***scroll down for transcript***
Transcript
4 clock ticks
“It’s past time to broaden the narrative” (said by Sequana Murray)
Intro Music
Introduction: Hello and welcome to another episode of Broadening the Narrative. This is a podcast where I talk to some of my favorite people who have broadened the narrative for me. I'm your host, Nicki Pappas, and I'm so glad you're here.
Transition Music
First Segment
Nicki: On today's episode, I am joined by Stephen Pappas, my partner in this life for the past 10 years. We will be discussing our journey toward mutuality. Before we begin, I just want to say that Stephen is one of my favorite people because his love is steady. I call him steady Steve for a reason, and I’m so glad that he is here with me today. We wanted to talk through gender roles, what we used to believe, what we believe now, and why this is important. As a caveat, we do identify as people who love Jesus, and our viewpoints come through that lens, but I want people of all faiths and no faith affiliation to feel seen, heard, and honored. My perspective as a white, middle-class, cisgender, heterosexual, Christian woman is limited, so I want to acknowledge that in the beginning. Also, our goal is not to convince anyone to think the way we think. You don't have to land where we land for us to still respect you as a person. However, we cannot agree to disagree on the equality of human beings. To quote James Baldwin, “We can disagree and still love each other unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist.” If you hold to a belief that oppresses and denies the humanity and right to exist of others, we cannot agree to disagree with you. You are wrong, and we want to be clear about that. Alright, Stephen, I’ll let you introduce yourself and tell us a little about yourself.
Stephen: Well, thank you for having me on your show. I’m glad to be able to have this conversation with you. As Nicki said, we’ve been married for the past 10 years and together for about 12 almost. I enjoy taking walks outside, getting to play disc golf, play the guitar, fun things like that. I’m also an Enneagram 9 and seeking to grow in becoming a more boundaried person and hope our time is beneficial and fruitful.
Nicki: Ok, well I want to give a little backstory. I reached out to our friend Jordan to tell him what we were planning to do and asked what he thought we should include. He suggested it would be helpful for people to hear why we were so sold on complementarianism initially and then what changed. Before we get into that, I just want to say that Jordan is one of the few men in the circles I’ve been a part of the past decade who has treated me like a human being. He’s always looked me in the eye and engaged me in conversation, and one time when he preached a sermon at the church we were a part of, he reached out to me to ask for my thoughts and insights into the text. And I want to thank Danielle, who is married to Jordan. She never once treated me like a threat to her relationship with Jordan. And these types of behavior are rare, and we could do a whole podcast just on that. But I did want to take the time to thank Jordan for seeing me, valuing me, and truly honoring me. So thank you, Jordan and Danielle. Real quick, I want to define the terms complementarian and egalitarian for anyone who is not familiar with the terminology. On her blog, the late Rachel Held Evans wrote a “Week of Mutuality” series in 2012. She explained that Christians who identify as complementarians believe that the Bible requires Christian women to submit to male leadership in the home, church (and, according to some), society. So complementarians will hold tightly to any verses that seem to plainly state this one way submission without implementing verses that would require men to submit to women. She also wrote that another name for egalitarianism is mutuality and explained that Christians who identify as egalitarian usually believe that Christian women enjoy equal status and responsibility with men in the home, church, and society, and that teaching and leading God’s people should be based on giftedness rather than gender. So Stephen, can you talk a little about why we were complementarian?
