When it is Wrong to Want to Know God’s Will

I just came across a little something I wrote nearly three years ago. I've revisited this topic many times since in passing conversations, but had somehow forgotten that I had once written about it. As I am short of current posts this fall, and as I am still trying to live out the lessons stated here, I thought it was worth sharing now. 

When it is Wrong to Want to Know God’s Will
28 December 2008

There is a perpetual struggle amongst Christians to relinquish control to our Creator, to allow him to guide us daily in the path of his own choosing, according to his own will. Never mind that the path is also one according to his own goodness; we simply would rather have the freedom to choose a lesser path – and routinely do.

But there comes a time in many of our lives when, having ventured out on a path of our own choosing and found a dead end or a stain-darkened alley one too many times, we reach a point of desperation. Now it has come: Now (finally) I am willing to submit to your will, Lord. Bring it on! Just show me what you want me to do. Now that I’ve exhausted my ideas, I’ll give your way a try.

I recently reached such a point in my life. I finally had to admit that my little version of reality was in fact a swiftly fading daydream. The path before me was slipping away beneath my feet, and I was grasping for a handhold. After months of feeling assured that God was clearly leading me to a specific destination, I had begun to feel thwarted at each attempt to move forward on my journey. It seemed as if God had changed his mind, as if he had erased the route completely and hadn’t bothered to draw up a new one.

At that point I wandered for an extended period in a barren land, aimless and without purpose. I grieved the loss of my unrealized dreams, I attempted to create new dreams to replace the old, I occasionally gave myself over to the despair of imagining the status quo stretching out forever without a hope for change. I begged God, I ignored God, I accused him – of teasing, testing, torturing me. I felt that life as I was living it was hardly worth living at all, and I sank deeper into the paralyzing mire of despair and self-pity.

It was at this point that I finally became willing to do God’s will – whatever it was. All I needed to know was what it was. The unknowing, the limbo was killing me. I needed specifics: who, what, where, when, why. I was in a place of total submission (or so it seemed to me at the time), humbly desiring to receive my orders. Just tell me your will, Lord, and I will do it. I’m ready. You’ve stripped me down to the barest humility, and I admit your way is best. Now fill me in!

And then I read two little verses in Isaiah that threw me for a loop: “Woe to those who draw sin along with cords of deceit, and wickedness as with cart ropes, to those who say, "Let God hurry, let him hasten his work so we may see it. Let it approach, let the plan of the Holy One of Israel come, so we may know it." (Isaiah 5:18-19)

Woe to those who desire to know God’s plan? Why would the prophet bemoan those who sought to know God’s will? Isn’t that what the Christian life is all about, to know and do the will of God? How could that be wrong?I was completely perplexed. I didn’t understand the passage, but I knew that God had brought it to my attention for a reason.

What God and friends and time eventually revealed to me was that the problem was not in the knowing itself, but in the motives behind the knowing: Tell me what you want so I don’t have to keep trusting you in the darkness of unknowing. The issue is about control. Trusting in the midst of darkness is incredibly uncomfortable – I can’t take even a single step without guidance lest I lose my way, or knock my head on a low-hanging branch, or fall down a rabbit-hole. I must hold out my hand for guidance every single inch of the way.

But if I could know – could see – the path! Then I could really go somewhere, then I could really make progress. I might even find a handy shortcut, or a more scenic route to the same destination. Then I could withdraw my hand and take control once again.

And that is the woe, that in the seeking to know his will we sometimes are in fact seeking a way to get out of trusting him – to be “free” of him and his constant “interference” in our lives. And it is a woe indeed, for we will have traded his providence for a freedom that is no freedom at all.

In the midst of my struggles, I realised that what God desires is a deeper, more intimate relationship with me. I didn’t need to know the specifics of God’s will after all. I could follow along in the darkness, inch by inch by inch, never seeing where it was I was headed, trusting that God would make my feet secure. In a sense, the unknowing, the limbo was killing me – killing my stubborn independence and self-reliance so that I would be forced to throw myself wholeheartedly into the arms of God – his mercy, wisdom and love. And that is true freedom.

Favour in the Wilderness: A Reflection

Note: I've been mulling this over and wondering if it's too melodramatic or too interior to post on Bookmeal...there is a lot that I have left unsaid and what I have said is messy and rather open-ended. But, in the interest of honesty, and because this is my first attempt at a post in three months, what the hey! Here goes, for better or worse...


--

My last post was dated May 3rd. Yes, well. This summer I have been uprooted from my "country life in the Canadian prairies" (as per my introductory blurb on the right) to - what shall I call it? Urban sophistication in Alberta's downtown core? Right now it feels more like "self-doubt straddled on the fence between here and there." Time will tell.

I lived in Niton Junction, Alberta, Canada for eight years. That is the longest I have ever lived in one place. The second longest stretch was seven years in San Diego, from birth to age 7. After that, my life has been snipped into tidy three-year packages, give or take. I have been uniquely shaped by each place I have lived, but perhaps on an even deeper level I have been shaped by the act itself of perpetual home-hopping. Over the years I have had difficulty defining home. Where is it? What is it?

