A Fresh Model starts by Abandoning Worn Out Terms (i.e. egalitarian, complementarian) Part 1

"Battle of the Sexes" dilemmas seem dated now. Even for Christians.

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…

 

Exploring Misandry in the church Part II

"ugh...typical guy! Idiot."

misandry |misˈandrē|
noun
the hatred of men by women
ORIGIN 1940s: from Greek miso- ‘hating’ + anēr, andr- ‘man,’ on the pattern of misogyny.

As promised, I’m covering the female side of misogyny, which is misandry.
I call this type of article a “BOOM post”. You have been warned.

I would be remiss to not admit that sectors of feminism are strongholds of misandry. Feminism, though, as many women think of it, is far more general. It has to do with equitable treatment toward women, in business, home life, society in general, and it hinges on the ability, explicitly or implicitly, to have choice (of many kinds) as a basic unalienable right. A wiser person, female or male, will understand, however, that freedom of choice must be balanced with one’s community, not rooted or executed from a selfish starting point.

It seems to me that troubles for either gender will stem from control issues. For men, it may be that they feel somehow impotent in their life, interactions, career path, health, etc. Perhaps the feeling or appearance of weakness is the pivot point.

For women, it may be that they want to be regarded well, and cherished (and I don’t mean in simply an emotional, or fuzzy way. This is more of a cherished at an essential level of being for (female) human flourishing). They want to not feel objectified (which, is disregard), or to relegated to a small box, i.e. a narrow role, a low ceiling limiting personal or career pursuits, an intellectual prejudice.

I find it interesting that body image plays a powerful role for both men and women. Ill-health, lack of fitness, the effects of aging, being fashionable, and certainly other issues influence personal issues of self-worth, emotionally and bodily. They also influence how each gender reacts to the other. Those things hated, or feared in one’s self will be trigger points and irritations all too glaringly visible in the other gender. Spite develops.

I will cover some ways misandry happens among women. Please note I use the word among purposefully, because there seems to be an execution of misandry in a social capacity more than in any other way. For men, they may both take their misogyny on as a personal war, and they may find strength in numbers, but women may tend towards a “team strategy”.

For women, physical aggression with misandry is not normative. Rather, it is mental, social, and tactical. Bullying of other female by female happens this way as well. The tendency may to manipulate, rather than misogynistic tendency to (in some respect) conquer or master (perhaps with resources, people, money, intellectual pursuits, empire, and including areas of competencies and skills). (I’m speaking quite generally, please bear with me.) Women seem more socially powerful, while men seem more dominant. Perhaps a good analogy is to say influential in contrast to jurisdictional.

For some general information, I will note 6 areas ripe for, or given to misandry. (Please note that these same areas are ones of great good, effectuality, and ministry if they are not perverted by selfishness and sin. Yes, the same goes for males.) Steps should be taken to purify and strength these venues through the Holy Spirit, and his Fruit, not disable or disband them.)

1. Gossip as bonding.
2. “Tribal Culture” (if you will) of malcontent.
3. A “sick clique” (more on this is a later post) It has to do with venting, fault finding, griping. For men, the counterpart might be verbal attacks or passive aggression. But, this also can and does happen with females.
4. Platforming (A leader or leaders pumping up/motivating a like-minded group)
5. Subversion of Systems (rather than negotiation)
6. Rebellion (overt or covert/and sometimes unintentionally) to authority, powerful groups, institutions, concepts, norms in question.

Often man-hating patterns are established in the context of a social group norm. There may be a retaliation tenor, as well. A pecking order type of culture may subtly and socially pressure its affiliates to employ a particular attitude. Acceptance in the group will be linked to the propagation and use of this structure, and its attitudes. Bear in mind, unlike many times with males, this all happens as sub-context, and is almost always implied, not vocalized.

(There are others areas. I welcome your additions, or specific ideas or comments on them.)

To expose the flaws and missteps among women is to set myself up as an enemy of women, and undermine some of the great and vital gains women have made societally to achieve appropriate equality. Quite a few people, whether they will admit it, or not, believe a certain amount of misandry seems justifiable because of humanity’s long history of abuse and antipathy toward the female gender. In recent, postmodern times, the female voice (or story), as well as many other historically-marginalized groups, has been given new validity and attention.

It is not my intent, of course to sabotage any positive and rightful gains for females. I do believe these rectifications have been sorely overdue, and really have not yet been accomplished. And what a sad commentary on the Christian assimilation of the ministry of Christ, and the human expression of the redemptive nature of the gospel.

To women, I say, we can be secure and mature enough to take on and strength whatever weaknesses we may have that are causing injury of harm to the body of Christ. We can work toward a better way, healing, and unity. As for you males, please read this all compassionately, and let it help you understand women’s weaknesses and strengths better. There is responsibility that comes with know more, so I trust you to use this new knowledge for good not evil.

I mention all of this, not to divide any of us from each other, or to give us weapons to beat each other with, but rather to call out areas of potential growth. Then, we can call them into question ourselves (men and women), confess before God, humble ourselves to each other in love and service, and work toward unity, reconciliation, and enacting God’s glorious Kingdom Come. God transcends gender, and our petty hang ups and weaknesses. It is in God’s strength and grace that we may be fashioned as new creatures that reflect God’s good character and nature.

I would have loved to make this whole article somehow more jocose (or humorous at all), because that’s usually how I roll, but I couldn’t switch gears, adapt and integrate that writing style on this one. Don’t expect such seriousness in any following installments on this, or any topic. (There’s only so much of this trajectory I can take, before I have to insert more cheer.) :)

So-weigh in. I’m listening.

Wishing I was a Guy (poster envy)

Taking an interlude away from my theology of disability post series, today.

As soon as I saw this awesome poster, I wished I was a guy for about 2 seconds. It’s so goofy and cool at the same time.

click for video

There’s probably a good reason why there are no females on this poster. And, no I’m not going to say because Evangelical Christianity is basically a boys club with bonus points for popularity. It’s probably because for some reason we can somehow respect a goofy guy, and still take what he says seriously.

Is there a double standard? Take Tina Fey. She’s obviously brilliant, and she’s also cute, and incredibly funny. But, what if she cranked it up a notch, and started a devotional series, or starting sharing her suggestions on worship music, or maybe exegeting Romans 12. Would her street cred take a dive? Would everyone just start scratching their heads? Maybe that’s a bad example.

Let me try it the other way. What if Beth Moore did a poster spoofing Carol Burnett? Would this help women rely on her more thoroughly while getting out of their pits, or becoming more secure?

What is it about leadership or ministry and gender roles? I’m puzzled.

I may have to test it out personally. A Zena Warrior Princess outfit may in my future.

Carol Burnett