Her.meneutics: Are Evangelical Women Primarily Interested in Parenthood?

back to Christianity Today

RSS Feed | Help

email to a friend

twitter updates

Follow Her.meneutics on Twitter

What Is Her.meneutics?

The Christianity Today women's blog provides news and analysis from the perspective of evangelical women. We cover news stories and books related to international justice and evangelism, pregnancy and sexual ethics, marriage, parenting, and celibacy, pop culture, health and body image, raising girls, and women in the church and parachurch.

Her.meneutics is edited by associate editor Katelyn Beaty and online editor Sarah Pulliam Bailey.

interests

books and media

church life

justice and politics

relationships and family

sexuality and health

spirituality

theology

women of note

writers

More ...

Free Newsletters

books we're reading

blogs we're watching

« MIA: Men Who Don't Use Pornography | Main | The Sin Behind My Swearing »

September 9, 2011

Are Evangelical Women Primarily Interested in Parenthood?

Maybe many are, but there is so much more to the story. Welcome to Her.meneutics.

Rachel Stone

Rachel Held Evans is soon to complete her “year of Biblical womanhood,” which has included stunts like sleeping outside in a tent during her period and following her “Biblical Woman’s Ten Commandments,” which include “thou shalt submit to thy husband’s will in all things,” and “thou shalt not cut thy hair.” As part of the project, Evans has also interviewed women who incorporate literal practices from Scripture into their daily lives: conservative Mennonites, a Quiverfull mom, and an orthodox Jewish woman. Evans, who has no children and has even confessed to being afraid of motherhood, noted that while she would not have a child as a part of the experiment, she would be looking for creative ways to mother--which included a weekend spent with “Chip”--a RealCare Baby “infant simulator.”

Evans, who has, in recent months, taken on Mark Driscoll and Donald Miller, is embarking on the project for “egalitarian reasons,” says a recent Slate article by Ruth Graham. Evans herself says that the project is aimed at exploring “biblical womanhood” because “while many hail [it] as the ideal, few seem to agree on exactly what it means, so women like me receive mixed messages about how to honor God with our decisions.” As one believing the Bible to be “inspired by God,” her project aims not to belittle the Bible or poke fun at earnest believers, but, in her words, to “creatively investigate our application of [the Bible].” Overall, it looks to be an amusing and interesting project with an important point: no one really applies ALL of the Bible literally.

Graham’s profile, however, seems to frame Evans as particularly daring within “the insular world of conservative Christianity”: she’s an egalitarian, Graham writes, “within a world where there’s an ongoing debate over whether husbands are the masters of their wives” (really?); she’s one of the “rare prominent evangelical women who isn't primarily interested in parenthood” but who instead “tackles thorny theological questions, gender issues, and the future of the church.” Graham, who in a Twitter exchange noted that she went to Wheaton, reads this blog regularly, and goes to church, seems to paint Evans as a renegade in an “insular world” of evangelical moms.

It’s a generalization, Graham admits, but she suggests that it’s a “fair generalization.” Here at Her.meneutics, we don’t feel this is so. It didn’t take us long to think of numerous prominent evangelical women--living and dead--who’ve wielded (and continue to wield) influence far beyond the walls of their homes and quite apart from the role of “mother”: Harriet Beecher Stowe, Henrietta Mears, Joni Eareckson Tada, Joyce Meyers, and Beth Moore, to name just a few. (We had a much harder time coming up with prominent evangelical women who were primarily concerned with parenthood.) One of my own heroines, Dr. Catherine Hamlin, helped develop the surgery to repair obstetric fistula and has been honored with some of the world's most important humanitarian awards. (In her memoir, The Hospital By The River, she tells some hilariously self-deprecating stories about her feeble housekeeping skills.)

As one of my fellow contributors noted, a generalization of this magnitude about say, Jews or New Yorkers (I happen to be both by birth) appearing in Slate would never fly. Graham needn’t have looked far beyond these pages for confirmation that plenty of evangelical women are concerned with many, many things beyond domestic life. Our most read posts have little or nothing to do with parenting. (Much, much more to do with sex and orgasms. Figure that out!) One of our contributors has even written an entire book about about how evangelical mothers need identity and purpose beyond the role of mother (Mama's Got a Fake ID.) Another, Karen Swallow Prior, has a full career as a university professor but has never had children. Still others (like me) are married with children; others are married without children, others are single. We are as different as can be, representing numerous denominations, political convictions, interests, and dispositions.

