Why Women May Speak, Lead, and Teach in the Church

Junia Is Not Alone,* and Neither are Plenty of Others:

Women and Leadership in the New Testament

http://www.allanbevere.com/2019/10/junia-is-not-alone-and-neither-are.html?m=1

by Allan R. Bevere

October 22, 2019

John MacArthur is at it again. In a recent conference, MacArthur reiterated his view that the New Testament is clear that women should not serve as pastors or in any leadership roles above men. (You can listen to his comments here.) But is it so clear? Actually, I believe it is clear, but in favor of women in church leadership.

I am going to give a quick fly-over of the pertinent passages that speak to women in ministry, but first let me make what I think is a crucial observation. All too often in making a case for or against this or that issue in looking at the Bible, we can narrowly focus on one or two passages of Scripture that seem to settle the question. The problem with such an approach is two-fold: first, it fails to understand those passages in their larger canonical context, in this case the canon of the whole New Testament. Second, and related to the first, is that when the passages in question are seen in light of the larger canonical context, a different understanding of particular Scriptures can emerge. In the case of women in leadership, the three passages often used to deny a place for women in ministry are 1 Corinthians 11:1-16, 1 Corinthians 14:33-40, and 1 Timothy 2:8-15. I will deal with these Scriptures in due course. Before that, I want to do a quick fly-over of the relevant New Testament passages that give us the larger picture of the question at hand.

The Gospels:

Mary and Martha (Luke 10:38-42)-- in the well-known story of Martha running around the kitchen practicing hospitality for Jesus and her other guests, she complains that Mary is not helping but rather sitting at Jesus' feet listening to his teaching. When the focus of this text is on Martha's complaint, what can be lost is that Rabbi Jesus is allowing and even commending Mary's posture as a disciple. Only disciples of the rabbi were permitted to sit at his feet, and that honor was reserved for men alone. It is reasonable to assume that if Mary was permitted to be a disciple, she was expected at some point to carry on his teaching to those around her. What Jesus is doing here is a radical reorientation of social convention.

The Samaritan Women (John 4:1-42)-- The first surprise of the story is that Jesus addresses a women and a Samaritan, something that no Jewish male in the first-century with any self-respect would do. The Samaritan woman herself is shocked that Jesus would even initiate conversation. After this encounter, the woman (I wish she had been named) returns to her villages and tell of her conversation with Jesus. John tells us "many Samaritans from that city believed in him because of the woman’s testimony..." (v. 39). Many from her village became disciples because of her preaching.

The Women at the Tomb (Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-12)-- I am excluding John's resurrection account because I want to deal with Mary Magdalene separately. All four Gospels are in agreement that female followers of Jesus were the first to hear of the resurrection of Jesus and the first to proclaim it to Jesus' male disciples. If one were trying to invent a fable of the resurrection of Jesus in first-century Judaism, having women as the first witnesses to resurrection would not be the way to tell the story. In first-century Judaism, women were generally considered to be unreliable witnesses, and this was especially true in Roman culture (cf. Luke 24:11). So, why do all four Gospels tells us women were the first witnesses? Because that's the way it actually happened. With the differences in the resurrection accounts, this is the one detail on which all four agree.

Interlude:

It is important to note that when Paul offers the nutshell of the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-11, the women are conspicuously absent.

For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me (vv. 3-8).

I do not believe that Paul purposely omits this detail, as he says at the outset, "For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received." But what seems to have happened in the two-plus decades after the event of Easter is that the women attested to in all four Gospels have dropped out of the basic proclamation-- perhaps for evangelistic reasons in contexts, both Jewish and especially Gentile, where the testimony of women was not respected. This is only conjecture, but it does make sense of the omission.

Now back to the task before us.

The central claim of the Gospel is that Jesus was raised from the dead. If the tomb was not empty, if Jesus' bones are still somewhere on the outskirts of Jerusalem waiting to be found, then Christianity is indeed nothing more than a hopeful fable unmoored from reality. It is the critical and essential claim of the Gospel-- and God entrusted that initial proclamation to women. They were the first preachers of the resurrection of Jesus.

Mary Magdalene (John 20:1-18)-- Two things of note in the story of Mary Magdalene at the tomb: First, when she recognizes the risen Jesus, her exclamation is "Rabbouni," "rabbi" or "teacher." This was a title of respect from a disciple, a student to one's teacher. Second, Jesus tells Mary to go and tell the men-- his male disciples-- of her encounter. Once again, we see the role of women as the first preachers of the resurrection. (It is interesting to ask why the risen Jesus did not appear to Peter and the beloved disciple when they were at the tomb.)

The Book of Acts:

The Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:14-21)-- With the coming of the Holy Spirit comes the fulfillment of the words of the Prophet Joel-- "You're sons and daughters will prophesy" (v. 17). The Greek word "prophesy" (προφητεύσουσιν; prophēteusousin) means proclaim or preach. In the Didache (100-120 A.D.), an early manual of church discipline and order, the traveling evangelists are referred to as prophets. In Revelation 11:3 the two witnesses "prophecy or "preach" wearing sackcloth. One cannot miss the echos of the Old Testament prophets. In these last days, daughters as well as well as sons will preach the gospel. To exclude our daughters from the call to preach is to reject the work of the Holy Spirit in these last days.

Not only that, Peter quotes Joel that even the lowest of those on the first-century social status totem pole will receive the Holy Spirit and preach-- "Even upon my slaves, both men and women, in those days I will pour out my Spirit; and they shall prophesy" (v. 18). Throughout the book of Acts we see that the coming of the Spirit results in proclamation and the gift of the Spirit is no respecter of social status or gender roles.

Paul's Letters:

Romans (16:1-16)-- There can be no mistaking that the Roman Church had women in ministry working alongside the men, but let me mention three in particular.

