Needed: A coalition of feminists and conservative Christians

[Dave-W]

What bekki is describing, does, sadly, happen in some circles. I wouldn't say all, but too many.

Indeed.

 

[Dave-W]

As a conservative Christian, I must say this criticism is hardly fair.

Do you understand what the word "conservative" means? It means either trying to maintain the status quo or trying to move back to an earlier status quo.

By being supportive of an egalitarian (or even feminist) viewpoint, you have left being conservative behind.

 

[Endeavourer]

But my questions are, is it possible? And if possible, is it something people actually want to work together on?

I find this an intriguing proposition. Much work is being done within conservative Christianity to combat abuses of power and efforts to hold on to that power by people who have risen to the top. Further, there is a growing community of conservative abuse activists who are calling out the harm certain unBiblical viewpoints are causing.

Yet, it is my experience that a person with those unBiblical (IMHO) viewpoints may make great husbands or pastors unless they use those tenets to coerce others into giving them power. The biggest problem within Christianity is advancing towards or claiming power, not beliefs like headship.

For example, my husband believes in the headship doctrine; I believe headship is a misapplication of Scripture. I don't get that at all from their cornerstone verse in 1 Cor 11:3. Yet, he doesn't seek power over me or over anyone. He 'takes the lower seat', he says there are no verses in the Bible that direct him to take control or exert control over me, he says any 'submit' verses are to me rather than him and they are none of his business, etc etc. He doesn't see any verses allowing pastors to gather power and lord over their flocks. He sees the pastor's role as a servant to the church, not a lord over it. He has served as an interim pastor from time to time.

The Holy Spirit's work in his heart to bring out the fruits of the Spirit and shun the fruits of darkness is antithetical to grabbing power. Therefore, the end fruits of our diverging views on this issue are the same and I have a marriage that any egalitarian would also love to have. He has a marriage that any headship guy would love to have. I feel our marriage is egalitarian and he feels our marriage is a headship one. When you both rightly apply the FULL counsel of Scripture to your own marital behaviors, you won't be doing these things in your marriage:

Gal 5:
19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

In the 'headship' marriages I'm aware of, and there are many, any problems relating to the marriage are the husband's (or wife's) selfish behavior rather than their theology. It's funny how the theology rarely comes up unless the husband is looking to demand control of his wife and get his way.

The main problem with coercive, controlling 'leaders' in any organization is the misapplication of their doctrines (whether their doctrines are right or wrong) to gather power. As a person gathers more and more power, and starts accepting worshipfulness in his/her following, his or her mind can be given over to itself. Also referred to as worshiping the creature more than the creator, as Paul states. It's my thought that when someone starts to accept worship they start down the slippery slope of Romans 1.

I don't see how such a partnership would be possible (or desired) when one of the very foundations of conservative Christianity is that women are NOT equal to men.

I have yet to see conservative Christians in pursuit of any sort of goal to combat misogynistic men. Quite the opposite, in fact.

And when sex abuse cases are brought up, the only real horror I've seen among conservatives as a whole isn't for the victims of abuse, but for those who are apparently being falsely accused.

Wanting to push uncomfortable publicity back under a rug isn't anywhere near the same thing as wanting to honestly acknowledge and deal with the misogyny that is solidly ingrained in their very doctrines and institutions.

Apparently it is not possible, thanks to such stereotypes and attitudes like these towards conservatives. I called out how hurtful and untrue these comments were, but was swatted down with this rejoinder and more stereotyping:

Have conservative Christians been speaking out against misogyny in Christianity and against rape, and in support of the victims rather than their rapists on a WIDESCALE basis? Much of what I see (as well as many unbelievers who are horrified with Christianity due to conservative Christians) is more like what I read in this article:

If you want to have a dialog perhaps dialing back the stereotypes and derision of the other side would be a nice first step.

 

[Endeavourer]

Do you understand what the word "conservative" means? It means either trying to maintain the status quo or trying to move back to an earlier status quo.

By being supportive of an egalitarian (or even feminist) viewpoint, you have left being conservative behind.

I just want the Bible to actually be interpreted for what it actually says regardless of who believed what in any era. I would classify myself as a fundamentalist in that I believe the Bible (as originally written) is inspired, inerrant and literally correct.

