Bible Study is Group Therapy

So last night wasn't the disaster Michael and I envisioned. And that's a good thing. We had discussions and people asked some really good, challenging questions. It helped me dig even deeper into what I believe about marriage, roles (or the lack thereof), and my understanding of our group. Another refreshing part of the night was that one of the women in the group spoke first about what she believes about marriage and it was like she had crawled into my brain and knew exactly what I thought and felt. I've struggled to find women friends who have a similar view of marriage and men and women in general. One other woman in our group is also the same way, just not as vocal about it-- and I couldn't be more excited about it. I actually found friends who think like I do and I feel kind of at a loss of what to do because it's been so long since I've been around people like that. I don't think marriage roles/no roles will the center of every discussion I have with these women, but it at least took me to a deeper understanding and appreciation for these women. When I get frustrated in my marriage about whatever, I can expect that they will understand my thinking of marriage and give me advice/comfort accordingly. I don't have to worry about hearing "just be more loving," "the Bible calls women to submit," etc. So I'm excited to grow deeper with these friends and grow as a group. As I said before, we had great questions and I think if we continue that, we can really grow and strengthen each other as individuals, as well as a group. So, thank you Jesus for not having last night be stressful and frustrating!
(Also, I'm really working on and getting better at speaking in a group and being able to articulate myself and my thoughts in a coherent sentence/statement. Who knew this group would be like group therapy as well??)

Let's Be Adults About This... Hopefully

I'm at it again. I currently find myself on the edge of impending doom... okay, it's not that dramatic, but it feels that horrifying. What I'm talking about is a "discussion" of roles of men and women in marriage... this time with people who have researched and are married so this is going to hit REALLY close to home when we disagree. We managed to get through a discussion/debate/what-have-you about abortion without anyone flying off the handle, but that seems so minor in comparison to a discussion about marriage. The roles and views of men and women strike people at their core-- the foundations of their marriage and how they conduct their lives. I have a feeling this will either end quickly because no one will want to get into it, or it's going to be a disaster. I really hope it's not a disaster AND I hope we don't just stay on the surface. But I fear that neither one is very preventable. Some people have short fuses and others say they get heated no matter what the topic is... grrreeeaaaatttt... Intense people dealing with an intense discussion. Hopefully I'll leave pleasantly surprised that people could be mature and we can go away with "we agree to disagree and we still like each other." But I'm older and viewing marriage from a much different perspective, so hopefully I can speak my point of view without being immature or condescending (I had issues with that the last time I had a "debate" about men and women and church/home).
The discussion of roles is a seemingly uncomplicated one, until you start researching for whatever side you're on, and you see how one belief about men and women has an impact on other areas of belief about men and women. I hope to learn something new tonight, as well as teach something. If nothing else, I hope we can all gain a respect for each others' marriages and/or come along side anyone who needs or wants help/encouragement.
Our group strives to be one of community and we're slowly but surely getting there. It's taken a while for people to open up and share what is really on their hearts and weighing on their minds. I want to live life with these people, and growing deeper and digging to the heart of issues is the only way we will get there. Oh, and time. I have to remember that deep relationships cannot develop overnight or even over a weekend.
Okay, I've processed enough about this. It's quite possible I will have more to say/process after the night is over. Wish me luck!

