Homer wrote:Much to ponder. Paul meant something when he said for women to be silent, just got to find out what it is.
I'm coming to the conclusion that this part of it is somewhat contextual and cultural, that if the culture would receive non-silence as some form of authority or headship usurptation (as they did then), then silence is the measure. In another culture, if "sharing" etc. and honestly asking for further clarification / understanding without threat would not be seen as an authoritative activity, then that might be permitted. However, as the actual "activity" might be somewhat cultural, I can not see the basic position of Paul as being "culturally relevant" only in his day that there is a
positional respect that must be afforded in all cultures however that is manifested in that culture.
So, if one can arrange things such that a woman's activies aren't seen as authorative, then I think you may be playing with fire but could have a biblical setup with women in various ministerial roles. So, it is VERY important to me before I am to "join" the church (implictly endorsings its major doctrines?) that I understand therationale and safeguards/limits for women that this congregation believes will help it to stay faithful to Scripture (or determine if they are complete egalitarians like the national organization seems to be). I think they can be "wrong" on this and I can still join, depending on those reasons. What's most important to me is that they have firm exegetical reasons grounded not in political convenience or modern sensibilities but in an honest approach to exploting gifts consistent with Scripture.
However, I have been reading the sections on the United Methodist's Book of Discipline and their various proclamations, etc., on the subject and I am near disdain for the lengths to which they seem to go for full parity in all respects with a virtual (no, explicit and purposfully notorious and encouraging) rejection of any limits positionally or otherwise that would suggest that women and men are in any way different in positional roles or otherwise.
They seem to be responding exclusively to a prior generation, which held women in low regard, value-wise and seem to have over-reformed this clear error in the church's past. One thing in particular concerns me the most and this seems really liberal from a post-modern individualism and to exemplify a rather low view of Scripture... Consider this quote from a leader's resource posted at the General Board's website on the subject of women and quoting the Book of Discipline...
***
Methodism’s founder, John Wesley, believed that the living core of the Christian faith was "(1) revealed in Scripture, (2) illuminated by tradition, (3) vivified in personal and experience, and (4) confirmed by reason." In the United Methodist Church this way of examining Scripture and doing theology is sometimes referred to as the "Wesleyan quadrilateral."
Wesley’s position, and the position of the United Methodist Church, is that Scripture is primary. The United Methodist Book of Discipline notes, however, that the Christian witness, "even when grounded in Scripture and mediated by tradition, is ineffectual unless understood and appropriated by the individual. To become our witness, it must make sense in terms of our own reason and experience."
What matters most, according to the Discipline, is that "all four guidelines be brought to bear in faithful, serious, theological consideration. Insights arising from serious study of the Scriptures and tradition enrich contemporary experience. Imaginative and critical thought enables us to understand better the Bible and our common Christian history."
***
While I agree with Wesley's famous "quadrilateral," this application of it sounds extremely subjective and suggests that the bible can be twisted any which way if imaginative and critical thought can lead an individual to "lean on his own understanding" if he just can't seem to "appropriate" the doctrine. (basically, this sounds like you can dismiss a teaching if it sounds at odds with your personal views -- ok, then I say there's no hell and we should be able to eat drink and be merry and still be with Jesus).
Here are the portions of the Book of Discipline and my response in red/bold...
¶ 161 E) Women and Men—We affirm with Scripture the common humanity of male and female, both having equal worth in the eyes of God.
Amen
We reject the erroneous notion that one gender is superior to another, that one gender must strive against another, and that members of one gender may receive love, power, and esteem only at the expense of another.
Amen
We especially reject the idea that God made individuals as incomplete fragments, made whole only in union with another.
OK, well fair enough - if a woman wants to stay single they can remain a whole unto themselves and participate fully in life careers, etc. -- the bible speaks only of the home and the church. When one marries, one must submit to God's picture of marriage, not man's.
We call upon women and men alike to share power and control,
Ouch! This is the key. Seems completely foreign to scripture.
to learn to give freely and to receive freely, to be complete and to respect the wholeness of others.
OK
We seek for every individual opportunities and freedom to love and be loved, to seek and receive justice, and to practice ethical self-determination.
Sure, so far as that isn't balanced by how it affects those around us -- I don't think any Christian has full ethical self-determination.
We understand our gender diversity to be a gift from God, intended to add to the rich variety of human experience and perspective; and we guard against attitudes and traditions that would use this good gift to leave members of one sex more vulnerable in relationships than members of another.
Agreed! but the requires that the church discipline a husband that is putting a wife in a position of vulnerability. If he's fulfilling his (different) obligation, she will never be vulnerable.
From The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church - 2008. Copyright 2008 by The United Methodist Publishing House. Used by permission.
¶ 162 F) Rights of Women—We affirm women and men to be equal in every aspect of their common life. We therefore urge that every effort be made to eliminate sex-role stereotypes in activity and portrayal of family life and in all aspects of voluntary and compensatory participation in the Church and society.
Can't go there -- "in every aspect" covers a lot of ground contrary to Scripture
We affirm the right of women to equal treatment in employment, responsibility, promotion, and compensation.
OK
We affirm the importance of women in decision-making positions at all levels of Church and society and urge such bodies to guarantee their presence through policies of employment and recruitment. We support affirmative action as one method of addressing the inequalities and discriminatory practices within our Church and society. We urge employers of persons in dual career families, both in the Church and society, to apply proper consideration of both parties when relocation is considered.
We affirm the right of women to live free from violence and abuse and urge governments to enact policies that protect women against all forms of violence and discrimination in any sector of society.
Too dependent on the premise to comment.
From The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church - 2008. Copyright 2008 by The United Methodist Publishing House. Used by permission.
We have been engaged in fellowship at one of the UMC fellowships, and could continue to fellowship as "frequent visitors," but I am meeting with the pastors to consider whether I can join the organization without agreeing with the "national institution(since my kids would benefit from full membership in a umber of ways)." If the local fellowship (as seems perhaps to be the case) has a more conservative view and has better exegesis and limits/controls in this area (they seem to be somewhat flexible on the paedobaptist issues and are willing not to baptize my children until profession), then I might be inclined to join the local fellowship.
If there aren't visible controls or limitations, though, as life goes on I just hate to see my children raised with such a visible error that might influence their views of God's vision for men and women.