I believe that many have misunderstood the Bible's teachings on marital roles. In any case, I want to live my life according to what the Bible says, in the best way I can understand it.

Anyone who knows me would definitely classify me as a conservative Christian. And I would classify myself as that also.

 

[Dave-W]

Anyone who knows me would definitely classify me as a conservative Christian. And I would classify myself as that also.

Most everyone I know would count me conservative also.

But I cannot count myself that way for the reasons I have stated.

 

[~Zao~]

I just want the Bible to actually be interpreted for what it actually says regardless of who believed what in any era. I would classify myself as a fundamentalist in that I believe the Bible (as originally written) is inspired, inerrant and literally correct.

I believe that many have misunderstood the Bible's teachings on marital roles. In any case, I want to live my life according to what the Bible says, in the best way I can understand it.

Anyone who knows me would definitely classify me as a conservative Christian. And I would classify myself as that also.

While the ideal to any of the problems encompassed in headship and submission doctrine are notably that each person, no matter the gender, interpret so that none feel that the other have a foot on one’s neck. Simply because that is the interpretation of Christ’s power over satan, but more importantly because it’s a lie as to the position accorded us by the Father,

He doesn't see any verses allowing pastors to gather power and lord over their flocks. He sees the pastor's role as a servant to the church, not a lord over it.

That applies to the verses of a man in control of his house. Man is an alternative pronouncement of mankind. All of the household of mankind is involved in this relationship.

Yet, he doesn't seek power over me or over anyone. He 'takes the lower seat', he says there are no verses in the Bible that direct him to take control or exert control over me, he says any 'submit' verses are to me rather than him and they are none of his business, etc etc.

That is the biblical position of all in Christ, so for me, for him to not engage in understanding is ignorance resulting from simply ignoring part of scripture that God wants understood. How can that be any less than choosing one scripture over another.

The Holy Spirit's work in his heart to bring out the fruits of the Spirit and shun the fruits of darkness is antithetical to grabbing power.

In home and in a church and that goes for anyone. Too bad he only thinks males are included in that as an indication of the Holy Spirit, while thinking women need to be commanded to do against their nature that lacks the Holy Spirit by the implication.

Therefore, the end fruits of our diverging views on this issue are the same and I have a marriage that any egalitarian would also love to have. He has a marriage that any headship guy would love to have. I feel our marriage is egalitarian and he feels our marriage is a headship one.

Both of you have come to conclusions completely different about each other and the motives that drive the marriage. Altho I commend you on both for not usurping God within it. However it still seems like a game of make believe that you have grown accustomed to and leaves miles of wiggle room for being of one Spirit and one mind.

I think what Becky is doing is shaking the jar of type settings and finding many who hide behind lies.

 

[Endeavourer]

Too bad he only thinks males are included in that as an indication of the Holy Spirit, while thinking women need to be commanded to do against their nature that lacks the Holy Spirit by the implication.

I guess this is what happens when one person tries to speak for another's beliefs. Your statement here doesn't represent his beliefs at all.

THowever it still seems like a game of make believe that you have grown accustomed to and leaves miles of wiggle room for being of one Spirit and one mind.

I have no idea what you are saying here.

I think what Becky is doing is shaking the jar of type settings and finding many who hide behind lies.

I don't know what you are trying to say here. Bekky was being rude and stereotyping people who are not like her with a broad brush of what she imagines to be true but is not. I would say that is hiding behind lies.

I have been a conservative Christian my whole life and have only met one person, unfortunately also a "leader", who put a perpetrator ahead of a molestation victims. This 'leader's' behavior otherwise was lording, controlling and abundantly replete with the fruits of darkness in spite of his profession to be saved. And, his church, which didn't dare to stand up against his power, has dwindled to a handful of people, mostly his kids and their families. However, the perpetrator, thankfully, was reported to the justice system, and served a prison sentence for his deeds. The way the 'leader' put the perpetrator before the victims was that he prayed for the perpetrator every Sunday without praying for his victims while the perpetrator was in prison. That behavior only heaped more wounds on the victims. This 'leader's' conservative Christian doctrines had nothing to do with his uncharitable and dark fruits. He is widely known for never losing face and always winning his battles. His behavior and 'rule' has turned Gal 5 on its head, and therefore we (hopefully any kind of Christian, conservative or not) cannot identify him as a follower of Christ based on his fruits.

