What happened?

For this paper I’m writing, I have been reading a lot of things that relate to the Southern Baptist Convention’s view of gender roles and have found some interesting stuff. I just came across the Virginia Women’s Missionary Union’s “Declaration of the Dignity of Women,” dated September 11, 2004. It includes the following:

“We declare ourselves in sympathy with all the forces of righteousness: international and interracial justice; world peace…; universal education; Sabbath observance; sacredness of the home; the family altar; high standards forwomanly speech, dress, and conduct; improved industrial conditions; child welfare; and public health.” –WMU Plan of Work, 1914-1960

“Through the centuries, women have witnessed and served and waited on God to enlighten Christian men concerning women’s place and capacity in Christian institutions.” –Address to WMU Training School, May 8, 1941

“The New Testament says you are free. The walls are down; the veil of the temple is open, so make your own contribution… Women became the core of the first churches. They became deacons, they prayed, they prophesied, they led in worship.” –Ministers Wives Luncheon, Portland, 1973

“We’ve got to do a turnaround. Women are less respected today than they were when I first came into the denomination as an employed person… We’ve gone so far to the right that we’re not the people that I grew up under, not at all, and I regret that.” –Alma Hunt, Virginia Missions, Summer 2002

We connect with our prophetic past, remembering the voices of our foremothers: Jochebed and Hannah, Ruth and Naomi, Deborah, Mary and Elizabeth, Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the Mother of James, women dragged to prison by Saul, Tabitha (translated Dorcas,) Mary the mother of John, Lydia, Chloe, Nympha, Priscilla, Apphia, the four daughters of Phillip, Ammias of Philadelphia, and all of the other named and unnamed women who led in the first churches.

As we remember these and others, we draw the strength to lead in our own day, at a time when the leadership of women has been devalued and suppressed. We draw the strength to declare, with prophetic conviction:

* That we reject all blanket discrimination against women in the work of Christian ministry, in particular, as elaborated in the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message;

* That we reject the findings and policy of the North American Mission Board with regard to the non-endorsement of women to chaplaincy positions.

* That we reject any devaluation of women worldwide.

So, in 1914 members of the SBC were talking about things like racial justice, world peace, improving working conditions, and public health. And even before 1914 until, well, last September, SBC women were calling for gender equality. Interestingly enough, it seems that SBC leaders who want to subordinate women can’t even appeal to their own tradition. I’ve only heard a little about a “fundamentalist takeover” in the SBC—is that what happened? Where have the conversations and concerns about world peace and social justice gone? (Oh, and before I get accused again of making the SBC into a “whipping boy,” let me say that I know from experience that not all SBC churches warrant this criticism. But there’s a whole lot that do, and the SBC has national and international influence, which makes raising this question pretty important, no?)

Comments

[Wasp Jerky]

Tony Campolo makes some good points about women and their role in the church in his latest book, Speaking My Mind. He notes, for instance, that in centuries past in this country, women had a much greater role in evangelistic work, perhaps even comparible to that of men. He also points out the hypocrisy/racism inherent in the idea that it's okay for women to be missionaries in foreign countries, but not pastors here in the U.S.

[Anonymous]

While most western cultures reject gender discrimination, it seems to me that the issues raised here are more concerned with women's positions and recognition in the world rather that women's positions and recognition before God. The SBC cannot silence you, and will in fact, (like any political organization) acknowledge you when you have achieved a sufficient following and momentum that they can no longer repress you. Ironically, at that point you will no longer need them.

[Wasp Jerky]

I'm not sure that's entirely true, anonymous. Billy Graham's daughter has had to deal with men turning around and refusing to look at her during speaking engagements. She may not have the biggest following around, but if she can't catch a break, who can?

[Anonymous]

I hear you saying that Graham's daughter was treated disrespectfully by men. All men? Or those 'Fundamentalist Christians' with an agenda to repress women? If the latter, why waste time trying to gain status amongst such a crowd? My point is that breaking into the Good Ole Boys Club should not be the focus to begin with. Go live life as directed by Christ with or without their endorsement.

[Nicole]

I own a book that helped illuminate the shift within in the SBC and make sense of it. It is entitled The Way We Were and is by Fischer Humphreys. You can borrow my copy sometime, if you're interested.

[Todd]

Natalie, good post. There is a book by Gilbert Bilezikian, "Beyond Sex Roles." We used it for a DMIN seminar at SWBTS, which was a bit of a surprise. Bilezikian is a graduate of Wheaton.

We might cast what goes on in fundamentalism as the creating of an "eye of a needle" we must pass through before given voice, ear or place. In the end, they can have their eye and needle. So, for them it is less about getting intot the Kingdom of God and more about accessing the Kingdom through their formulations.

[Anonymous]

Nat,

John here...

You might want to talk to my Aunt, (Donna's Aunt to be clear)...she is used to pastor a church that WAS SBC, but they were removed from fellowship when she became pastor...

She also was very involved in the early days of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship...which is the group that left the SBC when the Conservative Takeover/Resurrgence (depending on who you get your info from) took place.

She has dealt with gender issues during most of her life in ministry...she might be a good source of info...

I just thought I would mention it.

Blessings.

[greg]

Takeover is probably a good word. As you note, Southern Baptists can't appeal to their own tradition, but it isn't just on the issue of women. The SBC doesn't appear to take most Baptist distinctives seriously anymore. That is one of the points the CBF and Mainstream Baptists are attempting to make.

Bruce Prescott has a timeline here:
http://www.mainstreambaptists.org/mbn/takeover_timeline.htm. I didn't know if blogger allowed html in comments, so I just pasted it.

[Natalie]

Thanks everyone for the info...

You won't be hearing from me for a while, since I have 3 papers due in the next 2 days, and I am leaving for spring break on friday. Woo-hoo! (If I make it to then...)

[Paul]

Hi Natalie,

I got to this site from JustTodd (my brother). Great comments. And don't worry about being accused of making the SBC your whipping boy. I'm being accused of the same thing over on a lifeway discussion board.

Religous establishments don't much like prophetic voices. Preach on, girl!

[Wasp Jerky]

Natalie can't preach, Paul. She doesn't have the biological equipment required for that sort of thing. She'll have to be content to play the piano.

[Shawn]

Good post Nat. I have always been somewhat confused about the roles that are promoted for women within the SBC. They either say one thing and then do another or they just say things that are inconsistent with scripture. I must admit that there was a time when I was on the wrong side of that debate too. It's amazing what we'll buy into if we haven't done the homework.

[Christiane]

Hi, not a regular here, but someone sent me the link. I just want to clarify something Todd said. Dr. Bilezikian is not a graduate of Wheaton College (he went to Gordon Seminary in Boston). He is however Professor Emeritus from Wheaton. Also, while he loves Beyond Sex Roles, he would recommend reading Community 101 instead because it deals with the women's issue but gives a more broad approach to the church as a whole. Just my two cents. Thanks.