Ten Years Ago…

I’m not a sentimental person.  I don’t do flowers or fluffiness.  Yet today is an anniversary I’d like to remember and share with the world.

 

Ten years ago today, mine and Mr GLW’s worlds change forever.

 

It would probably be helpful for you to know Mr GLW’s name is Baggy as I share this part of our story with you.

 

I met Baggy in the year 2000.  My youth group were at Easter People and as a long-time friend of my youth worker Alice, Baggy came to help with our group.  He was old.  I was 16 and he was 29.  I was a crazy Christian teenager who loved Jesus and wanted everyone else to know Him too.

 

Less than a year after Easter People, I found myself in a relationship with an abuser.  It’s a story I’ve told in various ways on this blog and elsewhere.  I was with him for four years.  In that time he destroyed me almost completely.  I had my first child at 18 and was married months later.  I was pregnant again at 20.  Six months into my pregnancy my ex-husband raped me and my son was born three months premature.  He was immediately transferred 50 miles away.  My daughter and I lived in hospitals for five months with our tiny baby.  In that time, I had only two nights away from the hospital when I went to clear my possessions out from the house I had shared with my ex-husband.

 

Two of my greatest supporters throughout the time I was with my ex-husband (and when we lived in hospital) were Alice and Andy Smith who had been my church youth workers.  I would go stay with them when I attempted to leave my ex-husband.  They would visit us in hospital and take my daughter to stay with them for a few days.  It was Andy who I told about being raped.  They took me to the police station and looked after my toddler as I sat for three hours and made a statement about what I had been subjected to.  I don’t know if I would have made it through without them!

 

They were still in regular contact with Baggy, throughout the time I was married and when I was living in hospital.  When my ex-husband and I were both 19 he was convicted of sex offences and placed on the sex offenders register.  At the time, Baggy worked for the police and we had a phone call where I asked him various questions about police processes.  But mainly he was a friend of a friend who was kept informed about what was going on in my hugely complex life.

 

Whilst living in hospital, having lost everything, I found the God Who Is.  Previously to this, He had been the God of my parents and the God I sort of knew.  But in that hospital, He became my God, the God who saw me.  When all else is lost, God becomes real very quickly.  I began to hear God speak to me, audibly.  I know non-Christians reading this probably think it could probably be explained by the stress of life, but it really wasn’t.  He told me to read the Bible, a lot.  I was 21, but I looked about 15.  I had a seriously sick baby.  A toddler.  I had just separated from my husband.  I had no home as I had moved all my possessions into my parents’ garage.  And I was going through a criminal investigation due to being subjected to rape.  And I would sit reading the Bible, telling everyone how much Jesus loves them.

 

When my son was ready to be released from intensive care they were going to transfer him back to our home town.  I knew if I went back I would end up back in the relationship with an abuser.  God told me to move to Gateshead, where lovely Andy and Alice Smith lived.  My son was transferred to a new hospital and we moved with him.  Alice and Andy found a flat for us.  It was still a time when the social security system worked well and we were financially poor, but could survive.

 

One day we had some time away from the hospital visiting Andy and Alice who were having a party.  Baggy was there.  I had rarely seen him since I was sixteen.  As I stood chatting to him, God told me audibly that I was going to marry him.  I soon left the house in shock.  Convinced I had imagined God’s voice.  I told Him that no, I would not be marrying Baggy.  He was still old (34 by this point).  He wasn’t my sort.  In fact, nobody was my sort.  I would remain single for the rest of my life.  Marriage had nearly killed me.  End of.

 

Eventually my son was well enough to leave hospital, after a couple of attempts in which we left hospital and I had to resuscitate him at home when he stopped breathing and went either blue or grey.

 

Soon afterwards Andy and Alice moved to Essex.  I didn’t have a TV or internet and spent most evenings chatting to either God or friends on the phone.  Over the next year or so Baggy and I chatted on the phone regularly.  Whilst on one level I knew I would never want to marry him, on another I knew it was the only outcome for my life.

 

Over the months in Gateshead I attended a course in which I began to recognise that what I had been subjected to was labelled “domestic abuse”.  I accessed counselling.  I went to a large church in which I was vaguely anonymous.  I grew into myself and into God.  It was a beautiful time for me and the two small people God had given to me.  My son grew healthier.  My daughter grew happier.  Miracles of provision and transformation happened.  I learned to drive.  I learned to live alone.  My ex-husband was found not guilty by a jury.  I was prescribed higher and higher dosages of anti-depressants.  I gained some friendships and lost some.  The world was complex and messy, beautiful and desperately awful.  All at once.

