Outcomes of gender inequality

[PloverWing]

Zoii's comment is one of the reasons it's valuable to have female clergy. I'm grateful that most of the mainline Protestant denominations (at least, here in the US) ordain women.

 

[JackRT]

Non-Denoms have a serious problem with pastoral abuse. Without a denominational structure in place there is no way to remove a pastor if (or when) he goes off the rails. And that can be doctrinally, morally, or financially.

A few years back I encountered an interesting situation in a local "non-denominational church". The congregation had become very unhappy with the pastor and called a congregational meeting to get rid of him. They were shocked to find that he owned the land, the church, everything! there was no way that they had any say in anything. They voted with their feet. I have a great distrust of non-denoms. They all seem to have the same evangelical/fundamentalist philosophy and are indistinguishable from the major denominations of the same philosophy but do not have the same oversight or back-up.

 

[Dave-W]

Dave, I think what Zoii's saying is that there is no church where abuse and cover up has not happened. And while that might not be true at the individual congregation level, I think it's certainly true at an institutional level.

This is fact. It is history. We need to look at it square in the face if we're going to be able to deal with how it happened and work to minimise its chances of happening again.

I do not know if I would paint it with quite that wide a brush; but I do agree that where ever there are people involved, you will find sin of one sort or another. It is a fact of living in a fallen world.

 

[Dave-W]

Dave I meant to reply to this before. To me I do not care if classical or conservative denominations recognize females in leadership. At a personal level that merely sends me a danger signal to not go near them. The point I was making is that I recognize female pastors and value them. Within a church female pastors are who I seek out and a church who denies this level of service is doing a disservice to a very large section of their Congregation; but more importantly are limiting the pool of incredible spiritual leaders.

I definitely can see your point. But if you reject any and all male leadership, are you not also "limiting the pool of incredible spiritual leaders?"

One thing I have seen over and over again in my 55+ years of following the Lord: that He often sends His remedy via someone who is likely to be rejected or ignored. (remember at one point HE even spoke thru a donkey) THAT principle is reason enough to me to not reject female pastors; or those that have a radically different theology to my own.
As soon as I start to reject someone, that is the moment God will try to speak to me thru that person.

 

[Paidiske]

There's a difference between "Ministry of women is not valid," and "I personally seek out the ministry of men because I prefer it."

Someone like Zoii choosing to be in a church with a female pastor is not saying that men cannot be pastors, or even cannot be good pastors; but she's making a choice about what she's looking for in her own pastor. It doesn't limit the church that she does so.

 

[Zoii]

The Australian Royal Commission into Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) did a statistical analysis of offenders. I cite their work because I always get alarmed when anyone believes that such offences arent possible in their institution or their church...

Taken from https://www.childabuseroyalcommissi...stical-Analysis-of-sentencing-for-child-sexua
The analysis was of 2800 CSA victims:

The offending in this database was most likely to have occurred in a religious or non-religious school (both 27 per cent) or a church (23 per cent). Almost two-thirds of the schools and churches in which the offending took place were Catholic. More than half (53 per cent) of the cases involved indecent assaults, although one-third involved a penetrative offence. Almost half (48 per cent) of the offending lasted less than five years, although 7 per cent took place over 20 years or more. Some form of grooming occurred in almost one-third of cases. In 43 per cent of cases, the institution took no action, although in 39 per cent of cases the offender was dismissed. The offender pleaded guilty in 71 per cent of cases. The average number of offences per case in this database was 8.5, although the maximum was 67 offences

And concerning the victims:
Two-thirds of the cases in this database involved male victims only, while the most common age group of victims was between 12 and 16 (44 per cent). In just over half of the cases, the offender did not have any prior record, although in 9 per cent of cases the offender had previously committed a sexual offence against a child, and in a further 15 per cent the offender had previously been in custody for a child sexual offence. In 58 per cent of cases, the offender had committed CSA offences against more than one victim. Cases with multiple victims were more likely to occur in religious institutions and were more likely to involve penetrative offences and grooming behaviours

 

[Dave-W]

The congregation had become very unhappy with the pastor and called a congregational meeting to get rid of him. They were shocked to find that he owned the land, the church, everything! there was no way that they had any say in anything. They voted with their feet.

