Last night at house church we discussed Men and Women in the Church by Sarah Sumner a little bit. I think we are all trying to find common ground, which is a good thing. Because ultimately it's not an issue that any of us would want to affect our fellowship. But along with that, maybe some of us have been a little reticent to really state where we're coming from...
For the last 10 years or so, I have taken the Biblical passages regarding women fairly conservatively. I have believed (and taught other women) that we are to be submissive to our husbands and not to be leaders in the Church.
There, I said it. I outed myself.
To be fair, I am reconsidering these issues, and it is shaking up my understanding quite a bit. Like I shared with those of you at house church last night, my understanding of husband-wife roles (which has blossomed over the last 5 years or so especially) seems to have really enriched our marriage. So I feel like I have a lot at stake.
An interesting thing about Sumner's view of the texts is that she actually does not set aside the unique roles in the marriage relationship. She does a beautiful job of laying out the analogy in Ephesians 5 that describes how the husband is the head of the wife, who is the body. I love how she describes the submissive "posture" of the wife as the body and the loving sacrifice of the man as the head, and the interaction between the two. After reading that chapter, I was relieved to see that perhaps my understanding of husband-wife roles would be compatible with a new understanding of women's roles in the Church.
However, the point when our consensus fell apart is when Sumner says that the fact that the husband is the head doesn't make him the leader. Somehow that doesn't compute for me. I understand that headship means more than that, and I appreciate her expansion of the head-body analogy. But it seems to me that leadership is implicit in the husband being the head. If the husband and wife disagree, then someone has to submit and someone has to lead. Right? If the husband is described as the head in the Biblical analogy of the marriage relationship, then it would seem to follow that he is the leader in these situations. To be fair to Sumner, I think she would say that this analogy is not even addressing these situations, perhaps?
This may seem like a minor point of contention between her and I, that wouldn't really affect the practice of the concept. But ultimately it affects whether or not a woman can be a church leader. Because if a wife is to be led by her husband, then I don't see how she can lead the church of which he is a part. There is a conflict of interest. What if he disagrees with the direction she is leading in the church? Wouldn't she have to yield to his opinion since he is her leader?
I guess some of this goes back to our definition of what a church leader is and what a church leader really does, i.e what level of authority they have. Many of us have been part of churches where the leadership position was used in an abusive way, in one way or another. Some of our church leaders have thought their position entitled them to micromanage our lives, to demand a certain level of commitment which translated into certain actions or activities that were expected in order to be in good fellowship with the church. (For those of you who haven't experienced this and don't know what I'm talking about, this can play out as a legalistic list of obligations and behaviors, such as: attend church Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Wednesday night, plus serve in at least one ministry; abstain from drinking alcohol or using tobacco or cussing; vote Republican; observe the Sabbath and give a tithe on all your earnings; and the list can go on and on.) We may also have been taught that their leadership provided some sort of umbrella of protection as long as we went along with it, that they were responsible for us and would be answerable for us somehow. Most of us that are part of Wheatland are moving away from this type of leadership.
Sumner makes a good point that no person is the head of the Church. Christ is the head of the Church. But yet, aren't there decisions that have to be made, and people who have to interpret what Christ's desires are for those decisions? And when people don't agree on which direction Christ is leading, someone has to decide, and that person is the leader. Right? Actually (and I am just thinking this through as I type), maybe not. Maybe the church, inhabited by Christ's Spirit, can reach a consensus on what Christ desires for its direction and even for decisions on specific issues as a whole. There may be a few who disagree with a certain decision, but if most feel that this is the way the Spirit is leading or speaking to them, then that is a way that Christ is leading His Church, isn't it? I guess most of us have been taught that Christ uses certain persons that he raises up to be leaders in order to lead His Church. That the responsibility for making decisions is delegated to trusted, approved decision-makers, who make all of the decisions every time. But it doesn't have to be that way, does it? It could actually be the whole church that has a voice. Or is that just the chaos that is described in 1 Corinthians, which we are to try to avoid?
