From: "Jennifer"
Subject: Re: Atheism
I would like to address your commentary on the Southern Baptist Convention, because as you have probably guessed, I am also a Southern Baptist. It is clear that you are not Southern Baptist, for your writing on the organization is dripping with distain [sic] as you apparently DO NOT understand the role of women in the organization or the church.
Actually, it isn't necessary for a person to be either a Southern Baptist or a Southern Baptist woman in order to understand how the Southern Baptist Convention has treated women. It's not uncommon for people to argue "you aren't X, therefore you can't understand X well enough for your comments to considered seriously." Such an argument, however, is precisely what can't be taken seriously. It is true that there are some things that only an insider will know; at the same time, there are at least as many things which only outsiders will be able to see -- precisely because they are outsider.
As a woman in the church, I do. Let me make it clear to you that the message that wives are to "submit" to their husbands is as misinterpreted as the treatment of women in Islam. Submission of the wife does not mean that her husband becomes her master, nor she his slave. What is does mean is that the man is the SPIRITUAL head of the household and that the wife becomes his partner and confidant in growing closer to God. It means that the man is supposed to step up and assume his role as the Godly example to his wife, his children, his community, and his church. "Submission" of the wife, Mr. Cline, is less about the woman, and more about the man stepping up to assume his given role according to God.
I've never written that, among Southern Baptists, women should be slaves and men should be masters. What Jennifer writes, however, is not entirely correct. Jennifer makes it seem as though female submission applies only to spiritual matters, but in reality the "Baptist Faith and Message" is much more general. It reads:
A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ. She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation.
Notice that there is nothing there that limits "submission" to spiritual or religious matters. Instead, the husband is supposed to lead generally when it comes to the family and she is supposed to serve as his helper. A woman may be equal before God, but she isn't accorded an equal role in the family or in the marriage.
With this explanation, it should become clear why the church also does not support female pastors. Since the man is the spiritual head, women are not seen as pastors, but often hold high places of leadership within the church and can do whatever work they desire as ministers. Ministry is not limited by gender, for ministry is not just "preaching." This is not "holding women down," sir, but instead freeing them for other jobs in the community, in the home, or wherever the woman chooses to use her talents.
At least Jennifer is consistent. Just as she has seemed to use "freedom" elsewhere in order to describe a situation where the state controls and dictates to people, here she uses "freedom" to describe a situation where women are excluded from important positions of power and forced to remain in different -- not to mention less respected -- roles in family, church, and society.
It's important to note that no restrictions are placed on the positions men are allowed to hold. A women is "freed" to do things which men can also do if they choose -- but it is not "freedom" when that is combined with the exclusion from roles men are allowed to have. Women are not "freed" to be nurses if men can also be nurses but only men can be doctors. Women are not "freed" to be secretaries" if men can also be secretaries but only men can be office managers. Women are not "freed" to have other jobs in the community or home if men can also have them but only men can have leadership roles in the church or home.
That's not freedom. It's not slavery, either, but it is a second-class status that is being masked as something better through rhetorical tricks and an abuse of language.
On all subjects, do your research, Mr. Cline. Experience it before you write or form your opinions. This is the same lesson I teach my students in class. To be open minded, you have to form your opinions based on your experiences, not your emotions. You should know that, sir.
I do indeed do my research -- which is why my articles on the Southern Baptist Convention include a great many quotes from original sources. To be told not to rely on my emotions by someone who consistently resorts to rhetorical tricks in order to elicit emotional reactions, though, is simply ridiculous.
More selections from the Agnosticism / Atheism Mailbag...
No comments:
Post a Comment