3 thoughts on “The Christian Feminist Podcast, Episode #72: Response to “Feminism is Poison””
I really enjoyed this episode, and was encouraged by the positivity. I have listened to the Sheologians and agree with some of the criticism, especially regarding the fact that they could have been more gracious in tone. A couple of comments from your male panelist need to be addressed, though. He said that the Church needs feminism to correct it, and that the cross was an act of protest. Neither of these ideas are in keeping with orthodox Christianity. Feminist ideology has no authority over the body of Christ, Jesus is the head of the Church. And God’s revealed word in scripture is the only fit authority to correct errors within the Church. And to say that the cross was an act of protest is a serious misunderstanding of what happened there. God Incarnate voluntarily sacrificed himself to atone for our sins, satisfying the justice of God and providing for our salvation. This was no protest, it was justice fulfilled, and mercy provided to us as God himself paid our sin debt. I think this is an example of what is an epidemic in the Church- that is the culture informing one’s view of Christianity rather than Christianity informing one’s view of the culture. Thanks for the show, I’m still cherry picking my way through the archives and look forward to hearing more thoughtful discussions!
Hi Philip, thanks for your comment. I think you and I are more in agreement than it might first appear.
What I meant by “the church needs feminism to correct it” isn’t that orthodox Christian theology needs to submit itself to the whims and demands of feminist thought. I agree that if Christianity is true, it’s much more important that we do as God says than that we adhere to any culture’s idea of the correct treatment of and relationship between the sexes. But I think that feminism has been very useful in the last hundred years in highlighting the ways our culture has mistreated women, ways so deeply engrained that even people who might want to see it still cannot. When and where feminist theory and those who champion it force us to re-examine our practices, and even our scriptures, to see if we are affording women the rights and honor they deserve, I think it’s a good thing. For example, if it takes a group of feminists to argue that the Bible treats women with enough respect that they should be allowed to vote, I’m grateful to feminism for pointing that out to the church. But where feminism says anything that boils down to, “If Christianity makes a demand on women we do not want to bear, then we will drop our Christianity in favor of our feminism,” then the feminists who say that and I will have to disagree.
As for the cross and protest, I agree that the cross was conceived by God well before the incarnation of Christ. It’s not purely reactionary in that way. But I see the cross as, among other things, a protest against the notion that the Law was able to save us, a protest against the power of the Roman state and all earthly powers, and a protest against Satan’s work in this world and in the hearts and minds of humans. I believe that the cross can legitimately be used as a locus to rally around when Christians make similar protests against legalism, against corrupt government, and against immorality itself.
If you agree, I’m glad. If you still think I put my foot in my mouth, I’ll covet your prayers for my continued education. Thank you for listening, and thank you for thinking while you do.
That’s well said, Blake. Thanks for your gracious clarification. I continue to appreciate the tone with which you and the other hosts communicate with.
I really enjoyed this episode, and was encouraged by the positivity. I have listened to the Sheologians and agree with some of the criticism, especially regarding the fact that they could have been more gracious in tone. A couple of comments from your male panelist need to be addressed, though. He said that the Church needs feminism to correct it, and that the cross was an act of protest. Neither of these ideas are in keeping with orthodox Christianity. Feminist ideology has no authority over the body of Christ, Jesus is the head of the Church. And God’s revealed word in scripture is the only fit authority to correct errors within the Church. And to say that the cross was an act of protest is a serious misunderstanding of what happened there. God Incarnate voluntarily sacrificed himself to atone for our sins, satisfying the justice of God and providing for our salvation. This was no protest, it was justice fulfilled, and mercy provided to us as God himself paid our sin debt. I think this is an example of what is an epidemic in the Church- that is the culture informing one’s view of Christianity rather than Christianity informing one’s view of the culture. Thanks for the show, I’m still cherry picking my way through the archives and look forward to hearing more thoughtful discussions!
Hi Philip, thanks for your comment. I think you and I are more in agreement than it might first appear.
What I meant by “the church needs feminism to correct it” isn’t that orthodox Christian theology needs to submit itself to the whims and demands of feminist thought. I agree that if Christianity is true, it’s much more important that we do as God says than that we adhere to any culture’s idea of the correct treatment of and relationship between the sexes. But I think that feminism has been very useful in the last hundred years in highlighting the ways our culture has mistreated women, ways so deeply engrained that even people who might want to see it still cannot. When and where feminist theory and those who champion it force us to re-examine our practices, and even our scriptures, to see if we are affording women the rights and honor they deserve, I think it’s a good thing. For example, if it takes a group of feminists to argue that the Bible treats women with enough respect that they should be allowed to vote, I’m grateful to feminism for pointing that out to the church. But where feminism says anything that boils down to, “If Christianity makes a demand on women we do not want to bear, then we will drop our Christianity in favor of our feminism,” then the feminists who say that and I will have to disagree.
As for the cross and protest, I agree that the cross was conceived by God well before the incarnation of Christ. It’s not purely reactionary in that way. But I see the cross as, among other things, a protest against the notion that the Law was able to save us, a protest against the power of the Roman state and all earthly powers, and a protest against Satan’s work in this world and in the hearts and minds of humans. I believe that the cross can legitimately be used as a locus to rally around when Christians make similar protests against legalism, against corrupt government, and against immorality itself.
If you agree, I’m glad. If you still think I put my foot in my mouth, I’ll covet your prayers for my continued education. Thank you for listening, and thank you for thinking while you do.
That’s well said, Blake. Thanks for your gracious clarification. I continue to appreciate the tone with which you and the other hosts communicate with.