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.
Thanks, Lance (and Robert). I'll share this info w/my husband.
-Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 6/30/2003 07:13:42 PM
Robert Montgomery just sent me the following:
Outreach and Education Ministry (Full-Time)
An ecumenical Church of Christ in Birmingham, AL, is searching for a person, male or female, to help us develop creative ministries in community outreach as well as to coordinate all educational programs for young children through young adults. Some preaching responsibilities also involved. Theological degree highly preferred. Organizational skills and a deep love for people essential. Position available July 15, 2003. If interested, we strongly recommend you visit our web page at www.cahabavalley.org to learn more about us and to read the full job description with salary information. Send letter of interest with resume to Search Committee, Cahaba Valley Church, 5099 Caldwell Mill Rd, Birmingham, AL 35242.
:::posted by Lance on 6/30/2003 05:29:28 PM
Tom,
I sure wish I knew the answer to those questions also. I've been dropping hints at leadership (especially the one elder who I know thinks like a small minority of us there!) to have a class on gender. I've even hinted I would help teach it. Everyone seems to be afraid to even talk about the possibility of a class. They haven't had one in several years (and I've been told it was very traditional in views when they did have it) and I've been told they probably won't even consider it for several years. Just have to keep trying. There are also other issues they are dealing with and I suspect most are afraid to add anything to the mix right now. Amazingly, one of the issues involves women who would like to serve in the worship and can't.
Wiley
:::posted by Wiley on 6/28/2003 10:05:03 PM
Hello friends,
W are reconnected with the world. It is good to be back online again. The tricky part is to not OD on the first day!
Is anyone aware of any churches looking for a puplit minister? My husband and I believe our work here is coming to a close.
-Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 6/28/2003 04:54:17 PM
The Blogger people sent me a note saying they resolved the Mozilla issue. Looks like it's working again. So I don't have to use Microsoft (says the guy who was up past midnight installing XP on his wife's computer).
So, pragmatically, why does the issue of gender-justice inspire such strong issues as fear and disdain? Why are church leaders afraid to even discuss it?
-Tom
:::posted by TWD on 6/28/2003 10:00:02 AM
Tom, I also had trouble posting, so you were not the only one. I was wondering if perhaps I had the mark of the beast…
…Carmen, I’m not sure you really answered my questions on your reading of Genesis and concerning the term “equality” – I don’t know if that was un/intentional, so perhaps I should clarify my confusion. You mention watching “church after church that once taught gender-justice fall back into patriarchy.” What churches? Churches of Christ? Mainline denominations? I was never aware that CoCs ever really did teach gender-justice, up until very recently – hence the need for a site like this. So what are you talking about? And when you talk about “the universal case of Man and Woman,” what does that mean? I know of no such case, unless you’re making reference to some kind of archetypal psychology or essentialist philosophy, and I tend to be a little wary whenever people start talking of “universals” anyway. Call it the historian’s suspicion.
Biblical languages aren’t my specialty, but I wonder if you’d be able to textually support the reading you appear to be taking of Genesis. Lance’s article (esp. “misconception #1”) and the statement from CBE could be germane to this discussion. On my reading of Genesis 1, “male and female” are structurally connected to “them,” – the recipients of the Divine creative activity, rather than the One doing the creating. But sexuality and sexual differences are not part of what constitutes the “imago Dei” – image of God. To be female or male is something that humankind shares with the rest of creation, and likewise is wholly good, but the “image of God” is something that sets humans – both female and male – apart from cows and birds and fish, etc. That, at least, is my reading...but if someone's got a better one I'd love to hear it.
I could say more on this, but I’d like to hear others chime in. Until then, I remain a “skinny-butted dude” (for now, that is)….:)
Chad
:::posted by Chad on 6/25/2003 03:28:14 PM
Argh! I've been battling with trying to post since Saturday, and apparently Blogger quit supporting the browser I use on Linux, forcing me to go use Microsoft stuff. I wonder if Macintosh users are running into the same problem. It's inconvenient, and galls me, but that's a topic for a very different forum :-)
Carmen, no need to apologize to me. While there may be some disconnect, I think we are in the same ballpark. There is something about God creating humans as male and female in his image that is important.