I moved to the country with all the passion and dreamy-eyed wonder of a newly-married twenty-eight year old (sort of) artist, a tender shoot just beginning to rise out of the rich soil that had nurtured and nourished me during my five years at Regent College in Vancouver. I had plans. I had technicolour dreams for our little acreage life in the middle of nowhere.

But it didn't happen. During the last four years in particular, I watched so many of those dreams die, one by one by one. I felt like little pieces of me were dying too, and I grieved. Over and over again, I seemed to hear one word from God: No. I was crushed under the weight of it, defined by the pain of it, and at times embittered by the unfairness of it.

Over time and for reasons I don't fully understand, the good earth of my previous growth had become a parched and barren land, and I was a bruised reed. I had ceased to produce seed. I was so hunched over I no longer was able to provide shade for others.

"Therefore I am now going to allure her; 

   I will lead her into the wilderness 

and speak tenderly to her."

Hosea 2:14

God in his mercy met with me in the desert and spoke words of comfort and life. He spoke of his faithfulness and his love. He also showed me that some of his No's were in fact only Not yet's. There was still hope, a future for me in his keeping.

This is what the LORD says:

 “The people who survive the sword 

will find favor in the wilderness;    

I will come to give rest to Israel.”

~

"They will come and shout for joy on the heights of Zion; 
they will rejoice in the bounty of the LORD-- 
the grain, the new wine and the olive oil, the young of the flocks and herds. 
They will be like a well-watered garden, 
and they will sorrow no more. 
Then young women will dance and be glad, young men and old as well. 
I will turn their mourning into gladness; I will give them comfort and joy instead of sorrow. 
I will satisfy the priests with abundance, and my people will be filled with my bounty,” 
declares the LORD.

(Jeremiah 31: 2, 12-14)

I don't presume to say that the not yet has arrived and become now. Whether I like it or not, it's the nature of pilgrimage and the Christian life to keep moving, to keep pressing on toward. Who knows what trials this new leg of the journey holds? But what I can say for sure is this: In February, just six short months ago, God said Yes. Aside from the geographical details of moving our family of six from Niton to Edmonton, it remains to be seen exactly what else he was saying Yes to at the same time. Opportunity, sacrifice, joy, pain, brokenness, hope? A helping of each, I'd imagine. I'm a little less romantic this time, or at least trying to be. And I think that's okay - it's not cynicism or pessimism, but a willingness to let God define my adventures a bit more broadly than I would if I were in charge...Which I'm not...Which is the point - a lesson I learned in the desert.

~
Becky
Edmonton, AB

Embodying Attentiveness: Lessons from the Trail

The Way is Made by Walking: A Pilgrimage Along the Camino de Santiago, by Arthur Paul Boers
progress: 111/178

This book is a collection of Mennonite pastor and professor Arthur Paul Boers' reflections on his 500-mile pilgrimage along the Camino de Santiago trail in Spain. Being that I have been on my own pilgrimage of sorts, it caught my eye in the bookstore. In the foreward, Eugene Peterson defines pilgrimage as

The ancient practice of walking, usually with others, to a holy site while paying prayerful attention to everything that takes place within and without, soul and body, all the ways that are inherent along the Way, along with the companions who are also on the Way. (9)

Boers goes on to explain that his pilgrimage differed from other experiences of challenge and hardship in his life because this journey and all of its difficulties was one of his choosing. Although he defines pilgrimage in its truest sense as a physical journey with the goal of spiritual transformation, he explains that pilgrimage has a metaphorical application as well: as an interior journey of spiritual transformation. The latter has been my experience, and indeed, many of his lessons on the Camino de Santiago have resonated with the lessons I've been learning in the wilds of rural Alberta. He writes

We live at a time when our walk with God is seen as more fluid, including steps forward and backward, perhaps even sideways at times, and we are not always sure which is which. (24)

A major theme of pilgrimage is the idea of movement - that God is the God of movement, and that we best keep company with Him by walking, or journeying, with Him. In the Old Testament, he dwelt in a tent and travelled as a pillar of fire or cloud, and Jesus himself was called The Way. Boers writes

Human nature means that we are always yearning wanderers. We are all homeless, ever since our eviction from Eden. And pilgrimage is an inevitable consequence. We need constantly to look for - and stay on the move for - God. This search keeps us unsettled. Deity is not easily tied down. Biblical faith is wary of confining divine presence too closely to one place or building, land or sanctuary, race or nation. Faithful people are repeatedly and providentially called to go elsewhere, be displaced and meet - even be - strangers, all in order to encounter our Creator more fully. (39)

God is always calling his people to movement, as "aliens and strangers" in search of a "country of their own." (Hebrews 11:13-16). The Christian life is one of journeying and the transformation it brings. Throughout the Psalms and Proverbs, we are called to "walk" in His ways (c.f. Proverbs 2:20), which means we are to walk with Jesus. And it is this walking that changes everything. It is about seeking and finding the path, and then traveling upon it. As Peterson points out, it is about paying attention: to God, to where He is leading you, to what He is doing in and through you, and in and through others on the journey with you.

This is where the literal and metaphorical understandings of pilgrimage intersect, for the physical journey is a one-time experience which trains us how to live the rest of our lives more attentively. Following the pilgrim path requires alertness as we watch for signposts, and discernment as we weigh carefully whose directions to follow. The walking itself slows us down for thoughtfulness, reflection, and prayer. We begin to see with clearer vision how God is "at work in all things" - a lesson Boers learned from a fellow traveller.

