VOLUME 13
WWW.THEVENTRILOQUIST.US
A Case for Egalitarian Christianity The case for an egalitarian approach towards gender roles • Jordan Ryner “Feminism. We don’t like that team.” These are the immortalized words of Dr. Thomas White, uttered just before proclaiming that feminists oppose marriage and therefore are not on the team of the Bible. I remember sitting in my living room with a friend just after Dr. White said this. While his oversimplification of an ideology and damnation of anyone who disagrees with him was initially humorous, his juvenile approach to theology saddened me. What’s worse is that, if Drs. Gredy, Cornman, and company have their way, complementarianism (a soft form of patriarchy) will become an official part of Cedarville’s doctrinal statement. Since our leaders are so adamant about making this change, I feel it necessary to make a case against their narrow interpretation of Scripture and consider the possibility that literal interpretation does not mean male headship is the only “Biblical” model for male-female relationships. Like many of you, I grew up in a conservative Baptist family, attending a conservative Baptist church. Perhaps the biggest difference, however, is that I never heard that the man was the head of the household (or if I did, I never saw it lived out). My father wasn’t the head of the household so much as he was my mother’s soul mate- her other half. They both earned an income, paid the bills together, cleaned the house and yard together, and went to church together. Whenever I needed advice I knew that I could go to either of them. I never once thought that my mother was submissive or that there was any difference in their roles as husband and wife. They were two people, made in the image of God, brought together in union. When I arrived at Cedarville in 2010, I quickly realized that this school thought differently. Things became worse after Dr. White became president. I thought to myself, “How is the church representative
Farewell from the Editor
of God’s Kingdom if half of its members are secondclass citizens?” Are we all not equally made in God’s image? The hardest part about believing these things is that it is nearly impossible to start a conversation on this at Cedarville University without being shamed, ridiculed, or declared a heretic. A heretic. Even though I’m only espousing what my Christian elders taught me at my home church. While many Christians agree with Cedarville’s complementarian views, I have found that there are many who do not. One prevailing view is that male headship is the result of the fall. In Scripture, we see no declaration by God that man is the head of the woman until Genesis 3:16. To interpret this verse as Scriptural support for male headship would require that we take Scripture out of context. Genesis 3 is a curse. It is a list of horrible, terrible things that will befall humanity as a result of sin. Male headship will exist because of sin. In other words, men will sin by trying to obstruct women’s attempts at freedom and independence. Women will, in turn, sin by submitting to men in hopes of maintaining a peaceful equilibrium in their relationships. This is because women often have a maternal instinct that makes them more relationship-focused while men are frequently more action-focused. The sin is not to resist these natures, but rather to give in to them to the point that it hurts yourself and/or others. Throughout the rest of the Old Testament, we see a largely egalitarian Yahweh who tries to steer a patriarchal society of sinners away from sin. He calls prophets and prophetesses, kings and queens alike to serve His divine purposes. In the Gospel, Jesus preaches to men and women alike. Christ’s first act postresurrection is commissioning Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome to spread the word of His resurrection. This makes these three women the first
After four years at Cedarville, three years of involvement with The Ventriloquist, and two years serving as the editor of the paper, it’s finally time for me to move on to the next chapter of my life. I’ve lived through perhaps the most turbulent period in Cedarville’s history to date (although I suspect that the turbulence is not yet complete) and I’ve seen the university change in ways that I never would have imagined possible just a few years ago. As a farewell, I offer a few reflections on my perceptions of the direction and focus of the campus community. I’ve heard and seen quite a lot about “the agenda” of The Ventriloquist over the past few years. (By the way, I find it fascinating that in the past three years not a single person has reached out to ask what our agenda is.) As would be expected, people hold a wide variety of stances towards the paper, from complete support to outright hostility. From the latter camp, I’ve read quite a bit about how I’m attempting to “destroy the university” with my “antiGod” agenda and other similar sentiments. So I suppose I will use this space to clarify and explain what my agenda actually is. While The Ventriloquist has
