we think about marriage relationships and how we practice gender justice in all arenas of life, including in our religion.
Several years ago I was conducting a weekend workshop on gender issues for a congregation in Tennessee. A man came to me to express appreciation and told the sad, sad story of why he was interested in the topic. He had two daughters, both of whom he and his wife had raised to be strong, faithful, committed Christians. Of course, they had raised their daughters with traditional views about female submission at home and at church. But he was very proud of his daughters.
Then his daughters got married. He had nothing against his sons in law. He did not disparage them at all. But he was so sad about what had become of his daughters since they had married. He said that both of his daughters had married men who were less enthusiastic about church than they were. Since both daughters believed in "submitting" to their husbands, both had subordinated their own faith to that of their husbands. This man told me he was so sad to see that his daughters' faith had been, as he put it, "stunted" by their desire to be "faithful" and take following roles behind their husbands. So now this man was rethinking all he had believed and taught his daughters about gender. But was it too late? What will his grandchildren believe?
I'm glad for people like you who see the connection and live your marriages in such a way that your children can't see the sense in stunting the faith of women.
Brotherly,
Chris
:::posted by Christopher on 8/10/2002 11:26:32 AM
Hi Lisa,
I have two daughters ages 5 & 9. Let's keep in touch. I want them to marry boys raised by Christians like you! It is so encouraging to know you are out there. I also have a 7 year old son.
This past year I had the joy of standing in the waters of baptism with my daughter. I know she's young, but her simple obedience was a lesson in faith for us all. If she were a boy, she would be able to serve communion. She hasn't questioned me on this exclusion. And right now I could say she's too young, which is true, but that's not the reason she's excluded. I suppose it will be one of those teachable moments Katie was talking about, where I will have to tell the truth. My son has begun asking about baptism too. I will really feel the strain when he is permitted to serve where she is not.
I pray that I won't have too. There is a new sense of hopefulness at our congregation. We have taken some steps toward inclusion, but we are a long way from justice.
In Christ,
Ann
:::posted by Ann on 8/10/2002 11:20:04 AM
I have read several posts from parents of daugters who are concerned about gender justice. I want to speak up as the mother of two sons (ages 8 and 9). Our household practices mutual submission as opposed to heirarchy. My sons have received balanced parenting from mom and dad. They see both mom and dad as "in charge." One day while watching an historical television program, my younger son asked "Mom, why is she being treated that way?" (the woman is question obviously had no say in a family decision). I explained to him that at one point in time, women were seen as being less smart than men and were not allowed to make decisions like women do now. The expression on his face said it all (extreme puzzlement). His words, "That makes no sense!" Indeed.
I anticipate that someday soon I'll be explaining about why women aren't speaking (from the stage) at church. I can already see the puzzlement and words, "That makes no sense!" I want my sons to see that the ground is level at the foot of the cross. People are people. The ground at the cross is level in the world, in the home, and yes, even in the church. I want them to marry women who know their own mind and can articulately speak it (even if they do not agree with me!). Everyone is important is a familiar refrain in our house.
Blessings,
Lisa
:::posted by Lisa on 8/07/2002 06:20:47 PM
I have enjoyed reading the posts on this forum, and I'm encouraged by the interest and the spirit of all of you.
On the subject of our "brain drain" over the issue of gender justice, my friend Jerry Sumney comes to mind. He graduated from Lipscomb in the 1970s. After earning a PhD from SMU, he taught at Ferrum College in Virginia for ten years. During that time he helped his local Church of Christ congregation take a few baby steps toward at least considering the issue of gender justice. But when he was invited to join the faculty of Lexington Theological Seminary a few years ago and had to find a new congregation in Kentucky, he said he couldn't wait around for Churches of Christ to sort through the issue. For him, a critical factor was that his daughters were getting old enough to notice, and he didn't want to raise them in a church that systematically disrciminated against them. So he joined the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). Jerry's a great guy and would be an asset to any congregation.
