Schedule:

8:15-9:00 AM ~ Registration & Sign-In

9:00-9:15 AM ~ Welcome

9:15-10:15 AM ~ Alan F. Johnson

10:15-10:25 AM ~ Break

10:25-11:30 AM ~ Lynn Cohick

11:30-1:00 PM ~ Lunch

1:00-2:00 PM ~ Dorothy Irvin

2:00-2:10 PM ~ Break

2:10-3:15 PM ~ Mimi Haddad

3:15-3:35 PM ~ Break

3:35-4:40 PM ~ Gilbert Bilezikian

4:40-5:00 PM ~ Closing

About the Speakers:

Alan F. Johnson (ThD) is emeritus professor of New Testament and Christian ethics at Wheaton College and Graduate School, Wheaton, IL. He is the author of several commentaries, including 1 Corinthians (The IVP New Testament Commentary Series), Revelation (Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Rvsd), Romans (Everyman’s Bible Commentary, Rvsd). He is co-author with Robert Webber of What Christians Believe and general editor of How I Changed My Mind About Women in Leadership, Compelling Stories from Prominent Evangelicals (October, 2010). Alan has served as national president of the Evangelical Theological Society. He and his wife, Rea, live in Wheaton and have four daughters and nineteen grandchildren.

Conference Topic: Women and Justice in the Ancient Near East: Historical Comparisons of Israel and Ugarit in Priesthood and Kingship

This presentation focuses on how women fared in two areas of potential leadership in Israel and Ugarit during the same period of time in the Ancient Near East. The purpose of the comparison is to see if women in Israel did any better or worse in these areas than women in the kingdom of Ugarit to its north.

Why did Israel allow only a few female royal rulers and no priests during the monarchy period of its existence? Is there evidence that this historical fact was based on a divine mandate that only males rule and only males serve as priests in Israel’s religion? How does gender and “justice” play out in these areas of female restriction? What implications does this have for the church today?

Lynn H. Cohick (PhD) is associate professor of New Testament in the Department of Biblical and Theological Studies at Wheaton College and Graduate School, Wheaton, IL. She has written on women in the Greco-Roman world, including her recent book, Women in the World of the Earliest Christians (Baker Academic, 2009). She has written on women in Early Christianity and on the relationship between Jews and Christians in the ancient world, including her book, Melito of Sardis: Setting, Purpose, and Sources (Brown Judaic Studies, 2000). She has a commentary on Ephesians forthcoming in the New Covenant Commentary Series (Cascade, 2010).

Conference Topic: Marriage and Ministry: First Century Marriage in the Life of the Church

Often today women are denied a senior ministry position based on an interpretation of Paul’s injunction for husbands to be the “head” of their wives (Eph 5:21f.). Cohick examines the ancient protocols and expectations of first century Gentile and Jewish marriages, and suggests that the gospel challenges assumptions of submission and hierarchy within the family and within the church.

Dorothy Irvin (ThD) has a pontifical doctorate in Catholic theology from the University of Tuebingen, Germany, with specialization in Bible, Ancient Near Eastern studies, and archaeology. She has taught theology at several Catholic universities; published a book on the Old Testament and a commentary on the three Sunday Scripture readings for the entire three-year lectionary cycle; and contributed articles to books, journals, and encyclopedias. She has been on the staff of an archaeological project in Jordan for nineteen years. Most recently, she has begun presenting, in the form of annual calendars, her work on the archaeological documentation of women in the early church who were deacons, priests, and bishops.

Conference Topic: Women Ministers in the Early Church: The Archaeological Documentation with visual presentation

A major reason against women as head pastors is that we have no history of them serving as such in the early church. They are a modern innovation, and therefore suspect! But is this true? The archaeological material begins about the time the New Testament canon was being completed; it includes frescoes, mosaics, sculpture, and tomb inscriptions (in Latin and Greek) attesting to women as synagogue leaders, prophets, stewards, deacons, presbyters, and overseers.

