Theology for Women

I recently received an e-mail from a young woman who loves her career but is getting married soon and wonders how her job will fit with her family. If she’s going to have kids one day and stay at home with them, then why bother building a career now? Is it even worth it?

This is a question that many women find themselves asking, so I decided to post a version of my response to her. I hope you will find it helpful.

~~~~~~

This is a question that a LOT of women ask–what’s the point in working now, or even getting an advanced degree, if I’m not going to use it later on? In my opinion, the root of this question comes from observing a very narrow sample of what the Christian family looks like.

For many of us, when we look around our church we see families in which the father works and the mother stays at home. And as a result of our cultural surroundings, we assume that this model of family must be set in stone by Scripture. In reality, this model is more often determined by the family’s personal circumstances.

You see, this model is most typical of white, middle to upper class families. Once you depart from this demographic you will find that not all families can actually survive on the salary of one working parent. And those of us in a more privileged demographic may come to experience this first hand as a result of the economy’s recent turn. If the country’s economic situation worsens, we will see more and more families in which both parents must work because one salary isn’t enough to live on.

That said, we should be wary of ascribing spiritual superiority to families with privileged financial circumstances. Just because a mom is able to stay at home does not, by definition, make her a better Christian mom.

For another example in which life circumstance might lead a wife or mother to work, there may come a time when the wife is the only one who can get a job and her husband cannot. If your husband is having trouble finding work, your own career might be the only thing sustaining the family financially until he does.

In my own situation, I will have to be the primary provider during the first years of my marriage because my fiancé has another year of seminary, after which he will pursue a Ph.D. When the time comes for me to fill this role, I will be glad to have the education and experience to work a job that will support us both.

And for all you single gals, this isn’t a question you should really even be asking just yet. Instead of looking too far ahead, focus on what God has for you right now. Only God knows when your season of singleness will come to a close, so don’t waste this opportunity simply because you think your job skills will eventually go unneeded. The fact of the matter is that God wants to use you in your career NOW, so make sure you’re maximizing your time and energy for the Kingdom of God and get out there!

So in light of these arrayed circumstances, I would be so bold as to state that it is irresponsible for women to assume that once they get married they’ll have all their needs provided for. That mentality results from a culture of excess, but our country may be entering a time when such a scenario can no longer be assumed. We need to train ourselves to be ready in the event that we need to help provide for our families. Yes, the husband is the head so it is his primary responsibility to provide, but his wife should also be helping him.

Those are the practical argument for women building careers, but there are other aspects to consider as well. One reason the model for American Christian families is often so narrow is that it fails to be creative. There are numerous ways for families to allow both parents to work AND be in the home with their kids, but we don’t often consider them.

For example, I once interned under the president of a non-denominational women’s ministry who actually home-schooled her kids SO THAT she could have a more flexible schedule to work. Because she wasn’t bound by a schedule determined by a public or private school, she could decide when and how to school them in such a way that worked with her speaking and writing schedule. Ironically, she spent more time with her kids than a lot of non-working moms, yet she accomplished more than any woman I’ve ever met.

Now that’s not to say that we all need to home-school our kids, but I think it goes to show that when it comes to the family, we need to think outside the box.

I once a read an article by Nancy Pearcey in which she traced the history of the American family, and as a result of her research she found that prior to the Industrial Revolution the whole family lived and worked together. Unlike our current model in which the family is disjointed because the father goes off to work and the mother stays at home with the kids, EVERYONE worked on the family’s farm or business together. The mom and dad both worked, but they were with their kids throughout the day.

It wasn’t until the Industrial Revolution, which took men out of the home and placed them in factories, that we even see a model in which the man leaves his wife alone with the children. We’re so used to this model that we think it’s Scriptural and that it’s always been this way, but that’s not actually true. Prior to the Industrial Revolution we had a much more holistic picture of the family, in which the husband and the wife both shouldered the burden of providing financially and raising the children.