Men Don't Need a Chore Chart

Gender-role-reversal-- it's becoming more of a common occurrence for men to stay home to be househusbands, if not stay-at-home-dads. I read this blog recently that talked about an article he read and the comments that people (mostly women) left that reflect the feelings towards men who stay at home instead of work.
The responses he posted made me have the same reaction that he did. Women talked as if their husbands were 5 year old children who needed a chore-chart to make sure he completed everything, and if he didn't, to give him grace and understanding. I'm not sure if there are websites out there for stay at home moms where men are reading them and commenting about needing to communicate and have understanding. If there are, that's great, but I can assume they are few and far between. Women still fall under the stereotype that they intrinsically know how to keep a clean house, like doing housework, and are the only real ones who can do it the "right" way. Michael knows how to clean dishes-- he's not an idiot. He knows how to sweep, vacuum, wipe down counters-- he doesn't need me to stand over him and make sure he's doing it "right."
There was a website he linked to, http://www.parenteam.com/ . It is a support website for working mothers with stay-at-home-husbands. If a couple is needing support and a resource for the husband, then that's great. But it sure seems like it expresses more that men need help in understanding what to do (again, that women don't need that help).
As a bit of an experiment to see the difference in stay at home moms and stay at home dads. I searched "stay at home moms" I got a whole list of ways for moms to make money while at home, how much staying at home costs, and the very last listing on the first page was a website for resources, activities, etc for stay at home mom. However, when I typed in "stay at home dads" I got a whole list of articles, references, website devoted to stay at home dads, etc. Again, I'm seeing a big gap between what women should naturally do and what men need help doing. There was a link to a study researching stay at home dads and their psychological well-being. Are they doing that for women? Being "super-mom," I'm sure, takes a toll on some women-- working all day and having to come home and be the one in charge of the house--kids, cooking, cleaning, etc. I learned in one of my classes in college about what this phenomenon of women working and coming home to work again. It's called her second shift. And if she is also in school, it's called her third shift. That men aren't expected or encouraged to be the ones to stay home if the woman wants to work, it is kind of upsetting.
It's interesting the looks Michael and I get when we tell people I'm the one working and he's the one at home being a house-husband. It's "weird" to people. It shouldn't be! I know there is a shift, and I think that's great. It's becoming more common, which will make it less-weird to people, but it still has a long way to go. Men who stay home should stand up for themselves and not feel any less of a man for doing so. Most people, as I have learned, expect that a man is only home because he's unemployed, injured, or some other reason that he has to be-- not because he wants to or chooses to. Men have to fight others' perceptions of him staying home and why he is going so. If women are stay at home moms, no one questions it. No one asks why they're not working. They also know a lot more stay at home moms than stay at home dads, so it's even more difficult for men to find support from his peers.
I hope more men are willing to speak out about that they are just as capable as women in maintaining a household, caring for children, taking them to soccer practice, etc. I understand the need for resources because it's not as common for men to stay home, so they might feel lost. But I also think they should just do what comes naturally. If it's nice outside, take the kid to the park, if it's lunch time, feed the kid! If they honestly don't know what to do, it would be understandable if they sought the answer online or even through his wife. But men can learn to cook dinner-- even if they ruin it the first few times, no one started out cooking without making a mistake or two. We need to be giving men more credit than their getting, as well as needing to challenge men to rise up to the challenge and put their whole heart into it. Even if the man is unemployed and that's the reason he's home, take pride in it-- stay at home moms do! And don't treat couples/men/women any different if the woman is the one working and the man is at home. They're no different than anyone else. Michael is definitely no less of a man or a husband because he stays home-- it is actually truly a blessing because I don't have to worry about doing it all when I get home from work!

My Husband is Gonna Be a House-Husband

I have finally run into the differences between marriages with my friends. I didn't have much ground being "only engaged" or "just dating" when it came to understanding the complexity and the deep issues that really can only be experienced in marriage. It has been interesting talking with our friends at church and in our small group about the differences in our marriages-- how decisions are made, who handles housework, etc. It's no surprise that Michael and I are nowhere near the majority-- I actually question if there is anyone like us in the young marrieds group, even at a church like Pathways. We hear people talk about their marriages, and why and how decisions are made and we sit back thinking "we would never do it that way! What about the other person's feelings/opinions/desires?"
Of course, we're only 2 months into this marriage, so maybe after a bit more time we might fall more into the traditional norm, but it doesn't seem likely. I'm sure it helps that I hate cleaning and doing housework, so I refuse to do it all by myself; and Michael doesn't expect me to, just because I'm a woman. He actually cares more about clutter and a clean house than I do (except I'm starting to lean more his way because our house isn't big enough to be dirty-- it takes over in no time!) so he is more apt to do the cleaning.
I don't know if I've mentioned it before in here, but I love to cook. With that, it would probably be expected that I cook all the meals. Well, I married a keeper because Michael loves to cook as well and loves to learn. I've taught him stuff, and he enjoys cooking dinner just as much as I do. He currently is working at the print shop he was at a few months ago to get some money before he starts school. He gets off work earlier than me, and gets home way before. I came home last week on my third day of work to him making dinner. (I might also mention he was wearing nothing but one of my aprons... he makes me laugh so hard!)
We trade off, even share the duties when we both get off work at the same time. When Michael starts school, he will get off at 12:30 so if he can't get a part-time job-- either he can't find one or school is too stressful, he'll be a house-husband. And he's totally okay with that. He's actually looking forward to it! His advisers told him that the first 7 months are the hardest, so it's looking like a house-husband is what he's going to be! It'll be an interesting adjustment and a very big reality check since what we're about to do is not very common, especially in Christian circles. But that's what is also exciting-- we're embarking on a journey of our own without anyone putting their own ideas or thoughts on us; we can choose what we want and can succeed and fail in our own right. We're excited and completely freaked out at the same time, but it's good-- that's how we grow as individuals and as a couple. We have to turn towards each other during this time to get through the rough parts and praise the good parts. So here's to living differently! Let's see how this goes!

