There are some conversations that keep coming around and
around so I blog about them again and again. Reformed theology used to be one
of those but I haven't bothered in a while because it has been hashed over so
many times that it just wore me out and the Arminian answers are just so awful.
So now I write about things like non-violence which also gets a visceral
reaction and of course gender. Today was one of those gender days and as usual
the discussion has gone around in circles, circles based on whether we should examine
what Scripture says to inform our decisions on application or whether we should
look to see what Scripture doesn't say to override what it does. I know that is a loaded and smarmy statement.
One of the common arguments against the historical and I
would say glaringly clear teaching on gender in the Bible is the notion that Paul is
addressing an issue in the culture of the day, making concessions or teaching
for pragmatic reasons or dealing with some specific problem. The accuracy of this is pretty
easy to ascertain by simply reading what Paul wrote. What is Paul's reasoning for
his teaching on gender (emphasis mine)?
I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority
over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then
Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a
transgressor. (1 Tim 2:12-14)
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the
husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his
body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also
wives should submit in everything to their husbands.
(Eph 5:22-24)
But I want you to understand that the head of every man is
Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. (1 Cor
11:3)
For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image
and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from
woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for
man. (1 Cor 11:7-9)
So we have the creation order. We have the relationship
between Christ and the church. We have man as the glory of God but women as the
glory of man. An image of male headship that is not incidental or cultural but
intentional. God could have created Adam and Eve simultaneously but He did not.
He made Adam, declared him incomplete and in need of a helper and created Eve
out of Adam. There is a very explicit pattern here that is repeated in 1
Corinthians 11:7-9 and it deals with the order and method of creation.
So what we have to work with is sufficient to inform our
interpretation and application but what we don't have is almost as important.
No hint of the culture of that day. No suggestion of pragmatic reasoning.
Nothing that implies that this is something only for this time and place,
having no universal application. I have said this all before but many who find
the Biblical teaching on gender odious and embarrassing in our enlightened era simply
refuse to accept it.
Here is what is so troubling about this to me. Because we can't
get past our institutional religious setting we think that "If you ain't a
pastor, you ain't nothing". The only service and leadership in the church
that matters is "preaching". Ironically "preaching" as we
understand it doesn't even appear in Scripture so we have elevated an
extra-biblical practice to a position of overwhelming prominence and in doing
so have diminished every other calling in the church and especially diminished the calling
of wives and mothers. This is true even among those who, on the surface, reject
institutional religion but still can't let go of that need for ecclesiastical recognition.
Being a mother and raising children. Caring for the home.
Submitting to a husband who is often an idiot but needs your support anyway.
Those are infinitely more important and difficult than preparing and delivering
a 45 minute sermon once a week that no one will remember next month anyway. The
church should be doing everything in our power to support and encourage our
sisters in this noble endeavor. Instead we subtly look down on them and say
they are not good enough. You need a career! You must be allowed to
"preach"! You must be granted a religious title! Being a mother and
wife is hard enough without piling on extra expectations. The simple fact of
human beings is that we cannot do it all. We are not made to do it all. There
are 24 hours in a day and about a third of them we need to sleep. There are
only a limited number of years to bear children. We exist in time and space so
if you are in location A doing activity Y you cannot also be in location B
doing activity Z. We should encourage wives in what they already have on their plates instead of piling on more.
Being a mom and wife is stressful enough without making our
sisters feel like they are not doing enough. If you care about women, care
enough to affirm and support their calling as women and quit trying to make
them into something that God never intended regardless of what the culture
around us might say.
3 comments:
Your last paragraph is unfair to egalitarians... no one is MAKING women do anything... instead, we are freeing women to do whatever God empowers them to do... if it's being Suzie Homemaker, GREAT! My wife has no compunction to lead a church or take any role in leading some sort of incarnation of church... She's perfectly content where she is...
But, if a woman feels that intense call to lead, is given the gifts and abilities to do so, egalitarians say "Go for it!" It is a freedom to do what God calls them to do.
I could go down the line on all your scripture references and give you a DIFFERENT exegesis of them with opposite results so I'm not going to play Scriptural bingo with you... just pointing out that your evaluation of egalitarians is unfair... no one is forced into anything...
A lot of disobedience is dressed up in the language of "freedom". I think you are missing/ignoring my point, I am not suggesting that anyone has a gun to their heads, not that sort of "making them" but that the culture egalitarians create and reinforce from the secular feminist mindset cause the issues I am referencing.
Your language still implies that somehow simply having an egalitarian viewpoint puts undue pressure on women to fill certain roles. This is no more the case for women than it is for men. Just because men can be church leaders does not mean that there is a culture being fostered that puts pressure on them to be something they are not gifted for nor called to do.
From an egalitarian viewpoint, if a women does not feel the call to ministry, she is free to do what she is called to do, whether it is as a domestic engineer or as a partner in earning for the household or whatever . However, if a woman is given gifts, talents, etc., for leadership and feels a calling to use it for God's Kingdom, the egalitarian viewpoint allows the space to do so. This is the same as it would be for any man as well. That's what egalitarian is... it's allowing gifting and calling to determine role rather than gender.
Post a Comment