First, in verse 1 Paul mentions Phoebe who is a "minister" or a "deacon" (διάκονον; diakonon). It is not clear if at this point in the history of the early church whether a deacon is a formal church office, but Phoebe participates in the list of leaders Paul mentions; and she is mentioned first and singled out as a diakonon. It is also highly significant that in 15:8, the Apostle refers to Jesus as a diakonon. Moreover, it is obvious that Phoebe is the bearer of this letter to the Roman Church. If Romans is a draft of Paul's defense of his gospel before the leaders of the church in Jerusalem, as Richard Hays suggests, then Paul has entrusted this singularly important epistle to someone who has to be a trusted leader.

Second, in 16:3-4 Paul writes, "Greet Prisca and Aquila, who work with me in Christ Jesus, and who risked their necks for my life, to whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles" It is important that Prisca is mentioned first. In that world, the names of persons are listed in order of significance as in the Gospels when the writers often list in order Peter, James, and John (e.g. Matthew 17:1-2). In the Book of Acts, Peter emerges as the leader of the Apostles. Moreover, in Acts 18:18, Prisca (here Priscilla) is also mentioned before Aquila. Has Priscilla taken the lead in the couple's ministry? It is true that in 18:1-2 Aquila is given priority and mentioned first "with his wife Priscilla." Traditional gender roles are not completely rejected in the New Testament, but women in leadership in Roman Church does not conform to traditional conventions.

Third, and perhaps most important is Junia. "Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives who were in prison with me; they are prominent among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was" (16:7). Notice that Paul refers to Junia (a female name) as "among the apostles" (ἀποστόλοις; apostolois). Apostolic ministry eventually expanded beyond the original Twelve. Moreover, Junia was in prison with Paul. Can it be doubted that she was there for the same reason Paul was-- proclaiming Christ crucified and risen? From the witness of the New Testament, it was church leaders who were arrested and subjected to punishment, which makes strategic sense. To stop an undesirable movement, cut off the head and the rest of the body will die.

Those who argue that Junia was a man-- Junias-- do not have the manuscript evidence on their side. The first reference to Junia's gender outside the New Testament comes from Origen (c. 185-254) who confirms she was a woman, possibly because there were those in his day uncomfortable with that truth and sought to obscure it. In other words, there would have been no debate over Junia(s) gender a century or two later if she had been a he.

Galatians (3:28)-- "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus." While this passage does not directly address leadership roles, it is another affirmation that in Christ, such stations in life should not be the basis for a church hierarchy. The main issue in Galatians is that there are some Jewish Christians who want to force Gentile converts to practice "the works of the law," that is, those identifying practices that marked out Jews as God's people from everyone else-- circumcision, kosher laws, Sabbath and holy day observance. For Paul, this relegates the Gentiles to second class status within the new covenant in Christ. So Galatians 3:28 is an affirmation of the irrelevance of these distinctions as a hierarchy within the church. To say that there is no "male and female," (and note that it is and not or) is to say that gender is not a determinative of equality and therefore hierarchy within the church. If there is to be no second class status based on these distinctions, it is reasonable to assume that such distinctions are of no account in the leadership of the church as well.

Philippians (4:2-3)-- Euodia and Syntyche (feminine names) are not getting along and that is causing enough of a rift in the church that Paul feels the need to briefly suggest they work things out. Paul refers to them as co-workers and "have struggled beside me in the work of the gospel." They are also mentioned with Clement, a man who is a co-worker as well.

Colossians (4:15)-- Paul says very little about Nympha other than there is a church that meets in her house. Whether her husband was an unbeliever or she was widowed we do not know. But hosting a congregation in her household would have made her "the house church leader and patroness."

We now come to three passages often used to exclude women from leadership.

1 Corinthians (11:1-16)-- It certainly appears that Paul affirms traditional gender roles here, but we should not expect it to be any different. Nevertheless, nowhere does the Apostle exclude women from leadership. Indeed, in verse 10 Paul states that a woman's veil in prayer is "a symbol of authority on her head." Moreover, there is also an equal kind of reciprocity that Paul affirms between men and women. "Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man or man independent of woman. For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman; but all things come from God" (vv. 11-12). This reciprocity is "in the Lord," as believers in their roles relate to fellow believers. Could it be that the maintaining of traditional family roles was for the sake of evangelism to unbelieving Jews and Gentiles, who had a particular understanding of household management, rather akin to Paul's concern for Christians not behaving in ways that cause others to stumble (1 Corinthians 10:23-33)?

In distinguishing between gender roles, Paul is affirming that women are in the church, in the covenant as women, on their own status (not as under the old covenant where women were included by virtue of the men because of circumcision). As it has been noted, "In worship they are to be their true selves; this also means... that women were not to copy men but to be women in their public ministries."

(14:26-36)-- Women should be silent in worship, but why and when? The context of chapter fourteen is about order in worship. In reading up to chapter 14, we know that women in Corinth are participating in worship, which also means speaking publicly. Here Paul's admonition of silence concerns the fact that in this context women, who were not granted the kind of education enjoyed by men, were apparently disrupting worship by asking their husbands to explain what they did not understand (perhaps during the sermon). They are not scolded for wanting to learn. They are reminded that there is a time and place appropriate for learning.

1 Timothy (2:8-15)-- Three things: First, while in other places Paul seems to reinforce traditional gender roles, here he does the opposite. Men do not have to be stoic tough guys in worship. They can and should lift "up holy hands without anger or argument." It's OK to worship and get caught up in the Spirit. In insisting that women dress modestly, Paul is not concerned with the women of the congregation turning on the men by dressing provocatively. To the contrary, women do not have to settle for being (to use modern phraseology) "trophy wives," whose purpose is only to be beautiful to look at in worship. They have more significant roles to play in the church.

Second, women are to "learn in silence with full submission." While this admonishment grates against our twenty-first sensibilities, it must not be missed that the women are permitted to learn, just like Mary sitting at the feet of Rabbi Jesus. This does go against conventional roles for women. Women are to learn silently so they might at some point be able to teach when ready. The verb translated "permit" is in the present tense and should be rendered "I currently do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man." This prohibition is temporary. Moreover, Paul may be trying to keep the church from going down the road of a female-run pagan cult. Tom Wright states,

There are some signs in the letter that it was originally sent to Timothy while he was in Ephesus. And one of the main things we know about religion in Ephesus is that the main religion – the biggest Temple, the most famous shrine-- was a female-only cult. The Temple of Artemis (that’s her Greek name; the Romans called her Diana) was a massive structure which dominated the area; and, as befitted worshippers of a female deity, the priests were all women. They ruled the show and kept the men in their place.

