The CBE Scroll

Baptism in Christ: Giving Words Their Full Meaning

Recently a friend of mine received a very distinguished award from her denomination for her long-term leadership in promoting the “maximum baptismal role of women in the Church.” As I pondered our baptismal role, I remembered that many baptismal fonts from the early church had Galatians 3:26-28 inscribed on them. Why? Baptism, rather than circumcision, became the public expression of our covenantal relationship with God, attained through our union with Christ. Just as Christ rose victoriously over sin, we too rise out of the waters of baptism, symbolizing our rising victorious with Christ over sin. United to Christ in baptism, God does not look upon our sins, but sees that we are clothed in Christ, a reality that Paul summarizes in Galatians 3:27-29: “You are all children of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

To be united to Christ completely redefines our identity and status with respect to God. It also redefines our relationship to one another. In the same way Christ established satisfaction or peace between sinners and God, so too Christ builds peace between the members of his body—the Church. Because of this, theologians suggest that our christology (what we understand about Christ and our salvation in him) directs our ecclesiology (what we understand about the Church). Just as there is an intimacy or a union between Christ and each redeemed soul, there is also unity or mutuality between those who are redeemed by Christ. To be in Christ is never simply a statement solely about one’s redemptive status. For our redemption also directly influences our status in relationship to one another, as members of Christ’s body.

Paul boldly suggests in Galatians 3 that Jews and Greeks, slaves and free, males and females are all one in Christ. He wrote these words to a world in which nearly half of the population were slaves. How radical Galatians 3:28 must have sounded to first century ears! How radical our baptism remains today! Be clear about this! Our relationship with Jesus changes everything! That is the true meaning of baptism. Our significance and influence is not defined by our earthly parents but through our relationship to God from whom we receive our ultimate inheritance. And our sisters and brothers receive the same inheritance and gifts from God’s Spirit. These gifts never come in pink or blue, yellow, black, or white. Through the power of the Cross, expressed in Christian baptism, we no longer ascribe value, dignity, and worth according to social status, ethnicity, gender, or class. Hallelujah.

“Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks.” (John 4:23, TNIV)

Very often the questions asked by those struggling with the gender issue are quite profound. For example, after leading a workshop at the last Urbana Missions Conference, a graduate student from Harvard told me, “If the Bible really teaches that all women must be submissive to males, and men will be the final arbiters of women, then God is basically saying women are inferior to men. And I cannot be party to such an system that places women under the permanent jurisdiction of a male, not because of a man’s character, or intellect, or walk with God, but simply because he is male. This seems unjust and also unreasonable.”

Her question was rooted in a desire to know truth. How can you know truth, or theology for that matter, apart from reason and logic? Logic is foundational to theology, and thus logic is essential to understanding the gender debate. Women today are told by secular culture that they are equal to men—a moral principle. Therefore, in culture women can pursue any task a man pursues—a functional consequence of a moral principle—equality. But, when women are told that God created them equal to men—a moral principle of equality, but that they must be submissive to men—a functional consequence of inequality, that does not follow the moral principle. Women and men recognize in their gut, and in their minds, that this does not make sense. It is illogical. And, though they love God and cherish their relationship to Jesus, the call for women’s submission smacks not only of illogic, it also seems unjust. Because of this, it erodes trust in God and the church.

Moral principles have logical consequences—to erode women’s confidence in God’s goodness is a salvation issue. This may explain the significant growth in pagan movements—where logic related to gender is intact. For a thorough examination of this issue, see Wicca’s Charm: Understanding the Spiritual Hunger Behind the Rise of Modern Witchcraft and Pagan Spirituality, by Catherine Sanders. Friends, let us engage principles of logic and common sense, being confident that God is the author of all truth! Scripture and logic tell us that women and men are equally created in God’s image and share equal responsibility for using their gifts in service to Christ.

May we, as Christian men and women engage our minds fully in loving and serving Jesus! Hallelujah!

Mimi Haddad

“In your relationships with one another, have the same attitude of mind Christ Jesus had: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a human being, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death–-even death on a cross!” (Philippians 2:5-8, TNIV)

Lately I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about what empowerment for Christian service in the church and world means in light of the model Christ has provided us with. Suffice it to say, it’s a challenge. There is nothing assertive or upwardly mobile about God putting on flesh and serving, then dying on a cross. It spells difficult words for someone who wants to think of “equality” as empowering, and yet it remains the model before us.

Immediately preceding the glimpse of worship contained in chapter 2 of Philippians, Paul exhorts those at Philippi to “in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.” (3-4). In the ordering of their (and our) relationships and our proclamation of the Gospel we are somehow to emulate this model of selflessness, of obedience, and of humility. It strikes me as odd, then, that in considering who can and cannot serve within the church and world, the Christian community quickly turns to the language of power.

Stripped of notions of power and held to the model of Christ, the question of who can and cannot serve is turned on its head. The question of a woman’s being permitted to preach or teach is no longer a question of her right or power to do so, it is a question of her being permitted to serve–-really serve–-and ultimately emulate the model of Christ. Similarly, empowerment becomes an exhortation to one another (regardless of gender) to follow Christ in this downwardly mobile fashion.