 

Eventually I told God that he would have to tell Baggy to marry me.  I certainly wasn’t going to tell him.  And if it really was God, and not my imagination, this would prove it.

 

Then God told me to move to Essex.  I’d visited Andy and Alice, who now lived in the same town as Baggy.  I attended their church and God spoke to me.  They had been praying for our family for months and that Sunday they invited us to the front, to pray with us.  And so I made plans to move to Essex.

 

Baggy helped me to move.  Flying to Gateshead and driving the van down to Essex (for non-UK readers, this was an almost 300-mile journey).  Later on he told me that during this journey, God told him the he would marry me.  This came as a complete shock to him.  He’d been single for 13 years.  He was happily single and childfree, doing missionary work in Poland and that’s how he had envisaged life continuing.

 

Over the twelve days that followed from me moving to Essex, neither of us knew the other had been told by God we should get married.  Eventually I had an awkward conversation with Alice about it.  Seemingly, unbeknown to me, Baggy had a similar one with Andy.

 

Eventually on 26th February 2007 we had a conversation.  I mumbled a lot and offered him cups of tea.  And I rarely mumble.  It was very awkward.  But whilst sitting on opposite sofas we mumbled our way to realising that we God had told us to get married and so we agreed to do just that.  10 years ago today.

 

We got married six months later.  And the journey we’ve been on has been amazing and painful and wonderful.  Immediately that I found myself with someone to support me, my brain shut down and I became seriously mentally unwell.  Baggy went from being single to inheriting two children and a seriously crazy wife-to be.  I went from being poor to co-owning a house, two cars and having a super awesome husband-to-be.  We never got engaged or did engagement rings.  I gradually came off high dosage anti-depressants and Baggy described me as transitioning from being Eeyore to Tigger in about a month.  Both children quickly started to call Baggy daddy.  We attended family court to fight my ex-husband getting contact with the children and we succeeded.  Which was (and continues to be) a huge miracle.

 

Life has rarely been easy, but it has been awesome.  My wedding ring is inscribed with Ephesians 3:20, “Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us.”  It was also inscribed on Baggy’s first wedding ring, but he lost that one on the honeymoon and is currently on his third wedding ring.

 

I would have never asked or imagined marrying Baggy.  He’s still thirteen years older than me (obviously!).  But I think my life experience packed in about the same levels of maturity as his stable and single adulthood gave him.  He’s absolutely the best person I could have ever married, even though I would never have chosen him.  And as a committed feminist I sit in the tension of having had a divinely arranged marriage whilst holding onto values of bodily autonomy and personal choice fought for by feminists through the years.

 

Having indulged in an uncharacteristic amount of sentimentality, I will end here.  Our relationship is not a model for Christian marriage, it is a rare and complex partnership in the midst of the more conventional romances and proposals that take place in most Christian relationships.  However, it is our story and it continues to be the best one God could write with all of us GLWs.

 

 

Advertisements

#WMH Tom McLean Feedback

I’m currently live-tweeting whilst reading Why Men Hate Going To Church by Dave Murrow.  You can check out my tweets on Twitter with the hashtag #WMH.  I tweeted this page from the book:

wmh-quote

Tom McLean (@Tom_McLean) kindly send me some GREAT information to counter the stuff listed here, hope you find it as useful as I did!

 

In the two paragraphs above, sentence by sentence:

1. You’ll struggle to find detailed evidence of attendances in C13th. Was an era of huge change – rise of the mendicant orders (the Dominicans, the Franciscans). Parallel growth of women’s religious orders, but from earlier roots (e.g. Scholastica, sister of Benedict, so C6th), not completely new. Change was social as well, but the claim about men’s attendance is at best unprovable.

 

2. Catholicism has never worshipped Mary. Devotion to her stems from at least the C3rd. (Have a search for Sub tuum praesidium – the John Rylands Papyrus Gr. III 470 is of note! Pic here: http://frederica.com/gallery/places-and-things/1067611) Title of Theotokos (God-bearer) given to her by the Council of Ephesus (431). Growth in C12th/13th period of devotion to the Blessed Sacrament – so Jesus, in the form of the sacramental bread. (Growth of Feast of Corpus Christi – originates with Juliana of Liege, but popularized by Pope Urban IV and Thomas Aquinas). On Corpus Christi and popular devotion in the period, see Miri Rubin, Corpus Christi. On Marian devotion, see Miri Rubin, Mother of God: A History of the Virgin Mary.

