I’ve taken a long hiatus from my blog while I was at
Governor’s School, AP Training, and moving back home. But I’m determined that I will not give up
this project. So on my first Sunday in
my new/old home, I’m taking time to read, study, and write.
I’m still studying Mary Kassian’s The Feminist Gospel. I’ve
made it to chapter 3 (I’ve got a long way to go!). In this chapter, Kassian examines the
argument and effects of Mary Daly’s The
Church and the Second Sex.
Published in 1968, The
Church and the Second Sex led Daly’s administration at Boston College to
issue her a terminal contract. After
protests, the administration reversed this decision and gave her a promotion
and tenure. Kassian reflects, “Students
viewed the reversal of the terminal contract as a victory for women’s rights and a covert admission of
guilt by the Church.” Daly’s work,
largely based on deBeavoir’s The Second
Sex, differed from its inspiration in one key idea – the church was
redeemable.
Amen to that! I can’t
overlook this crucial point. People who
have a problem with the treatment of women in the church need to understand
that the mistreatment of women is a result of the church – the people who make
up that particular church body. In God’s
design, men and women are equal, equally esteemed, and worthy of dignity and
respect. The church as an institution frequently
distorts God’s design because of sin.
So, the church should work to
stamp out the mistreatment of women in the church. That is one component of the church’s
sanctification. Other areas that have
the same need are the church as it pertains to racism, classism, sexuality, and
generally interacting with broken people in broken systems. (That’s not at all overwhelming, right?)
Daly’s first major theme was “that the church was guilty of
causing women’s legal oppression and deceiving women into enforced passivity.” The idea is this – the church didn’t do much
to oppose the social legal oppression of women as far back as the Middle
Ages. Women were useful in their
submissive roles. For years, the church
got away with this because they emphasized the reward that women would receive
in heaven. Many Christians still cling
to this hope – that the injustices of the world will be overturned in the new
heavens and earth. Theologically, this
is true! But it’s a poor excuse to
overlook the mistreatment of people in this world.
Jesus himself exemplified the fact that we should address
the needs of people in the world today.
Matthew 25: 34-40:
"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?' The King will reply, 'Truly, I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'"
There is a reward awaiting believers in heaven. But that eternal reward does not absolve members of the church from an active life on this earth. So if the church tells people that they should just suck it up and deal with hardship now because it will end someday, they're missing the point. Jesus embodied charity for us when he came to earth to live among us. Clearly, the lives we're living now are not pointless.
Daly’s second major theme was that the church taught “women’s
inferiority in its doctrine.” I hadn’t
considered this before. The idea is that
as Christian women watched the Virgin Mary bow before her son, they saw that
women were strictly submissive to men: men are to be revered. This is an interesting point, but it’s flawed
in its interpretation. Mary bowed at the
feet of her son, who was the Son of God.
EVERYONE should have bowed at His feet!
If the church confused every church leader with Jesus, then there’s a
problem.
I’ll continue to come back to the fact that I do believe in
male headship. So I believe that men
have a degree of authority in the church that should not be available to
women. However, women in the church are
NOT to bow down at the feet of men in the church. Men are not worthy of worship. God is.
Daly’s third major theme was that the church’s moral
teaching was harmful because woman embodied the curse of the flesh while man
embodied the pure spirit. Because Eve
gave the fruit to Adam, she was morally inferior. I think this is a misreading of
scripture. Yes, Eve gave the fruit to
Adam, but she is not any more culpable than man. In fact, scripture later says that sin
entered the world through Adam. Woman is
not solely to blame for the fall.
But apparently the church, in history, taught that woman is “other,”
“Daly claimed that the Church was the promoter of the antisexual sentiments
that cast women’s body as sinful, thereby stifling women’s sexuality…women
could only overcome their special sinfulness by maintaining a perpetual virginal
state” (Kassian). If this was the
teaching, it’s wrong. Woman is not
sinful because of her sexuality. Woman is
sinful because she is a human living after the fall. I don’t know enough about church history to
know if this is really what women were taught or if this is a misinterpretation
of the church’s teaching. I mean, humans
get a lot of things wrong, so I wouldn’t be surprised.
Finally, Daly’s fourth major theme is that women were
excluded from leadership in the church.
Daly said it was pointless for a girl to “aspire to such an exalted role
[as pope, bishop, priest, pastor] no matter how great her talents and piety.” This is tricky territory for my writing. As I said before, I do believe in male
headship within the church. I believe
that only men are to be ordained in ministry.
This position is a tough sell. It’s not my goal to convince anybody. I know that this is where my own views
diverge from feminist views. I
understand that this is still a hang-up for many people when it comes to the
church. I understand that, historically
and contemporarily, this makes it hard to postulate that the church esteems
women as equal to men. I get that, and I
can’t tackle it tonight.
I start my workdays tomorrow. But it feels good to have spent some time
thinking about these issues.