Now if you were writing a letter to someone in a small, new religious movement with a base in Ephesus, and wanted to say that because of the gospel of Jesus the old ways of organising male and female roles had to be rethought from top to bottom, with one feature of that being that the women were to be encouraged to study and learn and take a leadership role, you might well want to avoid giving the wrong impression. Was the apostle saying, people might wonder, that women should be trained up so that Christianity would gradually become a cult like that of Artemis, where women did the leading and kept the men in line? That, it seems to me, is what verse 12 is denying. The word I’ve translated ‘try to dictate to them’ is unusual, but seems to have the overtones of ‘being bossy’ or ‘seizing control’. Paul is saying, like Jesus in Luke 10, that women must have the space and leisure to study and learn in their own way, not in order that they may muscle in and take over the leadership as in the Artemis-cult, but so that men and women alike can develop whatever gifts of learning, teaching and leadership God is giving them.

Third and finally, Paul writes in 2:15, "Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty." The reference here is to Genesis 3:16:

To the woman God said,

"I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children,
yet your desire shall be for your husband,
and he shall rule over you."

Are Paul's words based upon the curse or upon the undoing of the curse? Some have read this in the first way-- that the task of women is primarily to bear children and be subordinate to their husbands as a result of the fall. But it can also be read, and I think better, as Paul's belief that the curse of pain in delivering a child and being ruled over by her husband are being undone in Jesus. For Christians, we do not live under the curse and all that comes with it. We have been freed from it. So, I think Paul's words are conceptually more akin to, "Women will be kept safe in their childbearing (the curse notwithstanding) and must remain in faith and love and holiness, with modesty (not conforming to men's images of them).

Even though Jesus has undone the curse of sin, we still live with its effects. I think this is why we see the tension in the New Testament between affirming traditional gender roles and yet moving beyond them. How do believers live as citizens of the Age to Come when This Age is still very much alive and well? It is not always easy to know.

I am not suggesting there are no difficulties with these last three passages that need to be untangled, but when viewed in the context of the New Testament canon, it is obvious they must be seen in light of what is affirmed throughout-- women had an important place in the first decades of the church and participated in its leadership as apostles, disciples, teachers, and evangelists.

In thirty-five years of pastoral ministry, I have become a better pastor because of my female colleagues in ministry; and I rejoice to be a co-worker with them.

Junia is not alone. Thanks be to God!

- ARB

*The main title of this post Junia Is Not Alone is taken from the title of an ebook written by Scot McKnight.

What Is Intersectional Theology? Let's Find Out.

Intersectional Theology cowritten by

Grace Ji-Sun Kim & Susan M. Shaw (Fortress Press)

Intersectional Theology: An Introductory Guide

Amazon Link

Intersectional Theology: An Introductory Guide offers a pathway for reflective Christians, pastors, and theologians to apply the concepts and questions of intersectionality to theology. Intersectionality is a tool for analysis, developed primarily by black feminists, to examine the causes and consequences of converging social identities (gender, race, class, sexual identity, age, ability, nation, religion) within interlocking systems of power and privilege (sexism, racism, classism, heterosexism, ableism, ageism, nativism) and to foster engaged, activist work toward social justice. Applied to theology, intersectionality demands attention to the Christian thinker's own identities and location within systems of power and the value of deep consideration of complementary, competing, and even conflicting points of view that arise from the experiences and understandings of diverse people.

This book provides an overview of theories of intersectionality and suggests questions of intersectionality for theology, challenging readers to imagine an intersectional church, a practice of welcome and inclusion rooted in an ecclesiology that embraces difference and centers social justice.

Rather than providing a developed systematic theology, Intersectional Theology encourages readers to apply its method in their own theologizing to expand their own thinking and add their experiences to a larger theology that moves us all toward the kin-dom of God.

About the Authors

Grace Ji-Sun Kim is associate professor of theology at Earlham School of Religion in Richmond, Indiana. She is the author or editor of fifteen books, including Mother Daughter Speak (2017) and Embracing the Other (2015). She is a coeditor for the series Asian Christianity in the Diaspora. Kim is an ordained PC (USA) minister and blogs for the Huffington Post, Feminist Studies in Religion, Sojourners, TIME, and The Nation.

Susan M. Shaw is professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at Oregon State University. She is author of Reflective Faith: A Theological Toolbox for Women (2014) and God Speaks to Us, Too: Southern Baptist Women on Church, Home, and Society (2008) and general editor of the four-volume Women's Lives Around the World: A Global Encyclopedia (2018).

Editorial Reviews

"Given the unprecedented religiopolitical realities of the early 21st century, this book needs to be at the top of every pastor's 'must read' list. In ways both academic and acutely personal, Susan Shaw and Grace Ji-Sun Kim invite us to the brave work of listening across lines of gender, race, class, nation, sexual identity, ability, age, and other forms of social difference in which we discover not only more of God and our neighbors, but also the still untransformed parts of ourselves." --Julie Pennington-Russel, First Baptist Church of the City of Washington, DC

"In this book, Grace Ji-Sun Kim and Susan M. Shaw offer a remarkable resource to the churches. The authors lift up the concept of intersectionality as a theological prism through which our lives, collectively and individually, can be more honestly assessed and appreciated. The book is an open window into new depths and breadths of what is involved in thinking truthfully about God and ourselves as radically relational beings who can find ourselves, and one another, only at the intersections of our many, varied, and evolving identities. Intersectional Theology is a brief, readable introduction to Christian theology at its most truthful best." --Carter Heyward, emerita, Espiscopal Divinity School and author of She Flies On: A White Southern Christian Debutante Wakes Up

