Something that has been in my mind a lot this semester is the issue of biblical gender equality. I'm in a Women in Christian History class, and this has led to lots of dicussion about how to interpret what the bible says about women and how that has been misunderstood and applied for most of church history. I've also talked to people who are confused about the issue or uncomfortable using the words "Christian" and "Feminism
together (I can understand that. Feminism is a loaded term). I've stumbled across some cool websites on the topic. Just now, I've discovered the Christians for Biblical Equality's (CBE) website. You should check it out and see what they have to say.
I liked what Shane Claiborne had to say about the organization:
“This is beautiful work--simple, genuine, redemptive. It shouldn't seem radical... but it is. It shouldn't even be necessary to say 'men and women are equal...' but it is. Hopefully in another ten years, the saints of CBE will end gender inequality and put themselves out of jobs. Until then, may we all live in discomfort amid a booming choir of white men, while the church is pregnant with women who are ready to lead and write and preach but still get funny looks or cold shoulders.”
I have a lunch date with Linh I have to get to now. Let me know what you think.
This entry was posted on 12:15 PM
and is filed under
bible
,
feminism
.
You can follow any responses to this entry through
the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response,
or trackback from your own site.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Very interesting website.
I used to think that anything with the hint of the word 'feminism' in it was secular, humanistic, liberal (of course), and downright evil.
'Equality' is another issue. I'm for that!
I'm still not too sure about women preachers. Hmm.
just skimmed that website a bit...very cool. i'll have to perrruse it more later. bout to call you ;)
i'm a feminist and i don't care who knows it! and i hate that it has negative connotations. not fair.
my thesis is basically on what charlotte bronte has to say about this. she has a lot of female characters who believe that god created them to be more than housewives, that he would not have created them to not really live their own lives. it is awesome.
I'll have to peruse the website a little bit...
God created us with different roles, but they are equally important roles - not one is less than the other.
I struggled with this a lot soon after I graduated from college - not really knowing what it meant for a woman to be submissive in a marriage, etc. I think "submission" gets as bad of a wrap as "feminism." I read Elisabeth Elliott's "Let Me Be A Woman" and it completely solidified everything for me and helped me to see what the Bible says about woman's role in her marriage, family, and thus the world. I think the Bible is pretty clear about women in ministry, that we shouldn't teach over men - its pretty cut and dry. But we can still serve in the church in a very powerful way and we are very necessary to the well being of the church body. Its an absolute joy to be able to spend my days investing in eternal things - the lives of my children, making my house a home, and loving my husband. I really do believe that is the calling of a Biblical woman and that the role of a Biblical woman is vital and necessary in today's world - no less than a man's role, just different. Sort of like working together at a board meeting... the VP of marketing is just as important to the success of the company as the VP of product development - both equally important, but very different roles.
There is SO much that can be said on this topic... we might have to have coffee when you're in town next!
I love the Shane Claiborne quote, and I could not agree with him more. There are women who are tremendously gifted to lead and to preach who have found themselves the victims of manipulative and misguided theology. Some of the best preachers that I know are women (also, some of the worst preachers that I know are men who think women shouldn't preach). The problem is that people have taken a couple of specific (and highly contextual) passages of scripture and have built an entire theological system around them. If all I needed was three Bible verses to justify an entire worldview, I could make a case for anything that I wanted (including polygamy, slavery, anti-Semitism, and incest). I'm not saying that those passages are without value; I'm merely saying that they have been stripped of their original context and misplaced in a misogynistic worldview.
This topic is especially problematic because women are the only group of people who participate in their own oppression. I know a lot of women who think that women should be left out of leadership. It's difficult to make any progress when there are so many women who, quite frankly, would rather keep things the way they are.
In short, there's nothing that men can do that women can't do as well. To tell someone that they have certain social obligations and restrictions because of their gender is archaic and misguided.
Knowing you as I do, I can say with absolute certainty that you are highly gifted in some of those areas that have been labeled as "For Men Only." It would be truly tragic if you and other women like you found yourselves unable to use your gifts because of an archaic structure that is fueled by ignorance and fear.
Hmmm are we aware of the meaning of the word "misogynist"? It means "the hatred of women." Are you prepared to say that one who interprets the text of 1 Timothy 2 literally has a latent hatred of an entire gender?
There are plenty of Christians who wholeheartedly support and promote gender equality but also take Scripture at its word on issues of roles and responsibilities. But militants like this Shane Claiborne ruin the entire debate by casting their views as "archaic", "misogynistic", and "fueled by ignorance and fear." What a gross mischaracterization. It saddens me to read that bright young Christians are drinking this kool-aid.
Scripture is bursting at the seams with the idea that men and women have different but equal roles in marriage, in society, and - yes - in the church. Paul writes clearly that he does not permit women to teach in the church -not the case for men. He also teaches that women and men have different roles in the family - men are appointed the head of the family, just like Christ is the head of the church. That doesn't mean that a woman's role in the family or the church is any less important or vital than the man's, it just means their roles are different.
I take what Scripture teaches about the woman's position in the church and in the family for what it says and celebrate it. Shane Claiborn and some commenters here attempt to impose their myopic view of progressive cultural roles onto the plain language of Scripture, and in doing so denigrate and devalue the beautiful role that God designed women to fulfill.
Put another way, one view embraces the fact that Scripture has placed a high value on the role it enumerates for women - indeed, a value equal to that of the man's role. Claiborne's eisegetical view reads Scripture with a preassigned value of that role in mind - namely, that it's 'lesser' in some way. So really, who's the misogynist?
Sounds like anonymous could use a hug.
Post a Comment