SMcK: The following post is by Beth Allison Barr, who is poised these days to discuss the most recent spat about women in ministry among the Southern Baptists. Beth is the author of The Making of Biblical Womanhood. By Beth Allison Barr In 1967, Watts Street Baptist Church in Durham, North Carolina, made history as the first Southern Baptist Church to ordain a woman—Addie Davis—to pastoral ministry. This moment seemed to hint at a bright future for SBC women. Indeed, by the early 1980s the SBC had ordained around 200 women.
So much of the SBC ordination of women issue is related to power dynamics and fear. Having been raised in the SBC and ministered to by ordained SBC women in my college days at Samford, I have been disturbed by how the younger millennial generation of SBC's has grown up with a narrative that basically 2000 years of church history has been complimentarian. Knowing that Al Mohler switched his position back in the day was disappointing, but he wasn't the only one. His wife and Dorothy Patterson being so involved in the oppressive 2000 BF&M that further limited women was additionally painful. To be going backwards over the past couple of decades instead of forward seems in Dr. Barr's explanation to be somewhat intentional as a way to be fighting the culture. Paige Patterson confesses to loving a good fight, and yet the fight has been against women, not the culture, ultimately. Although I am no longer in the SBC, I along with others wish it would lay down the power-mongering and follow the Phlippians 2 Jesus. Truth tellers like Dr. Barr have to be so brave. It shouldn't have to be that way in any church that calls itself the bride of Christ.
I am puzzled as to why conservative evangelicals do not look at the broader picture of human authority-submission relationships in the Bible. The Scriptures also say to submit to the king, to submit to your master, to submit to your father, to submit to the church leaders. But typically only "submit to your husband" is understood as being universally valid for all cultures. Why the difference? We have no difficulty in saying that the doctrine of "the divine right of kings" was based on a misunderstanding of the Scriptural command and that democracy works better ....
Just as BAB so eloquently writes in her book, the thought came to me that all the "Biblical inerrancy" the fundamentals preach endlessly actually is not about the Bible being wrong!!! It is about how WE interpret the Bible! The ones who state that their interpretation is the only interpretation that honors God have a my way or the highway mentality that benefits themselves... The fault lies in us, not in the Bible or in God, or in Jesus, or in the Holy Spirit.....
The fundamentalist positioned souls have always planted their flag on the teaching of what the Bible says. That they teach Bible before anything else. That they are all about scripture and handling it well. But what I have seen in the Complimentarian vs. Egalitarian (Men Lead vs Women allowed to Lead) is that the fundamentalists hang their argument on 3-4 verses of scripture -that are open to interpretation and the Egalitarians hang their argument on the whole of what scripture (like 450 verses). Which position seems to stand on the whole of scripture? It’s not a tough argument. It’s not a fair argument. The question seems obvious, would you rather build your argument on 4 verses open to interpretation or 500 verses that would be described as the whole of scripture?
"It was also connected to Mohler’s growing belief that secular trends in American culture were corrupting the Christian family—leading to higher rates in divorce, single parents, etc."
If that is a key factor, and I believe it is, then it is interesting how that takes precedence over gospel, gifting, etc... issues.
On a side note Beth, I really hope you are not being "scathed" as Beth Moore indicated. Your work is appreciated.
This reminds me of a joke that was going around in the 90s. "Question: If moderates had won control of the SBC and its institutions, what would Al Mohler be today? Answer: President of Southern Seminary."
Hi Jessica, I just started reading and enjoying some of your articles, you are certainly a gifted women. You mentioned soteriology, and biblical inerrancy, just wondering what your understanding of these doctrines are?
Just when you think enough already---way too many books from an evangelical egalitarian standpoint. Then Beth pulls a rabbit out of the hat. Super research and writing, Beth!
So much of the SBC ordination of women issue is related to power dynamics and fear. Having been raised in the SBC and ministered to by ordained SBC women in my college days at Samford, I have been disturbed by how the younger millennial generation of SBC's has grown up with a narrative that basically 2000 years of church history has been complimentarian. Knowing that Al Mohler switched his position back in the day was disappointing, but he wasn't the only one. His wife and Dorothy Patterson being so involved in the oppressive 2000 BF&M that further limited women was additionally painful. To be going backwards over the past couple of decades instead of forward seems in Dr. Barr's explanation to be somewhat intentional as a way to be fighting the culture. Paige Patterson confesses to loving a good fight, and yet the fight has been against women, not the culture, ultimately. Although I am no longer in the SBC, I along with others wish it would lay down the power-mongering and follow the Phlippians 2 Jesus. Truth tellers like Dr. Barr have to be so brave. It shouldn't have to be that way in any church that calls itself the bride of Christ.
I am puzzled as to why conservative evangelicals do not look at the broader picture of human authority-submission relationships in the Bible. The Scriptures also say to submit to the king, to submit to your master, to submit to your father, to submit to the church leaders. But typically only "submit to your husband" is understood as being universally valid for all cultures. Why the difference? We have no difficulty in saying that the doctrine of "the divine right of kings" was based on a misunderstanding of the Scriptural command and that democracy works better ....
Just as BAB so eloquently writes in her book, the thought came to me that all the "Biblical inerrancy" the fundamentals preach endlessly actually is not about the Bible being wrong!!! It is about how WE interpret the Bible! The ones who state that their interpretation is the only interpretation that honors God have a my way or the highway mentality that benefits themselves... The fault lies in us, not in the Bible or in God, or in Jesus, or in the Holy Spirit.....
The fundamentalist positioned souls have always planted their flag on the teaching of what the Bible says. That they teach Bible before anything else. That they are all about scripture and handling it well. But what I have seen in the Complimentarian vs. Egalitarian (Men Lead vs Women allowed to Lead) is that the fundamentalists hang their argument on 3-4 verses of scripture -that are open to interpretation and the Egalitarians hang their argument on the whole of what scripture (like 450 verses). Which position seems to stand on the whole of scripture? It’s not a tough argument. It’s not a fair argument. The question seems obvious, would you rather build your argument on 4 verses open to interpretation or 500 verses that would be described as the whole of scripture?
James S. in Portland
"It was also connected to Mohler’s growing belief that secular trends in American culture were corrupting the Christian family—leading to higher rates in divorce, single parents, etc."
If that is a key factor, and I believe it is, then it is interesting how that takes precedence over gospel, gifting, etc... issues.
On a side note Beth, I really hope you are not being "scathed" as Beth Moore indicated. Your work is appreciated.
Terrific eye-opening post, Beth. Thanks much.
This reminds me of a joke that was going around in the 90s. "Question: If moderates had won control of the SBC and its institutions, what would Al Mohler be today? Answer: President of Southern Seminary."
Hi Jessica, I just started reading and enjoying some of your articles, you are certainly a gifted women. You mentioned soteriology, and biblical inerrancy, just wondering what your understanding of these doctrines are?
Just when you think enough already---way too many books from an evangelical egalitarian standpoint. Then Beth pulls a rabbit out of the hat. Super research and writing, Beth!
What does one do when they can find no home on this issue?
Dr. Mohler's full embrace of patriarchy is one induced through the threat of shame. His own confession is that Carl Henry threatened him with shame.
https://baptistnews.com/article/mohler-says-hes-embarrassed-by-past-support-of-women-in-ministry/#.YIMYcC297UJ