Grace Irwin

Here are a few details of Grace Irwin's recent passing at the age of 101. Word Guild

The Word Guild pays tribute to three Tarr Award winners who passed away in 2008, all of whom were single women and pioneering Canadian Christian writers who lived to a great age. Grace Irwin died in Toronto at age 101 on September 16, 2008, after a long, active and vibrant life. Grace's nephew, John Irwin, is on the board of Christian Info Canada, the umbrella organization that encompasses The Word Guild. Margaret Epp died in Saskatchewan at age 95 on September 7, 2008. Margaret Clarkson died in Toronto on March 17, 2008 at age 93; her memorial service was held in June. See more information in the Tarr Award section.

Here is an excerpt from a blog post dedicated to her various novels.

Grace Irwin had a happy and fulfilling career as a High School English teacher. When she did start to write she gave us some very thoughtful novels. Two of them, written in the style of biographical fiction, were "Servant of Slaves", the life of John Newton, slave trader and hymn writer; and the life of Lord Shaftesbury in "The Seventh Earl". These were the fruit of months of research.

This is a brief excerpt from her memorial service, by John Irwin, with reference to a project undertaken by the University of Toronto in 1968 to translate and publish the complete works of Erasmus.

Grace stood at the podium and announced that Erasmus had written long ago what she wished to say to those who now packed Convocation Hall. For several minutes she read, or rather recited from memory, with great expression, Erasmus's Latin preface to the New Testament.

She was a classics scholar, author and minister of God's word. We have lost a great friend in Grace Irwin.

Image from April 2004 at OISE, Toronto, Grace's last public speaking engagement at a book launch for Full Circle, by Ruth Hayhoe.

Luther and the complementarians

Here is an interesting piece from CBMW.

Luther clearly regards the subjection of women as the result of judgment that came upon Eve and her female descendants at the fall (cf. Genesis 3:16). He writes, "If Eve had persisted in the truth she would not only not have been subjected to the rule of her husband, but she herself would also have been a partner in the rule which is now entirely the concern of males."[21] While they cannot perform the functions of men in terms of teaching and ruling, Luther acknowledges that in procreation, feeding and nurturing their offspring, "they are masters." They rule over their children, but not in the church.

Luther saw the submission of women as a punishment resulting from the fall rather than part of creation order resulting from God's design. However, the fact that Adam was created before Eve (Gen. 2:7, 1 Tim. 2:13), charged with keeping the garden (Gen. 2:15), and named Eve "woman" (Gen. 2:23) suggests that God intended Adam to exercise leadership and authority over Eve before the events of the fall. While the ability of women to submit to authority was no doubt aggravated by the fall (Gen. 3:16),[22] the basis for female submission has its roots in creation order rather than the tragic events of Genesis 3.

This piece from CBMW demonstrates how modern complementarianism has turned classic theology on its head. Luther wrote that Eve was subjected to her husband by the fall, in Gen. 3:16; and Laney writes, that the fall made it difficult for women to accept submission.

Luther believed that women were inferior in nature, but he did not use scripture to prove this. It was a cultural presupposition. He did use Gen. 3:16 to show that women were made subject to their husbands by the fall. Luther represents the view of most theologians up to his time.

Modern complementarianism teaches that women are "equal" in nature although by disposition nurturers and not leaders. They are different by disposition. But in creation, women are subject to their husbands, and in the fall, women resist this natural and intended state of subjection.

The classic theologian has a possible ideal of an Eden without subjection, and the modern complementarian brings subjection by necessity into Eden. The modern complementarian has a world view that is diametrically opposed to classic theology. That both views end up with women under subjection is no surprise. But classic theology says woman is subjected to man by sin, and modern complementarians say that woman is subjected to man by God.

They claim to be the same religion. Oh well.

Ezer again

I have posted on this topic before, and all I can think is that ezer kenegdo "help meet" means that women and men are in a mutual relationship. In a book I am reading now, Sefer Yetsira, a Hebrew text from the 2-6th century, I am not sure, the term kenegdo is used for the hands, not as a dominant right hand and a left hand, but simply the hands, five fingers on one and five on the other. The feet also are kenegdo.

So, what does that mean about the woman being a "help?" Woman want help also. We don't want to have to survive on our own. Not really. I think it means that a woman is a "help" similar to a man, she is "like" him, and that they are to be a help to each other. Anyway, that is what the Latin says, "adiutor similis eius" a help similar to him.

Of course, men and women are very different, and that is why they can help each other - they should each help the other in what the other lacks. Basically, men lack giving birth to the baby and women lack strength to do other things while they are giving birth to the baby.

And from these simple biological facts a host of other differences ensue. But, these differences do not mean that men should lead and women should follow. These differences mean that men and women together are better than men alone, or women alone, and that is all there is to it.

Maybe men and women should take turns leading and following, or maybe they should lead together, or even follow together. But men and women should be a help to each other, and not always trying to put fences around each other and limiting each other.

Thanks Rachel, for your thoughts on this. You wrote about ezer,

"when it's attributed to God, He is never subordinate to His people, he is their rescuer. Dr. Susan Hyatt in In the Spirit We're Equal "defines the hebrew to mean "one who is the same as the other and who surrounds, protects, aids, helps, supports," with no indication of a secondary position."

Be subject to every fellow worker

I was tussling with another problem today when I noticed this text.

Now I urge you, brothers^[c]—you know that^(AA) the household^[d] of Stephanas were^(AB) the first converts in Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves^(AC) to the service of the saints— 16^(AD) be subject to such as these, and to every fellow worker and laborer. 1 Cor. 16:15-16

I also remember that Grudem wrote,

we have never been able to find any text in ancient Greek literature where hypotassō (passive) refers to a person or persons being "subject to" another person, and where the idea of submission to that person's authority is absent.

Does he just make this up? I suppose the answer is "yes."

Alternatives to authority and submission

While Grudem and Ware support the notion that the relationship between Father and Son is one of authority and submission, this is not the traditional belief of the church. There are many other ways that the relationship between Father and Son have been described.

Saint Augustine believed that the will of the Father and Son was indivisible. If the Son subjected himself to the Father, he was subjecting himself to himself. J. N. Darby, who formulated doctrine for the Plymouth Brethren, and greatly influenced Dallas Seminary, taught that the will of the Father and Son was unanimous. Chrysostom talked about the Son submitting to the Father and providing counsel to the Father, in a relationship of reciprocity.

It is wrong to believe that even in the historic church, the Father and the Son were in a relationship best described as one of authority and submission. If that were the ideal relationship, the idea way of interacting, then we should all still be part of the Catholic church, a catholic church, and any divergence would be sinful.

The danger of the teaching of authority and submission in the godhead, is that this is used as the model for all human relationships. It is hard not to read the idealization of dominance and submission in this paradigm.

The five positions of subordination

This is the teaching in St John's Shaughnessy Church,

Marriage is like the trinity, The Father is in charge. Jesus ALWAYS submits to the father, he obeys, he says what his father has told him to say, Jesus sees the father in the trinity as the head, and he obeys him. It is never the other way around. Isn't it interesting?

Here is the elaboration from CBMW's Gender Blog,

Does a relationship of authority and submission really exist eternally among the persons of the Godhead? We know that while Jesus Christ walked the earth he was fully submitted to the Father, while remaining fully equal as God. But has he and will he forever be God, yet also ever in a relationship of submission to the Father?

It's a very important question. While the commands of Scripture in Ephesians 5:22 for instance, that make plain the distinct roles between men and women under God's design are clear— they, as God's Holy Word, need no further defense to be obeyed. Still, what beauty, what wonder, what glory remains to be seen as we peer into the relationship between God the Father and God the Son that the Scriptural authors open to us?

