The CBE 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

.

A book review by Anna and Ryan Snyder

This past fall, when we first learned John and Stasi Eldredge had written Love and War, a book on marriage, our initial reaction was negative, to say the least. Don’t get us wrong, we find the Eldredges’ desire to help people improve their marriages admirable. But having just finished re-reading large portions of Wild at Heart and Captivating, their books on men and women, respectively, we instinctively worried about the advice they would give. The Eldredges often claim God created men and women as almost complete opposites, and as a couple firmly committed to the idea that women and men have more similarities in their humanity than they do differences in their gender, we weren’t clamoring to see this type of approach applied to marriage.

The book, however, exceeded our expectations. At times, we actually found ourselves wanting to like it. Unfortunately, at its conclusion, the negatives still outweighed the positives.

Focusing largely on their own experiences, the Eldredges begin by asserting marriage is “fabulously hard” (p. 13). In fact, given that (1) men and women are complete opposites, (2) we are all broken people, and (3) Satan hates marriage, they say it is a “miracle of the first order” that any marriage makes it all (p. 14). However, despite these difficulties, marriage plays a crucial role in God’s story. We live in a world at war, they write, and God gives us marriage to provide us with companionship, and as a picture of his love. Thus, although marriage is excruciatingly hard, God is on our side.

With all this in mind the Eldredges proceed to discuss a number of important, marriage-related issues. From communication, to sex, to having a shared mission in one’s marriage, they offer input and advice, much of it helpful. For example, they explain how people’s brokenness contributes to problems with their spouse, and they encourage people to embrace the resulting conflict as a way of seeking transformation. Additionally, their discussion of the need for both spouses to seek fulfillment in Christ, rather than each other, was commendable. Much of their advice even borders on being pro-egalitarian; they advise a process of mutual decision-making and encourage couples to exercise authority together in matters of spiritual warfare.

However, despite its good points, we reluctantly found ourselves increasingly frustrated with the authors. Their extreme negativity about marriage was exhausting; a few of the more choice examples include comparing the exchanging of wedding vows to the special forces “vowing their lives to one another as they embark on a perilous mission in dark lands, the outcome of which remains quite uncertain,” (p. 4), and claiming “if you cannot admit the disappointment of your marriage, you have made an idol out of it,” (p. 67). They also resort to stereotypes, often attributing marital difficulties to irreconcilable differences between the genders. Sadly, by persuading men and women they are complete opposites and that marriage is almost impossible, they may well convince them their marriage is irreparable, the exact problem the authors are trying to correct.

The authors also treat Scripture carelessly, taking it out of context and providing incomplete quotations, without indicating they have done so. They use pop culture even more heavily than they use the Bible, reporting that human-made movies and stories prove how God intended the world to be. Also, throughout the book the Eldredges often muffle their own meaning with indirect, unstructured, and hard to follow writing. They are overly repetitive both with unclear and weakly constructed analogies and by restating nearly all of Wild at Heart and Captivating.

When we finished with the book, we were left wondering why our marriage is not as hard as the authors say it should be. We have never contemplated divorce, wondered whether we made a mistake in getting married, or threw our hands up in resignation to the fact that marriage is just so hard. While it is true we have only been married for roughly two years, according to the authors, we should have found ourselves wildly disappointed with our marriage by now, or even contemplating divorce, as they were at this point. Yet, while marriage is sometimes difficult, the overwhelming majority of the time we have found it to be better than we ever imagined.

So why do the authors insist marriage is so difficult? Has this been true of your marriage…or are we abnormal in experiencing a joyful and fulfilling marriage? (We doubt the latter is the case.) Why is everyone – Christians included – so down on marriage? Is this a self-fulfilling prophecy (the old ball and chain, etc.)? What causes divorce rates to hover at 50% both within the church and outside it? What are we missing?

by Mary Ann and Sam

Mary Ann:
Did you know there was a man in biblical times who took his wife’s family name?  In Nehemiah 7:63, a man is mentioned named Barzillai, who had married a woman who was a descendant of Barzillai of Gilead and had taken her family name.  He changed his name to hers!  When a friend first mentioned this, I thought she was kidding.  Isn’t it practically biblical for a woman to take her husband’s name when she gets married? The answer, surprisingly, is no!!  It’s western tradition, but it’s not biblical.