Reading Pearcey’s article challenged me to question the model that I had always come to accept. It caused me to search for alternative models in which the father is less absent from the lives of his children. My fiancé and I are praying through this as well, and seeking out what model would work best for us.

We both want to be ministers, and that may very well mean that I stay at home more so that he is free to pastor a church. But it doesn’t mean I have to step out of ministry completely. I may work some so that he has to work less, thereby freeing him up to spend more time with our kids than he might have otherwise.

But whatever the model, we want to make sure that we do it as a team. Yes, he will be the head of the home, but that means he has an even GREATER responsibility to be in the lives of our kids, rather than just leaving that role to me when he leaves the house every morning. He doesn’t want the home to simply be “my realm” but to instead be “our realm.” So depending on where life takes us, we’re going to try and think creatively about how to minister to and care for our kids first and foremost, while also honoring and maximizing one another’s individual gifts and callings for the Kingdom of God.

And that’s what I would encourage you to do–be creative, and don’t get stuck in the model that you see around you. Yes, honor Scripture, but even the Proverbs 31 woman worked, so you can certainly be a good mother and also have a job. Your boundaries should be Scripturally prescribed (God first, Marriage second, Kids third, and Work last), but within these parameters you can seek to build a family model as innovative as the infinitely creative God who made us.

In my last post I discussed the objection that many theologians make to the figure of God as a father. This post is a continuation of that discussion as I explore a second attribute that many theologians, feminists included, prefer to ignore: the wrath of God.

One of my favorite shows on television right now is the Colbert Report. It comes on Comedy Central and it’s hilarious. It also provides at insightful look at the culture and politics that surround us . Since the show’s creation, Colbert has becomes a media icon, and for good reason.

Now to my great delight, Colbert decided to put together a Christmas special, and it’s called “A Colbert Christmas–The Greatest Gift of All!” It premiered last night and while I didn’t see all of it, what I did catch was pretty hysterical.

Throughout the Christmas special, Colbert sings about various themes involving the Christmas season and culture, and what I want to highlight here is a particular song that he performed with Elvis Costello. It was entitled, “There Are Much Worse Things to Believe In,” and it’s a critique of Christmas cynics, arguing that of all the ridiculous beliefs in the world today, a belief in Christmas is not the worst you can do. One of the “worse” beliefs that he enumerates in the song goes as follows:

Believe in the judgment, believe in Jihad, believe in a thousand variations on a dark and spiteful god.

As I said, Stephen Colbert is one of the premier commentators on culture today, which means that his perspective represents and influences a large segment of the American population.

And what is that segment saying? “We don’t want a God of wrath.”

In today’s culture, even within Christian circles, grace is in and wrath is out. In a society of tolerance, wrath is a scandal. Our culture prefers a God who looks more like Santa Claus than the God who burned Sodom and Gomorrah to the ground.

What, then, does this cultural perspective have to do with feminist theology? Well let’s begin with what the attribute of wrath means for Christian theology on the whole. A theology of wrath depicts a kind of God who implements punishment, judgment, hardship, and eventually kills his own son in what some feel is little more than infanticide.

That kind of theology can be scary, not just in eternity, but in the present.

What, then, does this mean for women?…

In a world where the Son of God endures his father’s wrath through a humiliating and excruciating death, and in a Church that calls Christians to follow that same path–such a world is perceived as being dangerous for women.

Why? Because throughout history, countless women have remained in abusive marriages and unhealthy situations from which they should have fled, instead remaining in them, all the while justifying the abuse. It was their “cross to bear” so to speak.

The logic of this mindset follows that we live in a fallen world in which sin has consequences, and we must bear those consequences, so we must press on in whatever situation we find ourselves

That said, a theology that views suffering and hardship as a natural part of a world estranged from God, and even encourages its followers to endure that suffering—such a theology is seen as unhealthy for a population that already suffers. That message is not redemptive. It offers no hope for individuals who are presently being persecuted. It only compels them to remain in their hardship.

