Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
September 21, 2017, 02:25:47 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Women and GC  (Read 63639 times)
The Clone
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 49



« Reply #40 on: March 21, 2007, 09:30:53 pm »

I am sorry to name drop here, but I am looking for an old GCM member who was my youth pastor, and went off the Open Door. She was a great woman and influence on my life. She was at Evergreen, and her name is Corajayne Murray. Does anyone know how I could get hold of her.

The Clone.
Logged
exshep
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 260



WWW
« Reply #41 on: March 21, 2007, 09:31:08 pm »

Quote
“I have a question. Where does a single woman fit in the mainstream GC scheme of things? I will explain later. I just want to send up the flag for now and see who salutes.”

Um, call me crazy, but I don’t think she really does fit. But married women didn’t either OTHER than roles (also open to single women) that have to do with teaching Sunday school, nursery, hospitality, and passing the offering plate, oh and singing.
*****

That was what I thought. I had a friend in GC who never married. According to a former member, she was treated as something as a side show and left off in a corner. Funny thing is her former church denies there was such a member by her name let alone a church at my alma mater, where she was originally recruited. The woman was apparently a member 1982- c2000.

If there were a movement to ostracize single men who would not marry, I am not sure how I would feel. Assuming I invested nearly 20 years, I would probably feel bitter, betrayed, and violated.
Logged

Had friend in Columbus church 80's and 90s. Member left in 1993  Involved GC in Texas  2005-2007.  Empathy to both  with  positive and negative aspects.
exshep
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 260



WWW
« Reply #42 on: March 21, 2007, 09:31:29 pm »

Quote
I am sorry to name drop here, but I am looking for an old GCM member who was my youth pastor, and went off the Open Door. She was a great woman and influence on my life. She was at Evergreen, and her name is Corajayne Murray. Does anyone know how I could get hold of her.

The Clone.

I can relate. I have a friend in GC who I been praying for decades that we could reconcile. Clone, I pray you find her. Let us know the outcome.
Logged

Had friend in Columbus church 80's and 90s. Member left in 1993  Involved GC in Texas  2005-2007.  Empathy to both  with  positive and negative aspects.
exshep
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 260



WWW
« Reply #43 on: March 21, 2007, 09:32:53 pm »

Quote
Except for ex-shep’s church… there seems to be a complete disregard for the ideas of women.

I remember a message by a higher up directed towards other male leaders where the leaders says, “We need to protect our girls from the pressures of our leadership roles in the church.”

So unlike other organizations where marriage might get you a place of leadership that gender might not, you actually were no different from any other woman. Quiet, subservient, and submissive. UGH.
*****

So I noticed. The above quote of “protecting the girls” would get one terminated for sexual harassment in the corporate world. Forgive my hyperbole, but all of the sudden radical feminism is starting to look appealing.

I do remember the women were to not say anything to a male who was not interested in GC. I remember I had a nice friendship with a GC sister who worked at the First National Bank. I never could figure out why she all of the sudden refused to wait on me.
Logged

Had friend in Columbus church 80's and 90s. Member left in 1993  Involved GC in Texas  2005-2007.  Empathy to both  with  positive and negative aspects.
exshep
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 260



WWW
« Reply #44 on: March 21, 2007, 09:33:10 pm »

Quote
…. (I am gagging as I write that) becoming more infantile and childlike. That’s what I felt when I went to women’s gatherings. In fact, this may get me in HUGE trouble, but I think that the higher up a woman got (in marriage that is) the more infantile her speech became. It’s true! It’s almost like there was the “gentle and quiet” voice women were to adopt– it was almost like a slow drawl. I am not kidding.

You are not alone in your suspicion. I experienced firsthand from a friend in GC. It also happened in the bible school I left. The women seemed to go through a reverse adolescence. This was academically doumented by Bill and Lorna Goldberg in a mid 1980s article in Social Work. I tried several library search engines and even the Goldberg’s website to no avail.
Logged

Had friend in Columbus church 80's and 90s. Member left in 1993  Involved GC in Texas  2005-2007.  Empathy to both  with  positive and negative aspects.
G_Prince
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 303



« Reply #45 on: March 21, 2007, 09:33:26 pm »

So while I agree that single women were ignored… they were and are, married women also were ignored often and if they weren’t it was to keep reminding them of their place. What I found is that when a bright, articulate, visionary woman got married… it was expected that she sublimate all of that and follow her husband’s leadership in everything…. (I am gagging as I write that) becoming more infantile and childlike. That’s what I felt when I went to women’s gatherings. In fact, this may get me in HUGE trouble, but I think that the higher up a woman got (in marriage that is) the more infantile her speech became. It’s true! It’s almost like there was the “gentle and quiet” voice women were to adopt– it was almost like a slow drawl. I am not kidding.