The Countdown Begins

It's a mere 27 days until the wedding... needless to say, stress is running high. Thankfully, our biggest stress has been taken care of-- we've found a place to live! We are living in a basement apartment of the neighborhood pastor of our church. Sounds weird, but we really like her and her husband, so we're excited. The neighborhood it's in is also fabulous! We were really sad to leave Fort Collins because we loved the feel of the neighborhoods, Old Town, and the laid-back attitude of everyone. Well, last night we were driving home from the pre-marrieds group held at our future residence and found an area just like Old Town Fort Collins. It had a lot of independent shops, it was close to the house (walking/biking distance), and just so cute!
So speaking of wedding and marriage, the issue of roles and responsibilities has come up. Michael and I have talked extensively about it and have an understanding of what is expected of each other. We have agreed on it being egalitarian-- that we are equals in every part of the relationship. But how will that work out? What makes it that different than other relationships? It seems so normal to be equals and that we'd make decisions and be no one being a "leader"-- that we play to our strengths and can come together when one person is struggling.
If I happen to be stronger in prayer than Michael, it shouldn't be expected that just because he is a man, that he should be "in charge" and the initiator of any prayer we say. And I'll be the first to say how insightful and wise Michael is when it comes to the Bible and discussions-- but it's not because he's a man, but because God has blessed him with that gift. But sometimes, one of us may be feeling down or struggling in an area of our lives and the other person may become more insightful or more initiative with prayer.
We go through seasons, and if there is no expectation that one person must be the one to fulfill some duty or responsibility, then there is more freedom and openness and intimacy that can be achieved in the relationship. I would think that if a man thinks that it is his job and sole responsibility to be the leader, whether spiritual or "of the house," it puts so much stress on fulfilling that duty instead of being able to go with the flow and be able to be humble in not being the leader all the time. But to each his own, I guess. It's not the kind of relationship for us, but I guess it can work for some people. So wish us luck as we get closer to the wedding! It seems so far away yet so close!

Women: Submission

So the here is the anticipated "submission" blog. I have a few things to say about it. The Ephesians passage is very popular for keeping women in submission and men in power in the relationship. Here's the passage:

22Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. 24Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. 25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, 26that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, 27that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. 28So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. 29For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. 30For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. 31“For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. 33Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

~Ephesians 5:22-33

This passage embodies the entire reason we had this discussion in the first place. I don't have much more to say about this because my other blogs pretty much sum up my feelings about the subject. However, I will tell you about some of the things I learned about this passage and shared with my Bible study. First, we discussed the meaning of submission. Everyone else defined it as "respect" which I can totally agree with. However, when they were talking about how relationships/marriages should work, it was the women following blindly behind what the husband is passionate about and called to. The feeling I got about their definition of respect was letting the man get his way and make all the decisions, and not disputing his decision. When looking at the dictionary definition of submit, this is what I found:

sub·mit /səbˈmɪt/ –verb (used with object)
1. to give over or yield to the power or authority of another (often used reflexively).
2. to subject to some kind of treatment or influence.
3. to present for the approval, consideration, or decision of another or others
4. to state or urge with deference; suggest or propose
5. to yield oneself to the power or authority of another: to submit to a conqueror.
6. to allow oneself to be subjected to some kind of treatment: to submit to chemotherapy.
7. to defer to another's judgment, opinion, decision, etc.: I submit to your superior judgment.

It was pointed out that I saw and talked about submission in a negative light. When looking at this definition and also how I have seen it work in relationships, I don't see how I couldn't. I know and understand that for a gazillion years, the church has taught that women should submit to their husbands and that is what God has called all women to do, but is that necessarily true? For a long time, the church in America supported slavery and the discrimination of black people. Churches wouldn't let African-American people through their doors. They did not see them as equals, even though God created them equal. Today, churches no longer deny African-Americans access to their church-- they changed their minds and realized that God created all people the same, no matter what their skin color was. Why can't the church change their mind about women as well?