Further, how does the relationship of the Godhead inform our relationships between the sexes? If equality of essence and distinction of roles exist eternally in the trinity, what a strong paradigm that provides for human relations between the genders.

Four evangelical scholars will consider this important biblical question next month in a debate set for 7 p.m., Oct. 9 in the chapel at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (TEDS) in Deerfield, Ill.

Defending the non-subordination view will be Tom McCall, Professor of Biblical and Systematic Theology at TEDS and Keith Yandell, who serves as Professor of Philosophy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Noted scholars Wayne Grudem and Bruce Ware will represent the complementarian position which affirms that a structure of authority and submission will exist for eternity in the Godhead. Both Grudem and Ware are well-known across the evangelical world and both have published extensively on the gender issue.

There are several different variations on the "subordination" view. The way I see it, there are at least these five positions,

A Arianism
B Subordinationism
C Functional Eternal Subordination
D Temporal subordination of the Son to the Father
E Indivisibility of the will of Father and Son

Grudem and Ware will take position C and the classical position is a mix of D and E. It is important to distinguish the position that Grudem and Ware will take from position A and B. These would be considered heresy.

It is also important to realize that the position of Ware and Grudem dates from about 30 years ago and is not the traditional position of the church. If it were, then a Christian marriage would be one in which the husband would never submit to the wife in anything, and the wife would always submit to the husband. There would be no case for the wife not submitting. This would be a "total submission" relationship. It is almost to bizarre to imagine.

In my view this teaching is not acceptable in any form. Although there are many different aspects to the recent fissures in the Anglican Communion, and I appreciate points from both sides, this teaching is the explicit teaching of slavery of the woman in the home. "What beauty, what wonder, what glory..." would not be my view.

straining humanity

Here is something written originally by Jim Packer. He might want to qualify it, but the fact is that he said it, and Gender blog cites him and so it goes,

By this I mean that, other things being equal, a situation in which a female boss has a male secretary ... will put more strain on the humanity of both parties than if it were the other way around. This is part of the reality of the creation, a given fact that nothing will change.

Can a school administrator not have male teachers under her, can a queen not have loyal male subjects, can a teacher not give instructions to a male student support worker - without straining his humanity?

The problem is that the inability of men to work properly under women, if women are in the lead, is a reality of human nature. The question is whether this is a good thing, a product of God's perfect creation; or an imperfect thing, the product of our fallen state.

Frankly, does it matter? If God has given a man a job where he is under a female boss, he ought to comply without worrying about whether it strains his humanity.

The trinity and the subordination of women

As far as I know marriage has only been compared to the subordination of the Son to the Father in the last half of the last century. This paragraph from the sermon I listened to recently is almost word for word similar to the theology of Bruce Ware.

Marriage is like the trinity, The Father is in charge. Jesus ALWAYS submits to the father, he obeys, he says what his father has told him to say, Jesus sees the father in the trinity as the head, and he obeys him. It is never the other way around. Isn't it interesting?

I can't say to what extent Paul intended this comparison. Did he line up all the verses from the gospels of the Son submitting to the Father? It does not seem likely.

The question that one can possibly ask, and potentially answer, is whether the church fathers thought that the Son always submitted to the Father and the Father never submitted to the Son. Did the church fathers believe that the Son was subject to the Father?

I sincerely believe that I would be better off if I had access to the necessary documents in Greek, but for a start, I would like to post on Augustine's view of whether the Son is subject to the Father. This is only tentative. Some day, I might investigate further.

In this chapter, Chapter 8.— The Texts of Scripture Explained Respecting the Subjection of the Son to the Father, Which Have Been Misunderstood. Christ Will Not So Give Up the Kingdom to the Father, as to Take It Away from Himself, of On the Trinity, Book 1, Augustine writes,

Nor let any one, hearing what the apostle says, But when He says all things are put under Him, it is manifest that He is excepted which did put all things under Him, think the words, that He has put all things under the Son, to be so understood of the Father, as that He should not think that the Son Himself put all things under Himself.

For this the apostle plainly declares, when he says to the Philippians, For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like His glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself.

For the working of the Father and of the Son is indivisible. Otherwise, neither has the Father Himself put all things under Himself, but the Son has put all things under Him, who delivers the kingdom to Him, and puts down all rule and all authority and power. For these words are spoken of the Son: When He shall have delivered up, says the apostle, the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and all power. For the same that puts down, also makes subject.

While Bruce Ware compares the role of the husband to the Father who sends, Augustine is explicit in saying that the Son is sent both by the Father and by Himself, Book 2,

For perhaps our meaning will be more plainly unfolded, if we ask in what manner God sent His Son. He commanded that He should come, and He, complying with the commandment, came. Did He then request, or did He only suggest? But whichever of these it was, certainly it was done by a word, and the Word of God is the Son of God Himself.

Wherefore, since the Father sent Him by a word, His being sent was the work of both the Father and His Word; therefore the same Son was sent by the Father and the Son, because the Son Himself is the Word of the Father. For who would embrace so impious an opinion as to think the Father to have uttered a word in time, in order that the eternal Son might thereby be sent and might appear in the flesh in the fullness of time?

But assuredly it was in that Word of God itself which was in the beginning with God and was God, namely, in the wisdom itself of God, apart from time, at what time that wisdom must needs appear in the flesh. Therefore, since without any commencement of time, the Word was in the beginning, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, it was in the Word itself without any time, at what time the Word was to be made flesh and dwell among us.

And so Augustine rebutted the view that the Son was subject to the Father, except in that he was subject to Himself, that is, the will of God the Father, and of the Son, is indivisible.

Deaconesses of Sydney Diocese: Part 3

I read a post today railing against the two income family. Apparently the fact that women can work has driven up house prices and caused many other ills. Here is some insight into what it was like for women to live on a less than sufficient income. More on the deaconesses,

The narrow moralism taught in their training at Deaconess House and Moore College and the strict injunctions given to them to work only with women and children, could alienate Sydney deaconesses from the people to whom they were trying to minister. Deaconess Dorothy Harris, in expressing her dislike of helping out at the Carramar Hostel for unmarried mothers, is an example of a Christian worker hampered by having acquired an over-moralistic attitude:

That was a job I didn’t enjoy. The actual work was all right but all those pregnant young girls I found nauseating. They had destroyed what should have been part of a future satisfying marriage and brought distress and unhappiness to themselves and families.

While admitting that “there were, of course, many instances where ignorance or some forms of abuse brought about the pregnancy”, Deaconess Harris still reflected the patriarchal church’s judgmental attitude towards women so often espoused by Anglican clergy, and the tendency to free the male of sexual responsibility.

Anglo-Catholics tended to favour the ministrations of women religious rather than deaconesses. In the Anglo-Catholic oriented Church Standard of 17 May 1940, in a series on parish life written under the pseudonym “Quiz”, there appeared an article entitled “The Dirge of the Deaconess”. The writer appeared to be torn between sympathy and rejection. While portraying an unflattering image of the deaconess, he also spoke out against the Church ‘s exploitation of women in this form of ministry.

“Quiz” described deaconesses as “bands of martyrs” who sacrificed their womanhood “to become a despised drudge with nothing on earth to press forward to but eventual retirement in some poverty-infested garret”. The writer continued:

The life demanded of a deaconess flouts every divinely endowed human instinct ....Wearing flop hats and starched collars their uniform closely resembles that of a female felon. Surely the more Catholic and certainly more soul- sating would be the graceful robes of a nun.... So long as the present attire makes many a deaconess resemble rather the captain of her school hockey team than a vestal virgin. she will be treated as such by the average pavement trotter.

