by Anna Lisa Gross
The Progressive Brethren gathering was full of wonderful people with deep passion and faith. It also perpetuated some damaging sexist principles. Who would have thought that God would be referred to as male 3 times in the first two sessions of the summit? Who would have thought that pastors would be referred to with male pronouns? These matters of language continue to be important to all who yearn for gender equality and for women to view themselves as whole and holy. Until women truly have similar encouragement, support and opportunity to be leaders in the church, we must be intentional about our language. (In the last session of the conference, God was referred to with a female pronoun.)
We are appropriately determined to achieve equality and wholeness for queer folks within the church, but cannot skip over straight women in the process. Our full inclusion will come together (if it comes at all) since the reasons we are denied access are the same. Allowing all genders and sexualities into full leadership would demand looking into gender and sexuality in our own lives. What if we find out something we don’t want to know about ourselves? What if we realize that we can’t keep living the way we’ve live? What if we can no longer depend on a powerful, righteous Father God to be in charge and make meaning in our confused and aching world?
Women, by far, did most of the work preparing for the conference. The worship planning committee was all women, though two of four preachers were men. The conference planning committee was mostly women, and the most tedious tasks (publicity, registration, logistics, etc.) were performed by women. Thanks to all of these women’s work, a man was given 3 hours for a keynote presentation. Women led more workshops than men – an important task of leadership that requires time and energy, but results in far less limelight. Do women choose tend to choose these roles intentionally? Are we nudged toward them by others? Are we intimidated by the spotlight? Do we prefer interactive sessions to lecture formats? Do we worry that we don’t have enough to say to fill a keynote?
Women prepared the food and cleaned up after meals. Men performed concerts.
Are the hairs on the back of your neck bristling yet? (At the horror of the situation, or at my audacity?)
I really do appreciate all of the work of all of these people.
Thank you, Pat, for cooking!
Thank you, Chris, for performing a summit theme song!
Thank you, Kurt, for preaching!
Thank you, Elizabeth, for planning worship!
Being progressive together would be far more meaningful and enlightening if we first poured energy and insight into the way we gather together – who does the work, who gets the credit. What we eat, what we eat it on. Where we gather, and how we get there. We may not be able to save the church, or even the Church of the Brethren, from pettiness, fear, waste, consumerism, self-centeredness (and so much more), but we can grow together, leading lives rooted in progressive faithfulness.





1 response so far ↓
Audrey // November 26, 2008 at 8:05 pm |
As one who participated in planning this conference, I must admit that this review definitely stings, and not in a life-giving way. I wonder why you assume that energy and insight were not poured into the conference? Might there not be more going on beneath the surface than you were aware of? Or is the only explanation you can think of for why things didn’t turn out as you’d like that there is ‘insidious sexism’ at work?
Further, why this grave concern about sexism and no mention of the white privilege that was much more a problem at this gathering than sexism?