I found this "losing my religion" essay by Jimmy Carter to be interesting and thought-provoking. Also memory-inducing as I've lived through several incarnations of hierarchical religious groups preaching doctrines that subjugate women.
Losing my religion for equality
Jimmy Carter
July 15, 2009
http://www.tutufoundationusa.org/2017/04/27/jimmy-carter-losing-religion-equality/Excerpts:
"Women and girls have been discriminated against for too long in a twisted interpretation of the word of God.
"I have been a practising Christian all my life and a deacon and Bible teacher for many years. My faith is a source of strength and comfort to me, as religious beliefs are to hundreds of millions of people around the world. So my decision to sever my ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, was painful and difficult. It was, however, an unavoidable decision when the convention's leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be "subservient" to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.
"This view that women are somehow inferior to men is not restricted to one religion or belief. Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths. Nor, tragically, does its influence stop at the walls of the church, mosque, synagogue or temple. This discrimination, unjustifiably attributed to a Higher Authority, has provided a reason or excuse for the deprivation of women's equal rights across the world for centuries.
"At its most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities.
"The impact of these religious beliefs touches every aspect of our lives. They help explain why in many countries boys are educated before girls; why girls are told when and whom they must marry; and why many face enormous and unacceptable risks in pregnancy and childbirth because their basic health needs are not met.
...
"It is simply self-defeating for any community to discriminate against half its population. We need to challenge these self-serving and outdated attitudes and practices - as we are seeing in Iran where women are at the forefront of the battle for democracy and freedom.
"I understand, however, why many political leaders can be reluctant about stepping into this minefield. Religion, and tradition, are powerful and sensitive areas to challenge. But my fellow Elders and I, who come from many faiths and backgrounds, no longer need to worry about winning votes or avoiding controversy - and we are deeply committed to challenging injustice wherever we see it.
"The Elders are an independent group of eminent global leaders, brought together by former South African president Nelson Mandela, who offer their influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering and promote the shared interests of humanity. We have decided to draw particular attention to the responsibility of religious and traditional leaders in ensuring equality and human rights and have recently published a statement that declares: "The justification of discrimination against women and girls on grounds of religion or tradition, as if it were prescribed by a Higher Authority, is unacceptable."
"The carefully selected verses found in the Holy Scriptures to justify the superiority of men owe more to time and place - and the determination of male leaders to hold onto their influence - than eternal truths. Similar biblical excerpts could be found to support the approval of slavery and the timid acquiescence to oppressive rulers.
"I am also familiar with vivid descriptions in the same Scriptures in which women are revered as pre-eminent leaders. During the years of the early Christian church women served as deacons, priests, bishops, apostles, teachers and prophets. It wasn't until the fourth century that dominant Christian leaders, all men, twisted and distorted Holy Scriptures to perpetuate their ascendant positions within the religious hierarchy.
"The truth is that male religious leaders have had - and still have - an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter. Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world. This is in clear violation not just of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but also the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, Moses and the prophets, Muhammad, and founders of other great religions - all of whom have called for proper and equitable treatment of all the children of God. It is time we had the courage to challenge these views."
-----
As a JW, being female, in the weekly evening "Ministry School" meeting to teach members how to preach I could not address a congregation in a talk. Rather, I had to be on stage with another female and we would look at and speak to each other, the congregation "overhearing" our conversation, to avoid having women "teaching" men directly (a male JW would by merely standing alone at the podium giving their talk directly to the assembled masses).
If I was teaching Bible study to a male prospect, as soon as he committed to being baptized I would have to don a head covering (scarf) to complete his lessons, as even a non-baptized (but committed) male would be higher in the hierarchy than I was, being female. If he seemed particularly like a very good prospect, even leadership material, often a male JW would take over the lessons at that point, to prevent a lowly female from teaching such a vaunted almost-member.
When I left the JWs and started attending a fundamentalist BAC church with a friend (yes, I was a glutton for punishment on the religion front) same deal. "Women should remain silent in the churches" according to the Apostle Paul, whose words in this regard are zealously followed by men who are happy to perpetuate the discriminatory beliefs. Once, during an informal evening meeting, the male speaker lost track of a scripture he wanted to quote. He was stumbling around, getting the words mixed up and it stopped him in his tracks as it was an integral part of his address. Without a second thought I called out and recited the words of the scripture to help him move on and the mouths of the men around me dropped open and their eyes bugged out as they stared at me. A male friend sitting nearby whispered "Nighty, you're not supposed to talk in church". I didn't actually consider that "talking in church", especially as it was not a formal meeting of the entire congregation but merely a voluntary evening gathering. I didn't find out til later too that women weren't supposed to be in church without their heads being covered. I was the only female at the Sunday services not wearing a scarf or hat but I thought it was just their fashion, not a biblical requirement (according to them). The day it was preached from the pulpit about "the wicked amongst us", eg, females with uncovered heads, was my last day attending that church. Ever.
As a Mormon, as you all know, the discrimination is also ingrained into the doctrines and policies. In my experience, though, LDS practices seemed actually more liberal than churches I was accustomed to! However, it did seriously bug me that in one of my callings, the major essential world-shaking calling of being bulletin board monitor, the bishop required me to pass everything by him before I displayed it on the board, including announcements and decorations and pictures. Once I tacked up some postcards depicting Jesus that I thought were really interesting because they weren't the common ones you see around everywhere and I thought they'd make a nice change. I didn't ask the bishop first because they were pictures of *Jesus*. How could he object to that (I thought - mistakenly). I got called into his office for him to reiterate that *everything* must go through him first. I was clueless enough to argue, saying "but it's Jesus". Ha. Yeah. The missionaries, with whom I was still friendly (especially as I found the Mormons there decidedly frosty and didn't make friends except with other converts) told me that Mormon Jesus in his white robes and scarlet sash is the preferred image. OK, so I got rid of quiet Jesus with his birds and kids and no red sash or pristine white robes.