 

3. Weakness and dependency seem to get commended from at least Paul onwards… Struggle and sacrifice never portrayed as an alternative, but integrated with. E.g. Franciscan poverty is about sacrifice of possessions and wealth, but necessarily leads to a degree of dependency on (theologically) God and (practically) whoever gives you a meal, but also to freedom to go where the Church requires.

 

4. Some degree to which clergy became practitioners of faith, and reduced reception of the Eucharist. Though this led to a great growth in popular devotions aside from the official liturgies of the Church, see popularity of places of pilgrimage, the rosary, guilds, mystery plays, etc. On sociology of Christian worship, see Martin Stringer, A Sociological History of Christian Worship.

 

5.…and probably of women. Though only really know about men who became important. (Not so much on what Teresa Berger calls ‘men who were only men’ – see her Gender Differences and the Making of Liturgical History).

 

6. Men in the New World, yes – the first round with the likes of Columbus were the Jesuits. I know nothing about Puritan history which I suspect is more his focus… My instinct would be that a response needs to consider the make-up of the population more – was there an imbalance between men and women in the population at large?

 

7. Perhaps! But how do such rolls relate to the population at large? The comments in Bryan D. Spinks, ‘Imagining the Past: Historical Methodologies and Liturgical Study’, In Liturgy’s Imagined Past/S: Methodologies and Materials in the Writing of Liturgical History Today, edited by Teresa Berger and Bryan D. Spinks, Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 2016, pp. 3–18; and Breen, Timothy H., Imagining the Past: East Hampton Histories, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1989 might offer something interesting.

 

Good introductions to Church History:

  1. Very accessible introduction – Miranda Threlfall-Holmes, The Essential History of Christianity
  2. Detailed single volume – Diarmaid MacCulloch, A History of Christianity
  3. A little dated in places, but quite accessible, and still worth reading – The Pelican/Penguin History of the Church – several volumes by one of the Chadwicks, but other authors too. First one: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Penguin-History-Church-vol-1-Early/dp/0140231994
  4. Victorian Church – Owen Chadwick, The Victorian Church (2 vols)
  5. A bit more theological in character, the early chapters of Alistair McGrath’s Christian Theology: An Introduction (and the Reader that goes with).

 

When should a church be disqualified from having women in it?

Mez McConnell is the Director of 20 Schemes, a church planting organisation seeking to “see Scotland’s housing schemes transformed by the gospel of Jesus Christ through the planting of gospel-preaching churches”.  His passion for and commitment to seeing lives transformed by Jesus is extremely inspiring. 20 Schemes is working with some of the most marginalised people in society.  This is also a mission I am committed to.  I come from a working class background, have been a teenage mother and single parent.  I have lived in deprived areas almost my whole life and have worked with many women who have been deeply wounded by men and by poverty.   My husband and I are now raising a little boy from a severely deprived background having spent a year trying to support his mum to be able to become a parent again.  As such I hope that this blog is read in light of my great respect for 20 Schemes mission and passion.

 

Mez published a blog on the 20 Schemes website earlier today entitled “Why My First Church Hire Was A Woman, And Yours Should Be Too”.  At first glance, this blog seems to be incredibly pro-women, challenging male-led churches to value the contribution women make to the life of the church.  Not only that, he is insisting women should be paid for doing this, shifting away from the idea that women’s labour should be offered free.

 

Mez’s audience seems to be those who wouldn’t consider employing women in any role within the church and so it is a positive step that he is challenging such men (and women) to consider the role women can have in Christian communities.  Some of what he says is very helpful, including that:

 

  • Untrained “pastor’s wives” shouldn’t be offering pastoral support.
  • Women need other women to walk the journey with them.
  • 20 Schemes trust women and train them well
  • Mez explains he finds it “offensive to suggest that by giving women responsibility at [a pastoral] level we are opening the church up to serious error. Far more men have led churches astray than women.”
  • Mez states, “Women are encouraged that they have a serious part to play in the kingdom of God and that they are not just bystanders or there to cook the meals.”

