Ah, the minefield of gender issues! Christians love to debate it, or love to hate the debate. Either way, we gawk.
Rachel Held Evans, Donald Miller, and Mark Driscoll have been creating internet whirlpools, social media buzz, and blog traffic as they poke at these issues lately.
Rachel and Mark will launching books on the topic this fall, under the same publisher. Don claims he uses his blog to float book ideas and topics, so he’ll likely take a crack at it too. He’s been asking girls “why they give up sex” (sic.), and guys “why they hook up”, in separate posts, this week. He’s deleted 2 controversial gender-themed posts that he cranked out (his words), also.
Most often this issue is termed (generally) “gender issues” or “gender roles in the church”. We find words like “leadership”, authority”, “power”, “ordination”, “justice”, and “equality” used. A lot.
Here’s the trouble. These decades-old (or worse) labels (i.e. egalitarian, complementarian) don’t work well anymore. The popular writers discussing it right now haven’t tried to leave the worn out and confusing labels behind. We need a new model. We need more accurate descriptions, which is what labels try to do.
But, WHY Label? ugh.
I’m not a big fan of labels in the first place. I find them quite constricting. Yet, even if we don’t like labels, we have to agree that this sort of position makes us an “anti-label person”…this is, obviously, you guessed it, a label. Run everyone, a circular argument!
Categories are limiting and inadequate, and yet they are also necessary. We can’t hope to communicate without them. Keeping that in mind, I don’t want to be under the choke hold of worn out labels, as I enter this “hot topic”.
So, for the sake of discussion and mutual understanding, I’ll start very differently than all the others I’ve seen covering, or dancing around, the topic. I’ll propose some new terms and categories. Innovation moves us forward. Yes, we are living in very exciting times, my friends.
This is what brought me to this point:
In the red corner, we have Rachel Evans. She claims to be an Egalitarian. In the black and blue corner, Mark Driscoll flexes his Octogon man muscles, and puts the smack down on the issue with his version of the Complementarian view of gender roles. Is Donald Miller in the yellow corner? He might assist Rachel in a tag team sort of thing. We shall see.
Where does that leave us? I. don’t. know. But, I’m seeing very little positive progress.
CH- ch-Ch-Chan–ges!
When it comes to these issues, most recognize that change is afoot. Authors are taking it on. People are making statements, and firming up their positions. Still, nobody can really define where we are going, or where we should be.
For instance:
Conservative churches who have women leading ministries rarely dare call these females “ministers” or “pastors”*. Oh, no. They are “directors“. Is this satisfying? What’s going on, here?
I think I can hear some of the inner monologue now…
“Darn those working women of the last 30 years. Things have gotten confusing once we operated on the assumption that women were capable. Why can’t they just stay in line? Hurry, hurry, define what male and female is! The sky is falling.”
DeLayian Thought:
Simply put: I’d like to propose a new term and viewpoint. Let’s try the word and idea of “Capacitarian”. Yes, my friends, a new word for a new time.
If you noticed that the root of this word, I just made up for the purpose of coining it and creating a new term of engagement, is capacity, give yourself 28 points. (It’s like Shrute bucks.)
You want Biblical backing? No problem. It’s based on Paul’s admonitions, no less. That’s right, the big leagues. 1 Corinthians 12-13. More on this later.
(You probably thought I’d go with Jesus being the first Rabbi to have female students, right? Or God allowing the scandalous idea of Jesus’ Resurrection to be validated by females. Nope. Why drag Jesus into this? It’s uncomfortable territory many complementarians aren’t ready for quite yet, anyway.)
The Capacitarian Axis:
Rather than look to gender, the garden of eden, body parts, or middle-eastern morays of 2 millennia ago, to pick up on the conversation (as usual), how about a Kingdom of God vantage point, which, by definition, transcends gender and culture both? See Galatians 3:26-29. It’s so crazy, it just might work. It’s a fresh starting point.
In the next post:
Defining “Capacitarianism”
pronounced: <CAP-pass-it-Tarry-ann-is- uhm>
It’s long overdue to create new and fresh smelling dialogue and definitions for how we operate and cooperate in community and within the church. In the next few posts I (and I hope we) will deal with moving toward a recoup of the way we follow Jesus.