I, for one, grew up the homeschooled daughter of a conservative Baptist minister, and I am now an evangelical Christian homeschooling stay at home mom who sews quilts, bakes bread, knits sweaters, and cooks from scratch pretty much every night.

(I wonder if you’re picturing me in a floor-length denim dress, no makeup, and a bun? Try nerd-girl glasses, a pierced nose, ripped denim capris and a Dorothy Day t-shirt.)

I'm also, as I said, a Jewish New Yorker with a master's degree from a Jesuit university who has the chutzpah to say "vagina" from the pulpit of my conservative, small town Baptist church. (It was in the context of talking about obstetric fistula and the aforementioned Catherine Hamlin, if you're wondering. And, if you're wondering, yes, it did raise eyebrows.)

And you know what else? I dare to believe that equality for women means that if I choose to write about parenting--as I and my colleagues here do from time to time--this is a choice that I’m free to make. In fact, a movement for “radical homemaking” in recent years has seen many women—and men!—make the choice to stay at home and make their own yogurt or whatever. It’s a movement that embraces the creative (and not merely consumptive) potential in people that I believe God intends. It’s not that I believe God only wants this from me (or from anyone) but I believe that’s a choice we’re free to embrace without being classified as people who care only about the domestic.

There’s always a grain of truth to stereotypes; if there weren’t, they’d never gain traction. The danger, though, is always this: that they will teach us to regard people as a member of a group they’ve never joined. But if we look beyond stereotypes, we may just find we have more in common than the stereotype would have us believe.

Comments

Great post. I too have been following Rachel's biblical womanhood experiment and look forward to her soon-coming reports. I appreciate Rachel Stone's contention that evangelical women are much broader, more diverse than is often portrayed or assumed. I am a mom and a grandmother, two roles I treasure and have had immense impact on who I am. Both "jobs" are gifts from God. But I am also a missionary, writer, editor, global speaker and an advocate for women, also opportunities I treasure and that have had important impact on who I am. God does not put every woman in the same box, and neither should we.

Hermeneutic hermanas, I agree with Graham! I think that many evangelical women do end up living a somewhat insular existence. I think we "care" about the world, and WANT to make a difference, but that we're also told--often quite clearly--that the most important job is taking care of our own. I think she nailed it.

As a generalization, we applaud the working SINGLE mothers, but when a woman who is married has the economic CHOICE about whether or not to work, evangelical culture expects her to choose full-time mothering over the work that many of the women you cited are doing.

Perhaps the question should be phrased, "Are evangelical churches primarily interested in women as mothers?" I would argue that the answer to THAT question would be "yes."

I feel strongly that many evangelical women forget that they were created with a primary mission that does NOT change when they become mothers: to love and know God, first and foremost, and then to become his witness and disciplemaker as we seek to love others. Certainly our children are a part of that mission, absolutely! But they are not the entirety of that mission. And I have found, for myself and for many other Christian moms I know, when they lose themselves entirely in the "mommy" identity, forgetting their primary identity as a child and follower of God, they are much more inclined to experience confusion and tension. Yes, I am a mother (and like Rachel, a homeschooling mom at that!): but, I am also a daughter, a sister, a friend, an aunt. I'm a writer, I am a lay leader at my church. But first and foremost, I am the Lord's missionary in whatever context he has called me. That includes my role as a mom, but it also goes well beyond it. Thank you, Rachel, for shedding light on the wonderful diversity that is represented by evangelical mothers today.