Mimi Haddad (PhD) is president of Christians for Biblical Equality. Mimi is a founding member of the Evangelicals and Gender Study Group at the Evangelical Theological Society, and she served as the convener of the Issue Group 24 for the 2004 Lausanne III Committee for World Evangelization. She has written numerous articles and has contributed to eight books, most recently Coming Together in the 21st Century: The Bible’s Message in an Age of Diversity, by Curtiss Paul DeYoung. She is also an editor and a contributing author of Global Voices on Biblical Equality: Women and Men Serving Together in the Church. Haddad is an adjunct assistant professor at Bethel University, Saint Paul, MN and an adjunct professor at North Park Theological Seminary, Chicago, IL.

Conference Topic: Good News in the Gospel for Women?: A Priority of Scripture Embodied in the Work of the Early Evangelicals

In their passion for evangelism, Scripture, activism, and the Cross, the early evangelicals developed a biblical foundation to defeat slavery and the subjugation of women. Said to be the first wave of feminists, their philosophical and theological work continues to inspire and challenge Christians to view women as equal in being and also equal in function.

Gilbert Bilezikian (ThD) is professor of biblical studies emeritus at Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL. He was a charter elder at Willow Creek Community Church and is the author of several books, including Beyond Sex Roles: What the Bible Says about a Woman’s Place in Church and Family.

Conference Topic: The “Servant Leader” Hoax

This pious-sounding cliché is commonly used as a foil to mask abuses of authority committed in both church and family environments. Christ’s radical teaching about the divinely-ordained nature of leadership exposes the hypocrisy of the system and upturns the hierarchical concept of leader literally flat on its head. He replaces it with a community-intensive developmental model designed to become the force intended to bring the paltry kingdoms of the world into subjection to the kingdom of God.

————————

It’s going to be well-worth the price of admission. If you enjoyed my Sunstone 2010 presentation, Dorothy Irvin’s talk is likely going to be that and so much more. You can register for the conference at the CBE Web site.

I might be attending the LDS General Relief Society meeting afterward. We’ll see.

Harley's 4th Birthday cake

Another milestone ticked away in my head: our family had reached the halfway point on the road to what might one day become our first serious point of interfaith parenting contention. In four more years, Harley will be eight years old, the age of baptism for children raised in LDS families. Paul firmly believes that eight year-olds are definitively old enough to choose a religion and commit to it for the rest of their lives. I don’t. I’m extremely uneasy about the prospect of baptizing a child that young.

My reasons for being uneasy with this proposal can be broken into three categories.

Experience

The first reason for my uneasiness over the baptism of eight year-olds is fairly simple. I remember being eight, and I certainly don’t remember doing much independent thinking on religious issues. What I do remember is an earnest desire to please the adults in my life, and I remember thinking that laws and rules passed down to me by adults were unquestionable. If my parents said to do it, I did it, and doing it was right. If my parents said not to do it . . . well, I may have done it anyways, because I was a rascal like that. But there was never a doubt in my mind that to go against my parents’ wishes was wrong. The idea that my parents might tell me to do the wrong thing was blasphemy. As the old Eric Draven William Makepeace Thackery saying goes, “Mother is the name for God on the lips and hearts of all children.”

Or in other words, I think children that young will do things because adults tell them to, and not because they’ve developed their own desire to do them for other reasons. I would rather my daughter commit to a church when she’s certain that’s what she wants to do rather than committing to a church out of a desire to please one of us.

Research

Fortunately, I don’t have to rely solely on my own experience. Research on moral development in the human brain does a pretty good job of vindicating my misgivings about letting a child that young make such a monumental religious commitment. For example, see Piaget’s Stages of Moral Judgment:

Piaget studied many aspects of moral judgment, but most of his findings fit into a two-stage theory. Children younger than 10 or 11 years think about moral dilemmas one way; older children consider them differently. As we have seen, younger children regard rules as fixed and absolute. They believe that rules are handed down by adults or by God and that one cannot change them. The older child’s view is more relativistic. He or she understands that it is permissible to change rules if everyone agrees. Rules are not sacred and absolute but are devices which humans use to get along cooperatively.

At approximately the same time—10 or 11 years—children’s moral thinking undergoes other shifts. In particular, younger children base their moral judgments more on consequences, whereas older children base their judgments on intentions. When, for example, the young child hears about one boy who broke 15 cups trying to help his mother and another boy who broke only one cup trying to steal cookies, the young child thinks that the first boy did worse. The child primarily considers the amount of damage–the consequences—whereas the older child is more likely to judge wrongness in terms of the motives underlying the act (Piaget, 1932, p. 137).

