My Friend Indie Makes a Lot of Sense
Indie has a new post about women being ordained and affirmed. It's well written with great perspective. And I couldn't agree more.
Go read it all here.
Go read it all here.
|
This is where I blogged for like 5 years. Now, I'm at SamDavidson.net. Check it out.
Comments (6)
8:28 AM
Thanks for the link. I thoroughly enjoyed the article and the websites about breastfeeding and cloth diapers?!?
I noticed the article about Michele Racusin mentioned only a small portion or scripture and that was only to argue against female preisthood. What are your thoughts on those scriptures and how should we interpret them?
9:29 AM
I don't usually respond to anonymous comments, but I feel this topic is important.
Those scriptures were written by men during a time and in a culture with deeply embedded patriarchy. They made sense in the time and place they were authored.
But, I believe we are no longer bound by such scriptural minutia (like many other recommendations and prohibitions). God’s universal call to love, equality, and justice is bigger than one person’s writings and another person’s interpretation.
With that in mind, I do not believe I am in a place to determine whether or not someone is ‘called.’ That is a very private and holy matter between the called and the Caller. However, should someone believe they are called, and that call is contrary to God’s larger call for humanity to love mercy, seek justice and walk humbly with God, I will question the authenticity of that call. But in this case, where a call is questioned due to the lack of a penis, I think that it is plain ridiculous to question.
I wholeheartedly confirm and promote female leadership at all levels in the church.
11:36 AM
Thanks for replying. I think you make good points, but there must be more differences between men and women aside from genitalia, and none of which should be considered negative but embraced. I guess this is a tough issue in my mind because the scripture specifically outlines roles in marriage, which are then compared to the structure of church.
What are your thoughts on the roles for marriage?
I appreciate your response and would not like to signup for an account.
11:56 AM
Anonymous friend,
I respect your nonviolent resistance to Blogger.
When you say there are specific roles for marriage, what are you referring to? I need you to be a little more detailed here, since marriage in the Bible is sometimes arranged and sometimes looks like polygamy. But again, we've got to remember that these roles were defined in a day in age much different than ours, when women wed at 14, had babies soon thereafter, when no one commuted to work or played little league, or worked for internet companies or joined fraternities.
In terms of 'roles,' I think each marriage is unique. Having certain genitalia at birth does not necessarily pre-qualify someone to take care of finances, cook, or hunt and gather. Each spouse should determine with their partner what their responsibilities should be in the relationship.
9:02 AM
Rather than going back and forth, I'm going to take a stab at this. Please feel free to criticize the assumptions I'll make.
Based on your responses it sounds like the only truth in Christianity are the three tenets mentioned in your first response, which I agree form the core of Christianity. However, you also give the impression everything else in the Bible, primarily
written by Paul, would be considered relative to the context of culture, and therefore is most likely irrelevant to us. It also
sounds like our daily lives and the many decisions involved are not subject to Biblical teaching, because of the impossibility of
understanding moral teachings in the context of our modern world with its vastly different situations (???). But should the advent of technology render these teachings meaningless? Would you consider actively seeking to glorify God a 4th central tenet to Christianity? And how do you do so without the guidance of scripture as it relates to specific issues?
The scripture I was referring to is found in Ephesians and talks about husbands being the head of the household as Christ is the head of the Church. I think it is far fetched to say this has something to do with finances or cooking or hunting and gathering, and I don't see the correlation to 14 year old wives, polygamists or any specific group. I do see how this could lead us to understand God's intention for marriage, and the Church. I guess the question in all this is if we should disregard the scripture that talks about certain aspects of the church, and if churches that read the scripture with these intentions should be criticized?
Matt
9:46 AM
Matt,
You make some excellent points.
If we're honest, we all pick and choose a little from Biblical texts to determine what we want to keep and what we want to get rid of. I can only assume that you don't greet people with a holy kiss (Romans 16:16); you probably don't think kids who disobey their parents are worthy of death (Romans 1:30); and you probably don't think that the whole 'women submitting to their husbands thing' applies if the husband is beating the living crap out of the wife.
We've got to be smart how we use the Bible. Lots of times we use it as a weapon, poking and prodding people so they will know that we are right and that they are wrong. But, the God I believe in (and the God I see throughout the life of Jesus) is the God who posits that it is more important to love our neighbors than to be right.
This is why, for me, the Bible is a great way to understand God, but not THE way. It is not the end-all be-all of who God is and can be. It is a great story of how people have understood God in the past, some of which may hold true for those of us wanting to experience God in the future. The problem with making the Bible as big as God is that if something were to happen so that something in this God-Bible were proven wrong or errant, then the whole system crumbles, like a brick wall; if you take out one brick, all you'll be left with is a mess.
But, Rob Bell uses the trampoline analogy. The point of a trampoline is to jump. It's malleable. It gives. And the springs are the finer points of doctrine that you and I are discussing. There's some give to them, since they were written at a certain point in history. You and I may differ as to how they bend and how far they can stretch, but the point is not the springs. The point is to jump. And so we jump, catapulting off of love, mercy and justice, the things that most of us will agree are important to God.
And what works for me? In my marriage, those big three (love, justice and mercy) is what we're focusing on. My wife doesn't submit to me, and I don't lead her (unless we're in a narrow cave). We walk together because we can better carry out God's love, mercy and justice when we walk together.
For you, you may need to lead someone and your wife may need to submit to someone, and by doing so, you two may carry out God's call better. But your truth is not THE truth for all marriages for all time, just as Paul's suggestion was not meant to be emulated forever.
Sam
Post a Comment