slaves, women & homosexuals
After the sermon on Sunday at South Hills (where I work), I was challenged to reassess where I stand on women in pastoral office, teaching, and exercising authority in the church. The classic position has been one of male hierarchy (as expressed in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood) where women are limited in the offices and roles they can have within the church. In the last couple decades many churches have begun to allow women to teach and be ordained as pastors. Our church currently has women who teach occasionally on Sunday mornings and hold the position of Director (which is licensed like a pastor, but not ordained). Our senior pastor expressed his desire to have women recognized as pastors.
In light of this I decided to pick up a book that has been often recommended, but I have never read. Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis by William J. Webb. I made a quick read of it this afternoon (the first 65 pages and the last 30, still have 160 or so to go). The basis of this book is the concept of a "redemptive-movement hermeneutic." For those who don't know, a hermeneutic is the process of interpretation. So, to probably butcher Webb's main theme, he calls for understanding that God is continually moving his people towards a more full expression of humanity, ethics, and living. So while some may find that the way the Bible speaks about slaves or women not progressive or acceptable, what Webb wants us to remember is that God was making radical changes for the culture at the time of writing and that he was wanting future generations to build on the universal principles that were beginning to be implemented amidst his people (consider the principles from Jesus' teaching about why divorce papers were a part of the Mosaic law, but not the ideal from Matthew 19). As Christians now universally support the elimination of slavery, equality in the workplace, etc, he calls for God's people to raise the freedoms of women, equality in service, and the honoring of gender differences. This he calls "complimentary egalitarianism." Or, he wants those who want to maintain an honoring of men to consider an "ultra-soft patriarchy" where women are free to serve, but have symbolic honor of men. (For those concerned, he advocates for a compassionate defense of heterosexuality as healthy sexuality.)
I have wrestled with this question since college (my thesis in Biblical Studies at BIOLA was on the Theology of Gender). I arrived at that time (2001) at a soft patriarchy, and have been encouraged by Webb's insights about cultural hermeneutics to consider his ultra-soft patriarchy. Not sure where it will all end up. But if you are interested in a well-balanced understanding of these issues within the church, I found this to be a great book!
3 comments:
I admit I know nothing about women's role in leadership, as I am not currently not a leader nor a woman. While the cultural interpretation does seem like a nice way out, 1 Timothy 2:8-15 (where I believe most of the argument is at) references Adam and Eve. It seems that if women can't teach, it's based on the order of mankind after the Fall. If that was cultural, could we also assume that pain in childbirth and the male's obligation to work is also cultural? (Genesis 3:16-19)
Or, as Wayne Grudem says, "'I do not permit a woman to teach.' What's so confusing about that?" (Toph paraphrase) I'm not sure I agree with him, but perhaps we do make the problem unnecessarily complicated.
Read this understanding that I agree with you basically, but don't necessarily think its all that simple.
If one doesn't apply the cultural interpretation as a "way out" for verses 11 and 12, why does modern Christianity use it for verses 8-10?
"I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness--with good works." - 1 Timothy 2:8-10 (ESV)
Last time I checked we don't force men to raise their hands when we pray and let women braid their hair, wear gold, pearls, and expensive clothing (some traditions even require expensive clothing on Sundays out of "respect" for God).
I haven't read the book, but is that section necessarily related to the order of creation after the Fall? Paul says "I desire;" does this mean it's similar to 1 Corinthians 7 where it's Paul talking, and not God? Obviously the principles would still apply, but I'm going to have to think about that a bit more.
Post a Comment