I am tired. There is a battle waging, on behalf of my sisters in Christ and in my own heart. I have become keenly aware of my femininity and how it is recognized, acknowledged and judged in the body of Christ. A paradigm shift is in the making and to be honest, I feel like I haven’t settled my feet on the solid foundation yet.
In the midst of this change of course, my journey has been saturated the past two weeks with blog conversations about Mark Driscoll and his statements about and against women. Not just his comments and advice in the aftermath of Ted Haggard’s confession but former quotes and attitudes attributed to him that have been maybe correctly labeled as demeaning and misogynistic.
I haven’t really offered my thoughts about the whole issue because I am still formulating my words, finding my voice, pushing aside the fear to speak out. I would never had identified myself as one who has been silenced by the church or those in the church. Though I cannot point to a single person or a single incident, the propaganda still abides deep in my heart, my being … women are to be silent. Even as I am punching my way out of this darkness, even as my husband is running beside, cheering me on, even as my best friend inspires me to keep fighting … I still find it difficult to step to the front, to have my voice heard.
The caution I must exercise is not to direct my anger, my hurt, my frustration toward a person. Mark Driscoll drives me crazy. I have never identified with his style of communication. I have described him as arrogant, one who loves to hear himself speak and thumping a potentially damaging message about women and their place in the kingdom.
It was not surprising, in fact, it was predictable to read his answer to the Ted Haggard disaster. Mark Driscoll makes several glaring remarks about women. Yes, I know he wasn’t blaming Gayle Haggard for her husband’s sin, but it certainly seemed like he was suggesting that women share in the blame of their husbands’ wandering minds, hearts and bodies if they don’t keep themselves beautiful and available to them. In taking a hit for the home team, he perpetuates the home-boy attitude that reduces women to mere objects for sexual pleasure.
I have already posted the best response to MD’s unfortunate words that I have read and I re-post it here with a few more, including one letter that calls for a public apology and discourse.
Fat, Lazy, Pastors’ Wives by Emerging Grace
The Wisdom of Mark Driscoll by Wendy
Mark Driscoll and Women by Helen
An Open Letter to Mark Driscoll by Rose
Disappointing Driscoll and the Pornographic Imagination by Susan
Then today …
The Apology that Wasn’t included this statement:
As I have re-read my blog, I can see how some may have misconstrued what I said. Because I was writing to male pastors, I spoke in such a way that was not as clear as it could have been regarding what is true of Christian marriage in general. Therefore, I hope that this post is more clarifying.
My stomach churns as I realize that either this smart young pastor doesn’t realize the public nature of a blog, which I doubt … OR … he was speaking to male pastors and felt comfortable conveying to male pastors that their wives may share in the responsibility of their own sinful choices. This makes what Mark Driscoll originally said even more disturbing.
My friend sums up my emotions about it all when she says, Thanks for Nothing!
Scot McKnight surprised me by his delight at Mark Driscoll’s clarification (note: it wasn’t an apology or admittance of wrongdoing or harm toward women … it was just a kinder, gentler clarification). I wasn’t able to respond before Scot closed the comments but thankfully, some bold people spoke out.
I have listened in to some who are predicting the fall of Mark Driscoll … pride goes before a fall, you know. Can I just say that I pray it will not be so. No church, no people should have to go through a scandal and tragedy. I pray that Mark Driscoll will be graced with a humble heart that will empower him with the grace of God.
And today, while washing dishes, listening to summer podcast of Engage, Chad Norris was speaking about friendships. He began to talk about how Jesus commanded his followers to love one another and how Jesus washed their feet. I crumpled to a stool as the spirit of God whispered to my heart, “would you wash the feet of Mark Driscoll?”
NOOooooo, God! You wouldn’t ask me to do something like that, would you? Would you?
Again, the paradox that I spoke of in the previous post? Exposed!!!
I am driven to the scripture and Jesus reminds me,
Matthew 5: 43-47
“You’re familiar with the old written law, ‘Love your friend,’ and its unwritten companion, ‘Hate your enemy.’ I’m challenging that. I’m telling you to love your enemies. Let them bring out the best in you, not the worst. When someone gives you a hard time, respond with the energies of prayer, for then you are working out of your true selves, your God-created selves. This is what God does. He gives his best—the sun to warm and the rain to nourish—to everyone, regardless: the good and bad, the nice and nasty. If all you do is love the lovable, do you expect a bonus? Anybody can do that. If you simply say hello to those who greet you, do you expect a medal? Any run-of-the-mill sinner does that.
48“In a word, what I’m saying is, Grow up. You’re kingdom subjects. Now live like it. Live out your God-created identity. Live generously and graciously toward others, the way God lives toward you.”
So, now what? Is Mark Driscoll my enemy? If I label him as a misogynist, maybe he is? Then what am I to do about that?