Stephen: Yeah, we were essentially complementarian because we thought that’s what the Bible taught, and we were seeking to be faithful to what we thought was God’s design. So we both grew up in the southern United States where the culture and Christianity are intertwined with men occupying a lot of leadership positions and women occupying a lot of the behind the scenes support roles. So even from the time we were young, we were in the church and we saw people leading and the roles that men and women were filling shaped our perceptions. The men were the ones speaking, teaching, leading in song, and preaching. I don’t think I ever saw a woman welcome or take up an offering or administer the Lord’s Supper when I was growing up. I did see women playing instruments or singing in the choir but not leading the choir. I didn't think about it back then really, that I can remember, but now I can definitely see how even those things shaped me. And I don’t remember my parents talking about these roles, but my dad was the one who brought in the most income for us, and I think that this subconsciously influenced what I believed about roles because I saw him as the provider for our family. And in college, I was part of a collegiate ministry where a woman was the campus minister and there were women who were on the leadership team and even presidents of that ministry, and I didn’t feel like there was a problem with any of that. I did think that men were supposed to be leaders, but it seems that when I got connected to reformed theology, people seemed to make a much bigger deal out of gender roles. The complementarian theology and the teaching of that became much more explicit. So those teaching complementarian theology said that this was the correct way to interpret scripture because the biblical texts were plainly stating a view that supported complementarian theology. And based on many sermons and books and even premarital counseling that we had that approached certain texts from a complementarian interpretation, we became entrenched in this theology. And we were influenced by our understanding of the word ezer, translated as helper in Genesis 2 in our Bibles and texts that talk about men and women, such as Epehsians 5, 1 Peter 3, and 1 Timothy 2. The translations in the English Standard Version of the Bible seemed to support complementarian theology because if you just read the words and don’t know the context, then it is really easy to hijack those verses to support complementarian theology. So for us, we thought that this is what the Bible teaches, and then this is just the way God wants it to be and didn’t really see anything wrong with it. We believed that just as we heard in sermons that this didn’t make women less valuable, it was just a difference in roles. And there seemed to be an airtight explanation for why an egalitarian interpretation of texts like Ephesians 5:21 and Galatians 3:28 was incorrect.
Transition Music
Second Segment
Nicki: I would only add to that the layer of spiritual manipulation unique to women in that we are taught that since Eve was deceived, we as women cannot be trusted. It's as if Mother Eve's deception becomes our perpetual perception which causes us to doubt ourselves. I was constantly wary of myself and my motives and other women and their motives. And the men around us were wary of us and our motives. Everything began shifting for me when I became a part of a Be the Bridge in May 2017. Being involved in a Be the Bridge group and the Facebook group taught me about race and the ways my behavior perpetuated harm against Black, Brown, Indigenous, Asian, and Pacific Islander People of Color. A few months later, I listened to the Truth's Table and Pass the Mic cross-over podcast episode “Gender Apartheid” and other episodes where Ekemini Uwan, Dr. Christina Edmondson, and Michelle Higgins talked about being Black women. I began to understand intersectionality and that we can’t talk about gender without talking about race and vice versa. The term intersectionality was coined in 1989 by Kimberlé Crenshaw to describe how race, class, gender, and other individual characteristics intersect. So, confronting my racial biases opened the door for confronting biases I harbored against women. I believed at that time that my beliefs about women were rooted in what God determined as good. I didn’t think I had permission to question the beliefs I held about women, but I also didn’t think I needed to. Whenever I would feel uneasiness about the ways women were talked about or portrayed, I talked myself out of it because I was convinced this was a manifestation of my unwillingness to be content with what God designed. I thought that any opposition I felt was an expression of my ungodly insubordination. And I’d been taught that if I didn’t accept my position as the only one who needed to submit, then it was because I was trying to usurp your God-given authority. So, in April or May 2018, a friend shared an article with me that was written by two women who identified as complementarian, and at the time I still identified as complementarian. It was a three part series titled “Toward a Better Reading: Reflections on the Permanent Changes to the Text of Genesis 3:16 in the ESV” by Wendy Alsup and Hannah Anderson. They wrote, “Since its release in 2001, the ESV has consistently rendered [Genesis 3:16] as ‘Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.’