 

I have become absolutely convicted that individual, organisational and church views on gender and sex are a primary Gospel issue.   Too many women (and men) are alienated from the Gospel because of Christians who insist that men’s and women’s roles are fixed with men being responsible for women (within marriage, church life or wider society).   Jesus says, “If anyone causes one of these little ones–those who believe in me–to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea.” I understand this to include those who alienate believers by their views of men, women and sex.  Many of the radical feminists I know started off life in faith communities and the rejected Jesus because of the horrific oppression the were subjected to or witnessed in the church.  Complementarian Christians are quick to insist that their theology is Biblical and that egalitarian theology is not.  I will meet them on their terms, complementarian theology is not Biblical.  It is oppressive.

 

The question Mez’s blog raises for me is, “When a church exemplifies oppressive views towards women, should this disqualify them from having women attend their churches?” And I would suggest there are at least 10 reasons Mez’s blog evidences taking up such a policy.

 

  1. Women are prevented from being obedient to God

If women are called to worship lead, to be an executive pastor or to youth work, they cannot be obedient to God in following that call because Mez explains that: “[Churches] will talk about hiring a youth worker, or an executive pastor or a worship leader before they would even consider a woman”.  The only role women seem to be able to do is to be women.

 

  1. Vulnerable women are at extremely at risk in patriarchal structures

Mez explains that single mothers and those with other vulnerabilities are a large proportion of scheme communities.  Much evidence can be provided that patriarchal structures disempower and further oppress women and prevent them being released into the fullness of life Jesus offers them.  Sadly, most efforts to address the oppression of working class people maintain the oppression of women[1]. Seeking to support vulnerable women without having a good understanding of male violence is likely to perpetuate rather than liberate women who have been deeply hurt by male power.

 

  1. The male leaders don’t have time for the messiness of women’s lives

Mez tells us it is “not wise or prudent for a man to invest serious amounts of time into” women who have been subjected to abuse, violence or sexual violation by a partner because their “emotional needs are often so great”.  This statement is staggering in how pastorally insensitive and revealing it is of how little women’s pain should be invested in by men.

 

  1. A third of the male leaders are a sexual risk to vulnerable women

Mez explains that a third of the leaders who preceded him were removed due to sexual immorality that happened when they were intensely counselling women (who he acknowledges had likely been sexually abused prior to the intense counselling).

 

  1. Extremely vulnerable women will be blamed if male leaders sexually abuse their authority

Mez blames women (with possible histories of having been sexually abused) for male leaders sexually abusing their authority.  According to Mez “Any form of tenderness or a willingness to listen from a male is almost always misunderstood sexually [by vulnerable women]… A man who listens to them is a very powerful aphrodisiac. Temptation can be for some [vulnerable women] very hard to resist. They aren’t used to men listening to their problems. They are used to men being the problem.”

 

  1. The male leaders are powerless to stop themselves having sex with vulnerable women

In the above quote Mez is saying that the church leaders who sexually abuse their authority are not the problem; these leaders are the victims of women who find men listening to them so much of an aphrodisiac that they essentially place the male leader’s penis inside them and with the male leader helpless to stop it.  The male leader just passively allows for sexual activity to take place, unable to act.

 

  1. Men cannot and should not have deep long lasting friendships with women they aren’t married to

Mez explains this in his fifth point about women’s role as pastors pastoral assistants.  Jesus explained that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ and as such should be seeking to build communities that are built on deep and long lasting friendships.  It is by our love for one another (not solely love of those who have the same sex as us) that people will know Jesus.  What state can a church be in if women and men can’t be good friends?  If the only deep interactions men and women have to be sexual?  Maybe that’s one of the reasons male leaders keep having sex with women who aren’t their wives?  Just a thought…

 

  1. It is unbiblical

Mez states that “The church is to be led by men after all.”  I shall put aside the fact his church is led by men who can’t stop themselves penetrating women unless they’re not allowed to be alone with them for too long.

The church is to be led by Jesus Christ, in partnership with the Holy Spirit.  Women and men are to serve God and those He calls us to love, giving up our lives in service to Him.  Jesus tells us that “the rulers of the Gentiles dominate them, and the men of high position exercise power over them. It must not be like that among you. On the contrary, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life — a ransom for many.”