Incidentally, when he first made the switch, he volunteered to teach Sunday School at his local Disciples congregation in Lexington. The first class they asked him to teach was a series on "Women's Roles." That may seem surprising, since the Disciples have been ordaining women ministers for more than a century. But, if you think about it, it makes sense. The issue is long since settled officially in that denomination. But members still get pressure from friends and family in more restrictive churches who contintually harangue on two key prooftexts. So they wanted Jerry to walk them through the Scriptural issues again.
I had the same experience last month when I taught an adult VBS class at a local United Methodist Church. The female associate pastor asked me to teach a series on Women in the NT for just the same reasons. And the class was very well received. The members were not inclined to argue for oppressing women, but they did want to hear again a coherent case for gender justice, since mostly what they hear is Baptist arguments for silencing women.
So, yes, it's too bad that we are losing talented women and men from the Churches of Christ over this issue. Thanks to all who participate on this forum and who work to help local Christians think through the questions.
--Chris
:::posted by Christopher on 8/07/2002 08:34:46 AM
Of course you're right. But the human failings of the institutional church cannot negate God's love for any of his children. There must be joy in our faith because of that. Our kids will suffer spiritually if they think that church -- that is, our participation in the body of Christ -- is a problem to solve, a sorrow to suffer, a burden to be borne. We have to recover the joy we knew "the hour we first believed" and pass that down to our kids above all else.
peace -- Katie
:::posted by Katie on 8/06/2002 12:47:23 PM
Katie, I take your words into my heart.
I look forward to the day when we can "talk more -- much more -- about our Father in heaven, and his soon-coming kingdom, and the unfathomable love he has for each of us", instead of fighting a battle for gender justice. But really, aren't they the same thing? Isn't justice and mercy that brings liberty the result of "the unfathomable love he has for each of us?" Straighten me out if I'm wrong.
:::posted by Vicki on 8/06/2002 10:22:16 AM
Vicki, Lance's first ad in Wineskins for this website said "For our daughters." We have one ourselves, 3.5 years old. So I find your sense of urgency familiar.
Lance and I answered the question about raising our kids to understand God's plan for women AND men by saying long ago that we wouldn't ever again worship in a church family that didn't practice gender justice. That narrows the choices considerably if you stay within the Churches of Christ! (We considered whether someday God might call us to another branch of his large family tree. Would we go? Yes, we decided, we would... But almost as soon as we came to terms with that possibility, God opened doors in our own siblinghood.)
When we were making those life-changing decisions, though, we were young and mobile. I know so many folks who would make a change if they could, but their lives -- jobs, marriages, etc. -- are such that they don't enjoy that kind of freedom. So what do you do for your kids?
All I can tell you is what my mom and dad did for me. I was raised in a fundamentalist, legalistic, rural C of C. But Mom and Dad always made it clear that it was God we loved -- not the church or its doctrines. It was God who deserved our loyalty and gratitude -- not the church or its traditions. They taught me that it was a good thing to ask hard questions by asking them themselves. They assumed that when the answers were messy, it was humans that messed things up!
At the same time, Mom and Dad loved "the church" and still do. They love the same things about it that I do, for the most part. A short list: the radical "priesthood of believers" in theory and practice; the autonomy of each church family to discern God's will; the sacrifice of personal ideology to the kingdom-of-God world that the Bible imagines; an appreciation for all the best things that the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper can be.
Because of their (our) love for these things, and for the people in our home congregation, Mom and Dad weren't bitter or desperate about their church situation, even when they saw a need for foundational changes. They remain optimistic, for the most part, that God is still present even in our most broken institutions. They are pretty sure that God can use them to further his kingdom cause right where they are, even though they are frustrated by the negligible pace of change in their brothers' and sisters' hearts.