And to some extent, I agree. A theology of suffering must be balanced with a theology of redemption and grace, or else we offer no picture of hope to a presently suffering world. Following Christ does not mean enabling abusive husbands and genocidal dictators.

But again, there is a temptation to throw out the baby with the bath water. Because this God of wrath has been used to justify persecution, unrighteous anger, and judgment, some theologians are fearful of this God. In their minds, He does not coincide with the God of love that they prefer.

With all of this in mind, why is it then crucial for women to affirm this attribute of God? If this aspect of God’s character has been used to victimize women, why must we defend it?

The first reason is that you cannot have a theology of grace without a theology of wrath. By definition, grace does not exist without wrath because there must be a punishment from which you are being delivered. Grace is the word we use to describe the mercy shown us when we deserved wrath.

So from a strictly theological perspective, this attribute is necessary.

But in addition to that, we should never think of God’s wrath as meaning little more than hardship upon hardship when what we really need is deliverance. It also means justice in a world plagued by injustice. When you endure a family or work relationship in which you experience difficulty or persecution, you do not have to despair because there will be vindication. God tells us that vengeance is His, and those who hurt you will face consequences. Either today, or in eternity.

Without God’s wrath, there is no hope that evil will be defeated. There is no guarantee that those who steal, kill and destroy will be held accountable. Without wrath, the wicked never pay.

As women, we should therefore affirm this divine attribute, not only for the sake of having holistic theology, but because it reminds us that God is not done with our circumstances. In a world where we experience persecution and suffering, we can know that God hears our cries and does not turn a blind eye to our oppressors. There is hope, and it ironically comes from the doctrine where you would least expect to find it.

So the next time you hear someone talking about the “scandal of God’s grace,” I would ask them what they think about God’s wrath. Grace is the en vogue theology of the day, but wrath is another measure. The test is whether you have a theology that incorporates both.

In these next two posts I am going to examine two attributes of God–His identity as Father and His wrath–that feminist theology has frequently considered to be in opposition with the good of women. I will attempt to explain why both premises are inherently false, as well as detrimental.

The next time you go to church and hear a sermon, listen carefully to the language that your pastor uses, particularly in reference to God. If you go to an evangelical church, it is likely you will hear the pastor refer to God as “Him” or “He.” If, on the other hand, you attend a non-evangelical church, you are more likely to hear God referred to simply as “God.”

If you find yourself listening to a preacher that qualifies under the second category, notice the hoops he will jump through to avoid using the male pronoun in reference to God. His sentences will sound semantically awkward and bulky as he makes statements like, “Then God reconciled God’s world to God’s self so that all could be in relationship to God.”

It gets a little redundant.

The reason you need to hone in on this language is that, in refusing to use male pronouns, the preacher is making a theological statement.

Today, many Christians are wary of describing God in gender specific terms, and for several reasons. The first is that it can limit our conception of God to being exclusively male. I can somewhat sympathize with this perspective. God is not male in the way we think of maleness. God encompasses both male and female attributes, so men are not somehow made to be MORE in God’s likeness than women. They simply reflect God’s character in different ways than women. This is a good point to remember.

(Though the balanced response is not to throw out God’s maleness altogether. That would be a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water. Scripture refers to God as being male for good reasons–we’ll get to that in a second…)

However, there is another strand of theology that rejects God’s maleness, particularly His identity as Father, and it comes specifically out of feminist theology. From this perspective, the idea of “father” has a negative connotation with many individuals, and should therefore be avoided. Many women have been abused or mistreated by their fathers, so they see the category of “father” as profoundly dangerous and frightening. And if such is the case, conceiving of God as Father will actually serve to alienate women from God if they have bad relationships with their own fathers.

In response to this problem, some feminist theologians have opted to avoid construing of God as Father. Not all of these theologians go quite as far as to completely ignore God’s role as Father, but they will still avoid referring to God in male terms. Regardless of their approach, God’s position as Father is labeled as patriarchal. It is a scandal.

