Two Hands

We've talked about this image before.  Take a look again.

In the book The Return of the Prodigal Son, Henri Nouwen encourages us to look at the father's hands in the image.  One of them - the father's left hand - for Nouwen, looks fatherly - masculine. Embracing, strong.  The father's right hand looks motherly - feminine.  In fact, scholars had compared the father's right hand to the right hand of the woman in the Rembrandt's painting, The Jewish Bride.  

At the WV Annual Conference last year, we considered a potential amendment to the United Methodist Constitution designed to make a statement about the worthiness of girls and women - designed to protect them from abuse.  I talked about my disappointment in the discussion about it here.

The amendment that was brought before the Annual Conference for approval in 2017 read:

Amendment 1: As the Holy Scripture reveals, both men and women are made in the image of God and, therefore, men and women are of equal value in the eyes of God. The United Methodist Church recognizes it is contrary to Scripture and to logic to say that God is male or female, as maleness and femaleness are characteristics of human bodies and cultures, not characteristics of the divine. The United Methodist Church acknowledges the long history of discrimination against women and girls. The United Methodist Church shall confront and seek to eliminate discrimination against women and girls, whether in organizations or in individuals, in every facet of its life and in society at large. The United Methodist Church shall work collaboratively with others to address concerns that threaten the cause of women’s and girl's equality and well-being.

See the underlined sentence?  That sentence was what caused such a heated discussion in our Annual Conference. It actually had been dropped by the General Conference but included in the version that went out for approval by mistake.  The version without that sentence was resent to Annual Conferences for a vote this year, in 2018.

But take a look at that sentence in the light of the Rembrant painting - in the light of scripture.  Don't we see what we might consider both maleness and femaleness in God's actions in the Bible? Don't we see God acting as a mother and acting as a father? Why are some people so threatened by the idea that God is bigger than our ability to describe him? (Or her?).  Our words, as you can see, don't work. 

I think of God as male, because I always have, but I know my thoughts about God are limited. My image of God is created by me and is not God. I love the idea that Rembrant, in 1669, understood that.  Why can't we?

Passionate Conversation

The other day I was having a discussion with a pastor regarding applause during worship. It's a topic that I am passionate about, and one that I've had many discussions about, so I was a little "wound up" during out discussion.  I wasn't angry, and neither was he. I was just convinced. And passionate.

He said, "But you're not angry about this." I wasn't - and while I have some frustration around the issue, I wasn't angry, especially not with him, and I'm glad he knew that.

I was thinking about that conversation on the way to work. It's fun to have passionate conversations when you try to convince someone else of your view. At times - not yesterday, but other times - I regret my participation in the discussion, because I wonder if the other person thought I was angry, instead of convinced and passionate. I wonder if the other person had as much fun as I did.

Thinking about that this morning, I think it might be gender related. Women who are passionate - or even angry - are not received the same way as men who are passionate or even angry. Do you think women are expected to humbly agree rather than argue? And is it possible that when they don't fall into line, they are judged for being witchy (or another word that rhymes with that one)?  Men aren't seen that way.

There are times when after a conversation I enjoyed for its passion and insight, I realize I've stepped on someone else's toes. I've either shown my expertise or I've shown my opinion. That wasn't what was wanted by the other person.

Or there are times when I'm more reluctant, and I say things like, "Well, what do I know, but...." or "I could be wrong, but..." I act self-deprecating, and I know it's because I'm a woman - and I'm a smart woman - and sometimes that is not what society (or the person in front of me) wants me to be.

Too bad.

Gifts and Gender

I was reading Facebook yesterday and ran across a post by Rachel Held Evans.  I don't remember what the post said; it was the comments that interested me.  The discussion moved into the traditional roles of men and women in the family.  The commenter (not Rachel Held Evans, whose opinions run the opposite of the commenter's) suggested that men have certain gifts and women have certain gifts, and those gifts should dictate how the family worked.  The man would be the one with the responsibility for being the head of the household and the disciplinarian, and the woman would be the nurturer.  Her opinion was that gifts are divided that way, and that's the way a family should be.

Huh.  Baldedash.

Everyone has gifts.  Everyone has different gifts, and God does not give them on the basis on gender.  I know it would certainly make life simpler if we could look at a person and say, "Oh, her gifts must be.... or "He's a man; these are his gifts."  Life isn't simple, thank God!  It just makes me wonder how anyone could believe that a stereotypical generalization could be better at deciding family roles than two people learning about each other and then deciding how each can contribute the the family unit.

My husband and I are, together, head of the household (and I know he would say the same thing if you asked him).  We each have responsibility for leading our family.  Neither one of us shoulders it alone.  Working out family dynamics might be harder this way, but it is so much more rewarding.

Life in a church is the same.  It's wrong to relegate women to certain roles and men to others.  It denies the gifts that God has given to them, and makes for some unhappy people who are unable to reach the potential God has designed for them.

Holy Spirit

I was led to a couple of blogs by this post by David on Methodist Preacher.com.  I do have opinions, but I'm not going to enter the fray.

However, in reading these, I was struck by an image I had never considered.  In my mind's eye, Jesus, the human (and he was 100% human, in addition to being 100% divine) was male.  I gather that from what is written in the Bible.  In my mind's eye, when I need an image of God, he is male.  In my mind itself, God has no gender.  I limit him with my male image of him, but I'm aware I do it. 

But, my image of the spirit has no gender at all.  I had never considered that before.  I might call the spirit by the male pronoun, but only because the word "it" is too impersonal.  Truly, I don't imagine any gender at all for the Spirit of God.  Just Spirit.  As close as my breath, part of my breath, living with in me and around me, but not male or female.  Just Spirit. 

Someone, Pam, I think, said the Spirit was a foreign invader, because she could not relate to him (because of the maleness).  Maybe the spirit is a foreign invader (not the way Pam means).  S/he is separate from me.  Foreign at times, but only because we disagree, and we argue until I am convinced. 

When I'm in my chair, praying, God is God.  There is God and there is me, and that's it.  No one else gets to dictate any part of that (not that anyone is trying to).