And speaking of the treatment of women in regards to the treatment of African-Americans, I was told an interesting analogy about what women are doing to themselves when they support inequality in relationships-- it is like an African American supporting slavery during the Civil Rights Movement... Why wouldn't women want to have an equal say? Why would they want to give all of the power to men? I understand that women have been taught that they need to submit and that may be a conviction of theirs, but I do not understand how, when faced with the idea of equality, they resist it.
I have to admit that at one point in my life (not too long ago, actually) I believed what I'm now against. However, I started to research this topic and really look into how I felt about the subject after a casual conversation with a great friend of mine. We were talking about relationships and what our ideal relationships are. I mentioned that I wanted the man as a leader, and she asked me why. I tried to give her an answer but I'm sure it was non-understandable. She said that she didn't want a man to rule over her, that she is a strong woman with her own ideas and her own passions. I referred her to another friend who had a lot more answers than I could give. I ended up talking to my "referral"-friend about it and that's what really got the ball rolling. I have since made up my own mind and done my own research. The whole point of this is, when confronted with a different idea and a different way of thinking (especially a way that gives me more of a say and role in a relationship), I did not run away or resist it-- I embraced it and took it on myself to explore and discover my beliefs. I could just as easily gone the other way and came to believe even stronger that women should be submissive to men. But I made up my own mind-- I wish that all women would do the same. Actually, I wish everyone would do that and make up their own minds about everything the church teaches (but that's a whole other blog post idea... and I'm not getting into that now). How much more freeing is life when you own it and embrace your convictions as your own. They're not all going to be the same-- it'd be boring if they were-- but at least everyone would know why they believe what they believe.

Now that all that is out of the way, here was my explanation of the Ephesians passage. First off, the book of Ephesians is a letter. Each verse was not it's own separate idea or theology--it is one long idea within the whole letter. Taking one verse out of a bunch (don't ask me to count!) is pretty much "Bible dipping." (I wrote a whole blog about that a while ago.) People pick and choose verses out of the Bible to support their ideas, giving no room for God to move and actually speak to them. God speaks of love, respect, and grace throughout the entire Bible, so why would those verses not speak of those as well? The verses must also be taken in context.

That's the other point: The letter to the Ephesians was a letter to a specific culture and city. The people of Ephesis (is that right?) had laws about women being submissive and that men rule women. So when Paul told women to be submissive to their husbands, he was telling them to follow the law. God calls us to follow His laws, but to also follow the laws of the country/city we're living in. And if we break the laws of our government, we are breaking the law of God. If the women all decided to stop being submissive in that culture, there would be mass chaos and mayhem. They would be out of control and not constructive in changing their lives. However, women in the US have full rights... so wanting and demanding equal rights is not against the law. The law actually encourages it. But women aren't embracing that. They are taking their equality to the voting booths, but not to their own homes. Isn't their homes the place that has more meaning? Being able to vote is useless if you aren't equal in the eyes of your husband. More than likely, and I'm just speculating here, submissive wives' views in politics greatly weighs or even mirrors their husbands' views, so they really aren't having a different voice anyway. But that's just speculation.

Last but not least, the man's call. They are not called to dominate over their wives. They are called to love and respect their wives as they love their bodies. I don't see men demeaning their bodies, putting them down, making their bodies inferior to their mind. They treat it with respect and love and spend hours at the gym/working out making it all that it can be. That doesn't sound like domination to me! Men are called to lift their wives up, help them along their journey in becoming the women they were called to be, to respect their wives and love, see, and treat them as Christ sees and loves them-- not as lesser beings, but as one and the same. Christ was not about power and domination, so why are men "called" to do so? That is one thing I can say I do not understand. But women are also called to respect their husbands, so let's not forget that. But respect is not interchangeable with submission. Respecting your husband/wife does not mean they are better than the other. It is an expression of love. If you love your wife/husband, you will respect them. Simple as that!

All in all, the main point in all of this blogging and discussion is that women are equal. (did I really have to say that?) And they need to fight for the right to be so in their relationships. They need to stand up for themselves. They are not called to rule over their husbands as much as their husbands are not called to rule over their wives. They are called to mutual respect and love. They should submit to each other and learn to compromise. And women should stand up together and encourage each other to live the equal life that God created all women to live. Men and women are called to love as Christ loves the church-- you do that, and you can't go wrong!