"Kim and Shaw invite us to adopt a theology that embraces differences, disruptions, and the margins by listening beyond our comfort zone and into deeper layers of our faith so that we leave no one out. A gracious invitation that we would do well to take up in troubling times such as these. This book gives us the guide to do so." --Emilie Townes, Vanderbilt University Divinity School

"Grace Ji-Sun Kim and Susan M. Shaw offer a crisp, concise, and well-researched introduction to Christian intersectional theology that will take its place as a standard text for this new and increasingly important approach not just to Christian theology but to Christian practice in the world. Intersectional Theology is a primer on theological method that will help to solidify the increasingly nonnegotiable claims, at least in progressive circles, that theology begins in human experience, that human experience involves navigating one's multiple social identities within lived contexts of simultaneous oppression and power, and that the goal of Christian theology and practice should be justice and liberation for all, with no one left out. Highly recommended." --David P. Gushee, Distinguished University Professor of Christian Ethics and director, Center for Theology & Public Life, Mercer University

Grace Ji-Sun Kim

What does the Mustard Seed have to do with Faith?

Matthew 13:31-32; Mark 4:30-32

Homebrewed Christianity

Grace Ji-Sun Kim & Susan Shaw

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Intersectional Theology

An Introductory Guide

https://readingreligion.org/books/intersectional-theology

by Grace Ji-Sun Kim, Susan M. Shaw

Review

“Intersectional theology recognizes that each of us exists in differing relationships to power and hierarchy based on gender, race, class, nation, sexual identity, ability, age, and other forms of social difference” (41). In Intersectional Theology: An Introductory Guide, authors Grace Ji-Sun Kim and Susan M. Shaw offer a concise and instructive guide on how to pay attention to social location and context in theological reflection that seeks to foster greater social justice. The authors apply Kimberlé Crenshaw’s concept of intersectionalityas analytical matrix to do “theology by questioning assumptions that are rooted in the dominant culture, purposefully pursuing justice, embracing the complexities and contradictions, and refusing to do theology as usual” (16).

Collaboratively written, this book performs what it sets out to teach, impressively weaving together multiple voices and perspectives, and presenting rich and diverse sources accessibly. 

Beginning with an introduction to intersectionality, Kim and Shaw explore social location through their own autobiography, highlighting the importance and difference it makes to develop a critical (self)understanding of one’s own intersectional identity in the process of theologizing. Several concepts are explored and interpreted constructively to demonstrate intersectional theological thinking at work—for example, the multiplicity of God, baptism, suffering, biblical interpretation, as well as a chapter on ecclesiology. The authors walk the readers through the different steps and stages of intersectional theological reflection, illustrating with examples and interjecting voices from diverse locations. Some of the deliberation moments elaborated on are, for example, the importance of understanding specific contexts and their histories; how to expand towards both/and thinking; employing power analysis to ideas and their implications; moving from center to margins when emphasizing critical reflection; and maintaining a self-critical stance of one’s own positionality within structure of domination. One strength of this work is the multitude of voices featured, from black liberation theology, womanist and ecowomanist perspectives, queer proposals, Asian conceptualizations, and more. 

In Intersectional Theology, readers will find guidance on how to enter an indeterminate process aimed at destabilizing universal truth claims, and holding multiple and competing perspectives to further justice in the praxis of communities. Acknowledging differences, and even tensions, between theologies does not have to be an obstacle, it can be an invitation. Kim and Shaw weave diverse voices together, not in unison, but in rich dialogue that shows how to appreciatively learn across differences, and tap into theological potential in moments where perspectives diverge. Intersectional Theology supports the reader in moving away from theologies that seek to be all-encompassing, and towards practicing continuous theological conversations that seek to hold convictions lightly, while insisting on growing the circle of engaged voices. 

This book is a very welcome addition to introductory theology guides. Though short, it is expansive in its incorporation of multiple voices and dynamic in its modelling of a mode of doing theology that is applicable to communal needs and practices. Intersectional Theology lends itself well for communal reading, and conversation in classrooms and communal settings where there is a desire to create liberative spaces and attend to the urgent demand to address the multiple oppressions impacting our lives. A glossary for some terms of analysis is provided, though perhaps it could be expanded when used for study with groups less familiar with theological jargon. The discussion questions after each chapter allow for deepening the personal reflection and facilitating conversations that maintain social justice commitments at the center of theological reflection.

About the Reviewer(s)

Heike Peckruhn is Assistant Professor of Religious Studies at Daemen College.

Date of Review: June 21, 2019

About the Author(s)/Editor(s)/Translator(s)

Grace Ji-Sun Kim is a Korean American theologian. Her many books include Mother Daughter Speak (2017), Embracing the Other (2015), and Colonialism, Han, and the Transformative Spirit (2013). Kim is Associate Professor of Theology at Earlham School of Religion in Richmond, Indiana. She is an ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church.

Susan M. Shaw is Professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at Oregon State University. She is author of Reflective Faith: A Theological Toolbox for Women (2014) and God Speaks to Us, Too: Southern Baptist Women on Church, Home, and Society (2008) and general editor of the four-volume Women's Lives Around the World: A Global Encyclopedia (2018).

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Intersectionality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An intersectional analysis considers all the factors that apply to an individual in combination, rather than considering each factor in isolation.

Intersectionality is a theoretical framework for understanding how aspects of a person's social and political identities (e.g., gender, race, class, sexuality, ability etc.) might combine to create unique modes of discrimination. Intersectionality identifies injustices that are felt by people due to a combination of factors. For example, a black woman might face discrimination from a business that is not distinctly due to her race (because the business does not discriminate against black men) nor distinctly due to her gender (because the business does not discriminate against white women), but due to a unique combination of the two factors.

Intersectionality broadens the lens of the first waves of feminism, which largely focused on the experiences of women who were both white and middle-class, to include the different experiences of women of color, women who are poor, immigrant women, and other groups. Intersectional feminism aims to separate itself from white feminism by acknowledging women's different experiences and identities.