Hmmm, I agree with Graham. Of course, as with any stereotype, it isn't an accurate representation of many Christian women, myself included, but my personal experience is that it does represent a good number of them. I'm a stay-at-home mom of three kids, so I'm very preoccupied with parenting since it's my day-to-day full-time job right now, but I also identify with the way you've described yourself, I have many other interests and concerns. But, my experience with the Church, especially in the South, is that I'm expected to be a stay-at-home mom. I'm currently contemplating going back to work, and I know that there will be lots of people who will look down on my choice to do that, feeling that my kids should be the only thing I spend my time on during the day. (No expectations on their dad, of course.) Many other Christian moms I know have few outside interests that require any significant time.... most conversations I'm in with other Christian moms are dominated by talk of potty-training and other toddler issues... I'm often frustrated that we can't seem to elevate the conversation to other things. So yes, my experience is that many Christian women are preoccupied with parenting to the exclusion of seeing themselves as having a realistic choice to devote themselves to other worthwhile interests. I also know lots of women for whom this does not apply, but they seem to be the exclusion in the circles I'm a part of.

Here's the frustrating thing about this discussion: we talk about staying home with the kids VERSUS working/making a difference. As if it's such a black and white line now. It's not. What about the stay at home moms that cook meals for neighbors, tutor underprivileged kids, visit cancer patients, go on mission trips, volunteer at their church or kids' school, organize community gardens, etc? The moms that don't have a Twitter account or a blog?

It seems so easy in our culture that values "influence" to overlook the average mom who's neither insular nor global, but is going about serving the Lord in the way she knows best.

Um, have you read Radical Homemaking? I was underwhelmed with the book,to say the least, and wouldn't be using it as the linchpin of my argument here, for sure.

And I have a lot of sympathy for Graham's characterization of the current state of women in the evangelical church.

I, too, am interested in many things, but I am especially interested in hearing and reading about other women's advice and experiences as they navigate being a wife and mother in the modern world. We don't have strong role models to look up to and model ourselves after, and I think that's one of the reasons this topic is so hot in the blogosphere.

I'm happy to see this topic covered on the blog today, and look forward to more like it in the future!

I think there are a couple different things going on in the comments here. I agree that many Evangelicals can definitely get preoccupied with making motherhood seem like the primary and most important calling for women. It's certainly been my experience and played a big role in my identity crisis and feeling like I didn't fit in--hence the book!).

That said, to say that Rachel Held Evans (whose project I'm also excited about!) is one of ONLY a few prominent evangelical women who care about more than motherhood is misleading. And hurtful. And counter-productive. The more we keep saying it IS true, the more it'll seem like it is. And the harder us moms will have to fight against that stereotype.

Of course, I think the trouble is that it SEEMS like it's all we care about because kids do have a way of usurping so much of our time and our lives. I totally get why those without kids us would think it's all we care about. But take some time to get know a Christian mom. Ask questions. Dig deep. You'll be surprised.

Gotta run--only 2 hours till preschool pick up. : )

Bravo, not just for pointing out the inaccuracy of Graham's stereotype, but for reminding us that fitting into the stereotype isn't inherently bad either. I am rarely concerned with parenthood (as a non-mom), but when I am genuinely interested, I don't want the guilt of "I should be better than this" to deal with.

This is such a fantastic conversation-starter! Love that you reminded us all of the wonderful Catherine Hamil. I think it's critical that we celebrate "women of valor" like her.

Just the other day, a prominent evangelical blogger casually mentioned that "a woman's highest calling is motherhood." I heard this a lot growing up, and I hear it constantly in the evangelical subculture. Perhaps this is what leads people to believe that evangelical women are defined by their roles as mothers (or potential mothers) - a very sad message to deliver to, say, a woman whose fistula cannot be fully repaired.

Our highest calling is to follow Jesus Christ. Following Jesus is something we can do as mothers, as singles, as activists, as workers from home, as workers in office buildings, as OURSELVES. Perhaps the best way to get this message out is to highlight "women of valor" who are working out their faith in various roles...just like you did here.

Amen, Rachel. That highest calling message is so dangerous. (I argue that motherhood isn't really even a caling--which gets me into all sorts of trouble...)

And I love that "women of valor" language.

it's a complicated topic. far too often, our culture is extraordinarily dismissive of mothering stories, and i do value them (and share them in my own writing.) but, i would love to meet evangelical women who weren't primarily interested in parenthood. i know few in real life, and christian blogs penned by moms are often about parenting and even more narrowly, homemaking.

add that to the fact that the field of "prominent evangelical women" is dwarfed by the parallel numbers of men. the church largely discourages women from being prominent, unless their platform is exclusively to/for women, regarding topics that are largely considered "womanly."

for goodness sake, harriet beecher stowe died in 1896! i've never heard of mears and would be interested to know how often moore or meyers speak to (or are read by) anyone without a uterus.

