I have written here before about how my faith has been bending since my move to DC two years ago. I grew up in a conservative church tradition which believes in a biblical mandate that women should not fill certain roles in the church. Since then I have been deeply involved with two churches that (at least in their church creeds) have no position on the issue. And I have met many people who, with varying degrees of certainty, believe every office in the church should be open to women. I've also encountered a few people who espouse the tradition I grew up in who I want to avoid aligning myself with (like the plague).
I am trying to see my way through the murkiness of this confusing issue. I have not come to many conclusions, but I have settled on two ideas where I believe the conversation must start:
1. If a community believes certain positions in the church should be closed to women, the implications of being wrong on this are dangerous. If it's true that the Bible makes no claim about whether men or women should fill roles such as pastor or elder, then such communities are denying women the ability to use gifts God has given them. The inevitable result will be confusion, pain, and disillusion for women who cannot understand why God has called them to do things he has denied them the opportunity to do, and why he only values these gifts in men. If we are not absolutely sure we are correct on this issue, and we default to a position that denies women these opportunities, we take an enormous risk.
2. Separate but equal is unequal. The popular view among mainstream traditional churches is that men's and women's roles in the church are complementary. They are not unequal, they are different, and they balance one another. I'm not convinced. When I attempt to look objectively at the traditional churches I've been exposed to, the complementary roles I see go something like "men are pastors, and women are... not pastors." I have tried, but I cannot see how the positions afforded to men (pastor, preacher, elder) and women (...) fit together in a way that maintains equality. It's not tenable. If you take the position that the Bible prevents women but allows men to perform certain church functions, I think you must accept that the Bible affords men a superior position in the church. It is impossible to have authority without subordination.
Here are two articles I found interesting while reading about these ideas:
Sojourners: The Persistence of Patriarchy
Christianity Today: Wounds of a Friend
Image: s13_eisbaer

Justin, I'm wrestling with many of these questions myself.
ReplyDeleteOne thought for now in regard to your statement, "It is impossible to have authority without subordination." Jesus says "For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me." stating that he is under the authority of the Father, but he later says "I and the Father are one." I think the trinity is a profound example of submission with perfect equality. I don't know how that works, but I believe it to be true.
The one who has all power and at the end of days will have every knee bow before him says "the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve."
Justin,
ReplyDeleteI traveled the same road you are traveling. In fact, at one point, I was a pain in the ass (I'm sure) to DCF leadership about this very issue. I was wrong. In the end, it came down to a few textual issues that demonstrated to me the deeply flawed way I read the scriptures. I went to them looking for the new rules, rather than looking to discover the heart of the Father, person of Jesus Christ, and presence of the Holy Spirit.
A bigger issue, though somewhat related, is that I've been thinking about the ways the church is more concerned with purity than it is with love. We'll love people as long as we can keep our antiseptic atmosphere and neatly drawn lines. In order to keep neatly drawn lines, we need to treat the scriptures like a rule book. As a result, we misinterpret and misappropriate letters sent to specific people in specific situations.
I think we way we treat women is just one of the results of this problem. The problem is amplified by the fact that those of us in the south grew up in a very patriarchal culture.
Thanks for being honest with your working through this problem.
Austin - I guess I think Jesus is a special case. I'm not sure what works for the Trinity necessarily works for men and women.
ReplyDeleteEvan - You're welcome, and thanks for your thoughts.
Once I had worked through the textual issues, the hermeneutics and the rest, question #1 haunted me: where is the potential for most damage - affirming too much in women or affirming too little?
ReplyDeleteNow THAT is a question worth asking.
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying we should directly apply the trinity to men and women, but we are made in the image of God. The picture we get of a husband and wife is also that of Christ and the Church.
ReplyDeleteCheck out a message Jon Ludovina gave, it was at least helpful to me. http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/5-1-11-different-equal-god/id213551693?i=93738417
Great thoughts. I've mostly put this issue (along with baptism, church membership, and music) in the category of the Bible is too unclear for me to care very much. If it's not in the Apostles Creed, it's probably not worth a debate (from me at least).
ReplyDeletePerhaps, but see #1.
ReplyDeleteLet me clarify. It's not that it doesn't matter. It's that the debate has been going on for so long, it the conversation seems to be not fruitful enough.
ReplyDelete