My sister, who interacts with LDS women in an interfaith group (and yes, we're both so surprised they take part as they are not usually involved in community activities that way, especially including other religions), recently told me of a Mormon woman she likes who has a calling I've never heard of, that is certainly higher than mine of bulletin board monitor under the bishop's thumb. I don't want to give the name of the calling as it could tend to ID the woman or at least the local congregation. This calling brings the Mormon woman into contact with this interfaith group which otherwise she likely wouldn't be involved with. Recently, she told my sister that she wouldn't see her again as her calling was over.
My sister's understanding of a 'calling' was the more common one, that a person themselves feels drawn to a certain area (like a Catholic woman may feel a calling to become a nun) or interest of their own; in other words, that it comes from within the person themselves (or from God, if you think in those religious terms). When she expressed this to the Mormon woman, saying I thought you had a calling to do this work, the Mormon laughed, saying yes, I enjoy it but my calling has been changed. Then she explained to my sister that the bishop is the one who decides what your calling is and it is not permanent and is subject to change and is not necessarily confined to one's own personal interests and certainly doesn't arise from one's own choice. My sister was so surprised that she hadn't known this, thinking this woman, who she enjoyed doing projects with, was doing it voluntarily because she wanted to do it and would be staying indefinitely. I told my sister that, yes, it's the bishop who decides what each member will do and they are expected to say yes to whatever they are told their calling is going to be.I don't think members of these more fundamentalist religious groups realize how strange these beliefs are to outsiders who are accustomed to more liberal ideas.
Believing that men should be in charge and that women should submit is certainly discriminatory. Just in terms of the way Mormon callings work, this is obvious. Why should that woman not continue working with the interfaith group in projects she is interested in and enjoys and has a talent for? Instead, she has received a much more minor calling now, one that will not utilize her obvious skills. All at the whim of a male bishop who is told he has the duty and the power to tell women what they will or will not do even in regard to areas he doesn't need to be involved with. Why does he get to fiddle with people's lives like that? I know he does so with male members too but with females the element of subjugation creeps in. A man choosing what a woman will or will not do, without regard to her preferences and choices. Because, supposedly, the "holy" scriptures mandate it.
I haven't even (yet) mentioned to my sister the bishop's intrusion into a female's most private life, in the mandatory meetings and intrusive questions. I can't even begin to describe my shock and disbelief at being asked by a male Mormon (the bishop), as a female adult convert, questions about my sex life. (Again, yes, he does it with males too but, again, add the element of a male being in a dominant power position over a female and the questionable dynamics are obvious). It didn't help me that the bishop was blushing. I likely was too. Sheesh.
I don't know if I will ever tell my sister about this aspect of being Mormon. She was already shaking her head and swearing over this revelation about Mormon callings, especially as she is losing a good addition to her interfaith group. She used to attend the Catholic Church, when her kids (a son and a daughter) were young. She is accustomed to patriarchy. But the dynamics in the Mormon Church in this regard really surprised her.
The big question hangs out there: Why do women put themselves through this? A question I think it's even more difficult for converts to answer. Part of it is the boiled frog phenomenon. Of course, the friendly, kind, can't-help-you-enough missionaries don't say females are lesser than, or the male leaders will intrude into your private life, or you will lose your autonomy, or freedom of choice is not top of mind with Mormon leaders, etc. So you get in and slowly these nets gradually tighten and eventually you may come to feel that you are so committed you are stuck. Same with JWs, in my experience.
Because I had questions - questions - not due to a voluntary disclosure on my part to having any kind of emotional issues - my bishop ended up at some point sending me to see the church psychologist. Of course, I acquiesced - because, well, he's the bishop. (Groan). The psychologist was an overbearing creep, and rude with it, which directly led to me making the sudden decision to Just. Leave. When I told him my "problem" was that "I have questions" (about the church) his conclusion at the end of the first and only session was "we are not working from a position of strength here". I guess he was a great diagnostician. I never attended another Mormon meeting. Way to clarify a situation, doc!
I like Jimmy Carter's conclusion - that in the early Christian church "women are revered as pre-eminent leaders" until male leaders in the fourth century "twisted and distorted Holy Scriptures to perpetuate their ascendant positions within the religious hierarchy." "The truth is" says Carter: "...male religious leaders have had - and still have - an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. ... It is time we had the courage to challenge these [aforementioned discriminatory] views."
This woman my sister worked with, who enjoyed, and was good at, her "calling" with the interfaith group is now "serving" in a calling that is millions of miles removed from the calling she just had. From what my sister knows of her, she has zero experience and little interest in the area of her new calling. "That's how Mormon callings work" I told my sis. She stared at me for a minute and then just shook her head.
Sometimes words do fail you (although not me, obviously, in this very long post!).
I wish Wendy would get hold of Russ' lighted pen and draw a map to The New World, one where women get to make their own choices. Including whether they want to be the ward piano teacher or the choir master or the sacrament passer or {{gasp}} the mission president. Or whether they want no calling at all.
What a concept.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/25/2020 09:12PM by Nightingale.