I have seen that situation also. But usually that pastor had such an emotional grip on key individuals, if not the majority of the congregation, that they were AFRAID of some negative eternal spiritual consequence for leaving. The doctrines of many groups (like the WOF) seem to lend to that form of abuse.

I have a great distrust of non-denoms. They all seem to have the same evangelical/fundamentalist philosophy and are indistinguishable from the major denominations of the same philosophy but do not have the same oversight or back-up.

Indeed. There are pentecostal NDs that are (on the surface) just like Assy of God; or evangelical NDs just like the Southern Baptist, etc.

 

[Zoii]

I definitely can see your point. But if you reject any and all male leadership, are you not also "limiting the pool of incredible spiritual leaders?"

One thing I have seen over and over again in my 55+ years of following the Lord: that He often sends His remedy via someone who is likely to be rejected or ignored. (remember at one point HE even spoke thru a donkey) THAT principle is reason enough to me to not reject female pastors; or those that have a radically different theology to my own.
As soon as I start to reject someone, that is the moment God will try to speak to me thru that person.

I see your point too. I should explain that I seek out people I trust. My father is definitely someone I trust. But if I dont know people then I have to make a judgement about who I could trust, and I think thats way easier for me if the pastor is female.

Everyone does this - your caution goes up when you profile a person or group that you dont know or trust so I cant see Im doing anything wrong

But also in my case this female pastor first caught up with me in another environment.... and encouraged me to check out one of her services. I came along but felt intimidated to come inside so sat outside watching everyone come out. My pastor saw me sitting outside and came over to me and brought me inside when everyone had gone. And thats what i prefer... to sit quietly inside when no-one is there. I like the beauty and tranquility of the church and my pastor answers my questions and does not judge me for my thoughts n opinions.

 

[Dave-W]

I should explain that I seek out people I trust.

I get that. We all do that to some extent.

But as I said, we live in a fallen world and people sin. Even people we trust. It is better to place your trust in the LORD and let HIM guide you. I have (even at your age) been warned by HIM to not trust certain ministers. Interestingly, the first one (when I was in high school) was a woman evangelist. Turned out she seduced and enticed away the Sunday School superintendent who was engaged to the senior pastor's daughter. She had no respect for covenant.

And I would submit that in every case listed in your Royal Commission study, that same issue is there: no respect for covenant.

 

[Paidiske]

The issue with clergy sexual abuse, though, is not just that it happens (although that is bad enough). But sexual abuse happens in all sorts of other settings, and in fact most commonly in the home, and I do not expect that it is something that can ever be entirely removed from human experience.

But the issue that has made this so much more than it might have been is the utter failure of the institutions concerned to recognise what was happening or respond appropriately. If every abuser, the first time they abused, was removed from any further opportunity to access children or exercise authority in a church or para-church setting, we would not be having this discussion.

 

[Dave-W]

But sexual abuse happens in all sorts of other settings, and in fact most commonly in the home, and I do not expect that it is something that can ever be entirely removed from human experience.

I understand the issue. My wife was abused from age 8 to 12 by a teen age male relative of hers. At age 60 she still carries the injuries. Her and his parents went to their graves not knowing what had happened.

But the issue that has made this so much more than it might have been is the utter failure of the institutions concerned to recognise what was happening or respond appropriately. If every abuser, the first time they abused, was removed from any further opportunity to access children or exercise authority in a church or para-church setting, we would not be having this discussion.

And I agree that church institutions have severely fallen down on the job in regards to this issue. So have state institutions like universities. They have even covered up serial rape cases. (here in the US) It seems that the church institutions are following the world in that respect.

IMO both need to see the scope of the problem and DEAL with it.

 

[Zoii]

The issue with clergy sexual abuse, though, is not just that it happens (although that is bad enough). But sexual abuse happens in all sorts of other settings, and in fact most commonly in the home, and I do not expect that it is something that can ever be entirely removed from human experience.

But the issue that has made this so much more than it might have been is the utter failure of the institutions concerned to recognise what was happening or respond appropriately. If every abuser, the first time they abused, was removed from any further opportunity to access children or exercise authority in a church or para-church setting, we would not be having this discussion.