Continued on Page 3 >
Continued on Page 3 >
Apocalypse When? Reflections on the apocalypse of Revelation! Sarah Jones, CU Alumna Lately I’ve been thinking about the end of the world. I used to wait for it, in a confused anticipation born of a youthful interest in the utter chaos it promised and the fear that I would be subjected to it, as one of Christ’s more inferior subjects. Years later, I still can’t quite banish the idea. Certainly, this fascination about the end of all things isn’t limited to the fundamentalist Christianity of my childhood. An entire subgenre of science fiction plays with the idea that either by accident or human malfeasance, life as we know it ends. But in these stories, life itself doesn’t altogether cease; it mutates, or struggles forward into the future. Humanity rebuilds, after a fashion. Sometimes things are better, sometimes they’re worse. But what I find really fascinating about the Christian apocalypse is that even though life endures, humanity doesn’t. We get this gauzy vision of an eternal future in faultless bodies. There aren’t many details. Is there love after Armageddon? Hate? Any emotion at all? And yet we’re still supposed to long for it, in the absence of any real
The Ventriloquist
APRIL 2014
Reflections on my time as editor of The Ventriloquist! Zach Schneider
detail. We’re supposed to take joy in the prospect of losing our humanity. I found the Revelation account of the Tribulation to be far more compelling than anything that came after it. It’s bloody but it’s real. There’s something tangible about it, despite all the metaphor. On some level, I understood the rage. It’s palpably human. Were I God, the creator of all life and the earth upon which it scrabbles, I would be furious. Can you imagine? You create a race of creatures in your own image and what’s reflected back at you but constant war and petty evil broken only by the occasional glimmers of kindness and hope and courage. I’d annihilate the world too. I’d just take myself out along with it. But I am not God, obviously, and I don’t believe that anyone else is either. And that brings me back to the apocalypse. The apocalypse is catharsis. It’s the logical conclusion of the way things are, the ultimate self-fulfilling prophecy. I think that’s why it still captures my imagination as much as it does. Every day on earth is somebody’s end of all things. Maybe the apocalypse is really a process. Maybe it trickles in, one blow after another after another until finally, the end breathes into silence.
Continued on Page 2 >
www.theventriloquist.us
Page 1
Apocalypse (con’t) That requires no deus ex machina and is therefore more likely, I think. But a fundamentalist would disagree, and there’s a mutant hope in their point of view. For fundamentalists, the end has to be a bang, not a whimper; it’s a great ripping of the cosmic bandaid. Sure, there’s seven years of tribulation but after millennia upon millennia of horrors great and small, that’s just a sneeze. And perhaps that’s why people can commit themselves to such a restrictive way of life. You look at a broken, groaning world and pick the dogma that promises to put it out of its misery. It’s the ultimate justification, not only for the pain you’ve witnessed in the world, but for your reaction to it. Even so come, Lord Jesus. In leaving fundamentalism, I sacrificed that for a life free of restrictions. Or so I thought: I haven’t completely moved on from that indefinite wait for the end. Too often, the mere fact of being human still feels dangerous. Every sleepless night, every ache, every kiss is one step closer to the edge of an abyss that’s pressed on my mind for as long as I’ve been aware. We leave so little behind, if you really think about it. That’s the great paradox of abandoning fundamentalism. You are still the same person you are when you left, with the same dents in your brain. But I don’t think that’s a permanent state any longer, and maybe that’s evidence I’m finally letting go of Armageddon. If I can believe that people change–that I change–then the world’s problems don’t need to be solved by annihilation but by the act of living deliberately well. The apocalypse might be catharsis, but it’s also a cop-out, and it’s not worth the cost of my humanity. ♦
! !