When we first got married, Sam and I really wrestled with the name change (some of you may remember that I blogged about it).  We wanted to be able to represent the uniqueness and individuality which God gave to us both while also representing the oneness.  But how could we represent both of our identities, both of our ethnicities and both of our backgrounds?  He didn’t want me to give up my name.  I didn’t want him to give up his name.  But practically speaking, it seemed much better to have the same last name.

Sam:
In our marriage, there is mutual submission because we believe in Biblical equality (Eph 5:21).  Each spouse has equal footing in all aspects of marriage. We have equal value and equal input in everything. When one of us sees a need, that one fills it. If dishes need to be washed and Mary Ann is tied up, I’ll do them, and vice versa. (Most of the time, we do it together because we love spending that time together.) The same goes for laundry, cooking, cleaning, shopping — everything. We make all decisions together, big or small. If we’re stuck at an impasse, we’ll talk it through until we’re at mutual agreement. I have no desire or need for veto power (which by the way, I think that “veto power” is a terrible idea if you want harmony in your relationship).  I am no better, smarter, privileged, or more valuable than she is, nor she than I. God made us equally in His image, and we are both intrinsically valued.

So because we are equals, when it came to deciding what to do about our last name, I had to humbly ask myself who was I to say that Mary Ann had to drop her last name and take mine? It’s the same effect as asking of myself, would I be willing to drop my last name and take hers? That thought didn’t sit well with me when I thought about it initially, because it made me realize how drastic of a change it is to lose your last name. The dilemma we faced was, whose name would be dropped? We eventually realized that there was a way to not have to drop either last name but, rather, to include them both.

Mary Ann:
Most people (Christians, mainly) don’t really think twice about having the woman change her name.  And if Sam was a lesser man, he might have set his manhood on a need to brand me with his name.  However, his determination in our having an “inclusive name” (he coined that phrase) despite the challenges and difficulties of changing his name (with the California legal system) and whatever flak he may incur from traditionalists has augmented my admiration of him as a man.  Through this journey, I have learned that he is unflappable in his purpose when he is certain about a course of action, he is confident in who he is as one who answers only to God and not anyone else, and he is secure in his manhood.  He has made me adore him even more so than ever, and I am so proud to share a name with him.

A few weeks ago, he and I both officially changed our name.  We both added the other’s surname to our own to make an inclusive name (someone else would call it ‘hyphenated’).

Sam:
We decided on her surname first and then mine because it has a nice ring to it. I like it. Not only does it represent both of our identities, but it also represents our new family — a product of diversity and a blending of two cultures.

“There’s a video I want you to see,” my roommate Kate told me earlier this week. “I think it might be really bad.”

Of course that piqued my interest. “Bad” You Tube videos come in many different flavors: Would this video be poor quality, offensive, or just plain bizarre? With wide eyes and low expectations, I turned toward Kate’s computer.

As it turned out, the video’s humor was based on a grossly exaggerated negative stereotype of a U.S. American man of one culture hitting on a woman of another at the cinema. Kate had been introduced to the clip after the Bible study she co-leads, and while she chuckled at it ridiculousness, she found it completely offensive, inappropriate, and unfair.

Against the opinion of many friends, I agreed that the video was racist, and I was frustrated the skit had aired on a major television network. However, after further consideration I realized it does convey a sliver of truth. Even if its portrayal of women and men of certain cultures is inaccurate, it shows that someone somewhere finds the way certain men relate to certain women disgusting. This focus on supposed differences can lead us to consider a larger issue at hand: If not as the video portrays, how do we behave when we’re interacting across both gender and cultural lines?

Every (sub-)cultural group has its own flirtation norms, meaning that when individuals of two cultures interact, they’re often playing by two sets of rules. Men and women are frequently on separate pages already, so compounding that existing divide with an ethnic-or class-based cultural gap can make communication quite complex, especially when it comes to initiating (or stalling) romance.

