Authority in the Christian blogosphere

5aLtmYn

Christian women find their voice and live out their callings online

Two weeks ago Tish Harrison Warren wrote a piece for Christianity Today titled “Who’s in charge of the Christian blogosphere?” In it, she wonders whether the kind of platforms people – especially women – gain through blogging should be accountable to some kind of ecclesial structure, much like pastors are theoretically accountable to their denominations.

Warren posed the piece as a rumination on responsibility: how can we make sure these bloggers – many of them laypersons, their “only” virtue being their popularity – “do” theology responsibly? She cited Jen Hatmaker as an example. Hatmaker – who has been in ministry for two decades and is a published author and popular speaker – recently announced that she is supportive of the full inclusion of LGBTI people in the church, a decision that proved unpopular in the evangelical world. (Read her response to the immediate flare-up of criticism here.)

Warren’s article wasn’t well-received, at least by my Twitter timeline’s standards. Warren was criticised for singling out Jen Hatmaker in a way that came across as chastising: how dare Hatmaker, “only” a blogger, deviate from the evangelical bottom line? The article read and felt like a gendered attack, Hatmaker acting as the negative example of what happens when those outside formal structures don’t toe the line.

Warren has since issued an apology to Hatmaker, but the article is still up on Christianity Today – the first part of a series called #AmplifyWomen. It’s ironic and telling that the first article in this series wasn’t about amplification at all, but about control.

Warren wouldn’t be the first woman delegated to keep her fellow women in check. One comes across it often; if you need an example, just skim any article relating to women on The Gospel Coalition blogs (alas, a favourite teacher of mine, Jen Wilkin, has participated in something similar). Warren has come across as sincere in her Twitter replies to criticism and praise, but I doubt she realises that a lot of her article’s backbone is internalised misogyny.

Make no mistake, the issue at play in Warren’s piece isn’t responsibility or accountability. As quite a few influential bloggers have pointed out, they are accountable: to their personal relationship with Jesus Christ, to the church or spiritual communities they form a part of, and to their friends, families, and peers. In fact, one could argue that the response to Warren’s piece is an indication of how much accountability there is in the popular Christian blogosphere: her article didn’t remain unchallenged, and the criticism was mostly fair and well thought out.

No, the issue Warren’s article skirts around is control. Unfortunately, there are still many church traditions where women aren’t allowed to preach, speak or teach (or if they are, it’s only to other women or to children). In these denominations, women aren’t allowed to have authority. So when these women, who are forced into silence by their churches, turn to the Internet to share their voice and listen to the voices of others like themselves, this presents a conundrum to the men and women in church denominations who delineate the function and authority of women. How do you control women speaking outside the traditional sphere of the church?

Well, you can’t, not without making it exceedingly obvious that the issue is really control rather than authority. If you’ve followed any of these popular female bloggers, authors, speakers and preachers (Jen Hatmaker, Rachel Held Evans and Sarah Bessey to name the bare minimum), you realise that their passion and gifts are Spirit-derived, unlike the man-made ecclesial structures that would insist they aren’t allowed to write Spirit-filled words or share Spirit-filled truth or preach prophetic, Spirit-filled prophecies. If it becomes clear that so many women have the gift of teaching, preaching, and disciple-making outside official church structures, you have to ask yourself: are these women and their ministries the problem, or the fact that so many churches continue to deny them?

It’s interesting to me that, around the same time this piece was published, an editor over at The Gospel Coalition went on a Twitter and comment rant against what he calls “discernment bloggers”. He had had a run-in with the women who run Spiritual Sounding Board and The Wartburg Watch, both websites dedicated to blogging about spiritual abuse in the American church. This editor, Joe Carter, called blogs like these divisive and the women who run them “broken wolves in sheep’s clothing”.