It's a funny thing.... the Bible says "by their fruits ye know them". It doesn't say "by their doctrines ye know them."

My family was involved in exposing the molestation by a highly revered minister in our denomination. When we learned of it, two of my uncles drove about 1,000 miles to request an emergency meeting of the church. Thankfully the elders and deacons in that church agreed to meet with them. They confronted the minister in front of the elders and deacons. He was immediately exposed publicly and to the congregation, deposed from his position as a preacher and had to face the justice system. Unfortunately, I feel he didn't get the full weight of justice that he deserved in his sentencing. I know some of his granddaughters who are living with the consequences of his behavior for the rest of their lives. How do you compensate for that?

Other than the exception I cited above, I have yet to personally meet anyone who fits the stereotypes Bekky described, although most of the Christians I'm personally acquainted with are 'conservative Christians'.

 

[~Zao~]

It's a funny thing.... the Bible says "by their fruits ye know them". It doesn't say "by their doctrines ye know them.”

As well as out of the mouth come the musings of the heart. Matthew 15:18

 

[~Zao~]

It’s really times such as this that fruit is so important and should be carefully and prayerfully handled. Conformity to doctrine rather than transformation to the Holy Spirit is the key issue. Something each individual (or is that each gender?!? ) must work out

 

[Endeavourer]

Have you seen any of the threads discussing Cardinal Pell?

I looked him up. That's quite a story of being hoisted on his own petard, if the allegations of his abuse are true.

Kudos to him, however, for acknowledging the abuse was wrong and setting up a system to protect from and expose abuse. Most abusers are all about enabling their continued abuse rather than doing something to protect the victims against their own behaviors.

Perhaps he wanted to be caught in his addiction to abuse (assuming the allegations are true)?

 

[bekkilyn]

I don't know what you are trying to say here. Bekky was being rude and stereotyping people who are not like her with a broad brush of what she imagines to be true but is not. I would say that is hiding behind lies.

I grew up as a Southern Baptist. I am still fairly theologically conservative when it comes to Christian doctrine. I was born, raised, and lived in the south (U.S.) in the bible belt my entire life. I do have *some* inkling of what I'm talking about. I've personally experienced it. I know many both still within Christianity (in a more moderate or progressive sense) as well as many, many, many more who will never set foot within the religion again (some within *any* religion at all) without a direct visitation from God himself because they have been so severely harmed and almost irreparably damaged by conservative Christian indoctrination.

Calling it out is not being rude. One of the biggest problems within conservative Christianity is that so many are unwilling to step outside of the bubble they have been living in and really expressing interest in other people outside of attempts to evangelize and indoctrinate them, and that is inclusive of other Christians. Yes, it's not just unbelievers who get showered with conservative religious tracts because we're a woman wearing pants or jeans, or because we're participating in an Easter egg hunt, or some other such thing with the assumption that we aren't saved or don't know Christ.

If you truly look at what is posted under hashtags such as #exevangelical or #exchristian or #churchtoo, one might receive some spark of understanding why the perception of conservative Christianity outside of the bubble is so low. Even if the perception isn't true, then it's a really good indication that conservative Christians need a better marketing plan.

Instead, the typical responses are denial, blaming people for just being rebellious against God, and/or quoting that verse (out-of-context) for hating us because we follow Christ, when it's more like that quote from Mahatma Gandhi, “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

 

[Dave-W]

He doesn't see any verses allowing pastors to gather power and lord over their flocks. He sees the pastor's role as a servant to the church, not a lord over it. He has served as an interim pastor from time to time.

Then he surely does not understand Hebrews chapter 13; specifically verse 17. It is a command to submit and OBEY congregational leadership.

If he really thinks gathering power over a wife is proper and biblical, then a pastor gathering power over him is just as biblical.

By the same token, if he thinks a pastor is to serve the church, then a husband ought to serve his wife.

