Theology for Women

Forty years ago Pope Paul VI released a statement on contraception that, looking back, was stunningly prophetic.

The essay, entitled Humanae Vitae (”Of Human Life”), was written at a time in American history when contraceptive pills were becoming very popular. Women across the country were celebrating their newfound freedom as the history of American sexuality turned a new page.

The Catholic Church, however, was singing a different tune. Unlike the many women who rejoiced over the changing cultural tides, the Pope raised a voice of concern–a concern that we can now see was completely warranted.

Although the Catholic Church’s position on contraception has been debated among Christians (Catholics put a heavy priority on the procreative purpose of sex,whereas many other Christians do not), there is one point on which the Pope was completely right.

If only we’d listened.

What follows is an excerpt from Humanae Vitae in which Pope Paul VI projects the cultural implications of contraception. His predictions could not have been more accurate, and I have posted this today because of the profound impact it has had for women since:

Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.

Did you get that?

FORTY YEARS AGO, Pope Paul VI predicted the exact situation that we find ourselves in today. He warned that the practice of hormonal contraception would divorce the responsibility of sex from the act of sex. He also feared that, as a result of this divorce, men would no longer need to guard the sanctity of sex, thereby leading them to treat women and sex in a recklessly casual way.

And his fears came true.

Sex without consequences. That is what the contraceptive revolution bought our country. And what do you think happens when we cheapen the price of a costly good? We no longer value it quite so highly.

Pope Paul VI was exactly right.

So while the contraceptive pill seemed like a gateway to women’s freedom and a means for valuing the female life even more, it instead devalued women, giving men the freedom to use them for sexual gratification without weighing the implications of their actions.

Now I write all of this not as a diatribe against the practice of contraception, but to caution us about considering the ideological impacts of the decisions we make. Just because science develops a solution to making our lives easier or providing us with a convenient short-cut does not mean we should embrace it.

Whenever we seek to relieve ourselves of divinely placed forms of accountability and responsibility, we forget that God created those measures for our own protection. Sex is about more than just procreation, but the fact that sexual intercourse leads to the birth of a new human life should cause us to approach the act of sex soberly and reverently.

While the contraceptive pill can’t take all the blame for the objectification of women and the number of absent fathers in our nation, it certainly played its own part. In a consumer-driven culture that wants what it wants right now, we have taken a thousand tiny steps in the wrong direction, and those tiny steps add up to a society that has wandered horribly off the path of truth.

No, the contraceptive pill is not, in itself, an evil, but blank-check contraceptive practices do not coincide well with a Scriptural view on marriage, family and sex. It is time we start examining why. I hope you will ask yourself that question.

Right now I am sitting on a plane that is somewhere between Minneapolis and Raleigh-Durham. This weekend I was in Albuquerque, NM for a family reunion, and even though the idea of a family reunion might sound kinda lame, just picture a large band of Hoddes wandering around random tourist attractions like the Rattlesnake Museum and a landmark commemorating the “Skirmish of Albuquerque.”

(You’d really think they could’ve come up with a manlier title than “skirmish.” It sounds like they just stood around and slapped one another with gloves in between exchanging verbal insults.)

Yes, the Hodde clan is a colorful bunch. Between my uncle sneaking up behind people and making farting noises, and the stories about UFO abductions (no one in my family has experienced this personally, but apparently it happens a lot in Albuquerque?), there was never a dull moment.

On the flight from Albuquerque to Minneapolis I also had an interesting experience, but of a different kind. I happened to sit right next to a Catholic priest named Father Stephen, and we spent the entire flight discussing theology, ministry, and the Gospel.

Father Stephen has a parish in New Mexico, but he is also heavily involved in the pro-life movement and we had a fascinating conversation about it. In particular, he had some tremendous insights into the role of men in the current abortion crisis. As Father Stephen explained, the sin of Adam in the Garden of Eden is still very much alive in the practice of abortion today.

What follows is the logic behind this very astute conclusion:

Adam’s sin in the Garden was a failure to lead. Rather than protect Eve and dispute the serpent, he sat by and let her make a decision that negatively affected both of them. Ironically, when it came time to place blame, Adam pointed directly at Eve. As far as he was concerned it was ALL HER FAULT. End of story.