Intersectionality is a qualitative analytic framework developed in the late 20th century that identifies how interlocking systems of power affect those who are most marginalized in society and takes these relationships into account when working to promote social and political equity. Intersectionality opposes analytical systems that treat each oppressive factor in isolation, as if the discrimination against black women could be explained away as only a simple sum of the discrimination against black men and the discrimination against white women. Intersectionality engages in similar themes as triple oppression, which is the oppression associated with being a poor woman of color.

Intersectionality has been critiqued as being inherently ambiguous. The ambiguity of this theory means that it can be perceived as unorganized and lacking a clear set of defining goals; this arguably means that intersectionality will be unlikely to achieve equality due to its unfocused agenda. Without a clear focus, it is difficult for a movement to create change because having such a broad theory makes it harder for people to fully understand its goals. As it is based in standpoint theory, critics say the focus on subjective experiences can lead to contradictions and the inability to identify common causes of oppression.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Woman standing in library room | Photo by Lucas Souza on Pexels.com

WOMEN THEOLOGIANS YOU SHOULD

BE READING RIGHT NOW: 2019 EDITION

https://dailytheology.org/2019/03/09/women-theologians-you-should-be-reading-right-now-2019-edition/

March 9, 2019 · by Christine E. McCarthy · in Theology and Culture

On this International Women’s Day, a 2019 update to last year’s primer on new and notable works from women theologians and religious historians. Add them to your personal libraries and/or get your universities to buy them for theirs. All links go directly to the publisher’s websites.

• Lisa Sowle Cahill, Blessed Are the Peacemakers: Pacifism, Just War, and Peacebuilding. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2019.

• The Catholic Women Speak Network, Visions and Vocations. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2018.

• M. Shawn Copeland, Knowing Christ Crucified: The Witness of African American Religious Experience. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2018.

• Kelly Brown Douglas, Stand Your Ground: Black Bodies and the Justice of God. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2015.

• Teresia Mbari Hinga, African, Christian, Feminist: The Enduring Search for What Matters. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2017.

• Linda Hogan, Keeping Faith with Human Rights. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2015.

• Mary Jo Iozzio and Patricia Beattie Jung, eds., Sex and Gender: Christian Ethical Reflections. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2017.

• Cathleen Kaveny, A Culture of Engagement: Law, Religion, and Morality. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2016.

• Erin Kidd and Jakob Karl Rinderknecht, eds., Putting God on the Map: Theology and Conceptual Mapping. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2018.

• Grace Ji-Sun Kim and Susan M. Shaw, Intersectional Theology: An Introductory Guide. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2018.

• Kathryn T. Long, God in the Rainforest: A Tale of Martyrdom and Redemption in Amazonian Ecuador. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.

• Staughton Lynd and Alice Lynd, eds., Nonviolence in America: A Documentary History, 3rd ed. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2018.

• M. Therese Lysaught and Michael McCarthy, eds., Catholic Bioethics and Social Justice: The Praxis of U.S. Health Care in a Globalized World. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2018.

• Elizabeth McAnally, Loving Water Across Religions: Contributions to an Integral Water Ethic. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2018.

• Catherine R. Osborne, American Catholics and the Church of Tomorrow: Building Churches for the Future, 1925-1975. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018.

• Julie Hanlon Rubio, Hope for Common Ground: Mediating the Personal and the Political in a Divided Church. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2016.

• Christiana Zenner, Just Water: Theology, Ethics, and Fresh Water Crises, revised edition. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2018.

Forthcoming

• Karen Bray, Grave Attending: A Political Theology for the Unredeemed. New York: Fordham University Press, 2019.

• Robyn Henderson-Espinoza, Activist Theology. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2019. (An early version of this list failed to indicate that Dr. Henderson-Espinoza identifies as a non-binary transgender Latinx, not as female or woman. We are very sorry for the error and remain pleased to include their forthcoming work in this list which lifts up underrepresented theologies and histories as well as the work of underrepresented scholars. Updated 16 March 2019.)

• Jennifer Herdt, Forming Humanity: Redeeming the German Bildung Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019.

Biography

• Charles Marsh. Shea Tuttle, Daniel P. Rhodes, eds., Can I Get a Witness?: 13 Peacemakers, Community-Builders, and Agitators for Faith and Justice. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2019.

Jimmy Carter - Standing Up for the Equality of Women

Illustration: Dyson

Losing my religion for equality

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/losing-my-religion-for-equality-20090714-dk0v.html?stb=fb

by President Jimmy Carter

July 15, 2009

Women and girls have been discriminated against for too long

in a twisted interpretation of the word of God.

I HAVE been a practising Christian all my life and a deacon [in my church] and Bible teacher for many years. My faith is a source of strength and comfort to me, as religious beliefs are to hundreds of millions of people around the world. So my decision to sever my ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, was painful and difficult. It was, however, an unavoidable decision when the convention's leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be "subservient" to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.

This view that women are somehow inferior to men is not restricted to one religion or belief. Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths. Nor, tragically, does its influence stop at the walls of the church, mosque, synagogue or temple. This discrimination, unjustifiably attributed to a Higher Authority, has provided a reason or excuse for the deprivation of women's equal rights across the world for centuries.

At its most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities.

The impact of these religious beliefs touches every aspect of our lives. They help explain why in many countries boys are educated before girls; why girls are told when and whom they must marry; and why many face enormous and unacceptable risks in pregnancy and childbirth because their basic health needs are not met.

In some Islamic nations, women are restricted in their movements, punished for permitting the exposure of an arm or ankle, deprived of education, prohibited from driving a car or competing with men for a job. If a woman is raped, she is often most severely punished as the guilty party in the crime.

The same discriminatory thinking lies behind the continuing gender gap in pay and why there are still so few women in office in the West. The root of this prejudice lies deep in our histories, but its impact is felt every day. It is not women and girls alone who suffer. It damages all of us. The evidence shows that investing in women and girls delivers major benefits for society. An educated woman has healthier children. She is more likely to send them to school. She earns more and invests what she earns in her family.