The writer also deplored the lowly accommodation - “small room with gas ring and use of bath” which the deaconess’s meagre stipend forced upon her, asserting that “this criminal system has all the austerities and none of the blessings of community life, and saps the very womanhood from her veins.” One of the problems for the urban deaconess was that she was not entitled to the accommodation benefits accorded to clergy and her salary was much lower.

A sermon on marriage

Notes from Richard James' sermon on marriage. Aug. 24, 2008, St. John's Shaughnessy Church, Vancouver.

Marriage is like the trinity, The Father is in charge. Jesus ALWAYS submits to the father, he obeys, he says what his father has told him to say, Jesus sees the father in the trinity as the head, and he obeys him. It is never the other way around. Isn't it interesting?

But in no way can we say that Jesus being subject to his father is demeaning. ... In the godhead himself there is submission. To submit to any authority, you are being Godlike.

In Gen. 1 God said, Let us make mankind in our image. To be made in the likeness of God is to be made in relationship where, just as the son submits to the father, we have a couple, a head and a helper.

Wives, submit to the husband as the head - he is in charge. God solved the argument before it started, he said, I have to choose someone, okay, husbands, you are in charge. I hold you responsible.

Now what does it look like? If you are married to a good husband, who ... you will find a very happy wife, ... if however, you are a wife who is married to a lousy husband, just line up over here and we can discuss this in a therapy group afterward. [laughingly] Its not easy.

I want to point out something that is very important. In our culture we decide that if something doesn't work we change it. But God designed humanity. God designed the world and gave it order. We submit to all authorities because God has put them there. Never in the Bible do you see God saying plan B is if it is not working, swap. You never hear, wives command your husbands, and husbands submit.

We do live in a culture where wives command husbands. ... we reject all authority structures because we think we know better.

God does not say, I put you in charge now rule. He always tells authorities, I have put you in charge but what I want you to do is love. You are in charge husbands, I have decided this, too bad if you don't want to be in charge, you are in charge, says God, like I am in charge of you, so I want you to love your wives, in the same way I love the church, so far that you are willing to die for her. Use my love for you as the minimum requirement for how you love your wife.

If there is any husband who raises his voice or strikes his wife the smell of hell is close to your marriage. How dare you ... Love your wives sacrificially. It is so shameful when you go to other cultures where the gospel is not preached, women are sold. they are treated like objects.
But it is an irony. In a culture where Jesus has been proclaimed and women have been raised to equality, and have been treated in every way equal but different to men, that same culture, people jettison God and the women say they want to jettison the men, they say, we want to be in charge.

- Husbands ask your wives how you can be a better husband, and take notes.
- The biggest mistake Adam made and we men make is we are not willing to lead.
- It is difficult in any culture if you have a lousy husband. This culture has made it easy, you just divorce him. that is not necessarily, the solution love them as if they were the lord.
- A good divorce? Divorce is a natural consequence of living in a culture that denies the living God.

I know Richard and his wife, and quite simply Richard is not exceptional in his teaching that wives are to obey in everything and men are in charge. Richard is teaching what is the standard belief system in complementarian churches.

Intellectuelle

Intellectuelle has my favourite women bloggers. Here are two recent posts. Can feminism be a good thing? and Quote: on friendship in marriage, part IV by Bonnie.

The Deaconesses of Sydney Diocese: Part 2

More from Freedom From Sanctified Sexism - Women Transforming the Church by Mavis Rose, pp. 56-75.

The Diocese of Tasmania also allowed considerable responsibility to their deaconesses but also, like Gippsland, assigned them to remote, pioneering areas. Such was the case of Tasmanian deaconess, Elvie Fraser, trained in Melbourne, who in 1982 was commissioned as Deaconess of the Furneaux Islands, centred on Flinders Island. Elvie Fraser commented:

I can do all that a priest can do except consecrate the elements at Holy Communion, officiate at weddings (because I cannot pronounce the Blessing) and pronounce the Absolution.... We reserve the Sacrament. As we have to pay the fare across from Tasmania for a priest to consecrate the bread and wine, and that is rather expensive, we try not to run out too often.... Because it is not always easy to get a priest to come when we need one for a wedding, I now have a licence to officiate at weddings.

Deaconess Marie Kingston, a rural dean, who ran seven centres in the isolated Tasmanian parish of Derby-Ringarooma, admitted that in spite of her heavy responsibilities, “my status is no different from that of layreader”.

One of the important functions of Deaconess House in Sydney was to train women for overseas missions as well as for the Australian frontier areas. The missionary course was shorter if the trainee did not wish to graduate as a deaconess. Non-ordained graduates were usually referred to as parish or missionary sisters. According to Judd and Cable, under the sub-heading “The Export of Women” (just as if trained churchwomen were commodities!), between 1892 and 1931, 70% of the Church Missionary Society’s 246 missionaries were women. Deaconess Mary Andrews, while Head Deaconess in Sydney after serving with distinction in China, acknowledged the limitations for deaconesses in the Australian urban situation under the close supervision of male clergy. In her opinion, “for those women who sought a more active church role in the extension of Christ’s Kingdom, there was only one option, missionary work, both overseas or in remote parts of Australia.”

The experience of Jacinth Myles illustrates how irksome service in an urban parish could be. After four years of training in Deaconess House, Sydney, Jacinth Myles was employed as a “parish sister” in a Blue Mountains parish. She recalled:

From the start the rector made it clear where I stood. “You are the employee, I am the employer".... My weekly program in that parish was drawn up by the rector and it was not open to negotiation. It did include some adult group work, but it did not include involvement in the services apart from reading the Bible.

Jacinth Myles found that it was in Australia’s rural areas that she was accorded more opportunities and recognition. In Armidale, in contrast with Sydney Diocese, she was advised that “the position would involve a fair amount of leading services and preaching”. When handed her weekly programme, she was not expected to adhere to it slavishly but was “completely free to follow whatever ministry the Lord wanted me to have”.

A young woman from Sydney

Just before listening to Sarah Palin's acceptance speech on being invited to be the running mate for John McCain in the US presidential campaign, I met another beautiful and intelligent young woman. She had just completed an undergrad degree and had recently come here from Sydney, Australia.

She told me that had just joined a ministry training program for a year. I asked what the purpose of the program was and she said that it was developed to "train men to plant churches." I asked how she had become part of it and she explained. This is how I remember what she said.

It is a huge problem being a woman. Everything is against me. They said in the interview that I was an ideal candidate in every way and that I was just what they were looking for and had all the qualifications, but it was a problem because I was not a man. I mean, I would have been the ideal candidate if only I had been a man. But I said, you need women for the women's ministry, women's ministry is growing, you need women. So they let me join. I mean I can lead a Bible study for young mothers, right?

Gafcon

I do not have an official opinion on the recent Gafcon Conference and Jerusalem statement. I had once supported the Anglican Network churches, but now, for a variety of reasons do not. I attend a small Anglican church which remains within the ACC.

The issues are much broader than just same sex blessing. There are facets of geography and ethnicity, conservatism and national identity. I can only express a personal experience. I saw that the major issue in my personal context was the role of women. I was not aware that our church had had any applications for same sex blessing ceremonies. I also was aware that a prominent member of our congregation had signed the statement of concern regarding the TNIV Bible translation. I could not agree that Christians should behave like this. These are internal issues and perhaps specific to my particular context.

I have come a long way from a fundamentalist background to a strong conviction on the equal ministry of women. This best recognizes the contribution that women have made throughout history, especially in the remote areas of Canada and Australia.