If I ask my earlier question again ("What if [the husband] disagrees with the direction [his wife] is leading in the church? Wouldn't she have to yield to his opinion since he is her leader?") in light of the church structure which I just described, then I have already answered myself. The answer is, we are relying on the consensus of the church as a whole, inhabited by Christ's Spirit, and what they believe is the direction He is leading them - rather than on an individual leader who is somehow taking responsibility for the entire congregation of interpreting Christ's desires for them. So there would never be an opportunity for this scenario to occur.
Maybe a leader isn't so much a judge and decision-maker as he or she is an example that people are inspired to follow...
I may have just talked myself out of my earlier reservations regarding women in leadership. We'll see. I will be interested to discuss this with some of you later - especially you, husband. :-)
We have been on Ephesians 5 at church for a couple of weeks. I like how Pastor Neil described the submission. It is not what the husband does but the wife's willingness to put herself under the husband, like we, the church, are to put ourselves under Christ. That is how I saw it anyhow.
ReplyDeleteGail
Gail, I agree - the husband is not told to make the wife submit; it is addressed to her as her responsibility. The husband is told to focus on loving sacrificially, not to focus on making sure his wife is submitting.
ReplyDeleteI have to be honest, I have a hard time hearing anything from N.B. because of how he hurt our family. (Thus our decision to leave there.) I have forgiven, but I still feel a wary, self-protective impulse, if that makes any sense. But in this case I do agree with his point.
I don´t think head (greek: kefale) is about leadership in the antique world, not even in the Bible. It is about beginning, to be the first one. Cheque that!
ReplyDeleteI don´t even think leadership and decisionmaking is a biblical concept. Servanthood and mutual submission is.
The kingdom of God is not like any other kingdom!
LOVE this post. i appreciate you writing your journey through your thoughts here. i love it when you share in house church too because it's all so good. you're so articulate and really know where the church has come from...along with being open to where we are going (as a church).
ReplyDeletethanks!
thank you for that really nice compliment, Chill - it means a lot. :-)
ReplyDeletegreat post. i get uneasy, though, when the word consensus is used as a way to make decisions. it seems that if there is consensus, there is no need for a decision. Consensus generally seems something to be acheived (which means there is not consensus to begin with). i also think back to the messages of the prophets and how, if the church operates by consensus and most people don't like what they hear, these types of messages get buried. true, if we are all abiding in christ we will hear these messages. however, we are still beings in a fallen world. i don't think it's wrong to try to acheive consensus, but we must be careful not to cross over into manipulation or a mob-type mentality.
ReplyDeleteIf Judge Judy went to President Bush and said,"God spoke to me and here is the way to get out of this war situation" and it came to pass, would that make her president? No she would still be Judge Judy.
ReplyDeleteJesus surrounded himself with the twelve disciples that was his inimate cricle of course there were other men and women. After Jesus death and resurrection the disciples became apostles and added along the way others and surely once again there were many that followed both men and women. But women as apostles have not been mentioned.
Mary birthed Jesus and yet she tucked everything in her heart if any woman had every right to preach, to teach, and go to the temples and say, "My Son is not dead he is ALIVE"- it would be her. But she didn't I often wonder why?
I don't doubt God will use women in certain situations for his purposes it's obvious throughout the bible. I still yet to see in the bible where women were preaching in the temples. The women gave advice, help, and other things along side their male leaders. In some cases when leaders lacked wisdom God used used women to counsel the leader. The male leader took her counsel and continue being the leader. The political arena and the "church' arena are different. I yet to see in the bible where women where priests, deacons, elders & overseers but I have seen judges and rulers that were woman.
I am very weary because I am now hearing "well if my husband is willing to lay his life for me, then I will submissive." And I also have to deal with the elder, deacon & overseer being married to one wife, not the overseer to one husband. It seems to me that there is a created structure not to be abused but there is a structure. I bet that if we read other materials there would be another book that would slice every scripture that Sarah Sumner used and come out with a different senerio. So far the women that have blogged from WM are in agreement with Sarah Sumner and i sense that I am going aganist the grain. Surely God will deal with me if I'm wrong but for now I'll stick with the legalistic view of men being leaders of the church. ~Qp
QP - Please don't feel alienated. Yes, there are many books out there that examine these same scriptures and bring to light different aspects of them, essentially ending up at a complementarian view of marriage roles and a restrictive view of women's leadership. In fact, those books were all I had read before - I had never read a book that brought out the issues that Sumner brings out.