A particular challenge Boers faced on his journey was to lighten his load. He was constantly being challenged to simplify, if not by other more experienced pilgrims, then by his sore muscles and the blisters on his feet. What could he do without? How were the possessions in his pack weighing him down unnecessarily? Again, the literal weight of his pack challenged him to consider the metaphorical burden of his possessions. He reflected on the toll that his own accumulation of possessions has taken on him, as well as the toll his own consumerism takes on the world at large. His bold statement, "Every time I use a car, I make a theological decision" has returned to my thoughts to challenge me about my own flippancy with regard to the world's resources.

I was also intrigued by Boers' link between simplicity and hospitality. By lightening his backpack, he was forced to rely on the hospitality of others when he was in need. I wonder how much our possession of Every Useful Thing prevents us from experiencing the grace of hospitality from those around us? I am generally quite willing to loan out my Useful Things, but it is harder to receive from others when I am in need, yet that interplay of giving and receiving is so essential to our humanity. To be only a Giver or a Receiver is to be broken, severed from the shalom that true community embodies.

I am over half-way through this book, and the reading of it has been a journey in its own right. My life does not match up to the ideals of pilgrimage. It is rushed, and wasteful, and preoccupied. I'm like a stick figure wandering through the beauty of the three(+)-dimensional world unawares. How do I flesh out that anaemic little stick person and embody the attentiveness of pilgrimage in the busyness and distraction of my day-to-day life?

A Sobering Responsibility: A Guest Post by Rosie Perera

The following is a guest post by Rosie Perera, in response to my recent request to share a bit about her journey as a woman in the Church. I met Rosie at Regent College but it wasn't until I'd moved away and joined Facebook that I've really started getting to know her - one of those all-too-rare cases in which Facebook has facilitated the deepening of a friendship beyond cyberspace, to phone chats and the occasional coffee date when we've crossed paths in Vancouver, and even a side-trip to out-of-the-way Niton! I have appreciated her informed perspectives - and her willingness to discuss them with me in a way that models grace, not condescension - on a wide range of topics, including politics, spirituality, technology, and anagrams, to name a few! A prolific writer, speaker, teacher, and photographer, you can hear (and see) more from her on her blogs Space for God and Faith and Technology and Iambic Admonit. She has two stories to share here: one an observation from her childhood, and the other a more personal glimpse into her own journey.

--

I grew up in a very conservative Congregational church, where women were not involved in anything except playing the piano, minding the nursery, and teaching children’s Sunday School. Even the offering was always collected by men. I’m not sure whether the latter was a conscious decision or just a default because nobody had ever thought of doing it differently. But certainly the fact that there were no women elders or deacons was due to what they believed to be biblical principle. When I was growing up, I never questioned it or even noticed it as odd, since I’d never been exposed to anything different. Many years later, the church had dwindled to the point where there were only two deacons serving a congregation of about 40. One of the deacons died or moved away, and there were no other eligible men in the church available to serve. The leaders reluctantly asked my mother, a pillar of faith and long-time member of the church, whether she would be willing to serve as an interim deaconess, until another eligible man joined the church. She initially said no, because she felt it was forbidden in the Bible. But since there were no other options, they prevailed upon her. She finally agreed, but with strong reservations, and insisted that it only be temporary, until a man came along who could take the position. As soon as the other deacon heard that she’d agreed to serve, he resigned, because he didn’t want to serve on a deacon board with a woman. Thus they had to ask another woman in the church, who agreed to serve. And so, ironically, the church went overnight from not allowing any women deacons to having nothing but women deacons. And lo and behold! It worked out, and they did a good job, and the church’s compunctions about women serving as deacons faded away.

--

I have been attending a little lay-run Mennonite church in Vancouver for 14 years. About half the preaching is done by laypeople in the church and the rest is by guest preachers. My first few years at this church, I was studying theology at Regent College. Thus it wasn’t surprising that after a couple of years I was approached by one of the leaders in the church asking whether I would be willing to preach for them sometime. The church is very welcoming of Regent students and likes to give them an opportunity to grow by giving them preaching and leadership responsibilities. And they are very forgiving of people who aren’t all that good at preaching (yet). I was not studying to become a pastor. In fact I actively did not want to ever preach. I’d been brought up to think it was wrong for women to preach. Besides that, I was afraid of the responsibility it would entail, and of the possibility of misleading people to their eternal damnation. I had by that time been exposed enough to biblical equality both in my previous church (where I’d seen women preach) and at Regent, where I was at the time just finishing a course on Gender, Sexuality and Community. I’d read Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen's Gender and Grace, Gretchen Gabelein Hull’s Equal to Serve, and Rebecca Merrill Groothuis’s Women Caught in the Conflict, and had found them all reasonable and convincing, while the readings in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood that we were assigned rang hollow. Still, I was afraid to try preaching myself, so I said no, I wasn’t ready yet. A number of months later, the same leader asked me again. The church was preparing for a sermon series on 1 Peter and he wondered if he might be able to slot me in somewhere. This time, I reasoned that perhaps God was nudging me to do it, since it was certainly not coming from my own desire. I told the leader that I might be able to have my arm twisted if the passage that included 1 Peter 2:24-25 hadn’t been spoken for yet, as I’d just written a paper on those verses for my exegesis class. It turned out that was the only passage that hadn’t yet been assigned to anyone. Again it felt like maybe God was nudging me, so I agreed. However when the time drew closer, I panicked and got cold feet about it, and backed out. Another year went by and I was asked again if I would preach. I said “yes” and went ahead with it this time. But oh, what a torment!