Jen, it strikes me that the discussion has so often been to the effect of "what are the male and female attributes of God?" I personally believe that when we turn the order of the question around to match the creation account--"what are the divine attributes of male and female?"--that we gain a lot of understanding.
It's easy to minimize the feminine in the first question, but hard in the second, because the image of God was/is male and female together.
C.S. Lewis had some interesting thoughts on the concepts of sex (biology) versus gender (essence) in his novel "Perelandria."
Carmen, watch out for aircraft carriers and all those other big ships in the bay! Yikes! I'll stick to local streams in a canoe, thanks.
-Tom
:::posted by TWD on 6/25/2003 10:14:22 AM
This reminds me of a fascinating discussion we had in one of my ACU classes about language about God, specifically regarding the male/female metaphors. How literal are they, how much does our language restrict as well as illuminate our concept of God's nature, etc. And also why the Father-Son language is elevated to a special status. It was pretty interesting to see that many people were open to feminine language about God as long as that language was subordinated to the Father-Son language as THE proper way of thinking about and referring to God. I'm interested in Carmen's take on this (I know you must have one! Share!)
Jen
:::posted by Jennifer on 6/24/2003 05:49:48 PM
Hey, Carmen! I have been open to the idea that God is female-male for about a year now. I am glad to see thatthere are others.
Our 'puter was zapped by lightening (thru the cable! - why didn't someone tell us there was a surge protector for that, too?) and I am at the library. A part had to be ordered, and we're (im)patiently waiting. I'll get caught up on all this when we're back on-line.
I was hoping to see that Patty had been on. Anyone heard from her lately?
Glad you're all still here!
Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 6/24/2003 12:00:08 PM
There sure are Julie! -- And the bruises to prove it, too! No pain no gain! Or to put it in the words of some dead Christian mystic who's name I have forgotten, "my bruises are the shadow of God's protecting hand"
:::posted by Carmen on 6/24/2003 01:39:25 AM
Hi Carmen, I love the name of your sculling group...I think we have some Extreme Broads on this board, don't ya think?
grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 6/22/2003 01:50:57 PM
Dear Friends! Boy, do I owe you an apology! Summer kicked in, and I hit the beach with the Extreme Broads – a group of women 45 and over – and have been sculling around the bay for the last two weeks (yeah, yeah...) like I have something to prove. So I’m covered in bruises and my arms feel like sandbags, but I’m making up for what I was denied before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that required schools to provide female students competitive sports (class of ’74). And I wouldn’t be surprised if a couple of my Extreme Broads friends compete in international competitions. As for me, I’d be happy if I could just stay in the boat which I’m sure was engineered by some skinny-butted dude … :)
Sorry Tom – I guess I misunderstood the meaning in your essay. Chad – Evidently you are not alone and are in good company. Yessuriebob the ball is in my court about the sex of God! Yeeeeikes!!!
First, I would like to say that you people are so great to endure my unconventional search for a Theology of Woman that can endure beyond the current Justice Theology (which I support as the only available alternative) As I watch church after church that once taught gender-justice fall back into patriarchy (in practice, if not in preaching) I have increasingly become convinced that what Christians need is a Theology of Woman rather than an “Act your way into a better way of feeling” program which most reputable marriage counselors advise can, at best, only buy time to heal a damaged relationship. In the universal case of Man and Woman, the wounds are not superficial … they are deep and do not respond to conventional surface remedies.
On the sex of God (yeeeikes!!!) I left Christian theology a long time ago and have found more help in Jewish theology. In reformist – and even some moderate – synagogue the liturgy is being adjusted to reflect the idea that God is neither male nor female or BOTH male and female (my preference). From what I have seen (and, I admit I have not seen everything) the spiritual import of the feminine in the story of humankind is more prevalent in Jewish theology than in the Christian from the restorative and feminine powers of the mikveh to the reminder of the passage from Genesis Rabbah in which it is explicitly stated that God created Adam as an androgynous being, “as it is written, ‘Male and female [God] created them … and … called their name Adam’”
I know that this is not comprehensive and introduces more questions than answers, but this is after all a chat board and I feel shy about posting more at this time. I look forward to hearing what you all have to say.
:::posted by Carmen on 6/22/2003 01:30:27 AM
Good to see some life coming back. It's been quiet.