I have been deeply appreciative of the atmosphere at our local Anglican Seminary where the Native Ministries also has a home, and the campus Hillel group have a temporary home during their renovations.

I no longer view separation from fellowship with those who promote the same sex blessing to be high on the agenda. I have twice before in my life been in churches which split so this is just one more human driven fracture to my thinking. It is sad to see, but I am grateful to remain in the ACC at this time.

The deaconesses of Sydney Diocese Part 1

I have decided to post a few small excerpts from a lengthly chapter on the deaconesses of the Sydney Diocese. I had been thinking of how the first women ordained in Canada came from a worthy tradition of women who worked for little pay in the north and marginal areas of Canada. These self-sacrificing pioneers took on some very physically demanding assignments and often served where a church could not afford male clergy.

From halfway down the page,

So, away from the arena of churchmen scheming on their perpetual subordination, how did the Australian deaconesses themselves perform ?

As well as their Christian outreach to the urban poor in Melbourne and Sydney, deaconesses played an important role in inland and overseas missions. The Bush Church Aid Society depended on deaconesses for much of its outback ministry. The main areas of operation were in Bathurst, the Riverina, Gippsland and Willochra dioceses. As Judd and Cable comment in their history of Sydney Anglicanism: “The most striking aspect of Bush Church Aid work was the crucial part played by women in the growth of the Society”

They pointed out that in Sydney, while “male lay readers and catechists could assist the clergyman, deaconesses could not preach but only ”address" the congregation and read services in his absence". In the Bush, the deaconesses were allowed to lead local worship. As noted in Chapter One, away from direct clergy supervision women in ministry were allowed more opportunities to develop their talent and demonstrate their resourcefulness.

The Annual Reports of the Deaconess Institution from 1920-21 included a section “Bush Deaconess Report”. In these reports, the formidable tasks being assigned to young female graduates of the Institution were recorded, items such as: “Sometimes a whole month is spent by the Deaconess riding on and on through scattered parishes... visiting, teaching in schools and holding services”.

Deaconess Winifred Shoobridge, assigned to Gippsland Diocese, was reported to have “her own pony and thus can work more expeditiously”. By 1937, Deaconess Shoobridge was “travelling in a little Morris Oxford which is equipped with a bicycle (which helps with the daily visiting), a lantern outfit, Bibles, supplies of Mothers’ Union magazines and other literature”. Deaconess Shoobridge noted that bush women would greet her with comments such as “I’m glad it’s a woman come instead” or “Come in, you’re the first woman I’ve seen for ten months”.

Sydney deaconess Dorothy Almond also worked in Gippsland, in the “Big Scrub” region in the East, stationed at Cann River District, working among “pioneer settlers”, the nearest doctor being “sixty miles distant”. Dorothy Almond in 1923 was written up in the Victorian newspapers for her heroic efforts to save a desperately ill woman in the remote Croajingolong area of Gippsland. She rode forty miles and then walked sixteen miles in stormy weather in order to bring medical aid to the patient. “Through her ministry, in conjunction with that of a doctor, who was able to come out later, the woman’s life was saved”.

Deaconess Agnes McGregor, working for Bush Church Aid in the Far West near Wilcannia, in the late twenties, commented: “One has so many experiences that it is hard to know which is best to relate - punctures on treeless plains when the temperature is 115oin the shade (but there is no shade!) or well down to the footboards in sand and having to use the spade for two hours (no one to give the needed push) or trying to find the track in a blinding duststorm.”

In Gippsland Diocese, it became practice to appoint deaconesses to areas which could not afford the stipend of a priest or a deacon, and which were too demanding for a trainee lay reader. Mrs. Edith Littleton, eldest daughter of Bishop Cranswick, recalled that the deaconesses “were very poorly paid but there was no other way we could staff the diocese in those days”. Underlying this statement was an admission that the Diocese of Gippsland was prepared to exploit women workers for the sake of serving the Church’s frontier areas.

The Diocese could not get male clergy to accept such conditions. The positive aspect was that these difficult situations allowed deaconesses to prove themselves capable of carrying out the duties of clergy. Yet, despite his progressive views on women, Bishop Cranswick, while allowing the deaconesses to be addressed as “the Reverend”, did not give them the right to sit in the House of Clergy in Gippsland Synod. They were not given clergy seats in the diocesan Synod until April 1949.

In time, the deaconesses in Gippsland were placed in charge of parochial districts, officially under the aegis of some remote priest. They were permitted to conduct funerals, baptise infants, preside at Parochial Councils (before women were allowed to be members of them), prepare and present candidates for Confirmation, conduct Morning and Evening Prayer Services and preach. So highly were the deaconesses regarded in Gippsland that Deaconess Nancy Drew recalled that she was appointed to succeed Deaconess Winifred Halter to the parish of Nowa Nowa in 1955 because the people had petitioned the Bishop for another deaconess even though a male priest could have been appointed. When Deaconess Drew left in 1963, the people again asked for a deaconess.

Formal Women’s Ministry : The Deaconess
from Freedom From Sanctified Sexism - Women Transforming the Church by Mavis Rose, pp. 56-75.
Allira Publications, 17 Cervantes Street, MacGregor, Queensland 4109, Australia.
Copyright: Mavis Rose 1996.

ReFocus Canada and Bruce Ware

I have been asked to put together a short list of articles which outline my concern with Bruce Ware's influence on the churches of Vancouver, in particular, the Anglican Network churches such as St. John's Shaughnessy.

I am aware that the present disunity in the Anglican Communion worldwide is made up of many competing concerns, of race and geography, of male and female, of local autonomy vs unity and hierarchy. However, I have personally experienced the current trend as an effort to keep women out of the pulpit and make them submissive in the home.

While this is couched in terms of "obedience to the word," I would like to point out that slaves remaining submissive to their masters is also "obedience to the word," as well as colonies to empire, and subjects to the crown.

Back to my central concern. On April 14-15, 2008 Bruce Ware spoke at the Willingdon church to a group of pastors at the reFocus Canada conference. The goal of the conference was to "equip pastors to preach the full counsel of God." The focus was indeed on the authority of God over Christ, Christ over the church and leaders given authority over the church.

However, Bruce Ware is also a noted speaker on complementarianism, the teaching that men and women have distinct and complementary functions in the home and in church. Although he did not focus on gender relations at reFocus Canada, he did say,

Marvel at the submission of the eternal Son to the eternal Father, carried out with absolute fidelity to His Father's will, and with nothing but joy and happiness and satisfaction. Note: this is true not merely of the incarnate Son, but of the eternal Son, to the eternal Father! And marvel at the Spirit's joyful willingness to be eternally in submission to the Father and to the Son. Take this to heart, and apply this principle broadly in ministry:

It is as God-like to submit joyfully and gladly to rightful authority as it is God-like to exercise wise and benevolent rightful authority. Is it any wonder that that when God created human beings in His image, that He made them equal in essence, but distinct in function? Relationships of authority and submission in human relationships, then, derive from and should be modelled after the relations of authority and submission in the Godhead.

Bottom line: The basis for authority is in the eternal Godhead. What is authority if there is nothing to submit? Does authority originate with creation? No. Authority and submission is eternal within the very Godhead. We as Christian people and Christian communities ought to be among those who are the most counter-cultural in the societies in which we live: rather than chafe at and despise submitting to authority, we ought to joyfully and gladly submit to God and do the will of the Father. Wives to husbands, church members to elders, employees to employers, citizens to the states. This is not some device simply to maintain control, but a reflection of the divine order.

