Second-Class Citizen

In the news report I referenced the other day (and in just about every complaint you will read on the subject), the complaint about the Bible versus women in the church is that taking the Bible as it is written on that subject makes women out to be "second-class citizens". Without even asking if this is true, what is a "second-class citizen"?

The dictionary says that the term refers to "a person considered inferior in status or rights in comparison with some others." The term typically includes the question of "opportunities" or "importance", where the "second-class citizen" doesn't have the same "opportunities" or is of "lesser importance". Wikipedia says that it includes the concept of not only discrimination and oppression, but systematic discrimination. So America, for instance, is accused of creating "second-class citizens" out of illegal immigrants because they're employed, but not allowed all the same rights as citizens. Black Americans are often classified as "second-class citizens" because it is said they don't have the same opportunities as the white Americans. And Suzanne Venker has suggested that the newest group of "second-class citizens" is ... wait for it ... men. For that claim she cites male bashing in the media, school cirricula centered on girls, the whole Title IX thing (look it up -- it is disturbing when you think it through), the male loss of legal rights in family court, and the shocking rise of female-on-male domestic violence. (She indicates that recent statistics show that domestic violence is currently 50% male and 50% female.) Being a second-class citizen, then, is a bad thing.

Now back to the question at hand. If we take the Bible as it is written (including God's commands and structures as He designed them), is it actually true that the church, the Bible, and God relegate women to the status of "second-class citizen"? Well, first, let's be clear. Assuming it does (and we haven't yet established the claim), one thing is certain. We ought to. That is, if God says, "Do X", whether or not we like X, we can know a few things. We can know it's a good thing even if we can't see it. And we can know that we are morally obligated to do it even if we don't like it. So if the Bible views women as second-class citizens, we should.

But the question still hangs there. Does it? I think, with a little thought, we can see that we're suffering (again) from misplaced values and misappropriated words. For instance, most people are quite sure that "submission" equals "inferiority". Please think that through. Jesus claimed for Himself that He was in submission to the Father. If that equivalence of "submission" to "inferiority" is true, then we have a twisted God (the Trinity) in which God the Son is inferior to God the Father (who are one God). That makes no sense. Nor is it logically required. "Submission" references a role and authority, not superiority and inferiority.

There is a value placed on roles over other roles. A CEO is obviously more valuable than a janitor or a secretary. Perhaps in terms of salary that's true, but try to find a CEO who can do his job without someone to clean up and someone to manage the office. It can't be done. The roles are different, but this doesn't require that the people are more or less valuable. (And surely I don't have to make the case that a higher salary is not the same as a more valuable person.) (For a clear, biblical argument on the difference of roles versus the values of people, see Paul's discussion on the Church as the Body in 1 Cor 12:1-27. He argues things like "God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as He chose." (1 Cor 12:18) and "the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable" (1 Cor 12:22). No part is less valuable based on its "demeaning" role and, apparently, the more valuable parts are the ones with the "lesser roles".)

And, of course, we have the whole problem of "rights" and "opportunities". We agree on the face of it that "second-class citizens" shouldn't have less "rights" than "first-class citizens" (which, then, eliminates the concept of "second-class citizen"), but then we get muddled about what constitutes a "right". We agree that "second-class citizens" shouldn't have less "opportunities" than others, but then we get muddled about what constitutes an "opportunity".

Something here I really need to address. A recurring complaint appears to be that "the Bible places the blame for the Fall of mankind on women". They will point to the fact that Eve ate the fruit first and then to Paul's reference to this event in 1 Tim 2:14. They understand all this to be God saying, "It's Eve's fault!!" Again, if that's what God is saying, we must agree. And, again, I don't see that this is what God is saying. First, all references to the event in Scripture have God holding Adam responsible, not Eve. For instance, Paul wrote that "sin came into the world through one man" (Rom 5:12), not "woman". The letter to Timothy says that Eve was deceived but Adam wasn't. That would mean that Eve's sin was mitigated but Adam's wasn't. It is biblically unsupportable to charge that God in the Bible holds women in general and Eve in particular as primarily responsible for the sin of mankind. That would be men in general and Adam in particular.

I would argue, then, that the Bible does not make women into "second-class citizens". Instead, God repeatedly indicates that men and women are of equal value, but have differing roles. When men and women operate in these different roles for which God designed each and that they operate as a whole -- a "complement" (the meaning of Genesis 2:18) -- but not differing in value or basic rights. Instead of demeaning women, I would argue that the Bible exalts them, making them "joint heirs" (1 Peter 3:7), precious, worthy of great care. Now, it would be foolish to suggest that some have not abused the Scriptures to justify abusing women. It is quite true. But the failure of evil men to properly recognize God's perspective on the high value of women and to treat them correctly in that view doesn't negate the truth that neither the Bible nor God view women as second-class citizens even while affirming and defining differences in gender and roles. It would be wise not to confuse this. It will be difficult not to confuse it, given our modern assault of feminism and our confusion over things like "rights" and "opportunities", but it would be wise.