[Vision2020] Can the women leave? Was kirker Shopping Regs

[keely emerinemix]

Paul,

It is more than a little jarring to read item #8, isn't it?  And I 
understand your ambivalence -- on the one hand, it certainly has a sexist 
ring to it and puts the woman under the rule of both her husband and her 
pastor, and yet, these women probably could renounce their membership in the 
church if these restrictions and the attitudes that inform them are too 
distasteful, right?

But it's not that easy.  Most conservative Christian churches are entrenched 
in patriarchy, having missed the message of reconciliation in Christ by 
focusing on a few Pauline passages in the New Testament that were written in 
specific cultural contexts.  This, of course, violates a basic principle of 
Biblical interpretation, and that is that difficult or unclear  passages 
must be exegeted in light of the totality of Biblical doctrine and teaching. 
  I believe that most of these conservative Christian churches and their 
congregants would be repelled at the idea of a majority group maintaining 
control over a (sociological) minority group on the basis of three or four 
questionable passages, and would rightly denounce bigotry and bad 
scholarship.  But sexism in the church has been assumed to be honorable, or 
at least benign, and somehow necessary for a full understanding of our 
Creator God.  It isn't honorable, it isn't benign, and it's an impediment to 
a proper understanding of the God who is revealed in Scripture as both 
female and male, without being a man or a woman.

Christ Church practices a relatively "hard" patriarchy that, coupled with 
what I think is inordinate influence over the flock by its purported 
shepherds, all male, is potentially -- and actually -- more harmful than the 
"soft" patriarchy that other evangelicals live out.  In addition, the 
emphasis on being a covenant family formed by the complete sovereignty of 
God, extending even to infant baptism and toddler participation in communion 
(which most evangelical churches frown upon, believing that both deny the 
necessity of informed, of-age willingness to trust Christ), makes it 
enormously difficult for women to leave a church situation that their 
"covenant head" insists they stay in.  In fact, Wilson counsels women (and, 
to be fair, men) to discuss their spouse's disagreement with Kirk polity 
with the elders.  In other words, if Mary's husband develops a 
core-conscience objection to a teaching, instruction, or practice of the 
church, or even states his disagreement with the elders, Mary knows that she 
should talk to the elders about it -- it's not only encouraged but expected. 
  At this point, "submission" to her husband as head of the household 
appears to be less than an ironclad requirement.  And if Mary were to get 
out of line, the expectation is that her covenant head -- her husband -- 
rehabilitates her by "lovingly" laying out a course of action for her to 
follow.  If she proves to be intractable, he then ought to go to the elders. 
  Please note that these are not instructions for those suffering from 
spousal abuse, or for those who've witnessed a crime committed by their 
spouses, but for dissent and the always-available Kirk accusations of 
"bitterness."  Under this structure, how safe can a woman feel, particularly 
if the threat of losing custody of children is assumed to be part of the 
risk of divorce?

Very well, some might say. Any woman who chafes under such restrictions but 
loves the church and adheres to the rest of its teachings can simply choose 
to stay single, right?  Well, she could . . . but Wilson's enthusiastic 
endorsement of marriage-as-normative-state, and his and his wife's glowing 
review of Debra Maken's "Getting Serious About Getting Married:  Rethinking 
The Gift Of Singleness," which insists that God has commanded people to 
marry, period; and the cultural of pairing off that pervades the Kirk, all 
make it exceedingly uncomfortable to be an unmarried adult at Christ Church, 
particularly if singleness is chosen.  A century or so ago, many devoted 
Christian women purposed to stay unmarried so they could preach, teach, 
travel and work for the Gospel as ordained or lay ministers, choosing the 
unencumbered life of austere, bookish singleness.  The message women get 
from Christ Church is one that utterly eliminates full-time ministry as a 
noble choice; instead, the elders  prefer that women marry, bear lots of 
children, set a pretty table and learn from their mothers-in-law how to cook 
their husbands' favorite childhood meals.   It's a pretty poor substitute, 
as far as I'm concerned, but it has horrific effects on the Kingdom of God 
and on any woman who experiences an epiphany of liberation in Christ while 
under the rule of her menfolk, spousal and ecclesiastical.

And that's why a lot of us speak out, Paul.  Many of the teachings and 
practices of Christ Church are not benign; not beneficial to men, women, 
family, or society; and are not Biblical.  To a disciple of Jesus, it 
matters.  I follow a Savior whose message of restoration, redemption, and 
reconciliation is the reason I use the gifts given to me with the boldness 
and joy that I do.  Any less would be a sin, and God have mercy on the women 
who can't or don't use their gifts, and on the men who hold them down.

keely




From: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
To: vision2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] kirker Shopping Regs
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:59:04 -0800

I would also like to point out that they simply suggested some extra
rules when dealing with people of their own faith while doing business.
For example, chastising someone who is not of their church for being
"unbiblical" wouldn't necessarily go far.  They don't say anywhere that
members of their church have to patronize brothers of the church with
their business, they  just give some rules they should follow for when
they do.  They also specifically state that they need no explanation for
going to some other business for "normal" reasons (such as price or
distance).

I don't agree with their theological views, but if you have entered into
their faith you are agreeing to abide by their rules.  I don't see any
problem with that.

I am still trying to parse rule 8 though: "Wives, do not do an end run
around your husband.  If he has said that you are not going to spend any
money on whatever it is, then you should not try to get the service
without spending any money.  This just turns one sin into two."  Anyway,
those wives presumably have the freedom to renounce their religions if
they feel they are too sexist.  I don't understand their reasoning about
the role of women in their church, and probably wouldn't agree with it
if I did understand it, but as long as the women in question are there
by their own choice, then there is no problem.  I hope the church is
being very careful to make this clear to everyone involved, because the
opportunity for abuse here is great.

Paul

Pat Kraut wrote:

 >I wonder if you are aware that many churches publish an in house business
 >directory? The first one I saw I believe was at St Marys here in town. I 
do
 >not know of any churches that issist that members only buy from that
 >directory. They are published with the idea that if you are seeking a
 >certain service it could be nice to work with a like minded christian. If 
CC
 >has one it could be just something that is practiced by many others.
 >
 >
 >
 >

=======================================================
  List services made available by First Step Internet,
  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
                http://www.fsr.net
           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

_________________________________________________________________
Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on your 
Live.com page. 
http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701