ReplyDeleteI know there are women at all points along the spectrum at WM - some who believe that women should not be leaders and in complementarian marriage roles, some who are unsure and feel there are "holes" in their current understanding and so are reexamining the issue (this is the group I am in), and some who believe women can be leaders in the Church and in egalitarian marriage roles.
The main thing to remember is that we all are trying to be faithful to the Scriptures, because we all believe they are God's Word and that they mean something that we should try to understand. No one (in our group) is trying to simply dismiss the verses in question or find an excuse for how they wish things could be. I believe that we all sincerely want God's will for WM and our marriages - we want to see God's Kingdom lived out in those arenas. But we are reexamining how much of our understanding might have been biased or influenced by the things we have heard just from one side of the issue over and over.
You have to look at the book, really. She's not just some liberal scholar trying to write off important Biblical issues. She has struggled with this personally, and has some important points to add to the discussion.
As I mentioned in my post, the last 10 years or so of my life, I have thought that women should not be elders and that wives should submit to their husbands. I am familiar, of course, with the verses and situations you mentioned that support this understanding. But there were always verses and situations that bothered me, that didn't fit with that understanding. One example is Deborah, who was a judge in Israel, a position that was not just a legal position but a spiritual, leadership position - the highest leader in Israel at the time.
I think we have to deal with the fact that we do not follow exactly what the Bible says about women. Whether we follow a complemetarian/limited leadership position or an egalitarian/limitless leadership position for women, none of us are calling for women to be silent in the church, not to teach at all in the church, to wear head coverings (whether that be a scarf or long hair - I vote for long hair ;-), or for every women to give birth at least once so she can "be saved through childbearing." We may say that we are trying to follow the principles that are given in those scriptures, that we are drawing out the basic understanding in that a woman shouldn't have the authority to determine doctrine. But yet, we let women teach at conferences and as guest speakers and we read women's books and let them teach our children and teenagers during their formative years. Even if they aren't called Pastor or Elder, women are having a huge influence in the Church today, and yes, are even influencing doctrine.
So we just need to determine - if we really think women need to be limited from having authority over men because men are to be the pastors, elders, "keepers of the doctine," decision makers, etc., then we need to stop letting women teach our teenage boys, stop letting women speak at conferences or as guest speakers at church, and stop reading women's books or using their Bible study videos. However, if we don't believe this is what God desires, then maybe it would benefit us all to examine why we draw the line where we do.
Again, please don't feel minimized or alienated because some of the women at WM are reexamining the issue or might disagree with you. We love you and we value the contribution you have at WM and to each of us personally! I really think (hope and pray) we can all discuss this without losing our fellowship.
Teason - Thanks for the comment! Interesting thoughts about consensus vs decision. I'll have to think about that some more.
ReplyDeleteRegarding how God leads the Church versus how God led Israel, my first thought was that only a few had the Holy Spirit poured out on them in Israel, such as prophets and kings. But in the Church the Holy Spirit is poured out on every member - so obviously the way God's will comes to light will be a little bit different. You're right, we are still in a fallen world, and we need to consider that. We are quite capable of misunderstanding God's will or of being deceived. Maybe checking our own perception of how Christ is leading the church against that of many others who are also inhabited by His Spirit helps guard against misunderstanding or being deceived.
Jenny~ please don’t confuse my going against the grain for feelings of alienation. I may have to go against the grain but alienate I don’t feel. I am very comfortable in saying without pause these reexaminations are very concerning to me, having stated that, I have to say that I don’t have to have people agreeing with me in order for me to feel maximized. I am standing with conviction that this book may bring more confusion and disorder and is going against Titus teachings and God’s structure.