But it wasn’t all her fault, was it? God had given Adam moral responsibility for Eve by giving Adam His commands before Eve’s creation. Of the two, Adam should have seen right through the serpent’s lie, and he should have taken responsibility for caring for Eve. But he didn’t. Instead, he let Eve take full responsibility.

And therein lies Adam’s sin.

Yet this story is not unlike many of the scenarios playing out today, particularly in regard to abortion. Men are failing to step up and take a stand when women need them to.

In his own experience, Father Stephen has witnessed countless women go to their boyfriends or husbands and ask, “Do you think I should have this baby?” The man then responds, “It’s up to you,” which she interprets to mean, “I don’t really want this baby.”

So the woman aborts the child, thinking she’s done what the man secretly wanted. Meanwhile, the man washes his hands of it. And if it ever becomes obvious that abortion was the wrong decision, he can easily point to her and blame, “I left it up to her. It was all her decision.”

Sound familiar?

It is the story of Adam and Eve playing out over and over again, thousands of years later. Just like Eve, women today need men to step up and support them.

You see, there are two crucial parts of the decision making process that a woman must consider in light of an unexpected pregnancy: whether your significant other wants the child, and whether you’ll be able to take care of the child. Both of these questions are easily resolved when men take responsibility for the choices they have made.

That said, women need men to help them while they’re pregnant, take care of the baby once it’s born, or even help them with the adoption process if that is the path she needs to take. And most of all, before the baby is even born, the man needs to voice his desire to keep the child and love the child. Such words of affirmation can make all the difference in saving the life of a baby.

Now at this point you may object: “What if the man is absent or refuses to support the pregnancy? How can we possibly address the countless scenarios in which men fail to step up?” Well it is here that we remember Paul’s teachings about Christ—he is the second Adam, the one to reverse the curse, which means that Adam’s failure was not the final word.

Similarly, the absence of men in the family today does not mean the family is doomed. Even when “Adam” fails today, Christ steps in to make things right. Christ fills that gap and heals the world that Adam and Eve left broken.

And how does Christ do that? Through the Church. As the Body of Christ, we are the hands and feet of Jesus, so we are a part of the curse reversal. We are the ones to step in when fallen men repeat the sin of Adam. We are the agents of healing, renewal, and protection for this world. That is our job, so while we must certainly challenge men to stand up and fill the role that God created for them, we cannot waste time placing blame. That is what Adam did.

So as much as we want the government to fix our problems for us, we have a far more reliable Savior for that job. Christ, through his Church, can effect the healing we long to see in our broken country, and we are a part of that plan.

That said, we must stop waiting around for someone else to do the hard work for us. When we lazily complain about the state of abortion in our country and do nothing but point fingers at our liberals policy makers, we do little more than perpetuate the sin of Adam. Instead, let’s stop waiting around, and let’s do something.
What are you doing?

With the recent nomination of Sarah Palin for Republican VP, the feminist movement has taken a very unexpected turn. 

On the one hand, she’s taking a giant step forward for women. She speaks of breaking the glass ceiling and she’s aspiring to hold a political position that no women has ever before attained.  

And in an even more shocking turn of events, we are now hearing Conservatives use language that has traditionally been attributed to feminists. They argue that anyone who questions Palin’s candidacy in light of her family responsibilities is a blatant sexist. Conservatives also point out that no one ever asks Barack Obama that question, so they firmly defend Palin’s equal right to political opportunity.  

Yet traditional feminists are befuddled, if not frustrated by Palin. Why? Because she is a new breed of feminist, opposing many of the views that feminism has typically held. She is not pro-choice, and she does not support same-sex marriage. She is a Conservative, and she promotes an ideology that feminists have historically assumed to be inherently anti-woman.  

Such a development is fascinating, as well as enlightening. It reveals that the feminist movement has not represented women nearly as holistically as they have claimed. Rather, it has represented a particular brand of women, a brand that excludes a large portion of women in America today. 