 

  1. The church is playing Pharisaical mental-gymnastics with women’s callings

Mez explains, “When we say that our women’s worker pastors our women we don’t mean that she is a pastor, rather, she assists the pastors by providing day-to-day pastoral care to our women”.  The Pharisees played the same sort of mental gymnastics as this to keep their hierarchies in place, “Okay, so we don’t swear by the temple, we just swear by the gold of the temple.”  “I know we don’t support our ageing parents, but that’s because we’re giving all our money to God.”  “We’re being obedient by even tithing all our herbs, look at how awesome we are.”

 

  1. Women are used out of necessity

Mez explains that without women pastors pastoral assistants, “Even with a small church and multiple elders we would struggle under the weight of pastoral issues in our congregation”.  Primarily women are asked to take a role in the church because a) men can’t help putting their penises in women and b) there’s too much work for only the men to be able to do it.  This isn’t about women’s gifts or call.  This is an argument of efficiency, practicality and utility.  It is not about the unique ministry of women, the value of women or God-breathed life in women.  It is not about the image of God that is found in women.  According to the blog Mez has written, this is about men being sexually deviant in nature and therefore women having to lead, pastor and disciple work with women.

 

Mez finishes by saying something I am in total agreement with,

 

“The local church needs women’s workers. Most of the women living in our poorest communities are suffering without the hope of the gospel. They have not heard the good news that can set them truly free from their burdens. Women on schemes need more than women parachuting in to be another worker in their life, perpetuating dependency. They need women who will do life with them every single day of their lives. The harvest is great, the workers are few and women are being left on the shelf. They shouldn’t be. Employing more women for ministry should be our highest priority.”

 

It is heartbreaking to me that the rest of his blog undermines this hugely important message.

 

To find out more about the 20 Schemes perspective on women, have a read of THIS application process for church planters and their wives (only married men can be church planters).  It has been suggested the process may be in breach of various equality and data protection laws.

 

 

 

[1] Even the great Paulo Freire described a poor man beating his wife as the abusive man’s response to oppression and not as a form of oppression in its own right.  Women are always left behind in liberatory movements.

Jon Jorgensen and Repackaged Patriarchy

In the last week, I got my first introduction to Jon Jorgenson after stumbling across his video “Who You Are: A Message to all Women” after it found its way into my Twitter feed.  The video is well on its way to having 6 million views.  Jorgenson is a Christian spoken word poet and although this video’s title is aimed at women, the video is set in a lecture hall and seems to be seeking an audience of younger women and girls.

 

A white man telling girls who they are didn’t seem like a particularly liberatory model.  So I decided to have a watch.  With emotive music and short dramatic sentences, the video is designed to create a specific emotional response.  He tells girls they’re smart and precious and funny and insists we have a responsibility to set free the “world changing woman” within ourselves.  Incidentally the video is entirely produced by men.  So he doesn’t think women are actually smart enough to be involved in creating his videos with him.

 

After moaning about the video on Twitter, I was informed that he has also created one for men.  So I had a watch of “Who You Are: A Message to all Men”, it has close to 2 million views.  The thing that is MOST fascinating is comparing the words of the videos (and though I don’t have time to delve into them, also the tone and body language within them and soundtrack lyrics behind them).  The subtly (or not so subtly) different language devices within stories that are broadly the same.  The overarching narrative of both videos are:

 

  1. You Are Awesome
  2. Things get in the way of you feeling amazing
  3. You have the capacity to change the world
  4. Jesus died for you
  5. The devil will tell you you’re not amazing
  6. Reject the devil
  7. You Are Awesome

 

The image below has the words typed up in two columns in order for you to compare them.  I’m hoping you can zoom in and read it…

 

Screen Shot 2016-12-02 at 21.15.13.png

Here’s some of the issues when the videos are compared:

 

Women are passive: Beautiful, smart, funny, kind, unique, precious

Men are active: Strong, brave, capable,

 

Women receive: they “are worthy of love and affection”

Men give: they have ability, potential, gifts, talents, kind words, wisdom, jokes, joy to spread, they are full of qualities, traits and virtues

 

Women are “the most stunning of all God’s creation”

Men are “the Lord’s most valuable creation”

 

Women are objects: a diamond, rose, pearl, “the most

Men are subjects: writers, athletes, inventors, artists, musicians, technicians

 

The things that get in the way of women knowing their worth are all related to how they look (except maths test scores and pottery modelling): weight, hair, shoes, whether girls envy them or boys want to “have” them, clothes, modelling, hot list or not list (yes it says that), cheerleader, can’t stand to look in the mirror,

 

The things that get in the way of men knowing they are loved by God are related to activities and physical size: being muscly, being small (and in the library), baseball, swing dancing, fastest, slowest, tallest, smallest, skinniest, fattest, captain of the team or last one picked,

 

For women it doesn’t matter whether “you’re Miss Popular or never really had someone you could call a friend”.