Here are a few websites that have more info on equality in relationships, the church, etc.:

http://www.cbeinternational.org/new/free_articles/bib_eq_101.shtml

http://www.cbeinternational.org/new/free_articles/award_winning.shtml

http://www.jesuscreed.org/?cat=27

Women: Created as Equals and Roles in Relationships

God created men and women as equals
Also, it was discussed that Christ was the head of the church, so men are the head of women........ connection? I don't see it either. My rebuttal (I mean response :-) to that was that Jesus was the bridegroom and the church is the bride, and if taken in the equality light, they (the bride and groom) are equal so no one is over the other. Christ is God, and God is over everything and without gender, so equating a male dominance based on God being over everything makes no sense. If God is over everything, He is over everyone, including women. So with the previous idea, who should be over who? (or is it whom?)-- wait, am I starting to see a position of equality? I think I am! God created men and women equally-- Eve was Adam's ezer [one who is truly fitting and fully adequate- just right; means 'one who helps'; it does not refer to someone who is secondary or inferior; 'like him'; literally 'as agreeing to him or his counterpart']-- his equal. God wants men and women to live in harmony with each other, neither one being better than the other, but fulfilling their unique call from God, with no regard to their biological makeup:

"You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourself with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for all of you are one in Christ Jesus."
~ Galatians 3:26-28

Men and women are equals in marriage because God created men and women as equals and views them as equals. God looks at their hearts and calls them as His children, and does not change His calling because someone is a man or as a woman. God does not talk to someone more or less because they have a penis or vagina. If they are seeking God's heart, a relationship will form and they will walk in God's will for their lives, as well as their marriage. And a marriage is not, as John MacArther says, that a man is like the sun, shining God's full glory, and that women are like the moon, shining a reflected glory from men. (I think I threw up a little in my mouth) (Thanks to Molly for that little tid-bit!)
Also, if God made women as equals to men (which everyone agreed with), why would women become less in a marriage? Why would they not be as much as a person or have as much of a say the instant they have a ring on their left hand? BOO-YA! No one one had a response to that and the topic was quickly changed! (I won that! wait, this wasn't a debate...)
But seriously, how can they believe that women and men are created equal but they are not equal in marriage? I mentioned that it was only after the fall that women were told that men would rule over them. It is because of their fallen state that men's pride and egos would take over and oppress women. It may not go to the extreme of abuse, but if you're keeping a woman in the kitchen and only letting her out to take care of the children and clean the house, how is that not a form of oppression? Women may choose to be a stay-at-home mom, which I want to do someday (screw having a career!), but it is the woman's choice, not her duty to do so. It is a calling on their life and their role in the marriage that a woman does so, not a God-given role for every woman everywhere. I have a friend, in fact, who once she graduates will be a female chemist. Her boyfriend (and soon-to-be husband) is in school to be an accountant. Can you guess who will be making more money? They'll be well-off financially, but she will be more powerful and make more money in the workplace. God has given her that talent and that passion. Should she reject that because "the church" says she should be a certain way? She may eventually take time off to be a mother, but she may not. Is that wrong? I don't think so. If God calls her to a certain career and not to stay at home, then she's actually going against God's calling on her life if she stays at home. She may find the cure for cancer (am I putting her future on a pedestal?) and that is God's purpose for her life, but because she chose to do what someone else told her she "should" do because she was a woman, she will not fulfill what God set her out to do. I know that's an extreme example, but on a much smaller and realistic scale, that's what "the church" is telling women to do-- who cares about your passions/calling/desires, it's all about your husband and his calling and passions; stay at home and be the perfect housewife and God will bless that because that is your God-given role. If women are so different, why would the church tell them all to be the same? Wait, it's men who are in charge...

Well, that's the end of part three! Stay tuned for part four!