...In the latest and permanent rendering, however, Genesis 3:16 now reads ‘Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you.’” They discussed the original Hebrew and the translation problems that arise under the permanent change that has been made. The committee would not be revisiting this verse. So, as I began to see the ways that translating decisions were being made without meaningful input from women and that these decisions impact the ways I am perceived by the Christian men in my life, I wanted to read more. And with this translation of Genesis 3:16, the false idea that women want to usurp power from men and that it's the plan of God for men to rule over women is supported and perpetuated. And I knew from my real life experience that I didn’t want to dominate you, but I also didn’t want to be dominated. I thought, “There has to be a better way,” and that’s when I stumbled upon Rachel Held Evans’ “Week of Mutuality” posts from her blog. And I loved reading them, but I was still unsure if I could make the switch from complementarian to egalitarian, and I tucked those posts away in my mind. Then, in October 2018, I attended a Truth's Table live event. During the Meet and Greet time beforehand, Dr. Christina Edmondson said that complementarian theology was a reaction to feminism. I'd never heard that and didn't realize how recent the theology was. We're talking 1977. So in 1977, George Knight III published his seminal work on the now-called complementarian view on gender. It was called New Testament Teaching on the Role Relationship of Men and Women. And this blew my mind because I was taught this theology as if it's been the only option since the inception of the church. Then, Dr. Christina Edmondson said she doesn't want to teach her daughters a reactionary theology. Instead, she teaches them a biblical theology. She expounded on that by saying she tells them they are fearfully and wonderfully made and that humanity wasn't complete until the woman was created, demonstrating women fully bear the image of God. I also listened to the Truth’s Table podcast episode "Silence Is Not Spiritual" with Lisa Sharon Harper. And this was the first time I can remember hearing it explained that the woman, not just the man, was created in the Genesis account to exercise dominion. I’d always heard it preached more like the man was given dominion and the woman was created to help him and in helping him the most important way she could help him was by bearing children. So Lisa Sharon Harper elucidated the point that every single person of every gender bears the image of God and is to have dominion and that to crush, exploit, oppress, silence, or rule over another person is to make war against that person and against God. She emphasized the call of women and people of all genders to have dominion, and I just hadn't understood that before. The final pivotal point for me was listening to the Almost Heretical podcast’s Gender Series. Tim Ritter and Nate Hanson explored passages from the Bible that have been used to silence women. They explained that the teaching of Jesus ended hierarchy, that Paul was advocating for women to have authority over their own heads when writing about head coverings, that Paul’s theology of power is the exact opposite of what we were taught, that Paul encouraged women to prophesy in the church gatherings, the Greek words translated as “exercise authority” and “head,” and the line about women being saved through childbearing and how it unlocks an unexpected meaning for the passage. The series made my mind explode. They used Cynthia Long Westfall’s book Paul and Gender: Reclaiming the Apostle’s Vision for Men and Women in Christ to explore many of the passages. The vast amount of scholarship on this one topic is what caught my attention and led me to a deeper dive into what Godde believes about women. So that was my journey. What about you Stephen?
Stephen: Yeah, my journey is your journey, just a few months or more behind you. So it mirrors your journey in that it started with critiquing my beliefs about race through the Be the Bridge group and conversations, a lot of conversations, with our friend Greg. And this led into the gender conversation. It was easier for me to enter the racial conversation because I remember feeling defensive at some of what you would share with me regarding disparities and racism, but I was also quicker to catch that defensiveness when discussing it and digging into why I was feeling that way as opposed to just shutting it down. And the racial conversation was disorienting in its own way just because it was a whole new world experience that I had not known or been soft to before. But then I remember you listening to the Almost Heretical series that you referenced and feeling uneasy. It was questioning the foundation of the beliefs I held to and based on the fear of the slippery slope, I was really apprehensive about looking into the gender conversation. I was much more quick to dismiss what you shared with me when I did feel defensive. And I did listen to most of the series, but I still would have said I was complementarian initially.
Transition Music
Third Segment
Nicki: To discuss what changed for me, I have to quote Jordan from the texts we exchanged. He wrote, “One of my main things for changing my mind was about how following my strict conservative principles for studying the Bible actually led me there. Conservative, expository preachers constantly harp on the importance of studying the historical, cultural, and immediate textual context and doing word studies, but when it came to passages about women and leadership, they all of a sudden decided that that wasn't important because the text ‘is plainly understandable’ or because ‘insert proof text here.’” And I agree. I started to realize that I needed to apply the same diligence to this topic as I do to other theological topics in order to be consistent in my hermeneutical approach. Cynthia Long Westfall examined hermeneutical principles on page 208 of Paul and Gender. She wrote, “Three hermeneutical principles are shared by most traditions that hold the Bible as authoritative: (1) We do not base a doctrine on one verse. (2) We do not base a doctrine on a verse or passage with interpretive problems. And (3) we give weight to the clearer teaching.” I started to realize these principles weren’t being applied to many passages about women. But even most complementarian pastors understand this on some level when looking at 1 Timothy 2:11-15 for example. Verse 15 is “But she will be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with good sense.” “She will be saved through child bearing.” That's