Showing posts with label gender. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gender. Show all posts

Monday, March 9, 2015

JPL Computers

Image courtesy: NASA/JPL-Caltech; JPL photo number P-163.1

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) is a facility in Los Angeles County, California that can trace its history to the early 1940s. At that time, rocket motors were a new development and the lab was an arm of the American military. A little known fact about the early years of JPL gives insight into both computing power and gender roles in America during that era.

In "the 1940s and 1950s, JPL used the word 'computer' to refer to a person rather than a machine."2 Although the agency was developed exclusively by men, and all of the leadership consisted of men, it was an "all-female computer team . . . that [was] responsible for doing all the math by hand required to plot satellite trajectories and other scientific calculations."3 Many of these women had been recruited right out of high school.4 Slide-rules, pencils, and paper were the tools of this team as digital computers were only in developmental stages at that time.5 A group similar to the one pictured here was the team who made it possible for Explorer 1 to be the first satellite launched by the United States when it was sent into space on January 31, 1958.6

Today, NASA and the JPL uses even larger teams of people to analyze data. At the website http://beamartian.jpl.nasa.gov/, more than 54,000 men and women have signed up to use their personal computers to analyze data sent to earth by the Mars Rover.7


1 http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/explorer/computers.html; Page Last Updated: January 3, 2008; Page Editor: Susan Watanabe; NASA Official: Brian Dunbar
2 http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/explorer/computers.html
3 http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/explorer/computers.html
4 http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/explorer/computers.html
5 http://www.computerhistory.org/timeline/?category=cmptr
6 http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/explorer/explorer-overview.html
7 http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2010-366

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

A Daughter in the Church

One of my daughters called me the other day. She asked me some questions about why we read words like, "I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet." (1 Timothy 2:12) and apply them in our present context but read words like "I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes . . ." and do not apply them in our present context.

I thought about all that I had to say on this topic and decided that I would at least start by saying something on this site. There are many other portions of the Bible that could be added to this list of "why this but not this?" Furthermore, we ignore much of the Bible with the practicalities of what we do: "But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved." (1 Corinthians 12:5) or "Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God" (Philippians 4:6). On the other hand, we put a much greater emphasis on some verses than seems warranted:
"Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." (1 Corinthians 14:34-35)
This latter text is very interesting for, we do not actually apply it by requiring that women be silent in our meetings of the church, yet we use it as evidence in other discussions about how we will conduct ourselves in our gatherings and in the leadership structures. Some biblical scholars have good evidence to suggest that these verses are an editorial commentary added by a scribe1; but, even if we allow that they are part of Paul's original writing, we must read them next to words of Paul in which he encourages both men and women to teach, pray, and prophesy. Fee says, "these verses [1 Corinthians 14:34-35] stand in obvious contradiction to 11:2-16, where it is assumed without reproof that women pray and prophesy in the assembly."

More must also be said about the sloppy way in which we interpret our Bibles. I have previously blogged on how easy it is to open a few passages of scripture, read them, and then ask, "What does the Bible have to say about this?" It is much harder, but much more accurate, to "appeal instead to the 'broad sweep of Scripture' and to generalities regarding justice, love, and common humanity."2

What else would I want my daughter to investigate? I would want her to understand this statement by the Spirit filled, evangelical scholar, Gordon D. Fee.
Perhaps the worst thing the evangelical tradition has done on gender matters is to isolate them from the bigger picture of biblical theology. Indeed, I think we are destined for continual trouble if we do not start where Paul does: not with isolated statements addressed to contingent situations, but with Paul's theology of the new creation, the coming of God's eschatological rule inaugurated by Christ – especially through his death and resurrection – and the gift of the Spirit.
   
Two texts in particular serve as a proper starting point here. First, 2 Corinthians 5:14-17, where Paul argues with the Corinthians who are calling into question both his gospel of a crucified Messiah and his cruciform apostleship. He responds that the new creation brought about by Christ's death and resurrection nullifies one's viewing anything any longer from the age old point of view (Gk. kata sarka, "according to the flesh"). Christ's death means that the whole human race has come under the sentence of death (v. 14), so that those who do live (in God's new order) now live for the one who died for them and was raised again (v. 15). The result, he goes on, is that from this point on, to view either Christ or anyone/anything else from a perspective that is "according to the flesh" is no longer valid (v. 16). Why? Because being in Christ means that one belongs to the new creation: the old has gone, the new has come (v. 17). It doesn't take much reading of Paul to recognize that this radical, new order point of view – life marked by the cross – lies at the heart of everything he thinks and does.3

I want my daughter and all of us reading this post to begin to understand the culture into which the gospel came. Again, I call upon the excellent thinking of Gordon Fee.