I got to pick the passage I was going to preach on. I was given a huge lead time (a few months). The situation couldn’t have been more ideal for my first time preaching, or so I thought. But both the freedom and the lead time proved to be difficult challenges. I spent all but the last three weeks dithering over what passage I would preach on. I finally settled on Genesis 22, the “Sacrifice of Isaac,” because I’d done some work with it at Regent. I had translated the whole chapter for my Hebrew class, so I knew the text pretty well. I relied on all my great exegetical skills that I’d learned in class, prepared lots of geeky notes about what various words meant in the Hebrew, and the inclusios and other poetic devices used in the story. I was getting nowhere on coming up with a main point to craft into a sermon. I had not taken a homiletics class and felt woefully inadequate to the task. My anxiety grew the closer it got to that Sunday I was to preach. I procrastinated and stressed out. By the Saturday night, I had about one or two paragraphs of un-crafted words towards a sermon, nowhere near enough to fill up the 15-20 minutes that was allotted to me. In a profound state of panic, I called up a Regent friend of mine late at night and asked for prayer and wisdom. I told him how I was dreading this appointment with the pulpit the next morning. He had the brilliant insight that my journey towards that hour kind of paralleled Abraham’s trudging approach to Mount Moriah. His steps must have been heavy during those three days, as he knew what awaited him at the top. Ultimately, it was God who provided the ram for the sacrifice. My friend told me to be myself, be transparent, tell my own story and link it with Abraham’s. So that’s what I ended up doing. I didn’t use much of the material I’d prepared, and mostly spoke off the cuff. It was probably less than 10 minutes in all. But thankfully my church has a time of discussion and response after the sermon in our worship service, and the people took up what I’d said and riffed on that for quite some time, and the whole became better than what I’d humbly offered. Indeed, God did provide the ram.

Since that time I’ve been invited back to preach on a dozen or more occasions, and it has gotten easier with time. But it is still a sobering responsibility, and I hope and pray that it will never be something I feel nonchalant about. That lesson I learned my first time about trusting in God’s provision, and seeking him rather than entirely relying on my own intellect, has never left me. Of course I know that I do have to do my homework; I can’t just “wing it.” And I do still struggle with procrastination most times. But I’m not nearly as panicky about it, and I’ve completely gotten over the fear that I might be doing something terribly sinful by preaching.

Entrenchment, Anger, Offense and Respect in the Gender Debate

Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Gordon Fee

As I've continued to explore the topic of gender equality in the church, I've been amazed at just how much material is out there - in the news, on blogs, in conversations with old friends. I'm overwhelmed with the information and sophisticated arguments that are available to the masses, and I'm also overwhelmed with hope. There is a strong international community of Christians who are working toward the ideals of gender equality that have not lost their faith or their faithfulness in the process. The godliness, intelligence and integrity with which this view has been advocated has won it a valid place within the ranks of evangelicalism. At the end of his chapter on "Contemporary Evangelicals for Gender Equality," Ronald W. Pierce concludes this way:

The 1990s into the beginning of the twenty-first century found biblical equality advocates functioning as a mature force within evangelicalism rather than fighting for a right to survive as in the preceding decades. Their literature reinforced their theological heritage, while at the same time developing it and expanding its influence in both theoretical and practical terms. (74)

The most discouraging part of this chapter was the deepening entrenchment that has occurred amongst the two sides. It seems there is very little room left for helpful dialogue, and that makes me sad. I always feel like truth must win out if only the two sides press on hard enough to see the discussion through to the very end (unfortunately, the church tends to be better at dogma than dialogue). And yet, there are many godly and intelligent women and men of integrity on the other side of the fence, too. So how do we agree to disagree as a people who are called to "make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4:3)?

The best I have been able to come up with regarding my own attitude is to think about it in terms of the already/not yet context: I truly believe the kingdom of God is leading us toward the freedom and shalom of racial, social, and gender equality of Galatians 3:28, and we are called to begin living out that reality now. However, some have a different understanding and are not yet able to acknowledge or live out that truth in the same ways, because of hermeneutical, social, or cultural constraints. Whatever it looks like when the already meets the not yet, we'll all finally be able to agree, thank God!