There are many more details to Piaget’s work on moral judgment, but he essentially found a series of changes that occur between the ages of 10 and 12, just when the child begins to enter the general stage of formal operations.

See also Kohlberg’s Six Stages, on the same page. Children undergo a serious shift in their understanding of moral actions between the ages of 10 and 12, so I think 12 is a much safer minimum age for choosing a religion than 8.

Theology

I’m rather dissatisfied with the theological justifications my LDS friends have given me for why children ought to be baptized at age 8. Note that I’m not questioning the need for baptism in general; just the need for baptism at such a young age. Let’s look at the usual reasons given one at a time.

- For the remission of sins

This is the official reason for baptism as given in the 4th Article of Faith. Little children have their sins covered by the atonement of Jesus Christ until they reach the age of 8, and then their sins start counting as their own, so children are baptized at age 8 to cleanse them from their sins. This raises the question: is an LDS baptism necessary for the forgiveness of sins? Are Mormons and their alleged ancient predecessors the only people in all of human history who have ever had their sins forgiven on this side of the veil?

Most of my LDS friends would say “no;” non-Mormons can have their sins forgiven as well. So if my daughter can have her sins forgiven through prayer and repentance like the rest of us, I don’t see much imperative for baptizing her at age 8.

If you do believe that an LDS baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins, then your answer makes much more sense and has the benefit of being theologically consistent. Politically incorrect, but theologically consistent. I guess my daughter will just have to live with being as unclean as her mother is.

- To profess membership in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

We’ve already established that I think 8 is too young to fully comprehend and commit to a religion. I especially think 8 is too young to comprehend and choose between two competing religions. My commitment to free agency dictates that I wait until she’s older and can do a better job of grasping the importance of such a decision.

- To profess faith in Jesus Christ

See my last answer. Besides, since an LDS baptism requires an interview where the candidate affirms LDS distinctives such as the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith, LDS baptism really can’t be separated from the question of LDS membership as a whole.

I’m certainly not denying that young children can have faith in Christ, but I think public profession of that faith is a huge step to take and one that should only be entered into when the child has more understanding of what it means to be a disciple of Christ.

- To obtain the gift of the Holy Spirit

Some parents have pointed out to me that even if there are no theological consequences to delaying baptism until a later date, baptism is a prerequisite for the gift of the Holy Spirit, and they want their children to have that guiding influence in their lives as soon as possible. As I’ve argued elsewhere though, the biblical record shows that neither baptism nor the laying on of hands are requirements for the gift of the Holy Spirit. LDS families are free to believe otherwise of course, but as far as I’m concerned, if my daughter wants the gift of the Holy Spirit, she can receive it the same way I did: by praying to her Father in Heaven and asking Him for it.

- Because God commands it

Some LDS families have simply expressed to me that they choose to baptize their children at age 8 because it’s commanded in the LDS scriptures (D&C 68:27). I respect this reason on the surface, but for my own part, I think “because God says so” is a rather unsatisfying answer when it is not accompanied by a theological or rational framework to explain why God insists on this age for baptism.

Conclusion

To be clear, I’m not looking down in disdain on any Latter-day Saint individuals for having their children baptized at age 8. If I refuse to take a stand against paedobaptism in my own tradition, I’m certainly not about to get up in arms over slightly-delayed-paedobaptism in yours. Besides, they’re your kids, you made ‘em, and I firmly support your right to do what you want with ‘em. Point in fact, if you really want your kids to grow up LDS, it’s probably better that you’re hooking them into the church when they’re that young, before the little demons darlings have truly perfected the art of questioning your authority as a parent.

As far as our own situation goes, while I’m not writing anything in stone, for now my inclination is to say “no” to baptism at eight. And since the LDS church won’t allow my husband to baptize our daughter without my consent, ultimately, I’m the presiding authority in this decision.