This position is profoundly errant. We must always be suspicious of any theology that responds to an abuse of a doctrine by dismissing the doctrine altogether. That is not a proper or healthy response. In doing so, we miss out on the goodness that God wrote into His creation.

For example, by conceiving of God as Father, we are actually provided with the hope of correcting the mistakes of our earthly fathers. Maybe you had a horrible dad who neglected you or showed you conditional love, and as a result of that experience you are left wounded and feeling incomplete.

But the best response to this experience is not to ignore God’s role as Father. The best response is to embrace it. Maybe your earthly father didn’t love you, but you have a Heavenly Father who does! If there is a void left in your heart that you long for your earthly father to fill, you have a Heavenly Father who is waiting with arms spread wide to fill it.

Rather than dismiss the category of father, which will later serve to hinder any chance at a healthy family life, an understanding of God as Father seeks to restore our paternal conceptions. It gives us a picture of what healthy fatherhood looks like, which is particularly important as women seek healthy marriages with husbands who will care for their families.

It is for this reason that a conception of God as Father is not antithetical to the good of women. On the contrary, it is in our best interest. It gives us a standard against which we can hold the men in our lives. If you are dating a man who does not model the love and sacrifice of God, then he is not a man with whom you should yoke yourself. God as Father is therefore our best protection, a source of safety and healing in a broken world. That is why God as a male and God as a Father are doctrines we must never cast off.

I know I spend a lot of time talking about theology and ethics and philosophy on here, and sometimes I’m afraid that some of you get a little bored, which is why I was delighted to find out that I’m not alone in my Christian nerdiness!

This past summer an author named Wendy Alsup published a book called “Practical Theology for Women.” Wendy is the Deacon in charge of Women’s Theology and Training at Mark Driscoll’s church in Seattle, and on her own blog she says of herself, “I am a wife and mom who happens to like math and theology as well.”

Except for the math part, I think we were destined to be friends.

To read a great review of Wendy’s new book, click here. It really revs me up to read it.

Also be sure to check out Wendy’s blog, which you can find here.

It is discoveries like these that signal to me the Holy Spirit is on the move. It is the dawn of a new age for women’s ministry!

I don’t know about you, but for many years when I would attend Christian conferences, I avoided the women’s break-out sessions like the plague.

(And just to be clear, I am speaking to women right now. If you’re reading this and you’re a guy, then I really hope you avoided the women’s break-out sessions. That would be weird if you didn’t.)

The reason I was so deliberate in not attending was two-fold: One, I was fairly certain I already knew what they were gonna say. Something about submission or modesty. Two, I hated being defined by my womanhood. I wanted to attend sessions that taught me how to be a better Christian first, and a woman second.

In my mind, women’s ministry equated with a mushy, emotional, let’s-all-hug kind of theology. Some of it was helpful, but after awhile you’d heard it all and it was time to move on. I’d gotten all the mush that I needed for one lifetime.

Well since that season of my life, I’ve re-evaluated my stance, but not because I’ve come to embrace the emotion-driven theology that I once spurned. I have not. I still hate it, and I have to fight every fiber in my being that resists it—sometimes women really do need a good cry or an old fashioned hug fest. I need to accept this.

But the real reason I’ve come to value women’s ministry anew is that it is our best tool for equipping women within the Church. Yes, our pastors can do this and male leaders are able to teach us, but women will never know what it means to be a woman in leadership if some of us don’t step up and set an example with our lives.

For generations, the vision cast for women has been painfully small. Not all of us have realized our full potential in serving the Kingdom of God because we don’t even know what that really looks like. It’s not often that we’ve heard female preachers teach with power and authority, and there aren’t a lot evangelical women with doctorates in theology. We’ve seen men do these things many times, but not women.

It’s not that women are too stupid to study theology, or that we aren’t capable of teaching. It’s that we didn’t even know that we could. That is the climate that we younger women are coming out of. Only in very recent years have the number of women in seminaries come to equal that of men.