But how did this come to be? In their quest to further the cause of women, how have feminists divided women? The answer is quite simple–they have done so by committing the same crime that they sought to amend. In response to a brand of womanhood that was seen as narrow and oppressive to women, they sought to redefine womanhood, but they redefined it in just as narrow a category as their predecessors.  

Feminism reacted against a  school of thought that placed women solely in the home raising the children. Women were not allowed to vote or hold positions of leadership, so they were also discouraged from pursuing higher education. The feminist movement felt that women had more to offer the world, and that the female voice needed to be heard.

As a result, feminists sought equal status and opportunity with men.  Yet in this process, some feminists have over-reacted, belittling motherhood and bashing men. Not all feminists have done this, but the movement has digressed enough that it has developed specific, narrow standards by which true feminism is measured. If you do not conform to these standards, then you are, by definition, opposed to the movement itself.  

The problem with this development is that it does not account for the diversity of women that we find in the world. Yes, some women are ambitious and aspire to be doctors, lawyers, investment bankers, etc. But some women desire to be stay-at-home moms and that is all they’ve ever wanted to be. Is it somehow less noble that these women want to spend their time pouring into the children who will one day be the leaders of our country? By no means, but it is not a role that has been touted as furthering the cause of women.  

In seeking to correct the culture’s understanding of womanhood, feminism has committed the error it sought to correct. Both ends of the spectrum, extreme conservatives and extreme liberals, define womanhood far too narrowly, and thereby exclude other women as somehow being less feminine. 

And that is a dangerous game to play. When you make that move, you no longer encourage women to pursue their inherently female strengths, and a woman’s femininity is no longer defined by God. Women are instead pressured to conform to a mold, which will ironically limit them instead of giving them greater freedom.  

That is why this new development in feminism is so exciting. The feminist movement is taking on a new texture as more and more voices contribute to its direction. And as Christian women, we shouldn’t miss out. Rather than bite the hand that fed us by condemning the feminist movement which gave us the rights that we have today, we should rise up and add our voices to the conversation. Women constitute a powerful force in our society, so we need to take responsibility for helping to direct it.  

We must, however, avoid the pitfalls inherent in the feminist movement. Namely, we must be wary of becoming too woman-centric either. Ultimately, that is where feminism has gone awry, as well any movement that does not have Christ at the center. Feminism has the tendency to focus solely on women (as the name implies), thus leading feminists to occasionally trample other causes that interfere with their own. 

That is exactly what has transpired in the pro-life debate–the life of a child becomes an obstacle in the life of a woman, so the child is eliminated.

But we must be Christ-centered feminists. What does such a feminism look like? It is a feminism that values women as being equal to men, just as Genesis describes. It fights for the image of God in woman, defending their role in the Body of Christ, acknowledging that women add a crucial dynamic to the Kingdom of God.  

HOWEVER, Christ-centered feminism is a feminism that never subjugates the Gospel to the cause of women. Yes, God can be glorified through women and we should do everything in our power to protect that glory, but sometimes God is glorified in our sacrifice and humility as well.  When our cause threatens to override the good and pleasing will of God, then we must cease and desist. But you know, that’s what’s best for women anyway. When we think that the two agendas are at odds, we deceive ourselves. What is good for the Gospel is always good for women. It may not appear to be so at the time, but if God is faithful, and He is, we can trust this to be true. Be a strong woman, but be a strong Christ-centered woman.

This past week Barack Obama and John McCain appeared together at Rick Warren’s church for a discussion of their beliefs. Although I was slightly weirded out that the event was hosted by a church, I was pleased that Warren pushed them on issues relevant to evangelical Christians, particular that of abortion.

For me, the topic of abortion is a very central one. One’s stance on abortion reveals a lot about one’s understanding of the value of human life. Period.

HOWEVER, just because you are opposed to abortion does not mean you are consistently pro-life, and that is what I want to discuss today.

To be pro-life is to value all life, across all ethnic and class lines. And while I don’t want to go into all the details of how that might play out, there is one instance that I want to highlight here:

How does one’s pro-life ideology relate to birth control?