9:00 AM ~ I’m getting dressed for church, Paul is ironing his suit. Due to having been out of town so much in the past month, I haven’t been to either church in nearly a month, so I have decided to attend both my congregation at 10:30 AM and Paul’s ward at 1:00 PM. Harley will be attending both. I select a black pantsuit and a red dress shirt, black high heels, my hair in soft curls, dangling earrings and an ear cuff. Paul will also be sporting a black suit and vest. This weekend I saw a deep purple dress shirt with matching tie on sale, so I got it for him (”You got me a grown-up shirt and tie!” “Yes I did!”). Harley is rocking a white and blue sleeveless sun dress, white tights, her hair in pig tails.

9:30 AM ~ Paul makes a final decision that he’s not going to my church. He attended Rock Canyon Assembly of God when he visited Utah and Sumner Presbyterian when he visited Washington state, so he more than did his evangelical quota for the month.

9:45 AM ~ Just as I’m about to load Harley into the car and head off to my church, Harley suddenly decides that what she needs is cottage cheese. Lots and lots of cottage cheese. Paul gets her a bowl before I can say anything and I grumble about not wanting to be late again as I pace around anxiously.

10:28 AM ~ We make it to my church on time in spite of the cottage cheesy delay and I drop Harley off at the nursery. All of the college students are back from summer break and it’s great to see them again. Worship during the service is really, really good. We sing this song, one of my favorites:

I wonder to myself if any of the people in my congregation are ever miffed by my Pentecostal habit of raising my hands during worship. Not many people in my congregation do it.

11:02 AM ~ The kids are dismissed for kids’ church, and I leave briefly to transition Harley from nursery to kids’ church. It’s something I’ve been trying to do lately. She fusses quite a bit, but calms down not long after I leave. The sermon is preached by a North Park M. Div. student since the pastor is on vacation, and she does a really great job.

11:50 AM ~ Harley and I mix and mingle in the foyer. Harley happily stuffs her face with strawberries and grapes from the after-church snack table.

12:30 PM ~ We stop at home and I run inside to get Paul, and we’re off to the LDS church.

12:45 PM ~ We’re mixing and mingling with people before Sacrament meeting. One of the counselors in the bishopric asks me about my Sunstone presentation, and not seeing any way around it, I start to tell him about the early Christian evidence for women as elders, bishops, deacons, and priests and that I don’t see any reason why Mormons can’t believe that women had the priesthood, that it was lost in the apostasy, and that it’s something God has yet to restore as per the 9th Article of Faith. The expression on his face leaves me worrying that I just said the wrong thing.

1:10 PM ~ I insist on sitting in the chapel for the start of Sacrament meeting in spite of Harley’s awful behavior; it’s something I’ve begun making us do recently. I want to be there until the Sacrament is passed at least, then we can retreat elsewhere like we usually do. Harley fusses horribly and keeps trying to make a run for it. Paul sits on one end of the pew, I sit on the other, and we tell Harley she can’t leave that space. She keeps trying to climb over or under it and cries horribly, but eventually resigns herself to her fate and cheers up a bit. She gets more interested when the Sacrament is being blessed and passed and keeps chirping, “Water! Water!” in the very quiet chapel at the top of her lungs. One of the guys blessing the sacrament is wearing a light blue shirt. I’m informed that he is a recent convert. I don’t know if they’re letting him do it in a light blue shirt because he’s new or because Mormon culture is finally relaxing its preferences for white shirts, but either way, I approve.

1:25 PM ~ Paul and I take Harley and retreat to the nursery room where we turn on the speaker so that we can hear the meeting, unload her toys and let her play. I read about the Holy Spirit from my theology textbook during the meeting.

2:15 PM ~ Paul informs me that Harley’s behavior is horrible when she has to line up for Sunbeams and that I’d better help him with dropping her off. So I do. Harley stands there like an angel most of the time and doesn’t complain. “Oh, now that Mommy’s here, you behave,” Paul grumbles. Damn straight.

2:45 PM ~ Sunday school is on Jonah. Oh Jonah. I cannot begin to express how much I wish I could just sit the entire LDS church down and force them to watch this movie—which is available on YouTube in its entirety if you feel so inclined. I finish my reading from my theology textbook on the Holy Spirit.

2:50 PM ~ The other counselor in the bishopric is sitting with us. He tells us that a student just moved into the ward who is attending Trinity College on sports scholarship and lives on campus, and points this person out to me. Yup, that’s right: there is a Mormon student at Trinity. Paul is excited that there is another Mormon living on campus. I’m excited to get living confirmation of other anecdotes I had heard of LDS students being accepted to evangelical colleges.