Call me crazy, but I spot a pattern here: women who won’t adhere to the “it’s all fine, it’s alright” party line of patriarchal, male-dominated church and spiritual traditions are called out by the benefactors of those traditions when their unsanctioned, Spirit-filled commentary hits too close to home. These churches, like Warren’s article, claim it’s about God-ordained authority; but it’s really about male-centric control. If God gives women authority to witness outside the church, then their authority isn’t in question.

As someone who had once lost her voice to an oppressive, male-dominated church situation and rediscovered it through blogging, I cannot overstress how important the voice of female Christian bloggers are. Even when those voices are more conservative than I am or have a theology that differs from mine, I’ve been enriched by the writing and teaching of Christian women who blog, both those with large followings and those with a smaller audience. Sometimes simply the reminder that there are powerful, Spirit-led women using their gifts is more of a comfort than I can say.

Christianity is a much bigger place than any one church, any one denomination, or any one pastor would have you believe. Faith, discipleship and following Jesus don’t heed the lines humanity draws around them. More often than not, the Holy Spirit uses those lines as starting places rather than as borders. These lines are porous, made to break through, much like sheep pens are meant to be left if the flock are to find places to graze, explore, grow and mature.

When an article like Warren’s appears, I see it as an indication that things are right rather than that things are wrong. It means that somewhere, someone is toddling from their sheep pen, following their Shepherd out into the world. It means that someone has chosen to listen to the voice of the Holy Spirit rather than the strictures of men.

Weekly reads

wrs

Weekly Reads is a collection of interesting, inspiring or thought-provoking blog posts, articles and resources from around the web.


Quote of the week

“Silence isn’t merely not speaking. Silence is what is left over in our minds after a more powerful voice than our own fills our headspace; before it is again crowded full of thoughts and words.” Jorg Zink


Weekly funny

617caa8b39591262036ae6036b56883e

Weekly reads

wrs

Weekly reads is a collection of interesting articles, blog posts and resources from around the web.

“I remember tearfully sharing with one of my staff partners Jenny about all of my fear with preaching. Jenny looked me straight in the eye, and asked, “Larissa, are you preaching because you love God and love people?” I told her, “Yes.” Jenny responded, “Then you need to keep doing it.” And so I kept saying yes.”

Like Mary Dyer, in this long process of waking up and moving on, I finally lost my fear and found my true voice. I am a woman, and I am empowered to speak the truth in love. I am a woman, and I can live by the power of the Holy Spirit. I am a woman, and I can be an advocate for the vulnerable among us. I am a woman and a Mama Bear.


Quote of the week

“All fear is but the notion that God’s love ends.” –Ann Voskamp, A Thousand Gifts


Weekly funny

bz-panel-06-24-13

Complementarianism through the lense of Tim Challies’ “Black and White Bible, Black and Blue Wife” review

freedom_pigeons

Please note: If you’re looking for a response to Tim Challies’ review of Ruth Tucker’s book that isn’t steeped in melodrama and sarcasm, I hope you’ll enjoy, err, something else.

A few days ago conservative blogger Tim Challies – “Informing the Reforming” – reviewed Ruth Tucker’s book Black and White Bible, Black and Blue Wife. The book chronicles Tucker’s escape from an abusive marriage to her complementarian husband. The blurb of her book says

Ruth Tucker recounts a harrowing story of abuse at the hands of her husband, a well-educated, charming preacher no less, in hope that her story would help other women caught in a cycle of domestic violence and offer a balanced biblical approach to counter such abuse for pastors and counselors.

Weaving together her shocking story, stories of other women, and powerful stories of husbands who truly have demonstrated Christ’s love to their wives, with reflection on biblical, theological, historical, and contemporary issues surrounding domestic violence, she makes a compelling case for mutuality in marriage and helps women and men become more aware of potential dangers in a doctrine of male headship.

