Palin Puts Baptist Men on the Spot
The nomination of Sarah Palin changed Southern Baptist fundamentalism quicker than Eve tempted Adam to eat the apple in the Garden of Eden, metaphorically speaking. The Republican Party's first woman caused Republican Party's first-line male clergy to revise their theology about women, while claiming they never meant what they said earlier.
Only 10 years ago, the Southern Baptist Convention thumped the Bible and announced in Salt Lake City, of all places, that the woman's place was in the home. More exactly, they added a family paragraph to the Baptist Faith & Message statement, which said that a wife had the God-given responsibility to her husband "to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation."
Their words were abundantly clear and literally interpreted. The wife had no other role, no other divine appointment, no other responsibility. No exceptions were made for women who work outside the home, either by necessity or vocational fulfillment. The woman was to be a household manager and to nurture children.
Their statement was economically unambiguous: the husband "has the God-given responsibility to provide for, to protect, and to lead his family."
One of the two women on the Baptist Faith & Message committee, which wrote the family statement, said that women should never "be ashamed to be a worker in the home." She said that women were to be "helpers first of all to our husbands" and "homemakers are the backbone of our society."
The SBC president, who appointed that committee, would later say, "The wife should not be burdened with the necessity of working outside the home."
When he was chairman of the SBC's Council on Family Life in 2003, he said, "Particular attention should be given to the specific roles established in the Scripture for the husband and the wife in the areas of provision and management. The husband should be vocationally focused and able to provide for his family."
Now SBC leaders are reinterpreting their statement.
None does so more dishonestly that a seminary professor who wrote last week that "the Baptist Faith and Message does not address the question of women in secular leadership, only spiritual leadership."
Wow! Talk about mendacity.
All of a sudden their faith statement is about spiritual leadership. That's certainly not what the words say and what the leadership said. If they had meant to affirm women in the workplace, then they would have said so, which they did not, even in their interpretative document of their faith statement.
Another SBC official wrote that he saw no conflict between his denomination's statement on women and supporting Palin vice-presidential campaign. He said that men and women are "assigned different but complementary roles in the home" and "our confession of faith does not speak to the appropriateness of women serving in political office."
Well, no, the confession of faith doesn't speak literally to women running for office. But when his wife served on the committee that wrote the family statement, neither she nor he spoke up for women working outside the home.
In fact, when I said in June 1998 that Southern Baptist fundamentalists "hope to make June Cleaver the biblical model for motherhood, despite numerous biblical references to women who worked outside the home," fundamentalists responded with the claim they were only being faithful to the Bible.
Fundamentalists could have clarified that their statement was only about spiritual leadership and had nothing to do with women being employed outside the home. They could have said they valued and honored women pursuing their God-given talents in the workplace. Nope, they said their statement was all about the Bible.
So, why are SBC fundamentalists rushing towards theological revisionism?
Theological accommodation always arises in response to cultural change. Palin has changed the Republican culture, forcing SBC clergy either to say they can't support her because what she is doing counters biblical teaching or to shift their interpretation of the Bible. Their fear of being shut out of the White House, should she win, or blamed for Republican defeat in November necessitates their theological revisionism.
What the revisionist storm will wrought for Baptist women in church leadership and in family roles is unknown, except that it will not be what is was. And that's bad news for the patriarchal clergy of the Christian Right who hide behind the Bible in the pursuit of political power.
Robert Parham is executive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics.
Robert Parham
Originally posted by kirksey957From the SBC's Christian Life Commission pamphlet called Critical Issues: Homosexuality:
Palin Puts Baptist Men on the Spot
The nomination of Sarah Palin changed Southern Baptist fundamentalism quicker than Eve tempted Adam to eat the apple in the Garden of Eden, metaphorically speaking. The Republican Party's first woman caused Republican Party's first-line male clergy to revise their theology about women, while claiming they never meant wh ...[text shortened]... utive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics.
Robert Parham
Discrimination against gays and lesbians is proper, in the areas of:
* employment.
* to protect the (presumably heterosexual) "family."
* to protect other social institutions.
If only Sarah Palin was a lesbian....
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI'm hoping Jeremiah Wright will do her.
From the SBC's Christian Life Commission pamphlet called Critical Issues: Homosexuality:
Discrimination against gays and lesbians is proper, in the areas of:
* employment.
* to protect the (presumably heterosexual) "family."