what the text says. Plainly. Yet the complementarian pastors I know understand enough about Pauline theology to know it can't mean what it sounds like it means. There has to be more to it. They dig enough to say that of course Paul cannot mean that women are spiritually saved by having children, but we stop short in our excavation. There is further to go in this passage. In Paul and Gender, Cynthia Long Westfall also examined 1 Corinthians 11:3. “But I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of the woman, and God is the head of Christ.” On page 87, she wrote, “Most scholars have assumed that the topic of 1 Corinthians 11:3-16 is the authority of men and the subordination of women. This is partly because ‘head’ is a metaphor for authority in Latin, English, and German, so the meaning of ‘authority’ has seemed to be intuitive in the history of the interpretation of the passage.” And, Stephen, you mentioned the word ezer earlier and how we understood that as helper because of our translation. In reading Half the Church by Carolyn Custis James, so much changed. Regarding ezer she wrote, "Long before I started digging, scholars tallied up the twenty-one times ezer appears in the Old Testament: sixteen [of those] times [were] for God as Israel's helper. This created quite a stir as you might imagine, prompting the upgrading from mere helper to strong helper. What followed was a divided (and at times heated) discussion over the meaning of 'strong’ - How strong is strong (a debate yet to be resolved)? Putting the facts together, isn't it obvious that the ezer is a warrior?" In addition, as I began to understand more about mutuality there was a shift. Verses can be found to support complementarian theology. Yet those same verses, when understood differently based on cultural and textuals contexts and with different valid translations of certain words, an understanding of those words and the contexts can then support egalitarian theology, or mutuality. But more than this, there are clear and unambiguous passages that were addressed to all the people, not just the men, at the churches where the letters were sent, that support mutuality, or a belief that regardless of individual traits, we must exercise our gifts and respect the exercising of the gifts of others. I’m thinking specifically of 1 Corinthians 12 and Romans 12. Cynthia Long Westfall makes the case in the chapter on calling that we have scriptures directly addressing all members of the body when discussing spiritual gifts and using the gifts to build up the entire body. These passages are clear and should be used to aid in the interpretation of passages like 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Further, Ephesians 5:21 deals with people in the churches needing to submit to one another, so I began to realize that it can’t just be women doing all the submitting if we are instructed to submit to one another. This verse illustrates that there have to be times when men submit to women. On another note, I am required to submit to and honor those that society and the church have put below me as a white, cisgender, heterosexual woman. In any way that I am privileged, I am to be looking to empower others, not keep the power for myself. And another key piece for me was rethinking the line in the Lord’s prayer, “Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” I remember having a conversation with our friend TJ about the ways the Bible was used to justify chattel slavery. We talked about Godde’s kingdom coming to this earth and how chattel slavery was incompatible with God’s kingdom because there will be no slavery there. I began to see that the ways people are silenced, discredited, and pushed to the margins today, even under the guise of biblical orthodoxy, are incompatible with Godde’s kingdom. Regarding women, I thought, wait a minute, if we are supposed to be living into and manifesting Godde’s kingdom here on earth as it is in heaven and all people will flourish and seek the flourishing of one another perfectly, why would I support anything that prevents that from coming to fruition now? And I know people fear what’s been called the slippery slope that you alluded to, which I now see as an excuse for not exploring a less cruel terrain’s interpretation. And admittedly, once I started to realize that there were other ways of seeing the world regarding race and understood ways I was wrong, it humbled me and opened the door to interrogate other ways I could be wrong, beginning with gender.
Transition Music
Fourth Segment
Nicki: I am near the top of the ladder in many ways, and who I was isn’t who I want to be anymore. I don’t want to prize my power so much that I pridefully refuse to be held accountable. I don't want to be hardened to the plight of other human beings. I don’t want to hurt others and call it being truthful to the biblical text when really it’s a way of attempting to hide my contempt, dislike, or even hatred of someone I have othered and dehumanized. So in short, I began to realize that I could be wrong no matter where I land on any and every given topic that is up for debate. So the question I am now asking is, “Which way would I rather be wrong?” As our friend named Danielle said, we better hope there are people with flawed theology in heaven, otherwise none of us are getting in. And so I am erring on the side of love because love is a fruit of the Spirit and there is no law against love, as stated in Galatians 5:22-23. I also began to question the validity and benefit of complementarian theology because of conversations with my single friends who are women. I will be having a conversation with some of them in the future to share with you all on the podcast so they can speak to the ways that complementarian theology has harmed them. To these single sisters, we love you. We see you. We are better humans because of you. So yeah, I did a lot of research and reading and listened to podcasts, but I also engaged in many conversations. What about you, Stephen? What changed for you?