I think for us as egalitarians, these cultural differences make life pretty darn tricky. Sometimes the male-female scripts of a particular culture don’t seem to match up with my egalitarian ideals, and it’s easy to rush to (sometimes inaccurately) label others as sexist. My lack of cultural fluency sometimes leaves me confused about whether a man is hitting on me or how I might respond appropriately, which might in extreme situations lead to cases of potential sexual harassment, as one culture would define. And obviously, ignorance paired with prejudice leads to the kind of media portrayal we saw in this video.

The long-term solution, I think, is to pair our work for local and global gender equality with intentional efforts to understand people that are culturally different from us. As we get to know them and better get to know ourselves, we’ll be able to live together with less miscommunication. Greater clarity in all relationships will benefit cross-gender relations, as well, as we begin to understand the rules that dictate flirting, friendship, and the like. Plus, confusing—even offending—each other gives us practice embracing patience and grace.

In the meantime, any thoughts on navigating male-female interaction across the cultural divide?

I was shocked. I remembered the old Bryan*, the Bryan that put on the brakes during a discussion of Large Group speakers at our Coordinating Team planning retreat. “Why is it suddenly illegal to bring in white men?” he asked, frustrated. As Multi-Ethnicity Team Leader on our exec, I was pushing hard for more female and ethnic minority speakers during our weekly InterVarsity chapter meetings. Some of the other C-Team members were fairly supportive; Bryan was making it an uphill battle.

How did that same Bryan end up sitting next to me on a flight home to North Carolina, rattling on excitedly about speaker Brenda Salter-McNeill and other highlights of Urbana 06? I had noticed how carefully InterVarsity had crafted its triennial missions conference, putting women in the pulpit and using the gender-accurate TNIV, among other things. Nevertheless, I hadn’t imagined its potential effect on Bryan’s support for women in ministry. But he could not deny the voice of the Holy Spirit through these female speakers—who was he to silence God?

As I prepare to graduate, I realize the stark contrast between InterVarsity and much of the evangelical world—my female friends and I will no longer find widespread acceptance as leaders. However, regardless of our personal beliefs, when women are suddenly barred from such roles, we might actually miss them. Women like me have had invaluable experience leading in mission on campus, and men like Bryan have served alongside women, being blessed by their leadership.

Across a fairly wide spectrum of parachurch organizations, opportunities abound for the reconsideration of limiting views of women. Women lead in many mainstream evangelical ministries, large and small, and God’s work through them is not unnoticed. Christianity Today features articles by authors like Lauren Winner, and Joan Mussa and Julie Regnier serve as Senior Vice Presidents for World Vision. Women even teach future pastors at Fuller, Gordon-Conwell, and Trinity, three of the largest non-denominational evangelical seminaries. A female student leader from Campus Crusade organized UNC’s 24/7 Prayer week this year, and countless other local ministries depend on the time, vision, skills, and prayers of women who love Jesus. While varying in their official positions on women in ministry, each of these more missionally driven organizations senses a practical need for women’s participation.

Yes, it may seem contradictory at first: despite affirming women in their specific ministries, many parachurch organizations like InterVarsity remain silent about female deacons, elders, and pastors/priests in the local church. (Some organizations would say they oppose it, in fact!) I myself used to feel abandoned by this silence, but now I celebrate it. While I question the validity of this sharp church/parachurch distinction and would appreciate InterVarsity’s eventual allegiance to CBE’s egalitarian cause, I have begun to rejoice in the quietly strategic—even inadvertent—role of other parachurch organizations in advancing gender reconciliation and justice.

Especially among university students and other young adults, the parachurch, with its focused yet flexible structures, is often uniquely suited to interact with diverse constituencies otherwise lacking exposure to women in ministry. Indeed, perhaps one of the most significant things we can do to support gender equality is to remain invested in the parachurch organizations that are already informally, sometimes accidentally, changing minds and hearts about women. Regardless of what is or isn’t said about the issue, the mere presence of women in leadership transforms lives. By donating to humanitarian organizations, encouraging college-bound high schoolers to join a campus ministry, volunteering at a local level, or simply connecting others to a female author who has mentored us from a distance, we may be doing more than we realize to advance women’s ministry. Of course, I look forward to finding clearer allies to CBE’s mission. But I’m excited to see the Lord is already at work, sometimes in the places I least expect.