For men it’s doesn’t matter whether “your dad could beat up his dad or you never had anyone in your life who could fill that role”.

 

Women “deserve someone who would give their life up for you because you are powerful and strong, capable”

Men “have a power inside you that was formed before the beginning of time in a secret place by the God of the universe”

 

Women get to change the world, but he gives no examples of what they do.  Just to read about women ing the Bible: Esther, Ruth, Mary, Martha.

Men get to change the world with their gifts, talent, courage, ability, and joy

 

Women are cherished, loved, adored by God

Men are treasured, entrusted and love by God

 

This videos are seeking to change the world, to change how women and men perceive themselves.  But particularly the messages Jorgenson sends to women are regressive and reinforce women as objects and ornaments.  It’s all very well wanting to challenge the cultural messages that women and girls are oppressed by.  But you cannot dismantle the devil’s house with the devil’s tools.

 

As well intentioned as these videos are, they continue to perpetuate the same models for women and girls that exist across society.  Perhaps that’s why the one for women has so many views.  It isn’t enabling women to reject the messages that oppress them, but rather to hear God tell them those same messages in a nicer voice.

 

The messages given to men are slightly more benign, there’s less about aggression and redemptive violence.  However, the comparative messages in the videos still leave men to conclude they are the actors (reinforced by a man performing both videos), the agents and that women are put on earth by God to be attractive and passive.

 

We must challenge these messages wherever we find them and remain steadfast in recognising that girls and women deserve better than repackaged patriarchy to empower and inspire them.

 

Wake Up.

Trump is the president elect.  White evangelical Christians supported him and voted for him.  They justified his actions, defended him and endorsed him as the Christian candidate.  Mainly because he said he’ll overturn abortion laws.  Also because he is a white man who is an expert manipulator and a narcissist.

 

Over the last few days I’ve seen a number of Christians reject evangelical as their label.  They can no longer align themselves with a Christian culture which is misogynistic, racist, xenophobic, bigoted, self-aggrandising and seemingly incapable of self-reflection.

 

Bill and Beni Johnson are the leaders of Bethel, a globally known megachurch, famous for its worship songs and healing ministry.  Bill Johnson took to Facebook this week to justify why he and his wife had voted for Donald Trump.  Using the Bible.  Bill Johnson-ology (a new brand of theology) is very self-esteem oriented…  Poor people lose self-esteem if the state helps them.  Rich people lose self-esteem if they are taxed because it robs them of their choice to show compassion.  Abortion also features highly (point 1) of Bill Johnson-ology.  It also involves a whole load of double standards where Hilary Clinton’s behaviour is unforgiveable, but Donald Trump’s is forgiveable.  Immigrants should not be helped, because citizens come first and actually Donald Trump is like Jesus because both of them suffered for not being politically correct.

 

After reading this, I then attended an Evangelical Alliance (EA) event in London.  It is 170 years old.  In its infancy, the EA had many disagreements, including Britain refusing to allow slave owners to join the alliance, standing against some Christians and their organisations in the US.

 

The event shared lots of things the EA is doing.  Its mission, evangelism, work with public leadership and its advocacy.  Yet, no one mentioned that evangelical is quick becoming a byword for bigot, racist and misogynist.  The UK and US media are telling the world that evangelicals voted in Trump.  Because we did.  Evangelical is synonymous with TRUMP VOTER.  And the EA doesn’t seem to realise what this means for their alliance or for the future of evangelicalism.  It doesn’t matter that US evangelicalism is different to that within the UK, because that’s a complex nuance and a false dichotomy.  Especially when so many evangelicals voted Brexit because they believe the EU is about to usher in the antichrist because they read it in a Left Behind novel or something.

 

I wish I could make this my Farewell to evangelicalism.  But I can’t.