In the meantime, I will continue forward on the path to gender equality, encouraging people to love God and to follow his calling, regardless of their gender. I will try to resist cynicism, stereotyping and oversensitivity. And I hope that those in the patriarchal camp will live out their convictions with sensitivity, humility and excellence. I trust that somewhere in between there is room for respect, if not agreement, and it is each of our jobs to find that place: not only to respect others but to be worthy of respect ourselves.

~~~

Well, this blog didn't go where I thought it would go! My original point was this: all of the superior material out there on the gender equality debate has made me wonder if I'm reinventing the wheel by trying to write too much about DBE - my strongest conviction as I've read it has been that others should read it in its entirety and think through the views on their own. I have found the arguments complex and convincing, but even if others disagree, I hope they will be moved to a deeper level of respect for those who advocate gender equality.

However, I will be continuing to share snippets of what I'm reading and learning, from DBE and other sources (and experiences). For starters, I wanted to post a few links for what I've been reading online lately:

1.   Jennifer Danielle Crumpton wrote an article for the Huffington Post entitled "Femmevangelical: The Modern Girl's Guide to Sharing the Good News", in which she tells her own story of being a young woman on her way to seminary who hears a patriarchal sermon on 1 Timothy 3:1-13. She writes, "That sermon changed the way I went to seminary. You might think it burned enough to seal the deal -- that any sentimentality or lingering value I held for the evangelical religion of my youth had been scorched. But actually, it lit another kind of fire inside. Instead of turning away, I decided to take back my tradition." She offers thoughtful insight on words like evangelical and repentance, and goes on to discuss what she identifies as the "the important role of underdog women in the story of God and humanity."


2.   The post entitled "Love and Respect (Part 1)" on Chimaera takes a look at love and respect and challenges as sexist the complementarian view that separates them according to the genders. Is love (primarily) for women and respect for men, or are we missing the point? She asks herself the question of whether she'd prefer - if she could only choose one - love or respect, and her answer is honest and thought-provoking.

3.   It might be worth directing you to Chimaera's part 2 article as well, noting that Steve and I had quite a spirited discussion about whether it was helpful or too snarky, and whether there is a place for snarkiness, or even downright anger, in the gender equality debate. Her post begins, "If you aren’t convinced that Love and Respect Ministries is sexist, read on until you are." My first response was to laugh. Steve's was to be turned off by the cynicism. In the end we both agreed that while it may not always be conducive to dialogue, there is much anger with regard to this topic, and it needs to be heard too.

4.   A friend challenged me to read a complementarian's blog series on women in the church and pointed me to Thabiti Anyabwile's blog. His purpose in writing is to focus on what women can do within a patriarchal framework instead of what they can't do, an appreciated gesture meant to affirm women. In one post he plugs an upcoming conference (now past) which will seek to equip women to teach other women. I think it is great for more women to be trained in biblical exposition and equipped to know their Bibles better, so that they too can be teachers of Scripture. Indeed, there are some great women involved in this conference. But I can't help wonder why women and men must be segregated in such a way. Is it because women are a bit of a minority in this area and therefore worthy of a special female-themed conference? Or is there some perceived difference in what and how we teach women versus men? Further, Anyabwile quotes an organizer of the conference:

Over the last few years, the Charles Simeon Trust has been challenged to consider training women to teach the Bible to other women.  We have asked ourselves several questions: Is this a good idea?  Does the Bible commend it?  What would it look like?  How would it best be accomplished, especially given our complementarian theological convictions?  In answering these questions, we are convinced that God would have us play a part in this aspect of pastoral ministry.

I'm not sure offended is the right word for how I felt (thankfully, the organizer does go on to strongly affirm from Scripture that women should indeed be allowed and equipped to teach other women), but the fact that it could even be in doubt startles me. The offense part comes in when I begin to imagine what other things such people might question about women. But maybe that's just my pride speaking, and I should respect their commitment to the authority of Scripture. Read for yourself and let me know your thoughts.

5.   Lastly, a friend emailed me a link to "10 Reasons Why Men Shouldn't be Pastors." Just in case you want to throw my own words back at me ("I will try to resist cynicism, stereotyping and oversensitivity"), I will add that there is always room for humour, especially when it makes you think, and this one's a good one.

I'd love to hear your thoughts...
~B

Bobbed Hair, Bossy Wives and Women Preachers: Swim On

Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Gordon Fee

progress: 151/507

The first few chapters of the book discuss the historical widening and narrowing of women's ministry roles. Although the tradition of the Christian church has been overwhelmingly patriarchal, history provides consistent examples of exceptional men and women who modelled or worked toward equality in the church - from martyrs, monastics, and reformers, to quite a few mainline demonminations at the turn of the twentieth century. I was quite intrigued to discover the role my own alma mater played - on both sides of the fence. Two different circulations (Alumni News and Moody Monthly) from Moody Bible Institute in the 1920s celebrate the stories of female alums who who ministered in roles that the Moody of my era (1990s) would have met with clear disapproval. The first woman to graduate from the pastor's course in 1929 accomplished a feat that would've been impossible during my time there in the mid-90s, when preaching classes were not open to women. Such stories as these compelled the author of this chapter (Janette Hassey) to conclude, "Consequently, the early MBI stands as an appropriate educational symbol of 'fundamentalist feminism.'" (42)

!