Ya can’t have it both ways.

 

[~Zao~]

Then he surely does not understand Hebrews chapter 13; specifically verse 17. It is a command to submit and OBEY congregational leadership.

If he really thinks gathering power over a wife is proper and biblical, then a pastor gathering power over him is just as biblical.

By the same token, if he thinks a pastor is to serve the church, then a husband ought to serve his wife.

Ya can’t have it both ways.

I honestly don’t see how any of it has anything to do anything except with the gift of administration which anyone can claim I’m sure. Very Pauline and very Judaist, both in the setting of Levitical ministry, which is passed away. However Hebrews 13 points outside of that altar.

 

[Paidiske]

I looked him up. That's quite a story of being hoisted on his own petard, if the allegations of his abuse are true.

Kudos to him, however, for acknowledging the abuse was wrong and setting up a system to protect from and expose abuse. Most abusers are all about enabling their continued abuse rather than doing something to protect the victims against their own behaviors.

Perhaps he wanted to be caught in his addiction to abuse (assuming the allegations are true)?

The Melbourne response has been widely criticised as being designed to limit liability for the church, rather than respond appropriately to victims.

My point was, though, that here is a man who has been found guilty of child sex abuse, and there are loads of conservatives insisting on his innocence.

I'm going to ignore the vast majority of the derail over the last page or two, but just comment that it's not that feminism wants to overturn civilisation, it's that it wants to overturn patriarchy. If patriarchy = civilisation for some people, that's a good indication that we have a problem.

 

[bekkilyn]

I wonder if it's the liberal or progressive or even moderate Christians promoting the poisonous, vicious, and toxic views towards women in this rather revealing linked thread:

New data on response in business to #metoo

 

[Endeavourer]

I do sense that woman are increasingly viewed as more of a potential liability in the workplace.

I have personally experienced significant limitations in my career due to the glass ceiling just under the old boy's network because they want to be pigs in their meetings. It wasn't until a man who knew me very well was included in these meetings that I heard what was going on, how denigrating they were towards the women in the company (referring to them as c**ts for example) and how I'd never get a promotion because I was a woman. I left that position in 2011.

Yet I've worked at companies that were very respectful and inclusive of women at all levels. Whether you will be discriminated against in a promotion or even being hired is still a crap shot, even now in 2019, and I think the instinct/desire to hire men instead of women is getting worse with ##metoo.

 

[archer75]

I do sense that woman are increasingly viewed as more of a potential liability in the workplace.

I have personally experienced significant limitations in my career due to the glass ceiling just under the old boy's network because they want to be pigs in their meetings. It wasn't until a man who knew me very well was included in these meetings that I heard what was going on, how denigrating they were towards the women in the company (referring to them as c**ts for example) and how I'd never get a promotion because I was a woman. I left that position in 2011.

Yet I've worked at companies that were very respectful and inclusive of women at all levels. Whether you will be discriminated against in a promotion or even being hired is still a crap shot, even now in 2019, and I think the instinct/desire to hire men instead of women is getting worse with ##metoo.

It's impossible for me to understand why people can't just do their work and then go home. Why are there even these little interactions that might be upsetting, flirtatious, etc.? just do your work and leave.

 

[Paidiske]

Well, I do get that. Lots of people spend most of their waking hours at work. We're human; we have needs beyond completing tasks; we need human interaction, friendship, all of that.

Doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't keep it entirely appropriate, but I don't think it's realistic to expect us not to interact in parallel to doing our jobs.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Christianity is a religion, not a political milestone to conquer, yet feminists want to "conquer" in the churches as if it's a political field.

It's not, it's God very Word, God's very plan for mankind and anything political or social or any of our own ideals must be left at the curb because this is Gods land.

I think conservatives will fight you for the proper understanding of God's Word before they will cave to pressure.

I think as human beings we can respect one another, but I don't see a coalition together any time soon.

 

[Paidiske]

Feminists want to see the reign of God in our churches; including in the way women are encouraged, enabled and equipped to participate in accordance with our gifts and callings. That is God's purpose for humankind.

It's not about seeking power through faith. It's about seeking the full flourishing of every child of God.