What I also find so upsetting is that those who suffered too frequently were not nurtured by the church who the victim placed so much respect and trust in. Rather in too many cases it took an adversarial approach against the victim in an effort to protect the institution.

 

[Dave-W]

What I also find so upsetting is that those who suffered too frequently were not nurtured by the church who the victim placed so much respect and trust in. Rather in too many case it took an adversarial approach against the victim in an effort to protect the institution.

I completely agree with you.

I know it is not very charitable of me, but having seen first hand the permanent damage done by sexual abuse, I am in favor of torture and death to any such perpetrator. I think those who knowingly cover up such heinous crimes should suffer the same fate.

And of course any and all resources should be brought to bear to heal those so injured. Church and family should be the first line of support. But sadly they often add more shame and injury by blaming the victim. That is not good and especially it is not GOD.

 

[Paidiske]

A link to this popped up on Facebook today, and I thought folks here might be interested:

Does teaching submission encourage abuse?

 

[Dave-W]

A link to this popped up on Facebook today, and I thought folks here might be interested:
Does teaching submission encourage abuse?

It was an interesting read. IMO the problem comes from taking translated terms from Aramaic and Greek of 2000 years ago in the mid east; and using them in 21st century english-speaking america.

One of my biggest gripes on how scripture is taught in churches is the lack of historical, cultural and linguistic context for the texts we read. We cannot and MUST not take a term such as "submission" without understanding what the apostle was saying to people in that language (Koine Greek) and that culture (1st century diaspora Jews living in Greece). If that was properly done, there is NO WAY that it could be taken as an excuse for abuse.

 

[mnphysicist]

One of my biggest gripes on how scripture is taught in churches is the lack of historical, cultural and linguistic context for the texts we read. We cannot and MUST not take a term such as "submission" without understanding what the apostle was saying to people in that language (Koine Greek) and that culture (1st century diaspora Jews living in Greece). If that was properly done, there is NO WAY that it could be taken as an excuse for abuse.

And there in lies the challenge, massive numbers of contemporary Christians in the US do reject historical, cultural, and linguistic context.. and when you exclude such, it can very much be taken as an excuse for abuse. One can swing this even further with the teachings of Gothard etc.

 

[mnphysicist]

Consider the following from the article.

Biblical womanhood, headship, and male authority teaches women that they have no right to choose… well… anything. A trip the mall is up to their husband, if he decides its his business. If he determines that she needs to stay at home and homeschool her kids instead of teaching grad school with her Ph.D., then there is no discussion. She gets no say in the matter. If he decides that he wants to have sex, then her headache is of no consequence. If he decides that she needs to be thinner, then she goes on a diet. If he decides that she needs to wear makeup, then she goes to Sephora. None of this is considered abuse. It’s considered the husband’s God-given authority. And if a woman questions that authority, the full force of the church community, their social connections, and their Christian doctrine backs him up. I can tell you that growing up in this environment as a little girl was very abusive for me. Even aside from the physical violence in our home.

If a church is teaching the above, young folks both male and female should run away as fast as possible. There is no love, respect or compromise in any of that balderdash, and its only a tiny step away from where emotional abuse becomes sexual or physical. Note the lack of consent in the sex part.

That being said... I think folks could probably make a complementarian approach to marriage work, provided both parties are fully on board with it, and means of safe exits are known and are readily available. Alas, such is vastly different than the abusive patriarchalism and misogyny called out in the above.

 

[Dave-W]

And there in lies the challenge, massive numbers of contemporary Christians in the US do reject historical, cultural, and linguistic context.

Indeed. This is a lack on the part of pastors to properly educate their congregants.

 

[Paidiske]

Yes and no. Sometimes you can say it till you're blue in the face...

 

[Dave-W]

Yes and no. Sometimes you can say it till you're blue in the face.

I get that. But my experience was when the historical context of the NT was explained (by a Conservative Jewish rabbi) the gospel stories went in my mind from grainy black and white to Hi-Def Technicolor.

I don't know how it is in your area, but here in the US most churches teach the attitude "WE (and only we) have the TRUTH the WHOLE TRUTH and NOTHING but the TRUTH." It breeds an arrogance against anything that would change that in any way. It has primarily been the leadership (both lay and ordained clergy) that have promulgated that attitude in the congregants.

That needs to change.