I'm at work (just got the system back from a server outage) and have started reading a new book I found at "Mardel" in Ft. Worth yesterday. Curious if anyone has heard about it or read it yet.
"Men and Women in the Church: building concensus on Christian Leadership" by Sarah Sumner, PH.D. InterVarsity Press, published 2003 http://www.ivpress.com
Grace to you and peace
Wiley
:::posted by Wiley on 6/21/2003 09:39:03 PM
No Chad, you didn't miss anything. I think we were all waiting for Carman to reply to your questions. Carman? Carman?
:::posted by jch on 6/20/2003 10:40:51 PM
Well, I guess there are three of us....what did we do wrong?
grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 6/20/2003 10:22:41 PM
Tom, I guess we have officially been "left behind." HA! :)
Chad
:::posted by Chad on 6/20/2003 03:30:36 PM
Well, if you missed it, so did I. :-)
-Tom
:::posted by TWD on 6/20/2003 12:45:37 PM
Did I kill the blog??? Everyone kidnapped by aliens? Did I miss the rapture? :)
Chad
:::posted by Chad on 6/20/2003 11:48:18 AM
Carmen -
This may be just me, but I'm a little confused; so perhaps you can clarify for me...how do you read Genesis as describing God as "Male and Female"? I'm also unsure of why you feel "equality" is something that "sets standards, limits and demands evaluations which erupts in anxiety and suffering." Can you give some examples of what you're talking about? Definitions might be constraining, but that is not necessarily the case. In my experience, definitions are usually the starting point of "creative thought," and they can always be changed in the process of analysis. Words are, after all, all we have to make sense of our world.
Blessings,
Chad
:::posted by Chad on 6/16/2003 11:50:36 AM
Tom -- Thank you for publishing the link!
We seem to be on the same track -- exploring the mystery of Male and Female and what that means to the soul seeking a God who is described in Genesis as Male and Female. From the beginning God wanted Man and Woman to be "one flesh" and to pro-create. But God is careful to explain (listen Mormons and Swedenborgs) that marriage and childbearing is just the turning of the soil (or the flesh) of Male of Female through which the real product of their oneness will be revealed in the Child who will then make them one in Spirit. I think it is oneness that God is after not equality. Equality sets standards, limits and demands evaluations which erupts in anxiety and suffering. I don't think that God is calling Man and Woman to strive for equality, but to simply reach for oneness. Then we will be "like God."
The feminine metaphors fascinate me too! I can't help but believe there is a message in them (I love those old churches that look like an upside down ark because the ship is also a feminine image that bears forth a message of salvation and community) In fact the entire story of Jesus draws attention to womankind. I think that the oneness of male and female in Christs' teachings were quite confrontational for those who had been brought up in a culture that had come to elevate cirucumcision blood -- male blood -- to a salvific dynamic of their faith. Paul seemed to constantly be dealing with the competition between the perfection -- or oneness -- of Jesus' (one with no earthly father) sacrificial blood offering over the many blood offerings of males. Then, among the Greeks he had to deal with a culture that spiritually exploited the reproductive power of the feminine. I think that Paul in 1 Tim. 2 was trying to derail the "who's got the power" competition between male and female blood and draw attention to the oneness of Man and Woman in the incarnation of Jesus (The Second Adam) -- and at the same time reteach the Hebrew version of the creation story to people who believed that woman was formed first. He points out that the woman had her own "firsts" -- she was decieved first. This is why the Child -- redemption -- had to come through her first as God prophesied in Genesis. This is why we so often see Mary depicted as an archetype of Eve in church art.
Tom! Thanks for diving in with me! We really do need to get together sometime!
:::posted by Carmen on 6/15/2003 03:03:52 AM
Somewhat shyly, I provide a link to a document I've been working on in small bursts for several weeks: < http://www.paradoxis.com/tom/gender.phtml >. It isn't my intent to write the definitive treatise on the subject, as so many others have already gone there. I have been simply trying to capture my thoughts in response to the arguments I have come in contact with. Please read it or not, comment or not, as you see fit.
Carmen, your thoughts on equality and equivalence seem to fit with my first paragraph. There isn't equality between the sexes in a mathematical sense. Yet it was the two together that were created as the image of God, and blessed by God and given rule over the creation. So, in the sense of "rank" (I don't really like that word here either), they are equal.
