Posted 162 days ago
Emerging Women Finding Their Voice
By Julie Clawson, co-pastor of Via Christus Community Church
To the Men of the Emerging Church:
I wonder what the deal really is with men in the Emerging Church. High profile men write that equality isn’t biblical (but that they still support women in ministry), and that women should be allowed to live out their God-given roles. On one level that might sound good, but it’s just the same old oppression in a different packaging. Others tell me point blank that they won’t waste energy working to help women in ministry because current ministry structures aren’t biblical to begin with. So why waste time working to get women involved in a system that they are working to change? But the obvious problem is that the system is not changing; the boys keep it going as is, and the women remain on the sidelines. Others give an ample space for the fight over whether women are fully human on their blogs, but never really stick their necks out and actually support women. And then when certain leaders degrade and objectify women as mere sex objects, the men of the church remain silent or pat him on the back. This is the response we get from men in the Emerging Church.
What are you guys afraid of? Controversy? Having to share power? Having to talk to women? I just don’t get it. When they say they “support” women, but don’t ever do anything about it, I have to question if they respect women at all. Are we just a nuisance that they can placate with kind-sounding words? If they give enough platitudes and asides (“I really do support women in ministry, really”), will we shut up and pretend that everything is okay? I know a number of women who have dismissed the emerging church as a joke because of the way women continue to be treated.
Hey boys, guess what? We don’t want to be treated like a piece of meat or art. We don’t want to be treated like second-class citizens, endlessly tokenized or debated. We want to be a part of the conversation and respected for who we are. We can have our own conversations, but it would be really nice of you to make the slightest effort to treat us as human beings and let the world know about it.
What I would like to see is one—just one—male leader in the Emerging Church come out in complete support of women. No debating our worth. No stereotyping us into assumed roles. Just complete and open support with a commitment to do whatever you can to help the women’s voices be heard. That isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Women in the Emerging Church
To clarify my words above: Yes, I was ranting and therefore made use of hyperbole. I know that there are men in the EC who do support women, but there is still an ongoing perception by women that the Emerging Church doesn’t support them. I’ve somehow stumbled into a strange position where I think I hear more about this issue than many people (which of course influences my perception). Because of my involvement with Emerging Women, a lot of people seem to think I’m an authority on women in the emerging church. I get emails, questions about women in the EC, confused inquiries about what is going on, and complaints—lots of complaints. Responding to the women who contact me is weird because I am not the authority (not that one exists at all), and the EC is such a fluid thing that no one can give a definitive answer for why things are the way they are. That being said, I do try to respond, but often feel torn. Half the time I do my best to defend the EC and explain that anyone who wants to step up to lead is more than welcome, but the rest of the time I find myself empathizing with the frustration and confusion these women are expressing.
What am I hearing, and from whom am I hearing it? First, I have had good conversations with women leaders within Emergent (all from mainline backgrounds) who don’t think there are any problems at all. I respect their experiences, but I hear too much from women who think otherwise.
From other mainliners who have already been through the fight to gain respect as women in the church and who have pushed for inclusivity in the church, I hear a good deal of shock at how patriarchal the EC is. They only see male figureheads, male authors, male bloggers, male speakers, and worse yet, only hear male language used in reference to believers and to God. This is really offensive to them, and they see it as an implication that women are not wanted or valued. Thus, whatever good they may see in the EC, they aren’t sure if it’s worth joining a group that is so far behind in regards to women. Why go where they are “obviously” not wanted?
Then there are the evangelicals. Many of these women are just beginning to believe that they can have a voice in the church, and are still being met with opposition in their churches and families. They want to find a place in the EC because it has helped them so much, but are often afraid to join what looks like the typical “boys club” that they are used to experiencing. Or, they are unsure if they are even welcome in that world. They want to know before they sign on that they will be accepted for who they are (and not condemned because they are female) and that the invitation to join is for them as well. While the official message may be, “Yes, of course women are respected and welcomed,” if these women do not hear that message or see it actually lived out, then they do not feel they are wanted. This of course does not apply to all women interested in the EC, but is a theme I’ve heard too often to ignore.