It is simply self-defeating for any community to discriminate against half its population. We need to challenge these self-serving and outdated attitudes and practices - as we are seeing in Iran where women are at the forefront of the battle for democracy and freedom.

I understand, however, why many political leaders can be reluctant about stepping into this minefield. Religion, and tradition, are powerful and sensitive areas to challenge. But my fellow Elders and I, who come from many faiths and backgrounds, no longer need to worry about winning votes or avoiding controversy - and we are deeply committed to challenging injustice wherever we see it.

The Elders are an independent group of eminent global leaders, brought together by former South African president Nelson Mandela, who offer their influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering and promote the shared interests of humanity. We have decided to draw particular attention to the responsibility of religious and traditional leaders in ensuring equality and human rights and have recently published a statement that declares:

"The justification of discrimination against women and girls on grounds of religion

or tradition, as if it were prescribed by a Higher Authority, is unacceptable."

We are calling on all leaders to challenge and change the harmful teachings and practices, no matter how ingrained, which justify discrimination against women. We ask, in particular, that leaders of all religions have the courage to acknowledge and emphasize the positive messages of dignity and equality that all the world's major faiths share.

The carefully selected verses found in the Holy Scriptures to justify the superiority of men owe more to time and place - and the determination of male leaders to hold onto their influence - than eternal truths. Similar biblical excerpts could be found to support the approval of slavery and the timid acquiescence to oppressive rulers.

I am also familiar with vivid descriptions in the same Scriptures in which women are revered as pre-eminent leaders. During the years of the early Christian church women served as deacons, priests, bishops, apostles, teachers and prophets. It wasn't until the fourth century that dominant Christian leaders, all men, twisted and distorted Holy Scriptures to perpetuate their ascendant positions within the religious hierarchy.

The truth is that male religious leaders have had - and still have - an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter. Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world. This is in clear violation not just of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but also the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, Moses and the prophets, Muhammad, and founders of other great religions - all of whom have called for proper and equitable treatment of all the children of God.

It is time we had the courage to challenge these views.

- President Jimmy Carter

*Jimmy Carter was president of the United States

from 1977 to 1981.

Confessions of an Egalitarian Complementarian

Confessions of an Egalitarian Complementarian

Source Link

by Roger Olson

March 4, 2015

Comments

The topic is gender. It’s a minefield. Anyone who dares to step into it must be prepared to be injured. Especially in American academic institutions it’s a minefield. And it is a major point of division among evangelical Christians. I speak from within both contexts.

In academia we are in a time of recovery from rampant patriarchalism and that has led to some over reactions. Two trends are noticeable. First, any acknowledgement of real difference between the sexes—beyond biology and patriarchal oppression—is discouraged. One academic professional society requires facilities where it meets to make all restrooms unisex. Second, insofar as differences between males and females are acknowledged—beyond biology and patriarchal oppression—typically female modes of behavior are to be prioritized. No positive acknowledgment of typically male modes of behavior is permitted. These two trends are in some tension with each other, but both are easily observable in American academia and they filter out into the media, government and business.

Among evangelicals one is pressured to choose between being either “complementarian” or “egalitarian.” There is little room for middle ground or hybrids. Somewhat mimicking secular academic trends, many evangelical egalitarians shy away from any talk of interdependence between the sexes or of differences between them beyond biology and social conditioning. “Masculine” and “feminine” are only social constructions and nothing more. Any mention of innate differences between boys and girls beyond physiology is discouraged. The assumption is that “difference” inevitably leads to hierarchy (read “patriarchy”).

On the other hand, many evangelical complementarians insist that power differentials between males and females are rooted in revelation and the Trinity itself. “Male headship,” it is argued, does not mean male superiority but only divinely ordained male leadership. In reality, however, among evangelical complementarians, male headship always tends to flesh out as male domination and female submission.

I stand (sometimes alone) in a middle space, a liminal space (to use academic jargon), between egalitarianism and complementarianism. It’s often an uncomfortable space to inhabit. What this means is that:

• Among academics I reject the radical minimizing of sex differences. I believe male-female difference is more than biology/physiology and social conditioning. I admit that identifying that difference is never easy, but I believe it is observable in tendencies of behavior well before hormonal influences can account for it. We are one humanity; our humanity is one. But difference does not mean inequality in any other area of human life; we celebrate difference and “otherness” (in academia). We can be and are one humanity in variety. And maleness and femaleness is one of the irreducible manifestation of that variety. It cannot and should not be obliterated by social engineering.

• At the same time I stand together with feminists in opposing oppression based on sex or gender. Females should have every opportunity to fulfill their human giftedness including entrance to every level of leadership in every profession. (On the other hand I think professions commonly considered reserved for females ought to be opened without hindrances to males. If the profession of engineering would be improved by having more women engineers, then the profession of nursing would be improved by having more men nurses.)

• Among evangelicals I stand with the egalitarians in affirming that women called by God to lead should be ordained and recognized as leaders at every level of religious organizations. I stand with egalitarians in affirming that husbands and wives should submit to each other in marriage and that both, together, should lead families. I have been a member of two churches pastored by women (and am now attending a third) and have many women students who will be pastors of churches. I work within a denomination whose executive leader is a woman. My wife is a deacon in our church. My wife and I have for forty plus years made all decisions in our marriage and family together. When we do not agree we do not act in any way that affects both. I do not claim “leadership” and neither does she—except together, as one.

• On the other hand, I agree with complementarians that “manhood” and “womanhood” are rooted in creation and are not reducible to biology/physiology or social construction-conditioning. Although they overlap much (and there’s nothing wrong with that), manhood and womanhood, maleness and femaleness, masculinity and femininity, complement each other. Typically men need other men and they need women; typically women need other women and they need men. “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle” is not true. Woman is made for man as man is made for woman. The two need each other and complement each other. We should celebrate the difference and interdependence without creating or supporting hierarchy.

