Catholic voters favor Trump in most battleground states, according to new NCR poll [National Catholic Reporter, 10/14/24]

Are male voters reluctant to vote for a woman? [AP News, 10/11/24]

Sexist Language Surges Online as Harris Battles Trump [Newsweek, 10/11/24]

How can we be where we are as a country? How can so many people appear to be so willing to vote for a too-old, increasingly cognitively challenged, many times over convicted, womanizing, cruel, aggressively hostile to those who disagree, dishonest, authoritarian-leaning, narcissistic man?

Is the problem that the other major party candidate is a woman?

Even if Kamala Harris manages a victory in November, the Church has a lot of explaining to do, as the Church is the source of much of the sexism that is deeply embedded in our culture. While the Christian Church is not the only influential body, there are critical issues that must be addressed, especially since the scriptural grounding of the discounting of women is pretty shaky.

The sexism in the Church runs deep and, in so many ways, extends beyond the notion of “sexism.” I remember one of the classes I took at the Div School in which we read some of the writings of the Desert Fathers, early Christian monks who lived ascetic lives in the Egyptian desert. Many (most?) of these men equated any sexual desires or feelings not to the natural inclinations of the human body and the human experience. Instead, these early ascetics— at least some of them—spoke of those moments of lustfulness as visitations from the devil. And what form did the devil take? That of a woman, of course. It’s not so outrageous to consider that monks in a desert would experience carnal desires and might then fantasize about women. The linking of those feelings not only to the work of the devil, but to equate women with the personification of evil was (and remains) extremely problematic.

For many Christians, women are connected to evil, mischief, recklessness, waywardness. There also the sense that women are devoid of certain qualities that are essential to such things as leadership. It’s all there in the Genesis 2 and 3. The man doesn’t succumb to the temptation of the serpent. It’s the woman. But, is that the only way to interpret that story? What about the seemingly subordinate, “helper,” status of women in Genesis 2 and 3? The traditional interpretation of this part of the Bible is actually not in any way a full reading of the text. The story does not provide one definitive, foundational explanation of the relationship between men and women that many Christian pastors, leaders, adherents have come to believe. There’s a lot more going on in the story or, in other words: it’s not as simple as it looks.

For Christians turning to the New Testament for guidance on how to understand the role of women, many turn to a passage in 1 Timothy that suggests that women may not teach or have any sort of authority over men. It has turned into another definitive verse. Yet, upon closer inspection, that interpretation of the text is not the only way of reading it. In fact, it very likely is not how that passage should be read and understood. There is a willfulness here, it seems to me, to make this passage into something it is not. Unfortunately, that problematic interpretation has taken root.

And has become a significant lens, along with other problematic interpretations of passages, through which many Christians view family relationships, communities, the Church and its churches, and the country.

It may come as a surprise that the Holy Bible offers other important insights into the lives of human beings and our connection to our Creator. Some of those insights ought to be front and center when we consider how the Christian faith influences how we understand the relationship between women and men and the private, public and faith-based roles of men and women. Here are just a few:

• In Genesis 1, human beings— the woman and the man— were created at the same time.
• Jesus Christ entrusted a woman to be the first person to share the news of resurrection.
• Jesus taught, healed, ministered with, and ate with many women.
• The Apostle Paul relied on women as partners in his work to spread the good news.

It is because of these stories, and more, that I continue to identify as a Christian and have followed the call into ordained ministry and service. Yet, my voice and the voices of those in my corner of Christianity are very small and not especially consequential, at least not in moving into the forefront of public discourse a different (but still faithful) interpretation of holy texts that provides a vision of equal status, and the sharing of gifts for various roles (including leadership), of women and men.

As far as those more dominant voices in the Church, the ones that claim the one and only path for understanding Biblical text and story, all I can say: they have a lot to answer for in how they have contributed to the sad state we are in in this country.