Agatha, I didn’t know you were so analytical!

I’m always envious of how you and Gen, clarify rather obscure ideas and impressions so easily. Anyway, this statement is exactly my sentiment. I’ve seen so many bright talented women marry GCM’s rising stars and become almost mindless. It’s as if in order to follow properly they have to kill all their passions, dreams, and abilities in order to focus on enabling and nurturing their husband’s.

When I see then and ask them how they are, they immediately launch into what their husband is doing and what his plans are for them. What happened to them? Are they even a person anymore? I think “a brother’s” take on women was very enlightening. Women first of all need to be checked and under control by male authority and rational. Second, women need to respect and be submissive to men always even if they are treated poorly.

(conjouring Stephen Colbert’s whine) If you don’t like it ladies, it’s in the bible! You wouldn’t want to disobey God would you?
Logged

Here's an easy way to find out if you're in a cult. If you find yourself asking the question, "am I in a cult?" the answer is yes. -Stephen Colbert
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 962



« Reply #46 on: March 21, 2007, 09:33:41 pm »

Mamie said,

“Faithwalkers: My understanding (and I could be wrong - please correct me if I am) is that Faithwalkers is intended, at least in recent years, to give younger generations the opportunity to hear from those who have been “walking in the faith” for many, many years. I believe that, if that’s the intention, then half of the stories that are shared should be those of women who have been in the movement since the beginning - and there are many wonderful examples. To only have men sends a subtle (and that’s the part that bothers me) message that it’s only the men’s stories that younger men and women can learn from. I strongly disagree! I think both men and women need to hear from faithful women.”

Mamie, I agree. This is one area where GC really falls down on the job. If you listen to the Faithwalkers talks, the only ones by women tend to deal with the GC definitions of “female vices” (my term here not theirs). And by “female vices” I mean things like how women dress, are they supporting men, are they supporting their husbands, are they busybodies? There is some talk about women being in the fray, but it is spoken of as an aberration… a special circumstance.

And in one message, their was a assumption that all of the women would get married, and not only that… they would get married to men within the GC movement.

So, women are under represented at Faithwalkers, and when they are represented they are kept in the areas of “women’s issues.” I find it so offensive that men and women!!!!! continue to perpetuate stereotypes of women as busybodies, constant talkers, people who can’t think for themselves— who need their husbands to help them prioritize their lives.

This in my mind, plays into oddly sexual politics. I mean that. I personally feel that women are reduced to gentle, docile creatures that produce children.

And as for us “feisty women,” how many times was there a talk by women who also claimed to be not so great at being gentle and quiet and “confessed” this shortcoming… perhaps with an understanding chuckle from the other women in the audience? Let’s see if I can put this into words: Even though women might not have fit the stereotype.. gentle, quiet, submissive… this was the goal, the aim, the prize. This was what the “good” GC men were looking for. Not an independent spirit, not a mind that thinks for itself.

I didn’t fit naturally, although I made myself fit. People would say how unique I was, but it was often tempered with a you’ll grow up someday… kids will mature you… someday you won’t always be so emotional attitude. And I rejected this line of thought. I am not like everyone else. My goals and dreams ARE unique and so are many of the dreams that these other women have.

This one gets me all fired up and ready to rumble… so I have to be careful not to get too upset… don’t want to offend anyone tooooooooo badly.
Logged

Glad to be free.
mamie
Guest

« Reply #47 on: March 21, 2007, 09:33:52 pm »

The slow disappearance of wives as “real people” is yet another reason why I fear for the first generation of women, especially leaders’ wives, as they pass the 50 yr old mark and are looking forward to (or dreading) the next 30+ years of…..what?? Teaching the younger women? (not that I think that’s bad - I really don’t, depending on what they’re teaching) Caring for their grandchildren? Putting on potlucks?

If you know much about theories of human development, you’ll know that they are entering a developmental phase called “generative” - they’ll want to be DOING lots more, giving back, teaching what they’ve learned, passing the baton. They’ll by and large outlive their husbands….then what??? I’m hoping for a re-emergence or re-formation of their unique selves. That there will be some kind of internal groundswell that they finally have the oomph to follow because it’s God calling them. That their husbands will finally trust their wives’ own walk with the Lord enough to give the reins to their lives back.

