November 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            
Search


Archives
Recent Entries
Recent Comments
Meta

Get Firefox!

The Boy's Club

Rachelle has a challenging, troubling post here about her experiences as a woman attempting to minister in Seattle in the shadow of Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill. I'm not going to attempt to summarize it - go and read it. It's deeply moving and deeply troubling.

I'm a day late on this, but I hope I can still chip in. There are many things I want to say about this. I could talk about bringing the resources of contextual theology to bear on this question. I think it needs to happen; I think it is happening. I think that it's naive, incredibly naive, to say that the complementarian position is just a straightforward reading of the text, as I mentioned in the comments over at Bob's blog. The bottom line is that all theology is as much a product of its context as it is a product of its content. I think that the challenging thing is to be able to hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches, to do the hard work to determine what scripture meant and what it means. Culture is so much a part of meaning that simply extracting any of the texts about women and men and who can do what, where and when, and assuming that those texts say the same thing now as they did back then is, frankly, more than naive - it's dangerous. And besides, we don't do that anyway, except when it's convenient. I mean, when was the last time that you heard a sermon on circumcision? But for Paul in Galatians, it was the very antithesis of the gospel. For some reason, we don't really wrestle with that issue so much anymore. If I were a cynical man, I'd ask why that is. And I'm cynical, so I'm asking.

But I don't really want to talk about contextual theology.

I also could talk about a biblical view of gender, about what it means to be created female and male, about why it's significant that we're created in the image of God. I could recommend Middleton's excellent book The Liberating Image and suggest that we absolutely need to begin with image when we talk about this - but I'm going to save that one for when I get around to Middleton. I could talk about how hierarchy and patriarchy are a pattern rooted in the fall, as I've done here. I could also talk about how the gospel is at its core a call to a new social reality, to be a new people practicing new ways of being people together, and that as a result Paul isn't just talking about getting into heaven when he says that in Christ there is neither male nor female. Which is, I hasten to add, not to diminish the fact that we are gendered persons - rather, it's to recognize that we contribute to the Kingdom precisely as gendered persons, and that those of us who are of one gender should not hinder those who are of the other from being full persons in Christ. That is, after all, the gospel, and part of what it means to be "in Christ" in the first place.

But I don't really want to talk about biblical theology.

What I want to say is this: first, as a male, I want to offer my apologies to my sisters on behalf of my brothers. We have not treated you like sisters. We have not done what is necessary. For this, I am sorry. There are a few of us who have things together, but most of us live oblivious to our own privilege. And theologies of privilege must be torn down, like all idols. The fact is that, while a lot of us express sympathy and support for you, it's not tangible. It isn't a matter of constant prayer. It isn't something that we actively struggle against by your sides. We've casually participated in the systems that exclude you, and offer our condolences from inside the circle. It's something that I think we rarely consider, and even more rarely act to change.

Second, I want to say this to my brothers in Christ: if we have been complicit in this, it must end. We need to renounce our membership in the Boy's Club. We need to walk away, and to not do so quietly. A friend of mine who is intelligent, articulate, and deeply spiritual once told me that, as a woman, there were things that she could say that would never be heard. She can struggle against this system from the outside and be quietly ignored. Things will only change when we stop lending our tacit support and speak out as men on behalf of our sisters in Christ. Not because they are unable to do so for themselves - far from it! The women I know are overwhelmingly more than capable of speaking out eloquently, intelligently, and coherently. But, unfortunately, their voices will never be heard by some, simply because they are women. That is, frankly, appalling. It's a denial of the gospel, and we need to recognize it as such.

I can't do much. But I can do small things. I can, for one, begin asking seminaries that I consider if they support ordination of women, and refusing to attend if they do not. It's a small thing; it feels minuscule. But it's what I can offer.

I can lend my small voice.

Grid blog for International Women's Day: Find the posts here

Technorati Tags: ,

Posted by Scott on 10:56 PM in Contextual Theology, Emerging Church, Praxis
Email this post | Bookmark this post on del.icio.us
Trackbacks

TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.theopraxis.net/cgi-bin/MT/mt-Ping.cgi/274.

Comments

Dear Scott,
Today you are my new hero. I so appreciate not only what you write here, but the attitude with which you have written. You give me hope for the future church.

Posted by Phyllis on March 10, 2006 02:26 PM

Scott, as i'm sure you know (but especially if if you don't), i really appreciate you. Not just because i agree with you in this issue.

mostly, it's because you are willing to listen.

Point blank.

i feel heard and i feel like other women are heard when you listen. regardless of where the discussion goes with you, i know that i have been heard.

beyond that, thank you for being willing to die a little to yourself and your rights, so as to give women some space to work out their faith and their calling.