Let him bring out the best in me, not the worst in me! and I am an intercessor, a prayer warrior. So, I must pray, wash Mark Driscoll’s feet with prayers to the Lord.
I can pray for Mars Hill, Mark Driscoll and his ministry … for God’s protection, blessing and direction. I can continue to learn and renew my own mind about God’s heart toward women. I can speak out boldly about the new beliefs that God is planting in my heart. I can be available to share the burden of other women who have been wounded and silenced. I can encourage them to let God nurture their voice.
I want to be a positive voice. Are there times for exposing the lies and harmful teaching? Absolutely, but with kindness and grace. I wish this were my first response and maybe one day I will be transformed enough that it will be. But today, I must set aside this first response and respond as God does … in mercy, in grace and in love.
Immersed in the Mystery,
Cynthia
Related Tags: Mark Driscoll
Cynthia,
Sometimes the best foot-soak uses pretty hot water.
Thanks for the link here, and I also appreciate what you’ve written here. Good reflections.
grace to you, sister,
-Susan
I don’t know what to think of this… You help me!!
this hapax legomenon
Joy, which post were you worried about? Feel free to comment or email me. Thanks.
Jadon, let me quote from my own post to try and put this in perspective.
Joy is the friend referenced in that quote. She and I have been discussing the subtle message that we have internalized about ourselves. If you knew me in person, you would never guess that I would be struggling with whether my thoughts, opinions and beliefs were valid as a woman. I am outspoken, passionate, and strong in my convictions. Yet, as I have been entering into discussions about emerging church and Bibilical equality, multiple fears have bubbled to the surface.
Like I said before, I cannot point to one person or one circumstance that planted this seed in my being. I think it has been years of hard complementarian teaching, coupled with a general attitude toward women in this society. I gathered from your blog that you are in Canada and I have no idea what your culture is like. Joy and I live in the Southeastern United States. I grew up and still live near Greenville, SC , home of Bob Jones University. The message here is very clear … women are meant to be pretty (but not too pretty so as not to tempt other men), stay at home (unless you are working to put your husband through Bible college), submit to the husband’s decisions (because someone has to be in CONTROL), bear children (and don’t converse about the difficulties of bearing and raising children for “children are a blessing of the Lord”, women should stay silent (unless they are sharing recipes or diaper rash treatment tips) and the reason for all of this is that a woman has to stay in her place because she is more easily deceived.
There, just in typing it, I have boiled my issue down to one thing. I have not trusted my voice, my opinions, my convictions because “a woman is more easily decieved” I have felt that I couldn’t speak boldly about anything regarding God and spirituality because I may have been deceived without knowing it.
Ok, this has gotten long and you may be wondering what all of this has to do with your posts. When someone comes out of a physically abusive situation, he or she will flinch at any movement of the hand. Joy and I feel like we are coming out of oppressively abusive circumstances. Joy has her own story to tell and may feel free to share that; mine is not as clear and is so subtle that I hadn’t realized it. It is with fear and trepidation that we write and enter the conversation. We click the post button and hope that our thoughts will not be pulled apart and invalidated by what is in many ways, still a male driven conversation.
We flinch and enter into protective mode if we perceive that our little posts may be being ridiculed … even if they are not.
Sometimes, it is difficult to determine a person’s motives, their stance. I think that because she and I were quoted just under your satirical writing about Mark Driscoll and the bunnies, it was not clear if you were reducing our posts to just bunny fluff. Were you satirizing us as well? Because the first thing I ever read on your blog was a piece of satire, I wondered if the entire blog was satirical … were you posting bits of posts from other blogs because you agree or because you are making fun of their thoughts. But maybe she and I are just gun-shy, so to speak and are reading much more into than you intended.
After having read through a bit more of your blog, I think that you referenced my post and her post because we made good points. Please forgive me (and I am sure Joy can speak for herself even though I have continually used “we” here) for jumping to any conclusions and painting you with a broad brush. We both actually know types that would post a collection of “thoughts” from blogdom just to sit back and snicker at the shallowness and heresy. I don’t believe that is your purpose at all.
Thanks for taking the time to clarify any concerns.
Cynthia
Cynthia,
Thank you for this. The dialogue and debate of the past few weeks has left me very tired and discouraged as well. I think the quote from Eugene that Susan used in her post (thanks for the link) is profound. We’ve allowed something that should be holy (our relationships as men and women, our capacity for intimacy)to become so base and ugly. I want to borrow your prayer that somehow this will bring out the best in me.
“…and hope that our thoughts will not be pulled apart and invalidated by what is in many ways, still a male driven conversation.
We flinch and enter into protective mode if we perceive that our little posts may be being ridiculed … even if they are not.