Kirk, you have my sympathy; I lost my father 24 years ago, but still miss him terribly sometimes. May God hold you in his comforting hands.
-Tom
:::posted by TWD on 6/13/2003 10:29:39 PM
Julie -- Sorry! My posts were not lost, I edited them. When I posted, I had some time to discuss things that were on my mind. I checked in every day for a few days to see no responses. At first I guessed that everyone was just busy, but, eventually I gave in to the idea that my thinking is just too unorthodox for this board ... and then the flood gates opened and I knew I would be too busy to respond for a couple of weeks anyway ... so I deleted my posts.
Lance -- I agree that complementarianism is a tin man sort of gender-justice -- a good clean exterior without a heart. However, I am not satisfied with the term "gender-justice" either since it can be so inflammatory. As opposed as I am to patriarchalism (don't like the word patriarchy either since women are mostly responsible for keeping the system intact) and it's assault on the soul, I have seen how it can, in practice, have more heart than complimentarianism! Equality doesn't work because there is no equality between men and women since men can't be women and women can't be men. I like the term equivalence -- a balance of different elements. But then, I'm suspicious of definitions since they tend to set perimeters for creative thinking ...
Kirk -- I am so sorry to hear about your father's passing. Your love for him is very evident. God bless you as you learn to live without his nearness.
:::posted by Carmen on 6/13/2003 10:06:31 PM
Chad,
WOW! You nailed it on the head, brother! I do attend at Community in Hendersonville. God is doing a wonderful thing in that family of believers. As I understand it, the church split from Hendersonville CofC about 12 years ago when Ken Dye was the minister. They maintained an accapella format for about 10 years. After much study and prayerful consideration they moved to an instrumental format and began exploring the "classic roles" in which both men and women had participated. The chruch officially claims "non-denominational" as a classification...but recently has been leaning towards a more interdenomiational atmosphere. I recently attended a "new members / visitors" class that encourages you to ask any questins at all about the church, it's background and it's mission. Members of the class included those comming from, Methodist,Genral Baptist, CofC, Catholic, Presbytarian and Southern Baptist congregations. The over whelmingly obvious mission of this church is to bring people to Jesus...not to a speciffic theology. It seems that these Christians have learned a very valuable lesson - we can learn from one another and we become more of what God wants us to be. People can openly talk of how they are personaly convicted about this or that...but I've not yet seen anyone try to bind their personal convictions on another brother or sister. I had a shepherd tell me that personally, he wasn't "comfortable" with women addressing men in classrooms and certainly not from a pulpit. But that over the last few months, he has seen just how powerfully God is using these women in worship and in classrooms...resulting in his belief that God is in control and it's his job to simply submit to God's authority in these matters...not determine who has God's authority too preside and serve. It's encoraging and uplifting to know this. Personally, I think I'm tasting a little bit of heaven right here on earth. The blood of Christ has truly made for a united family. Many have been called to give up a lot..their jobs at universities/ high schools bearing the CofC logo, others have been literally cut off from family and friends. Perhaps that is what accounts for the deep feeling of family which exists among this group. Chad, you are so right when you say that Nashville is a powder keg for a lot of issues. In fact, there are so many issues that women's roles are touched on as a peripherial argument for things like "praise teams", song leaders vs. worship leaders and a whole slew of other topics that are dedicated to division and exclusion. Thisnis the last metropolitian area in the country to ever "change" anything. A sea of churches dedicated to preserving the past...it's just downright scarey. (Of course, a lot of these people probably think when Christ returns, He'll wear a toga and ride a donkey! LOL) We live in an area of the country that takes things much slower...and that's not always a bad thing. But it impeads our ability to be flexible..a lot. As for the issue about how gender justice changes the relationships between men and women... Pesonally, my husband is first and foremost...my brother in Christ. I've been granted the enormous blessing of serving him as a wife and soulmate. But that brotherhood is the foundation on which everything else was built. I have many friends of various ages that are men...many of them close friends. As we enter into this wonderful experience of gender justice...I will be very interested to see how things "play out" among men and women who are serving side by side. My suspition is that we have given "lip service" to the term "brother and sister" but now we will actually experience the bond....Just my thoughts.
Awaiting His Shout!