* to protect other social institutions.
If only Sarah Palin was a lesbian....
Originally posted by kirksey957"Their words were abundantly clear and literally interpreted. The wife had no other role, no other divine appointment, no other responsibility. No exceptions were made for women who work outside the home, either by necessity or vocational fulfillment. The woman was to be a household manager and to nurture children."
Palin Puts Baptist Men on the Spot
The nomination of Sarah Palin changed Southern Baptist fundamentalism quicker than Eve tempted Adam to eat the apple in the Garden of Eden, metaphorically speaking. The Republican Party's first woman caused Republican Party's first-line male clergy to revise their theology about women, while claiming they never meant wh ...[text shortened]... utive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics.
Robert Parham
Actually, the nomination of Sarah Palin throws the whole liberal agenda of women's liberation on it's head.
For forty years now we have been preached at by the liberal left that women are equal to men and should be recognised for their efforts. Now we have a woman on the ticket, and what pisses the left off is she isn't a liberal.
Go figure!
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneIf only you were a Christian...
From the SBC's Christian Life Commission pamphlet called Critical Issues: Homosexuality:
Discrimination against gays and lesbians is proper, in the areas of:
* employment.
* to protect the (presumably heterosexual) "family."
* to protect other social institutions.
If only Sarah Palin was a lesbian....
Originally posted by josephwBut wouldn't you admit that your average conservative fundamentalist Christian male who has long supported the idea of men only in leadership roles as that is what the Bible teaches is mightily confused right now and the dirty little secret is that they will cut her some slack not because she is conservative, but because they are sexually attracted to her.
[b]"Their words were abundantly clear and literally interpreted. The wife had no other role, no other divine appointment, no other responsibility. No exceptions were made for women who work outside the home, either by necessity or vocational fulfillment. The woman was to be a household manager and to nurture children."
Actually, the nomination of Sara ...[text shortened]... e a woman on the ticket, and what pisses the left off is she isn't a liberal.
Go figure![/b]
Originally posted by kirksey957What the Bible teaches about the role of women has primarily to do with the local assembly and not what they can do as a citizen of a nation.
But wouldn't you admit that your average conservative fundamentalist Christian male who has long supported the idea of men only in leadership roles as that is what the Bible teaches is mightily confused right now and the dirty little secret is that they will cut her some slack not because she is conservative, but because they are sexually attracted to her.
Man, are you that confused about what the Bible teaches?
Originally posted by josephwSo far as I know, Jesus never said a word against homosexuality. He only had two commandments. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the second.
If only you would follow the teachings of Jesus, then you would be a Christian instead of saying things like "if only she was a lesbian".
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." Mark 12:30-31
From what I can tell, the vast majority of "Christians" have abandoned the teachings of Jesus for the teachings of Paul and others.
From what I can tell, you are a part of that group.
Originally posted by josephwOK, why should the assembly known as the church and the country be any different in terms of gender leadership? And please something besides "for the Bible tells me so."
What the Bible teaches about the role of women has primarily to do with the local assembly and not what they can do as a citizen of a nation.
Man, are you that confused about what the Bible teaches?
Originally posted by kirksey957Because one is a creation of God, and the other is a creation of man.
OK, why should the assembly known as the church and the country be any different in terms of gender leadership? And please something besides "for the Bible tells me so."
Why do you reject the authority of scripture?
In the Bible we find everything we need to know concerning life and living. Why confound the plain and simple meaning of scripture with the so-called higher criticism?
In this world we will continuously see the struggle in the political arena for power and control. But not so in the Church. Church leadership is about being a servant to those in our care. It makes little difference what gender one is. There's plenty to do for everyone. It's just that a specific responsibility is placed on the men in the Church to perform a certain function and another on the women. But there are those who wish to bring the world into the Church and corrupt it for power and self aggrandizement.
Originally posted by josephwIt's not that I reject the authority of the Bible, but rather I don't discount or reject the authority of women. Do you subscribe to all biblical teachings about women?
Because one is a creation of God, and the other is a creation of man.
Why do you reject the authority of scripture?
In the Bible we find everything we need to know concerning life and living. Why confound the plain and simple meaning of scripture with the so-called higher criticism?
In this world we will continuously see the struggle in the politi ...[text shortened]... who wish to bring the world into the Church and corrupt it for power and self aggrandizement.