Women: Leadership in a relationship

What is a leader?
The next discussion turned to what a leader is. We discussed what the general definition of a leader was, and what a leader was in a relationship. A general leader was defined as two things: First, someone who is passionate and inspires others to follow them/their example. Second, someone who tells people what to do and how to do it. What is a leader in a relationship? No one could give a good answer. Why should a man, just because he is a man, be able to have the final say? Why do women not have as much right in a marriage to give their opinion and be involved equally in the decision-making? Just because they are a man, does that mean they are automatically smarter/wiser/more in-tuned with God? Do women lose all opinions and decision-making abilities when they say "I do"? One of the girls even said, flat out, that men should get the final say and ended the statement with, "even though I'm totally not like that." Then why do it? If you don't agree with it or believe it, why do it? Just because someone told you that was the way it should be done? She's already putting aside her own ideas for someone else's (and I can't resist saying that a guy convinced her that men as the head of the relationship is the "right" way-- I don't get it, I just don't!).
There were a few examples that we discussed regarding leadership and decision-making. The first was the game "Follow the Leader." One of the girls used this as an example that, although everyone was following the leader, they were in fact following the person in front of them (symbolic of the man). The man is taking direction from the leader who is giving direction to the woman. (*roll of eyes*) They denied the fact that a leader in a relationship is someone who tells everyone else what to do and how to do it.... except, if the leader is telling/leading everyone to go left, they're doing what the leader is telling them to do. I'm not seeing the difference in this analogy.
The other issue we discussed, with a lot more heat under it I might add, was who makes the decisions. Does someone have the final say? How are decisions made? The example that was used was a couple moving. Who makes the decision of where to move or even if they move at all? When discussing this topic with my very wise friend, she explained to me the way her (egalitarian) marriage works: They only make a decision if they both agree or get the same calling/vision. If they don't agree or have the same calling, they don't move a muscle. Only when God gives them the same calling do they do anything. They discuss every decision together and come to a conclusion together-- neither person gets more of a say than the other. This idea went kinda over the heads of my Bible studiers. One scenario that was brought up was: what if one person wants to move (actually it was the wife in this example) and the man doesn't? Since they can't agree to move so they don't go anywhere, doesn't that mean he "wins"? Not at all. It is out of respect and love that the decision to not move is made. By forcing the man (or woman) to do something they don't want to do is manipulative and wrong-- not a definition of equality. It may require compromise. Yes, people want their own way, but one person shouldn't get their way just because of their biology. And out of love and respect, the man or woman may agree to move. But it has nothing to do with authority or leadership when that decision/compromise is made.
As the discussion continued on, a question was asked of me that actually took me by surprise. When I mentioned that I didn't know the definition of a leader in a relationship, I wasn't kidding. However, I was asked, "What would it look like if Michael was the leader?" Were you not listening to anything I've been saying?!? I answered, even though I was more confused as to how they could ask me that, but whatever, "I don't want him to be the leader. And he doesn't want to be the leader. We both believe in equality in a relationship and marriage. We make decisions together and we support and encourage each other in everything. Even though he is not the 'leader,' he is still one of the most passionate people I know! He respects me and treats me as I should be treated. He loves God and follows God with all of his heart. He is passionate about church and is excited about what our church is doing. He is in no way weaker or less of a man because he is not and does not want to be the leader." God has blessed me with a man who holds the same beliefs about relationships and marriage as I do. I believe that that is not a coincidence!
However, this was the question that was asked in response to that: "If Michael is so passionate, isn't that being a leader?" "What do you mean? I don't understand the question." "Passion is inspiring. So a person who is passionate inspires people to follow." WHAT?! My response (with other thoughts thrown in): "Michael is passionate about a lot of things. But by no means does he lead me in those passions. Yes, he teaches me about certain things, but never leads me. One of his main passions is music. He is the worship leader at church, but it really does not play a role in our relationship. But what about my passions? Just because I'm a woman, does that mean they don't matter? Are my passions not inspiring?" Both Michael and I are passionate about God and our church. But I was passionate about God long before I even met Michael. Yes, we can encourage each other and inspire each other in our relationship with God, but in no way does he lead me. He does not tell me what to read, how to pray, what to believe, etc. It's my own personal relationship with my creator-- I don't need Michael there to help it grow. We can come together and have a relationship centered on God and come together to study together, but there's no leading or submitting going on. Also, I was there when the first thought of Revolution came to be. Michael was nowhere around. We were passionate about it before we even met! We can both be passionate about Revolution and where it is going and form relationships and friendships within Revolution, but my passion and drive for it has nothing to do with Michael and his drive and passion has nothing to do with me. We both enjoy it and play central roles in it, but I don't rely on him for my passion about church. We both are there because we are following God's calling on our lives and it happens to be the same passion... coincidence? I think not! We rely on God to give us our own calling and vision and if we are truly meant to be together, then God will (and has) give us the same calling and vision. But God will not only give the vision/calling to Michael and he passes it on to me and I follow blindly. God uses our passions to change and grow our own lives and our relationship. We come together and encourage, inspire, teach, lean on, support, challenge, and help each other. We do it because we love each other and because we love God. It has nothing to do with our identity as being a man or a woman, it has everything to do with our identity as a son and daughter of God.