Now before I dive into this, let me give you a little bit of background as to why this has been on my mind of late. You see, recently I’ve been seeing a commercial that irks me every time it airs. In the commercial, a woman stands in the foreground describing all that could happen to her in the next 5 years–she could get a promotion, buy a new house, coach soccer, move to Memphis or finally finish a book.

“But,” the commercial continues, “if your plans don’t include having a baby, then consider taking _______. ”

I then checked out the contraceptive’s website, and it’s all about having a worry-free, hassle-free life.

Now is it me, or are a lot of birth control commercials now sounding just like this? There’s another commercial that bemoans the hardship of having to take a pill every day and how inconvenient that can be. Why not simplify your life with a once a month shot? Or an IUD that you NEVER had to think about? Then you don’t have to deal with the annoyance of daily birth control. What a relief!

The language of these commercials is what gets me–worry free? Hassle free? That’s the same kind of thing you hear about vacations, buying a car, ab workouts, or 30 minute meals. But birth control? They talk about time and sacrifice as if it’s a bad thing, but when it comes to family and children, is “quick and easy” really the best approach?

It is clear from commercials like these that the culture has turned birth control into just another instant gratification means to getting the life you want. A baby is not convenient for me right now, so I’m gonna take a little pill that prevents the unpleasantness of an unwanted child.

And herein lies the problem: when we treat birth control that way, we find ourselves using the exact same language as the pro-choice camp. We treat children as being valuable on a conditional basis. Only when they come at certain, predetermined times are we really excited to have them. Otherwise, they can stand in the way of getting what we want on the time line we want it.

All of this is not to say that birth control is in itself wrong. There is something to be said for being responsible–I wouldn’t have unprotected sex with my husband anymore than I would drive without a seat belt. Trusting God doesn’t mean letting the chips fall where they may. There is a degree to which we must take responsibility for our own actions, and be good stewards of what we have.

But our motives for doing so should be distinctly different than the world’s.

And something else to consider–some birth controls affect the lining of the uterus, making it difficult for an egg to attach to the wall of the uterus. In such cases, it is still possible to get pregnant, but we are, in a sense, creating an inhospitable environment for our potential children. It’s like we’re saying, “I’ll take you, but only if you can survive in the hostile environment I’ve created for you.” That’s not exactly a pro-life attitude is it?

What’s more, artificial birth control requires the very least sacrifice and thought on our parts. Natural birth control demands that we be thoughtful and intentional about our bodies and our sex lives, in a way that taking a pill each day does not. When we take a pill, we don’t have to think about it quite as carefully, which I find a bit worrying. If we call ourselves a people who value family highly and want to discerningly protect it, such an instant gratification approach should cause us to pause and examine ourselves.

It is for all of these reasons that I will seriously have to pray through whether or not to take birth control whenever I get married. There are still natural methods of birth control, so if I don’t take a pill or an IUD, then I will certainly practice natural methods until we feel God calling us to intentionally expand our family. But in the meantime I’m trying to discern what it means to practice “pro-life” with my body and in my language about human life.

Please don’t misunderstand me to mean that taking a contraceptive is morally wrong or counter to Scripture, because that is not at all what I mean. There are certainly times when we are not yet able to provide the life that our children deserve, and in those cases I believe that contraceptives are warranted.

But if it’s simply a matter of inconvenience, if it’s a matter of not having the quality of life you would want to have, not being able to afford all the luxuries you would otherwise be able to have, then be wary. I know a lot of people who say, “We can’t afford to have a baby right now,” but in reality, that’s not really true. If they accidentally got pregnant, they would be just fine–they’d just have to cut corners a bit more. So when we find ourselves speaking about babies that way, we must be honest with ourselves and admit that we are talking about children using the same language as the world.

When it’s all said and done, I don’t have any prescriptive wisdom or a concrete answer to give. I honestly and sincerely believe that each couple should prayerfully make their own decision, and whatever position they come to is right for them. But be sure to ask yourselves how your language about that decision differs from the world. Ask yourselves how the orientation of your heart differs from the world’s. Is this an area of your life that you have totally surrendered to God, or are you wanting to hold a tight grip of control on it, under the guise of being responsible with your resources?