Or they’ll leave their husbands and GC…or they’ll dissolve into nothing… (well, okay, that was a little melodramatic, but honestly, it’s worth thinking about, for me and others who deeply care about our sisters who are in that place or will be soon).
Logged
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 962



« Reply #48 on: March 21, 2007, 09:34:05 pm »

Quote
Nate said:

“Thinking that we should aspire to be leaders is counter-intuitive to the gospels!!!”

Nate I would like to remind you that this is not core GCM doctrine. Brent Knox gave an interesting message on this very thing where he speaks of how men should have a “lust for leadership.” This was at a national conference, is still posted, and has never been refuted.

Nate, I agree with you, but WE together do not agree with core GC teaching on this. Whatta ya gonna do about it? Smiley
Logged

Glad to be free.
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 962



« Reply #49 on: March 21, 2007, 09:34:23 pm »

Quote
Puff said:
“At my GCM singles college group, women were taught in their life groups that if a brother in the life group asked them to do something, they should submit to him on the basis of his gender. ”

Now this, this is just plain wrong. Never does it say in the Bible that women are to submit to just any old guy… even if he is “a brother.”

This kind of thinking is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. A “lengthy urethra” does not a leader make.
Logged

Glad to be free.
Tony
Guest

« Reply #50 on: March 21, 2007, 09:35:27 pm »

Wow. I don’t even know where to begin. This discussion is so very hard to join when it doesn’t seem like it’s a discussion so much as an us-against-them group meeting where we all talk about what’s wrong with them, and don’t actually consider any points to the contrary.



First, it seems that many (not all) of the things that Gene, Genevieve, and Mamie are talking about would be common in any church that believes in a complementarian (instead of egalitarian) views on gender roles. Gene, it is in fact not held amongst most Bible scholars that 1 Cor 11 is cultural — most hold that the symbol of a head covering is cultural, but that the argument for the needed symbol is from the creation account, not culture. If any of you would like a more thorough study on gender roles from the complementary viewpoint, the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood website (www.cbmw.org) is an excellent resource. In particular, the books Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood by John Piper and Wayne Grudem, as well as Man and Woman in Christ by Stephen B. Clark are very good. FYI, this position is not just a GC position, but is strongly supported by the Southern Baptist Convention, the Catholic church, the various Reformed churches, some synods of the Lutheran church, and many in the evangelical world. You find very wide representation on that Council.



Second, when a GC woman or man posts a contrary example, they are most ignored or picked apart. You can consider me somewhat aggravated that everybody has thus far written off my wife’s examples of ways that she is serving that both respect a complementarian view and use all of her mental, physical, and emotional capacity. She is not only a great resource to our family, but also to our church and movement.



Mamie, I am very sorry that you felt ignored in you church. I know of single women in our church who are older, not involved in campus ministry, successful in their jobs, responsible for multi-million dollar budgets, and consulted on matters of expertise within our church. I don’t know what to say to you. I hurt because you felt like you couldn’t be the person you are without incurring judgment from others.



I don’t know what else to say. Are you really surprised when one church “feels” like the people who are leading that church? I know the church makes up all of God’s body, but that doesn’t stop any particular part of that body from being somewhat different than average. I think it’s obvious that some of your personalities / demeanors clash with those of the rest of the women in your church. Do you think that they really despise you or wished that you were different? Did you despise them? Why not celebrate the diversity of the Body of Christ? Why not do the hard thing, and be the bold women you claim to be? Wouldn’t the Body of Christ be better off? Or, were you specifically asked to leave or be different because you were just too unique?



I think I’m done ranting for now. I’m sure I’ve transgressed somewhere in that ranting; since I’m pretty emotional right now, and I’ve written a fair number of words. I better just apologize preemptively for the mistakes I’ll find later.
Logged
MamaD
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92



« Reply #51 on: March 21, 2007, 09:36:01 pm »

Howdy Tony,

I have been sick all day and just came online and found I had a lot of catchiing up to do, so pardon me if I’ve missed your point…my head is a little fuzzy at the moment.

I’m trying to figure out why you are so upset…really, I am.

And, before we go any further, I personally don’t believe women should be pastors or elders and I think men should be the primary support in their families. So, I think we are in agreement on a lot of this.

