Saturday, July 24, 2010

Asking for an apology from CBMW

I would like to pass on an email which I received just now. Please link to it if you possibly can. I am happy to provide evidence that each of these concerns regarding CBMW is valid. Let me add that I have many more concerns than those listed here.

Dr. Randy Stinson, President
Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood
2825 Lexington Road, Box 926
Louisville, KY 40280

And

Dr. J Ligon Duncan III
Chairman of the Board of the CBMBW
First Presbyterian Church
1390 North State Street
Jackson, MS 39202

The Freedom for Christian Women Coalition met on July 24, 2010, in Orlando, Florida, and agreed and affirmed this Demand for an Apology from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood because of the concerns as listed in the following pages.

For the sake of all Christians, men and women, we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, make a public apology for the misuse of Holy Scripture as it relates to women, and cease to publish or promote The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood.
Sincerely,



Freedom for Christian Women Coalition

DEMAND FOR AN APOLOGY FROM THE
COUNCIL ON BIBLICAL MANHOOD AND BIBLICAL WOMANHOOD

At a time in our church history that the main focus should be on winning lost souls and spreading the gospel to a hurting world, we fear for the future because the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood has placed a greater priority on women’s submissive role rather than on the gospel of Jesus Christ.
It is with that thought in mind that we make these statements.

1. We are concerned that men are being taught that they are god-like in their relationship to women within the church and home. As the mothers, wives, and daughters of these men, it is our concern that this doctrine is setting them up for failure as Christian fathers, husbands and sons;

2. we are concerned about the sin that evangelical church leaders commit when they deny the love of Christ fully to women simply because they were born female;

3. we are concerned about the damage this causes to families when husbands and fathers are told that they have Headship over their wives and daughters;

4. we are concerned about wife abuse, girlfriend abuse, and abuse to female children that takes place in many homes where evangelical men are taught that they have earthly and spiritual authority over women;

5. we are concerned that the children who attend churches that subscribe to the principles of The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood will grow up not knowing the full redemptive power of the blood of Jesus for both men and women;

6. we are concerned for the mental and emotional development of girls and boys who attend churches that teach males have superiority over females;

7. we are concerned that men who are taught that they have Male Headship over a home and church do not feel that they are not accountable for abusive attitudes and actions towards women;

8. we are concerned about the mistranslation of the scriptures by complementarian translation committees and by the false teachings propagated by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood;

9. we are concerned that pastors who teach and preach male domination/female subordination cannot relate in a loving, Christ-like manner to female members of their congregations because they have already judged them and found them lacking;

10. we are concerned that the issue of wifely submission, promoted so heavily by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, is more about power and control than about love or obeying the Word of God.

It is because of these concerns that:

1. We demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood acknowledge the harm that has been done to the church body by The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, confess it as sin, and denounce it;

2. we demand that denominational leaders and all churches and seminaries which have adopted The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood do the same;

3. we demand a public apology from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, and from all heads of seminaries and Bible colleges that have adopted The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, for the inestimable damage this statement has done to all Christians whose lives have been influenced by it;

4. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood begin to promote the Biblical design of functional equality for all Christians, both men and women;

5. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood begin to speak out against pastors who continue to demean women and oppress Christians by the use of The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood;

6. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood chastise pastors who claim that abuse of women is acceptable and justified because the wife is not submitting to the husband;

7. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood make known to every boy and every girl who attend an evangelical church, that God is their head, and that authority over another human being can come only from God;

8. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood teach men that they share equally in the burden of society’s ills, and that all that is wrong with society today cannot be blamed on women;

9. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood do everything in their power to teach seminarians to show the love of Christ to both men and women;

10. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood teach pastors to be loving towards those Christian men and women who disagree with The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood;

11. and, finally, for the sake of all Christians, men and women, we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, make a public apology for the misuse of Holy Scripture as it relates to women, and cease to publish or promote The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood.

Shirley Taylor, bWe Baptist Women for Equality presented at the
Seneca Falls 2 Evangelical Women’s Rights Convention July 24, 2010 in Orlando, Florida

AFFIRMED BY THE FREEDOM FOR CHRISTIAN WOMEN COALITION AT THE SENECA FALLS 2 EVANGELICAL WOMENS RIGHTS CONVENTION
JULY 24, 2010 IN ORLANDO, FLORIDA

18 comments:

E said...

IMO, instead of demanding an apology, I think they should issue a denunciation of The Danvers Statement and/or CBMW in line with the "history of repeated injuries and usurpations" listed in the Declaration of Independence against the King of Great Britain.

A "Demand For An Apology" has no ability to extract such an apology from CBMW. I.e., it's sound and fury, signifying nothing.

However, a public denunciation of the evils resulting from The Danvers Statement and its support by CBMW and sympathetic churches might be the kind of thing that causes CBMW to feel compelled to respond, even if only to defend itself. Especially if a magazine like Christianity Today reports on and publishes the Denunciation.

Don said...

I see this as a useful development. When enough women figure out that non-egalism is not all its cracked up to be, then it will die. One cannot expect that the ones in power will relinquish it.

Suzanne McCarthy said...

