The Players Association and search committees...

Although I get the point, somehow I've got to cringe at the thought of comparing a pastor to a union boss....something about not bringing up an accusation without at least two or three witnesses....

:^)

I'll just hope that pastors get the idea that conflict is part of their job, and don't take part in fleecing taxpayers for millions for new churches, as baseball players union leaders do.

The same thing works vis-a-vis Christian ministries, which avoid -- sometimes with gargantuan investment of effort -- saying something that will "offend" or "cause a ruckus" or "express the wrong tone" and so forth.

Two examples from the previous 48 hours:

1. A 15th anniversary dinner of a local Christian crisis pregnancy center, which does excellent work, which I support financially, which our parish supports via contributions of time, money, and materials. I attended this event last night and delivered the benediction.

The main speaker at this joyful banquet was a founding director, a woman who is -- by my judgment -- an exemplar of current evangelical female slickness.

During her address she took pains to slander Operation Rescue as a forgettable, small-beer ministry "that focuses on hate." Against this slanderous characterization of that ministry, this founding director touted the organization she had helped to found as "focused on love." A quote: "We're not here to stop abortion. We're here to reach out to women who are hurting, to give them Jesus' love."

You see, I think this founding director (she's no longer with the local ministry; she's moved to another state) knows that almost everyone in the audience falls into one of these groups: (1) those who have had an abortion, or (2) those whose close family member has had an abortion. To speak of abortion as a vile, treacherous wickeness ... well, that's not loving. And, it likely would not garner nearly as much in financial contributions as how she did, in fact, portray the organization's work.

2. A nationally promoted confernece on womanhood, sponsored by a national organization devoted (ostensibly) to complementarian "values" vis-a-vis Christian womanhood. The organization and the conference promote a document called a "manifesto" on womanhood (militant sounding, right?). Within that manifest, however, you find the most weasle-worded clap-trap I've ever read.

Consider, for example, this paragraph from the brochure on the "manifesto" which urges women to:

"Live out the mandate of Titus 2—as older women, modeling godliness and training younger women to be pleasing to God in every respect; as younger women, receiving instruction with meekness and humility and aspiring to become mature women of God who in turn will train the next generation."

Is that precious, or what?

Why does it make my blood boil? Well, here's why ... if anyone can read the relevant verses in Titus 2, he will see that what this manifesto has done is to castrate Paul's Apostolic instruction about the God-ordained mission of women.

Believe me, friends. Old feminist women teach young feminist women to be effective feminists. Old female witches teach young female witches to be skillful and zealous witches. Name any virtue, any noble calling, or, if you like any perversion, any crime, any spiritual outrage -- in every one of them old women will teach young women to excel.

So what???? This is what old women are ALWAYS going to do with y oung women -- teach them.

Teach them what, for crying out loud??

You see, what this manifesto does is to muzzle Paul on the very point which cuts across every nerve, tendon, and muscle of mondern feminism. It muzzles Paul on what HE insists is the curriculum of womanhood: "... that they [i.e. the older women ] admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed."

Do you know that this manifesto NOWHERE uses the word "obey" or "obedience" to describe a woman's relationship to a husband? Nor does this manifesto once use the word "submit" or "submission" to denote anything about a marriage relationship, much less a wife's toward a husband. The manifesto is littered with footnotes to Bible verses. But, comb those Bible footnotes in vain to find one that links Ephesians 5 to a statement about marriage. Footnote citations to 1 Timothy 2:9ff and 1 Peter 3 are linked to vague statements about virtues or unspecified spiritual qualities, devoid of any express acknowledgement of what those footnoted verses are saying.

What is clear to a careful observer is this: the manifesto goes overboard to ~avoid~ speaking God's words that address issues of high controversy and much ruckus on the contemporary scene.

I wonder why this is so.