So why isn’t the message of welcome and inclusion being heard (if it exists at all)? The most common answer is because most of the authors and speakers are still male; they are the voices that get heard no matter who else is out there. Even at the recent Midwest Emergent Gathering where we attempted to be very deliberate about giving women a voice, the upfront presence was still predominantly male. And we got flack for it, big time. It’s not that there is anything wrong with male leaders. They are great guys who have taught us wonderful things and have helped us along our faith journey, but because of their popularity and the number of people desperate to be mentored (in even the smallest ways) by them, there is no room for us women. We don’t fit in with the boys clubs and the male bonding experiences (which is what many public events seem to be). There are no female “heroes” that self-identify as emerging that we can look up to and be mentored by. The names that women in the EC respect, like Anne Lamott, Phyllis Tickle, Sue Monk Kidd and Diane Butler Bass, do not (to the best of my knowledge) label themselves emerging. Thus, if there is no one in the EC to mentor us (or even to guide us and open the doors), then women begin to wonder why they should even want to be a part of it at all.
Then there are the negative messages that (often unintentionally) get sent. There are constant messages that tell women, “You are not wanted here,” even when that message is not intended. When the most popular blogs on the Emerging Church have ongoing debates not only on whether or not women are permitted in ministry, but also, by implication, on whether women are inferior to men or if we are even made in God’s image, the message gets sent (loudly) that we are not respected, valued or welcome in the EC. When women plan a workshop at a gathering, and then a big name male plans the exact same workshop at the exact same time and everyone goes to that one, the message is sent: “Your voice is unwanted and worthless.” At a conference last year, when a panel of women leaders was set in front of the crowd so they could publicly ask questions of male experts, the message was sent, “You women are inferior to us men.” (The conference planners later admitted what a disaster that session was.) And at just about every single emerging event, where it is extremely rare to hear gender-inclusive language, women who are used to being included in the broader culture are left feeling very alienated. I don’t think anyone intends to send the message to women that they are not welcome, but that is what is perceived at any rate.
What helps complicate the negative (albeit unintentional) messages is the silence of the men, the “yes, but…” excuses, the vague talk about Biblical gender roles, and the lack of positive action. When certain prominent leaders take a stand against women, it takes other popular leaders speaking out against hate language for that message to be overpowered. Then, saying “yes, but…” to women is like saying that women aren’t worth their time or energy. They want to help us, but it’s too complicated and might take too much work. Instead of dwelling on all the problems that might possibly arise and using that as an excuse to inaction, could men please just give women their unequivocal support for once? When men mention “gender roles,” most women mentally download some version of the “barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen” scenario that has been drilled into them for years. Define what that really means. And also, most women do not want to be told what they should be like by a man. We want to be accepted for who we are no matter how closely or distantly we fit some system of culturally defined roles. Using language like that is patronizing and demeaning.
So what would it look like to actively work to improve things? Here are a few biggies: Make sure that women are asked to speak at your events. Get women publishing contracts. Work jointly with women on the big writing projects and event planning teams. Get used to using gender-inclusive language. And don’t always refer to God as male (not that you have to go so far as using the feminine names for God, just always default to the masculine). Add women to your blogroll. Discuss the ideas women are talking about on your blogs, in your sermons, and in your books. Stick your neck out and publicly stand up against sexism and demeaning language. Publicly admit that you respect women and support them in ministry for that matter. It isn’t “affirmative action” or “lowering your standards,” as I have heard it described. All of this involves being deliberate about being inclusive. And I know that there are a lot of guys out there who are doing this already, but when there is still an overwhelming perception on the part of women that they are not welcome, more needs to be done.
I will say this again: I am not the “authority” on this issue. I’m just reflecting on my experiences and my somewhat unique position of hearing from a wide spectrum of women involved in the EC. Not all women feel this way or think there is a problem. I know that. But it is for the many that do, that I plead for the men of the EC to loudly and without reservation demonstrate their support for women in the Emerging Church.
Speaking of God
Earlier, the issue of gender pronouns for God arose and I would like to address that here. This issue freaks a lot of people out. They think that to even discuss this topic implies that one has left behind any traditional construction of Christianity. I thought that way for a long time. But this is a topic that is a given for many in mainline churches and has started to become a serious issue for women from evangelical backgrounds. I don’t claim to even attempt a comprehensive treatment of this issue, but I’ve been forced to wrestle through it, so here we go.