Stephen: Yeah, so I listened to the Almost Heretical series on gender, and it was an introduction to new ideas. Though it didn’t change anything for me at first, it did make me a bit softer to having women exercise their gifts and to different interpretations of the scriptures that had once seemed to fully support a complementarian view. Based on some negative interactions with church leaders, listening to some other podcast episodes, and conversations with you, a lot of conversations with you, I began to understand power dynamics in society and the church better. It took over a year to become more comfortable with the tension and the differing views and interpretations. As I’ve been listening to the Almost Heretical series again as well as some other podcasts, such as Justice in America and the Uncivil podcast, it’s really helped solidify some views. Regarding the Almost Heretical gender series, I definitely now see the validity of the egalitarian or mutuality stance based on understanding the context behind the letters that Paul wrote. Something that hit me one day after talking with you was realizing that never once did a writer in the Bible tell husbands to lead their wives. The instruction given by Paul is actually for husbands to love their wives, and that landed on me in a new way.
Nicki: Well, what did you say to me after we listened to the Almost Heretical Gender Series?
Stephen: You asked me if I viewed you any differently now, and I said, “I see you as my equal now.”
Nicki: Yeah, and I think that that "now" is key. You didn't say, "I see you as more equal" but "as my equal now."
Stephen: Yeah, before, I would have thought that because I was a white man I could do something better than a woman or really anyone who was not white. I would not have expressed this, but I did begin to understand that I did believe this.
Nicki: It wasn't just you. I, too, thought men were the pinnacle. More specifically, white men. And even more specific white, cisgender, heterosexual, Christian men. In thinking they were at the top, everyone else became less human: Black, Brown, Indigenous, Asian, and Pacific Islander People of Color, women, transgender men and women, people who practiced other faiths or no faith and many others. I dehumanized all these people and made excuses for the othering. To be clear, there are no excuses. I am sorry for the ways I dehumanized you all and vow to love and live justly. I will align the way I vote with you and support policies and politicians that you support locally, state-wide, and nationally. So Stephen, what have you most enjoyed about this journey?
Stephen: Well, before I answer that, you know, just what you were sharing, I also perpetuated bad teaching, bad thought, bad views that were really oppressive to you and to others who aren’t like me essentially, and it’s just really heartbreaking how God has been used to oppress people and to bind people rather than to bring healing and freedom and flourishing, so I want to also apologize and ask for your forgiveness and anyone else listening to this who would have been or is not treated well or not valued as they truly should be as an image bearer of God.
Nicki: Yeah, well, I appreciate you saying that, and I think about Maya Angelou and her quote about essentially when you know better, you do better, and so I can just see in you that once you knew better, you’re on this journey to doing better, and it’s a really beautiful thing to be a part of with you.
Stephen: Yeah, thanks. So what have I enjoyed most about this journey? I would say I’ve enjoyed most getting just to be free from the restrictions of certain beliefs and to see what other people have to offer and try to enable both of us to use our gifts and me not have to be the one who leads but give a platform to other people. Specifically for us, I’ve definitely enjoyed feeling more like we’re working together instead of feeling like we are opposed to one another and not having to maintain some position to lead you but we can give space for each other to use our strengths and to support one another in our weaknesses. How about yourself? What have you most enjoyed?
Nicki: I would have to say I’ve enjoyed feeling lighter. I don’t feel weighed down, I’m not constantly second guessing myself and wary of my motives, and I just have more fun with you now. I really love being with you. We’re besties, there’s much more joy, and our relationship just doesn't feel as hard for me anymore. But, speaking of hard, what’s been the hardest part for you?
Stephen: Yeah, as an Enneagram 9, I definitely just go after and desire the inner peace and stability, and this journey has definitely thrown that off, so it’s been hard to work through the tension and not have everything put together, definitely shaking a lot of the foundations of my life. But it’s been good for sure on the back end. So, what’s been the hardest part for you?
Nicki: I think the most difficult part for me has been becoming comfortable as my own person apart from you and your approval of my beliefs. I had to learn to be ok with you not understanding me and us not being on the same page. So that was difficult. What advice do you have for anyone who is complementarian and starting to question gender roles?