The complementary function of male and female is then for the male to have authority and the female to submit to that authority.

John Neufeld also spoke on the issue of gender at this conference. He said about elders,

And they are men. In the Old Testament, elders appear to have been male. Then see Paul's counsel in 1 Timothy 2:12, which is explained in verse 13 because Adam was formed first, then Eve. The explanation of the command is grounded in creation: there is an order in creation. The man, Adam, is given federal headship over the human race, just as Christ, the second Adam, is also given federal headship over the human race.

Further readings from Bruce Ware:

Male and Female Complementarity and the Image of God

[W]hile unified in our essential human equality and our common responsibility to do the will of God, the temporal priority of the image of God in the man, through whom the woman is formed as a human bearer of God's image, supports the principle of male-headship in functioning as the image of God persons both men and women are. This is precisely Paul's point in 1 Cor. 11.

The reason he is concerned about head coverings is that he knows that God has designed women and men to function so that each respects the other's God-ordained roles. Women are to honor and men are to embrace the special responsibility that God has given men in the spiritual leadership in the home and believing community. Where male-headship is not acknowledged, our functioning as the image of God is hampered and diminished.

This puts Paul's instruction in Ephesians 5 in a new light. What we realize is that when wives submit to their husbands as the church submits to Christ (5:22-24), and when husbands love their wives as Christ loves the church (5:25-27), they exhibit their God-ordained roles as bearers of the image of God. It is not only in their equality that they are image of God. They also bear and express God's image as they function in a manner that acknowledges the headship of the male in the bestowing of image of God (1 Cor. 11:7-9).

Summaries of the Egalitarian and Complementarian Positions on the Role of Women in the Home and in Christian Ministry

Male and female were created by God as equal in dignity, value, essence and human nature, but also distinct in role whereby the male was given the responsibility of loving authority over the female, and the female was to offer willing, glad-hearted and submissive assistance to the man. Gen. 1:26-27 makes clear that male and female are equally created as God's image, and so are, by God's created design, equally and fully human.

But, as Gen. 2 bears out (as seen in its own context and as understood by Paul in 1 Cor. 11 and 1 Tim. 2), their humanity would find expression differently, in a relationship of complementarity, with the female functioning in a submissive role under the leadership and authority of the male.

These articles are from the website of the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.

Sermons by Bruce Ware,

Building Strong Families in Your Church

Identity is rooted in priority given to the male… Her identity as female is inextricably tied to and rooted in the identity of the male… Her created glory is a reflection of the man’s… has her glory through the man. Seth is the image of God because he was born through the fatherhood of Adam. Specifically Adam is mentioned and not Eve. As Seth is born in the likeness and image of Adam, so is he born in the likeness and image of God. Male headship is a part of the very constitution of woman.

Complementarian Vision of Creation

The very wise and good plan of God, of male headship, is sought to be overturned as women now, as sinners, want instead to have their way, instead of submitting to their husbands, to do what they would like to do, and seek to work to have their husbands fulfill their will, rather than serving them;

and their husbands on their part, because they are sinners, now respond to that threat to their authority either by being abusive, which is, of course, one of the ways men can respond when their authority is challenged, or more commonly by becoming passive, acquiescing and simply not asserting the leadership they ought to as men in their homes and churches.

I apologize for this being a repeat of information for some.

Update: Here is where Ware says that women demonstrate that they are Christians by embracing their role to bear children.

reruns

I have not forgotten about women bible translators but I have not been able to give the topic the attention that it deserves so I will come back to it soon.

Here is the first woman ordained in the Anglican church worldwide. Click on her name to read my post about her.

Florence Li Tim Oi

St. John's Shaughnessy Church Vancouver

Tonight at St. John's Shaughnessy Church for the beginning of VYC, Richard James spoke and said that the high rate of divorce is because women will not accept their role, Eve's sin was her rebellion against Adam, women's desire is against their husband, God has put men in charge to end all arguments, men have authority and women have submission. This is God's word and a test of faith.

This is the biggest Anglican Church in Canada. This church has left the Anglican Church of Canada and joined the province of the Southern Cone. This is the church of Dr. James Packer who edited the ESV Bible and has signed a statement that another Bible, the TNIV Bible, translated by men who worked in the same institution as him, was "untrustworthy."

Addendum: I am recording what was told to me by my daughter. I have not attended this church myself for the last two years. She got up and walked out of this service which was the evening youth service.

abortion

If anyone links abortion with an egalitarian society, they need to think again. Abortion and infanticide were commonly practiced in patriarchal societies. These practices permeate every type of society. Female infanticide is a continuing crime. The figures I have seen are about 50 million missing women in China and perhaps the same in India. Is this not a holocaust created by the belief in the lesser value of women as providers and protectors and bearers of the family honour?

The statistics very widely, but frankly 100 million or 50 million, what is the difference? Why is any Christian allowed to restrict the functions of greater value to the male? Why are these people permitted the label of Christian?

I am not saying that this injustice is worse than the disruptions of war and famine in other places. Gender injustice is not the only evil on earth, but it is an evil.

A group of us teachers were sitting around chatting tonight about classrooms of Asian students that have twice as many boys as girls in them. I don't know what our sex ratio is here, but it got me thinking.

desire to control

Last year attended two courses taught by well known evangelical theologians. The one, an Old Testament specialist, taught Gen. 3:16. He said something to the effect that women "desire to take control" and this is the cause of the recent increase in the rate of divorce.

I talked to him privately later and asked him to think of the couples that he knew who were divorced. I asked him if he felt that most of these divorces were caused by the woman's desire to control. He said on reflection, perhaps not. But 200 young people heard his public teaching that day and only I heard his private admission.

Not long after I listened to the other theologian, an egalitarian, a NT specialist, teach on 1 Cor. 7. He looked up from the text and commented that divorce is a terrible thing. And then he tearfully said that the things that men and women do to each other makes him weep. He told a story of a friend of his, in his 70's who had recently left his wife to live with his secretary.

The things that people do to each other, both men and women, are very cruel. There is no need to lay this burden on the shoulders of women alone. Let us all be egalitarian in the way we distribute guilt and blame. I would rather not know that some complementarians give the priority of leadership to the man, and the priority of blame to the woman.

So, when I read in this book, page 30,

"you will desire to control your husband,
but he will rule over you,"

I would be a lot happier if I had not heard that text over and over again used to prove that women are the primary cause of divorce. I would be a lot happier if there were a footnote. I would be a lot happier if someone explained that this is the insight of Susan Foh, writing in the 1970's and not the eternal word of God. In fact, I don't even know what translation this is. Is it the private translation of the authors of this book.

Update: I can't believe that I did not realize that this was from the NLT. That was really fuzzy of me. Not a translation I would recommend. Give me Pagnini. English is not doing it for me today. I am going to have to work off my cranky mood somehow. The NLT does have a footnote, which I accept as good enough, but the book I cited does not include the footnote.

Equal access to decision-making

I will be continuing to write about women and Bible translation. This evening I have been rereading Queen of the Dark Chamber, the autobiography of Christiana Tsai, who records that she was one of the first women in China to graduate from high school. She became an evangelist and was instrumental in the training and encouragement of many other Chinese women who became preachers and church planters throughout China.

I will write more about Tsai soon but this got me thinking about women and decision-making. Christiana's book is almost entirely about women as leaders and actors. Here is a UN statement on women as decision-makers. I am reflecting on how women missionaries were once so convicted that they were teaching a gospel of dignity and participation for women. I am trying to figure out what happened.