3:00 PM ~ Something else happens during Sunday school. One of the toys we brought for Harley is a large, plastic blue train with buttons on it, and this train makes VERY LOUD noises when its buttons are pressed. I am idly examining the train as the relatively quiet Sunday school class continues, and I note that the switch on it is flipped to “OFF,” so I think I’m safe. Silly me. I accidentally bump the button. Suddenly the train begins chugging and whistling at the top of its mechanical lungs. I frantically flip the ON-OFF switch several times, but the train keeps chugging away undeterred, so I take the only escape left to me. I thrust the train into Paul’s lap and point innocently.

3:15 PM ~ Paul leaves early because he has to work at 4 PM today. I attend the joint Priesthood / Relief Society session alone. The counselor whom I spoke to about ordained women in early Christianity earlier in the day is teaching the lesson. My friend who is the Relief Society secretary (also married to the other counselor in the bishopric) comes and sits by me, later joined by her husband. The lesson is really good. The counselor talks about the story of William Tyndale and goes on to discuss the value and meaning of Scripture, with some final emphasis on the Book of Mormon. I raise my hand at one point and talk a bit about the story of Lazarus and how it comforted me during my mother’s death. Afterward, I approach the counselor and tell him that I truly enjoyed the lesson, that I think with a few modifications it’s exactly the sort of lesson that an evangelical would be proud of, and he thanks me for sharing about my mother’s death. Then he says, “Jack, what we talked about earlier? It’s possible.” It takes me a second to realize that he’s talking about women and the priesthood in the early church. I grin. Then he adds, “But we don’t know for certain.” No, we don’t. But I’m relieved that I didn’t offend him earlier, and delighted to hear people keeping an open mind on the issue. That’s all I ask.

4:10 PM ~ The Relief Society president drives me and Harley home, and we have a pleasant chat on the way. Harley’s Sunbeams class sent her off with a bag full of grapes, so she’s one happy kid.

The rest of my day is mostly just me relaxing at home, making dinner, doing dishes, and getting some reading done.

That is how the Sabbath sometimes goes down with the Meyers-Jeffries clan. Thanks for tuning in.

Welcome PBS Religion & Ethics Newsweekly viewers! If you’re new to ClobberBlog, and found me via the PBS segment, these articles may be helpful or of interest to you:

My Mormon-Evangelical Interfaith Marriage — A series I did discussing how we came to wed and how we make our marriage function. Contains a discussion of our legal separation and near-divorce.

About ClobberBlog — My biography with links to other pages that explain the purpose of this site.

Infrequently Asked Questions — Stuff people tend to ask me from time to time.

Comment Policy — If you are so inclined.

I hope everyone enjoyed the segment. We enjoyed working with PBS and are grateful to them for giving us the chance to share the story of our challenges and our love.

Special thanks to the Evangelical Covenant Church for letting PBS film at the denominational meeting in Lake Geneva and Zack and Paige from my church for watching Harley during the interview.

Sorry for falling behind on responding to comments and other discussions around the Web. We just got back from our trip to Washington state yesterday morning (I went 32 hours without any sleep), my classes started last night, and my daughter has a minor surgery next week that we have to prepare for.

Also, my husband and I are going to be featured on PBS Religion & Ethics Newsweekly tomorrow @ 6 PM EST. Look for a blog post about that tomorrow night.

I’m showing it in this post because it represents a permanent mark that was put on my body that has been with me for as long as I can remember—and yet, it happened without my consent. I was too young to have any say in the matter, so my parents made a medical call on my behalf. I’m not ungrateful and I doubt I’d have chosen any differently had I been old enough to decide, but it stands as an event in my life that effected me that I had no control over.

In fact, it seems that there are a lot of factors in my life which have profoundly influenced my way of thinking which were and always have been beyond my control. Things like:

- being a woman
- being white
- having been born into a poor working class family
- having been born in America
- being born into a non-religious family
- growing up with abuse in my home
- having good Christian examples in my life as I grew up who guided me to the Gospel
- being relatively healthy for most of my life

Other factors beyond my control that have been less significant, but have still effected my life in some way or another:

- having three brothers and one sister
- being 6′0″ tall
- having curly (sometimes frizzy) brown hair
- being slender by nature and not having to worry (much) about my weight

The point of all this being, before we’re even born, a lot about the way we’re going to turn out is already written. We have absolutely no agency over a huge portion of who we are.

