I have been looking at reactions to John Piper's sabbatical on the web. It is news in reformed circles, particularly.
As you are probably aware, John Piper is reformed in his persuasion of Christianity, his theology inherited by us all under Henry VIII, but his also a more Calvinistic, complementarian expression on display particularly, and in more exaggerted form, at places like Mars Hill under Mark Driscoll.
In reading around the blogosphere this morning, I came across this reaction to Piper's announcement and must admit to finding its saccharine sweetness a little disturbing.
Now, perhaps this says more about me than it does about Driscoll and his wife. I am open to learning more about myself. My feelings perhaps betray a cynicism and also that the 'wifely submission' thing, which is so insisted upon by some Christians, still has a tendency to grate a little.
Driscoll's wife responds to Piper's decision to take an eight month break, with the following:
Grace's Answer
I was brought to tears and was extremely humbled by the courageous letter that Dr. John Piper wrote to explain that he is taking a sabbatical “because of a growing sense that [his] soul, [his] marriage, [his] family, and [his] ministry-pattern need a reality check from the Holy Spirit.”
This is a hard thing for any of us to do, let alone someone whom God has raised up with a public ministry, allowing his life to be exposed before the world. I am so grateful for the example he has set by this action.
Growing up as a pastor’s daughter and now as a pastor’s wife, I can honestly say that pastors rarely do this. The pressure to be all things to all people, and the lies by which the Enemy tries to persuade leaders can cause them to believe that church ministry IS their life. The Bible is clear about what God’s priorities are, but sadly, I have seen so many examples of pastors’ wives who are no longer the first love (after Christ) of their husbands.
I am thankful for the precedent and example that Dr. Piper and Noël are setting because:
- It frees up wives and children to be priorities (1 Tim. 3:4; Eph. 5:28).
- It allows the church and ministry to not be idols (1 Tim. 3:5).
- It can give wives a new freedom to have this honest discussion with their husbands (I have seen many wives silenced or unsure of how to have this conversation when they have genuine concern) (Prov. 19:14).
- It can give children a new freedom to have this honest discussion with their dads (I have seen so many kids of pastors feeling last on the list with the church at the top) (Prov. 17:6).
- It urges us all to examine our priorities and make sure our Jesus, our marriage, and our children are the top three, in that order (1 Tim. 3:1–5).
- It challenges the church to give their pastor the freedom to examine his own life and take a break if needed (Mark 2:27–28).
- It challenges us to not idolize pastors or think of them as sinless, but rather see them as gifted, called men (under immense pressure) who need to be free to repent and be redeemed like the rest of the church members (Heb. 13:18).
- It challenges wives to examine if they have enabled their pastors-husbands to become islands unto themselves (Gen. 2:18; Prov. 31:12).
Thank you, John and Noël Piper, for the courageous and humble example of what it means to BOTH preach the gospel and live it out in your life!
Pastor Mark: And thank you, sweetheart, for sharing your perspective with others and your life with me.
In response to what I see here, when I read the words 'Grace's answer', I see, in my head, a girl with her hand up in class and yet this is a mature woman. Something feels passive and assenting about her response from the outset.
She is adept at using the Bible (ESV, of course!) to support her points, as one would expect but there are surely a number of challenges here and it is no wonder pastors' wives suffer some of the things they do in such a set-up.
At point three, I imagine that the whole culture of this expression of Christianity does little to help those women who feel as though they are silenced. There is a particular hermeneutic adopted in the teaching in these churches, in which, particularly at points like Ephesians 5:21, you would have supposed they presumed that the Holy Spirit inspired the division of the Bible into its verses and sub-headings too.
At point four, if children feel as though they can not approach pastor fathers, might it be because they are brought up in a patriarchal expression of Christianity in which what dad says has supreme authority? How would it be if these same children came, in time, to have mothers who were also pastors; mothers who saw their calling to their children as bound up with their calling to God, nurtured within a marriage with a focus on giftings and shared responsibility rather than narrow gender defined roles.
At point 8, I am reminded of all the tracts and sermons I have encountered from these churches in which the wife's value seems all bound up with the ways in which she either does to her credit, or does to her fault, facilitate her husband's self-actualisation.
Anyway...I'll leave you to come to your own conclusions.
I've tried three times to cool my heart long enough to write something in reply to this heartless, unchristian, unloving, unkind, ignorant post, but it's simply not possible at the moment.
ReplyDeleteThen I will wait Rosemary and listen to what you have to say. I have indicated in this post that I am aware of my own mind-set. My reception to this sort of thing is rather coloured by Piper's list of appropriate roles for women and his reaction to women who are abused by their husbands.http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2009/08/21/john-piper-on-submission-in-abuse/
ReplyDeleteRachel,
ReplyDeleteI have wondered about posting on this. Had not seen these remarks by Grace and would agree with your analysis. Very sad that her response has to be mediated through her husband.
Rosemary,
I am confused as to which post you are referring. Is it John's, Grace's, Mark's or Rachel's? I don't see how Rachel's fits your description.
Somehow that’s worse Rachel. In other words, your view is ‘coloured’ by the views of Cheryl Schatz talking about her views of John Piper, rather than what Piper has said about the role of women. Let me try and give you an insight into the world of a woman married to a man in ministry. Those women you describe as doing the ‘wifely submissive thing.’ Obviously ‘wet wimps’ one and all. Certainly the ‘goody two shoes’ who put their hands up in class and wait patiently for the teacher to give them permission to speak. I’d laugh if I wasn’t so cross on behalf of ALL women. I wish I found you supportive of women Rachel, but all I find is defensive remarks such as the above, trying to prove that you’re right to do what you’re doing. No care and support at all for women in general, rather directives that they are to stand up and BE women, [exacerbating gender wars] rather than serve, or .. horror of horrors .. do the ‘wifely submissive thing.’
ReplyDeleteFirst let me say that everything I say is personal experience, and I’m free to say it now because my husband has just resigned after 19 years service at this church. Nothing compared to Piper’s service of 35 years, so his wife will have been through so much more. I’ve never met either of the women you so denigrate, in fact I have no idea about either of them, but I don’t make the suppositions you do so unkindly.
Let me start with the children of such a marriage of which you say so ignorantly ..
“At point four, if children feel as though they can not approach pastor fathers, might it be because they are brought up in a patriarchal expression of Christianity in which what dad says has supreme authority? How would it be if these same children came, in time, to have mothers who were also pastors; mothers who saw their calling to their children as bound up with their calling to God, nurtured within a marriage with a focus on giftings and shared responsibility rather than narrow gender defined roles.” [continued]
‘Meetings’ becomes a dirty word for the children of a vicarage, dad, and sometimes mum is always in a meeting. If they’re not in a meeting, they’re with a parishioner, or inviting total strangers to share a meal, and expecting marvelous hospitality and Godliness from said children. Or they’re in their study, which means they can’t be disturbed. They spend every weekend, which is the only time the children have off from school .. working. Yes, they get a day off sometimes, but it’s always during the week, never when the family can spend time together. Such children have to frequently deal with the distraught, or smelly drunks, even absolute nut cases, and lack of money because it’s just been given away to a ‘worthy cause.’ And when it becomes known at school that their father is a minister, a LOT of stick. Certainly verbal abuse even if it’s only as mild as you have just dished up to your fellow women!! That’s just the tip of the iceberg of course, and those children have NOT chosen to follow the Lord, their parents have. What you say above would be entirely irrelevant to them, no help whatsoever.
ReplyDeleteThe spouse of someone in ministry has to be the father and mother of those children, just as much as does a single parent. You CANNOT do the ‘wifely submissive thing’ or the ‘husbandly submissive thing’ and be both parents, it’s impossible. You must be strong and help those children not just to cope, but to understand.