The issue at hand is the names we use to refer to God. The majority of names we use in the English language are gendered masculine. Although we are generally okay with some of the neutral names and metaphors for describing God, people often get very offended when God is referred to with feminine names and images (even though such are present in scripture and church history). How we speak about God is a topic that has received a lot of attention recently. With Peter Rollins’ well known book How (not) to Speak of God and Bruce Benson’s lesser-known (but more in-depth) Graven Ideologies, the concepts of what we know about God and how we express that have become popular topics of conversation. The ideas those authors present (based on the implications of postmodern philosophers such as Derrida, Levinas, and Marion) revolve around the idea that any attempt to speak of God is idolatry—conceptual idolatry, but idolatry nonetheless. We are not God. To claim to know or understand (or even fully name) God is an act of idolatry. Since we cannot have absolute knowledge of God (which would in fact make us God), we attempt to describe God using the things we know (language, images, metaphors). All of those attempts at comprehending that which cannot be comprehended must be held lightly. Any attempt to assume that our names or metaphors for God actually define God become idolatry. We start to worship our idea (name, image, metaphor) for God instead of actually worshipping God. Of course, we can’t not speak of God, so we must make use of metaphors and names. The Bible is full of descriptions for God; some we have turned into names, but they are all simply descriptions of God, small attempts to understand aspects of the incomprehensible. Creator. Light. Shalom. Midwife. Provider. Father. Potter. Refuge. Sustainer. Mother. Healer. None of those names from scripture define God. To choose one as the God we worship is to choose to worship an idol of our own creation. So instead, we use a multitude of names to describe God—that which we cannot grasp but are compelled to worship.
To assume that God is gendered—that God is either male or female—turns God into an idol. God is neither, and yet God can be described as both. Of all the ways that we speak of God, this is the one that carries the most emotional weight. Rollins brushed aside this issue in his book, saying that it has already been addressed well by others. I found that infinitely frustrating because while this idea has been addressed extensively in mainline circles, there is hardly anyone talking about it in evangelical and emerging circles. To only see God as Father and to deny that God is also Mother not only ignores scripture and creates an idol in the form of a male, but it reinforces negative stereotypes about women. Why can’t we discuss God’s feminine characteristics? Is there something wrong with women? Are we inferior to men? Are we somehow more sinful or more sexual or less intelligent than men? If the metaphor of Father can be used for God and the metaphor of Mother cannot be, then what does it reveal about our underlying assumptions about women?
It is generally at this point that many people respond: “Of course God has no gender, and I see how feminine terms could be used to describe God, but I’m really just more comfortable continuing to use the male names, and I don’t want anyone to think I’m into that whole Divine Feminine/Goddess worship stuff that’s so popular these days. It’s not hurting anyone, right?” But, would it change things to know that there are many, many women out there who have rejected Christianity because all they see is a male God represented? They do not see themselves relating to a male God, and they do not see themselves as being created in God’s image if God is male. Then there are those women in the church who see themselves as inferior to men because they are female and are not made in God’s image. The logic goes: if God is male then male must be better. I just finished reading a book called When God Was a Woman by Merlin Stone, which is a diatribe against the domination of the Hebrews and their male God over the goddess cultures in the Ancient Near-East. This book is almost thirty years old and is still considered a classic among feminists. The gender of God is a big issue for a lot of people. My question is whether our comfort is more important than truth or more important than all those people who have rejected Christianity for unnecessary reasons?
This is a topic that I have personally struggled through over the last couple of years. I went from thinking that using feminine names for God was just a silly (and offensive) game for extreme feminists, to seeing the need to question my default names for God. This isn’t just about equality. This is much bigger than that. It is about avoiding conceptual idolatry and naming God rightly (while being aware of the tension that we can never actually do so). To default to male names for God limits my understanding of who God is and unintentionally excludes some from the communion of believers. It isn’t a game or a side issue or a red herring. It reflects the center of my faith: the God I believe in. It takes effort to not just use my default name for God (Father). It isn’t comfortable to say Mother or Healer. But I’ve realized that I have to—for my faith and for the faith of others. It’s scary. It makes some people angry. But it also opens doors to those who have been left on the outside for far too long.
Reader Comments