Sometimes, it is difficult to determine a person’s motives, their stance.”
Cynthia, I understand what you’re saying. That’s why I invited further conversation when Joy was confused by my blog. As a man myself- last I checked -I know I have to be careful to deeply consider first how women react to Driscoll’s opinions. What is revealing to me is that many people, especially the men, do not seem to comprehend how the other sex perceived the post without discounting it quickly afterward. It is hard for everyone, women and men, not to get defensive and protective here.
Thank you Cynthia (and to all the women) for contributing to this issue. I appreciate it. Your opinion and experience is very important, particularly because we men need to hear it, even though we aren’t all willing to listen at times. Both women and men are effected by Driscoll’s miscalculations and sloppiness on gender relations, and sometimes us men don’t realize this.
Jadon,
Maybe just tired but your response here brought tears to my eyes. Thank you for understanding. Thank you for listening, for considering our opinions and experience as important. You are right that both men and women are affected by by MD’s opinions and those that share his opinions … as Amber said, our relationship as men and women has been tainted. We can’t give up this discussion or debate and I continue to hold onto hope that grace will abound.
Jadon,
Thanks for your comment above and for your willingness to listen!
In the wake of this debate I’ve been wondering about something you noted…
“What is revealing to me is that many people, especially the men, do not seem to comprehend how the other sex perceived the post without discounting it quickly afterward.”
Can you offer any insight into this? Why do many of the men who initially make sympathetic gestures seem to disengage so quickly (before any real progress is made)? I would appreciate any thoughts that you (or anyone else) can offer on this. I’d like to better understand!
Jadon,
Just visited and left a comment. Thanks for your invite to converse this… It helps to get all the angst out so that I can talk intelligibly with people IRL… like my husband!! LOL
Pingback: Calacirian » Women Revisited
Well well well well well said.
(Sorry for the delay, Amber. I’ve been slightly frustrated trying to articulate a helpful response. My apologies…)
Amber, I think the main reason is that men experience these types of situations differently than women somewhat, which is quite evident with the recent Driscoll post and clarification. Moreover, men may perceive it more as losing power instead of losing artificial advantage. It is much easier to attempt to smooth over conflict or put out fires of frustration as well. Men may find short-term gain as more comfortable than long-term pain. They may also assume that women need to struggle with this more than they need to do. Men may not always know how to respond to these problems specifically as men either.
To take the Driscoll post and update as an example:
Men, especially complementarians, tended to see Driscoll’s post in the most positive way possible because it was about them and sexual temptation by women. Not only that, female criticism reinforced the feeling of being undermined, which increased male defensiveness. (Complementarian men could also assume that women should just be submissive or silent on the matter.)
Women (particularly noncomplementarians), on the other hand, perceived Driscoll’s post as a personal affront because there were only negative or unflattering images of them and not enough focus on what men could do to engage and build trust between women and men. Moreover, women did not seem to remark that men could not do this alone. Essentially, men saw the content and considered the intent legitimate, while women saw the post skewed and considered the intent inadequate. Mark’s post thus became mediocore and ineffective in creating trust between the sexes.
This also occurs after Driscoll’s clarifications. Although he explicitly argues his original points more clearly, he omits any concern about whether it discounted women in some fashion. This gave the impression to men that the women’s concern about the original post was not supportive toward the men. Since men saw the primary intent as legitimate, it did not assist them to respond to women satisfactorily. With women it merely reinforced the sense that their criticism was disregarded. Therefore, Driscoll has continued to divide women and men against each other, which is a disservice to both.
Does that help, Amber? If I need to elaborate or explain myself further, please let me know. Thank you for your question.
Just stumbled across this conversation browsing from AEM…to the person who asked about forgiveness….you forgive not because the other person deserves it or will even know it. You forgive to disengage yourself from negative feelings and reengage with more positive energy. Forgiveness is a gift you give yourself, not the forgiven. They are actually irrelevant in the equation.
“Turn the other cheek” is not, in my opinion, about being good. It is about understanding that we are all connected and if we choose to retaliate (in this case, judge) we add to harm already done. Turn the other cheek of forgiveness and be on your way. The thing that changes is the way *you* feel inside. And the web of life, that tapestry that each of us weaves, becomes stronger, not frayed and torn.
Which is why it is so important for women to find and use their voices. Without that, there are strands in the web that do not happen. We are all a part of, and responsible for, creation.
Tammy,
I had meant to revisit the conversation and say much of what you have said. Forgiveness is for me. If I choose to walk in unforgiveness, bitterness, negativity, that hurts me … sometimes only hurts me, sometimes hurts those that I love the most. I can’t change or control or manipulate what others say or do. But I can, like you say, find my voice and speak truth and love and peace.
I love your picture of what Turn the other cheek means and I believe you are right on!