The CBE Scroll

An article in this week’s U.S. News & World Report reports that Pope Benedict XVI is about to ‘relax restrictions on celebrating the 16th century Tridentin Mass, citing “a new and renewed” interest in the ancient Latin liturgy, especially among younger Catholics.’ Read the full article here.

Who besides Mel Gibson is interested in the Catholic Church making such changes? Apparently there are individuals in a movement springing from seminaries who say that such changes will help membership attendance (now at forty percent, down from seventy-four percent in 1958) if practiced traditions are richer and doctrines stricter.

Not only are these restorers of tradition calling for the reinstatement of the Latin mass but also for ‘greater devotion to the Virgin Mary, more frequent praying of the rosary and priests turning away from the congregation as they once did. Perhaps most controversially, they also advocate a diminished role for women, who since Vatican II have been allowed to participate in the mass as lay altar servers and readers.’

Sisters, here we go again.

I came across this concept in a book some time back and then more recently someone sent me an email with the same content which had been taught at a school. It demonstrates what is happening in some sections of the Christian community and gives us cause for concern when young people endorse these practices. What am I talking about – some questionable new age techniques or dabbling with the occult? No, it’s some guidelines for young women and men as to their behavior when spending time with each other in groups and as dating couples.

The rationale for these suggestions comes from an interpretation of Creation which teaches that because Adam was made first he was to be the leader and initiator and that God made Eve to be Adam’s helper in the tasks which God had given him. This then defines what is feminine and what is masculine and the fixed roles these descriptions portray.

Young men are encouraged to practice their servant leadership and always take the initiative in deciding where to go and what to do. Even in conversations the men are told to direct the ideas and speak first, albeit considerately. They are also urged to be the spiritual leader in the relationship in preparation for being the spiritual leader of the home. To be fair, it is also stressed that the men are to be considerate, protective and respectful. So, you can see where this is going in respect to how the young women are expected to behave! They are told they should make room for the guys to practice their servant leadership as ‘a woman’s biggest temptation is to take control.’ This means stepping back and letting the man lead because that is how she can ‘practice for the time when she will follow a husband.’ In conversations it is deemed to be better to have awkward silences than for a woman to speak first.

Teaching like this, which describes masculinity and femininity by such detailed actions and attitudes, is having a marked impact on the current Christian scene. Have others come across this sort of thing, and why do you think some young people are finding it attractive? Obviously I have my own opinion but I’m sure we would all like to read some discussion on this disturbing trend.

I was recently invited to a women’s meeting by a neighbor whom I was just getting to know and wanting to encourage in her Christian life. This friend really enjoys these meetings and the fellowship of other Christian women there, and she wanted to share this with me. On arrival, I noticed a couple there whom I knew from our district and a man (of the couple) who was attending to the overhead projector. I assumed he was there for technical support. After the meeting I asked my neighbor about why this man was there that night, and she replied that he was there every week.

I didn’t press the issue at that point, but the next day I looked on the internet for this particular group of women’s ministries and discovered that they always have an ‘advisor’ at their gatherings. I found this rather odd, and so I emailed the group to ask why it was deemed necessary to have a male advisor present at every meeting. The lady who replied said that it was in order to give a male perspective, offer support and provide a ‘covering’ for the meetings. I then pursued this thought and asked if there was a female ‘advisor’ present at any men’s meetings they might have and I was told that a men’s chapter does exist. They are not required to have female advisors, but they are responsible to the national board’s advisors. When I asked how they came to this reasoning about women needing an advisor present, I was told that in the beginning ‘God put it on the hearts of the women’ that this was what they should do, and that I had to finish my conversation at that point, or I would have been seen to be arguing with God’s direction. I really wanted some biblical reasons for the practice and yet they were not forthcoming.

I am amazed that there are hundreds of these groups in dozens of countries and that presumably all those attending and in membership are happy with this arrangement.

She wore plain clothing, a white dress, a white bonnet, and a rather drab shawl, but her Christian life was vibrant, colorful, and focused on the work of the gospel. When, in the early 1800s, Elizabeth Fry dedicated her life to the pursuit of a Quaker life, her family was not pleased. Only her brother, Joseph Gurney, really stuck by her side through it all. In her supposed radical devotion, Fry struggled intensely between her desire for the comfortable and prestigious life she was used to and her desire to promote only the glory of Christ. This accounts for her seemingly constant state of depression evident in her journal and sometimes weight loss.