Such egalitarian attempts didn't last long. The latter half of the chapter discusses the reasons for the rise and fall of women's ministry in the last century. The rise of women in the church was due in large part to three factors: 1) Eschatological interpretations of passages such as Joel 2:28 and Psalm 68:11-12 among evangelicals emphasized the role of the Holy Spirit in empowering people - men and women - to meet the needs of reaching the lost in the "last days." 2) "Charismatic church leadership" maintained that Spirit-gifting was the primary qualification for leadership, rather than gender, and allowed women the opportunity to train and work as lay leaders, often alongside their husbands. 3) Social activism allowed women the opportunity to become public church leaders, and as they spoke out on behalf of slaves and other victims, they found a voice to speak out for themselves. (50)

For a while, women enjoyed a great amount of freedom to serve within the church. So what changed it all, and so quickly? Hassey provides four explanations: 1) Fundamentalist subcultures arose as a response to the modernist theology that had infiltrated the mainline denominations between WWI and WWII. Some of these exhibited separatist tendencies that narrowed the role of women. I found it interesting that one of the major movements of the latter variety was the founding of Dallas Theological Seminary, whose "southern conservative social values" limited the role of women in the church and society. (53) A significant contributor to the tightening of women's opportunities at Moody Bible Institute was the influx of DTS graduates onto MBI faculty. (53-54)

A second reason for the decline of women's roles in the church was 2) its institutionalization. An increased emphasis on professionally-trained rather than lay-trained ministers and its focus on specialization edged women out. One unfortunate consequence was that "educational attainment and credentials often replaced spiritual gifts as the essential leadership qualifications." (53-54) Another reason was 3) the fundamentalist reaction to social change. As women's roles in society expanded with the increase of secular feminism, the church reacted in fear by narrowing the sphere of women in the church. The author's mention of a 1940s book entitled Bobbed Hair, Bossy Wives and Women Preachers made me laugh despite the ominous undertones of how Christian gender perspectives were changing. Hassey summarizes those changing perspectives this way:

"Convinced that the survival of the traditional family and of the entire social order was at stake, many evangelicals tightened their approach to women in ministry." (55)

Finally, 4) fundamentalist exegesis resulted in a revised understanding of women's role-limiting passages such as 1 Timothy 2. A narrowed understanding of biblical inerrancy led to a literalism which prevented such passages from being understood as occasional or culturally specific, and instead emphasized the instructions presented as the enduring standard for all women for all time.

I found it fascinating to observe the ebb and flow of women's roles over the course of a century, and the varied reasons for the changes that took place. What a bunch of reactionary folks we humans are, changing our minds as often as our world changes. I might be discouraged if not for the fact that I have confidence in the Holy Spirit's ability (passion?) to work through and in spite of our human tendency to complicate most everything with questionable motives and imbalanced perspectives. These are muddy waters to navigate, but closing our eyes and treading water accomplishes nothing, so we swim on.

~B

P. S. Click here for an entertaining history of the bob haircut. The most astonishing line I read: "Men divorced their wives over bobbed hair."

The Gender Debate: Terms and Definitions

Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Gordon Fee

progress: 151/507

I've been having a hard time deciding which words to use when writing about gender (did you know patriarchalism isn't listed in the Oxford Dictionary?), so I thought it might be worth defining a few terms here as one (final!) aside before we jump right into this meaty book.

Two Convictions
As a starting point, the book emphasizes the two convictions which are the foundation of the book: "That the Bible is the fully inspired and authoritative Word of God, and that it teaches gender equality in church, home and society." (11) The first conviction I agree with wholeheartedly, and this is what makes me willing to hear and consider the arguments for the second conviction. The authors go to great pains in the introduction to the book to point out that their convictions are primarily biblical, rather than cultural, personal or societal (17).

Two Definitions

The authors offer two definitions for their viewpoint:

1. "The essential message of biblical equality is simple and straightfoward: Gender, in and of itself, neither privileges nor curtails one's ability to be used to advance the kingdom or to glorify God in any dimension of ministry, mission, society or family." (13)

2. "Egalitarianism recognizes patterns of authority in the family, church and society - it is not anarchistic - but rejects the notion that any office, ministry or opportunity should be denied anyone on the grounds of gender alone." (13) This position is based on the fact that men and women are equally

• made in the image of God
• fallen to sin
• redeemable by Christ
• participants in the new-covenant community
• heirs of God
• able to be filled and empowered by Holy Spirit (13-14; see the book for Scripture passages, which will mentioned in detail later in the book)

Clarfifying Terms
There are also quite a few terms used to express the two views on gender in the Church:

Male leadership is also referred to as patriarchy, hierarchy, headship, authority and tradition. This view "restricts women from full participation in certain ministries and decision-making responsibilities. The emphasis is on male leadership rather than shared leadership in the church and home." (15)

Gender equality is also known as evangelical feminism, egalitarianism and biblical equality.

Further, the authors note that both views have employed the term "complementarity," with the difference being in the implications of complementarity between the sexes. Thus, this word can offer some amount of common ground as a starting point for dialogue.

A Final Word on the Debate
"The debate between those who promote male leadership and those who promote gender equality cannot be rightly settled by name calling, issuing propaganda or evading this divisive issue. It can be approached with integrity only through careful scholarly investigation of what the Bible teaches about the nature, gifts and callings of women and men. To that end this book is offered." (17-18)

A Change of Mind and Heart: An Article by John Stackhouse

