Complaints & Concerns I
A while ago, when I made a list of problems with the status of women in Mormonism, a friend and reader of this blog suggested that I compose a similar list of problems with the status of women in evangelical Christianity.
I did a couple of in-depth posts on some of my complaints, but, since I seem to have less time these days, I thought I would do two overview posts with only a paragraph or so devoted to each complaint.
Not all of these problems are unique to evangelical Christianity. However, they are all problems which I as an adherent of the evangelical worldview have to deal with.
Also, when I made my list of complaints with the LDS church, I tried to stick to institutional policy for the simple reason that no matter how well-documented and widespread LDS cultural mistreatment of women is, there will always be someone who thinks “not in my ward” is a sufficient apologetic. For evangelicals, I don’t really care that the cultural issues don’t happen in my own home church. They happen elsewhere in evangelical Christianity, and that bothers me.
So, here it is.
Not Unique to the Evangelical Worldview
1. Bible Passages That I Haven’t Reconciled (Yet) – Genesis 3:16a is the most disturbing offender. I do believe that I’ve found satisfying explanations to Genesis 3:16b, 1 Corinthians 11, 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, 1 Timothy 2:11-15, and Ephesians 5, which are the most commonly cited passages in support of a male headship gender system. It should be noted that I do not, under any circumstance, approach the Bible with the expectation that texts written thousands of years ago in deeply patriarchal cultures should reflect modern-day egalitarian values.
2. Women’s Anatomy & Pain – I’ve struggled sometimes with reconciling the notion of a loving God with the fact that this loving God inflicted half of his human creation with bodies that cause so much pain and inconvenience (menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, nursing, and menopause)—arguably intentionally so (see the above complaint about Genesis 3:16a). It’s nice that modern medical technology (birth control, epidurals, etc.) can reduce a lot of this pain and discomfort, but still. If you believe in God at all, you have to believe that he designed or at least allowed for this.
Glenn Miller has a very thoughtful article which attempts to deal with this problem: “Does female ‘pain-prone’ physiology indicate that God hates all women?“. I’m just not sure I find his arguments completely satisfying.
3. Women’s Anatomy & Weakness – A related complaint to #2. Women have suffered a lot due to the fact that men are so much stronger than them. I would wager that a strong majority of adult rapes never would have happened if the average woman had a remote chance of matching the average man in power. And as irrational as it may seem in our day and age, humanity has long bifurcated that those who are strongest physically are also strongest spiritually, intellectually and emotionally. If you believe in God, you have to accept that he has allowed this for a reason.
Evangelical Movements
4. Hard Complementarianism – It needs to be understood here that the movement calling itself “complementarianism” (which wasn’t its name until c. 1986) is not a monolithic entity. It’s more like a spectrum. While all complementarians agree that women cannot serve as senior pastors or elders and the husband should be the head of the household in some sense, beyond that they are all over the map on other points of application and practice.
The far end of the spectrum is what I call hard complementarianism, and this may include Christians who:
- Don’t believe women can be assistant pastors or deacons.
- Believe the husband is the head of the household with complete decision-making power.
- Think that married women should primarily be concerned with bearing and rearing children & managing the household.
- Don’t believe women should teach co-ed adult Sunday School classes.
- Don’t believe women should serve in any leadership capacity over men whatsoever; they are limited to leadership of other women and children, all under male supervision.
- Don’t believe women should teach adult male students about the Bible, even in non-church venues like seminary. For example, CBMW author Paige Patterson (President of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary) fired a female Old Testament professor in 2006 for that reason.
- Bar women from speaking in church meetings in any capacity apart from singing and maybe praying. Will not even allow them to give announcements or testimonies.
- Don’t allow women to baptize or administer the Eucharist.
- Abhor gender-inclusive translations of the Bible such as the NRSV, TNIV and NLT.
I have little respect for hard complementarianism. I believe the position derives from ignoring and distorting the whole of what the Bible has to say about gender as well as a harmful and destructive attitude toward women. The sooner it goes the way of Christian slavery, the better.
5. Soft Complementarianism – At the other end of this spectrum is what I call soft complementarianism. Soft complementarians may include Christians who:
- Allow women to serve as deacons in affirmation of the biblical record.
- May allow women to serve as associate & assistant pastors.
- May encourage and affirm the worth of gender-inclusive translations of the Bible.
- Allow women to serve as worship pastors and directors in other areas of ministry. Basically, any position of leadership that isn’t senior pastor or elder.
- Believe that male headship in the home should be loving, gentle and respectful; that men only have final say in decision-making power as an absolute last resort.
- Accept the validity of female vocations other than homemaker.
- Allow women to teach co-ed adult Sunday school classes.
- Allow women to participate in all aspects of the Sunday worship service with the possible exception of preaching; some will allow women to preach.
- Allow women to administer the Eucharist. May allow women to perform or assist with baptisms.
It should be fairly obvious that I see soft complementarianism as much more innocuous than hard complementarianism. My only practical disagreements with the softest of soft complementarians is that women can serve as senior pastors and elders and neither partner has final decision-making power in the home. Some of my favorite biblical scholars and theologians are soft complementarians. I understand the biblical arguments they have used to arrive at their position and I respect them.
Still, I do believe that the position is ultimately in error and that it negatively effects at least some women. My hope is that someday, in the long run, we can all be egalitarians.
6. Egalitarian in Name, But Not in Practice – Some local churches fly under the banner of a denomination that affirms egalitarianism while quietly refusing to allow female pastors and railroading women into traditionally feminine church roles. A lot of egalitarian denominations are not doing enough to promote women in the pulpit. This is a troubling phenomenon that galitarian reformers must face.
Categories:
Comments
Complaints & Concerns I — 8 Comments