Love that last paragraph!

Since I'm a guy, you might want to take my comment with a grain of salt. But from my own observations, it seems like a lot of evangelical women believe that motherhood is the ONLY thing God calls women to do. In fact, I've also noticed that in the same evangelical circles, it seems like the ONLY thing God has called us to do is raise families, and that's it.

Don't get me wrong, marriage and parenthood are wonderful blessings. But I don't think they are the main goal of the Christian life. Certainly loving your family the way Jesus loves us is part of the Christian life, but the Gospel is a lot more than just about creating nuclear families. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, Paul personally thought it was better to remain single. The main thing is, whether you remain single all your life or get married and have children, love people the way Jesus did.

On a funnier note - Several times I've had to email someone and inform them that just because I'm a woman doesn't mean I should be filed in the "Mommy Blogs" category for Christian bloggers. :-)

That's hilarious, Rachel! That's what you get for having an eponymous blog (and an obviously female name!) as a Christian...

I actually have no problem with the statement that "a woman's highest calling is motherhood;" I have a problem with the fact that it is never (and I mean I have NEVER heard this) followed by the statement "and a man's highest calling is fatherhood." Why, oh why, do we spend SO much time in our Christian culture and churches praising and encouraging women to be mothers and wives, but so very little time encouragement men to be equally as good and attentive fathers and husbands?! I believe wholeheartedly in motherhood and being a respectful and encouraging wife; I believe in it just as passionately as I believe in my husband being a involved father and a respectful and encouraging husband.

Monica, yes, I agree completely! We create this false dichotomy that you can't be someone who places a high value on motherhood (which I do--in case it was unclear in my earlier comment!) and simultaneously have interests and passions that go outside and beyond motherhood. But so many of the evangelical moms that I am privileged to hang out with and call my friends (you included!) are all leading such interesting lives that are uniquely designed to who they are, and they are demonstrating that you CAN be a Christian mom who embraces motherhood AND have influence in whatever way God has called. I have heard people like Scot McKnight and Dave Ferguson affirm that mothers are often the most missional people in the church. We need to keep telling those stories and demonstrate the amazing breadth of Christian mothers who are out there. And they are out there! Just looking at the women who have posted comments here is evidence already.

But is anyone actually saying that the calling to motherhood/fatherhood is GREATER than the call to follow Jesus? I've never seen it written or heard it said. I would guess that most, if not all, of the people who call motherhood/fatherhood a "highest" calling assume that the call to Jesus is primary and haven't specifically called it out because it's assumed.

What then do we do with the specific Biblical commands for being a parent while there are none for being a electrician or a painter or a professor or a doctor. That would seem to indicate that there is indeed something more required of a parent vis-a-vis those other roles. If causing little ones to sin (Mark 9:42) warrants punishment worse than drowning in the ocean, what would we say to a Dad who doesn't see his fatherhood as a higher calling than his job and consequently works 70 hours a week when it's not financially required and neglects to shepherd his children? He's failing at his calling and should repent..

Additionally, while not are called to full-time ministry, the Bible does seem to imply that elders/teachers will be judged more harshly (Hebrews 17:13, James 3:1). The higher "penalty" would seem to imply a higher "calling", all within the hierarchy of Christian -> husband/wife -> father/mother -> job/vocation, w/ the caveat that not participating in an area after Christian should be because doing so would hinder your Christ-focused ministry (1 Corinthians 7:7) and not because you want to travel, be successful at your career, don't want to be hindered, etc.

chris

Helen, wonderful point. I have been inspired even by non-Christian writers/bloggers (Amanda Blake Soule, aka soulemama.com) who approach motherhood and homemaking with a 'missional' kind of gusto--believing and living out their belief that they are changing their corner of the world in accordance with higher ideals than (for example) being a good consumer. Cooking and meals, for me, are about much more than being a domestic goddess and/or feeding my family. It's about living out my love for God and my neighbor while extending welcome to others and choosing to walk gently on the earth. So, yeah, on the surface, I'm a Christian mommy/food blogger/writer. But it's really so much more.