Fry is best known for her prison reform, call for fair treatment of the insane, and opposition to the death penalty. Her famous work began with her visit to Newgate Prison. Two friends of hers, Stephen Grellet and William Forster, had just visited Newgate, and discovered its appalling conditions. Many were imprisoned without trial, and many executed for the weakest of reasons - England at the time had about 200 offenses that called for execution. Guards often treated the women’s ward like their own personal brothel. Women prisoners gave birth and raised children within in their cells and many existed in relative nakedness and poverty. Though it was the nineteenth century, it was still common for crowds to gather and cheer at the executions of these prisoners. The governor himself would sell tickets to the front row and even enjoy his breakfast over a good hanging.

When Grellet and Forster left Newgate, Grellet went immediately to Fry, feeling she - above anyone else - could effect true change in the prison. Fry and her close friend and relative, Anna Buxton, went to Newgate to check it out for themselves. When they arrived, they found women crammed into the cells, fighting over food, nursing infants with their own emaciated bodies, sometimes trading food for alcohol and carrying on wildly. One striking memory for Fry would be two women taking the clothes off of a dead infant to put them on a live newborn. Fry was shocked that prisoners were treated worse than animals. There was no doubt in her mind that Christ was offended by the conditions at Newgate.

She and Anna gathered clothing and food and passed them out to the inmates. But, Fry recognized that the women needed more than bread and shawls; they needed education, a useful occupation, and above all the gospel. She found herself preaching to them on a daily basis, and they hung on her every word.

In fact, it was her new celebrity status in the prison that caused Fry to question her work. She found herself enjoying the attention too much. She wondered how much of her work was for her own benefit - to give herself props - and how much of it was for the cause of Christ. Afraid of sinning against her devout Quaker principle of humility, Fry withdrew from her work in London for a time and moved back to her country house.

From there, her husband Joseph Fry handled his business and her nine children received an education, the boys from the tutors and the girls from the governess. Joseph, an egalitarian by the standards of the day, was very supportive of her work and demanded little from his wife in the way of domestic duties. This freed Fry to employ her leadership gifts in the community, and she started a school for poor girls in her home. But, tragedy precipitated deep depression. Fry suffered the death of a brother and her favorite daughter, Betsy. The family business lost money. Eventually, they were forced to move back to London, where Fry again visited Newgate and renewed her commitment to the women inmates. She finally saw her role there as that of a minister of the gospel and took lasting joy in this work.

Through strategy, winsomeness, and social position, she convinced the authorities to let her start a school in the prison for children of the inmates and young convicts. The inmates themselves offered to give up one of their already crowded cells to provide the school space the authorities insisted upon. Soon the children and the women were learning to read. They reinstituted regular worship services. She helped them start a sewing business and arranged for product sales outside the prison.

Fry’s work at Newgate turned into a lifelong pursuit - even in her own relative poverty late in life - of changing the way English people understood their responsibility toward other human beings. Due to her work, laws were enacted for the improvement of the conditions of prisons and hospitals and the treatment of the insane, even bringing changes to the death penalty.

Bringing human equity to the hearts and minds of others requires putting our hands to the plow. Egalitarianism, as a call for human equality, requires the dedication of our time and our pocket books. We must, as God has blessed us, use our gifts to advance the cause of the gospel. There are many Elizabeth Frys in the world (maybe you) who need our support. Find one and help her create change.

In her latest blog post, Meg Jenista at Bridget Jones Goes To Seminary describes her enthusiasm for a summer pastoral internship. In the process, she reminds congregations to put their money where their mouths are when it comes to women in ministry: ‘You can say you are in favor of women in ministerial office. You can even write overtures to Synod and you should do these things. But, if your church or a neighboring church is vacant, or you need pulpit supply or an intern and you are not willing to consider a woman for the job, don’t kid yourselves. You’re not in favor of women in office.’ Read the full post here.

Are any of you women readers college or seminary students participating in pastoral ministry over the summer? If so, please leave a comment about what you’re doing. I’m not a member of CBE’s staff, but I know they pray regularly for readers of the Scroll, and I’d like to pray for your summer work, too. May you have many opportunities to serve and be served as you grow in wisdom this summer!