----

The Beijing Platform for Action also affirms that women have the equal right to participate in governance and, through that participation, contribute to the redefining of political priorities, placing new questions on the political agenda and providing new perspectives on mainstream political issues. The Platform defined two strategic objectives under this critical area: to ensure women's equal access to and full participation in power structures and decision-making, and to increase women's capacity to participate in decision-making and leadership.

Besides the Beijing document, a number of international instruments have affirmed the principle of equal participation of women and men in power and decision-making, including the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

At its forty-first session in 1997, the UN Commission on the Status of Women reaffirmed the need to identify and implement the measures that would redress the under-representation of women in decision-making. The removal of discriminatory practices and the introduction of positive action programmes were identified as effective policy instruments to that end.

Diary of Ma Yan

Recently a friend dropped by and returned The Diary of Ma Yan, which she had borrowed from me a few years ago. For anyone interested in China as a country, its education and rural economy, this book is a fascinating and legitimate easy-to-read introduction. It is the diary of a 13 year old girl who was unable to continue her education due the extreme poverty of her family life.

Her diary came into the hands of Pierre Haski, a French journalist, who published it as a book with his added commentary. He started a fund to offer support to Ma Yan and other young students in the province of Ningxia. Here is an excerpt,

Excerpt: "Mom said to me: ‘My child, I have something to tell you. I’m afraid that this is the last time you can go to school.’ I opened my eyes wide in astonishment, stared at her and said ‘How can you say such a thing to me? People cannot survive without knowledge these days. Even a peasant needs knowledge to work his land, or he will have no harvest.’

“Mom continued speaking: ‘With your brothers and you going to school, that makes three. Your father is the only one who works. We cannot afford to pay for you all. Your two brothers must continue their studies,’" explained Ma Yan.

"I then asked Mom: ‘Why do boys get to study and girls cannot?’ Mom replied: ‘You are still young, you do not understand. You’ll understand when you are older.’

“I want to study, Mom, I do not want to come back home. It would be so magnificent if I could stay at school forever,” said Ma Yan.

He pitched her tent cont.

Kirk Gayle has supplied more to the story of Gen. 12:8. He cites,

And here's from Rabbi Jeff Forsythe's notes on Midrash Beraishis Raba's teaching:

The Torah writes (Genesis 12:8) that Avraham prioritized his wife before himself. Avraham traveled and pitched "oheloH (his tent)." In Hebrew, the suffix "H" makes a noun possessive in the feminine gender (i.e "her" object). The masculine possessive comes with the vowel "O" as a suffix (i.e. "his" object). The Torah in Genesis 12:8 uses the strange combination of vowel "O" and the consonant "H" with the noun "ohel (tent)." The translation of the text as spoken is "his tent," and the translation of the text as written is "her tent." So what is the meaning of the Torah's placing of this unusual "O" and "H" together? The midrash explains that Avraham first pitched the tent of Sara, his wife, before he pitched his own. We see this because the "H" is a consonant which is more dominant in Hebrew grammar than a vowel ("O"). The Torah is teaching us that whenever a husband needs to do something for himself and his wife, he must take care of his wife's needs first. This will apply to all forms of help, respect, kindness and consideration for his wife.

Kurk also adds some further resources on women and Bible translation. This conversation will continue as I receive more information on this topic every day.

Robert Morrison: The Chinese Bible

Robert Morrison, 1782 - 1834, a missionary of the London Missionary Society contributed an enormous amount to knowledge of Chinese in England. During his life he baptised only ten converts. His translation of the Bible into Chinese, the first complete translation, was published in 1823. For a scholarly account of his life read his bibliography and refer to the Morrison Collection on the Babelstone site.

The bicentenary of Morrison's arrival in China was celebrated in Hong Kong and in Washington in 2007,

The second ‘remarkable’ characteristic was the aim of the conference, namely to commemorate the bicentenary of Robert Morrison’s arrival to China. The question beckons why a missionary should be commemorated whose calling produced only the slimmest of concrete returns. A missionary without a sizeable number of converts would certainly have to be regarded as a failure; common sense would seem to dictate.

Furthermore, Morrison is all too often remembered as a hard-hearted hermit who neglected his family in order to compete with Marshman, his arch-rival in Serampore (India), in a race to complete the first translation of the Bible into Chinese. Such fanaticism would hardly bode well for future remembrance.

The conference, however, produced fascinating insight into aspects of Robert Morrison’s private - as well as professional – life, dispelling his rather sombre reputation as insubstantial. In particular the keynote paper by Barton Starr, as well as the insight provided by Christopher Hancock painted a much more nuanced portrait of Morrison, revealing a person capable of a high degree of tolerance as well as tender affection.

This biography presents the other translation and scholarly work that he was involved in and explains his importance to our knowledge of Chinese - English relations during that era.

Robert Morrison:

- born near Morpeth, Northumberland, England, 1782; grew up in Newcastle-upon-Tyne; following a rudimentary education, apprenticed to his father as a last and boot-tree maker; joined the Presbyterian church, 1798; decided to prepare for missionary work; studied at Hoxton Academy (later Highbury College), London, 1803; studied at the Missionary Academy, Gosport, Hampshire, 1804; appointed by the London Missionary Society (LMS) and studied medicine, astronomy and Chinese in London, 1805;

- ordained and sailed via Philadelphia and New York to Canton, 1807; pioneering Protestant missionary to China, though he saw few conversions himself; married Mary Morton (1791-1821), daughter of an East India Company surgeon, in Macau, 1809;

- became translator to the East India Company's factory in Canton, securing a legal basis for residence and a means of supporting himself, 1809; completed the translation of the New Testament into Chinese, 1813; it was printed, 1814; viewed with hostility by Chinese officials; baptised the first Protestant Chinese Christian, 1814;

- served as translator on Lord Amherst's abortive embassy to Peking (Beijing), 1816-1817; returned to Canton, 1817; on the completion of his Anglo-Chinese dictionary, received the degree of Doctor of Divinity, University of Glasgow, 1817; with William Milne (1785-1822) founded the Anglo-Chinese College, Malacca, for training missionaries in the Far East, 1818; with Milne, completed the translation of the Bible, 1819; visited Malacca, 1823; travelled to England, 1823-1824; Fellow of the Royal Society, 1824;

- helped to established the short-lived Language Institution in London; ordained the first Chinese native pastor, 1825; married Eliza Armstrong (1795-1874), 1825; left England and returned to Canton, 1826; died at Canton, 1834. Publications include: Dictionary of the Chinese Language (1815-1823); Grammar of the Chinese Language (1815); Chinese Bible and numerous Chinese tracts, translations, and works on philology. His son from his first marriage, John Robert Morrison (1814-1843), succeeded his father at the East India Company and became secretary to the Hong Kong government.

For an excellent scholarly book on Anglo-Chinese relations at the time, I would recommend The Collision of Two Civilizations: Immobile Empire.

For information on contemporary Chinese Bible translations see this.

A bibliography of Morrison's works. Anyone interested in linguistics will enjoy perusing this list!

The language Jesus spoke

Jim Davila has posted on the Syrian village which still speaks Aramaic. Here is a favourite children's book recently translated into Aramaic. Malkuno Zcuro is The Little Prince in Aramaic.

Aramaic also appears on the Wind Tower at Regent College in Vancouver. The Lord's Prayer is written in Aramaic down the side.

Syriac is also notable for being one of the scripts on the Xian Stele in China, as well as on the tombstones in Quangzhou. (I have not found and image for this yet.)

(Oddly the Estrangelo Syriac script also appears on the bookplate for the Gleason Moss Collection of H.A. Gleason, Jr., who was my first and well-loved linguistics professor. His father was the botanist H.A. Gleason. Don't ask me how I know this, but somewhere there is a larger image of this tiny one. I seem to have lost it.)