You began your comment with:

This discussion is so very hard to join when it doesn’t seem like it’s a discussion so much as an us-against-them group meeting where we all talk about what’s wrong with them, and don’t actually consider any points to the contrary.

I know you were upset and defending your wife (so, good for you on that point), but two thoughts came to mind.

I think it’s great that all sorts of current GCM people are commenting, but you need to keep in mind that the purpose of this blog is:

Maybe if you kept in mind that this is a forum for discussing problems with GCM, it would help you see why people might disagree with something that was said. They may have experienced a problem in that area.

Also, in a sense, there is an “us/them” mentality, since the purpose is to discuss problems “us” have had with “them”.

Having said that, though, I see a great willingness on the part of the de-commissioned people to listen to comments from all sides. After all, your posts aren’t deleted.

And, finally, just because someone doesn’t accept your view doesn’t mean they haven’t considered your view. They may just disagree with it.

A thought I had was maybe the view of women varies by the church. I didn’t really see it at my church. Looking back, there was a lot of “talking down” to people, but I think it was equally directed at men and women!

Finally, waaaaay back, Mamie said:

“GC has NEVER known what to do with articulate, bright, visionary, dynamic women - except to get them “under a man’s covering”

I might add that GC has never known what to do with articulate, bright, visionary, dynamic MEN–except to get them under an elder!

Sometimes I wonder if the problem comes down to a different view of what it means to be a leader.

My husband is the leader in our family, but that doesn’t mean he leaves me a “to do” list every day with who I can see and what I have to do. I think the GC view of leader is to view the people “under” them as slaves who need to obey. That would not be my view of leader.

Also, the single women serving the men…that’s just sick.

I will now hit submit, fuzzy head and all, and hope this has made sense!
Logged
mamie
Guest

« Reply #52 on: March 21, 2007, 09:36:15 pm »

Tony -

At this point, I’ll only comment on the one part of your post that was specifically addressed to me regarding the single women in your church.

I believe that you know of at least one of those women and her involvement in an advisory role because of a specific part she played in decisions regarding the Rock’s purchase of property. I would suggest that you’re drawing conclusions from that involvement that are more positive than the situation really warrants.

I know most of the adult single women in your church very well and would encourage you to engage them - especially the ones with leadership and administrative gifts - in conversation about how well integrated into the life of the church they feel. I think it would help you see below the surface. And they would be shocked and thrilled that someone - especially a younger male leader - thought their opiinion on older single women in the church was worth knowing.

They are women who, for the most part, have chosen to stay there, not because of how they are regarded by the rest of the church and the leadership but in spite of it and with a strong commitment to try to impact it. But it’s been a long, painful struggle.
Logged
Angry
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 103



« Reply #53 on: March 21, 2007, 09:36:48 pm »

Yes -

It was even more paramount of a problem within the youth groups. College students were expected to conform to the concept of the women’s group needs being secondary to the needs of the male youth groups. The men had first crack at meeting times as well as first crack at use of the sanctuary and our media room.

It was expected that the women’s group would schedule their meetings slightly before the men’s group so that they could prepare snacks/munches for the men’s gathering - “that’s the women’s job”.

Angry
Logged
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 962



« Reply #54 on: March 21, 2007, 09:37:19 pm »

Tony said:

“I think it’s obvious that some of your personalities / demeanors clash with those of the rest of the women in your church. Do you think that they really despise you or wished that you were different? Did you despise them? Why not celebrate the diversity of the Body of Christ? Why not do the hard thing, and be the bold women you claim to be? Wouldn’t the Body of Christ be better off? Or, were you specifically asked to leave or be different because you were just too unique?”

I personally did not clash with anyone, and I was never asked to leave. My biggest issues are how the culture of GC fed into a feeling of depression and entrapment that magically disappeared after I left.

I have a hard time with personality traits being linked to moral values.

Tony, can you see our side too? You actually have experienced the benefit of GC changing their minds at least one area… so I’ll use that one for an example.

Years ago and even today in some teachings, pockets of GC, and in GC families getting your PhD in something not related to GC would have been frowned upon and still is to this day as I just pointed out.

GC saw the light and quit being dogmatic about “careers” and degrees and “the world’s way.” So you have worked hard, achieved a lot and now you have a Ph.D. That is absolutely fantastic. What if, what if you were in GC and this change had never been made? You wanted to be a professor, but it just wasn’t what God called GC people to do? You wanted to study, to learn, to influence others in this sphere, but that wasn’t acceptable?