I just came across an article by Regent College professor John Stackhouse, Jr on his blog. It's an excerpt from a new book entitled "How I Changed My Mind About Women In Leadership: Compelling Stories from Prominent Evangelicals," which includes personal stories of people such as Bill and Lynne Hybels, I. Howard Marshall and others regarding their conversions to egalitarianism. I was intrigued by his reasons for the change, as some of them are quite similar to the ones mentioned in my last post. He ends with suggestions on how women and men can work towards change. It's worth a read in its entirety, but if you're unconvinced or short on time, here are a few quotes to chew upon:

"So let’s recognize immediately that any deep change in us, such as the change from patriarchalism to egalitarianism, results only from the transformative power of the Holy Spirit of God."

"But this important breakthrough for me in my thinking about gender resulted also as a general theological principle: our task as theologians—and, indeed, the task of any responsible Christian—is to do the best we can to understand the Word of God in its multifarious complexity, even as that will sometimes result in an interpretation that does not fit every piece of the puzzle together without strain, leaving no pieces on the table, and certainly not pocketing the inconvenient ones, hoping no one will notice! No, all we can do is what we can do, namely, to submit to the Word of God as we understand it while remaining open to improvement of our interpretation later on."

"I needed to feel something of the pain of patriarchy: of being interrupted or ignored in conversation; of being passed over for recognition and promotion; of receiving condescension or suspicion instead of welcome partnership. And I needed to be confronted with their anger, with their refusal to be treated this way anymore."

Incidentally, the comments are also well worth reading, where differening views are eloquently expressed.

~B

Patriarchy - My Personal List of Ifs, Ands or Buts

Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Gordon Fee
progress: 151/507
  

I began reading this book last summer, and now I'm at the point where I've got to re-browse my notes before I can really get moving on this topic. Nonetheless, the topic has been at the forefront of my mind all this time, and has become a lens through which I have been re-viewing my world. My last post of 2010 was a bit of an introduction to the topic of biblical gender issues by way of a personal story from my own journey. However, I find I'm still not quite ready to dive into writing about the book itself. As I've been confronted with this topic in recent discussions and experiences over the last few months, I've been thinking about the reasons why I am willing to challenge traditional patriarchal views of leadership in the church. How did I get to this point? Of course, opinions, feelings and experiences cannot be authoritative; however I think it's worth mentioning them, if for no other reason than to let you know where I'm coming from and where my biases lie.

Judging Another's Spiritual Calling
How can I challenge definitively the way God chooses to work in another mature believer's life? This idea can certainly be abused: we have only to look at the news and the history books to see the way that Christians have used "God told me" to justify all sorts of unquestionably wrong behaviour. But what do you do when a woman, whom you personally know to be a godly, mature believer, tells you that she feels "called" to be a pastor? I was confronted by just such a person during my year abroad in Scotland. Even though I was much less comfortable with the idea of a female pastor back then than I am now, I was hesitant to pronounce it wrong. Was she mistaken, deluded, sinful? Or was she simply an honest woman trying to be available to God's call on her life? I couldn't say for sure, so I deferred judgment. Fourteen years later, I am looking for a more definitive answer.

Inconsistencies in the Practice of Patriarchy
As mothers and Sunday School teachers, women are given huge influence over the spiritual training of young (girls and) boys. But at some point in their development into young men, that influence is transferred from women to men. Why is female spiritual influence over a male okay at one point and not at another? Isn't the shaping of a young mind one of the most powerful influences that mind will ever experience? What does this say inherently about women as leaders, or about some men who are content to let women do all the "lesser" work of raising children until the diapers and flannelgraphs are done?

Even as a teenager, I was bewildered by the fact that in churches where women are not to have any spiritual leadership over men, it was still okay for missionary women to have leadership over men (Lottie Moon and Elizabeth Elliot are two historical examples of missionary women who are respected by traditionally patriarchal denominations). Are the unreached equivalent to the little boys, able to be taught by women until they reach a certain point of maturity? Is there a special dispensation for a woman to lead when a man is unavailable or unwilling to do so?

Impracticalities of the Patriarchal Position
In comparison with previous centuries, the twenty-first century affords women extraordinary freedom. We have access to education and jobs (among other things) like never before. All else being equal, I wonder how many universities would hire a man with a BA to teach a subject when a woman with a PhD in the same field is available (although perhaps the wages might not change much - there is still more progress to be made). Wouldn't they want the most qualified person they could find to impart the highest level of knowledge to their students? And yet, when it comes to many churches, a woman is barred from even applying to teach simply because of her gender. In this model, Bible training, teaching experience, even spiritual maturity, can be a moot point simply because of her gender. Is this what God meant when his inspired authors wrote about divisions between men and women - that it is better for any man to teach than one well-trained and godly woman?

Negative Effects of the Patriarchal Position
One of the worst examples of patriarchal ignorance I have ever witnessed was when famous missionary and author Elisabeth Elliot came to speak at a conference at my Bible college. It was a conference, mind you, not a church service, and yet, as she got up to speak, handfuls of young men got up and walked out as witness to their disapproval. I am still offended by their rudeness. Sometimes, men who believe that women should not teach men can fool themselves into thinking that they have nothing at all to learn from any woman. Although I don't believe it is inherent to patriarchaly, its practice can lead men to view women as inferior, forgetting that every time Jesus speaks about spiritual power and leadership, it is in terms of submission and self-sacrifice.

