by Rev. Al Kirk
“Grandad, I poopie,” the voice of a toddler standing next to the arm of my chair. The response was immediate and direct: “Grandad doesn’t do poopie. Grandad does wet. See your Nana.” It seems that women are saddled with the nastier things in life. They are the ones who change the diapers and clean up vomit. Biblically, it was the women who were on the way to the tomb that morning to complete burial preparations for the Lord. The men on Friday evening had laid him in the tomb, wrapped the body in a linen cloth with a hundred pounds of myrrh and aloes, and considered their job done.
I remember from visits to my uncle’s farm that it was Aunt Monty who was up before everyone else to prepare a breakfast of eggs, meat, biscuits, potatoes, and pie for the men in the family before they started for the fields. And the women, of course, ate last.
In times of civic unrest, it is women who are most vulnerable. In Biblical times they were booty, chattel, property to be used or sold as slaves for others to use. In the tribal conflicts of Africa, in the protests of Egypt, they are publically raped and discarded. In India even riding on public transportation may place a female in danger. Let’s face it. Too often women are considered second class citizens—things to be enjoyed.
The question is to what extent do we as a church foster this belief? Think of the long road within our own denomination for women to have the right to vote on congregational matters. It took synodical action to grant permission for women to hold office within the church, and even then it was restricted to those offices which did not touch upon [or sully?] the role of the pastor. Even now, we hear voices “Ah, pastor, if you let women take over the leadership of the congregation, then the men will withdraw.” That isn’t a women problem. That’s a men problem. We restrict the presidency within our university system to males, and, God forbid, that a woman be chosen to teach in one of our theological faculties. In many of our congregations the thought of a woman handing communion elements to a parishioner is anathema, but it is acceptable for them to tend to the preparation and clean up afterward. I was told by a fellow pastor that women should not be within the altar rail. Who then is going to change the paraments and altar cloths? Who is going to vacuum the carpet? We are quick to point out that Scripture says that wives are to be subject to their husbands, and overlook the preceding words of joint subjectivity. We argue from the “order of creation,” and don’t acknowledge the possibility that in God’s eyes creation may be cumulative with the woman as the crown of His creative effort. We ignore the fact that God decided to create humans in His image without distinction according to gender [“in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” Genesis 1:27]
I sat with an early morning men’s Bible class to listen to a video presentation by a prominent leader in men’s ministry. At one point he referred disparagingly to those “Galatian Christians.” It was obvious who he meant—those who are quick to quote Paul’s words from 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.” St. Paul will probably never be nominated as a leader in the Women’s Rights movement, but he does leave some rather interesting hints. Theologically he would not argue that the Jew is more important than the Gentile, nor a free man than a slave. Then why would he argue that a man is more important than a woman? In Ephesians 5:21 he clearly states that we are to “be subject to one another out of reverence to Christ.” This, I would offer, applies not only to wives and husbands, but serves as the thesis statement of the verses that follow—wives and husbands, parents and children, slaves and masters. Each is to be subject to the other out of reverence to Christ.
Within Christianity today there is a refocusing on mission. The congregation, which I am presently serving, is a member of the Transforming Churches Network and is intentionally “thinking outside the walls.” That is in keeping with the mission that the Lord so clearly gave to the Church—go, make disciples, baptize, teach. If God is serious about the mission, and we must assume that He is, then it would appear incumbent on us to use all of the resources with which He has provided, including human resources, to accomplish the mission. Rather than focus on roles, should we not rather focus on gifts? There are many gifted people among us and the gifts do not appear to be allocated on the basis of gender. Certainly there are women among us who are experienced, credentialed, and capable of serving as the president of one of our universities. I can think of several off the top of my head. In one of the congregations that I served as an interim, there was a group of four women to whom I could turn if I needed something accomplished. One of the group had extensive experience in local government. Another had a business background. Two others were doctors’ wives. They brought their experience and expertise to bear on the task assigned [and, by the way, all were in their late twenties or early thirties, and each had small children].
The Church, I believe, has a dual responsibility in today’s society. The first is missional. If we are to accomplish the task that the Lord has assigned to His people, then we must be prepared to utilize all of the resources with which He has provided us. We must do it on the basis of gifts without regard for traditional gender roles. Within the broader society we as a Church must promote the equality of women, their right to physical and economic security, and their right to develop and employ the talents with which God has endowed them.
Al Kirk
Interim Pastor