I haven’t read the book and I’m not really interested in Tim Challies’ review of the book as such; more in what his view of it says about complementarianism in general. We’ll take it from the top. Continue reading

6 Totally Legitimate Reasons to Leave A Church

LegitReasons

Making the decision to leave a church is rarely an easy one. Usually there’s a lot of inner conflict, a lot of going back and forth about the decision. Sometimes, though, there’s just no option but to leave. It’s reached the point where you just have to go, for the sake of your family, or your heart, sometimes even for the sake of your soul. Now, there are a bunch of bad reasons to leave a church, but there are also a bunch of good ones. If your church matches up to more than one of these, it’s probably time to seriously reconsider your spiritual environment.

1. Your church environment is spiritually abusive

More and more people and churches are waking up to the fact that spiritual abuse is a reality, and that it is as legitimate a form of abuse as emotional or physical abuse. The scars that spiritual abuse leave run deep exactly because the church is seen as a safe space.

Wikipedia defines spiritual abuse as:

Religious abuse refers to the abuse administered under the guise of religion, including harassment or humiliation, possibly resulting in psychological trauma. Religious abuse may also include misuse of religion for selfish, secular, or ideological ends such as the abuse of a clerical position.

A more nuanced definition of spiritual abuse is provided by Johnson and Van Vonderen in their book, The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse:

Spiritual abuse is the mistreatment of a person who is in need of help, support or greater spiritual empowerment, with the result of weakening, undermining or decreasing that person’s spiritual empowerment. […] Spiritual abuse can occur when a leader uses his or her spiritual position to control or dominate another person. It often involves overriding the feelings and opinions of another, without regard to what will result in the other person’s state of living, emotions or spiritual well-being. In this application, power is used to bolster the position or needs of the leader, over and above one who comes to them in need.

Spiritual abuse can also occur when spirituality is used to make others live up to a “spiritual standard”. This promotes external “spiritual performance”, also without regard to an individual’s actual well-being, or is used as a means of “proving” a person’s spirituality.

[…] The person in need—whether it [is] the need for information, dialogue, support, acceptance, or counsel—[is] sent the message that they [are] less than spiritual, or that their spirituality [is] defective. [Shame is] used in an attempt to get someone to support a belief, or [it is] used to fend off legitimate questions.

[The] results of spiritual abuse are usually the same: the individual is left bearing a weight of guilt, judgment or condemnation, and confusion about their worth and standing as a Christian.

It’s at this point, we say, that spirituality has become abusive.

Broadly speaking, some common traits of a spiritually abusive church are authoritarianism, perfectionism, and allegiance mentality.

2. Your church is more interested in going to church than being church

When a church is more focused on appearing godly than actually being godly, it’s in trouble. Is there an us vs them mentality when it comes to other congregations or other churches? Are there cliques within the church? Are people in the congregation quick to judge or silence, but slow to listen or empathise? Is there an atmosphere of “one upping” each other among congregants or leadership? Does your church focus on evangelism or outreach outside the church to the detriment of those who need spiritual guidance or financial help within the church? Does your church treat wealthy people better than it treats its poorer congregants? Or are wealthy people within your church constantly being pressured to give?

These kinds of churches tend to be far more interested in showboating than real discipleship. To them, how many people show up at a Sunday service far outweighs how many of those people are living God-fulfilled lives. It’s about appearances. From the outside these churches tend to look good: they’re usually busy and spend a lot of time in local newspapers. It may be what attracted you there in the first place. But is that where it ends – in photo-ops?

3. Mismanagement

Look out for the following kinds:

a. Finances. Is there too much/too little focus on church finances? Is money being spent well? How much transparency is there about how and why funds are used? Who makes decisions about church finances?

b. The way staff are treated. Wary, overworked staff are rarely a good sign. Have a lot of staff come and gone? Do you know why? Church staff – the pastor, the church secretary, the verger, the organist, the cleaner, the gardener, the regular volunteers – are a good indication of how things are working behind the scenes. How is their demeanour generally? Everyone has a bad day and no working environment, least of all the church, is perfect; but do they almost always seem overworked, stressed out, anxious? How are they treated when they make mistakes? How are they treated when they achieves successes?

c. Spiritual gifting. Are people being allowed to use their spiritual gifting in a constructive way? Are certain gifts excluded or exalted? Are people being encouraged to use their gifting without forcing them into situations they’re not really comfortable with?