You and the Cheryl’s and Suzanne’s of this world think you’re so strong, that you’re standing up for women, but you’re not helping women who are in that ‘hard place’ at all. Of what help is what you’re saying to the single mum? Of what help is what you’re saying to the abused mum? It takes a strong woman to stand by those people Rachel, not someone with sappy irrelevant sayings, pointing fingers at women and telling them they’re NOT being strong .. when they ARE. That the fault is theirs because they’re not being what the Lord has called them to be, when they believe that they are being obedient to that calling. When they’re listening to HIM rather than what you’re berating them for. How hard it is to go against the culture of the day. [continued]
I on the other hand, chose to try and support my husbands calling to full time ministry. So the many absences when I needed him on hand, the times when he wasn’t there and I felt I couldn’t cope without that extra pair of hands, had to be times of testing. Learning times so that I could help others in the same situation. So were the times when I was diagnosed as suffering from depression so badly that I was assigned to a Psychiatrist for a possible cure. So was the time when the man with the gun was brought to me in church demanding a new pair of shoes. Or the time when I locked the Sunday School children into a room with no adult present and asked them to be good and quiet until help arrived while I dealt with the big chap in a see through paper all in one who was so very distressed about a story in the Bible that he’d come straight to the church building after getting bail from the police station. Or the time when a very large gentleman bashed his face into the concrete arch surrounding our front door, then turned to me with his bloody face and asked me for a hug so that he could cope with the fact that his two daughters had been murdered. No, I’m certainly doing the ‘wifely submissive thing’ when a woman I’ve taken in and cared for, for a couple of years, taken to the hospital and stayed with while she gave birth, [getting my children into trouble at school because my husband was hundreds of miles away and couldn’t help] robbed me of my grocery money as a reward. When I’ve had to listen to the accusations of my husband having an affair when I knew that overwork and stress made that impossible. When the church we’ve belonged to all our Christian lives, turns on me because I don’t happen to believe that women are called to teach mixed congregations. When that same church denigrates your husband who has put his all into building up a congregation in obedience to His Lord. Your reward is certainly not here and now I can assure you. Then, when you’ve spent those 19 years in obedience, [well your best is pitiful I know, but trying anyway] .. when the congregation has grown from 30-40 to 500 a Sunday with a couple of church plants on the way, the Lord tells you it’s time to resign, or in Piper’s case, take time away. Let me tell you that’s more devastating than all that happened previously. It is ultimately humbling. Then you discover that not only is your heart entwined with that congregation, but your security is as well, what on earth are you going to do without it. Pride has you thinking the church can’t manage without you, the Sunday school children you love so much won’t find quite the same replacement. Piper and his wife are going though all this, even if they have the hope of returning which we don’t. Honestly Rachel .. you bring all this down to the question of the ordination of women, is that from God? Is that the question God is asking? [continued]
ReplyDeleteYou remind me of John Spong to be quite honest. He has an article in the magazine of our local paper on this the Holiest week of the year. He says he speaks out for the benefit of church goers. You and others tell me you speak out for the benefit of women. I find it hard to believe that .. but then I’m a wimp, doing the ‘wifely submissive thing.’ I have no strength of mind without my husband do I? What I do in support or to serve, is definitely wrong and God is in fact cross with me for not standing up for women, not being a good example to them.
ReplyDeleteWell take it from me Rachel, that on behalf of two women I’ve never met, nor their husbands, and I probably won’t until we join Him .. you have made me practically apoplectic with anger and grief at such lack of understanding.
though in general I would be in the same ball park as you about the role of men & women, I don't have that reaction to her points as you do - rather, I'm thankful that we are in a church & culture where sabbatical breaks are built in to the normal pattern of service in both small and extended ways ( I think in most diocs it's every 10 years for a major sabbatical) I'm thankful we don't so much need her point 6, nor feel the need for " reasons" to take sabbaticals because that structure is there.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that she sees this as " courageous" decision says more about the culture in which they work, and the way in which individuals hold so much in themselves, than anything regarding the gender of the protagonists in this situation. - I think one can read too much in about that...
I think she is only articulating within her own culture theological and social) all the reasons why any minister, male or female NEEDS breaks. No one should need to justify them - they should be " automatic", but when not, then the way she supports it will come from her own culture and theology. We may disagree with her overall interpretations, but I don't think we can disagree with her reasons here.
Thanks Fibre-fairy, I think cultural differences are very obvious, yes. The life of pastors and their wives can be compared only marginally with the life of vicars and their wives/husbands.
ReplyDeleteRosemary, you have had it seriously tough and that can not be denied.
Within the Anglican Church there would have been a whole series of networks from which you could have drawn strength and support, which I think is part of the benefit of an established church, although, at the same time, establishment brings many frustrations.
I anticipate much joy in ministry. The Church of England, as far as I have experienced it, seems, under leaders like Rowan Williams and NT Wright, Bishop Alan etc, to encourage collaborative ministry between ministers and laity and across the ages and genders.
I anticipate sharing my ministry with other people and also my husband and my children and although, it might sound idealistic, we already anticipate everyone taking a role in the family so that the children have an input, about which they are excited, and my husband can work particularly alongside many of the dechurched men and the youth with whom he seems to build a quick rapport.
You describe much of the angst and the suffering, I am hoping that there might also have been much reason for rejoicing along the way.
Jesus asks us to take up our cross indeed but I am not sure just how we encourage others to walk with Jesus if all they see are burnt-out, sleep-deprived ministers who spend no time with their families. For surely Christ also came to give us life in abundance, much joy and eternal life that begins right now.
Rosemary, my heart goes out to you, it really does for what you have suffered. You have also brought up four boys as well. Christ will undoubtedly say to you “Well done, my good and faithful servant”.
Much love
Rachel
Rosemary,
ReplyDeleteI have read with horror your story of being the spouse of a pastor.
While I completely disagree with you on the role of women, that is really a side issue to what you describe which appears to be a very badly supported pastor which has opened up huge potential for damage and danger to the pastor and their family.
I suggest that at the heart of what you describe is a example of how Churches can abuse ministers.
- Where were the lay people when all this stuff was happening?
- Where were the support structures?
- Where were the management teams?
- Where was the pastoral care and oversight of the minister?
- Where was training about boundaries and safeguarding?
- Where was the expectation that a minister actually needs to model what they preach in terms of healthy discipleship?
- Where do we hear in this good news for you, your children and your husband? Where is the gospel for you - if it is not visible then how can you possible share it with others?
Now I do believe as a side issue that there is a tendency for this type of Church abuse to be more prevalent in male headship churches where ministers want to appear macho. Certainly in the Methodist Church one of the side benefits to having ordained women has been to move us to a more healthy understanding of ministry.
I hope and pray that you are your whole family find peace and healing for the hurts the Church have caused you.
I haven’t had it tough Rachel, I’m a strong woman, I’ve been described as a PW, [ a powerful woman, not at all sure I am, but I do have some influence I know], and I’ve had the most wonderful life imaginable. I AM doing it tough at the moment, having to give up all I’ve known and loved and not knowing if Our Lord will open another door.
ReplyDeleteOther quick answers .. you don’t need support networks Rachel, you need to listen to Him. He’ll comfort you.
Don’t anticipate joy .. it’s always a wonderful surprise.
You can only share your ministry to a certain extent. It’s yours, all one million learning curves of it, and it never ends. However it’s always service, not reception. You’re not guaranteed the joys, just the service, the hurt and the pain, Jesus told us that. Peace is what He promises you, the peace that passes all understanding .. so it’s not a concept that is easily passed on in a way that’s understandable.
Chuckle .. you make an assumption when you talk about burnt out sleep deprived ministers who spend no time with their families. I hope you’re not referring to us. If you are, check with any one of my sons and see what they say. Toby I know you’ll find on Facebook, maybe they all are, it’s something I refuse to join.
I have five terrific grandchildren as well, life doesn’t get much better I don’t think.
I have more questions, [although they’re all really the same one], and I ask because you have reduced this post to a question of gender, and ministry isn’t about gender. I know you believe thoroughly in the work of the Holy Spirit. So, was the Holy Spirit practicing deception on the church for the last 2000 years? Has He changed His mind? Have God [Genesis] and Jesus [the calling of the twelve] changed their minds? Why didn’t they know that from the beginning? And what precisely is wrong with helping guys to be better than they knew they could be?
Chuckle .. how to be misunderstood 101 .. sigh.
ReplyDeleteI haven’t suffered Rachel, far from it, I must constantly deal with the knowledge that I could have done so much more, and done what I did so much better. I’m a most loved and cherished wife and mother. I’m also in full time ministry ordained by God but not by the institution we call the Anglican church. What I described above ARE the joys and achievements of ministry. That’s what ministry is about, serving others. The opportunity to share my faith is given to me daily. The opportunity to teach others is also mine. I’m not fussed about leading services, certainly not about wearing those silly robes, anyone can do that, but few get the amazing chances I have had to serve.
You know me as Rosemary, but that’s unusual, here in New Zealand I’m not known that way at all, except by very few. I’m Wally’s wife .. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/lifestyle/mainlander/582350 Please notice I don’t get a mention!! I might add that my husband was born in Warrington UK, son of a bricky and a clippie, left school at 14 and joined the RN, a very slow reader but full of common sense. Or Jay’s mum [my eldest] .. http://www.ststephens.org.nz/ministry-team.php .. hmm, no mention of me there either! Sometimes I’m Toby’s mum [second son] http://tvnz.co.nz/content/2519474 eleven years with the Royal New Zealand Ballet, lead roles Peter Pan and the Hunchback of Notre Dame. Yet to make up his mind about ministry, although of course he does that already, but full time ministry!! Then again, sometimes I’m Alex’s mum http://tvnz.co.nz/view/tv2_story_skin/421167%3Fformat=html, he made it big here as a host on television and radio. He’s deliberately walking away from God at the moment. Only occasionally am I Tim’s mum [my youngest] http://timbehan.safitech.com/?page_id=2 I’m currently trying to talk him out of going into ministry quite this young, but to enjoy his role in the church, his new young wife, and life in general. But the important thing, the thing I want you to remember, is that rightly or wrongly, I think I had a bit to do with how all of those lovely guys turned out. If .. not something you believe in I know .. but if we ARE called as ‘helpers’ [Genesis] .. then I don’t need to see my name in lights to know what I’ve accomplished in these five men. Of course that means taking the bad with the good. There are disappointments, they let God and you down, then you must continue to love them powerfully. [continued]
Rosemary,
ReplyDeleteTell me has God changed his mind from when we understood slavery to be God's will? You can find plenty of descriptions, preaching and teaching about how God ordained the "Negro" to be a slave. Or consider the teaching of the Church relating to the Aborigine people in the past.