Stephen: Don’t be afraid. Research, examine the other views to see what kind of merit they have. Have conversations with women in various life circumstances. Hear about their experiences and listen. Listen, and listen with empathy. Don’t live from a place of trying to maintain a position or control or power at all costs, but I really just encourage you to follow the example of Jesus and empower others to flourish. What advice would you have?
Nicki: My advice is it’s ok to question and change and to change your mind. You are human, and it’s human to investigate and change your mind as you expand your understanding. Don’t stifle this part of your humanity. In addition, I would say take responsibility for your own feelings and don’t take responsibility for the feelings of others. The work of developing boundaries is crucial as you step out of the box you’ve been in. I would also say you don’t have to engage people in conversation who aren’t actually interested in hearing what you have to say. Okay, this question is based off of what Jen Hatmaker has described as the fruit of the theology you hold to, based off of the passage in Matthew 7 about how good trees produce good fruit and bad trees produce bad fruit and people are known by their fruit. What fruit do you see in the past regarding your theology about gender and what fruit do you see now?
Stephen: In the past, I see the fruit of what’s described in Genesis chapter 3 as the result of the fall, which is that men think that they should rule over women. I also see the fruit where no one wins because there is a power hold that men are seeking to maintain and women are either rightfully pushing against and struggling against or they’re thinking they have no right for offering their gifts in leading. Looking back, I also see this is restrictive for everybody really because it just pits men and women against each other, and no one wins that way. Now, with the view, I see good fruit that allows anyone to exercise your gifts, period, not restricted based on gender, and we can also offer our best selves to one another so we can live lives that benefit everything and everyone around us. What about you?
Nicki: In the past, the fruit was hindered women who either didn’t know what their gifts were or who didn’t know how to use those gifts in the church. Now, as explained on page 212 of Paul and Gender, “As in the story of the talents in Matthew 25:14-28, women are under a sacred obligation to use all of what God has given them and every advantage to serve [God]. Women must resist any effort to squeeze their strengths, gifts, and abilities into a mold that hides them in the ground and quenches the Holy Spirit.” In the past, I also saw an expansive crop of quarreling as the men with the power were trying to maintain that power. Now, I “reject foolish and ignorant disputes, because [I] know that they breed quarrels,” as written in 2 Timothy 2:23. In Jesus Feminist, Sarah Bessey wrote, "I'm through wasting my time with debates about women-should-do-this and women-should-not-do-that boundaries. I'm out. What an adventure in missing the point. These are the small, small arguments about a small, small god," and that’s on page 171. So yeah, I’m now trying to cultivate the inner peace that frees me from clinging so tightly to anything that I would get defensive if it's challenged. This puts me in a better place to engage others in discussion if we disagree and if someone who is marginalized in our society challenges me, then I am in a better and more humble place to accept their correction.
Transition Music
Fifth Segment
Nicki: Alright, so I reached out to my friend Kate, and she supplied us with a few questions. She asked, “What are the biggest changes specific to you and your relationship that you've seen or want to see?” I would say I feel more freedom to lead where I’m gifted. What about you?
Stephen: I see us as equals. I give space for you to utilize your gifts without you feeling like you’re doing something you aren’t supposed to be doing. I also don’t feel like I have to bear the burden of leading our family alone but we can lead together in our different giftings. I want to continue growing in seeing, valuing, and utilizing your gifts and growing in unity and harmony together.
Nicki: Kate also asked which changes came naturally or with little effort and which ones have you had to talk through and be more intentional about? I don’t know if any of the changes came naturally or with little effort for us. I had been unintentionally silenced for so long that voicing opposition or trying to forge my own path as my own person apart from you was difficult. What would you say?
Stephen: It’s been hard to give up my preferences. I’m stubborn, and I was benefiting the most from the former beliefs.
Nicki: How do you answer pushback from others?
Stephen: I think one of the biggest things is we need to understand the cultural context in which these biblical texts were written to really understand what the writers were saying. We also need to ask ourselves if our beliefs are bringing freedom to others and are they giving space to use the gifts they have received or are they restricting others. So like you said Jen Hatmaker said, what kind of fruit is the theology producing?
Nicki: Next question. Do you handle conflict, household roles, or anything else differently than before?
Stephen: I’m more open to your input and quicker to take a posture of humility toward you. I don’t think our roles have changed much as opposed to before, though.