4. Your church is intolerant

Intolerance can take many different forms:

a. Of differing opinions, for example different interpretations of Scripture;

b. Of other churches or religions;

c. Of certain groups of people (other genders, races, nationalities, sexual orientations* and so on).

Intolerance is never a good sign in a church. Does your church use the Bible to divide or to invite? Does your church claim special privilege from God in how it treats people? How does your church respond (or how would they respond) if they receive an invitation to an inter-faith event?

Jesus is unequivocal in how he expects us to treat people, both in his spoken commands (Mark 12:30-31) and in how he acted toward people himself. He didn’t exclude anyone: he dined with those commonly rejected by others, with prostitutes and tax collectors, with the sick. He taught foreigners and healed Gentiles. Even when he commanded people to “sin no more” (John 8:11), he never judged them. How does your church’s treatment of the “other” compare? How does your church treat women, gay people, people of other races, immigrants? What kind of rhetoric do they use to discuss these people? Is it grace-filled?

*A note on LGBTI issues: no matter a church’s conviction on the subject, all people are to be treated with love, respect and grace.

5. Your church makes unreasonable demands of you – your time, your finances, your skill set, etc.

Most people balance a full work week on top of a bunch of other activities. So when people don’t want to volunteer at every church fete or make anything more complicated than mac n cheese for the potluck, most churches would understand that this doesn’t mean they’re not committed. But there are exceptions. Some churches expect their congregations to do a lot, and when they say “no”, questions are asked, subtly or overtly, about how dedicated they are to the church or indeed, how committed they are to God.

The other side of the coin is equally awful. Often a congregation is entirely uninvolved with the church but expect a lot from it. They never volunteer for the sound desk, but want a Passion-worthy worship band. They don’t tithe but grumble about why the church never does outreach work. Neither a church nor its congregation can expect to “take” indefinitely without also giving in return.

6. Your church focuses on the Bible too much or too little

There are churches that mistake “being Bible focused” with aggressively touting their own interpretation of Scripture. This happens when a church is wrapped up in their own interpretation of the Bible to the exclusion of all else – other points of view, the work of the Holy Spirit and so on. This becomes harmful when a church is so “Bible focused” that they miss God or, indeed, people. Does your church use the Bible to encourage, inspire, teach, convict, to lead you, always, to God? Do teachings glorify God or the person doing the teaching? The Bible was not meant to be used as a weapon – at least, not against people. How do you feel when you walk out after a sermon – do you feel loved, precious, able and convicted, or do you merely feel bullied, depleted and unworthy? When a Bible is used to attack instead of convict, to inspire fear instead of love, it’s time to go.

To stay or to go – that is the question

And it’s a question only you will be able to answer. Some would argue that leaving a bad church is selfish and doesn’t help anyone. But bad churches are notoriously stubborn about change, often because they simply don’t have a problem with the way they do things. Still others will say, Well, no church is perfect – and no church is. Churches are, by their very natures, gatherings of self-confessed sinners. But the knowledge of our sinful natures should make us softer, not harder. It should make us more human – the kind of “human” God intended – not less.

Ultimately that is the question we need to ask ourselves and our churches: is our church godly enough that we get to be human inside it, with all its joys and frailties? And is our church human enough that we can carry its godliness into every aspect of our lives?

Do not let anyone disqualify you, insisting on self-abasement and worship of angels, dwelling on visions, puffed up without cause by a human way of thinking, and not holding fast to the head, from whom the whole body, nourished and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows with a growth that is from God.

Colossians 2:18-19 NRSV