Follow The Ventriloquist •Visit our website, www.theventriloquist.us. All of our articles are available to read online. You can comment on articles, interact with other readers, and contact us to tell us how we’re doing. •Like us on Facebook for updates and occasional posts about important current events. www.facebook.com/TheVPaper •Follow us on Twitter to stay up-to-date on all of the latest happenings at The Ventriloquist. @TheVPaper
Cedarville Out The Ventriloquist values openness, inclusivity, and dialogue, especially with individuals that are members of groups marginalized by Christian or popular culture. If you are questioning your sexuality and need honest dialogue, support, or a listening ear, Cedarville Out is available to help. Cedarville Out is online at CedarvilleOut.org or email cedarvilleout@gmail.com.
About The Ventriloquist The Ventriloquist is an independently-run, independently-funded student publication at Cedarville University. Our staff defines a university as an institution committed to collective learning. We believe this commitment should extend past the institutional level and include all members of the university community. We recognize that when each community member strives to cultivate creativity, critical thinking, and growth, richer education and character formation result. We believe healthy intellectual pursuit leads to more authentic followers of faith, the goal of any religiouslyaffiliated school. We accept well-written articles from anybody in the Cedarville community and publish them in hope that the reader will give each piece fair consideration. Article ideas, questions, and comments can be submitted to ventriloquistpaper@gmail.com.
Generation Progress The Ventriloquist is proudly published with support from Generation Progress, a division of the Center for American Progress. Generation Progress is online at GenProgress.org.
The Ventriloquist
My Freshman Year at CU My struggles with mental illness and Cedarville’s response to it! Iva Faber Life as a freshman far from home, in a new environment, doing something I’ve never done before, is difficult and scary, but navigating that while in the middle of a full-blown relapse seemed impossible. This was my reality though: I’ve struggled with mental illness for at least 5 years. When I arrived on campus, I thought I was someplace where I could be real, where I could be open and honest with people without fear of judgment. However, this isn’t what I experienced. I was so hurt to hear students all over campus making light of mental illnesses, saying things like, “People with eating disorders just need to learn how to eat,” or, “People who are depressed just need to get up and do something.” These are incredibly ignorant comments that make people keep their struggles to themselves. This is the truth: eating disorders go much deeper than issues with food and body image. It’s a disease, just like cancer or diabetes. No one chooses to despise herself so much that reaches a breaking point: the only things she can think to do are starve herself, purge, take pills, or binge--all for the sake of trying to “fix” herself. Self-harm is not attention seeking. If we wanted attention, we would be showing everyone instead of going to great lengths to hide everything. Sometimes people face such pain, and they believe the only way to release the pain is to hurt him/herself. Suicidal people don’t really want to die; they just want the pain to end. They’ve lost all hope that life will ever get better. People who are depressed have chemical imbalances. People with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) have dealt with extreme trauma. All of these people that I have mentioned are me. If you don’t take anything else away from my story, remember this: anyone struggling with one or more of these issues is a human being who God loves, just as much as He loves you. Treat us appropriately with this truth in mind. What if I judged or made fun of someone who was bald from radiation treatments because he/she has cancer? You would think I’m a horrible person. Mental illnesses should be viewed through the same lens. Those who suffer from mental illness(es) cannot help it. Trust me. I would turn it all off right now if I could, but I don’t have that power. God gives everyone their cross to bear, and mental illness happens to be mine. Here’s my story. During this semester, I experienced a close call with suicide. I expressed severe suicidal feelings to a few close friends, who took them seriously and contacted Student Life. I had to meet with a couple of people from Student Life; the meeting took place in my dorm. Although I was nervous and upset, the tone of conversation was anything but serious or considerate of my emotional state. Throughout the conversation, the student life employees were smiling, bubbly, and cheerful, and the subject deviated frequently from the task at hand. They then proceeded to take a vote on whether or not to send me to the hospital. I was sitting in the room; they spoke as if I wasn’t a few feet away from them. Ignoring my emotional fragility, they cracked several jokes, as if they hadn’t just voted about where I would be staying for the next week. But the decision had been made: I was going to the hospital. While I was in the hospital, a dean contacted the friends to whom I had expressed my feelings. The dean encouraged them to stop supporting me as much, saying that they didn’t need to “take ownership” of my treatment. The dean asked my friends to have me call because they didn’t know where I had been hospitalized. As per the dean’s request, I called several days later, and the dean asked me to email about setting up a time for us to meet. We scheduled a time to meet on the day after I was discharged from the hospital. At first, the dean seemed to be genuinely concerned and caring, assuring me that they were there for me whenever I needed anything. I let my guard down a little. Then, the dean reached over to the printer, pulled a paper out, and placed it in front of me. The paper laid out 4 “directives” I had to comply with in order to remain living on campus. Three of the directives weren’t an issue at all, but the first was. It read: “Thoughts, feelings and expressions of self-harm are to be communicated only to a counselor, RA, RD, dean, family, or to emergency personnel (i.e. 911) if your life is in danger.” I was threatened that if I talked about my mental health with my friends, I would be kicked out of my dorm. I felt like I had no choice in signing it. By legal definition, that is coercion. I asked the dean if I could at least get my friends added to the list, and we discussed the issue for a while before the dean finally said they would investigate the possibility. The dean met with one of my friends a week later and finally added them to the list.
