Quiverfulmania

[Smith]

Taking off from the most recent thread initiated by Darrell about the abuse (yes, another one), I found a link in the story about Vycki Garrison and her departure from the Quiverfull movement and her disdain for the Patriarchal movement, she is quoted in the article as saying about the bible....

"I don't think you can get equality out of the Bible. You can't get away from hierarchy, strictly defined roles for gender, authoritarianism, submission, dominating." Many believers might take issue with that, but to devout believers of Quiverfull, patriarchy is simply "the logical conclusion of what Scripture teaches,"

(Article found here)

After reading her story, I was really struck by the fact that this IS a "man's world" and if one lives within the confines of the Fundamentalist/Conservative Evangelical framework, and is a female or child, you're doomed in most cases to live your life under someone's thumb and never really enjoy the life you were given, after a while, the most you can hope for is either to live vicariously through someone else or live in perpetual cognitive dissonance.

Thoughts?

[pastor's wife]

Well, Vycki is no longer a believer, so while I value her insights about her experience living the Quiverful lifestyle, I would be very cautious in accepting her view of anything the Bible says.

If Christians followed Scripture, we would "submit to one another out of reverence for Christ" (Eph. 5:21), "serve one another in love" (Gal. 5:13), and "ALL OF YOU, serve each other in humility, for 'God opposes the proud but favors the humble'" (1 Peter 5:5). Nothing in those passages says that men are given an exception when it comes to women. It says ALL.

In Luke 22:25-26, Jesus told His disciples: "In this world the kings and great men lord it over their people, . . . But among you it will be different. Those who are the greatest among you should take the lowest rank, and the leader should be like a servant."

Romans 12:2-5 says, "Don’t copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think . . . I give each of you this warning: Don’t think you are better than you really are . . . Just as our bodies have many parts and each part has a special function, so it is with Christ’s body. We are many parts of one body, and we all belong to each other." Male and female - we are all equal and honorable in the body of Christ.

Just because Christian teaching has been abused and twisted to justify all kind of evil behaviors doesn't mean that that's what the Bible really says.

.

[richao]

(04-13-2011 07:50 AM)Smith Wrote:  Taking off from the most recent thread initiated by Darrell about the abuse (yes, another one), I found a link in the story about Vycki Garrison and her departure from the Quiverfull movement and her disdain for the Patriarchal movement, she is quoted in the article as saying about the bible....

"I don't think you can get equality out of the Bible. You can't get away from hierarchy, strictly defined roles for gender, authoritarianism, submission, dominating." Many believers might take issue with that, but to devout believers of Quiverfull, patriarchy is simply "the logical conclusion of what Scripture teaches,"

(Article found here)

After reading her story, I was really struck by the fact that this IS a "man's world" and if one lives within the confines of the Fundamentalist/Conservative Evangelical framework, and is a female or child, you're doomed in most cases to live your life under someone's thumb and never really enjoy the life you were given, after a while, the most you can hope for is either to live vicariously through someone else or live in perpetual cognitive dissonance.

Thoughts?

Look forward to reading the article. This is one reason that I find it hard to be a good evangelical: Although I believe Paul was probably progressive for his time (read Paul Among the People for a really interesting take on the difficult (for us living in the modern world) passages in Paul), I also believe that we now know more about the intellectual capabilities of women than Paul did. Relative to his time, he had a progressive vision for the role of women in the church, but why should we be bound by the relative position that he staked out?

In any event, as the father of a daughter, I hope that she grows up to find joy in marriage and motherhood. But I also want to do everything in my power to encourage her to develop her intellect to the greatest extent possible. For example, she knows that I don't tolerate complaints that "math is hard" or "science is boring," even though such attitudes are common among her girlfriends. If she decides to marry into the quiverfull movement, at least she'll be well positioned to homeschool her children effectively.