So I guess, as usual, my conclusion is two-fold and even paradoxical. (1) Don't hide your criticisms of the Churches of Christ from your daughter. She'll discover the flaws for herself soon enough. You don't want her to imagine that Christians are unthinking, acritical supporters of the institutional status quo. (2) Don't let criticism be all she hears, by a long shot. She needs to know what you love about these people, this family, this institution, that you're a part of. Not because loyalty to the C of C is a higher good, but because your spiritual and intellectual integrity in her eyes is at stake. Why do you stay? There better be some really good reasons that you can articulate to her over time. And I'll bet there are!
And of course, remember to talk more -- much more -- about our Father in heaven, and his soon-coming kingdom, and the unfathomable love he has for each of us, than you do about "the church," any church, period. Good advice for me to give myself.
I welcome comments from other parents on the forum. I speak more as a daughter than a parent at this point.
peace -- Katie
:::posted by Katie on 8/05/2002 08:16:43 PM
(Lance--actually Katie--adds: "Brain drain: Andre Resner, Ph.D. Homiletics, and spouse (whose name I can't remember -- I don't think I've ever met her)."
1. Her name is Mary. I first met her (them) at Pepperdine back in the day when Andre was a teaching assistant grading undergraduate essay exams and tutoring students on "Jesus the Christ."
2. Not that I'm an avid reader, but I noticed that the August 2002 on-line edition of the Christian Chronicle was posted the other day. Despite letters sent to the editor(s)--and not published--there is no e-correction to the biographical note on Katie's post-9/11 communion meditation given at Brookline. It appears that the article/manuscript will be forever archived as written by the "minister of youth" at West Islip. (Sigh). Perhaps the printed edition could have a surprise. We know the truth, good buddy.
:::posted by Fritz on 8/03/2002 12:20:55 AM
Thanks, everyone! That is why I know I must stand firm in this battle.
Appreciate the info re: Paul's leaving. I didn't know. My husband's first, full-time pulpit work was for the very small church in Worthington, Indiana with Paul's parents. His mother, Mildred, became the first woman treasurer while we were there. Precious folks. It was also during this time that Paul went to LI. Small world, or God's world?
Onward we go! --Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 8/02/2002 08:57:20 PM
Brain drain: Andre Resner, Ph.D. Homiletics, and spouse (whose name I can't remember -- I don't think I've ever met her). Now Presbyterian. Gender justice is probably not the sole reason that any of these folks leave, but it is up there. And I have talked to young women in our universities who will consider leaving if their callings and gifts are not recognized by our siblinghood. Also people close to me who consider it daily.
Keep in mind -- these folks are the ones we know about because they take their God-given talents elsewhere to bless our brothers and sisters in other denominations. My heart aches for the ones we don't know about, who just go...and maybe not to any other fellowship of believers.
peace -- Katie
:::posted by Lance on 8/02/2002 04:31:31 PM
Vicki asks: "Are any of you aware of any women who have left the fellowship of the Churches of Christ to follow God's calling to preach?"
Micki Pulley (Harvard Divinity grad, preached at Brookline C of C circa 1986) comes to mind. She now preaches for a Disciples congregation.
It's not just women, either: Paul Casner (Ph.D. in theology, former pulpit minister at West Islip, former involvement minister at Preston Road) also left over this issue. Aside from his personal frustration, he was very reluctant to raise his daughter in a non-egalitarian religious climate. He now preaches for a Presbyterian congregation in Nashville.
Note that we lose very good minds this way. The status quo on gender is definitely a “brain drain” for the movement.
[I realize that the usual practice is to be very discreet about all this. It is generally considered bad taste to offer more than vague allusions to "those who leave," with no names attached. My own view is that there is no shame in it--not for them anyway. These are real people with real names and they were some of our finest.]
On an aging thread about Jesus and women, I have just posted the first in a series of short essays on the subject: The First Female Gospel Preacher: Revisiting the Samaritan Woman.
:::posted by Lance on 8/02/2002 02:32:16 PM
Vicki,
I know a woman who is currently in the process of leaving the CofC to be a minister. She is going to seminary soon and has been looking for a new denomination. I think she decided on th |