Continued on Page 4 > Editorial Board
Zach Schneider Dan Sizemore, CU Alumnus Sarah Burch, CU Alumna Jonathan Hammond, CU Alumnus
www.theventriloquist.us
Page 2
Farewell (con’t) published various types of views and calls to action over the past few years, my agenda is not inherently one of political goals. My goal is to influence the campus community to think more and think more critically. To that end, we’ve published a wide array of theological, political, and campus news articles during my tenure as editor. While I am personally progressive, I have published a number of articles that I do not agree with on an individual level, because they contained well-constructed arguments or unique perspectives. The mission of The Ventriloquist, summed up in a sentence, is to provide a platform and a voice for ideas and perspectives that cannot find it elsewhere on campus. To a large extent, I think that The Ventriloquist has failed in its mission. Especially over the year, the general orientation and attitude espoused by the administration and mirrored by the student body is one of ideological fascism. By that, I don’t mean campus safety beating down dorm room doors but rather a firm belief in a faith, doctrine, and world that contain no shades of gray. If you’re a feminist, you don’t believe the Bible. If you’re pro-LGBT+, you’re exercising revisionist hermeneutics. If you publish a newspaper with controversial opinions, you’re pursuing an anti-God agenda. If you’re female and you want to teach the Bible to men, or if you’re gay, or if you’re insufficiently Baptist, you’re not welcome here. Ideological fascism is problematic because it is the enemy of thought and inquiry. Regardless of how confident we sound behind chapel lecterns and pulpits, we are imperfect human beings, which means that it is exceptionally likely that a large number of our views, beliefs, and doctrines are wrong. Thought and inquiry are the symptomatic medicine to our human condition: when we think critically about our beliefs and engage in good faith with those who disagree with us, we are able to identify and correct mistakes and wrong beliefs. Thought and inquiry in the face of prevailing theological opinion have been essential to making the church throughout history more like Christ, from the Reformation to the abolition of slavery to the women’s rights movement. But ideological fascism cannot tolerate critical inquiry because goodfaith dialogue with opposing views requires mental consent to the idea that we could be wrong. If we take the claims of feminism seriously, we must also open ourselves to the possibility that some of our beliefs and attitudes towards women are in need of correction. If we allow gay students to lead our campus community, we must also dialogue with a different perspective on the church’s attitude towards the LGBT+ community. If we allow atheists to speak on campus, we must take challenges to the ideological foundations of our worldview seriously. And that’s scary. It’s much more appealing to dismiss challenges to our beliefs with ad hominem attacks or straw figure fallacies. And so, we address the anti-Biblical “feminism” that wants to abolish the institution of marriage, assume that that particular view is representative of the entire feminist movement, and call it a day. But by doing so, we intentionally blindfold ourselves to our own inadequacies and mistakes. By trying to ensure that nothing ever changes, we inadvertently guarantee that nothing ever gets better. Critical thinking isn’t just an issue of progress, either. It’s a Biblical issue. In 1 Thessalonians 5:12, Paul instructs the church to “test everything; hold fast what is good” (ESV). Implied in this mandate is the responsibility to actually do our best to understand other ideologies and worldviews and find if they are good before holding fast or rejecting them. Caricatures and straw figures don’t cut it; it’s impossible to test an idea in good faith if you aren’t even stating the idea correctly. On the same level, the Bible consistently expresses the importance of bearing accurate witness and maintaining intellectual integrity; to fulfill these goals, it is essential that we engage in honest dialogue with a wide variety of views. The goal of The Ventriloquist, put simply, is to counter ideological fascism. To present controversial views or unique perspectives in the words of their own authors, so readers are at least forced to consider the existence and (hopefully) best arguments of another point