The issue here is not the rights of women. Don’t hear me as preaching some sort of she-woman empowerment message. That is not my agenda. The reason we should be educating ourselves and pushing ourselves in the study of God is because GOD DESERVES NO LESS! Mediocrity has no place in His Church. Women who are content with the status quo, you will not find your place here. We must consistently challenge ourselves to grow and learn and teach so that we can pursue God more fully and cast a vision for other to do so as well.

But this kind of vision cannot come from men. Why? Because men are not women. In the same way that I can’t exemplify to the men in my ministry what it means to be a godly, male leader, men cannot exemplify to women what it means to be a godly, female leader. Men can teach us many things about Christ and Christian discipleship, but how that plays out in a specifically female context is best taught by women. That’s why Scripture advises women to teach other women in Titus 2.

We need women to step up and do that job.

Yes, women’s ministry does matter. It matters a lot. We are waging a spiritual battle for the glory of God, and we must all be as equipped as possible if we are to fight this good fight. We must be pushing each other and challenging one another to grow and be stronger and dream big dreams. God requires this of women just as much as he requires it of men, not for the sake of women, but for the sake of His name. So until we are maximizing our gifts and abilities, it is not ourselves who are being robbed, but God.

That, ladies, is why women’s ministry matters. And that is where women’s ministry is going.

Evangelical women get a bad rap.

These days, the world conceives of evangelical women as little more than Christian Stepford wives. They look pretty, they obey their husbands, and they churn out babies like there’s no tomorrow. And if they’re really good, they’ll get their own reality t.v. series about what it’s like to homeschool 16 kids.

This is not, however, accurate.

Yes, some evangelicals fit that category, but evangelical women are far more courageous and independent than they are given credit for.

Recently I read an article in which Paige Patterson, President of Southwestern Seminary, wrote the following,

“The women of Southwestern are not wimps, and they are sold out to the task of taking the Gospel to the ends of the earth…[they] are willing to go to the places where e-mails are sent home full of cryptic shorthand because publicly declaring the message of Christ could come at the cost of their lives.”

What’s interesting about this article is that Southwestern is a Southern Baptist seminary. What’s more, this Southern Baptist seminary has been the subject of much controversy due to its strict stance on biblical womanhood. Patterson does not, however, sound like the stereotypical woman-hater he’s often caricatured to be.

That said, while I myself have not always towed the Southern Baptist line, Patterson is right on. Yes, some evangelical women are just looking for a husband. And some women are submissive because they never really learned to think for themselves.

But you know what, that’s really true of just about every demographic.

The truth is that countless evangelical woman are going out into the world and risking their lives for the Gospel, some even without husbands! They consider their lives nothing for the sake of Christ, so they are going into countries where many other Christians are afraid to go.

Last time I checked, that wasn’t really a part of the “wallflower” job description.

But what is even more interesting is that women are actually trend setters in their risk-taking endeavors. At my own church, I can probably count on one hand the number of men who have gone on the mission field, but I’ve lost count of how many women have gone overseas. I say that not to make the men look bad, but to add that women aren’t simply waiting on men to do this important work. They’re taking initiative in fighting this good fight.

All of that to say, if you are an evangelical woman, the legacy being set for you is far more than the culture would have you think. Our generation is producing women who are heroes of the faith, women who are strong and women who will risk their lives for Christ. That is who we are, and that is where we are going.

So don’t you let anyone tell you you’re a shrinking violet. If the world wants to find a wallflower, kindly encourage them to start looking elsewhere.

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.

So apparently a lot of you really like Head-Cold Sharon. I don’t know what that says about my regular personality, but I’ll try and bring her back real soon–maybe I’ll take a swig of Nyquil or something.

But now that I’m all healed up, I’m headed down to Charlotte to speak at another conference this weekend. It’s the North Carolina Baptist Campus Ministry Fall Convention, and I’m teaching on a similar topic to last weekend’s conference. The title for my session is “Unconventional Womanhood: Being a Christian Woman in a Secular World.”