• For example: A church for women only would be a travesty as would a church for men only (both exist). Children are best raised, when possible, by both a male and a female. If either a father or mother is not available the single parent should seek out a person of the other sex to co-parent with them (within appropriate boundaries, of course). Boys need both male and female teachers in schools, as do girls.

We need to overcome our polar oppositions and recognize both man and woman as uniquely gifted by God, equal in every way, interdependent, and yet really different ways of being human.

Creating Beliefs from Biblical Texts Not Meant To Teach Those Beliefs

Beliefs Known by Praxis

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2014/08/05/beliefs-known-by-praxis/

by Scot McKnight

August 5, 2014

Comments

What we believe and how we behave are not quite perfectly matched, at least not this side of the kingdom, but it is not unfair to say that what one believes is seen in how one lives. If you say you believe in God but never pray, or if you say you believe in forgiveness and hold grudges, or if you say you believe God loves all but your circle of friends is restricted to folks like yourself — well, your acts reveal what you really believe or you have acted outside the bounds of your beliefs.

Sometimes, however, it works another way: sometimes what we believe needs praxis to reveal what the beliefs entail. Sometimes the beliefs are such that the actual practices of those with those beliefs reveal that what we thought they believed is not how they understood their belief.

Take, for instance, women, authority, church, teaching, and leading.

We have a few statements in the Bible that we might call the beliefs, and then there are the practices of women. I contend the practices reveal that what some think the Bible “believes” is not in fact what the Bible actually believes.

Here are the principal texts that one might call the beliefs:

Genesis 3:16: To Eve God says, “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”

This is taken by some to mean the man’s “role” is to “rule” and the woman’s “role” is “to be led by her man.” Subordinationism for the woman, governance/headship by the husband. Or, another so-called “belief” text:

1 Corinthians 14:33-35: “For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”

Proper church order then is for a man to speak and a woman to be silent. The same kind of “belief” text is found here:

1 Timothy 2:11-15: “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.”

These two silence texts are taken by some to mean that women are not to be elders or teachers or pastors or preachers or stand behind the pulpit on Sundays in front of a mixed congregation of males and females [here all kinds of gymnastics have been created, like "adult" males or "Sunday services" etc].

One more. There are texts in Paul’s later Pastoral letters that give guidelines on the character and qualifications of elders and deacons.

Here’s such a list:

1 Timothy 3:1: Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.

8 Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons. 11 In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything. 12 A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. 13 Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.

Most importantly, it is argued from these instructions about elders and deacons that Paul believes they must be males since he speaks to males, which he very clearly does. He clearly assumes the elders and deacons are males. But does he teach that only malescan be elders and deacons? Many think Paul believes and teaches that elders and deacons must be males.

OK, to test what we think the Bible believes here, let’s examine the praxis. [I have some of this in my book The Blue Parakeet and some other stuff in Junia Is Not Alone.] The praxis texts of the Bible, I contend, prove that many are creating “beliefs” out of texts that were not meant to teach those beliefs.

The praxis reveals that the beliefs are otherwise. The praxis reveals that hierarchicalism in marriage is not intended, that female subordination to men in all social conditions is wrong, that total silence in the churches is wrong, and that women were deacons and that if there were female deacons then the assumed readings, creating those beliefs, are also wrong.

Here goes with the praxis texts:

1. Deborah judged all of Israel — which puts here at the top of the nation, over all things, including military, political, legal, and therefore also “religious” dimensions of life in Israel.Judges 4–5. This woman was subordinate to no man in Israel. She was above them all.

2. Huldah was a prophet, which means she spoke for God to the whole people of Israel. 2 Kings 22:14-20. She spoke for God. There was no male intermediary between her and God. That’s what prophets do — they hear a message from God and they speak for God to the people of God.

3. The Woman of Proverbs 31 did not work in the home (as it is said) but in the public sector. To be sure, she honors her husband. She buys and sells out of her own monies (surely this does not refer to her allowances). Her husbands “praises” her. She gets public honor for her work. I see precious little here that indicates hierarchicalism; instead, what I see is a man who loves his wife and a wife who loves her husband and who both work for the good of the family.

4. Junia is an apostle (Romans 16), and this term refers to missionary church planting, including evangelism and equipping the saints. I have big doubts that this term “apostle” is equivalent to what it means when we refer to Peter and Paul, but it surely refers at least to church planting missionary work. Not just supporting a husband church planter, but apostle-ing. (Missionaries have always done this; if on the field, so also at home!)

5. The daughters of Philip were prophets (Acts 21:9; to call someone a “prophetess” might diminish her gift so I prefer to use the same term), and a prophet spoke for God to the people of God. They did this.

6. Priscilla taught Apollos (Acts 18:26). It does not say she taught in subordination to her husband; it says “they” taught him.

7. Phoebe, and this is a text that deserves some consideration, was a deacon (not just “servant” as in 1984 NIV, but “deacon” as in NIV 2011). She “deac-ed” — which means she did the things in 1 Tim 3 pertaining to deacons.

What I’m getting at is this: though 1 Timothy 3 assumed both elders and deacons were males, this text definitively proves that women could be deacons too. Which means this: our assumptions that only males could be deacons are wrong. Paul’s rhetoric seems to offer a set of beliefs that indicate women could not be deacons, when the praxis shows they were deacons. Praxis shows what Paul meant when he said what he said in 1 Timothy 3. Our interpretation of 1 Tim 3 must fit Paul’s actual praxis of deacons.

Now a question: If this is the case with deacons, what prevents us from saying the same of elders/overseers? Nothing other than our assumed interpretations.

If with deacons, so also with elders.

The beliefs are seen more accurately when the outworkings of those beliefs are visible in practices.

Review: "Half the Church," by Carolyn Custis James

Half the Church: A Brief Interview with Carolyn Custis James

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/peterenns/2013/02/half-the-church-a-brief-interview-with-carolyn-custis-james/

by Pete Enns

February 22, 2013

Comments

 

Today’s post is a brief interview with Carolyn Custis James about her most recent book Half the Church: Recapturing God’s Global Vision for Women. For those 7 or 8 of you out there who don’t know who Carolyn is, her online bio will tell you that she is a busy writer and a popular speaker at women’s conferences, churches, colleges, and seminaries. Her ministry organization, WhitbyForum, promotes thoughtful biblical discussion to help men and woman serve God together.