End of part two!

Women: Leadership Positions in the Church

Whew! We finally had our discussion in my Bible study about women! It's been 3 weeks since we said we would have this discussion... that's a long time to make me wait to state my opinion... wait, I did state my opinion-- just to everyone else! (Sorry Jill!!)
So I thought I'd share what the night was like and the discussion we had (I am being very deliberate about it not being a debate.)
Oh, and I want to say a HUGE thank you to Makeesha, Molly, and my mom for helping me with this discussion! I couldn't have done as well without your help!
And as a warning, because this was a discussion and also because I wanted to be respectful and loving towards my fellow Bible studiers, I did not express my true opinions about what they thought/believed. So, as a result, I need somewhere to vent about what they said. So be prepared. I have to be honest and say that I tend to be a little harsh and very sarcastic, so be prepared. Okay, that was my disclaimer!
Also, there are lots of different parts and they all tend to be a little long, so I'm going to break them up into different parts so everyone can read them a little easier and can comment on each idea. I'd love to get everyone's insight and ideas about each subject. So comment away!

Women in leadership positions in the church
So Cheyenne led into it very smoothly and the discussion was off and running. I was the only advocate for egalitarian marriages versus leader/submissive marriages. Needless to say, I did a lot of talking. I'm not very good about stating my opinion when I disagree with everyone (or even one person for that matter), so I must say I did a pretty good job holding my ground. I made sure to note that I understand that people have their own understandings and convictions of relationships, but I just don't agree with it.
We started with the discussion of women in leadership in a church... some interesting ideas came out. One defense of women not being head pastors was that women actually have the honor of not being a head pastor because it protects them from the spiritual warfare and temptations that go along with that position.....????? I don't even know. Women can't handle life being difficult? I understand that higher positions tend to be attacked more (not even on a spiritual level) but why would it be an honor to not have to deal with that? Oh, thanks, I don't have to deal with anything. I'll just sit here and look pretty! (Can you sense my feelings about this?)
Women are given just as many and the same gifts as men. Why should they not be allowed to live out that gift? Women are given the job as Sunday-school teachers, whether they like it or not. Women are not allowed to have authority over men... but when does a boy become a man? 5 years old? 13? 18? 21? When is it okay for a woman to teach a boy (but not a man)? And what about mothers? Once their son reaches 18, does that mean she no longer has authority as a parent? Can she no longer teach him anything? On the day of his 18th birthday, does he automatically become smarter than his mother? Wait, isn't that called adolescence? ;-) I'm 21 and I'm still learning things from my parents. I don't think they'll ever stop teaching me things! So does age and definition of a man/woman really determine when and how a person can be taught? And why can't women be up front? The girls said that there's nothing wrong with them being part of the leadership team or even as an elder/deacon, but just not the head pastor. But don't the elders have more power than the head pastor? So why can't they be up front teaching everyone? I went to a church in high school where the youth pastor was a man (big surprise) but his wife was a much more gifted of a teacher than he will ever be! However, she was never allowed to teach in youth group. Was it because her husband had the authority over the youth group? I never got ANY spiritual feeding from him, but came away a changed person when his wife taught in the main service! Gasp! A woman was a better teacher than a man? How can that be? God gifted her as a teacher, but her skill and gift were not allowed to be used to touch young girls' and boys' lives.
If someone has a gift God has given them, they should live life and follow through with that gift. If someone is called to lead worship, they should lead worship. If they have the skill to plan an instrument, but don't have a calling to lead worship or be in the band, they shouldn't be in the band. God may want to use them elsewhere or use a different gift. We should not assume that whatever talent someone has they should use it in the church. We should let people follow what God has spoken to them and into their lives. And we should definitely NOT prevent someone from using a gift that God has called them to use, no matter what their gender is. If a man has been called to lead Sunday school and a woman has been called to be head pastor, let them do so, taking assurance in the fact that they are walking in God's will and God will bless them and the church as a result. God wants what is best for everyone, so we must let Him do so. We need to leave our pride and our prejudice (wait, isn't that a book?) at the door and allow God to move in our lives and our church. It'll be amazing to see what God can and will do when we finally allow Him full access to our church and our lives!

End of part one! There's more to come!