For several years as a Christmas gift my father subscribed me to the Economist Magazine. In an article (2016) entitled “Drawbridges Up.” The article prophetically surmised that the world is no longer divided between the left and right ideologies of more government and less government rather it is between “drawbridges down” and “drawbridges up,” where the former understands trade “makes the world richer,” and the latter sees it as a threat. Where the former sees the world as a beautiful place to be embraced and the latter sees only sees hazards and enemies to be resisted by raising draw bridges, building walls, and keeping undesirables out even if that means surrendering established human rights.
The article concludes that while “the drawbridge-uppers have all the momentum, time is not on their side. Young voters, who tend to be better educated than their elders, have more open attitudes. “Millennials nearly everywhere are more open than their parents on everything from trade and immigration to personal and moral behaviour.”[1] Eight years later it would appear while the basic analysis was “spot on” the prognosis that “draw bridges up” might be short lived was perhaps overreaching.
Alas I am not a politician nor an economist, but I can testify that similar trends are playing out in the broader evangelical church. In the 70s with my generation of boomers there was a consensus of what was right and wrong according to established orthodox beliefs and practices. Growing up for most of my church life I built my faith with the straw and mortar of beliefs many of which were unique to classical Pentecostalism. Others were freely borrowed from evangelicals as Pentecostals and evangelicals have maintained a sometimes uncomfortable if not strained relationship. I believed the Bible was inerrant, that tongues were the evidence of Spirit Baptism, that the rapture was an imminent reality, that there was no place for abortion and the list could go on. My growth as a Christian meant deepening those beliefs but seldom did I entertain challenging them. Rather my undergraduate education in the mid 70s was largely designed to defend them.
40 years later much has changed. While this current generation are pushing the bridges down. Boomers, my generation who still have money and power are fighting harder than ever to stay in control of the drawbridges effectively raising them quickly whenever a perceived threat provokes them. For example, while my generation (55+) is generally confident that self-identified LGBTQ+ people are not welcome in the Kingdom of God, Millennials wonder why so much emotional energy is spent on things the Bible has very little to say at the expense of other things that the Bible has very much to say – poverty, justice, mercy and even creation care.
The three conference papers I abridge here were all conference papers that represent critical conversations for the Pentecostal church moving forward today, but unfortunately, they are marked by an unHoly hush.
Holy Hush #1 Domestic/Sexual violence
In 2021, I along with sociologist Valerie Hiebert, presented a paper to the Society of Pentecostal Studies entitled: “Eyes Wide Open Gathering up Shards of Stained Glass.” From a sociological and theological perspective, it dealt with the problem of domestic and sexual violence in the church. While there is not much written[2] or discussed on the subject in Canadian Pentecostal circles it does not mean there is not a problem. In my research on “Where have all the Bible College Students gone?” I can attest to victims of sexual/domestic abuse in our Pentecostal circles.
Hard to give a quick summary of the scope or origins of the problem. But in sum I point out,
Women were considered the foundation of the home. They were the paragon of moral virtue that kept their men and any children in check. If there was a problem in the marriage, the onus to find a ‘fix” was on her not her husband. Ipso facto should domestic violence occur, the woman was often both the victim and instigator. She was the unwitting instigator insomuch as there was probably something she did that brought on the abuse or could have done to have prevented the abuse.
A woman holds the key to success or failure in man; and man can give woman that lead which she, the weaker sex, needs in her God-given desire for purity” or… “fire the demons that sleeps in unsanctified men.”[3] “A woman may unconsciously cause her husband to resort even to crime in order to please her.”[4]
I need to pause and affirm it would be inaccurate and near impossible to say that such teaching in its varied modernized forms is the cause of domestic/sexual violence in the church. Unfortunately, it is equally impossible to deny, however inadvertently, it plays a role in sustaining, in particular among men, domestic violence both outside and in the church. As noted, “while male headship may not necessarily trip the switch of abuse, it can provide the wiring”.[5]
But the Bible says, many retort, “Husbands love, wives submit, that’s the biblical/cultural script or so women are reminded. After all it was not Adam who was deceived by the serpent. And it was not Adam’s fault that The Lord God said to the woman “your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you.” (Gen 3:16). Tragically this mischief with text has historically in many instances put a hold on any spiritual imagination being applied to the home or church. Subsequently, the potential for domestic abuse in the name of scripture remains unfettered in a largely incoherent biblical narrative.
I conclude with six talking points intended to spawn discussion in creating a theological path through the troubling waters of domestic violence.