I assume you do not accept slavery today. I assume that you do not believe that the colour of our skin or our ethnicity to determine whether we can serve God or whether we can be ordained within the Church.
If we do not accept slavery as God's will then God must have changed his mind from Scripture.
Tradition is important but seeking to understand and follow is more important. The tradition that women cannot teach men ignores a significant witness in scripture.
Your own mention of "helper" in Genesis ignores the fact that uses the same term for God himself.
Your focus on the 12 ignores the way Jesus treated women - 1st evangelist in John's gospel is a woman - chapter 5, Mary learning as a disciple, 1st resurrection appearance is to women, Paul lists Junia as an apostle etc etc.
You also ignore the (few in number but highly significant) women in the Hebrew Scriptures such as Deborah.
My own belief and practice is not to tell all women that they cannot choose to serve their husband but that I want all women to be free to choose to respond to God's calling - whatever that might be.
To recognise that some women have been called to teach, preach, be leaders in the Church is not to devalue other calls but to allow all to respond to the call God places on them.
I do recognise though that I do devalue and more than that denigrate and dispute an understanding that God has placed all men over women by virtue of their gender.
You catalogued a lifetime of suffering and loss in your comments. Now try to imagine the suffering and loss that comes from being prevented from responding to God's call.
Rosemary, you ask "And what precisely is wrong with helping guys to be better than they knew they could be?", to which I and, I'm sure Rachel, would answer 'absolutely nothing'. Can you, however, acknowledge that other women might be called to walk a different path? Differences of opinion about the role of women, in the family, in the church and in society are not going away anytime soon and we all need some sort of 'vocabularly of grace' that allows us to acknowledge the other fellow's position as well as our own.
ReplyDeleteThe tenor of your response suggests you feel personally attacked but that was not the intention of the post. Rather is it about whether women in complementarian marriages might have more difficulty expressing dissatisfaction and unhappiness with the state of the marriage than women in more egalitarian relationships. If John Piper's marriage is in serious trouble, does the fact that he has such rigid ideas about the role of women have anything to do with it?
On a personal note, you say that you have a wonderful life. I'm glad of that and happy for you. But the early 'chapters' of your response to Rachel, don't suggest that. They convey a good deal of anger, particularly around blurred or non-existent boundaries that make any sort of private life very difficult. And I have to wonder whether you felt able to voice concerns over this and the assumptions that congregations make about ministers and their families.
LOL .. can’t resist ‘teaching’ the little woman eh Dave?
ReplyDeleteI’m sorry to say you epitomise the hundreds of men who do not support women in God’s church! Oh you SAY you do, and you encourage them to put on the robes of office in a man made institution, indicating that they are ‘equal’ in God’s sight .. but have you treated me as your equal? Are you listening to me? The clear answer from your post is no. You’re patronising yes, obviously convinced of your own superiority yes. Decline to hear that I have not suffered at all, but have been richly rewarded by God .. yes. The fact is, you’re persecuting me, as many have done in our church here in New Zealand. You are as I say, the epitome of the lack of support women receive from far too many men, and now unfortunately, women too, who have been sucked in by feminist decrees and men’s wimpy weakness. Sigh .. “Where Father, are the ‘manly’ men you created? Where dear Lord Jesus are the men created in your image?”
Now to quickly answer some of your specifics ..
No, God hasn’t changed His mind about slavery. You sir, are a slave to sin for example, as I am. Chuckle .. but you resemble all good Liberals. No doubt you’ll keep bringing up this example as you raise the most heretical teacher to the highest office, then sigh with contentment that you’ve been ‘just.’ Never realizing the depth of God’s justice.
LOL .. the ‘new’ tradition that women can and should hold the office of ‘teacher’ within the church, ignores a significant witness in Scripture. Pointless for me to make that clear I know, you’re far too interested in examining the ‘jots and tittles,’ and the possible alternatives to accept the plain reading of Scripture.
You are 180 degrees wrong. My mention of ‘helper’ is excruciatingly aware that it is God that holds this role, and that He has called women to do their humble best to share a part of it. What an unspeakable honour. Trouble is, we do it so very badly. A lot of the reason for that of course, is that you, and folk like you, teach the exact opposite, and persecute those like me. You have no idea how hard it is for women these days to find their way in Christ. When was the last time you heard a sermon on the honour of serving? Or any teaching on the very honourable role of women? [continued]
I haven’t ignored any women, they ARE my role models. No it is you making the assumptions here, telling me what I’m ignoring when you haven’t the foggiest. Chuckle .. again, just like a Liberal, try and make me feel ignorant and a failure, that will put me in my place huh?
ReplyDeleteWhich of course belies your next comment about your belief and practice, you’ve just contradicted it in your previous paragraphs. I’ve been free to respond to God’s calling BECAUSE I’m married to a man who sees me as ‘equal before God.’ I wouldn’t have that freedom if I were married to you. You would give me the ‘appearance’ of freedom, then sit back with a sorrowful face when I failed, and kindly commiserate with soft words, all the while pointing out that you DID give me the chance!! But there I would be on the wrong track because of your encouragement and teaching .. and to be fair, probably to the teaching you have received as well. However, don’t say I didn’t warn you when you face God will you? I hope you’re aware that you WILL face God as the ‘teacher’ in this and your previous posts, and answer for these things!
You really must try to cease bringing gender into this, that is where it all goes wrong. How can equality EVER be seen and understood when the word ‘gender’ is mentioned? Equality means there is no gender, only a difference in roles. I imagine you take the words of Galatians as your badge, most with your beliefs do, well please take them REALLY to heart. I’m not a ‘gender’ .. chuckle, in fact I’m attempting to teach you!! The New Testament tries so often to demonstrate that we all have very different roles, well try to think of them as non gender specific. Try to take each person and evaluate their gifts from God and how best they may be used by Him. But a warning, don’t try to turn a nurturing, caring woman into a hassled, burdened person with no chance to develop those gifts. [continued]
Lastly, and once again, I have NOT suffered, you mention that as if it’s ‘suffering’ that will get you into God’s good Graces, and that’s rubbish. And no one can be prevented from responding to God’s Call .. who do you think is more powerful than God that they can prevent someone from answering God’s Call? Those who ‘suffer’ are those who are not being taught the truths of God by people who have taken the role of ‘teacher’ in God’s church, but are misleading folk into damnation. That may include you too, I don’t know.
ReplyDeleteIn case it doesn’t register, I’m deeply angry as I write this, so I’ll apologise up front if I’ve gone over the top. I WOULD ask you to re-read your post to me, and see how patronising, how deeply hurtful it is to all women who are struggling to be obedient to God as they see it.
****
Rachel in your new post, you refer to this culture’s ‘belief in the validity of a woman’s testimony.’ Do you believe mine?
Fern, you obviously think that I’ve been a vicar’s wife for 20 odd years and have never encountered women who wish to ‘walk a different path?’ Doesn’t that strike you as a strange assumption? One of the main reasons differences in opinion about the role of women are not going to go away, is because it’s being presented as an either/or and not as both/and. Why is that?
ReplyDeleteIn our church of over 500 souls, there are a few Baptists, the difference in theology is really quite marked, and yet we have no problem accepting each other as fellow Christians. No difficulty with agreeing to disagree, but that isn’t happening in either your country or mine on THIS issue. Why is that?
I agree about the vocabulary of grace, but try and put yourself in my shoes for a moment. Either here, or in the USA where women have been happily ordained for over 20 years. [BTW, I’m not against the ordination of women, that’s fine.] It was accepted in the beginning that there would .. like the Baptists .. always be some that disagreed. That hasn’t happened. Those who hold my opinion are not only not wanted, they CANNOT be ordained, they’re not acceptable. Why is that?
As I have said before, we have worked in and for an Anglican church that has ordained women for over 20 years. We presently have a lady as our Bishop. Bishop Victoria Matthews. Previously our Bishop was David Coles, who when he left told us proudly that he’d ordained over 130 women in his 18 years in office. 130 Fern, in a Diocese with just over 70 parishes. Where are they now? Well I’m not too sure. The church has spent thousands of dollars educating them. Given them parishes where they should have succeeded, although I know of a few who were given impossible tasks, but either I don’t meet the ones who experience the ‘joy’ Rachel is looking for, or there’s something wrong somewhere. I know at Synod I meet a lot of non stipendiary older ladies, who are bitter and don’t know quite what to do with their bitterness because there aren’t many men left to aim at. [Feminism you see is still a MAJOR concern for them, rather than Jesus or the Gospel]. I’m as much concerned about the damage done to them, as I am about the health of the church in general, and the damage we’re doing to the men who are noticeable in their absence in the pews of their churches. [continued]
Rosemary,
ReplyDeleteI don't know whether to laugh or cry at your outrageously odd interpretations of what you and I have written.
It seems a very odd idea to me that by directly engaging with someone in a civil way you would be accused of not treating them as equal or even of persecuting them.
Sorry let me just check that again. My comments are persecuting you!?!?! Huh!?!?! What!?!?
I have read your long comments in detail and more than once. I have not and won't respond to every one of your points. Partly because it is not always clear to me what you mean (for example I find it very hard to reconcile your earlier descriptions of hurt and struggle including clinical depression caused by the Church with your later claims to have not suffered at all).
