Gifted for Leadership: The “Gender Ghetto” in the Church

back to Kyria.com

RSS Feed | Help

e-mail to a friend

who we are

Marian Liautaud

Nicole Unice

Jenni Catron

Beatrice Rusu

more ...

Free Newsletters

top downloads

on Kyria.com

« Leading Absent | Main | Facebook Pages vs. Groups »

August 16, 2011

The “Gender Ghetto” in the Church

In a world of hurt, is fighting for a place at the table worth our time?

by Marlena Graves

In a recent article in the Huffington Post, Cathleen Falsani asks readers to list three of the top evangelical women leaders under sixty. Falsani contends it's hard to do and the title of her post suggests the reason why: "Jesus is Still Surrounded By Too Many Men." To lend readers a hand with the question, Falsani suggests that author and speaker, Margaret Feinberg (also a Gifted for Leadership blogger), should top the list. After all, Feinberg is a prolific writer who speaks at many large events throughout the country and was dubbed as an upcoming leader in American evangelicalism by Charisma Magazine. Even so, Falsani observes, Feinberg is, “probably the most influential young woman leader in evangelicalism you've never heard of.”

In a phone interview, Falsani asked Feinberg why she was one of the only women speaking at these large Christian events. Is there a "gender ghetto" in evangelical Christianity? Falsani wondered. Feinberg didn't think so; Fienberg believes that at the grass-roots level, the situation is changing for women—even if relatively few have places of national prominence. Yet at the end of her interview, Feinberg, who I deeply admire and respect, said something I’d like to explore a bit further. It was this:

"I wonder why we're even talking about this when there are so many needs around the world?…Now is not the time. When every starving person has food, when every homeless person has a place to live, when every well is dug, when AIDS has been eradicated in Africa, when all of our neighbors know Jesus, then we can sit and debate about titles and who should do what."

I understand Feinberg's sentiments. After all, the church has progressed far beyond where it was 20 years ago. However, I wonder whether gender inequity really is a peripheral issue that distracts us from what’s really important—spreading the gospel and from eradicating poverty and disease? I don’t think so. To somehow think that these aren’t related is to adopt a fundamentally disintegrated view of the world. Kingdom work is indeed hindered by not allowing women (and also minorities) a chance to have a place at the influential decision-making table.

Yet in some churches women are not. When this happens, there is no doubt that the gospel suffers. But how the gospel flourishes when we utilize both men and women’s gifts and input! Doing so is good stewardship.

Years ago, one of my girlfriends, who is skilled in outreach, started an adopt-a-block ministry in Springfield, Ohio. Soon her husband and others joined her. Her vision blossomed into a diverse church where men and women lovingly preached the gospel, fed and educated hungry children and adults, found jobs and homes for the homeless, ministered to prostitutes and felons, and walked with those full of doubt, especially college students who grew up in Christian homes. Earlier this year, the church decided to join another ministry that is doing similar work in order to better serve the city of Springfield. So because she was encouraged and not forbidden from using her gifts, Rebecca, in very meaningful and far reaching ways, spearheaded the spread of the gospel. Surely only God knows the eternal implications of Rebecca’s (and others’) faithfulness.

Wisdom demands that we eradicate gender segregation in the church. Every member of the body of Christ needs to be empowered to use their gifts. That entails giving women a place at the table of influence. When that happens, instead of debating minutiae and serving in a diminished capacity, we’ll all stand strong—together for the gospel.

Marlena Graves is a writer who received her Master of Divinity from Northeastern Seminary in Rochester, New York. She is married to her best friend, Shawn, a philosopher. Together, they have an energetic and fun-loving little girl, Iliana. Marlena regularly speaks to college students and congregations about spiritual formation. She blogs at His Path through the Wilderness and Her.meneutics.

Related Tags: equality, gifts, outreach, women's leadership

Comments

Excellent post. Ms. Graves is right to challenge Feinberg's response. Feinberg apparently wants to set aside gender issues by drawing our attention to other significant issues that remain unresolved. But many significant issues can be objectionably dismissed by attempting to point out other important matters that still need attending to. For example, why should the church address racism? After all, there are starving people around the world, wells need to be dug, and we've got evangelistic work to do. Environmental degradation? Set it aside. Now's not the time. We've got AIDS to eradicate and shelters to build for homeless people. Comprehensive U.S. Immigration reform? Not until after all our neighbors know Jesus. We could go on. But the point is clear. The church needs to resist such dismissals.