 

I love Jesus.  I would be dead without Jesus.  And I love Jesus in an evangelical, unapologetic, charismatic, raise your hands to the sky and sing your lungs out kind of way.  I love the Bible and think it’s inspired by God and I believe in capital-T Truth.  I live in the tension of being a woman liberated by God while reading Bible passages about women oppressed by that same God.  And I don’t want to just explain it away by making it say what I want it to say.  I raise my kids to know that Jesus saves and my daughter got baptised in the sea and I tell them that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, whilst also trying to equip them to overcome the toxicity of evangelical culture.

 

Why does Bill Johnson get to maintain the label evangelical, when he’s misrepresenting the Bible so horrifically?  When he’s doing such great violence to sacred Scripture?  Why do sexual abuse apologists, racists and bigots get to keep the label evangelical, when they’re defiling God’s temple just the same as the market sellers Jesus chased out with a whip?

 

Evangelical culture left me vulnerable to abuse.  Cultural constructs of forgiveness, submission, consent and the status of women left me ill-equipped to deal with male violence.  And consequently a man almost killed my child and drove me close to suicide.  But Jesus saved me and He saved me back into the evangelical church.  So I’m not leaving, because this is my home.

 

“Wake up, sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.”

 

Wake up Church, wake up Evangelical Alliance, wake up all you Christians.

 

Idolatry and the love of power wreak destruction in the holy places of God.  Our so-called brothers and sisters (oh God, how I weep that it was our sisters too) have elected an anti-Christ man to the most powerful office on earth.  Now is not the time for diplomacy, for platitudes or misrepresenting Trump’s insincere speech as “gracious and moderate”.  170 years ago, the leaders of the UK evangelical alliance stood against the US church in their perpetration of slavery and today we must stand against them once again.  For if we do not, we are culpable as bigots, racists and sexual abuse apologists.

When Men are People and Women are Novelty

This week Donald Trump’s misogyny became clearer to the world.  We now all know that he likes to sexually assault women.  Many were upset because they have wives and sisters and daughtersOthers were upset because he used bad wordsYet others wanted people to grow up and stop being so sensitive about the things men say in private.  Even when those things are a man admitting sexual assault.

 

Another thing that happened this week is that two brand new Christian events were announced.  Naturally Supernatural is a new event from the Soul Survivor team and replaces Momentum.  And Jesus Culture announced a new event that will be happening in Manchester.  These new events that haven’t happened previously.  Currently the Naturally Supernatural line-up includes five white men, one black man and one white woman.  The Jesus Culture event has seven white men (two of them are called Chris) and one white woman.  This event has more Chris’ speaking than women speaking.

 

Now, dear reader, you may be wondering how on earth Donald Trump’s misogyny is related to two new Christian events.  So I shall tell you.

 

Donald Trump’s misogyny started as a seed.  It grew in a soil of white male entitlement, wealth and power.  It grew as he was socialised to understand that men are people and women are novelty; where his power and wealth gained him impunity.  It has been cultivated most recently by white, male conservative Christians, who have either been silent on his comments, have undermined the seriousness of them or have reluctantly admitted that he’s in the wrong.  When these same conservative Christians have expressed concern, it’s because they are fathers and husbands.  It seems it’s only possible for men to care about women if they are emotionally invested in one.  Because men are human and women are novelty.  I wrote about that HERE.

 

These new Christian events are contributing to the soil.  At a very fundamental level they are saying men are people and women are novelty, in a Christian world where 65% are women.  Jesus Culture say, “There is a stirring.  God is on the move.  A hope for the nations.  The inescapable truth that He will do great things in our day.”  If Jesus Culture are unable to discern that God’s move involves a whole load of women, I’m not sure we can trust that they are really hearing from Him.  The world is changing, the roar of woman is finally being heard across our nations and yet Jesus Culture are deaf to her voice.  Because for them men are people and women are novelty.

 

Naturally Supernatural is “Equipping the church to live spirit-led lives.”  The Kingdom of God currently has a female majority, yet as an event they can only find enough women for novelty.  When the men who attend this event can only be upset about Donald Trump’s actions because of their wives and daughters, who can blame them when women’s only roles at the event are as wives, mothers, daughters and sisters?  There will be little that shows women are Christian teachers and leaders, competent and skilled, capable and trusted by God and by well-known Christian organisations to bring God’s Truth to all.

 

We can all imagine that we are nothing like Donald Trump.  That his words and actions are disgusting.  But unless we are actively working to create a world where women are no longer novelty, we are part of the soil.

 

Ali Campbell has also written about this over on his blog and has some really great stuff to say!  Read it HERE.