First, … Early Pentecostals were many things, but few critics have argued that Pentecostals worked to impede the actions of the Holy Spirit. If there was a disconnect between what Scriptures taught and what the Spirit was saying to the church, to the chagrin of many churches on the conservative end of the spectrum, Pentecostals generally defaulted to the Spirit and then looked for a passage of scripture to justify their actions. Perhaps not a trusted practice of evangelical hermeneutics but following the Acts 15 account “to circumcise or not,” intuitively these fledging Pentecostals did not want to “put God to the test” by placing any yoke on the actions of the Spirit.[6]
Second, as we have passed the century mark in contemporary Pentecostalism it is nigh time to fully embrace the hermeneutical work of the likes of Kenneth Archer and others[7] who are attempting to bring/resurrect an indigenous Pentecostal hermeneutic in coherence with our historical communal participatory practices where the Spirit is liable to “burst through anyone” even if that means shattering long standing cultural practices. Unfortunately, like the Pharisees confronted by the healed lame man on the temple steps, too often current Pentecostals have reacted to the Spirit’s liberating antics with a fear of containment. A certain brand of “family values,” reinforced by selected Pauline teachings[8] has for too long worked as the new Temple to keep everyone in prescribed roles of authority where men write the rules and women bow in acquiesce. Maybe it is time to suspend the hierarchal precept of a “head of the household” in favor of a triadic model of Spirit, wife and husband in mutual and constant negotiation.
Third, I suggest that Pentecostals should hold in tension their celebrated triumphalist theology of glory with a palatable theology of the cross. Left alone, triumphalist theology is a fertile breeding ground for the “holy hush” of domestic violence. Without a theology of the cross, there is little to no space for the work of grieving, lamenting, repenting, and forgiving. Broken Pentecostal families too often follow the only visible path forward by hiding and/or covering their shame with whatever fig leaves they can find. Until the church embraces a healthy theology of the cross, there is little reason to hope that domestic violence in its ranks will abate. It is impossible to deal with the “problem” if there is no problem.
Fourth, we might use this opportunity as a looking glass to dismantle other class distinctions[9] that continue to dog Pentecostalism as it moves forward. As Pentecostals we hold our banner high that the Spirit has been poured out on all flesh but my observation after 40 years in this field of practice and belief is that apparently some flesh is more deserving than other flesh. To this end let us stop scapegoating minority groups for our own brokenness. It is time to listen to what the Spirit is saying through the voices of the marginalized.
Fifth, let us embrace and affirmatively promote women in all places of church leadership, as yes, the Spirit leads them. This will not stop domestic violence, but it will go a long way to empower and signal women as essential contributors in the work of Spirit. It will embolden all of us to say “no” whenever and wherever sexism, chauvinism, and patronizing voices rear their diminutive heads.[10]
Sixth, let us resist the polarizing dualism of patriarchalism and feminism. Like most dualisms, this is destructive. Rejecting patriarchalism does not make one a feminist (whatever that means). And describing oneself as a feminist does not mean one has fallen down the a slippery slope. There is no slope, there are only people who with the help of the Spirit stand in dignified and mutual relation to each other. In our time, for that to happen there will be grieving, tears, and misunderstanding but it could also lead us home.
Holy Hush Number 2.: Abortion
As we are dragged into more political campaigns in the USA (2024) and Canada (2025?) abortion is destined to become a political football once again. It is a subject that needs to be updated constantly spiking as it did during the presidency of Trump and later with the overturning of Roe-vs Wade. It wasn’t always so. The irony is that it was not politicized until the late 70s. even after the controversial passing of Roe vs. Wade in 1971, the Southern Baptist Convention affirmed abortion under a wide range of circumstances. It really was not until the creation of the Moral Majority in the late 70s that abortion became a political lightening rod, in part to prevent President Carter from getting a second term in office.
I have written about this, and subsequently had to write a letter to a constituency member of Providence who felt my views should be brought to the Board of Governors and I be disciplined. As I said in an earlier post, I am Pro-life not Pro-Birth a distinction that I think is well articulated by Tim Alberta, albeit with references that are largely American.
"The message of abortion as a moral evil, as an affront to the loving God who made humanity in His own image, has proven curiously ineffective. Why?
For one thing, that message seems wildly inconsistent with the politics otherwise practiced by those who claim the ‘pro-life” mantel. If one is driven to electoral advocacy by the conviction that mankind bears the image of God, why stop at opposing abortion. What about the shunning of refugees?...What about the hollowing out of programs that feed hungry kids? What about the lifelong incarceration of nonviolent offenders and the wrongful execution of the innocent? What about the Darwinist health-care system that prices out sick people and denies treatment to poor people…what about the fact that, 2020 guns had become the number one cause of death for children in the United States…Indeed, America set another new record for school shootings in 2022, and the evangelical movement was silent.”[11]
Holy hush #3 LGBTQ+
In our circles this is a conversation to proceed at your own risk. Here in Winnipeg another Mennonite Brethren church was recently defrocked because of public openness to gays worshipping in their midst. Recently I had an adjunct contract at another institution to teach a single course on the book of Romans rescinded because it was deemed I was not safe to teach the students ultimately because of a paper I presented at SPS and later made available online through Academia.edu. The conversation started because I included in the syllabus as a supplementary textbook the text, Romans Disarmed: Resisting Empire/Demanding Justice by Canadian scholars Sylvia Keesmaat and Brian Walsh. The issue centered on their chapter “Imperial Sexuality and Covenantal Faithfulness,” Which among other things speaks to Romans 1:26,27. Who knew these verses would be Paul’s most important contribution to the church. And later it was also determined that my SPS article was too sympathetic to LGBTQ+ Christians. The guts of that paper I included in a previous blog based on the writings of Ivan Illich. The actual full-length paper on the parable of the Good Samaritan pushes the question who is my neighbour by including a case study from a pastor and a personal acquaintance that had to make the decision whether to officiate the marriage of a gay couple in his church.