If you’re LDS and you believe in a pre-existence, then some of this lack of agency may go away. Maybe you believe we willingly selected the families that we were born into, and thus did get some say over our race, nationality, religious upbringing and starting income bracket. Then again, maybe you don’t believe that; maybe we received little forewarning on the specifics of our future lives. Whatever the case, even Mormons typically don’t believe that we chose all of it. Sex, for example, is apparently an inalienable trait that no one chooses, and I don’t think we can downplay the significance of how being male or female effects our worldview and the choices we make in life.

For a long time now, the question of God and free will has been on my mind. Being an evangelical Christian who interacts with Mormons on a regular basis, I feel like I’ve heard a wide spectrum of religious opinions on this issue. In one corner, we have double-predestination Calvinists, who believe that God alone is in control of the eternal fate of every soul in existence and that we only have free will in a “compatibilist” sense. In the other corner we have philosophically savvy Mormons, who tend to argue that creation ex nihilo + free agency don’t mix, and creation ex nihilo + free agency + exhaustive divine foreknowledge especially don’t mix. As a squishy Arminian, I’ve often felt caught somewhere between taking fire from both camps and having things in common with each of them, and I’ve deeply yearned to retain some of the beliefs in each group. If classical Christian theology and belief in libertarian free agency are two masters, I want to serve them both.

These days I’ve been re-thinking this issue. Here’s some questions concerning the relationship between deity and human free agency that have stuck in my mind:

(1) Given the numerous and hugely important factors effecting our lives that we verifiably have no control over, why is it so important to us that we have ultimate control over the rest of it? Why do we resist the idea that the entire thing has been decided by someone else instead of just part of it?

(2) If there is an objective truth in this universe that everyone is meant to find, to what extent are we truly able to overcome the influences of our upbringing and find it on our own?

To be continued.

Long-time readers of this blog may recall that my mother passed away from pancreatic cancer in September 2008. This Saturday, my father will wed Dina, a long-time friend of the family who has never been married herself. Dina also happens to be Catholic, so between my Mormon husband and my Catholic stepmother, I should be one of the most ecumenical bloggers around.

I miss my mother terribly, and if I could have one wish in this life, it would be for her to be alive and here with me now. However, life didn’t go according to plan, and things being what they are, I don’t think I could ask for a better stepmother than Dina. She’s kind, compassionate, good-humored, loves my family, and understands my quirky sense of humor. She also has the greatest relationship with my daughter and Harley loves her.

I’m sorry my summer has been so busy and left me with little time for blogging. See you all when I get back.

I have an article that has been published at Patheos as part of their “Future of Mormonism” series:

Mormon-Evangelical Dialogue: Changing for the Better

There are a lot of really great articles on other subjects published by some great bloggers and authors, so be sure to check those out.

Comments are closed here; please comment at Patheos if you wish.

UPDATE 8-12-2010: Bumping this because the article has now been cross-posted at the Patheos / Washington Post blog. To those wishing to comment: while commenting at Patheos requires a Facebook account or Patheos registration, commenting at the Patheos WaPo blog does not.

For starters, my friend and fMh blogger Tresa Edmunds (aka Reese Dixon) was published in The Guardian: “Mormon, and feminist, too.” Tresa also published an article on “The Next Generation of Mormon Feminism” as part of the Patheos Future of Mormonism series.

Peggy Fletcher Stack has a lengthy feature article in the Salt Lake Tribune: “Mormon feminism: It’s back.”

And finally, Tresa is heading up a new LDS feminist organization, WAVE: Women Advocating for Voice and Equality. I’m sure I’ll have a feature post on this soon enough, but while we were driving to lunch at Sunstone, Tresa confirmed to me that WAVE is sort of meant to be Christians for Biblical Equality for Mormons, i. e. a conservative activist organization within the movement.

Congratulations to my LDS feminist friends on having their hard work recognized. I’m very excited for you.