Posted by kristi on March 10, 2006 04:21 PM

thanks scott. there was lot of healing power in this post.

rachelle

Posted by Rachelle on March 10, 2006 05:49 PM

Preach it, brotha....you warm my heart... smile. J.

Posted by Mrs. Moose on March 10, 2006 09:46 PM

Scott,
This is probably one of the best posts I've seen on this subject. I really appreciate that you see the larger issues of justice, power, and privilege.

I have been struggling with identifying the underlying issues, yet unable to find words. Your post about hierarchy and patriarchy as part of the fall described many of the things I am feeling.

As a woman, this is a difficult discussion to participate in. How do we express ourselves without coming off as victims or activists, without looking like we are striving for power ourselves?

If we simply leave the discussion to the men, we become like the old, deaf aunt in the room, while everyone discusses how best to deal with her. Most people don't see how patronizing their discussions and books and articles seem to the women they are discussing.

My concern is that this will simply be compartmentalized as a women's issue and a discussion of differences in theology.

I believe it is about the wrong use of power in the kingdom of God whether it happens related to gender, race, or status. It is more than a theological issue; it is a justice issue.

Anyway, I have lots of thoughts stirring about this that aren't yet clarified to the point of being able to express them.

It was great reading your words which resonated with what is inside of me. Thanks!

Posted by grace on March 11, 2006 10:59 AM

Thanks all for the kind words.

Grace - in particular, I'm struck by what you said here:

I believe it is about the wrong use of power in the kingdom of God whether it happens related to gender, race, or status.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Frankly, often the discussion - and I'm trying hard to be charitable here but it's tough - that comes from those who are not supportive of women's full participation in all aspects of body life reminds me too much of the conversation of the disciples arguing about who will be greatest in the Kingdom. I do occasionally run across this with those who support egalitarianism, but it's much, much less common, in my opinion. If the ethics of the kingdom are rooted in service and love, why are we struggling to retain the position of power? It doesn't fit, to me.
As a woman, this is a difficult discussion to participate in. How do we express ourselves without coming off as victims or activists, without looking like we are striving for power ourselves?...If we simply leave the discussion to the men, we become like the old, deaf aunt in the room, while everyone discusses how best to deal with her. Most people don't see how patronizing their discussions and books and articles seem to the women they are discussing.
And there's the catch-22. Frankly, I find it difficult as a man to raise the issue as well, both because I want to be sensitive to a struggle that I've never experienced and also because of the reception that I know I'm going to receive from some quarters - I've been called liberal and rebellious (and worse) for speaking out when I have. But that pales in comparison to what I know that many of you have experienced on an ongoing basis, and I simply don't have words for that. I can't imagine what it's like, and I'm not going to pretend that I understand, because on some levels I simply can't.

Bottom line though - for me, it is absolutely about power and its intersection with the gospel. And until we as the body of Christ figure that out, and then figure out how to appropriately handle power and our relation to it, we'll keep missing the gospel on many levels.

My prayers are with you. When you find the words, I'll be anxious to read them.

Posted by ScottB on March 12, 2006 01:29 AM

I would like you to unpack your ideas about power in the Church, Scott. I wonder sometimes if we read our worlds with a Marxist critical view (in terms of power) and thereby miss something in the critique. Is the Church, and any authority within the Church, about power? Should it be a discussion of power? Should our discussions of male and female roles and any differentiation that should or should not be therein center around the issue of power?

Anyway, I'm just muddling through this myself and haven't gotten hold of it as I'd like, so I'd enjoy further discussion of this sort.

Posted by Scott Lyons on March 13, 2006 07:47 AM

Thank you for these words, for affirming the equality, and value of each as an individual, not by their gender.

Posted by stephanie on March 13, 2006 06:42 PM

Scott -
Thank you for this. You don't know how rare it is to hear words like this from a man in the church. I deeply apreciated this post.

Posted by Christy on March 13, 2006 11:20 PM

Scott - fantastic question. I need another post to unpack that one, so can I get back to you in a day or two? Grace, I noticed, has a related post on her site that sort of frames the issue in a way I think is helpful (http://emerginggrace.blogspot.com). I'll pull something together that covers my thoughts on it. In some sense, yes, I do think it's all about power - that doesn't mean power is always bad or always misused, but rather that I think the gospel is largely about creating a new social reality, a new community, where power functions differently. Bah - gotta stop. I can't summarize this - it needs a full post. ;)

Stephanie, Christy - thanks for the kind words.

Posted by ScottB on March 13, 2006 11:37 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?