« EPIC. (I mean, literally.) | Main | The IAU. (Dude. I'm actually posting about the IAU. Wow.) »

August 26, 2006

Um, good Sunday School teachers don't grow on trees

News item: Church Fires Sunday School Teacher For Being Female.

For 60 years, Mary Lambert has worshipped at Watertown's First Baptist Church.

She has served on numerous church boards and taught Sunday school there for 54 years. She was married - twice - in the sanctuary of the gray stone building at the edge of the city's Public Square, and her three children were baptized in the church's pool.

Two weeks ago, Lambert received a letter informing her the church had fired her from a volunteer teaching position because of her gender. Her last day teaching an adult Sunday school class was Aug. 6. She hasn't been at the church since.

The Rev. Timothy LaBouf, pastor of the American Baptist congregation, said Lambert is welcome at church, but not as a Sunday school teacher.

Fifteen elected leaders at Watertown's First Baptist Church unanimously voted Aug. 9 to formally accept an interpretation of an excerpt from the Bible that says women should remain silent and have no authority over men.

I offer hat tips to Charles Pierce at Tapped (nice name, BTW) and Ed Kilgore, the New Donkey for their links. Pierce responds, in anger, that it's time to "run St. Paul's sorry ass out of the New Testament the way they snuffed the Gospel of Thomas." Kilgore responds with a relatively nuanced attack on inerrancy (I hate it when that word comes up, it always hacks more people off than it enlightens) cloaked as a defense of Paul.

I propose both men are missing the point, at least where the Church is concerned.

The point is: IT'S DADGUM HARD ENOUGH TO GET GOOD PEOPLE TO TEACH DADGUM SUNDAY SCHOOL WITHOUT TOOLS LIKE THIS LABOUF DORK AND HIS HATCHET MEN AT WATERTOWN GIVING THE REST OF US CHURCH LEADERS A BAD NAME.

I mean, come on! Let's just assume the BEST scenario here, that you're a young pastor eager to leave your imprint on a congregation and get it on the theological straight-and-narrow, as you see the theological straight-and-narrow. Let's just ASSUME that this move is simply built out of concern that there is a tradition-laden group in your congregation that simply wants things to be the way they've always been, to never change, and you are forcing the church to take scripture more seriously by making an example out of one woman (whatever benefit you get out of "making an example", I'm not sure, but let's go here just for argument).

And so you SEND A LETTER. You DON'T EVEN HAVE THE BRASS ONES TO DO THIS FACE TO FACE. FIFTY-FOUR YEARS, AND YOU SEND A LETTER.

Congratulations. You have made the nation aware of two things.

And who will want to take up this gig? Will they have running around in the back of their minds the next theological fine point that will become your crusade? Once you've beat on the fine letter of the law on this point, which point will be the focus of your next vendetta? And won't they know that you'll engage in whatever tactics necessary to prove your next point?

I'm sorry, this makes me absolutely furious. I know too many women of that generation who are absolutely PASSIONATE about their study of scripture, who take it far more seriously than I ever have. They don't presume that they have anything to say to a larger group, but they do. They are a rich, rich asset that most churches do not employ anywhere near as successfully as they should.

And if somebody wants to throw one or two of Paul's passages about how women shouldn't be allowed to hold authority (while quite conveniently ignoring the massive laundry list of passages about women who had absolutely vital roles to play in the development of the faith), then I'm going to throw a note from a slightly more authoritative figure back:

Jesus went through all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing every disease and sickness. When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, "The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field."

And you just told one worker with 54 years' experience that what she had to offer wasn't good enough.

Nicely done.

(UPDATE: After a little thought, there is probably a role for fairness here, especially since the church insists that other issues were in play and "scriptural rules concerning women teaching men in a church setting was only a small aspect of that decision" (never mind that, if they do admit that they considered 1 Timothy 2:12, that pretty much undermines every other argument they're trying to make). If you'd like to investigate this more fully, visit the church's website.)

Posted by Chuck at August 26, 2006 09:31 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.chuck-pearson.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/177