I agree that those feminist decrees are troublesome. Like where they read Genesis 1:27 and notice that it is human beings that are created in God's image they are just as much the image of God as any man.
I am sorry, what plain reading of Exodus 4 am I missing or Romans 16? You so called plain reading of a few texts flatly contradicts the plain reading of other texts such as these. As God does not contradict himself in Scripture there must be problems with the plain readings you refer to.
The last sermon on heard which included a substantial amount of teaching on serving was at our Synod. The last I preached on it was on Maundy Thursday, there Jesus gives a wonderful example of service doesn't he (I love the NLT translation which includes "Jesus showed the fullest extent of his love" as a description of that act of service which he commanded all his followers to emulate).
As for all this nonsense about putting you in your place. Clearly you have ignored what I have written earlier eg
"My own belief and practice is not to tell all women that they cannot choose to serve their husband but that I want all women to be free to choose to respond to God's calling - whatever that might be."
"To recognise that some women have been called to teach, preach, be leaders in the Church is not to devalue other calls but to allow all to respond to the call God places on them."
Where does that devalue your calling and your understanding? Instead of me denying you anything it is you who are denying every other woman a calling and understanding that is different to yours.
That quote also shows what a load of nonsense you are talking about "robes of office in a man made institution". I specifically and deliberately referred to "God's calling - whatever that might be." Oh and robes are not really part of my tradition.
I will share your views of what it must be like to be married to me with my wife. She will enjoy that very much.
I’ve made it plain I think that my recent posts have been written in anger. If you like, in anger AND pain. I have been and am being personally attacked. Mostly those attacks have been from women, and they’re vicious. Unkind doesn’t cover it. The couple of attacks from men haven’t been vicious, more .. like Dave .. patronising. Superior sort of, looking down their noses at me. A real comfortable place to be church for people like me!! Why is that?
ReplyDeleteWe none of us know why John Piper is taking time off. Nor should we, the man and his wife are under enough pressure. We certainly shouldn’t be making public guesses about their marriage which has been through so much. We also shouldn’t be making public guesses about whether he’s one side and she’s another [I can never remember whether I’m complementarian or egalitarian, that’s all nonsense to me], those things are their private affair, and shouldn’t be public speculation.
As for your final paragraph, I’ve admitted my deep anger, which may have boiled over inappropriately, but as for our church family, they are MY family. I love them all dearly, that’s why it’s so hard to leave. They are my support and encouragement and we couldn’t have managed without them. They are young, vibrant and exciting on the whole, and watching them grow, especially from children to adults, is THE most satisfying and edifying process. When we leave, we must REALLY leave, otherwise we’re not giving whoever the new vicar will be, a fair shot. Leaving family is tough stuff, perhaps the hardest thing we’re ever called to do. Can’t say for sure, but I suspect it is. So I have tremendous sympathy for John Piper and his family. I have an inkling about what they’re going through.
About voicing concerns. In the 20 odd years, my husband has never preached against the ordination of women. I have never spoken publically in this city about my beliefs, we have given our loyalty and effort to this church and it’s decisions, even though we disagree with them. That appears to work only one way. Why is that?
Rosemary
Rosemary
ReplyDeleteI have to say I do feel uncomfortable about some of the things that you are saying in response to people's opinions here. Of course, you are entitled to your opinion. Mine is that it certainly is not 'obvious' that Dave is 'convinced of his own superiority'. I do not think that there are many people who would arrive at such a conclusion from reading his post.
You are proposing now that suffering is somehow not compatible with joy. You are quite determined that we forget everything you said about how you have laboured for the Lord. Rosemary, we heard and imagined everything you let us see, from the descriptions of your life. Our human response is one of great compassion. Why now claim that you have 'not suffered at all'? You have suffered as would anyone dealing with what you dealt with. You have explored those things here with a high degree of transparency and vulnerability, dear sister.
Rosemary, Dave is not persecuting you, really, he isn't. It is the people in your church who have persecuted you, you say. Do not make him into some kind of personified version of the people who have hurt you. He simply found a flaw in your argument constructed around your idea that we suggest God changes his mind. God does not learn, of course, Rosemary, but we do. We have misapplied biblical texts in the past and for this we should lament. He used the example of slavery.
Most of the Christian women I know who support giftings-led roles, rather than gender roles are not taken in by feminist decrees. You support giftings-led roles too, you say. So surely it has to go both ways. If some women feel that they have been given gifts to teach and preach, they should be free to honour God in this way and be a channel through which others can hear His story and ours from the Bible: his Son dying for our salvation.
What is a 'manly' man, some kind of tautology which says very little. Women are not wanting to be 'manly', neither are men wanting to be, what would the parallel be? - 'womanly'? Wimpy? Oh Rosemary, aren't your ideas too fixed?
Maybe what we are really talking about is less about gender and more about a kind of modernist/post-modernist divide. I think I probably just belong to a generation that does not recognise fixed gender roles. This does not mean that I am casting the Bible in my own image. Modernism seemed to do that to me, but that is only my opinion. The 1950s, 60s even 70s Christian housewives read their own culture into the Bible.
The Bible does not fix us, it frees us. Children are to be obedient as are slaves, which I suppose in today's world might speak to those in employment, that we serve our boss as we would serve Christ. Between the genders there is mutual submission, there is huppotasso - voluntary submission - we put the other above ourselves, in asking for our children's obedience, it is actually because we put their needs above our own, wanting the best for them. Anyway, you know all this already.
cont.
Why is it hard for women 'to find their way in Christ', anymore than it is hard for men? We come to Christ as individuals, he welcomes us as his individual children, yes, we come as women and we come as men but each with our own unique story. I hear sermons all the time on serving, this is what we are made for: to worship and serve.
ReplyDeleteDave and I are not actually liberal in our theology. You compare me to Spong who denies the resurrection - ouch!! I do not deny the resurrection. Scripture is my guide in life, the truth, the framework and ideological pattern for my life. Through the written Word, the Living Word - Christ and the Spirit poured out for us, I do my best, flawed as I am, to make decisions about my life.
You imagine the sort of life you would have with Dave, you make too many assumptions based on no evidence. Why do you imagine failing? He wouldn't be the one 'giving you the chance' - you are still giving him the position of 'head', 'a chance' is not something he would propose to have to give you. In a marriage of mutual submission, you stand together equally before God, both succeeding and failing and thanking God you have each other when times are tough, trusting that you each want the other to thrive and glorify God using the gifts you have been given to the best of your ability.
You say "Equality means there is no gender, only a difference in roles." It is in fact quite the opposite. We will always be gendered. God made us male and female. This is part of the beauty of life - our complementarity - we are more human because we have each other. We become 'one flesh'. What this means is that each pair will work out how they can nurture one another, serve one another, bring up children, glorify God. We can not live some legalistic list whereby to quote John Piper, a woman with a male secretary is guilty of compromising the humanity of them both, this is just not true, but this kind of extra-biblical teaching does infiltrate some churches, particularly those influenced by the teaching of organisations like Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (USA).
You say in your last post that 'no one can be prevented from answering God's call', then it is on this basis that you must allow those women, who sitting squarely within the teachings of scripture and a church who has recognised 'two integrities' to answer that call. Your call is to teach and preach and support your husband and bring up your children, it is the same for many other women. Some of those women will also wear 'those clothes' and teach mixed congregations, they are being obedient to their call and the church which has blessed them to answer it. Their obedience and your obedience are in response to the one and same glorious Lord.
Lastly and importantly, responding to your final implication - teaching mutual submission and obedience to calling is not leading people into damnation. None of us have the whole truth, flawed as we are, surely our goal is to be united to one another and learn together as we say yes to the Spirit who leads us into all truth. We will only know for sure when we see him face-to-face. Your last sentence is very apt for it supports my point - we are all 'struggling to be obedient to God as we see it.' We are 'seeing through a glass darkly' - all of us - but we must learn to live together.
Your children are terrific, I looked up your addresses and your husband increased the size of the church hugely. He was at Gafcon and unperturbed by the appointment of a woman, I forget the details but this just goes to show we are all on the same side really wanting to see God's Kingdom grow, experiencing the pain and the joy. Adiaphora will always threaten to pull us apart from one another, lets not give the devil the victory. We all submit to the same Lord and witness to the same gospel.
Much love
Rachel
Rosemary,
ReplyDeleteYou say in reply to Fern 'No difficulty with agreeing to disagree, but that isn’t happening in either your country or mine on THIS issue. Why is that?'
But the Church of England accepts two integrities on the issue of women in ordained ministry. I live in a parish in which they do not believe that women should be ordained incumbents of parishes but deacons.
The Church here is thriving.
The Church sponsoring me in my training, my sending church, if you like, the church that wrote my references, in the next village where I lived before, does support women in ordained positions: deacons, priests, bishops.
They are thriving too.
There are men being ordained who do not believe that women should be ordained, I know some of them. They will make very good priests.
(Actually Rosemary, I might have been incorrect in using the term adiaphora in my last post. I am working out what constitutes adiaphora and I think it is more issues over ceremonies and robes.