As Demosthenes says in an offhanded, matter-of-fact way: "Mistresses we keep for the sake of pleasure, concubines for the daily care of the body, but wives to bear us legitimate children."
The idea that men and women might be equal partners in marriage simply did not exist, evidence for which can be seen in meals, which in all cultures serve as the great equalizer. In the Greek world, women scarcely ever joined their husbands and his friends at meals; and if they did, they did not recline at table (only the courtesans did that), but sat on benches at the end. And they were expected to leave after eating, when the conversation took a more public turn. It is especially difficult for most of us even to imagine our way back into such a culture, let alone to have any sense of feeling for it. Which is what makes what Paul actually says so counter-cultural in every way. . .4

I want my daughter to look at passages like Acts 16:3-5 in which Paul greets Priscilla and then Aquila and praises them because they risked their lives for him. He also greets the church that meets in their, not Aquila's, house. This is sure evidence that some things have already been transformed by the gospel. In Colossians 4:15 Paul greets Nympha and the church that meets in her house. In Acts 16:13-15, 40 we see that the first believers in Philippi met at Lydia's house.

I would suggest that my daughter read other great books on the subject such as Finally Feminist by John G. Stackhouse Jr. Then, I would ask my daughter to pray with me and ask that God might make each of us a suitable vessel for all of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. That, regardless of gender or the church context in which we reside, that each of us might work within those confines and teach, prophecy, counsel, pastor, lead, and love the people of God. May there be joy, love, grace, and unity in the churches of the Body of Christ.

1 On the inauthenticity of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, see Fee, God's Empowering Presence, 272-281.
2 Noll, Mark A. The Civil War as a Theological Crisis. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2006, p. 50 and also at http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=3403
3 (Hancock 2003, 64)
4 (Fee 2000, 68, 69)

Further Reading:
Fee, Gordon D. Listening to the Spirit in the Text. Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000.
Hancock, Maxine, ed. Christian Perspectives on Gender, Sexuality, and Community. Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 2003.
Stackhouse, John G. Jr. Finally Feminist. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.

Saturday, September 8, 2012

Women in Leadership

A young and godly woman in our church recently asked if I could direct her to some resources related to the roles of men and women in the church. She admitted to being confused by how people in the church speak of the issues. On the one hand we say that Jesus and Paul were quite revolutionary in their approach toward women. On the other hand we have Bible passages that suggest cultural constraints regarding women ought to be followed. I did my best to answer her question and I have written it up in the form of a blog that I am posting here today.

Cultural equivalency is an extremely challenging topic. Let me give you a few principles, a few of my conclusions, and then a book or two to follow-up.

The first struggle we have is where in the Bible we should start. If we start with 1 Corinthians 11:3-16 or 1 Timothy 2:12 and then look at other passages in light of these, we will likely have one mind-set as we come to the answers to our questions. If we start with Galatians 3:26-29 or Colossians 3:10, 11 (this passage does not explicitly mention women but taken together with what Paul says in Galatians we can see that the principles are the same) and then look at other passages in light of these, we will likely have another mind-set as we come to the answers to our questions. If we start with how Jesus spoke to the woman at the well (the very first person Jesus clearly tells that he is the Messiah), the woman caught in adultery (look at how he stoops down with her and writes in the earth - this would have been shocking for a Rabbi to get down to the level of a woman and the level of a sinner), or Mary, Martha, and other women whom he regularly discipled (women were the first to receive news of the resurrection - does this book-end the first part of Genesis where Eve is the first to sin?), what conclusions do we make? To me, these latter places (Galatians 3 in particular) are a better place to start rather than with the words of the Bible that deal with problem people in problem churches (such as 1 Corinthians 11 or 1 Timothy 2).

At the end of much study, I have concluded that, in the culture in which we live, Jesus wants women's voices to be heard in the church and in society. I believe that all leadership roles are open to men and women. I am prepared to stand before Jesus at the final judgement and say, "Lord, I have studied and tried to understand Your teaching and I have done my best to teach it to others. If I have erred, I have erred on the side of raising up all people."