Nicki: I have definitely seen you take more of a posture of humility when I disagree or have something to say. And I would say our household roles haven’t changed much because you’ve always jumped right in and never expected me to do anything on my own. Do you find communication with each other easier, harder, or the same?
Stephen: In some ways it’s harder because I have to practice humility by listening to you and truly valuing your input and not just thinking that you can give your input or your opinion but ultimately it comes down to me making a decision. In other ways it is easier because we’re working more from a place of freedom and as a team rather than restriction, and we’re working more from more of a place of unity.
Nicki: Yeah, I would say I find communication easier. I don’t feel shame for disagreeing with you. I feel more freedom to speak up and to even lovingly call you out if you aren’t exercising humility or if you’re unintentionally enforcing patriarchy in our home. I just feel safe with you in a way that is different than before. I mean, I’ve always felt physically safe with you, but this is a new level in that I feel more emotionally, mentally, and spiritually secure. This question actually came from my therapist in a session. She asked if our relationship felt like there was hierarchy in the past or now. What would you say?
Stephen: In the past, I wouldn’t have said there was hierarchy, though I would have said I was the leader, which looking back demonstrates that there is some level of hierarchy. If you have a leader, that means someone else is not the leader. For our relationship personally, the hierarchy is leveling out, but I still feel the internal struggle to not try to be the leader or view myself as the leader. How about you?
Nicki: I’ll be honest and say that looking back I felt more like I was a child in a parent child relationship. In every decision, it all came down to what you wanted and what you thought was best for us. I didn’t have an equal voice. This certainly came into play, and still does, in our finances. My spending has always been more scrutinized, and even though you aren’t the type of person who frivolously spends money, there has been more freedom for you to spend money. I think that especially because I’m a stay at home mom and don’t bring in any income, I would feel like the money in our bank account wasn’t really money for me, too. One practical way we are working on this is that since we aren't currently part of a local church, we've had the money we would have used to tithe and we’re splitting it down the middle to tithe where we each want to tithe. When larger needs arise, we talk things through, combine the money as needed. Otherwise, we are donating or using the money to be a blessing to others and meet physical needs. In the circles we've been part of, the physicality of verses like Luke 4 and Matthew 25 have been downplayed and they've been spiritualized. We are now seeing the absolute necessity of using our finances to fulfill Luke 4 and Matthew 25, but we may not always agree on what that looks like. So when we split the money, I don't have to defend my decisions for the donations I make or beg you to see why I want to donate somewhere or to someone. So this is a practical way of removing the hierarchy and functioning as equals there. So Stephen, who would you say benefits with complementarianism?
Stephen: Men.
Nicki: How so?
Stephen: Well this theology sets up a power dynamic really. By that I mean that with this theology men are the ones who lead and make the decisions, whether as a husband or a pastor or just as a man. To lead and be the one who makes the final decision is to have the power. Plus, as I mentioned earlier never once did a writer in the Bible tell husbands to lead their wives. The instruction given by Paul is for husbands to love their wives. And the men who follow this teaching are not thinking, “How do I give up this power to benefit others?” Complementarianism also teaches that wives have to put their dreams on hold or not have dreams and ambitions in order to support and help their husbands in fulfilling their own quests that they say they’ve been called to.
Nicki: I would just add that any theology that props up a power dynamic is dangerous. As the women of Truth’s Table voiced in the "Gender Apartheid" episode, why are people afraid of the slippery slope of interrogating these beliefs but not concerned with the misogyny fueled by them and extrabiblical barriers erected by the theology to keep from getting to the ordination of women, for example. That's what the Pharisees did. Ok. Thinking about the question, “Who benefits with egalitarianism?”, what would you have said in the past?
Stephen: Women.
Nicki: What does that answer reveal?
Stephen: It just shows that I saw egalitarianism as taking power from men and giving it to women in order to put them above men.
Nicki: What would you say now to the question, “Who benefits from egalitarianism?”
Stephen: I would say everybody because it ensures equality and flourishing for all people.
Transition Music
Sixth Segment
Nicki: I agree. No one is excluded if we operate from a mindset of mutuality or mutual submission. If we all outdo one another in showing honor, look not to our own interests but to the interests of others, and submit to one another, then we don’t have time for arguments over who is out and who is in, who can exercise this gift and who cannot, or who can have this or that gift and who can’t. Mutuality levels the field and invites everyone regardless of race, gender, gender identity, class, sexual orientation, or any other characteristic we could think of to use in order to draw a line. As the late Rachel Held Evans so aptly put it, "What makes the Gospel offensive isn't who it keeps out but who it lets in." And in all this, I’m not saying we don’t need white men. I just want white men to see how much they need others so we can all flourish. Well those are all the questions that we had. Stephen, can you share your challenge for the closing?