Great post. Ignoring gender issues to focus on other problems (as if it were an either/or proposition) also misses the fact that they all have the same root cause--sin. If we can't address our prideful, unjust behaviors in our own homes and churches, how do we expect to be able to do it on a wider scale? We need to do both.

This is an excellent article. Thanks for writing it. How easy for Feinberg to say that "there are more important issues" when she has a national platform. If only she would us it to advance other talented women that she knows of. The plight of women will have to be grassroots, and national in order for the gospel to be advanced and all of the other important needs of the world are to be met. It is a both/and argument in my view not either/or.

I disagree with most here. The reason Margaret Feinberg IS a leader and has a national platform is because she is focused on what God has given her to do. She doesn't have her head stuck in the sand, she is aware of the a fore mentioned issues but is totally devoted to what God has given her to do. That IS leadership. Those whom God has called and gifted to address gender issues should be so focused and not call into question the devotion of another woman of God.

@ Tracy

It seems to me that the author isn't trashing Feinberg. She said that she had deep admiration and respect for Feinberg. She isn't calling into question Feinberg's devotion to God. She seems to think that Feinberg either mispoke or didn't consider the implications of her answer to Falsani. Personally, I've seen the gospel hindered when women are kept from positions like and elder or deacon. I've been in these positions. A women's perspective is definitely needed in such places--these are places of influence.

I have a friend whose wife is the Vice President Academic of Carey Theological College which is located on the caampus of the University of British Columbia.

Dr Barbara Mutch is an effective Christian leader here in Canada and is doing an excellent job of providing intelligent and inspiring leadership to a rising generation of evangelical Christians here in Vancouver BC

Ny friend, Paul Mutch, told me that his wife had had the privilege of being a member of a Baptist church in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan where the senior pastor, a man, encouraged women to go as far as their abilities would take them.

Yes, women in leadership is an issue the church is facing right now, but not nearly the most important. And I think that if you go back and read the context of the original article, that's what Margaret was trying to get at. When we go back to Jesus’ teachings, he doesn’t argue about the logistics of church leadership, but just does. He loves unconditionally. He meets needs and goes out of his way to engage with the marginalized. Yes, there is a gender issue within the Church today, but why do people get caught up in that argument when instead men and women—titled or not, can be the hands and feet of Jesus to the world?

Jessica:

Arguing against the deeply embedded patriarchy found within contemporary American evangelicalism is not equivalent to arguing over the "logisitics of church leadership" or "titles". While Jesus does not explicitly offer arguments concerning patriarchy, it's not clear what follows from that. Jesus also doesn't explicitly offer arguments against racism, environmental degradation, objectionable immigration policies, abortion, sex trafficking, and so on. But surely the church today should be making the arguments against those things. So, too, with patriarchy. And that's true even though there are other important things to argue about (and do, of course).

Suppose someone wrote: "Yes, there is a racism issue within the Church today, but why do people get caught up in that argument when instead whites and blacks--titled or not, can be the hands and feet of Jesus to the world?" That doesn't sound like the sort of stance we should be taking on racism. Nor is it the sort of stance we should be taking on gender and patriarchy.

I, too, struggle with the balance of this issue. A comment on my blog recently suggested that the "women's issue" is simply a "theological disagreement" not quite as important as the activity of saving the world from the maladies mentioned here. But that disagreement causes grief to women who are not allowed or are maligned as they use their God-given gifts and like the story of Rebecca or the argument of "Half the Church" shows - it hurts the church's ministries as a whole.
But I also see Tracy's point in her comment. Is the best way to move towards a resolution of this issue to continuously talk about it, debate it and pull out our blogging guns every time someone like Mark Driscoll makes a comment that makes us shudder? Or is it to quietly, confidently get to work solving issues like AIDS and poverty and let God take care of honoring the women who do work like that?

I think, perhaps, the truth lies somewhere in the middle?

Dallas Willard so clearly addresses this in the intro to the affirming, compelling, oh-so-encouraging book HOW I CHANGED MY MIND ABOUT WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP

Meanwhile, let's keep our eyes focused on Christ, and continue to do what He's called us to do, without putting too much energy into endless debate about our place at the table. To be sure, there's room for us all, even if we haven't received an invitation from "official" leaders. Our energy is better focused elsewhere because the "harvest fields are white," and there's no shortage of work to be done using the gifts God has given each of us.

