Join our Newsletter
If you like The NakedJournal, you'll enjoy my weekly newsletter about deconstruction, freedom, and life in general.
Tony Jones' Curious Call For Schism
On November 27, 2013 In his post, Maybe Schism Was the Wrong Word, Tony Jones shares his conversation with Sarah Cunningham who "fundamentally disagrees" with Jones' position.
Jones recants of using the word "schism".
Jones and Cunningham obviously disagree over this issue, yet he is fellowshipping and even collaborating with her at upcoming events, which goes against the words and spirit of his original post.
I'm confused.
21 comments
I admit I’m a bit confused by Jones’ stance. Is there a reason he chose the issue of gender inclusion? Hasn’t the GLBT issue been on the table for about 40-50 years? Could it be that the gender inclusion issue doesn’t affect his professional standing, whereas other justice issues would require him to lay aside his ordination and other credentials that identify him with an unjust institution? I can’t help but wonder if he has intentionally drawn his line in the sand so that it keeps him safe from the repercussions of his own call while others are required to take the risks.
Or, am I missing something?
Note: I edited this because I accidentally deleted the earlier version with an edit.
I admit, I’m a bit confused by his stance. Is he choosing the particular issue of women in the ministry for a reason? Hasn’t the GLBT issue been around for about 40-50 years as well? Is the gender inclusion more pressing because it doesn’t actually affect his own position, whereas to say the same about gender identity and sexual orientation issues would require him to lay aside his own ordination? Is it just me, or is it convenient that injustice he’s chosen seems to keep him “safe” from his own call to action?
Or am I missing something?
It would appear Tony Jones is thinking out loud: he knows something serious must be done, and he’s not sure if he wants separation or collaboration.
It appears he is advocating for one, while doing the other – maybe, like a great many things, the appropriate action is contextual.
There are many motivations, and they are described in various ways:
“(Our understanding of) God’s plan for women”
“Faithfulness to (our interpretation of) the Bible”
“Conformity to the tradition (of our Church)”
“Shared culture and values (with those like us)”
“Fellowship and community (with those like us)”
“Well-understood and clear-cut roles (in some areas)”
“Gender-specific roles and responsibilities (again, in some areas)”
These are gender-neutral motivations that may advantage one gender more, but can have perceived advantages for people of all genders. Conformity has huge advantages for those who do not wish to ask questions or change their views – and, if we are honest, we are all like that on some topics, some of the time!
It is interesting. If I were to list out all the socially conservative people I have known in my life, well over 50% have been women.