Malestrom: Why Egalitarian-Minded Evangelicals Don’t Have to Chuck the Bible

Last updated on: June 9, 2015 at 1:26 pm by Sarah Conrad Sours

Malestrom: Why Egalitarian-Minded Evangelicals Don’t Have to Chuck the Bible 2015-06-09T13:26:20-06:00 Sarah Conrad Sours

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I have frequently (well, half a dozen times) been asked to spearhead a discussion on feminism or feminist theology. I’m not sure whether or not I do feminist theology, but I know I don’t specialize in feminist theology. I haven’t studied it, I’ve never listed it as a specialty or a research interest anywhere, and I’ve never publicly claimed any particular expertise or even competence in it.

But I keep getting asked to do it because, I suppose, the only time men think of inviting women to do theology is when they need someone to do “women’s” theology.

(Okay–the charitable read is that men are appropriately reluctant to describe women’s experience and insights and so want to make sure not to speak on behalf of women. When my male colleagues ask me to do feminist theology, I assume this is why, because all of my male colleagues are actually pretty terrific. But when men I don’t know assume I do feminist theology because I’m female, I get a little squinty-eyed and tilty-headed and suspicious-minded.)

I used to answer these requests by apologetically declining sufficient expertise to speak on the subject. About three years ago, though, I realized two things: 1) I should stop apologizing for having research interests, and 2) I should stop giving my male colleagues permission not to know anything about feminist theology.

So, I started answering, “Why don’t you do feminism, and I’ll talk about the ethics of masculinity? I think our students would get a lot out of that.”

No one’s ever taken me up on that offer–I don’t know whether because they don’t want to have to talk about feminism or because they don’t want to hear what I have to say about masculinity.

This is the best part about Carolyn Custis James’s book: that she does not let being a women who has written about women keep her from speaking authoritatively about and to men. Instead of sitting quietly in the corner with all the other women and talking about “women’s issues,” she has written the necessary partner to her earlier book on women in evangelicalism. Malestrom shows how patriarchal cultural patterns are both detrimental to men and profoundly unbiblical.

Image via Pixabay. Public Domain.

She has set herself a daunting task, trying to show the latter. Outside evangelical circles, the Bible is largely seen as either a primary cause of patriarchy or too steeped in it to generate any genuinely counter-cultural options. Within evangelical circles, the impetus to protect the Bible from its critics (because, you know, God needs our help with that) has generated a hermeneutic of suspicion toward feminist or egalitarian “revisionist” readings. Neither party is all that keen to believe that a specifically evangelical reading of the Bible, committed to the sorts of things evangelicals tend to be committed to, can offer all that much criticism of patriarchy and its cultural expressions.

But James makes it work.

I’m not sure all the chapters are entirely successful, and although I understand why she saved the Jesus chapter for last, I felt, through the entire book, that starting with Genesis rather than Jesus was a mistake (and the sort that an evangelical would make, oddly enough).

That said, the chapters that were successful were really successful. This is the first time I’ve seen Tamar read as an integral part of the narrative arc of Genesis, and I love where she names all the ways Jesus fails as a patriarchal family values super-hero. I’m not convinced that Judges isn’t a wee bit critical toward Barak, but thank goodness that someone is reminding evangelicals that Deborah is in there and that Barak acknowledged her authority to tell him what God wanted him to do.

I suspect that James’s voice will go largely unheard, alas. Her reading of the text will not be revisionist enough for those inclined to agree that patriarchy is a bad thing, and will be too revisionist for those inclined to agree that the Bible is a good thing.

But I’m dropping my copy in the mail today, and sending it to someone who, I hope, will appreciate it. And I’m making sure I have my theology-of-masculinity talk ready for the next time someone invites me to talk about feminist theology. (Also, I’m baking a batch of cupcakes to give my awesome male colleagues, who bring up “women’s issues” in faculty meetings so that I don’t have to.)

Patheos is hosting a book club this month on James’s book. Read more here!

Uncategorized

books

Previous Post

May 29, 2015

How Much Openness Can We Afford?

Next Post

June 17, 2015 A "Vocation" Is Not an Excuse for Theft

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month July 2017 February 2017 October 2016 August 2016 June 2016 April 2016 March 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which Christian group is known for practicing strict nonviolence?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Methodists Presbyterians Mennonites Lutherans