Wouldn’t you feel trapped, forced into a mold that you didn’t choose, etc? What if the only men who were respected in church were those who took the practical jobs who just got money to provide and the rest of the time devoted it all to GC?

That is how some women feel in GC. They really want to follow God, they want to use their talents. But their talents aren’t needed or respected. This happens in GC all the time. There are the scholarly men and women who are told to read fewer books. There are the men and women who might be led to go to another organization for mission work who are discouraged…. yes this is still happening.

And there are women who never marry. Who are still treated as though they are waiting for a husband. Who are “placed” under men in small groups, families, etc.

Maybe it’s just because I am a woman, but this literally makes my stomach churn even thinking about this. It’s like being a child for life.

You know, I wanted to do some things differently in my life. And I chose not to do them because that just wasn’t what women did in GC. My husband wanted to do things differently, but he didn’t because that just wasn’t what GC men do.

This goes far beyond any complementarian/egalitarian controversy. I listened to a message last night where women were told not to wear camis under sweaters because this was underwear and would they want a man not to come to the Lord because they were wearing this? I have listened to wives of pastors encourage women not to go on a much needed retreat with other Christian women and to “get home with their husbands” where they belonged. I have heard sermons by men in which they talk about their wives reviewing priorities, schedules and relationships with them to see if they are properly supporting the husbands vision. I have been laughed at, teased, and chastised for my vivacious and somewhat loquacious personality while my intelligence and abilities were consistently ignored and downplayed. I never wanted to be a leader. I just didn’t want to be a second class citizen. Nor did I want daughters and sons to grow up with these viewpoints.

There is a point where GC crosses over from complementarian and into oppression. Of course it isn’t nearly as bad as the old days. Nor is it the worst or only organization that does this.

But try to imagine thinking your whole life of your future. What am I going to be? How am I going to serve God? What will I be when I grow up? How will I raise my children? Who will I marry? What will it be like? What will my first kiss be like?

And then when you get to each one of these rites of passage or different rites of passage for singles, you find out that each of the decisions isn’t yours alone to make. Oh no, there are proscribed codes of conduct. There are behaviors to emulate. There are mentors to consult with. There are expectations of others. There is a path to take, and if you don’t take it… you aren’t following God’s heart.

Please understand that I mean no disrespect to Kirsten at all, for I too am a stay at home mom… I even homeschool. But I had to leave and make that decision myself. At GC, there just wasn’t an option for anything different.

So, right or wrong, imagine these decisions women are making. I love being a mom. But I would like men who strongly believe in women’s “roles” to think just exactly what they are asking of women.

They are asking that women give up their bodies for their children. They will carry, be torn apart giving birth to, breastfeed and care for their children. They will wipe up feces every day for many years. They will teach the same things over and over again. They will go for hours and sometimes days without a conversation. They will comfort, cajole, nag, discipline, and grow weary getting little ones to do what they need to do.

They will spoon feed, potty train, read endless copies of Good Night Moon and Mr. Brown Can Moo Can You? They will chase the boogey man away and push the swing millions of times. They will get up and do all of this whether they feel good or not. They will wash urine and feces and vomit soaked sheets again and again and again. They will cook food that will not always be eaten.

And then they will attend GC parenting conferences where they are warned of idleness in homeschooling. Or women’s conferences where they will be told not to be busybodies. Or perhaps they will drag themselves wearily to church where they will be encouraged to greet someone new, when they are already feeling at the end of the rope.

I know during my GC days, my consolation was holding my son. Just holding him and remembering why I was doing all of this anyway.

You see sacrifices like this are only good if they come out of love. That isn’t the kind of sacrifice anyone in their right mind would expect of someone. It has to be a personal decision based on love and optimism.

And if they choose another route of not being a wife and mother, they will be ignored, seen as aberrations, and people won’t know what to do with them. They may be lonely they may live full lives of complete fulfillment. Each woman is completely different. But one thing single women are not is the property of the church or other families that they can “learn from.”

Roles of women, roles in the church, attitudes towards women, female representation at Faithwalkers, the way women are treated on a daily or weekly basis is all related. Either women are equals or they’re not. We can be different but equal, but only if we are respected and encouraged and supported and given a chance to be ourselves where we are called to be. I have said before that I don’t think women are called to be pastors or elders. But women can Biblically be called to be deacons, wise contributers, even fantastic speakers in the right setting… sometimes even including men— gasp!, women can have amazing powers of discernment or gifts of knowledge.