Adiaphora, secondary issues, morality, doctrine....emm. For me, the women in ordained ministry issue has always been a secondary issue. I would like, however, to do some more thinking about this. I am writing an essay on Richard Hooker and he discusses adiaphora and also issues that cause disagreement but are not salvation issues, so perhaps I will be better informed once I have completed my assignment.)
You make parallels with debate over baptism. Interesting. I need to give this more thought.
You say you have supported women's ordination but feel women do not support your calling, I am surprised women can not see the integrity of your calling.
You say you have been the victim of vicious attacks from other women. Why are they so angry at you? One of my friends at college does not believe in women's ordination, we get on really well. There has to be a generosity exercised towards one another. I am sorry you have not experienced this generosity from women who have argued with you. There is sensible and constructive debate and this is how we learn from one another. There are accusations and threats and these things are not helpful or edifying at all.
Dave ..
ReplyDelete1. You haven’t answered my question, please try. Are you treating me as your equal?
2. My depression was hormonal, a common thing that many women suffer. I didn’t say it was caused by the church. I suffered it twice in my life, once on the birth of a child and again at menopause.
3. If you won’t respond to my comments and won’t ask for an explanation when I’m not clear, how can you ever hope to understand?
4. I did not imply that women were not created in God’s image, why are you trying to make out I did?
With regard to my understanding of Scripture, how can you know what texts I’m referring to that are apparently ‘flatly contradicted?’ Here we are standing on Holy ground as far as I’m concerned. I concur that God does not contradict Himself, so my question in an earlier post stands. Why has our church decided to change the 2000 year practice and tradition? When Our Father not choosing women as leaders, Jesus not choosing women as leaders, and the Holy Spirit who has been leading us into all Truth for 2000 years hasn’t ever pointed this out before now, when our culture demands such a sign of equality? It’s not so much that I’d like to hear your views, I would like your admission that my beliefs in that regard, ARE 2000 years old and HAVE biblical warrant. If you wish to debate that point rather than simply admit it, you do NOT consider me your equal do you? You’ll know in your heart.
Rachel, I certainly am not deserving of any compassion from you or anyone else. I’m a sinful, selfish, prideful person, but I have received the greatest of mercies on this earth, undeserved forgiveness from Our Lord.
ReplyDeleteThe catalogue of things I spoke about in my first post were a small indication of what being in full time ministry as a vicar’s wife is all about. I believe if I knew John Piper’s wife, I would hear a similar catalogue from her. In fact I find it strange that it hasn’t seemed to hit any bells at all over there, I know many other vicar’s wives here, and my experiences are not odd or out of the way. I didn’t recount those things in order to hear ‘Well done’ or indeed ‘I’m sorry for you.’ They’re simply facts.
I wonder what you consider persecution to be Rachel?
You say.. “If some women feel that they have been given gifts to teach and preach, they should be free to honour God in this way..”
IMHO, true freedom is the freedom we have to choose to obey .. or not. When I first became a Christian I was very excited, very enthusiastic. It’s one of the things that attracted me to your blog, you reminded me so much of myself so many years ago. But I also clearly remember a time in those early days, when my delusions of grandeur had me wanting to DO so much for my Lord who had done everything for me. Chuckle, I fondly thought I was going to be the best evangelist New Zealand had ever seen and yet through my reading of Scripture, I clearly heard the Lord ask me to be a Christian wife and mother. My immediate reaction was, “But I can’t do that. That’s too hard. I want to sacrifice myself in some way and earn the love You have given me.” So what I notice first about your above .. is that we’re NOT free to do anything other than His Will, we are not free to honour God in some way WE consider best. And only after we’ve seen that, will He show us what that is. Our wishes and desires don’t matter, His do. [continued]
So I might ask you for example, if you’re so convinced that God has gifted you to teach men, what evidence do we have of that? It’s common to hear such things as, ‘answering God’s call.’ That’s a difficult phrase to interpret and understand for us all. I was not and am not what I would call a ‘gifted’ wife and mother, I’m certainly no homemaker! I was also expected as the vicar’s wife to do Sunday School, when all I wanted was to be in church, but 19 years later I begin to see God’s Wisdom and calling, and am very happy that I did what I didn’t want to do. It’s really difficult to explain that in any clearer way, but the eternal lives of those children, and one’s own children, are MOST precious to Our Lord.
ReplyDeleteAre my ideas fixed? Well maybe I suppose, they come from years of experience though, so I can’t discount them entirely. If you’ve never heard the expression ‘manly’ men, then forget it. As for women, my experience is that the church, having chosen them for their nurturing and caring capabilities, proceeds to drum that out of them by burdening them with stuff. We have had two full time women on the staff here, both wonderful ambassadors of Christ. Both overworked because there is so much work to be done, much of it on a one to one level like any pastor. I’ve said this before, but I’ll repeat it.
If someone goes into the office of a male pastor with a problem, the visit may take half an hour. After listening, compassion and prayer are offered and if relevant, biblical advice. When they leave, the male pastor continues with whatever he’s doing. If that same person were to visit our female pastor, the visit would take a lot longer, lets say a couple of hours. There would be much more talking, much more listening, paper hankies for the floods of tears, as well as the above. However we have found [there goes experience again] that they carry that load onwards. Whereas the male pastor is able to switch off to a certain extent. They too carry the load and pray for the situation and the person, but they can also carry on with other duties. However the female pastor finds that much more problematic. [cont.]
They FEEL the pain of the problem in a way that I suggest is perfectly normal, they also feel the need to be much more practical in doing something, whatever they deem necessary about the situation. We have found for instance, that any female MUST have more time off in order to be able to cope with that sort of burden. Not because women are weak, far from it, but because women are nurturing, caring folk and as a church, we NEED and WANT those gifts from them. We have recognized that in order to have those gifts on offer in the church, such women need more time in order to accomplish what they are so good at. However the wider church rarely recognises that fact and pushes women to do ALL the tasks of a vicar, often removing from those women, the time they need to BE who they are. In effect, we can easily destroy the gifts that the church needs so badly.
ReplyDeleteI could have put that better, but it’s a busy day! You ask..
“Why is it hard for women 'to find their way in Christ', anymore than it is hard for men?”
Oh it’s just as hard for men, but I was specifically referring to those who, because they believe I am wrong in my beliefs, and that is almost 100 percent of the leadership in the Anglican church in New Zealand [we ARE in a different place to the UK, but unless you become very aware of the situation, this will be true in the UK too], do not permit me to hold my views. That is completely contrary to the Eames commission on the subject, but England is clearly going the same way. You yourself have made the Piper issue, a gender issue, why? We all know you don’t agree with John Piper, but him taking leave has nothing to do with that as far as we know, and I would be very surprised if it impinged in any way at all .. so why bring it up? If this matter is ‘secondary’ or adaiaphora to you, why is it a constant topic of conversation?
“this is what we are made for: to worship and serve.”
Hmm, I’m very fond of the first line of the Westminster Confession. “The chief end of man is to glorify God.” [and lastly..]
I obviously didn’t make it clear why I compared you to Spong, for which I apologise, but it has NOTHING to do with his theology. As I thought I had made clear, his reasoning for speaking out is that he does it for the benefit of pew sitters, and it seems to me that this is often your reason for such a post as started this whole discussion. You do it for women, but you leave out all the thousands of women for whom your reasoning is of no help. Is that what God wants? Because what God wants is paramount.
ReplyDeleteLet me be clear that I understand you correctly vis-à-vis Galatians Rachel. You say we will always be gendered. Do you mean apart from what you refer to as ‘giftings?’ I have so often heard that Galatians reference used as a proof that women can and should do anything a man should do before God, that I find you difficult to understand at this point. Do you see being a woman as a ‘gift’ from God? May I ask what you see as the difference between the gift of being a man and the gift of being a woman?
I don’t know how you can say that the Cof E accepts two integrities, that is not the picture we see when we read your newspapers or blogs. We see a total reversal of promises made. Not kept .. as they haven’t been here. However, this situation is complicated by the fact that you have two disparate groups who are not supportive of women in positions where they teach mixed congregations, the Catholic view and the conservative or reformed view, so perhaps we shouldn’t get into it.
Lastly, I haven’t debated this issue with women in our church since the decision was taken all those years ago, but the reason women clergy have done the things they have done to me, is because I don’t support their position, biblically I believe they are wrong and doing a disservice to both men and women. I thought I was clear about that. Someone in the UK who would express my point of view, is Carrie Sandom. Perhaps the clearest is .. http://www.reform.org.uk/pages/bb/fellowworkers.php
Hi Rosemary
ReplyDeleteThank you for your response.
"Do you see being a woman as a ‘gift’ from God? May I ask what you see as the difference between the gift of being a man and the gift of being a woman?"
Yes, I do see being a woman as a gift from God. However, I find it very hard to reflect on this as a woman for all women. I can only see it as gift because God broke powerfully into my life in a new way when I had my first child. If I was a man, perhaps this would have been the vehicle for his revealing presence in my life too, I do not know but it was how my life changed in orientation. I had no pain in labour, and God had given me foresight that i would have no pain some years before - it demonstrated God's faithfulness to me. I was taken up into a kind of 'seventh heaven' place, which is a bit hard to describe, but I have been back there since.
My life with God is very experiential. This is how we communicate with one another. i do not know why. Anyway, I digress. I do see womanhood as God's gift.