Here’s where you come in.
This is no place to go it alone (I don’t plan to).
Share your thoughts on the issue. Do you feel comfortable with the typical labels that relate to doctrine on gender?
Please, chime in, interact, and contribute to finding a more abundant path–together. A pathway for communion and fellowship with each other, at a better spot, where we don’t use our labels as crutches or bullets. And, a spot where power and agenda isn’t part of the equation. A precious place where we enact and embody the gospel of grace in and through our interactions.
Begin with me, please. Thank you for your help.
–Lisa
Endnote:
*A quick look at the word and context of the word “pastor”, indicates a shepherd vocation. So, a helper, servant, and guide, not a kingpin. Just saying…
I like it, and I like it because the old labels have become boxes which rather than help identify, help instead of normalize us into not thinking outside those labels. Putting the label in Scripture is always preferable. Great post, Lisa!
Lisa. I love the idea of using a new word for this discussion. I’m not even sure what side I’d fall in otherwise. I’m sorry I really have to think about this a lot more.
On one hand I wonder that if we’re working together in the Kingdom how can we have time for these debates?
If we’re looking for position are we really thinking about the Kingdom?
If we create glass ceilings aren’t we putting religion ahead of relationship?
Just a few rambling thoughts….
Thanks, Lisa! Interesting and important discussion!
Personally, I am tired of the labels and the fight. I want to be a part of a community that respects all people for what they can and do contribute, and gives opportunity based on talent, training, and desire. That means encouraging talent equally in all persons, offering training and education and experience equally, and respecting people’s choices in what they pursue. And none of that is simple, even in 2011!
My steps in that with my family have meant a lot of personal work in getting past my own prejudices and “mental foot binding” and then a lot of work in defining our own relationships and roles. One of my favorite memories in this is seeing a cartoon snippet where a female character was ranting at a male character about why she was the one who had to be the maid, using a lot of the same lines that had gone through my own frustrated mind (as a working mom with too many kids, all boys); the scene ended with the male character responding “Because you applied for the maid job, and I hired you!” and I got it.
Part of my process was trying to “sell” a new ideology to those around me that I respected. That mattered so that I would finish selling and defining the ideology that I was willing and able to live to MYSELF, and so I would find my real friends and allies as I changed my own world. I am fortunate that women before me paved the way to a world where I could find pockets of sanity in the gender wars without making them myself, though — and so I could live it instead of just fighting for it.
Gender does matter as a component of identity, but we can let each individual live out their own vision of their masculinity and femininity before God and the community that affirms them in their choices.
Today I try to simply live and teach and model health as a person, and not fight a constant battle. I hold my own when I must, but usually just chose clients and communities that show equal respect to all competent and pleasant people. I believe those places will be the places that succeed and grow the best, and that success doesn’t need a defense.
This is so useful. I really appreciate your help with this, Maria. I think we’ve been on a similar journey. It’s good to know I’m not alone!
Wow…
” Why drag Jesus into this? It’s uncomfortable territory many complementarians aren’t ready for quite yet, anyway.”
If that’s true then something is very very wrong, if it’s not then they can rightly accuse you of slander…
It really is about the use of one’s gifts for the continal brininging in and announcing the Kingdom isn’t it. Afterall if there is no male and femal in the Kingdom why do we insist that we be divided in the present? I am not talking about some future pie in the sky idea but in the Kingdom as it is right now presently confronting us with a way of living under the Rule of God.
um…yeah…I doubt it.
I reject the notion that “either or statements” apply here, or most of the time in logical (or semi-logical) debate. Plus, to stick to that particular tact, I could simply offer that such an accusation would itself be slander.Silliness aside, one must ignore God in the flesh (Jesus) in his attitude and interactions with women, to contend that women shouldn’t be treated on equal footing as men.
And yes, something is “wrong” and I hope we move toward remedy through grace. Most of the time the issue has hidden and dominating cultural influencers, but we rarely realize how powerful they are. We function that way a priori, despite the evidence.
um…yeah…I doubt it.