As I’ve been reflecting on this topic, I’ve been struck by the varying ways in which culture has shaped our understanding of godly womanhood. Most Christians would agree that culture has negatively influenced our concept of femininity in some way or another, but exactly how those influences have manifested themselves is up for debate.

You see, your answer to this question will largely depend on what perspective you’re coming from. Most of us would agree that trends such as the growing immodesty among Christian women are a negative impact from our society. But there is a point at which Christians are utterly divided. Here’s what I mean–

(And keep in mind that these are stereotypes. Not all people will fit these exact molds)

The conservative perspective tends to argue that the culture’s influence is most pronounced in Christian women who are hyper-feminists. From this angle, Christians are seen as having abandoned Scriptural teachings in favor of societal trends, ignoring God’s intention for distinct gender roles in favor of female agendas.

The liberal perspective frequently contends that oppressive cultural influences arise when women are primarily limited to the home. From this angle, Christians are portrayed as chauvinists who twist Scripture to debase women.

What is ironic about these two perspectives is that they have completely opposite understandings of the culture. One view sees the culture as being relativistic–anything goes, including all gender distinctions. The other view understands the culture as being too absolutist on the point of gender roles. From this perspective, women have been subjugated by their cultures for far too long, and Scripture should be read as speaking prophetically into that oppression.

So which one is it? Is our culture relativistic, or absolutist?

The answer is both. There are people in our culture who are extreme relativists, and that mindset has influenced numerous denominations. But there are also segments of our culture who are extreme absolutists, and they have influenced countless denominations as well.

And given this reality, it is imperative that we listen to BOTH perspectives. In Scripture we find a surprising tension between an emphasis on distinct gender roles, and female empowerment (which, at the time, was quite revolutionary). That said, we need to adopt a worldview that embraces both ends of the spectrum. Otherwise, we run the risk of excluding parts of Scripture.

Practically speaking, what does this look like? Liberals can embrace the very real language of gender distinction that we find in Scripture, a language that not only lends richness to our understanding of male and female relationships, but also adds depth to our understanding of the Trinity. Similarly, conservatives can embrace the female empowerment that very much exists in Scripture, pushing women to be leaders, to arm themselves with knowledge, to do so in ways that is not necessarily limited to the home and family.

As differing members of the Body of Christ, it is vital that we listen to a wide array of voices. None of us is immune to the influence of culture, so we need the perspectives of those outside our circle to give us clarity. That doesn’t mean you have to agree on EVERYTHING, but if you can’t find a single thing to learn from one another then you probably don’t have a correct understanding of the Church.

Godly womanhood is a complex thing, but the more we seek to understand it and listen to the perspectives of others, the more we will approach a holistic picture of it. The ultimate end, of course, being the glory of God and service to His Kingdom. Women accomplish little if they are not encouraged to cultivate their gifts and join men on the spiritual battlefield. But they will also fail to be effective if they deny their uniquely feminine strengths. So we must seek to find a balance of the two, not for the sake of women, but for the sake of Christ.

Well I’m back from the Kaleo Conference and it went great! I made some new friends and was greatly encouraged by the other speakers who were there! It was a really wonderful experience and I was blessed to be a part of it.

Perhaps the highlight of the weekend, however, were the shirts we leaders had to wear. Picture this–long-sleeve, button-down collared DENIM! That’s right, denim. I have not worn a denim shirt since I was in 6th grade (when they were cool) so this became a tool for God to humble me over the course of the weekend. Every time I put it on, I felt as though I’d been instantly morphed into a soccer mom from the 90’s. My other option was to tie the shirt-tails around my mid-section and look like a character on Saved By the Bell. Either way, I was not a happy camper–that is until one of the other female speakers totally called me out for being vain. And I was. After all, God can speak through anything–even denim shirts.