Its a beginning. I would also like to see a retraction of all the twisted exegesis that has been published to brainwash women.

Paula said...

We have to get in their faces, and keep up the pressure. Those people understand nothing but power, and would dearly love for us to keep compromising or talking or being eternally patient. Let them scream and threaten... they have a place and a fine income to protect, after all. It is time to bring the fight to the public, because every day we stay in the shadows is a day another woman suffers.

Rod said...

Here is my link to this post, Sue, thanks for the update

http://politicaljesus.com/2010/07/24/a-request-for-the-cbmw-to-apologize/

Shawna R. B. Atteberry said...

I've linked to this and posted the letter here. Thanks for letting us know about it.

J. K. Gayle said...

Thank you; FWIW.

Charis said...

QUOTE: 7. we are concerned that men who are taught that they have Male Headship over a home and church do not feel that they are not accountable for abusive attitudes and actions towards women; ENDQUOTE

Isn't there a double negative in there? It should be "do not feel that they are accountable" or "feel that they are not accountable".

Not to be a wet blanket, but some more input (like some of the above observations) and some really good editing wouldn't hurt before getting this published too far and wide?

Paula said...

I agree with the double negative and mentioned it when I first saw it in the bWE blog.

ernoop said...

Not really spreading like wildfire, is it? I wonder why. Over to the Wiccans...

Suzanne McCarthy said...

Ernoop,

You are a wimp! What is wrong with you? :-)

I hope something goes your way today to cheer you up.

ernoop said...

...and there's your answer.

Anonymous said...

I was at the confrence seneca falls two and these women are so dedicated and determined it's amazing

djf said...

Before you burn the CBMW at the stake, have any of you, including the blog author searched your Bibles on these matters, or read the Danvers statement, or read a book by or listened to a sermon by any of the men on the CBMW committee? The ones I am familiar with are very godly men who are, first and for-most concerned with the Gospel of Christ. They continually preach the Gospel. If you actually read the rationale that precedes the the affirmations of the Danvers statement, it is obvious that the intent is NOT to oppress women, but to save the last dying vestiges of family structure in this country, and maintain God's design. If the Bible is being taught properly, then the above "demands" are just absurd. All these people "demand" is for the Bible to be taught the way they think it should be, and not the way God wrote it. There is a lot of twisted nonsense being asserted in those demands. Does not match the Danvers statement at all. Made me nauseous. NO ONE "suffers" under the true model of family that God gave us. Again...read your Bible. The whole thing.

Suzanne said...

Djf,

I have read the Bible, the Danvers Statement and Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. I attended a church with one of the founders of CBMW for 15 years.

in my experience this teaching destroyed the family in fundamental ways. I realise that not everyone has that experience but this was mine. It is as if I did not start to live until I left this behind me.

Women must be able to initiate action, make decisions, carry them out, provide and protect their family. Anything less is an impairment.

I consider myself and the readers of this blog to be extremely well educated in complementarianism. I agree with the demand for an apology and I wrote to CBMW years before this demand was made, begging them to make their gender blog biblical.

Kristen said...

All these people "demand" is for the Bible to be taught the way they think it should be, and not the way God wrote it. There is a lot of twisted nonsense being asserted in those demands. Does not match the Danvers statement at all. Made me nauseous. NO ONE "suffers" under the true model of family that God gave us. Again...read your Bible. The whole thing.

This is exactly the same argument those who supported slavery in 1850 in the US used to make against those who supported Abolition. Exactly the same argument. It was said that the Abolitionists were denying what the Bible really said about slavery, in favor of what they thought it should say-- and that when slavery was practiced as God designed it, the slaves did not suffer. It was pointed out how "often" and how "clearly" the Bible spoke of slavery as being part of God's design. It was said that the preachers who upheld slavery were good men who cared about the gospel, and the integrity of the Bible, above all.

All this, to justify the power of one person to own another. And now, it justifies the power of a man to be in authority over his wife. But is this what Jesus wanted? Jesus, who said EVERYONE who came to Him must come as a little child? Little children had no power, privilege or authority over anyone in that culture. When Jesus said, "The rulers of the Gentiles exercise authority, but not so among you," that is what He was talking about.

It's high time we stopped missing the forest (the overarching nature of the kingdom of God as a place to renounce, not uphold, power and privilege) for the sake of certain individual trees (the proof-texts used to uphold male power over the female).

djf said...

A man is supposed to "live with his wife in an understanding way." And we are to "esteem others as higher than ourselves." We are supposed to treat others as we want to be treated. These are all from the Bible. If we read it as a whole, we know how to behave with our wives, husbands, friends children...etc.... There is not a different set of standards for marriage. I have a voice in my home. My husband gets my input on all matters, not because he thinks he has to, but because he has respect for me as the woman he loves. I don't know anyone that would call our marriage unbiblical. If a man is obeying God's 2 most important commands- Love God, and love your neighbor as yourself- he can't go wrong. The Bible does NOT tell a man to abuse his wife in any way, shape or form.

Suzanne McCarthy said...

The CBMW website has two mentions of "love your neighbour" and countless search results for "wives submit." I think that needs to be straightened out.