Truth be told, if He's given us the gifts, He wants us to share them with a waiting, watching world ... and He will be faithful to provide opportunities to do so!

Gee, when I saw the headline "Gender Ghetto" I assumed, quite wrongly, that this article was going to be about the feminization of the church and the lack of male leadership!

We're talking about this because women are leaving the church. There are many reasons why, but you can't discount the fact that the secular world gives women more respect and opportunites than many, many churches do.

By the way, one thing that we should also be talking about is how the number of women in the world is falling because of selective abortion.

Feinburg is right, there are bigger issues. You say that 'in some churches women are not. There is no doubt that when this happens the gospel suffers'. I would like to understand your rational and evidence behind this statement. I am not opposed to equal participation in decision making but I think this statement is quite extreme without backing it up.

I have been in churches and denominations that allow women as pastors/leaders and ones that have not, but in the end it seems that whether or not they do, there are women serving God. No, they may not be known nationally or internationally, but they are known and respected by their communities and are making a difference there. We are not all called to be a part of a national ministry and because, most of the time, women are called to be the primary care-givers to their children, jet-setting around the country is not practical. When we get over the titles, it doesn't matter, what DOES matter is that we are serving God in the manner in which WE are called to.

Also, "women are leaving the church?" Seriously? Most of the men already left. Perhaps we should be more aware of what Satan is really doing in and to our churches.

I think Marlena's disagreement with Feinberg is justified, at least to some degree. I seriously doubt anyone would suggest that making sure women are given the opportunity to preach is equally important as feeding the starving or 'saving souls' from hell. Granted, it is important that women be given the opportunity to preach (if qualified and called), and even complementarians would surely admit that it is important for us to get our sexual ethics right; we should be confident that we're treating women justly, fairly, lovingly, and the like.

We might interpret Feinberg in this way: Do the more important things first, the less important things second. I don't see any reason to suppose that Feinberg doubts the importance of gender justice; it seems that she's merely positing a hierarchy of moral obligations. Of course, it's an open question whether the hierarchy she seems to provide is plausible, but that's quite independent of whether she thinks gender justice is important.

But here's where I think Marlena's suggestion comes in: Feinberg's hierarchy is plausible only if gender justice is separable (in the relevant way(s)) from these alleged higher-order obligations. And is it? There's some reason to think not. Consider that there are numerous criticisms of Christian theism, and a major one concerns how the Church treats, has treated, and views women. I have known many a person who rejected Christianity because it lacked gender justice in some form. (Indeed, came close to rejecting Christianity for this reason!) Moreover, there is much literature to show that gender justice in the Church is vital for the success of the Gospel. Plenty of people will keep out of the Church until it starts treating women rightly. Thus, our goal of successfully spreading the Gospel significantly depends on whether we rightly advocate gender justice. For Feinberg to separate these issues as she does is mistaken only because the way the world actually is today, but that is a criticism decisive enough to justify disagreement and, I think, important disagreement.

When this happens, there is no doubt that the gospel suffers. But how the gospel flourishes when we utilize both men and women’s gifts and input! Doing so is good stewardship. - copied directly from the blog.
This is where is stopped reading. The gospel NEVER suffers when it is presented as the Bible does. It is God's gospel, not ours. We need to add nothing or take away - God's word is sufficient. Period. End of discussion. Are we that arrogant to think we need to do something to enhance His word? I hope not or if you think so, test yourself to see if you are truly His.

"Becky": Who said anything about 'adding' anything to the Gospel? This was hardly Marlena's point. Her point was, rather, that there are plenty of things that are important, including gender justice, and that (in today's world) gender justice is an important part of reaching the world. It's not that we need to change the Gospel (e.g., suggesting that the Gospel is all about women's rights, or something like that); rather, it's that we need to realize that how we think and act regarding women is important, and plenty of non-Christians are bothered by our lack of attention in this area.

You claim that "the Gospel NEVER suffers when it is presented as the Bible does." This is ambiguous. It might mean "The message of the Bible is clear and true, if presented properly" or "No matter what you are doing, so long as you present the Bible clearly and truly, there's nothing to keep people from believing." I don't see anything about the first statement that Marlena would disagree with. However, the latter statement is pretty obviously false: Of course people can affect the power of the Gospel. If we're to take the Bible seriously, we'd realize there are many cases in which (for example) sinful hearts get in the way of the Bible's power. People just don't get it because of their sin. Why think that OUR actions couldn't, or don't, get in the way? Clearly, they can and do.