The merits, of my article are fully up for debate. That is the point of these conferences, namely to walk through issues with peers. For me debating is not an issue in fact it is healthy, though I stand by what I wrote. What I lament at this stage in my faith journey is the ongoing effort to prop up the drawbridges in an effort to protect God and his church? Is that our job? My doctoral dissertation of 1995 examined the quest of authority in the church, and I concluded that when all is said and done pragmatism plays a critical role in our approach to theology. 30 years later I stand by that conclusion but today I am modifying my position and say it is “fear driven pragmatism” that has the momentum at this point. Keep the bridges up, circle the wagons as they used to say. But fortunately, we will not have the last say. It is not my church.
[1] “Drawbridges up,” The Economist (July 30th -August 5th, 2016): 18.
[2] Kristy Bennet-Dahms a graduate of Master’s college, nee EPBC, is currently doing important graduate work on the effects of power and abuse in the church.
[3] “Concerning Divorce”, Pentecostal Testimony (March 15, 1944).
[4] D.N. Buntain. “The Christian Wife”, Pentecostal Testimony (Dec. 5, 1940). This was and is stil the often unspoken response to rape even in the church.
[5]Julia Baird with Hayley Gleason, 'Submit to your husbands': Women told to endure domestic violence in the name of God”, ABC News https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-18/domestic-violence-church submit-to-husbands/8652028 In Tim Alberta’s carefully researched recent book The Kingdom, the Power and the Glory: American Evangelicals in an Age of Extremism, he submits that currently this issue is liable to split the Southern Baptist denomination in two.” (Harper Press, 2023):pp. 371-398.
[6] While this prophetic imagination represented perhaps the first 10 years of Pentecostalism, it did not take long for Pentecostals to acclimatize themselves to fundamentalist/evangelical ethos of their day that looked to Scripture as a prescribed propositional blueprint for how to live their life. And for those in this camp the evidence was clear. Women belonged in the home. “Above all, the Christian wife must be a good housekeeper. She must remember that whatever other qualities she may possess, that she cannot have a happy husband if she neglects her home for any other thing. She must keep the dishes washed, the floors cleaned, the beds made, and have the meals on time…No amount of curls, frills or smiles can make up for failure in the kitchen. The happiest husbands are those me who have been fortunate enough to have married a clear-minded Christian girl whose ambition was, and is, to be the best housekeeper in the land.” D.N. Buntain "The Christian Wife," Pentecostal Testimony (December 15, 1940). 3.
[7] In what has been informally dubbed the Cleveland School of hermeneutics, Archer and others are committed to interpreting the Bible through the lens of the Spirit in cooperation with the community and not interpreting the Spirit through the lens of the Bible. The result is a dynamic reading of Scripture that is current and confessional. See Kenneth J. Archer, A Pentecostal Hermeneutic: Spirit, Scripture and Community, CPT Press (2005).
[8] Many like to literally cite Paul’s admonition in 1 Corinthians 4 that women should be silent in church or 1 Tim 2:12 ff that suggests “women should not exercise authority over men and will be saved through childbirth provided they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty” as being faithful to an infallible and literal Bible. Never mind that no one actually practices this literally.
[9] I would name some examples but inevitably a “tribe” will show up that the reader may not approve, and the conversation ends.
[10] To quote Pastor and Quaker Philip Gulley, “The absence of women in leadership has created a church in which the worst attributes of men have grown unchecked - the manipulation of process to gain personal power, the abuse of children, the unrelenting patriarchy that values rank and privilege at the expense of equality and justice, not to mention the rampant sexual harassment of women that has only recently come to light. When the moderating influence of women is excluded, religious institutions become unbalanced and unhealthy. Just as any church that failed to cultivate the masculine perspective would be out of balance, so has the church’s historic marginalization of women harmed its well-being. One has only to look at the scandals of abuse plaguing the church and culture to see firsthand the staggering cost of male privilege” Unlearning God: How Unbelieving Helped me Believe, Convergent Books (2018) p.21.
[11] Alberta, The Kingdom, the Power and the Glory, p309.
Comments