[richao]

To clarify: It's not that I don't find Paul authoritative. Rather, it's a question of how he's authoritative. If it's the trajectory that he set that is authoritative, then arguably the core of his teaching is about opening up new possibilities to women that did not exist in previous generations. Indeed, there is much in Paul that suggests much of what he wrote about women (and other social issues) was informed both by his anthropology/theology and by his concern of what would and would not cause scandal in the world around them. Why are we not permitted to make the same judgments? Given what the scripture teaches about the spiritual equality of women before God and the fact that stifling women's voices is now a cause for scandal in our society, why should anybody object if women take a far more prominent role in the life of the church than they did in the time of Paul?

[pastor's wife]

@richao, I know we've taken the idea of slavery, which was allowed in the OT, and by using NT principles, decided that slavery violates the God-given right of freedom. Maybe the issue of women is a similiar one to that.

[Smith]

"Well, Vycki is no longer a believer, so while I value her insights about her experience living the Quiverful lifestyle, I would be very cautious in accepting her view of anything the Bible says."

While that's true, the twisting of evil and distorted beliefs brought her to this point so I wouldn't blame her for her views. After all, since Christ is not physically on earth, leadership of various sorts is all a Believer has to trust. Also, when literally everyone says something to the effect "I felt led of the Spirit", "I feel that God wants me to...", "I believe God wants us to....", "I believe God is telling us..."..it becomes apparent that after a while you are expected to follow leadership because who are we to ignore them lest we ignore God? I accept her views concerning herself because her experience is valid.

You said "If Christians followed Scripture..." Well, in her view as well as the Patriarchal and Quivering movement leadership is concerned, they were following Scripture. I mean, to the abused, admonishment by Scripture becomes a way of life so one can grow numb to even the best intent.

[leaving]

Pastor's Wife, you do know, don't you, that it's possible to learn lots of things off of unbelievers. I for one find Vyckie's reasoning here to be what I see in the Scripture, and I struggle with it all the time. It makes me not want to be a Christian at times, for it appears that God is lying by saying we were made in His image, that we are equal, but then says we are not really equal at all, that to have a voice in the world you MUST have a penis, otherwise you basically mean nothing except to birth sons. It's as if God created some (men) to live meaningful lives, and then purposely created others (women) to be second class with no rights. In fact, to be honest, I often wonder why God gave women brains as it is very clear that He NEVER meant for us to actually use them.

[richao]

(04-13-2011 08:40 AM)pastors wife Wrote:  @richao, I know we've taken the idea of slavery, which was allowed in the OT, and by using NT principles, decided that slavery violates the God-given right of freedom. Maybe the issue of women is a similiar one to that.

I think there may be something to that. In Paul Among The People (strongly recommended, by the way; written by a female Quaker who is a classics scholar, the book looks at Paul from the perspective of the cultural world he lived in), the author points out that many view Paul as affirming slavery, particularly in Philemon. She points out, though, that Paul's exhortations in Philemon are about as radical as one could've been given the constraints of his time. She also points out that his instructions, while accepting Philemon would remain a slave, fundamentally undermine the assumptions upon which slavery is based. The common belief among conservative Protestants today that slavery is wrong shows that we are occasionally capable of recognizing that the spirit trumps the letter. It's funny, though, (not to mention inconsistent) that so many of us insist on adhering to the letter when it comes to the role of women in our churches and families.

[elfdream]

On Catholic soapbox:

I'm glad we have Mary...and all the female saints...some of whom have been named DOCTORS of the Catholic Church.

I can honestly say, and I"m only speaking for myself, that I have not heard one single sermon on wifely submission or 'the woman's place' in the seven years I have been Catholic. If anything it follows the interpretation of PW's original post here. Mutual respect, mutual submission, we are all to serve on another and not to lord anything over anyone. The 'Husband's love' your wife is the golden rule for husbands. You treat your wife the way YOU would want to be treated which should be the norm for everyone in every situation.

Steps down again.

[steviusthedevious]

i didn't read any of the replies, so i'mma just do a drive-by post here:

believer of quiverfull? i'm a believer of christ! taking the biblicist's road on this one ...