Teressa<><
:::posted by Teressa on 6/12/2003 01:37:47 PM
Teressa,
Welcome! I'm curious where exactly it is you go, because your description sounds an awful lot like Community in Hendersonville. Nashville brings its own set of peculiar problems to the issues we discuss here. I lived there for five years and attended Woodmont Hills most of my time there. I still have many close friends there. Nashville is a powder keg of tension waiting to explode on all sorts of issues. And I wonder if that isn't inevitable given the years of silence, compromise, and conflict in CoC circles over the last few decades. Reminds me of Jerusalem in some ways. I am of the mind that, for change to happen and this discussion to really get going in CoC's there, what Nashville needs is a new community that is self-consciously tied to our Restoration heritage and committed to gender justice (and other forms of justice and love) from its inception. And I know there are people in Nashville who are already there theologically but are scared of being martyrs. Though, some have already been martyred in certain ways. So how 'bout it, you Nashvillian lurkers? If I ever moved back there, that's a community I'd want to be a part of, and I have no doubt that such a community would be a powerful witness for the gospel. After having drunk of "living water", can we really go back to the polluted stuff?
Joe, you caught me a few days ago! :) I've been "on the lam" ever since. In the question of intergender friendships, I think it makes a big difference whether you're married or single. I've had wonderful friendships with both single and married women my entire adult life. My oldest and dearest friend in the world is a woman I've known since 3rd grade, and we're both still single. I've wondered how and in what ways our friendship will change - and I have no doubt it will - if one of us gets married. I also think that we have to stop being naive about how the human personality becomes attracted to other humans and couple that loss of naivety with the development of a theologically (and psychologically) sound understanding of human sexuality. In other words, "When Harry Met Sally" defines the issue in a poignant way, but I think the Christian response to the question "can men and women be friends without sex getting in the way" must be a confident "Yes!". That said, we still have to articulate *how* that can actually work, especially if we were to be honest with ourselves about what actually happens within and between women and men.
just some at-work ramblings...
blessings,
Chad
:::posted by Chad on 6/11/2003 12:12:49 PM
Thanks for clarifying for me, Lance. I was fairly sure this was what was meant, but I'm notorious for misunderstanding. I agree, the compromise is all the difference in the world, and the result is the same in the end.
When you come to the deep rural South, you see how far we have NOT come in bringing about racial justice. The comparison makes my stomach churn. Both make me cry.
Power and control. Ugly qualities in those who wear the name of a Redeeming Christ.
:::posted by Vicki on 6/11/2003 10:40:29 AM
Vicki,
Egalitarian = No distinctions made. Giftedness is the only criterion for determining who can do what. (This is my view.)
Complementarian = Women may do more than they have traditionally been allowed, but in the final analysis their role "complements" that of men. This usually means some form of "male spiritual headship" with the argument hanging on authority and the line being drawn at preaching, or perhaps eldership.
The "complementarian compromise" comes when a church recognizes the gross injustice of traditional patriarchy, but can't quite bring everyone all the way to egalitarian inclusiveness. The result is a cease fire and compromise with women doing more, but... The "but" is, of course, all the difference in the world.
I think it would be better to compromise on practice without articulating a complementarian rationale for the compromise. Just go ahead and say: "We don't agree on the theology, but for now we do at least agree that women will do this and this." This at least leaves the door open for some sanity in the future. The problem with complementarianism is that it feels so much nicer and lets off just enough pressure to create complacency. It could set things back 50 years if we are not careful. Make no mistake: It may be kinder and gentler, but it is the same old song in the final analysis.
In the spirit of Floyd Rose's parable, try this thought experiment concerning complementarianism: "We feel that the gifts of black people complement those of whites. While loved equally by God, they are not intended by Him to exercise authority and as a result certain roles are restricted for them. At our church, we allow black people to do more than they traditionally could in the assembly, but..." Articulating this literally makes me feel ill. I will never understand how anyone could find this sentiment any less offensive when the word "women" is substituted for "black people."
:::posted by Lance on 6/11/2003 12:17:45 AM
Welcome, my lurker-friend! ('Bout time! Where ya been? Oh yeah, lurking.) This is such a safe place. gal328, and all it contains, is the tool God placed in my hands when I first heard Him calling me to his service. When that calling caused my world to be turned upside down, I came here for understanding and support from family I've never met. I look forward to sitting around God's table with them all.