Carolyn is also founder and president of Synergy Women’s Network, which facilitates collaborative learning communities that support and empower women and men leading together for God’s Kingdom purposes. In her spare time, she writes books including The Gospel of Ruth: Loving God Enough to Break the Rules and Lost Women of the Bible: The Women We Thought We Knew.

 

I admire Carolyn because she says what needs to be said respectfully and with power. She is not shy about ruffling some feathers, if that’s what it takes. And it usually does.

What’s the back-story that led you to write Half the Church?

 

Half the Church opens with, “Sometimes when you’re searching for answers, you get more than you bargained for.” When I started searching for answers to personal questions I was asking for myself—about God and about his calling on me as a woman—I had no idea I was wading into one of the most important (certainly one of the most controversial) issues facing the 21st century church. I didn’t imagine where that search would take me either.

 

I started asking questions when my life veered off course and I became the first women in my family who didn’t marry during or immediately after college. Instead of following the traditional roadmap for women, I joined a sizable and largely forgotten demographic of women who live outside the parameters drawn for women by the church. Messages for women coming from the church say a lot about women as wives and mothers, but rarely acknowledge or champion other paths we follow.

 

Furthermore, Christian discussions about women tend to focus largely on women in American pews, excluding women in other cultural settings, ethnic groups, socio-economic classes, and circumstances.

 

I came to the realization that we weren’t asking big enough questions of Scripture or challenging our conclusions by the real experiences of real women and girls in a fallen world.

 

I wanted to know how big God’s vision is for women? Will it hold up under the 21st century pressures bearing down on women’s lives? Does it equip us to advance boldly into the future or does it summon us to retreat into the past? Can the Bible still speak with relevance into the diverse lives of every 21st century woman and girl or should we, as many women are doing, simply move on without it?

 

So by asking those questions, what have you found?

 

This is much bigger than questions about me. And the stakes are a whole lot higher than just my personal concerns. Living with a small vision of God’s calling on your life has serious consequences. God’s mission in the world suffers setbacks when women settle for letting others take care of things or believe they’re out of line if they step up and lead.

 

The Bible contains too many examples of God calling his daughters to violate cultural conditioning and religious expectations by stepping up and leading for us to think it’s okay to take a backseat to what God is doing in the world. When God created the woman, he wasn’t making more work for the man. He was providing real help for a staggering mission—advancing God’s kingdom on earth. We’ve lost sight of that.

 

I found a vision for women that is bigger than I ever imagined and raises the bar for all of us no matter who we are, where or when we live, our marital status or circumstances, or what we see when we look in the rearview mirror. These callings apply to every woman and every girl from first to final breath.

 

We are God’s image bearers—which isn’t simply descriptive. It is a mission that necessitates knowing and representing God and joining his mission in the world. We are ezer-warriors alongside our brothers in the battle against the Enemy that commenced in Eden. God created the woman after making the emphatic blanket statement that “It is not good for the man to be alone.” God is the Ezer of his people, so this is a major way women uniquely image God. We belong to the Blessed Alliance of male and female image bearers mandated by God to be his vice-regents—ruling and looking after things in this world on his behalf.

 

This vision frames every woman’s story and calls her to strive to be more, never less. And despite apprehensions to the contrary, this is not a win for women and a loss for men. God doesn’t do that kind of math. When women step up to answer God’s call, the men in their orbit will benefit.

 

 

How did learning these things impact you?

 

It was a wake-up call for me.

 

I grieved my own complacency and wasted years. I knew I needed to change—to let go of old ways of thinking and to embrace responsibility for my part in God’s work even when it means moving out of my comfort zone.

 

What was the biggest aha moment in writing this book?

 

Actually there were several. But this one reshaped the entire book, including the title.

 

In 2009 I was stunned to see the connection between my work and what Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn call the “paramount moral challenge” of the twenty-first century.” Their book, Half the Sky: Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women Worldwide, exposes how low values of women and girls result in sex-trafficking, honor killings, child marriages, female genital mutilation, gang rape, etc. Their statement, “Americans of faith should try as hard to save the lives of African women as the lives of unborn fetuses,” hit me squarely between the eyes. I knew first, that we have a message that completely undermines the devaluing of women and girls and second, that we have responsibility to do something about this crisis.

 

Half the Church needed to be more than a reassuring and empowering message for women. God’s vision for his daughters is a call to action for God’s justice that demands a response. As God’s image bearers, this crisis is our responsibility. I was deeply encouraged that Sheryl WuDunn endorsed my book. Now many are reading both books together.

 

What surprised you most after publishing Half the Church?

 

Well, I wasn’t surprised that my book drew criticism. What did surprise me, however, was the fact that any thoughtful Christian could read a book that sounded the alarm about unspeakable suffering in the world and come away irked and obsessing over the fact that I didn’t address women’s ordination or male headship over women. Really? Women are being raped 24/7, little girls are being killed for being girls, and you’re miffed because your party line wasn’t endorsed? I still don’t get it—how American evangelicals can be so short-sighted and self-absorbed?

 

The best surprises are seeing how this message continues to change women’s lives and how God is using his daughters to change the lives of others. One of the biggest surprises was learning my book had inspired a woman to lead a group of women to climb Mount Kilimanjaro to raise awareness and funds to combat sex trafficking. Forty-eight Freedom Climbers (ages 18-73) tackled that climb. They raised $300,000, made two Guinness World Records for the most climbers attempting and the highest percentage summiting, and are gearing up to climb to the Mount Everest base camp this year. These are the kinds of stories that motivate me to continue to write.

 

Like I said, “Sometimes when you’re searching for answers, you get more than you bargained for.”

 

 

 

 

 

Synergy - the whole church

 

 

http://synergytoday.org/