ReplyDeleteYou are correct with your statement “there are women at all points along the spectrum at WM” but more and more I am hearing that now since they have read the book they are reconsidering what they once believed. I too agree that although controversies are never easy my hope also is that it will bring us to a deeper understanding of God’s word and a deeper love and trust in HIM.
“Our understanding might have been biased or influenced by the things we have heard from one side of the issue over and over.” I’m sure the homosexual has heard things over and over and feels that the statements are biased and have been influenced by someone, or the person who has a drinking problem surely they feel like they too need to reexamine what people have told them over and over because after all the bible states 1 Timothy 5:23 stop drinking only water and use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses. This does not make it right we have to view in light of the overall context of the bible.
Where in scripture does it say that Deborah was a priest? In the OT only priest were to teach the scriptures, she was a messenger of the Lord yes she sent and summoned Barak-it wasn’t a public message she did it privately. She didn’t teach in an assembled group or congregation. Have we ever thought that maybe Deborah the prophetess is an example that should motivate women in such situations to do what Deborah did; encourage a man to take the leadership role to which God has called him, did not Deborah exhorted Barak? Were there NO MEN to be judge? By the way Deborah did not lead the ten thousand men it was Barak! So if there are no MEN that want to step up to the calling of leading the church then the women should do it? WE THE WOMEN should be encouraging our men to take these leadership roles. I would really reexamine what Judges is all about it’s a book of what not to imitate!
Head coverings, wedding rings, crowns, and badges are all symbols and carry a certain status. Physical actions; a kiss, handshake, a bow are symbols for a warm greeting. These are outside symbols that can vary from culture to culture. But “Wives submit to your own husbands” or “I do not permit a woman not teach or to have authority over a man” are not symbols they are reality and the structure that God has ordained.
Women teaching women follows what God has ordained outside of that it could be that God’s grace and patients are long lasting, and if there are blessings it could be because God’s word is powerful and those who hear it will be blessed but if it’s because men are not stepping up then these women are in positions that were not intended for them. As a youth leader I don’t teach teenage boys the men do and the women teach the teenage girls. At home I am the mother and scriptures states “do not forsake your mother’s teaching.”
Fellowship will not be broken over this we are brothers and sisters in God’s family and I will be praying that we will continue to have joy and celebrate the creation of male and female and acknowledging that God’s love and worth for us is not based on gender and that our roles are complementary, not interchangeable. Once again let me reassure you I don’t feel minimized or alienated I just don’t agree with all that is being written or stated and I know that there is an advantage to being part of a group and hearing everyone’s opinion, so in all fairness that is probably why I don’t hear the other side. Whew! Sorry so long!
Because of the CROSS, Qp
In the world of computers, plumbing, and cars: don't mess with what works. If you are happy. If your partner is happy. Leave it be and blessed be.
ReplyDeleteDon't reconsider or re-evaluate. Call it good and be careful when calling it God.
I love you loving your relationship as is. It's beautiful!
Jenny,
ReplyDeleteI found your blog through a trail of blogs Rustin Smith's blog to Wheatland to WM blog then to yours!
I enjoyed reading your posts. I am a mother of 3 boys and I stay at home. One of your posts that was about tired of being the mom! That's what I'm going through today!
Your thoughts on WM are very refreshing. Last year I was in a discussion group about this book. It was so amazing and kind of like medicine to a battered soul.
I to grew up in the complementarian teachings. I put more pressure on myself to live up to the expectations of a godly wife and mother than my husband did. I to started feeling like there were holes in what I was believing about this subject.
I feel I'm finally able to articulate what direction I'm heading at least. Trusting God to clear my vision and encourage me to see the truth from the opinions of others.
I do have a question to ask. While journeying through this have you had hard time with the "roles" between you and your husband? I know that sounds too personal. It's o.k if you can't answer me. It's like once I figured a few things out (my husband was in the discussion group with me and is not of the complementarian view). I have found it hard to find my footing as a stay at home mother.
I hope this makes sense! Thanks for reading.
Molly