For further reading, I would highly recommend the following books. Finally Feminist by John Stackhouse and Christian Perspectives on Gender, Sexuality, and Community by Maxine Hancock (editor).

I will also include a quote from Colossians Remixed (page 211) by Brian J. Walsh and Sylvia C. Keesmaat. In this section of the book, Walsh and Keesmaat relate how a conversation might have happened at Colossae as people read the letter to the Colossians and wrestled with the role of women in the church.

"Phoebe is a deacon in Cenchreae, Junia is a prominent apostle, Priscilla is a woman who teaches and proclaims the gospel equally with (some even think better than) her husband, Aquila, and many other women work hard to proclaim the gospel in their respective places," [Tychicus] said.1

Apphia remained skeptical, remarking that while women in leadership might go over in the larger metropolitan centers such as Rome or Corinth, it's a different story here in the Lycus Valley. But she trailed off as she realized that she was speaking to Nympha, not only a successful textile merchant but the leader of a house church in Laodicea, just ten miles from Colossae.

Tychicus added that he had heard the formulation "There is no longer Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and free also include "There is no longer male and female."2

Nympha pursued the point. "It's clear that Paul is undermining the structure of the household in the empire, especially in relation to slaves. We need to listen clearly to his words, for when he suggests that slaves be freed, he does so in the context of the whole household system by also mentioning both women and children. My fellow believers, you know that when we became part of this Christian community, we gave up these allegiances. You know that we all became part of a new household, which does not support the hierarchical economic structures of the empire but in which all exist for the benefit and mutual service of others. You all experienced the coming of the Spirit, promised to both old and young, sons and daughters, slaves and free. You know how Paul's teachings have challenged the very basis of our society by contradicting the emperor's edicts on compulsory marriage, by urging widows to remain single, by urging us all to choose a life free of the encumbrances of marriage.3 It is no surprise then that Paul is also challenging the basis of the paterfamilias, which the empire regards as fundamental and which we have replaced with a new household in Christ Jesus our Lord."

As she paused, the older Jewish brother slowly got to his feet. "Our sister is right," he said. "We should not let our fear of the emperor keep us from following the call of our brother Paul to end these worldly structures. We have suffered for this gospel before. It may be that we will suffer again. But we are subject to Jesus, not Caesar. And we are citizens of the kingdom of the beloved Son, not the empire.

"We now need to spend some time in prayer, so that we may wisely discern . . .

I hope all of this is helpful. Please don't hesitate to ask me questions about it or challenge my thinking in this area. We are all learning together.


1 Romans 16:1-12; Acts 18:26; Philippians 4:3; Colossians 3:15.
2 Galatians 3:28.
3 In the Leges luliae "widowers and divorcees of both sexes were expected to remarry after a period of one month. Widows at first were expected to remarry after a one year period, but, following protests, that period was extended to three years" (Schussler Fiorenza, "Praxis of Coequal Discipleship," p. 233). Cr. 1 Corinthians 7; Paul Zanker, The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1990), p. 157.

Tuesday, January 4, 2011

Gender

Professor John Stackhouse has an excellent blog post at Stackblog.wordpress.com. It is a lengthy post as it is a full chapter from a book; but take the time to read it. It is an important contribution to conversations regarding gender. You may also want to read Finally Feminist by John G. Stackhouse Jr. I highly recommend it.

Here is a quote from the blog to whet your appetite.
Furthermore, I have needed these testimonies, not just when I was transiting from patriarchy to egalitarianism, but continually, to this very day. My wife has reminded me from time to time, “You’re not as feminist as you think you are.” I used to bristle when she would say that, for I had congratulated myself on having had my “conversion experience” to egalitarianism and I was now a fully enlightened man, totally emancipated from sexism, and (let’s be honest) a pretty admirable guy. But I have come to see, at least a little more clearly over the years, just how deeply entrenched are the “gender scripts” that I have tended to follow all along. I have not “arrived” at entire sanctification and I do not dwell in the New Jerusalem. I continue to mistreat women despite my sincere intention not to do so, and I have concluded that only women can help the situation by notifying me that, yes, John, you’re doing it again or, no, you failed this time to do what was appropriate. To recommend such action is not—horrors!—to blame women for my enduring sexism: “Since you aren’t complaining enough, it’s your fault I’m still mistreating you.” It is instead to say that if women want men to change in this way, then this is one crucial thing women can do to help us do so.