Francis Siewart

Many thanks to El Shaddai for mentioning Francis Siewart of the Amplified Bible.

The story of the Amplified Bible is a remarkable story of faith, hope, and love. It's the story of a woman, a foundation, a committee, and a publisher. Commitment, energy, enthusiasm, and giftedness--these are the words that paint the picture, the picture of the making of a translation.

Frances Siewert (Litt. B., B.D., M.A., Litt. D.) was a woman with an intense dedication to the study of the Bible. It was Mrs. Siewert (1881-1967) who laid the foundation of the Amplified Bible, devoting her life to a familiarity with the Bible, with the Hebrew and Greek languages, and with the cultural and archaeological background of Biblical times, which would result in the publication of this unique translation.

Remembered by The Lockman Foundation for her long life of tireless devotion to God, her expertise in the Greek language, and for her impressive knowledge concerning Scripture, Mrs. Frances Siewert went home to be with the Lord late Wednesday night, March 29, 1967. As the official Research Secretary of the Amplified Bibleproject, Mrs. Siewert displayed her tremendous passion for the Lord. This passion shown brightly throughout her monumental task of laying the translation foundation for the Amplified Bible.

Born in 1881, Mrs. Siewert (Litt. B., B.D., M.A., Litt. D.) dedicated her life to the intensive study of the Scriptures as well as to the cultural and archaeological background of biblical times. When asked by The Lockman Foundation in 1956 to recount, in her own words, her long journey as a Christian, Mrs. Siewert submitted the following amazing list concerning her life as a Christian to that point:

At six years of age knew scores of hymns and Bible verses.
At ten passed an oral examination on the Catechism.
At fifteen entered the academy of Pacific University, deeply religious atmosphere, compulsory Bible study.
At seventeen was meeting regularly with classmates to help them prepare for their Bible lessons.
At eighteen entered Willamette University. Elected president of the Y.W.C.A. under intensely spiritual stimulus. Elected editor of the Willamette Collegian by unanimous vote of all factions of the student body. (With no Bible in Willamette’s curriculum, she started a campaign to have it introduced, which authorities honored and was graduated at barely twenty with the degree of Bachelor of Literature, "cum laude.")
At twenty-two married a minister, who was a brilliant Greek student.
At twenty-four began helping ministers with their public written work, religious authors and editors with their manuscripts, writing stories for Sunday School material, some to be translated into German. Later, articles for such periodicals as the Sunday School Times.
At twenty-nine received Master of Arts degree from Willamette University. Thesis subject, "The Effect of the Bible on English Language."
At thirty-two received bachelor of divinity degree from Schuylkill Seminary (to which the credits had been transferred to make the graduation of a woman possible).
At thirty-three teaching Bible to girls and women on campus at the University of Washington, downtown in Seattle from city’s high schools and factories.
At thirty-six teaching young people and teachers of Bible in Denver, Colorado.
At forty teaching Bible daily in Clay County High School, Kansas, sixteen communities represented. In constant demand for Bible lectures at clubs, conventions, and in organized classes -- 254 such talks in one year. In meantime, completed seventeen reading courses at University of Indiana, and earned considerable credit in Psychology and teacher training at Kansas State College. Studied all of the courses pertinent to Bible teaching.
In 1940 left a widow. Devoted full time to biblical research for ministers and religious writers.
From 1952 to the present (1956) devoted time entirely to the translation task now in hand, with the work of the Gospel of John, which preceded it.

For all her immense educational preparation and thorough knowledge of Scripture, Mrs. Siewert always remained a humble servant of the Lord. In correspondence dated Sept. 8, 1954 to The Lockman Foundation President and Founder, F. Dewey Lockman, she stated, "Every day, almost, I find myself bubbling with the thrill of discovering some shade of meaning in the original Greek that had never been evident to me before. I have averaged 4 hours a day of serious Bible study since 1914, when I was already a theological seminary graduate, and yet I am finding daily evidence of the fact that there are countless Scripture passages which have been obscure to me until now."

He pitched her tent

I only have time for a very short thought. Before the end of the summer one should take a moment to think of a curious challenge in Bible translation regarding the pitching of a tent.

In Genesis 12:8, the Hebrew text says about Abraham, "and he pitched her tent." I know of no translation which honours the Masoretic text in this verse. They all record simply, "and pitched his tent."

"He pitched his tent" (Bereishit 12:8). The spelling, however, is OHELOH, which means "her tent". From here, we learn that Abraham first pitched Sarah's tent and, only after he had looked after her needs, did he pitch his own tent (Midrash Aggada, Bereishit 12:13). Lech Lecha

Velveteen Rabbi discusses her language lessons and struggles with trying to use gender properly in Hebrew.

Speaking inTongues:

The History of Language. This was a great TV show that I saw recently featuring not only Peter Ladefoged but also Salikoko Mufwene among others. Let's not forget Chomsky. I noticed that an internet friend, Peter T. Daniels, was a consultant for this series.

Currently there are more than 6,000 languages spoken around the world. This five-part series traces the history and evolution of language and attendant theories and controversies while evaluating the scope of linguistic diversity, the dissemination of language, the expansion of language into written form, and the life cycle of language. Prominent figures in the field of linguistics—Noam Chomsky, John McWhorter, and Peter Ladefoged, to name only three—are featured. 5-part series, 48 minutes each.

One striking fact was that out of 6,000 languages in existence today, only 600 will survive as living languages into the next century. Touchingly, Ladefoged talked about the reasons why the younger generation do not carry on the language of their parents. He spoke of the enormous loss of ecological diversity.

Mufwene injected some realism into the discussion by suggesting linguists should show more concern about the people and maybe a little less about the dying languages. It is not always to the benefit of the users of the language to be speakers of a minority language. The cost may be high.

I highly recommend this series but I don't know when it will be available elsewhere.

Not lording it over 1 Peter 5:3

Once again there has been a post on Between Two Worlds on 1 Tim. 2:12 featuring Dr. Kostenberger's interpretation of that verse. It is interesting to me that no less than 15 other blogs have linked to that post. It indicates that there is a strong thirst for a justification for restricting women's roles.

I entered the fray and as usual have found that my knowledge is deepened as I peruse other resources for ways to present this topic to the non-reader of Greek.

Here is where to start. The entries from the BDAG and Louw and Nida lexicons,

“to assume a stance of independent authority, give orders to, dictate to” (BDAG 150). Louw and Nida elaborate further, suggesting that the appropriate rendering for authenteo in 1 Tim 2:12 is “to control, to domineer” or “to control in a domineering manner” (37.21).

Next, one can look at the primary evidence. I have done so. However, to save you time, we can note that Dr. Kostenberger remarks that there are only one or two occurrences of this word early enough to be used as evidence. The one certain citation is listed in the original study by Baldwin under the meaning of "to compel, to influence someone." and Grudem agrees with the translation "compel." (Ev. Fem & Biblical Truth. page 677 - 680.) According to Grudem other translators suggest "prevail" and mention that this is a hostile relationship involving insolence.

The other occurrence of authenteo at the time, in Philodemus, is now agreed upon as reconstructed with meaning unknown. That is why Dr. Kostenberger hesitates to claim two occurrences. Later evidence demonstrates that authenteo tends to have a negative connotation, more often than not.

Third, Dr. Kostenberger claims that the two verbs in 1 Tim. 2:12 must either both have a negative connotation or both a positive connotation. Most people agree with this. However, where Dr. Kostenberger says that didaskein "virtually always" has a positive connotation, others note that in Titus 1:11, didaskein does have a negative connotation. Therefore, it is more likely that authenteo and didaskein both have a negative connotation in this verse.