Gift of manhood. I asked my husband about this one. He said he likes being a man. But he also talked about 'give and take', responding to circumstances etc. Being a man was not about conforming to a particular remit.
ReplyDeleteThis is because we make it up as we go along in response to the circumstances God graces us with. I looked after pre-school children, he did long hours earning. I am now training for ministry, he works from home and picks up children from school.
We compromise and work out the best response to needs as we can. We live one week at a time and adapt as we go along. We live quite bravely, expecting that people will understand and give us a chance. They usually do and have. We are prepared to show vulnerabilities and take steps when we need to make changes.
Ah - Gal 3:28
I tend to look at the whole sweep of scripture. Exegesis, exegesis! Rosemary, I have deconstructed the Greek of 1 Tim 2 11:15. I have entered into debates about Kephale meaning 'head' or 'source'. I have looked at George Knight verses Marshall, Grudem verses Bilezikian.
I look at the 'big picture'. I consider what it is to be an eschatological community. I respect the Church's decisions on this issue. I look at the patriarchal expressions of life and faith in the past. Rosemary, trust me, I would not be where I am if I thought I was offending a Holy God, disobeying my Lord or quenching the Holy Spirit. I do not want to labour into the exegesis of particular texts again. I have papers and papers and files and files on these issues as I considered arguments before going forward for selection conference. I understand too how an argument can be made for an alternative reading. I live in the tension. I am brave enough. God is making me more and more gracious as time goes on. One of my very good friends does not believe in women's ordination. I know priests who will be ordained who do not - it's okay. When I see him face to face I can not imagine him sending me down to Hell because I spoke about the Bible to men. I can not imagine him saying Jack and John and Bill love me because they heard about what I had done for them as you spoke and my Spirit took up residence in their lives and they served me all their days and you should have never preached that sermon on Isaiah 53. I really can not imagine that happening and that might all sound very basic, simplistic and half-baked but sometimes I just need some relief from all the academic scrambling over Greek sentence constructions.
Yes I am interested in Reform. There is a veiled reference to them in the very title of my blog. They are quite a small but obvious voice here, interjecting every now and then, threatening to remove funds from the Church of England if things do not go their way. They seem to want to split and yet not split. They were created in response to the decision to ordain women in the nineties. Live and let live, I suppose.
I have a feeling it will all be okay in the end. Even if the Church of England implodes with all the in-fighting, people will continue to live for Jesus. God will do something new in our midst. His gospel will always ring out and he will continue to reconcile his people to each other and to himself. Perhaps it could start with us! :-)
God bless you.
Rosemary,
ReplyDeleteBlogger just lost a long response from me. Aargghh!
Rosemary,
ReplyDeleteI am drowning in the volume of comments here and replying is not my highest priority. My work and family come first, it fights with many other internet sites for limited attention.
I will try to answer your specific questions, although I am afriad you won't like the answers.
"1. You haven’t answered my question, please try. Are you treating me as your equal?"
Yes and No. Yes by my understanding as equality is important to me. No by your understanding as you write: "If you wish to debate that point rather than simply admit it, you do NOT consider me your equal do you?"
I completely reject the idea that I only consider you an equal if I agree with you. You are my equal because of our creator and saviour not because I or anyone else agrees with you. Your equality is to me an essential part of your humanity.
More than that I believe that engaging with someone is a sign of respect and belief in their intrinsic value and equality. On my blog we have frequently see visitors who believe in male headship ignore questions, comments and challenges from women - it is a clear sign that they do not believe those women to be their equal.
"2. My depression was hormonal, a common thing that many women suffer. I didnt say it was caused by the church. I suffered it twice in my life, once on the birth of a child and again at menopause."
I apologise that in the context in which I read this I assumed that the depression was connected with the Church. Clearly I misunderstood you.
"3. If you won’t respond to my comments and won’t ask for an explanation when I’m not clear, how can you ever hope to understand?"
I just can't keep up with the volume at the present time.
"4. I did not imply that women were not created in God’s image, why are you trying to make out I did?"
You wrote “Where Father, are the ‘manly’ men you created? Where dear Lord Jesus are the men created in your image?”
By focusing on one group of people as being needed as the image of Jesus you imply that others reflect it less well. I wanted to point out that the unmaly men are also created in the image of the Lord Jesus and so are all women. There is nothing "manly" about being created in the image of God. You are just as equally created in the image of God as Mark Driscoll.
I totally disagree that you can claim certain men who exhibit "manly" attributes (generally which in my perception include predelictions to violence and power) better reflect the image of God than anyone else.
continued
"It’s not so much that I’d like to hear your views"
ReplyDeleteSo do you believe I am equal to you?
"I would like your admission that my beliefs in that regard, ARE 2000 years old and HAVE biblical warrant."
I do think that your views have been understood in Christendom as being the valid tradition and to have biblical warrant.
However, I disagree. I think they reflect views that emerged in the relatively early Church but which differ from the example and teaching of Jesus and what we know of the earliest Church.
We can see in the teaching of Augustine changes from Jesus in a number of areas particularly in relation to gender and pacifism. The earliest Christians understood the teaching of Jesus required them to be completely pacifist yet that changed dramatically over a few hundred years and continues today in manyn places - I have coresponded with US evangelicals who do not believe it is possible to be a Christian and a pacifist.
In the same way the understanding of women and their roles changed dramatically in that first few hundred years as Christianity spread and men seized authority. In Jesus we see him giving culture shattering roles and responsibilities to women (think of how he praised Mary to Martha, the woman as evangelist in John 4, the witnesses to the resurrection). In Acts and Romans we see women with authority over men (Junia and Priscilla for example).
So I accept your views are consistent with Christendom but I believe they do not reflect the life of Jesus or what we understand of the earliest Christians.
"If you wish to debate that point rather than simply admit it, you do NOT consider me your equal do you? You’ll know in your heart."
As I say above, I reject this definition of equality. We are not equal because we agree, we are equal because we are both created in the image of God, both loved by God, Jesus died for us both and rose again for us both. God pours out the Holy Spirit on us both and therefore we are equal.
So you can disagree with me and we can still be equal. In fact if I only considered people equal if I agreed with them then there would be few people that I am equal with.
Argumentatively yours in Christ
Dave
Rosemary,
ReplyDeleteYou describe women in ministry and include "We have found for instance, that any female MUST have more time off in order to be able to cope with that sort of burden."
This totally contradicts my own experience. I have written extensively on this on my blog over the years. I can reel off the names and many examples of women who have been in authority over me in the Church for whom this is not the case.
Firstly, let me say that this is a very interesting and stimulating thread. Rosemary, I'd like to pick up on a number of points. You ask (of Rachel) 'what does it mean to be a woman'? Intersting question. My experience is very dfferent from yours and Rachel, I've never married and don't have children. My church is a conservative evangelical one that doesn't place much value on women but the little it does is placed on wives and mothers. Women like me, the single or divorced, are second or third class citizens. So I do know a bit about being patronised or dismissed or just plain ignored. It's strange how often one finds that the church, which should be a place of refuge for all of us, is, actually, a source of pain. If you've been personally attacked by women who have different views on the role women should play in the church, then that really is appalling and I'm sorry.
ReplyDeleteThe situation in the UK is complicated. Both conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics oppose women's ordination but differ on the reason. For the CE's it's about male headship while the AC's have an entirely different view on the nature and meaning of the priesthood. I tend to think that there should be provision made for those who cannot submit to the authority of women bishops but I don't think we should lose sight of the fact that CEs demand concessions for themselves that they woudn't be prepared to give if the proverbial shoe were on the proverbial other foot.
I haven't known many women ministers but I do know quite a few women counsellors and therapists. They don't manifest the same patterns of behaviour as you describe in your women pastors - they don't need more time off work compared with their male colleagues in order to cope with the burden of what they do. This leads me to believe that the situation you describe is not rooted in gender differences but more to do with how specific individuals deal with these sort of stresses. There's a very common (but false) belief that anyone and everyone can counsel. Actually, they can't. Those who do it well understand the need for boundaries. Perhaps this isn't a role your women pastors are cut out for or perhaps they need more training and support.
Purely out of interest, why are you moving on? Is your husband retiring?
Well Dave, if you’re drowning, please ignore me. However, as I’m sure you say to your parishioners .. context, context, context. An awful lot of your reply is causing you angst because you haven’t read my post very carefully .. sigh .. which you admitted was the case vis-à-vis my depression. You really are busy, perhaps you should let something go.
ReplyDeleteMy understanding of equality is probably the same as yours, despite your remarks. As you pointed out, I said .. “If you wish to debate that point rather than simply admit it, you do NOT consider me your equal.” Now what is the context? It’s that I have a valid point, a biblical warrant for so believing. If you don’t admit that I have a valid point, then you don’t consider me your equal. Simple really, you just left out the context. I’m afraid all your pontificating about me has been a waste of time, and you don’t have any to waste.
I don’t require that you agree with me, I’m quite sure I made that clear. I require that you treat me with respect because the views I hold are biblical and have warrant. I would prefer not to have the debate about the issue itself, although I will if I feel I must. Suffice it to say for your edification, that as a farmer’s daughter, my view has been formed since childhood observations of nature and firmed as a Christian growing in my understanding of the revelation He has given us. That I’m nearly 65 years old, so it’s ‘old hat’ to me.