It’s not about “look at me– aren’t I great” it’s about just exactly why is it that roles keep coming up as though it were right up there with understanding salvation and sanctification. Why are we so obsessed with making sure others are in their places?
Logged

Glad to be free.
Tony
Guest

« Reply #55 on: March 21, 2007, 09:37:56 pm »

MamaD, yes, I realize that is the stated purpose of this blog on the “About” page. It’s because of that stated purpose that I often wonder whether it’s worth my time to read the posts and make comments. I’m happy to discuss issues, so long as it’s a genuine discussion where both parties might be willing to budge. If I want to read someone tell me they think I’m wrong, there’s lots of places to go for that.



I also realize that you are a complementarian, MamaD. That’s part of what really confuses me about your participation on this post. Maybe because I don’t see the master / slave mentality in the movement (with anyone), the only issues that I see left are those that only egalitarians would oppose. I mean, MamaD, did you see master / slave relationships around you? I understand you and your husband left over issues of church government, and that may be what you’re hinting at, but even in Brent’s message at Faithwalkers (the one Agatha flagged about “lust for leadership”), he teaches that the role of an elder or church leader is not one of being a master, but of a servant. Elder rule does not mean elder masters. Nor does congregational rule mean servant elders. However, the topic of church rule is kinda off-topic to the issue of whether or not GC values women. So, I’ll move on.



I was upset that Kirsten’s post got ignored. I was upset that throughout the existence of this blog, contrary views / examples are minimized for the sake of ganging up in GC bashing. I don’t know how that’s helpful.



So, Kirsten gave an example of a vibrant, visionary, impassioned woman woman with whom GC knows what to do. It had nothing to do with her getting married to me. I was the one who married the more mature person. Her example is a source of great inspiration to me. Her passionate nature is a great motivation for me to lead — if I don’t she suffers, and not quietly. It’s a good thing.



Also, Andrea Replogle is another example of a vibrant woman who may in fact be gifted in teaching, who has lead out in GCM.



Also, our church has encouraged women to participate in a Beth Moore Bible and video study. Beth is hardly a quiet woman, nor does she encourage women to be quiet.



Diana Whipple is name of a single woman in my church who is not involved in campus ministry, but is consulted heavily by our church’s building committee. In fact, I believe she was asked to be on the committee, but declined. Her day job, BTW, is the National Animal Disease Center’s Supervisory Microbiologist.



Another married woman who leads in both professional and church worlds is Mindy Song, a professor in Business at Iowa State, who also co-leads the Chinese student ministry at Stonebrook (the Ames GC church).



Of course, this says nothing of the countless brave, passionate, vibrant women who are serving behind the scenes as mothers, wives, nurturers, and administrators. But, since you guys seem to believe that they are betraying themselves / were forced / brainwashed / getting dumber, they don’t count for the sake of this argument. For those women serving in GC, I still think what you’re doing is noble, even if people here say you’re getting dumber.



So, what’re all you going to say about these counter-examples of bright visionary women who are being useful in GC?
Logged
Tony
Guest

« Reply #56 on: March 21, 2007, 09:38:10 pm »

OK, I just read the posts by Agatha and Mamie that were made while I was writing.



I should apologize for being argumentative and not being very understanding. Your posts showed much grace, and the last post I made walked all over that grace. For that, I am very sorry.
Logged
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 962



« Reply #57 on: March 21, 2007, 09:38:24 pm »

Quote
Tony said:

“So, what’re all you going to say about these counter-examples of bright visionary women who are being useful in GC?”

Cool. Now list all the bright, visionary, passionate men that are being useful in GC. Perhaps there are too many to list?
Logged

Glad to be free.
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 962



« Reply #58 on: March 21, 2007, 09:38:36 pm »

Tony, I am not hurt or mad in the slightest. I think it’s cool when husbands get mad if they feel their wife is dissed.
Logged

Glad to be free.
mamie
Guest

« Reply #59 on: March 21, 2007, 09:38:49 pm »

Tony - In answer to your question about what to do with counter examples, my response is to ask you to talk to Diana about single women in the church. Before you hold her up as an example, talk to her about why/how she has been involved and what it has taken on her part to get the leadership to listen to her and include her. She’s not anti-GCM, obviously, or she wouldn’t still be there - she loves the church with all of her heart. But ask her before you assume…
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1