My house is a mess, the furnace just broke down so I don't have heat or hot water (necessary in Alaska in early September)---but I'm not doing anything about it at the moment because there's something more pressing: being here, reading all this. Which I do because I care about ideas, about truth, about the kingdom of God MORE than I care about the cleanliness and warmth of my house right now. DO forgive the promo here, but I wrote a book 2 years ago, "Parenting is Your Highest Calling . . and Eight Other Myths" to address what is still pervasive in evangelical culture: the belief that as women our highest call is to have children and then to make them godly. We're taught that for lots of reasons---one of which can be a low view of God's sovereignty and the Holy Spirit, and a high view of our own abilities. As if WE can create godly children; as if God cannot people his kingdom without us. I think Hermaneutics is a hangout for women whose world is wider--but my experience is that too many evangelical women believe if they keep a clean house and immerse themselves totally and fully in their children's lives (to make them godly) that they are fulfilling all that God expects of them as women. To which I say, read the entire Bible, not isolated verses, and see how expansive God's concerns--and ours---are to be.

First off, this article is a little preemptive because Rachel's book isn't even out. It would be better to respond to her book rather than general thoughts about how she seems to be thinking about it all. She hasn't presented any conclusions yet.

Secondly, I am also with Graham. I'm an evangelical working mother for economic reasons, and there is a lot of pressure to be home. I've received emails from women at my church about how all Christian mothers should be home with kids, and I've heard it preached from the pulpit that that is a woman's highest glory. I love the blog world, but in real life I have a hard time finding women who want to talk theology and life outside of motherhood.

As for why you have a hard time thinking of evangelical women whose primary focus is motherhood, that's because they're all mother-hood focused and thus very few are writing books and being a part of the public discussion.They are the large majority, they simply aren't public leaders.

I have seen for myself the way single women without children are marginalized in evangelical churches. There are certainly evangelical churches which disparage working outside the home for married moms. But even in those churches which don't do this, womens' ministry is centered around women in the home, with children. Childless single women are not openly rejected, but neither is there any real inclusiveness shown towards them and their needs. In general, of course. I'm sure there are exceptions. But ask yourself, "If I were over 30, unmarried and childless, would I feel truly included in my church?"

The source of this attitude is deeply rooted in Protestantism itself, in the teachings of both Martin Luther and John Calvin. Luther, in rejecting Roman Catholic monasticism, made it clear that he believed bearing children was what women were for.

So yes, it is a generalization that evangelical women only care about motherhood. But it is one that is rooted in the historical beliefs and practices of evangelical Protestantism. And it is, I think, one of the areas in which we tend to be blind to the way things are, because they've always been that way. Whether it's truly scriptural or not.

Well done Rachel Stone (and Evans). And Ruth Graham. This is an important conversation.

What a great post Rachel!

My primary interests aren't home economics (that said, I just finished baking bread from scratch for the first time!). I love my husband and daughter passionately; I am deriously happy with them. But I have many interests outside of the home and I also write and speak about them. These are gifts that God has given me along with the wonderful gift of being a wife and mother.

But suppose another woman isn't interested one bit in what I am interested in? That's perfectly fine. I say to let those who believe their primary calling is motherhood and domestic managing be free and encouraged in their pursuits--not judged. In the same way, let those of us who are married or not married (for whatever reason) with children and also called to things outside of the home be free and encouraged in our pursuits while loving and serving our families.

We are all different. Our genders do not determine our callings. All of us who are parents are called to be the best mothers and fathers we can be and use the giftings given us--which may or may not make us domestic mavens.

Singles and those who are married without children are called (along with those married with children) to be disciples who faithfully, in the strength of the Holy Spirit, bring forth God's kingdom so that his will is done on earth as it is in heaven.

Maybe we should talk more about how we are all different parts of the body with our gifts (with or without children, whether or not we are married, with or without a proclivity to domestic mavenry). Let us be who God has called us to be in whatever place we find ourselves and support one another.

It seems to me that as backlash against the secular culture the evangelical church has made an idol of motherhood.