of view. That’s why we carry out our mission and why we publish articles that are controversial or unpopular. I don’t know what’s going to happen to the paper next year, and I am pessimistic about the direction and focus of the administration. So to you, the reader, I leave this challenge: when somebody, anybody, tells you that their view of Scripture or politics or theology is the only correct or Christian view, don’t believe them. Do your research, find the best arguments from both sides, and decide for yourself. Be The Ventriloquist in your own mind: think and speak from another perspective, and interact in good faith with the best opinions and perspectives that the world has to offer. There’s a big, beautiful world of inquiry outside the bubble of Cedarville, waiting to be discovered; and the process of thought, discovery, and self-reflection is what allows Christians to become more like Christ.
Egalitarian (con’t) preachers of the gospel, the first heralds of God’s Kingdom. This is made possible because we are all equal in God’s Kingdom. Male headship has been erased along with sin and it is possible for us to return to the benefits our race enjoyed in the garden. True equality is possible because of the ministry of Christ. After this, the majority of Scripture is a collection of letters by Paul. Occasionally, Paul revisits the gender issues in his letters to Greco-Roman cities. First of all, it is important to remember the context of his writing. He was addressing patriarchal societies that would not comprehend the possibility of egalitarianism; remember that this is before free thinking and access to libraries or Google, so the only knowledge of culture these people had was that of their own. Second, Paul, unlike Jesus, the judges, and the prophets, never claimed to speak on behalf of God. Rather, it seems that he was called by God to give his opinions to churches who needed an elder’s comfort. It’s important that we take Paul’s literature as opinion, not doctrine, or else we fall into the trap of rewriting the Biblical narrative. The reintroduction of rigid gender roles, like Paul’s advocacy for slavery in Philemon, would break from the Creation-FallRedemption model that God gives in the rest of Scripture and break apart the other literary structures such as forgiveness, redemption, and the inclusion of Gentiles in God’s Kingdom. In other words, I would argue that a complementarian interpretation would compromise the integrity of all Scripture. Today we as Americans live in an advanced society that provides a great number of freedoms that few humans before us have enjoyed. Women, minorities, and children have rights and are no longer considered property. Due to the influence of feminism, women have thrived in the workplace, in the home, and in the church leadership (when they are allowed to). This proves that there is no physical or mental difference in women that makes them inferior leaders to men. The final argument for egalitarianism is the constructed nature of gender. In other words, gender is more of a psychological label than physical. This isn’t to say that there are no physical differences between men and women. However, the personality traits that we recognize as “boyish” or “girly” are cultural constructs. Boys in the USA are taught at an early age to do certain things such as playing with trucks, wearing blue, and looking up to muscular heroes. Girls are taught to do things such as wear dresses, play with dolls, and dream about marriage. It’s not that doing any of these things is bad, but when we try to teach young people that they have to choose between one or the other, then we have a problem. For example, what if a 2-year-old boy likes to play house or dream about marriage? Is he bad? Many readers might say that’s fine. But when that child goes to school, he will be bullied physically and called derogatory and misogynistic names. What if a 2-year-old girl wants to play with trucks? Her parents will probably laugh, call it cute, and declare her a “tomboy”. But when she’s 18 and wants to drive construction vehicles for a living, her parents, who are proponents of male headship, would panic because “What guy would ever want to marry such a ‘manly’ woman?” The problem isn’t that the boy who plays house or the girl who plays with trucks are bad. Rather, the problem is that everyone wants these two children to conform to their expectations. This is oppression by definition. Everyone around these children wants to dictate who they are