Fourth, Dr. Kostenberger assumes that the meaning of authentein is somewhat synonymous with having a leadership role in the church. However, previous translations show that this is a recent assumption. The Latin Vulgate has dominare and Luther's Bible has herrschen - "to lord it over."

In 1 Peter 5:3 these two words dominare and herrschen are found again. For both Jerome and Luther, the word in 1 Tim. 2:12 was not a synonym for pastoring but was a synonym for "domineering" over someone else, as in 1 Peter 5:3,

not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. ESV

These are not translations of the same word in Greek. 1 Tim. 2:12 has authenteo and 1 Peter 5:3 has katakurieuo. However, we can say that Jerome and Luther thought that these words were synonymous and respectively translated both these words identically with a word meaning "to lord it over."

How did the English translations come to have "have authority" in 1 Tim. 2:12 then? In 1516, Erasmus provided the Greek text of the New Testament in printed form in parallel with his translation into Latin. He translated authenteo as "authoritatem usurpare." The Latin lexicons list usurpare as "use, seize, grab, take, have, exercise." From that, some translators derived the meaning "to have authority" and others, such as the KJV, as "to usurp authority."

I suggest that 1 Tim. 2 :12 ought to properly be translated as,

I do not permit a woman to teach or to domineer over a man; rather, she is to be quiet.

I am aware that this does not resolve all the hermeneutical and pragmatic difficulties of the passage. However it does provide us with a starting place.

For further reading, I suggest

Belleville, Linda. Teaching and Usurping Authority: 1 Timothy 2:11-15" (Ch 12) in Discovering Biblical Equality.

And these posts by Ben Witherington and Emily Hunter McGowin.

The ESV: A woman's Bible, not

Update: Dr. Packer told me a few years ago that there was a special effort being made to market the ESV in China, and now we know its true.
----

There have been several posts on the ESV again. I would like to explain why I cannot endorse this translation myself. I understand that many people will not share my view, but nonetheless, there are few enough women who review Bibles, so bear with me.

First, the ESV is a revision of the RSV and the KJV before that. Therefore, it inherits some of the very positive aspects of those translations. These would include the literal and literary qualities of the KJV. The KJV was known for not inserting implied wording into the translation any more than absolutely necessary to make the English grammatical. It was also tested for readability, a sense of rhythm and flow, and use of poetic and emotive language. It was both literal and literary.

The ESV inherits some of these qualities. It retains some of the original KJV style but not always successfully. Literalness also is retained in a very uneven way, so one is never really assured of whether a phrase is literal or not. For example,

No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. ESV

No one has ever seen God, but the one and only [Son], who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known. TNIV

No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father's heart, who has made him known. NRSV

No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. KJV

In moving away from the KJV, the ESV has not settled on a successful update for the archaic "in the bosom." The NRSV and the TNIV have been more successful theologically.

The overall treatment of gender in the ESV is not "transparent to the Greek." Here is what the preface of the ESV says,

[T]he words “man” and “men” are retained where a male meaning component is part of the original Greek or Hebrew. Likewise, the word “man” has been retained where the original text intends to convey a clear contrast between “God” on the one hand and “man” on the other hand, with “man” being used in the collective sense of the whole human race (see Luke 2:52).

If, for simplicity's sake, we assume for the purposes of this exercise that the Greek word anthropos means a "human being" and aner means a "male adult human being," we can see how the ESV is not transparent to the Greek. Let's look at 1 Tim. 2.

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people (anthropos) 1 Tim. 2:1

I desire then that in every place the men (aner) should pray, lifting holy hands 1 Tim. 2:8


there is one mediator between God and men (anthropos), the man (anthropos) Christ Jesus. 1 Tim. 2:5.

This chapter is not transparent to the Greek in respect to words for human beings. How does this work in other passages?

For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s (anthropos) gospel, For I did not receive it from any man (anthropos), nor was I taught it, Gal. 1:11-12

and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men (anthropos) who will be able to teach others also. 2 Tim. 2:2

When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men (anthropos)." ... he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers Eph. 4:8

In each of these passages, the Greek word is anthropos and could very well apply equally to women as well as men, just as 1 Tim. 2:1 also applies to women. There is no 'clear contrast between “God” on the one hand and “man” on the other hand' and one is at loss as to whether to interpret these verses as applying to "men" or to the human race.

There are ministries and websites that use these verses and limit teaching ministry to men. It is hard to say what role these verses play. However, New Frontiers is known for saying "We are working with teams of gifted men."

This further example shows once again how little one can say that the ESV is "transparent to the Greek."

For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man (anthropos), but men (anthropos) spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. 2 Peter 1:21

he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man (aner), but of God. John 1:12-13.

And so, over and over again, in verses where teaching or prophecy or gifts of the Spirit are mentioned, the word which normally means "human being" is translated as "man." This will make little difference to a man, since he is both "man" and "human" but how about women, are they only human when the text is translated "people" or do all occurrences of "man" refer to women also? Either, one must use an interlinear or one must guess, or just take someone else's word for it.

I cannot recommend the ESV to a woman.

Note: I acknowledge that I have not included a discussion of the footnotes in this post. In some cases, the footnotes ameliorate the situation, but not consistently.

Dear Molly, guess what

you are still a homeschooling mom. Just because the children also go to school does not mean that you are not a homeschooling mom. Maybe you don't want to hear this, but the kids will always need to be read to - they will need help with homework and projects, music lessons or sports. They will still require an awful lot of time, but that time will shift from morning to evening.

I know some homeschooling moms and just on purely anecdotal evidence, I think my relationship with my kids is as close and loving and cuddly and healthy as anyone else's. Your children will need to be fed and hugged and bandaided and rocked, for ever.

And don't anyone take me to the woodshed for not letting my kids leave home. They have more experience under their belts than I would want for most people in a lifetime.

Helen Spurrell

Many thanks to El Shaddai Edwards, Rick Mansfield and David Reimer for the ongoing success of this series on women Bible translators. Rick mentioned Helen Spurrell in a comment on El Shaddai's blog. I will be getting to Frances Siewert soon.

In Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study by F. Danker, page 188, we can read,

The nineteenth century saw a number of noncommittee type versions of the Bible, but the most noteworthy is a version of the Old Testament, published in 1885, whose claim fo fame was obscured by the prestige of the RV, which apeared in the same year.

At the age of fifty, Helen Spurrell, already accomplished in music, painting, and sculpture, decided to learn Hebrew with a view to translating the Bible of Israel. using the unpointed Hebrew text as her base, "she made free use," observes Pope, "of the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint version, substituting their readings for that of the Hebrew text in a number of passages ... She printed her text in paragraphs, not in verses, with the poetical passages laid out as poetry - devices that had just been adopted in the Revised Version.

Here is the only excerpt that I can find from her translation, Psalm 119:150-151,

"When designing pursuers approached me, who are far from thy law;
then Thou, O Jehovah, wast near, with all thy faithful commandments..." Surrell

They draw nigh that follow after mischief: they are far from thy law.
Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth. KJV

To get some sense of her theology we can read,

In her translation of the Old Testament Scriptures, Helen Spurrell expressed the following wish for all who should read her translation: "May very many exclaim, as the translator has often done when studying numerous passages in the original, I have found the Messiah!"

She is also mentioned in the introduction to Let Her Speak for Herself by Marion Taylor and Heather Weir. Anyone interested in women in biblical scholarship will find this book fascinating reading.