Fully redeemed,
Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 6/11/2003 12:05:45 AM
Teressa, First of all, all of our choices are made with our own personal histories as part of the equation. You just have to allow the Spirit to lead you. It sounds like you have. Don't doubt the Spirit. You sound like you are in a great place now. God will use you. We welcome you here. Join in the conversation and please feel at home. grace, Julie
It is exciting that we are all awaiting His shout.
:::posted by julie on 6/10/2003 11:18:42 PM
Hello! I have been lurking around and reading this website for a few months now. At first, because a dear friend (Vicki Cox) had referred me to it when i disclosed to her that I was interested in studying women's roles for myself, instead of simply taking what I was taught in the Churches of Christ. I am from a satellite city north of Nashville, TN and I can tell you that in relation to what I have read on this site...most, if not all, the churches of Christ in this area are still in the1950's format (and all that entails). There are exceptions...Woodmont Hills -where Rubel Shelley preaches, has pushed the boundries back considerably and now Madison has begun to join them in that they have instituted a contempoary worship service. Still...women remain relegated to the background. The closest thing we have in the way of a leadership role would be the position of "Women's Minister"...which caused more uproar than you could imagine as there are a majority of people here convinced that the only thing a woman can "minister" to is her children and the kitchen. Very difficult for a woman who is called to serve in any oither capacity to stay within the churches of Christ here. After my husband studied this topic with me (we frequently do bible studies together) he was convinced that the talents the Lord bestowed onto me not be wasted. At his urging...we have left the churches of Christ. It has been hard. It has cost us friends and family. We are know attending a church that could best be described as non/inter-denominational. It split away from the churches of christ 12 years ago. In that time they have begun instrumental worship, local outreach, community sport leagues and have extended women's roles. WWomen have and frequently do share the pulpit on Sunday morning....whole families serve communion, men and women teach together, women will read scripture and lead prayers in the public assembly...While women are not considred officially as "shepherds", the shepherds' wives are always down front and at the sides with their husbands to recieve those who need prayer or to respond to Christ... The business of the church is conducted by a "steerage committe' which have women as well as men. The Shepherds have admitted that they do not see a woman as a full time pulpit minister in the near future, but they also point out that considering where the church has been in the past...they've made incredible leaps towards gender justification and will continue to do so. We are saddened to leave the churches of christ....but we feel as if there aren't a lot of options. part of me feels that this is a cop out. But I really don't feel like "rattling cages" anymore in the CofC around here. I feel like it's a waste of my time when I could be using my talents to serve. Am I hurting the cause by choosing to serve rather than fight for a change in policy among these local churches? Your thoughts?
Awaiting His Shout,
Teressa Melton<><
:::posted by Teressa on 6/10/2003 04:29:24 PM
Lance,
Please explain "complementarian compromise."
:::posted by Vicki on 6/10/2003 09:40:27 AM
It may be of interest to some forum readers that Bering Drive Church of Christ in Houston, TX is looking for a pulpit minister. You can reach their website through our "Links" page. Bering Drive has made quite a bit of progress on gender justice, but they are stalled out in what Katie and I have started calling the "complementarian compromise."
:::posted by Lance on 6/09/2003 12:59:59 AM
Julie,
I think the best thing you can do right now is sit back and let people figure it out. It will be awkward and forced at first. It is important for now that there be a balance of men and women. This will assuage the fears of some that "the women are taking over". Eventually it will seem natural and go unnoticed if one Sunday it is all men or one Sunday it is all women. For now it is important that those who schedule this do so following a pattern to make sure that no one feels slighted. The men who serve on the table are likely unaware of any posture they are taking or appear to take. Since in that context men are used to being in charge when a woman is also serving it will just be natural to move to that role. They have been taught their whole life that a Godly man leads women. That will take some unlearning. What seems natural will become less natural. Give them time. I do understand your frustration. I have been in your shoes and felt your frustration. It is much easier for me to tell you this than it is for me to live it, but I do belive it to be the truth. Gender justice doesn't happen over night for anyone. Even the lucky ones who get to move to Brookline, or West Islip where it has been practiced for years will find themselves going through a period of adjustment. How much more adjustment is required when the entire church is making the change together. Mistakes will be made. People's feelings will get hurt on either side of the struggle but in the end it will glorify God for your congregation to go through this struggle and come out on the other side a better reflection of his plan for our world.
