The "Lens of Love" reapplied

A few years ago I wrote a post that was driven by a conversation we had with a friend of ours from church, one where I came to the conclusion that the core of Christianity can be summed up by one directive: Love God (and, in doing so, love your neighbor). Everything else naturally stems from it.

Since I believe that God is love and anything that is of love is of God (and vice versa!), I brought up the concept of a "lens of love" through which your actions can be filtered: do your actions pass the test of love?

At the time, I applied the post mainly to the issue of whether or not homosexuality is a sin. Recently, however, I was engaged in some debate about another part of Scripture that insists that only men can be pastors/elders in the church, and, as an offshoot, that women must submit to their husbands.

Now, either side can pick apart specific verses to make their case. One can point to the creation story of Adam and Eve as evidence of a "created order". Or one can argue that the historical context addresses false teachings (that happened to be done by women who had likewise been taught wrong) and not women themselves as a whole.

I do believe it's important to consider the historical and cultural context in which a verse in question was written. EVERYONE does this to some degree. I don't think there's anyone who really takes the Bible 100% literally, or we'd all be following a bunch of arcane rules about wearing jewelry, mixing fabrics, and dealing with women on the rag.

In this case, for instance, I'd argue that Scripture says masters should treat their slaves well, and that slaves should submit to their masters, but that doesn't mean the Bible condones slavery-- it was just addressing examples of godly living for the circumstances of the day. Circumstances that include not only slavery but a very patriarchal society, one where women had few rights and were fully dependent on their husbands. In those days, "submit to your man" was very much the norm, maybe even a downright survival mechanism for women.

But where do you draw the line? 

After all, one could argue, even applying context is just another form of human (i.e. fallible) interpretation, so when you encounter specific guidance like this, where do you draw the line between applying contextual interpretation, and taking it literally (ignoring, for the moment, that even literal interpretation involves linguistic context)?

Well, that's where the "lens of love" comes into play.

No matter how you slice and dice it, claiming that only men can be pastors and that husbands must be heads of the household says only one glaringly obvious thing: that women are inferior to men. The "best" arguments I've seen in favor of these principles are always quick to defend themselves against this charge, insisting that men and women are indeed equal beings in the eyes of the Lord, they just have different roles to play. Biologically, that may be true-- Schwarzenegger's "Junior" notwithstanding, women are the ones who bear children.

But we're more than just biological beings, aren't we? That's the whole point of having a spirit and a soul, the whole point of being created in God's image.

So if you're saying that men and women are equal in the eyes of the Lord but have different roles to play, you're basically saying that men and women are "separate but equal". Gee-- why does that sound so familiar? That didn't really fly too well during the civil rights movement, and it doesn't really fly too well today. And for good reason:

When you examine this claim, that one fellow human being is inferior to you, through the "lens of love", it is most decidedly NOT a loving claim. By any stretch of the imagination. It fails the "love" test. You cannot claim that men and women have equal worth and yet relegate them to specific roles within the church and family based solely on gender. Therefore, I reject the notion that only men can be pastors or that women should submit to their husbands. Not because I'm part of a culture that promotes feminist ideals, but because those notions are the antithesis to love.

This is also why I continue to circle back to the single, lone directive in the Bible that is completely free of cultural and historical context: Love God, love your neighbor. Everything else just follows. And in this case, loving your neighbor means treating them and valuing them as human beings of equal worth to your own, no more, no less.

N'est-ce-pas?

Birthday Fun

Last week I celebrated my 36th birthday. It's not exactly a milestone, unless you count the Chinese zodiac, in which case, yes-- after 36 years, it's cycled back to my sign, the year of the Snake :-)

But it was probably THE most fun I've ever had!

It started out on Thursday, the actual day OF my birthday, when, in keeping with office tradition, my co-workers broke out the cake and ice cream, and we hung out in the conference room, chatting, snacking, and relaxing for an hour.

The next day, Friday, I took the day off work so I could accompany Todd at "Grandparents/Special Guests Day" at his school. I'm extra glad I took the time to go, because the look on his face when he saw me arrive for the flag salute in the morning was priceless. He was soooo excited to lead me to his classroom and partake of the planned activities together.

All the special guests got to sit in the kids' seats, and together we worked on making "quilt squares" out of construction paper together. Each quilt square consisted of cutout traces of our hands, common personality traits, favorite Bible verse, and a picture of a favorite memory. Afterward, we enjoyed a mid-morning snack together and then watched the kids perform a musical they'd been working on all semester. Here are some shots of the day: me seated at a kid's desk, our quilt square, and Todd right after the performance:

Traits on common: Sense of Humor and Love of Animals. Favorite memory: Fun trips together: Strawberry Festival (hence the strawberry), California Adventure (hence the turtle) and Universal Studios (hence the Hollywood sign on the hills)

After the performance, we headed to UCSB for lunch. It was the start of Staff Appreciation Week on campus, and Friday was a chancellor's luncheon on the grass by the lagoon. I set up our picnic blanket and settled Todd in with a sack lunch while I got my food. As it just so happened, another, unrelated group had set up bouncy castles on the same lawn, so Todd got to play on some of them! I took a turn once, too, and quickly realized why these things are meant for kids :-P

A bouncy sparring ring, with Storke Tower in the background

After lunch, we headed home to change and pack up... for a hike! Since Allan was still battling a bad bout of the flu, and since the hot weather meant that the rest of our friends preferred the beach or staying home, Todd and I went by ourselves. It actually ended up working out great, even though we'd never hiked that trail before. Since it was such a hot day, we could take our time deviating from the trail at various points along the way, splashing in the San Ysidro Creek to cool off.

That ice cold water was refreshing! Too bad every bug in creation had the same idea-- we had to fight them for clear spots of water!

Though I was a little concerned with the fact that we would be hiking alone, the trail was pretty straightforward and easy to follow, and we encountered plenty of other hikers/runners along the way. We ended up spending so much time playing in the creek that we had to turn around after going less than 2 miles up the trail, as it was starting to get late!

That evening, after returning home and washing up, Todd and I went out for dinner at Denny's-- again, just the two of us.

Overall, Friday was probably one of the best and most enjoyable days I'd ever spent. It was great to be able to spend an entire day with my little boy, and do all kinds of fun things together, by ourselves. And since it just happened to be the day after my birthday, I considered it part of my birthday celebration with my son :-)

The next night, though, was the adult party :-) We hired a sitter, reserved a couple of tables at our favorite karaoke spot-- Old Town Tavern, brought in sandwiches and cake, and celebrated with 17 friends!

I had fun with my dance and singing partners, respectively (aka the "other men" in my life) :

Our party practically took over the whole place! While there were a handful of other people at the beginning of the night, by about 10-11pm most of them had vanished, leaving only our big group to sing, dance, and patronize the bar :-) What a blast!

Despite the fact that I'm apparently staring off into space in the above photo, I had a good time, honest! You can tell how much by the gamut that my facial expressions ran:

All in all, I'd say this was one of the best birthday celebrations I'd ever had. One day was spent entirely with my son, the other was spent in the company of good friends, with lots of fun and laughter. Completely different types of fun, but both left me feeling pretty cheered and satisfied by the end of the weekend :-)

Now... what to plan for that upcoming milestone of 40!