Brock Turner and Whitewashed Tombs

Last week two letters have gone viral across the internet.  The subject of both is the rapist, Brock Turner.  Firstly, the profound and deeply moving victim statement was published.  In the 12-page letter, the woman Brock Turner raped shares some of the many ways he hurt her and has forever changed her life in immeasurable, painful ways. “My damage was internal, unseen, I carry it with me,” the woman says. “You took away my worth, my privacy, my energy, my time, my safety, my intimacy, my confidence, my own voice, until today.”  She talks about the impact of the criminal justice system and courageously stands with all women who have been subjected to rape and sexual abuse.

 

The second letter was from Dan Turner, Brock Turner’s father.  It is as angry-making as the other letter is heart wrenching.  Dan Turner describes his son’s choice to rape a woman as “twenty minutes of action” and laments his son’s lack interest in pretzels and steak as evidence that his son should not be punished harshly.  The judge chose to go against all guidance and give Brock Turner an extremely light sentence with only six months in county jail (rather than the recommended 6 years in prison).  Even as much of the Western world is outraged by Dan Turner’s letter, it seems the judge was taking Turner’s sentiments into consideration in sentencing Brock Turner.

 

As Christians, how should we respond to this case?  What should be our interaction with it?  Should we focus on mothering and Jesus as the only answer, as Ann Voskamp has?  Or is there more to it?

 

Perhaps we should start by acknowledging that there are experts who are responding to sexual violence in a Western context and Christians are rarely the experts.  Christians claiming expertise are currently describing the choice of men to sexually assault as women “fall victim to sexual violence” and most efforts in the Christian world to address male violence against women doesn’t name the agent for fear of appearing “anti-men”.

 

Guess what people?  Men are the majority perpetrators of sexual violence.  This is a fact.  It is not anti-men.

 

The reason men are the perpetrators of sexual violence is not because men are innately bad.  As Christians we understand that the Fall has resulted in sin coming into the world.  This means that each person has the capacity to choose great evil, but also this means they have the ability to do great good.  Not only did the Fall result in personal sin becoming a reality for human existence.  It also ushered in the principalities and powers of evil in the unseen world.

 

The consequences of sin are listed in Genesis 3.  Pain in child birth; women will be dominated by men; men will struggle with the pressures of trying to provide in a world that makes it almost impossible.  Yet eventually, the serpent’s head will be crushed.  These are not God’s best plan for humanity, we already messed that up.  They are the consequences of sin.

 

Patriarchy is one of the powers and principalities that we must be fighting against.  This is perhaps where Christians could start.  Rather than leaping to the conclusion that we must end sexual violence, perhaps we could start by acknowledging and dealing with our own complicity in sexual violence.

 

When one of the most shared Christian response about Brock Turner’s choice to rape infers that it is a mother’s responsibility to act in ways that stop a boy becoming a rapist, we have a problem.  Yes, Jesus models a different way, but asserting that Christianity has the answer when many women and men who have rejected Jesus because patriarchy has so deeply infected the church that we are the staunchest purveyors of it?  In their rejection of the patriarchal-Jesus aren’t they more effectively seeking to end sexual violence than the many Christians who promote the toxic blend of purity culture and restrictive gender roles?

 

How do we declare Jesus as the answer to sexual violence when so many who bear his name are contributing to the problem?

 

Make the link 1

This image from Make the Link explains how sexual violence exists in a pyramid propped up by sexism, the objectification of women, traditional gender roles and rigid stereotypes for women and men:

 

 

Christians, this is where we start.  Not at the top of the pyramid, but at the bottom.  We must examine how our own lives and choices are contributing to a society where a man’s disinterest in pretzels is of more concern than the all-pervasive damage he has done to a woman.  It is easier to issue the rallying cry “fight sexual violence” at Christian summer festivals than it is to examine the ways those festivals continue to promote purity culture, sexual shame and a lack of women on the platform.  It is easier to be horrified at the crimes “out there” than to recognise that a patriarchal God is still the dominant God worshipped by many of our brothers and sisters.

 

Let us start at the bottom of the pyramid and recognise we are not the experts.  Let us begin supporting experts like Rape Crisis, NAPAC, Object, Women’s Aid, Refuge, Nia, AVA.  Because until then Jesus may be saying to us, “Woe to you Christianity.  You are like whitewashed tombs which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of bones of the dead and everything unclean.”