Women and Religion
A few days ago I chanced across an interesting document. I was doing genealogical research on the Internet and entered the name of one of my great grandfathers into the search engine at Alta Vista. One of the hits was a newsletter type of page for a large religious organization. I don't mean a church, I mean a whole group of churches - one of the "biggies" as in Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, etc. I won't name the organization.
Just below the line that contained the name of my grandfather, there were other words which caught my attention. While not what most would call a feminist, I absolutely believe that women are at least equal to men intellectually and spiritually. While men are physically stronger as a whole, women tend to be stronger emotionally. With this in mind, what I read was that a man had been elected to the position of vice president even though he didn't take a very strong stand against abortion or against women in the pulpit.
I was a bit intrigued by what I read so I read a bit more. Most of that particular article was a lamenting the fact that even though the church had gained four million members between 1950 and 1970, they had lost three million between 1970 and 1990. As soon as I read it, I couldn't help but think "With that attitude towards women, what do you expect?"
Considering that almost half the households in America during the last thirty years were headed by women, how can they expect to keep folks in their churches if they consider women to be second-class citizens? I was tempted to try and find an email address for someone in this organization and let him know why his membership has fallen, but I really don't think he would listen.
So, the chicken or the egg? Has membership fallen because morality is low? Or has morality fallen because of the lower membership? We tend to want to think that the former is true. We blame music, movies, television programs, schools, and parents for the way people behave. While I agree that parents are a main source of the problem, I think much of it is the church. Women are keeping their families away from churches that do not recognize them as capable care-givers.
I believe that religion is a necessity. Religion teaches us that we must be nice considerate neighbors. We learn that we should not take what is not ours - that we should not even desire it. But if we want women in our churches, we need to treat them with a bit more respect and a bit less patronizing.
Young women are not as obedient as they once were. They are educated. They develop their own opinions much earlier. They do not believe that men are better. They go to church and watch and listen while elders (by example) try to teach them that women cannot lead the community. They leave church and they don't go back.
I spent too many years making my own decisions and taking care of my family to believe that women are not capable of leadership. I have every reason to believe that women are very good leaders. A woman's first thought is for the safety of her family. If that includes an extended family made up of the members of an organization, a city, a state, or a country; so much the better. Women will make war against hurtful people; but not for money, power or glory if it means hurting her family.
A human female tends to her family, friends and neighbors as a grizzly to her cubs. A woman tending to the spiritual needs of her flock would be an awesome entity.
After reading the article and taking a few days to mull over its contents, I have realized why I pulled away from organized religion. It's too bad that the churches cannot change as quickly as the times. If I didn't have to be treated as a non-entity I would enjoy going to church. I think the elders should try to make an entry into the 21st century with the realization the women are part of the human race.
"The times, they are a-changin'."