Kirk- I am very sorry to hear of your loss and yet happy to hear how beautiful the service was. I too find it interesting that so much more is acceptable outside of Sunday morning. We had a woman lead the opening prayer at our wedding and no one batted an eye and yet the church where it took place is very far from gender justice.
Peace,
Patty
:::posted by Patty on 6/08/2003 08:46:14 PM
Hello, Gal328 folks...
I've been absent the past few weeks due to the failing health of my father, who died on May 17. His memorial service was held yesterday, June 7 at Cardinal Drive Church of Christ in Rolling Meadows, Illinois.
Because there was a core group of extremely dedicated church members who helped care for my father throughout the ordeal of his illness over the past few months, it was my intention that all of these folks--including women--have an opportunity to play a part in the service. The primary liturgical roles were filled by the current minister and a former long-time minister who is a member of the congregation. However, there were two women who publicly spoke about my father's life and interpreted the ways he expressed his faith. One of them is a school teacher who did a wonderful job, though she told me afterward she was a little nervous speaking in the church setting. (Who wouldn't be if you didn't do it regularly?) The other, who happens to be an elder's wife, shared a beautiful poem that she had written for the occasion. She has a wonderful talent of writing personalized poems for birthdays and other celebrations. Two other women came forward to lead a group of children who sang as a tribute to my father.
My mother and I received quite a number of heartfelt comments about the service from church members and visitors alike. The service was indeed very worshipful with a responsive reading; three hymns; a sung psalm; OT, Epistle, and Gospel readings; sermon; and prayers of commitment. Yet isn't it interesting how some would distinguish between "Sunday morning assembly" vs. "special occasions" in what practices are considered acceptable? I felt that my father's friendships with these folks were honored by no one being excluded, and I feel that God was honored in worship led by a diverse cast of men, women, and children. I certainly plan on thanking the church for a very beautiful, celebrative afternoon.
Peacefully,
Kirk
:::posted by R. Kirk on 6/08/2003 08:01:02 PM
We are all so quiet lately. I understand, Lance, about a lot going on.
I have a question for everyone here. We are in the beginning stages of practicing gender justice and there are some practical questions that I have right now. We have women serving communion and women reading scripture. So far the person who schedules the participants has usually put two men and two women serving communion and when women first starting reading scripture, then there were no women serving on the days that women read. It just seems too regimented. I feel like sometimes there should be one woman and three men serving communion and vice versa or all women or all men.... I just feel like it would look and feel more natural to mix it up. Does that make sense? Soon women will be doing the communion oration and praying. Maybe what I am asking for will come a few years down the road but some of those little things bug me. Like when there are two men and two women serving communion....the man always positions himself in the space beside the person passing out the elements...this still feels like a negative comment to women. Am I being too picky?
grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 6/08/2003 04:40:36 PM
I'm still here. Our family has a lot going on right now so I haven't had time for posting. I do check in every now and then to keep up with the conversation.
As for Carmen's posts, I assumed that she edited them. If not, I'll look into it and try to figure out what happened.
:::posted by Lance on 6/05/2003 07:42:27 AM
I know that I just posted but I have one more question. Where is Lance? We haven't heard from you in awhile and I was wondering if everything was okay. grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 6/03/2003 10:45:47 PM
What happened to Carmen's posts? The last one was originally longer than it is now and the other one is completely gone. Just wondering. grace, Julie
:::posted by julie on 6/03/2003 10:21:41 PM
I've read these recent posts several times, let them roll around in my head for several days, and have come to this conclusion, based on my own life and that which I witness in the lives of others:
Marriages among those who believe in and practice gender-justice in the church and mutual submission in the home are so much better and stronger, so unified and Christ-like in their life-walk, that friendships are a far less threat than when we walked in "the old way". That said, ALL are subject to failure and temptation, perhaps even tempted all the more, because of the threat we become to Satan who is constantly trying to wreak havoc with redemption and all that it brings to us. Tempted more, but able to bear the temptation better together.
Make sense?
-Vicki
:::posted by Vicki on 6/03/2003 12:54:00 PM
archives