To be pro-life is to value life to the utmost, no matter when or how it comes. That is what I offer here, so let us be Christians who live out our beliefs in every corner of our lives, and lifestyles. Please pray about what that looks like in your own life.

I will never forget the first time I saw a documentary on the life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. In case you are unfamiliar with this great defender of the faith, he lived in Germany during Hitler’s rule, and he was one of the only Christians in the entire country to resist the Nazis. In fact, he and a small band of Christians devised an assassination plot against Hitler. They were almost successful in their attempt, but the plan failed and they were all discovered. Bonhoeffer was subsequently executed.

The reason I loved the documentary so much is that it got me excited about my own faith. Bonhoeffer seemed like the equivalent of a Christian super hero–he stood firm against all odds in the face of clear evil. He fought valiantly, in the name of Christ, and he died for a noble cause.

I want to be a part of such a fight, in which the stakes are high and much is to be lost, but I lay down my life because I am a Christian, and that is my calling. I want to be remembered for standing unflinchingly against the powers of evil. I wanna be like Wonderwoman! Except the Christian version (which would probably have sleeves and knee-length shorts).

And I know that I’m not alone in feeling this way. Many women read about the lives of Jim Eliot, Martin Luther King, or women like Perpetua (who I wrote about last month), Christians who all fought and died for the sake of the Gospel. We read about these individuals, and it stirs something deep within us.

It stirs our inner warrior, that part of us that knows we were created to fight mighty battles on behalf of Christ. We are reminded of what our soul has known all along–that our calling is high and the struggle is great, but we will not have lived if we did not wage this war. We want to rise up and be women of valor, to live and die for something bigger than ourselves.

This desire, this calling, is written on the very foundation of my heart. And I know it is written on yours as well.

But what has become of this call to arms? Are we content to experience the fleeting exhilaration of a good sermon or an inspiring story, and then go back to our mediocre lives, never truly tasting greatness?

I think we are. We have become content to settle, and I see this in the way women talk about church leadership. When we discuss our future roles in the church, we do not use that kind of inspiring language. We do not refer to the imagery of epic battles and spiritual warfare. We leave that to the boys.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard women say “I feel called to marry a pastor” or “I want to marry a church planter.” Heck, I’ve said it myself! But it’s not often that you hear women talk about their own calling to ministry, their own desire to start a church where no church has gone before, their own sweeping visions for the Kingdom of God.

But regardless of where you stand on the topic of women in ministry, there is a degree to which women are unequivocally called to plant churches and lead within the church. Why? Because no person can plant a church alone. No person can lead a congregation alone. It takes a team of visionaries, a group of hard workers with varying gifts to pull off such an undertaking.

So even if you feel that only men should be senior pastors, a minister is nothing without fellow church planters, both male and female. You never hear about a solitary pastor starting a church in his apartment by preaching to his living room furniture and his dog. Instead, you hear about a team of individuals, couples, families and singles who begin meeting and worshiping together, all with one shared goal for their community–the spread of the Gospel.

That said, women are definitely called to be church planters. While there are certainly instances in which a woman must work or stay at home so that her husband is freed up to focus solely on starting a church, that is not the only role that women can fill. If your husband is called to plant a church, then you are not merely “the wife of a church planter”–YOU are a church planter! The two of you are likely called to the same purpose, so you’re not simply tagging along for the ride. Your husband needs a co-laborer who will build him up, spur him on, fill in the ministry gaps that he is not gifted to fill. He needs a fellow soldier who will wield a sword alongside of him.

And if you are single and feel called to church planting, don’t just wait around for a husband who feels the same way. Perhaps God wants you to take action now, to jump on board with a team of people who are praying towards the same end. You can lend your time, experience, training, education, and leadership wherever you are. The church certainly needs it.

Regardless of your circumstances, take ownership of the desire that God has written onto your female heart. Men are not the only ones who God calls to be warriors–the moment you committed to follow Christ, you became a part of a cosmic battle in which you are expected to fight. We are all soldiers together, so take hold of the call to which God is compelling you, and take up your sword. The forces of evil will quake with fear and dread if you will only rise up and respond to God’s battle cry. It’s time to fight like a girl.