But let's suppose this is incorrect. Let's suppose that the Gospel is successful no matter how we act, so long as we present the Gospel clearly. Does it follow that it doesn't matter how we act? Not at all. We should pay attention to important issues in the Church, including gender justice, even if the effectiveness of the Gospel isn't tainted by ignoring gender justice.

Gender quity in the church is only a part of the wider gender equity in the world - Westerm women may be liberated but in most of the world women are still subject to violence at a huge scale, and inequity in every sphere of life: education, politics, culture. Women are actually the key to sustainable development: when aid and development agencies target women, they get by far the best results. So highlighting the situation of women in our churches, is a step towards liberating women, and their families, in the rest of the world. In other words, gender equity and poverty reduction are not alternatives, they are intimately linked.

Before we start arguing about women in leadership amongst ourselves, how about we start working on getting this piece published in a magazine that is read by both men and woman. That would be progress!

Two Sundays ago our pastor went on "rant" about the feminization of the church and the lack of men leaders. Since when did having the pulpit give you the right to lie to your congregation because the last I checked-over 80% of the churches are pastored exclusively by men, and the percentage is even higher of how many men are worship leaders! Could you name a large international ministry run by a woman-neither can I.
Is feminine bad or ugly or sinful? Is masculine bad or ugly or sinful? Neither are because God is both and neither.
I am sick of mem playing victim-that is like a white man in the South in the 1960s saying the blacks were taking over.

Yet again people choosing to ignore what the bible says.

While creating the healthy environment for women to cultivate and use their Spirit-giving gifts is very much part of the reality of the spiritual battle the Church faces constantly, we as women need to pray very hard for a pure heart and a clear conscience so that we are not in actuality adding weight to the battle for the wrong side...God help us all!

Great post (wow, the font in this comment box is so tiny!)

I am glad you called it out, what Margaret said, and I respect Margaret, too, but we can certainly disagree respectfully with one another.

I held the "non-essential" view for many years in my attempt to remain diplomatic and focused on "what really matters." It's why I was willing to live with gender inequity and keep nice with misogyny. But those days are behind me. I now see that in resigning the issue of women's equality in the church as a "non-essential" issue, that I was declaring myself and my sister's as Non-essential. Our voice and our presence, our gifting - based on calling and not gender - were all swept into a miscellaneous category called Non-Essential.

This trivializes the injustice of gender inequity in the church and therefore keeps it in perpetual power.

Rachel Held Evans did a recent blog post on women of influence in the church that lets us know that all is not lost! God is working in a mighty way ... in many venues. Nothing and no one can stop His plans!

http://rachelheldevans.com/influential-christian-women?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+RachelHeldEvans+%28Rachel+Held+Evans+-+Blog%29

I agree why are we worried about the gender on the platform that is a distraction and a huge useless argument. Should we worry about who gets the praise as long as God gets the glory. God used many women who don't even look for acknowledgement they serve God with a heart that only wants to serve God and others, reach all and not worry who is getting recognized. I say lets move on to more important issues God uses Women to minister and we are AWESOME AT IT!! We don't need a big to do about it. Feinberg may be where she is because she is concerned about the Kingdom of God isn't that whar we seek for first??

I agree with this

"How easy for Feinberg to say that "there are more important issues" when she has a national platform"

If someone asked you if the next President after Obama will most likely be black or white - how would you answer?

Most people I ask say White since that is what has dominated. Obama is an anomaly as is Ms Feinberg.

There's only one way to change these perceptions - change the numbers and you change the perceptions

I think the problem here is most females usually don't take up an occupation in which she will be preaching to a church. I completly agree on the subject of AIDS and Homelessness there are too many of these individuals and everyone wants to not do anything about it. Which is why some Political Organization which are Christian in faith will advocate for the segregation of all AIDS patients. Such as Christian Concepts or the Knights Party.

Kyria's Gifted for Leadership

categories

who we are

Free Newsletters

top downloads

on Kyria.com

The “Gender Ghetto” in the Church

Comments

recent posts

Archives

resources