You say .. “On my blog we have frequently see visitors who believe in male headship ignore questions, comments and challenges from women - it is a clear sign that they do not believe those women to be their equal.”
Dave, please, please re-read the remarks you have made to me. I’m not kidding when I say they are patronizing and superior. You believe completely that you are right and I am wrong and that I need to be educated. You do not in fact accept that I have a valid biblical point of view, because you see the need to correct it. Tell me, do you feel the same need to correct Baptists about their view of infant baptism? You have marginally improved in your last post, but are still careless in your reading and making assumptions. You have me pigeon holed as something. Well maybe I am that, but perhaps I’m not. Why don’t you ask? [continued]
It’s probably the same with any like me who visit your blog I presume. It’s a waste of time speaking with those who are so obdurate. If your blog, like this one, is so one eyed that it cannot .. in fact refuses .. to listen to the women who believe as I do, then we shake the dust from our feet. Obviously I have no idea if that is the case on your blog, I don’t know anything about it. But I can tell you that the pain of trying to be accepted by men and women who believe the opposite to us, and think ‘education’ is the answer, is extremely hard. That is why my anger towards both you and Rachel was so overwhelming for me. When you consider people who disagree with you as ‘pitiful and uneducated theologically’ as well as wrong, and treat them that way .. well it takes a very strong person to hang around and answer. I would suggest it’s got nothing to do with equality, but may have something to do with the way they’ve been accepted or not as having a valid point of view, and how you have treated them. Although the indication is that you believe THEY are wrong and not equals because of your remarks above.
ReplyDeleteYou may of course criticise my prayer, clearly addressed to Our Father, but I hope you don’t make a habit of it with your parishioners. Must all prayers be PC?
You say .. “I totally disagree that you can claim certain men who exhibit "manly" attributes (generally which in my perception include predelictions to violence and power) better reflect the image of God than anyone else.”
I have to be careful here, because I want to be very rude and sharp about your lackadaisical and untrue reflection. I want to be kind because of your ‘busyness’ but that is the worst generalisation I’ve heard for a while, takes my breath away. I’m also sorry for you if the only manly men you know are violent men seeking power. Maybe your definition of manly is different from mine. I can only hope so.
Sigh .. ok I’ll try, but I don’t hold out much hope!! If we go back to Genesis to try and understand the curse that God has placed on us as men and women, we can see quite clearly that said curse is different for the different genders. At the end of the curse for women, we are told, “Your desire will be for your husband and he will rule over you.” Now if you will permit me to leave aside the first half and concentrate on the latter half .. [continued]
..in Christ, when you as a man become a Christian, you are ALWAYS going to have to battle with your natural desire, given by God in the way of a curse, to ‘rule over’ women. You are always going to have to battle with your desire to dominate instead of having dominion. And that Dave, is what you should be instructing the men in your care over and over again, because it’s a huge battle that we face. But ‘in Christ’ both genders have this struggle, just in different ways .. that’s one of yours.
ReplyDeleteMost of the rest of your post is your attempt to ‘educate’ me from your lofty position of being right. You’re not on your own you know. Charismatics are always trying to educate me too, so are the Liberals and lots of others. I HAVE been through all the arguments Dave, you may not be tired of it, but I do get that way occasionally.
Rosemary
Chuckle .. I’m glad you find it interesting Fern. I’m OK with it now, just a bit tired of the same old, same old, but the anger has gone thank goodness.
ReplyDeleteWhat can I say, you’re right. Spot on. The church is shocking in it’s lack of acceptance of single’s, divorced and with regard to women, elderly widows. It’s marginally better at elderly widowers. Single males of a certain age are judged these days to be a danger to children, especially boys, that is a terrible cross for them to bear if it’s unwarranted. I could say sympathetically that I’m sorry you feel like a second class citizen, but in some ways I’m not. Nor .. in one way .. do I think it’s strange that what should be a place of refuge, is a source of pain. You see both prove to me that you are His, and valued highly. So the question is, why does He allow it?
Well I’m not He, so I cannot know the answer absolutely, but I can share some thoughts I’ve had along the way. As a church, although growth has been steady both numerically and spiritually, we often seem to lurch from crisis to crisis. I think in a way, this keeps us dependent on Him. We have a tendency to begin to think it all depends on us .. and it doesn’t. Oh I know those words seem to trip off my tongue and perhaps seem to be a ‘typical’ Christian rejoinder, but they’re heartfelt. I’m suffering myself at the moment with regret for my own pride and lack of humility. [Now I’m answering your last question as well]. The Lord had to sit on us HARD to get us to listen to Him with regard to resigning from this church, and when He sits on you hard, it’s painful. I can’t explain that further, it’s not mine to share, but I suspect something similar is happening in the life of John Piper. I could of course be wrong, but that’s my suspicion, that the Lord is sitting on him hard. You see I’ve always used the glib and correct WORDS, always said that the Lord is the author of all, that this local church is HIS, not ours. That He has built it, not us. But when He made it clear that we were to leave, one’s immediate reaction is .. “Hang on, it’s ours.” Followed by the ignominious thought that you’d had something to do with it’s growth. That’s pride and lack of humility. Then .. you realise just how much of your security is bound up in this local church. I still can’t imagine it, and yet the last day is galloping closer and closer and still no inkling of what comes next. It’s so very hard to ‘trust’ when you’re walking blind into who knows what. I truly believe I’ve never faced anything harder.
[Continued answer to Fern]
ReplyDeleteI have often faced my own sinfulness, but never to this depth. What is worse is, folk here keep on saying such very nice things about us, when I know our own lack of worth to receive them. That too will be true of John Piper, he certainly won’t deserve the sort of stuff that folk are saying about him on the net, always from people who have given up nothing to the same degree that he and his family have. With regard to specifics, no we’re resigning not retiring, my husband is a couple of years younger than me and we do hope that his preaching ‘gift’ will continue to be used.
Let me add something I’ve discovered about single’s during my time in His church. Many, if not most of them, could teach us marrieds EVERYTHING about being dependent on our Father. You see we marrieds are often dependent on each other, which weakens our dependence on Him. It’s not wrong, we are one, but we have such a lot to learn in that area. I’ll go further, many of the single’s who are teachers in our church are the very best. I mean that MOST sincerely. Some [only some] are celibate same sex attracted individuals who have endured a pain I cannot imagine, but because of that pain, their ability to teach and help others is unique. My own Bishop is a single, which makes her FAR more acceptable to me, she has been ‘married’ to her church since she was a teenager. So what can I say that might help? I don’t know, but I DO recognise your worth and value. I acknowledge that you have much you could teach me and I could wish you were a member of my local congregation. Chuckle, but isn’t that a waste of time, because I don’t know where it’s going to be!!
“lose sight of the fact that CEs demand concessions for themselves that they woudn't be prepared to give if the proverbial shoe were on the proverbial other foot.”
Good point, I need to think about that, care to be a bit more specific?
I have to laugh out loud at your mention of counselors. I’m afraid they are often the bane of my existence because few are Christian, and those that are, are often improperly trained. I think my first comment must be that ‘boundaries’ is a very secular term, and while I understand the need for some boundaries if someone is ‘counselling’ on a regular basis, there is also in the church, an extreme need for ‘empathy and solid prayer.’ Empathy is not hard to find, solid prayer is MUCH more problematic. I’m so bad at it myself. Remembering to uphold in prayer, someone in need .. frequently .. is both time consuming and draining. I mean there are only so many words you can use in any given situation, so ‘arrow’ prayers are much easier, and most busy pastors only have time for that anyway!! I don’t feel the need to defend my observation, after all, I’ve admitted we’ve only had two female pastors, but my observation is real and true, and cannot I suspect be compared to secular work. Oh, I’ve just remembered a counselor who was absolutely marvelous. A guy who helped my son and daughter in law very much indeed when my husband and I had failed miserably. Chuckle .. good, now I feel better!!!
ReplyDeleteGod be with you Fern, and keep you sane in times of difficulty.
I’m afraid Rachel, that I don’t have the wisdom, nor the maturity to answer this post, despite my age!! I suspect it needs another. I’ll try, but you may have to forgive me if my words sound harsh.
ReplyDelete1. Seventh Heaven? Even Paul only talked about the third heaven, and he was being somewhat sarcastic. If I’ve missed the expression in the Bible Rachel, you’ll have to educate me. I know it’s Talmudic, but then we’re under the New Covenant.
2. No pain in labour? Well I’m gobsmacked. Here God promised us pain in childbirth and He left you out of this promise, makes you wonder if you can trust any of His other promises doesn’t it?
3. I’m glad your life is ‘experiential,’ but He gave us His word for a very good reason I believe, and we should probably trust that over our experiences, which can definitely mislead us.
4. With regard to that whole first post Rachel. Personally I don’t believe that God ‘forces’ anyone to believe. Even Paul with His Damascus Road experience, could have rejected it. Whereas I get the feeling that you consider it impossible to reject, and I find that concerning. Fortunately, my own single experience has a possible scientific explanation [although I don’t believe that scientific explanation], so I’m lucky. Although my husband tells me that those who believe without any such experiences, are more blessed. My advice would be to not talk about it if you can help it, it certainly won’t help anyone else to believe. Faith comes from hearing the Word!