This past week a couple in Florida was awarded $21 million from a jury citing the “wrongful birth” of their child. Apparently the couple’s first child had suffered from severe birth defects, but because the doctor had misdiagnosed the defects, not realizing they were genetic, the couple had a second child with the exact same problem. The couple then claimed that had they known their first child’s birth defects were genetic, then they would have terminated the second pregnancy. Unfortunately they are now burdened with the full-time care of two handicapped children, instead of just one.

Interestingly, the nature of the case has some legal implications which may prevent the couple from being awarded the full $21 million. In response to the politics surrounding the case, the couple’s lawyer was quoted as saying, “I believe that this case is so powerful and this tragedy was so preventable and is so poignant, that it is the kind of case that should rise above the fray and rise above party politics.”

That statement makes my stomach turn–what exactly is the tragedy here? That a less than perfect child was born? I can’t imagine how that would make me feel if my parents thought of me as a tragedy. Not good, I bet.

Now I have to admit that there is a part of me that sympathizes with the couple. Caring for a child with a handicap costs a lot of time and money, and not all families are financially able to do so. I don’t know the financial situation of this particular family, but I imagine that if they’d known their next child would have the same defects, they would have probably tried to avoid getting pregnant at all. As a result, this misinformation may have very well put them in a difficult situation. But, I still can’t get over the lawyer’s words. A life was created and brought into this world, and even though it doesn’t meet our American standards, I hardly think labeling the child as a “tragedy” is appropriate–a child with a handicap is by no means comparable to natural disasters or fatal car accidents.

So while I sympathize with the couple, the entire situation seems to reflect more on our culture’s view of children than it does the mere circumstances. Just last week I was watching a show on MTV called “Engaged and Underaged” in which a young couple had decided to get married after having a baby together. You can imagine my shock and horror as I watched the young mother listen to her future mother-in-law berate her for having had the baby. The groom’s mother didn’t want the couple to get married, and when the teenage girl explained that she wanted to be married for the sake of the baby, the woman exclaimed, “Well I told you not to have the baby in the first place! Whose fault is that?!?!” (fyi, this was said while the baby boy was sitting right there…clearly a very sweet family moment)

I can’t get over the fact that this woman talked about her grandchild like that. You would have thought she was talking about buying pants that were too tight, or some other material product that we can return if it displeases or inconveniences us. But just like the lawyer in the Florida story, she simply saw this child’s birth as a “tragedy.”

That is the world we live in. Everything in this world is assigned value based on what it can or cannot do for us–even humans. This is clearly the result of massive self-centeredness, but it has frightening implications, because it robs anything of its inherent worth. Taken to the extreme, there are some secular philosophers and ethicists who believe that babies and old people have little inherent worth because of their inability to care for themselves, anticipate the future, or contribute to society. Because of this thinking, some people have concluded that it is not altogether immoral to let such beings die.

And while that example is extreme, we must not deceive ourselves into thinking we are untouched by this part of our culture’s thinking. This mentality has shaped almost every one of us to some degree or another. In any circumstance in which we see fit to sacrifice another person’s life for a greater cause, we are putting a price on their life. We consider their life to be less valuable than the cause itself, a cause that can be war, peace, politics, religion, or simply the American dream. Almost all of us have figured out ways to devalue other people’s humanity if it stands in the way of what we want. Even on a less violent level, women will insult and dehumanize other women that they are jealous of. If a girl is standing in the way of you feeling confident about yourself, then by all means make fun of her, call her a slut, and slander her. Don’t think about the fact that she has a mother and a father, that she has a heart and a soul, or that she was made in the image of God.

This mentality is not, however, the vision of life that we are given in Scripture. Not only are we told that each life has inherent value simply by virtue of the fact that God saw fit to create it, but more importantly, each person and all of creation is made in the image of God. How dare we reduce people to mere statisitcs when we are talking about God’s image-bearers! We may not be at the forefront of the pro-choice debate, but most of us still have a long ways to go when it comes to taking human life seriously–whether it’s babies or illegal immigrants or even murderers, each person is God’s precious child. It’s about time we start acting like it.