Another area I have wondered about is how a strong division between the genders can negatively affect a community of believers. In my own experience, I have found that the wider the divide between men and women, the weirder I feel around men. I try to be normal, but some won't even make eye contact with me unless perhaps their wives are near. I feel cut off from half of my community, both in the areas of receiving and giving. In contrast, in churches where gender is not such an issue, I have enjoyed the rich friendship and camaraderie of both women and men without that same sense of awkwardness.

Another negative effect that can occur with gender divisions is the effect it can have on the spiritual maturity of the women themselves. A woman once remarked to me on what a relief it was to have her husband as the spiritual head of her home - she could just sit back and let him make the decisions! She meant well, and perhaps spoke hyperbolically, but I was dismayed. I wonder how many women are content to take a more passive role in their own (and others') spiritual development, simply because they feel that someone else (ie, their husbands or pastors or other male leaders) are ultimately responsible for it.

Positive Examples of Female Leadership
Some of my first experiences of women in leadership were negative, and reinforced my discomfort with the thought of a woman behind the pulpit. Some were either extremely liberal in their biblical interpretations, and/or biased in the opposite direction - women with something to prove. Others were just fluffy, not really preaching at all, but sharing their thoughts in a devotional or sentimental way.

It really wasn't until I went to Regent College that I began to witness positive examples of godly women preaching before the whole body of believers. Spirituality professor (and dear friend) Maxine Hancock spoke in Chapel with passion, conviction and academic excellence. She taught alongside her mostly male colleagues not primarily as a woman but as a learned, prepared and gifted speaker. (You can find a few talks here.)

We also had the privilege of hearing from many other Regent profs and their wives as well as male and female Regent students at our church in Vancouver, which was located on the University of British Columbia campus. Deriving its roots from a Brethren background, the church's leadership was shared amongst men and women from within the congregation and beyond, and I felt enriched by sitting under so many different members of God's household.

These are just a few examples from my own experience, but they exposed me to the great gifting that God has bestowed on men as well as women to teach and to preach. It made me question whether my initial discomfort with women preaching was due more to my own background and experience than to a black-and-white scriptural mandate.

Room for Another Interpretation in the Bible
Ultimately, the above questions, experiences and observations must bow to what the Bible says on the subject. I know that this is where I will lose many of you, and for different reasons - some of you won't recognize the authority of Scripture, others won't see room for an alternative, sound interpretation of the Bible's teaching on gender roles. As for me, I felt freed to pursue this topic further after I read an academic, evangelical article on 1 Timothy 2:11-15 in the Dictionary of Paul and His Letters which made room for a more egalitarian viewpoint. Tears came to my eyes as I read, and it was then that I realised just how deeply this topic has touched me. How encouraging it was to know that there are others who love God and the Bible who have been able to maintain their integrity while holding such a view.

Understanding of What it Means to Be Human
I have come to believe that it is in the community of men and women that we most fully live out our humanity. We look like God when we live in harmonious community with each other, because He is His own community - Father, Son and Holy Spirit. No man or woman alone can bear God's image to the extent that men and women together can. Adam-Eve-God. Husband-Wife-God. Mother-Father-Child. God of course has no gender but has imparted masculine and feminine characteristics to each of us, which reflect different aspects of His divine character. He is described in Scripture as both a protecting, providing, and disciplining Father, and a nurturing, wise and helpful Mother.

Men and women need each other. Just as a child needs a mother and a father (I am speaking in terms of ideals here, I mean no disrespect to the amazing single parents who do their best with the cards they've been dealt), just as a business or even a country is best run (in my opinion) when there are many voices - men and women need to hear from each other. So how should this play out in the church, which Paul described this way in Galatians 3:28:

There is neither Jew nor Gentile, 

neither slave nor free, 

nor is there male and female, 

for you are all one in Christ Jesus.  

If each gender (and indeed each individual) bears God's image in a unique way, how can the church afford to effectively silence half of its members? If men and women in community reflect God's image, what is lost when only men can lead? Just as a child is ideally raised by a mother and a father, isn't the church best served when men and women can share their diverse and complementary strengths in raising up a mature church?

Final Thoughts
I know that I've thrown a lot out here. Please understand, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything at this point - I'm just trying to articulate my thoughts so I can critique them as I proceed more deeply (and academically) into this topic. Just the act of having to write out my ideas has been helpful in challenging the validity of my logic or exposing my tendencies toward cynicism or overgeneralization.

I'm excited to explore further, but also a little nervous. This topic has a powerful tendency to divide, turning our opponents into heretics or oppressors or - even worse - liberals! I am happy to have many friends on each side of the fence, and just about everywhere in between. I pray this will protect me from reducing any person, made in God's image, to a one-dimensional caricature.

Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. - Ephesians 4:2-3 

Share

Back to Bookmeal

Hello again, faithful reader(s)! It's been a long time, but I have a good reason for going AWOL: I have been delivered! Our fourth child arrived just in time for the new year and we have been settling in quite well. We rejoice in this new little life, already so dear to us.

You might also have noticed that I didn't reach my goal of reading twenty books for Bookmeal in 2010. I don't feel like I've failed because I've gotten so much out of what I have been able to read and write (I hope you have too). I'll continue along this year, without being too specific on a timeline.

Even during my absence, I've noticed some new flags on my visitor list - welcome, and thanks for stopping by! Introduce yourselves sometime and get in on the conversation...

Share