and what they can do in their careers and their social and romantic lives. On the other hand, Christian egalitarians don’t mind “manly” women or “girly” boys. Rather, they are unconcerned with “gender-inappropriate” attitudes or careers and proud of the child for being true to the person that God made them. The Christian egalitarian does not fear the prospect of women becoming preachers, because gender should be an irrelevant factor in most theological discussions. For the same reasons, Christian egalitarians don’t mind if a male person wants to be a fashion designer or home decorator. Living in a Christ-centered community requires us to treat people equally, just as Christ treated them. Our greatest concern should be whether the boy who plays house or the girl who plays with trucks grows up to be a person who is true to themselves and true to God. If Cedarville wants to make complementarianism their policy, then there’s nothing we can do about it. However, we all need to recognize that this may not actually be the “correct” interpretation of Scripture, and in embracing this mentality, the university is hurting women because it is in their opinion a “Godly” action. This is not “Godly” or “Biblical”, but very much the opposite. ♦
!
Peace, Zach Schneider Editor
!♦
The Ventriloquist
www.theventriloquist.us
Page 3
Freshman Year (con’t) I found Cedarville’s course of action during these events to be appalling. If I had broken my leg, would I only be allowed to talk to certain people about the pain associated with that? By drawing a line like this, Cedarville is increasing the stigma surrounding mental illness, making me feel more isolated than before. Discrimination in this form is dehumanizing and leads to a belief that the people who belong to the discriminated group don’t have value. Cedarville made its message clear: You are different than everybody else, worth less than everybody else, and not wanted on this campus. Maybe this isn’t what they said, or what they meant, but this is what their actions said to me. I’ve cried over this: I watched the place I had grown to love turn against me out of ignorance and hate, and this pain tore me apart. When I needed love and support the most, part of this community of Christ-followers responded to me with hate and judgment. I know there are others like me on this campus having to deal with similar issues. That is my purpose in sharing my story. I don’t want anyone else to have to go the pain and judgment I encountered. Hopefully, something I’ve said here will cause people to change. Hopefully, people will think before they speak. Hopefully, people in leadership will find love in their hearts and show it through their actions toward and interactions with others. My plea to you is simple: learn from my experiences and stand up for others. Please learn to be kind to those around you. Don’t make jokes or ignorant comments about sensitive issues out of a lack of experience or understanding. That’s the very thing that keeps people locked up and hidden, telling no one of their struggles. Make this world a safe place for those around you, where people can be real and get the help they need and deserve. Stop adding to the hate, the judgment, the dehumanization and take a stand for those who are too scared to take a stand for themselves. To anyone struggling with mental illness: you are not alone. You are valued. You are beautiful. You have worth. You are loved. Stay strong. ♦
Dedication This issue of The Ventriloquist is dedicated to those who made it possible: to the professors and staff who taught us how to think critically and engage the world in dialogue.
!
To Dr. Carl Ruby, Dr. David Mills, Dr. Shawn Graves, Marlena Graves, Dr. TC Ham, Dr. Jeff Cook, Dr. Adam Johnson, Dr. Michael Pahl, Dr. Aaron James, Dr. Carl B. Smith, Dr. Deborah Haffey, Jon Purple, Mark Bentley, and all the rest:
!
Thank you for your time at Cedarville and for teaching us as students and Christians to boldly and fearlessly think critically about the world around us, not as people with no hope nor as those afraid of the outside world but rather as a community committed to changing the world through the vibrant and living power of faith.
!
Though Cedarville may no longer appreciate your contributions, your service at Cedarville speaks for itself, changing lives and opening minds to the beauty and fullness of the world around us. ♦
Crossword Solution online: www.theventriloquist.us/puzzles/april_2014!
The Ventriloquist
www.theventriloquist.us
Page 4