I have followed your blog Rachel, so you don’t have to explain the route you’ve followed, or what you have studied, that’s OK. With regards to your final optimistic paragraph hoping it will all come out in the wash. There is nothing new under the sun. Many moons ago many nonconformists left the CofE, a few stayed in. That same thing is repeated throughout history and it’s very interesting to compare it with Jewish religious history. However, what I think you might find helpful is to remember that Jesus came to break down barriers, but we have a tendency to raise them up again.
I’m afraid Rachel, that I don’t have the wisdom, nor the maturity to answer this post, despite my age!!
ReplyDeleteRosemary you are being sarcastic - oh well, we move on.
I'll respond to your points:
1. Seventh Heaven? Even Paul only talked about the third heaven, and he was being somewhat sarcastic. If I’ve missed the expression in the Bible Rachel, you’ll have to educate me. I know it’s Talmudic, but then we’re under the New Covenant.
...so I was a little careless borrowing this phrase. I told you it was hard to explain. I purposefully did not use the Bible. Must everything I experience in life be supported with a biblical proof text? Anglicanism influenced by Richard Hooker would say it does not. (Excuse the Hooker reference, he's in my head currently and that I can not be more helpful.) You talk about revelation coming through nature, for me it comes often through experience. It is hard, surely to argue with someone's experience, it is what it is. I had a blissful birth experience and marveled at the God who could give the gift of bearing life, please do not rubbish it, Rosemary,
2. No pain in labour? Well I’m gobsmacked. Here God promised us pain in childbirth and He left you out of this promise, makes you wonder if you can trust any of His other promises doesn’t it?
Oh Rosemary, I will never doubt the Lord, my God. It sure hurt afterwards but during labour - no, and people can overcome pain with prayer to God, do not doubt this?
3. I’m glad your life is ‘experiential,’ but He gave us His word for a very good reason I believe, and we should probably trust that over our experiences, which can definitely mislead us.
Valid - yes but I also believe God communicatesthrough the power of his Spirit and experiences have been recorded by theologians and Christians throughout time.
4. With regard to that whole first post Rachel. Personally I don’t believe that God ‘forces’ anyone to believe. Even Paul with His Damascus Road experience, could have rejected it. Whereas I get the feeling that you consider it impossible to reject, and I find that concerning. Fortunately, my own single experience has a possible scientific explanation [although I don’t believe that scientific explanation], so I’m lucky. Although my husband tells me that those who believe without any such experiences, are more blessed. My advice would be to not talk about it if you can help it, it certainly won’t help anyone else to believe. Faith comes from hearing the Word!
I do not understand to what much of this refers.
Word and Spirit, Rosemary surely.
I quote a helpful resource (http://www.crivoice.org/tulip.html)
Calvin - Irresistible Grace - The grace that God extends to human beings to effect their election cannot be refused, since it has been decreed by God.
Wesley - Resistible Grace - God’s grace is free and offered without merit; however, human beings have been granted freedom by God and can refuse His grace.
I have not worked out where my position is on this one yet, Rosemary, it is too soon to write me off for not expressing things the way you had hoped, perhaps I did not express things the way I hoped - hey, it happens, as I am sure you know only too well.
I hope that clears a few things up,
In Christ
Rachel
Rosemary,
ReplyDeleteIt seems there are only two ways for a man to not be accused of patronising you.
One is to agree with everything you say. I don't so that only leaves the other which is to say nothing.
Bye
Hmm, hoist by my own petard. Actually Rachel, I wasn’t being sarcastic in that first paragraph, but I failed in that regard later, especially on point two.
ReplyDelete“Must everything I experience in life be supported with a biblical proof text?”
Well I think that would be a very wise decision, to make the Word your measuring stick.
“You talk about revelation coming through nature, for me it comes often through experience.”
God’s revelation comes to us through His Word, He certainly makes that clear enough. Jesus Himself found all wisdom in the Word, not outside it. Even the Devil knows enough to try and use the Word to confound. Paul tells us we can also ‘find’ God through His creation [nature], but nature doesn’t always instruct us.
“It is hard, surely to argue with someone's experience.”
It’s impossible to argue with someone’s experience. Absolutely impossible. Of course that doesn’t mean said experience is either from God or revelatory in some way. To explore that we must examine God’s Word, because that’s what we KNOW He’s given us, that’s our measuring stick.
I do not for a moment wish to ‘rubbish’ your birth experience Rachel. I’m well aware that some women have a much easier time than others. What I’m concerned about is how other women are going to feel listening to you recounting your experiences as ‘God given.’ Inside their heads they’ll be saying, “Perhaps God doesn’t love me, He hasn’t been that good to me. Why not?” [cont.]
You run that risk here too .. “I will never doubt the Lord, my God. It sure hurt afterwards but during labour - no, and people can overcome pain with prayer to God, do not doubt this”
ReplyDeleteAnyone who experiences doubt, and that is certainly part of my Christian walk, is going to say more or less the same as above. What’s more, those for whom prayer has meant neither the removal of pain, nor a cure, feel like second class citizens. “Perhaps I’m not a Christian at all, this and this happens for Rachel, but nothing like that ever happens to me.” This is made worse by well meaning Christians who say to you .. “You just don’t have enough faith.” You will have to try and ‘undo’ all this damage when you get into ministry Rachel, and it is VERY damaging. How can I assure someone that you only need faith the size of a mustard seed when they never get the ‘answers’ that the ‘first class’ Christians get? Indeed, why has God so ordained it that there ARE first and second class Christians?
I certainly haven’t written you off Rachel. I’m very well aware that God teaches us some hard lessons, and that He does so because He loves us. I’ve been so wrong I wanted to move towns rather than face up to how wrong I was .. coward that I am. The church needs you to be the very best you can be, which is why I’m not at all sure I’m the one to help at this stage.
Rosemary
Rosemary
ReplyDeleteThis all probably comes down to the way we read Scripture. Scripture, Tradition and Reason being our Anglican heritage. And the whole of the Anglican communion is arguing about that so I do not want to get into that here.
I am not too worried about the holes you find in my arguments, every time I open my mouth I will mess up- that is the nature of being human. I am discerning about what I share, Rosemary. I try not to say things that will cause others problems. I know lots of people who dare to share what others could argue with. John MacAthur describes "When I was eighteen, the Lord threw me out of a car traveling seventy miles an hour. I landed on my backside and slid 110 yards on the pavement. By the grace of God I wasn’t killed. As I stood up on that highway, having never lost consciousness, I committed my life to serving Christ. I told Him I would no longer resist what He wanted me to do, which was to preach His Word." We could argue with this account too. Only God knows everything. And I am not comparing myself to MacArthur, just in case you write to me about that, I do not know much about him but read his writings sometimes.
Personally, I love hearing people's testimonies of the way that they have seen God in their lives. All I say is God broke into my life in a fresh way when I had children. We all have different stories. We do not compare. You suggest we do not talk about such things, I disagree, but agree that context is everything and discernment is always necessary.
Dave is now silent because he sees you find holes with everything he says. It isn't easy conversing with you Rosemary, that's for sure, but hey, we just get on with it...
I trust God, who knows all my flaws. I trust people. I blog here because I am not afraid to mess up, be vulnerable, make mistakes.
Rosemary, I have had a lot of affirmation in my life, from parents, teachers, friends, not all deserved.
I am now in an accountable prayer triplet, I have tutors writing reports on me to my bishop every term, I have spiritual direction and other people a bt like you who speak into my life, I will continue to learn, Rosemary, my whole life through. I am being pulled up for character flaws.
If I am so hopeless it will be reflected in my reports, there is nothing I can do but be myself and trust Jesus in his promise to transform us (life-long). (If I haven't expressed that as you wish, just let it go, if you can.)
I am beginning to think that God will use me, not in spite of my weaknesses but because of my weaknesses, as well. A lot of people are hindered by their own feelings of inadequacy and do not serve God for this reason. There are probably problems with a lot of 'works-righteousness theology' that people need to address too)
Well, if they look at me, which they will if I am in public ministry (Rosemary, I hear you, I know, they will look to Jesus, not me) but if they look at me and think - she is such a 'mess up' but she loves God and hopes to live like he loves her, then this might be an encouragement, just that little bit more than being presented with someone who always says everything perfectly and never makes any mistakes. cont
Mistakes are everywhere and you are happy to point mine out, that's fine.
ReplyDeleteI sometimes wonder if rather than me being the optimist, it is you. You expect so much from people, maybe that is why you have been so disappointed by people's reactions to your views in your church - they were not behaving as you hoped they would.
Anyway, Rosemary - has this thread come to an end? I do not know. I appreciate your contribution, I really do. You have 65 years to my 35. You DO have more experience than me. You have had it tougher than me. You have a right to express your opinions. We are all just muddling through aren't we? We ask forgiveness for our faults and know that God loves us all so much because he has adopted us as his children. It is a very good thing we do not have to earn that love, isn't it? We are however, all invited to involve ourselves in God's reconciliation project. We all contribute in our own way, with different gifts...so, I guess we just get on with it - yes?
I really hope you discern how the Lord wants you to serve him next and you have that peace that passes all understanding.
Blessings Rachel