But back to the conference itself. As I mentioned, I was speaking about Unique Issues for Women in Ministry. It was a fantastic topic and I really enjoyed exploring it with young ladies discerning a call to ministry. I received a lot of insightful questions and had some challenging conversations.

We covered a lot of material, but the one thing that seemed to resound the most with the women I taught was the idea that women’s ministry is utterly preoccupied with healing. If you walk into a Christian bookstore and go to the women’s section, you will find stacks and stacks of books related to healing–maybe it’s self-esteem, family relationships, sustaining your marriage, being a good mom, feeling ok with being single, and the list goes on.

Similarly, most of the preeminent women’s ministers today will begin their messages by sharing their testimonies of hardship and pain from their pasts. Many of them have suffered greatly due to abuse or neglect, and they are now helping women to crawl out of that pit and live whole lives.

All of which is good.

However, there is a dangerous temptation here–when the focus is on healing, healing can become the ultimate goal. We can slowly and subtly slip into thinking that God is here for us, as opposed to us being here for God. And we can become extremely self-focused.

Granted, this doesn’t happen to all Christian women, but this preoccupation with healing constitutes a large trend in women’s ministry today, and it is part of the reason, I believe, that women are not serving God as effectively as they could be.

In response to this trend, I urged the women to arm themselves with theology. And by that I mean “the study of God,” which is what the word literally means. We need to ingrain our hearts and minds with truth such that we can effectively combat the lies that our emotions feed us about ourselves and the people around us.

And when this happens, when we stop being consumed by our thought lives and by the things that wounded us in the past, we are suddenly set free to serve. Instead of walking into the Christian bookstore and heading directly for the self-help aisle, we are free to study spiritual disciplines and to educate ourselves in ways that will inspire us to action.

What’s more, action distracts us from a preoccupation with ourselves, and is therefore an important part of healing. Rather than mulling over the things that bother us, we fill that mental void with thoughts about Christ and ways to pursue him more passionately.

For all of these reasons, we must not stop at healing. Yes, healing is important, and I am so grateful for the countless female ministers who have helped women throughout the world to overcome their pasts, but healing is not the end. God created us to serve Him, not the other way around, so we must pursue healing only for the sake of freeing ourselves to follow Him more radically. Healing is only a tool we use as we equip ourselves to fight in the spiritual battle that wages around us.

This weekend I’m speaking at the Kaleo Conference at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and the topic is “Unique Issues for Women in Ministry.” I didn’t actually pick the title, but I think it’s perfect–women face so many challenges in ministry that are unique to our gender! It’s actually been quite overwhelming to think about.

But it should be a great weekend as I meet hundreds of young women who are discerning a call to ministry, and we think through what that call means.

You know, as I have prepared my talk and reflected upon the topic itself, I’ve been struck by how perfectly titled the session is. The idea of women being “unique” is a wonderful compass as women figure out what it means to be leaders.

The reason I love the title so much is that the last several decades have seen a trend in which women have sought to erase their femininity as they have served in leadership roles. They have cut their hair, worn pantsuits, and adapted male styles of leadership in order to fit in.

What is ironic about this approach is that it purports to be furthering the cause of women. They do this for the sake of breaking the glass ceiling. But in reality, they’re doing just the opposite–they are instead erasing as much of their femaleness as possible in order to succeed. That doesn’t exactly sound like a step forward for women. It rather seems to be reinforcing the message that women, acting like women, cannot be effective leaders.

But the other problem with women erasing their femininity is that they deny their female strengths, strengths that complement male strengths, to instead mimic what is already out there. They fail to recognize that their differences could actually be a strength.

With all of that in mind, it is important that women in ministry embrace their uniqueness. It is precisely those differences which also serve as our strengths.

Well I’m off to the conference–say a prayer for me Saturday morning because I’ll be speaking 4 times in the morning, each session lasting one hour in what can only be described as a teaching marathon. Whew! But I’ll tell you more about it when I get back. Have a blessed weekend!!