I reject the notion that “either or statements” apply here, or most of the time in logical (or semi-logical) debate. Plus, to stick to that particular tact, I could simply offer that such an accusation would itself be slander.Silliness aside, one must ignore God in the flesh (Jesus) in his attitude and interactions with women, to contend that women shouldn’t be treated on equal footing as men.
And yes, something is “wrong” and I hope we move toward remedy through grace. Most of the time the issue has hidden and dominating cultural influencers, but we rarely realize how powerful they are. We function that way a priori, despite the evidence.
Ed,
Truly, we are kindred spirits. Thank you for sharing your beautiful heart.
Ed,
Truly, we are kindred spirits. Thank you for sharing your beautiful heart.
The traditional positions certainly have their weaknesses. Generally speaking though, I find that they give a pretty good idea of where one stands. Under a new proposed paradigm, how would you distinguish between those who feel the New Testament prohibits women from holding certain roles and those who feel any opportunity is open to either sex?
I think there is certainly room to approach the issue from another direction and I think you are onto something there, but at the end of the day, we’re still going to have two general ways of thinking about it. At least that’s how it seems to me.
Thanks for posing that question, Dan. I’m not convinced it’s a dichotomy, like you say. It’s like having a 2 party political system. Just because we only use 2 platforms, doesn’t mean we’ve locked in the best, or the only ways. It’s just that 2 positions are all that get the most notice. They have the loudest proponents. Suppose their were term and optical party limitations, or maybe other options gain more weight. There would be a paradigm shift in how citizen run the country. I think it’s similar with gender issues.
I, for one, do not feel comfortable in either camp. I find both of them have flaws too big to overlook. Both groups don’t seem to fully realize the kind of corner they are painted into. The terms and definitions are threadbare. If we transfigure the framework and premises for the issue, I think the possibilities open up.
I truly hope that there is a true ‘third way.’ I think it would be helpful to really highlight the shortcomings of the two current ‘options’ in order to really press the need for a new way.
I believe that the way we approach the Scripture is fundamental to the discussion and I think – as someone who believes in the authority of the Bible – that it needs to be a key component.
I love this conversation. It *is* time for a new way to communicate about these issues. Not because the labels are worn out, though. (How can they be worn out when so many Christians still have never heard of them?!?) Because different people have different ways of thinking about how to follow Christ, based on their different understandings of what He accomplished (and is accomplishing).
To me, the basic issue is whether we will choose to put other human beings in the place of God. Hierarchalism goes way beyond issues of gender… in many churches it affects how every believer treats every other believer in that church. Some of the most God-loving and people-loving leaders truly believe that it is their job to protect the status quo up the chain-of-command, and to rattle the cages down the chain-of-command. It is done “for everyone’s good,” in the name of “God’s will.” But it bears more resemblance to business and military subcultures, and to fallen human nature, than to the kingdom of God. (See Mark 10:42-45.) It is favoritism, and in many cases it is idolatry.
I’m not sure which terms we should abandon and which we should adopt. Most I’ve seen have been unfair or unclear to someone. (Even my personal favorite, Pro-Unity, could be taken to imply that comps and egals are somehow… not. And does anyone know that it refers to my understanding of the metaphor in Ephesians 5 as depicting unity rather than hierarchy, unless I explain it? No.) I’m looking forward to your definition of “capacitarian,” and the resultant conversation as it unfolds.
Hoping something productive catches on!
What a pleasant discussion of a unpleasant issue. Perhaps your attitude alone could get Mark and Rachel singing kum ba yah together instead of fighting. I don’t have a lot to add except to say that I’m always amazed when I bump into people for whom gender equality is still an issue—even though I keep bumping into them. For instance, in my graduate class: A prominent author (I’ll save him the embarrassment of revealing his name) shared of his difficulty in writing from a female POV until a mentor suggested that he write from a male POV and then change the name and pronouns. His discovery: “that women aren’t any less complex and dimensional than men.” And all along I thought this was common knowledge. Sigh. Someday this won’t be an issue, right?
That was nice of you to not out him as foolish. Thank you for sharing and promoting what’s happening here, Heather!