To serve within the Christian community is to model Christ. It is to “put on flesh” (that is, imitate Christ’s downward movement), assume the nature of a servant, and become obedient–-to death. And, if anything, it is a setting aside of power, a deliberate and humble choice to be selfless and obedient. It is nothing that any of us would aspire towards if not called by God and exhorted by one another. It is not easy, but then again, when is following Christ easy?

As we continue to imitate Christ, may we find all of our notions of what it means to both serve and “empower” others to do so, challenged.

Will Rettig (previous administrator for the Scroll)

Servant Leadership or Christian Service?

“Jesus called them together and said, ‘You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave—just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.’”
(Matthew 20:25-28, TNIV)

How many of us feel uneasy when we are told that men, rather than women, are called to be “servant leaders?” Perhaps we are confused by this notion—that men alone are to be “servant-leaders”—because it contains an important truth though it carries that truth only part of the way. What do I mean?

Scripture speaks of the Christian life, for both males and females, as one of service. Jesus said that unlike the Gentiles who exercised authority over others, among his followers those who wanted to be first must become like slaves, just as Christ came not to be served, but to serve. There is no mention of gender in this important passage in Matthew 20:25-28, nor is there any mention of authority.

Similarly, Paul also said that he became a slave to everyone for the sake of the gospel (1 Corinthians 9:19). Paul became a slave not because he was male but because he was being renewed in the image of Christ. The gospel calls that all Christians take up their cross and follow Jesus, not because of their gender, but because of their desire to be followers of Jesus.

Celebrating the servant-leadership of all God’s people!

Mimi Haddad, President of CBE

.

The year 1994 witnessed the debut of a little family film known as The Swan Princess, one of several attempts by non-Disney enterprises to grab a slice of Disney’s highly successful fairy tale princesses franchise. My parents, who bought just about every movie that came out on video, quickly added it to our VHS collection once it had finished its theatrical run, and upon viewing it I found it to be a mediocre offering. Not an instant classic like other animated films, but certainly not hateable in its badness.
One scene from the movie did stick in my mind though. You’ll have to familiarize yourself with the film’s plot if you want more details, but in the beginning, Prince Derek makes an awkward and sudden proposal to Princess Odette based solely on her good looks. “You’re everything I ever wanted. You’re beautiful!” Derek gushes. “Thank you,” replies Odette, “but what else?” As our ham-fisted protagonist, Derek is obviously confused by this inquiry and after hemming and hawing for a moment, blurts out, “What else is there?”
Ah, silly Prince Derek. We of this enlightened post-modern feminist era know so much better than to limit our praises of women to their beauty.
Or do we?
A good friend of mine told me that he thought about this recently as he watched a few very different shows where males and females were introduced. “I noticed that the women were invariably introduced with a reference to their beauty,” my friend said, “Which makes perfect sense when introducing a woman whose job is at least largely, if not entirely, dependent on being physically attractive—model, newscaster, emcee, actress—but some of the women I saw introduced as ‘the beautiful/lovely [name]‘ were athletes, politicians, or authors.”
I’m sorry to say, I’m not sure that the Church is doing much better on this matter. In my eighteen years as a Christian, I can’t tell you how often I’ve heard male pastors, speakers and missionaries reference their “beautiful/lovely/gorgeous” wives, often with nary a word as to what else it is that they love about their wives. I currently attend a fairly conservative evangelical seminary where my classes sometimes have a male-female ratio of 4:1, and it’s not uncommon for class members to introduce themselves at the start of the semester with some brief words about their families. In this setting, too, I continue to hear regular talk of how pretty the wives are. I don’t blame my peers, as my guess is that they don’t even realize they’re doing it. Romantic paternalism seems deeply embedded within evangelical culture.
As a married female student whose husband is not enrolled in seminary, I’ve struggled with how to introduce my own family when my turn comes around. I could introduce him as “my handsome husband,” but I’m not sure implementing my own brand of romantic maternalism really solves the problem. I could avoid descriptors, but that sounds dull. I could leave out mention of him altogether, but I worry that those who know I am married will think I’m choosing not to discuss my marriage for the wrong reasons. So I’ve taken to mentioning his other qualities: my selfless husband, my courageous husband, my creative and talented husband. He certainly likes it much better when I brag about him for those reasons rather than for his smokin’ good looks.
Which isn’t to say, men, that you can’t praise your wife’s good looks to others from time to time. I assume that good looks were on the list of reasons why you were attracted to her in the first place, and there’s nothing wrong with that. I think it’s nice to get compliments on my own appearance from time to time, and I enjoy giving them almost as much as getting them.
I simply echo the question that Odette asked above: “Thank you, but what else?”
Proverbs 31:10-31 contains a rather famous list of desirable qualities in a godly wife. The only thing that list has to say about good looks?
“Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting, but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised.” (Proverbs 31:30, TNIV)
Amen to that.