It is good for me to remember that I am in the public eye.
But it is good for you to know that the whole reason I stay in the public eye is to fight against patriarchy, especially patriarchy within the evangelical church that damages both women & the Gospel.
I am an evangelical (Baptist), I know & believe the Bible, I know & understand the history of patriarchy & the church, I recognize patterns within churches that are indicative of both unhealthy attitudes & as well as the treatment of women, & I know how to interpret evidence.
I try to always speak from evidence. But I have never claimed infallibility. If I am wrong, I will admit it (as I have done).It is true I didn't talk about TVC in #MakingBiblicalWomanhood, but it is also true that it fits the patterns I discussed & is connected to the networks.
I haven't seen evidence yet to make me think differently about TVC, including Matt Chandler's confession. Maybe I am wrong. I hope I am. But I also doubt I am. We will see.
"Complementarianism is patriarchy, and patriarchy is about power. Neither have ever been about Jesus."
Call me out if you wish, but I stand by #MakingBiblicalWomanhood. Also, for the record, people in my life know where I stand too. I have never hidden who I am or what I do.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Bear with me:
I'm struggling with the stated reason for TVC disciplining Matt Chandler: "frequency and familiarity" of conversations with a woman "who was not his wife."
I suspect this isn't the whole story. But that doesn't matter for my concern:
My concern is this Harry-Met-Sally mentality that women & men cannot be friends without a cloud of suspicion over the "frequency and familiarity" of their conversations. My concern is that evangelical hyper-focus on sexual purity has warped our ability to have normal friendships.
If a friendship with a woman "who was not his wife" is the sole reason Matt Chandler is being disciplined, especially if (as Chandler insisted) it was neither sexual nor romantic, shouldn't that raise red flags for us?
Again, I suspect this isn't the whole story. If it is,
it doesn’t mean this is the only way to write history, but isn’t it the business of historians to shed light on how we got where we are? Isn’t a history that challenges false narratives used in human oppression important to write?
As a medieval historian, I understand concerns about presentism. My dissertation advisor, Judith Bennett, argued convincingly for how much history today needs the distant past in her History Matters: Patriarchy and the Challenge of Feminism. historians.org/publications-a…
My public facing #MakingBiblicalWomanhood clearly shows how much the modern world has forgotten the distant past and how much remembering history matters.
But is my scholarship "presentist" because it uses history to explain systemic patriarchy to modern evangelicals
in a public-facing narrative that appeals to readers?
This is a question I have asked myself.
Am I being faithful to my historical guild using my knowledge as a medieval historian to tackle the very recent manifestation of patriarchy by modern evangelicals (complimentarianism)?
I haven’t welcomed new folk in a while, so welcome!
I’m your typical medieval historian (professor, pastor’s wife, etc) who mostly uses twitter to fight patriarchy and enlighten folk about medieval history.
I wrote a book that has helped a lot of people and I’m turning it into a trilogy, so stay tuned for sneak peaks and news.
A 🧵: Complementarianism is a harmful structure that teaches gender hierarchy is ordained by God. It claims a beautiful vision of different but equal while teaching there is something innate to masculinity that makes men leaders and women followers. This is not equality.
It claims submission is a loving choice by women yet if women disagree they are living contrary to God’s design. So there is no choice. Women shld not have a seat at the leadership table in the same way as men, & if they ask for it they are power grasping. This is not equality.
Good people doing good work support complementarian structures. Most of them are not grasping power; they support it bc they believe it is true or bc they are trying to make it better on the inside or they have no choice. I’m thankful for these brothers & sisters in Christ.
I’m thankful for SBC executive committee acknowledging their willingness to cooperate w/the Department of Justice investigation as well as admitting need for further reform.
But their use of the word “mistakes” to describe what happened to the victims of abuse seems telling.
So much of the abuse happened and continued bc the voices of those less powerful (women, children, young men) than the male leaders at the helm of so many churches as well as the denomination were minimized, dismissed, and ignored.
And now we see the abuse of those minimized once again, turning not only the sexual crimes but the covering up of those sexual crimes into “mistakes”.
A mistake is when I type the wrong page number in a footnote or neglect to turn my daughter’s physical forms into the school.