Stephen: Sure. In closing, here is a challenge for Christian men. Ephesians 4:12 is about how spiritual gifts are given to all for the building up of the body. How are you intentionally seeking out the voices of women to be built up by their gifts? If you’re not currently submitting yourself to women as Ephesians 5:21 instructs you to, then that needs to change. As you have conversations with women and listen to their stories, you’ll probably feel defensive. Don’t dismiss what they are saying though. Lean into the discomfort and work through it.
Nicki: Yeah, and here’s a challenge for white people who are Christians. How are you intentionally seeking out diverse voices of Black, Brown, Indigenous, Asian, and Pacific Islander People of Color to be built up by their gifts? If you are not currently submitting yourself to Black, Brown, Indigenous, Asian, and Pacific Islander People of Color as Ephesians 5:21 instructs us to, that needs to change. Diversify your social media, the books you read, the podcasts you listen to, and where you spend your money. And I also have a challenge for white women. In the Truth's Table episode "BlacKkKlansman (Movie Discussion)," Dr. Christina Edmondson said, "I think it's incredibly nuanced, to think about the ways in which white women get close to male privilege instead of dismantling systems of privilege. They get closer to white male privilege through having a shared enemy." White women, we have to be about the work of dismantling all systems of privilege rather than seeking the approval of the white men in our lives. I know what I'm saying right now won't sit well with many white men, but we don't need permission to have differing opinions and to seek justice. If we wait for permission from those who hold the power, we’ll never get it. If you’re a man, I want you to ask yourself the last time you asked a woman for permission to think differently than she thinks or that you were concerned about her approval if you thought differently. I’m just guessing, but I imagine you’ve never felt that pressure or you rarely do. Women were not created to be ruled and intellectually controlled. We have our own minds, and we fully bear the image of Godde. And I want to say specifically to white women something I heard Myisha Hill of Check Your Privilege say in the Speaking of Racism podcast episode "Living into the Work." She said, “I’m often even telling white women that I work with in tech that the way that you’re treating women of color in these tech spaces are the way that white men treat you. It’s the cycle of abuse. It’s just passed down, and we’re not recognizing it as a culture.” I know it is difficult to push back against those we have been taught to trust as spiritual authorities because we are told we’re more easily deceived and we cannot trust ourselves, but fight against what I have heard numerous people of color describe as self-preservation. Submit yourself to Black, Brown, Indigenous, Asian, and Pacific Islander Women of Color to dismantle systems of privilege. So there you have it. This was a glimpse into the journey we are on, and we are thankful that you took the time to listen. I shared the resources I referenced and additional resources on the Broadening the Narrative blog on May 24th, and it is titled “Mutuality Resources.” And if you have any resources on this topic, particularly by Black, Brown, Indigenous, Asian, and Pacific Islander People of Color or those who identify as LGBTQIA or anyone else who broadens the narrative, please email with those. My email is broadeningthenarrative@gmail.com. Thank you, Stephen, for joining me and sharing with us.
Stephen: Thank you for letting me.
Nicki: Alright everybody, grace and peace to you all.
Transition Music
Closing: I want to thank Sequana Murray for the voice clip she sent to me for the episode intro. You can purchase her music on Bandcamp at bandy17.bandcamp.com. Her music is available on most streaming services under the name Bandy. I also want to thank Jordan Lukens for his help with editing and Danielle Bolin for creating the episode graphic. Please subscribe and review the show, but only if you’re planning on leaving a 5-star review. Otherwise, you can just skip this part. You can access the Broadening the Narrative blog by visiting broadeningthenarrative.blogspot.com, and you can find the Broadening the Narrative page on Instagram by searching for @broadeningthenarrative and on Twitter by searching for @broadnarrative. I hope that if you know and love me you can engage with the Broadening the Narrative blog, social media accounts, and podcast, as well as any recommended resources. Then, you can share with people who know and love you, and little by little, person by person, we can broaden the narrative. Grace and peace, friends.
Outro Music