Great conversation! I am really impressed with the quality of comments on this blog, and the real conversation it becomes.

I particularly resonate with what you had to say @Marlena. I think the real point is that everyone should be encouraged to pursue how they can use their gifts to glorify God.

In all that has happened with gender roles and debates, I keep thinking about how women spend so much of our time arguing with each other. Conversations about whether or not a woman's highest calling is to be in the home are important. But do they also become a time-sucker? Is part of the reason there aren't more prominent evangelical women because we spend time defending ourselves to other women before being able to move forward?

I think sometimes the aim of our conversation is too low. I would love to see more women talking more often about the unique role we have to play influencing people for Christ, whether in the home, the workplace, or the world. I think the Her.meneutics website is a good start.

I have been living outside of the US (in the Middle East, actually) for several years. Before that I taught with BSF--serious Bible study with women. This conversation surprises (shocks?) me. Are evangelical women really so caught up in female "role" over and above all of the richness of being human in Jesus Christ. So that gender is what defines rather than being one aspect of who we are?

I've been in a small town in Washington for the past several months. Similarly discomforted by the dichotomy of role I see in the evangelical churches here.

And yes, I am mother of now-adult children, married to the guy I wed at 21. Lawyer who "retired" 20 years ago to be more available to teach, write, build, volunteer, welcome, and, yes, give focus to home and family. It has been long, though, since I thought of myself or any other woman primarily in terms of role or gender.

I echo everything Kristen Rosser said above. Singles are often marginalized in the church. Perhaps that's why I find Rachel's blog and project so refreshing because she is aware of the same dichotomy among women in the church. If and when she has a child, I'm confident she will continue to raise the same issues, though perhaps sprinkled in with the musings motherhood will bring. As a single in my 30s, most of my friends are married and mothering. They are not solely defined by those roles and that is probably partly why our friendship has been able to continue. Not because we can't relate to each other in spite of our different paths (it's important to keep learning from one another!) but because I've had friends consciously decide they will only be friends with people in the same life stage. No one benefits from that kind of thinking. I would love to see marital status matter less in the church and who we are as God's children matter more.

I put aside my fledgling teaching career to raise our two sons and be at home whenever needed because my husband, a physician, works varying shifts around the clock. Twenty-four years later, with sons finishing college, I have lots of thoughts on the subject of stay-at-home moms and "working" (and getting a paycheck for it), and on moms who put their careers first and basically let the kids raise themselves.....and on The Accused "helicopter moms" like me who were condemned for monitoring our kids' behavior and whereabouts "too much". Personally, I wanted to be able to look back and say I did all I could to make sure our kids were pointed toward the right track.

One thing I keep seeing is that many parents make "the perfect children" or "the perfect home with smell of fresh-baked bread in the air" or "the perfect family".....into an IDOL. Worse yet, when the Empty Nest Years come along, many parents are so addicted to their children and grandchildren that they refuse to focus on a life of their own, apart from the grown kids and grandkids. Empty nest and retirement years a great time to focus more on witnessing for Jesus Christ in other places that are good places to live in retirement, but many refuse to be beyond a 10-minute drive to control.....I mean..."see" the grandkids.

Over the last half-century, sex has become a major dividing point between the secular world and the Church. Sure, there are lots of things that are wrong with how the world views sex that have been amplified, refined and targeted straight into the brains of our 21st century children. My five year old granddaughter knows about far more things than I knew about in high school - and I knew some stuff!

But in backlash, the Church has made the same idol out of sexuality. We worship it from the other side, but we worship it just the same. Where the world has it's pornography, we have our "modest is hottest." Where they have androgyny, we have hyper-gendered ideals. Out of that logically grows worship of those things that are uniquely male and female. And as women, we just happen to have hit the jackpot in terms of what it physically means to be different from the other half of our species.

As a woman, I have never heard it explicitly stated that being a mother was more important that following Christ. But it was implicitly encouraged. I have never been encouraged by a pastor to dig deeper. Never been drawn into a discussion of scripture by a Sunday School teacher. None of the women's bible studies I've ever attended involved exegesis of scripture. We learn about womanly things. Or how all that complicated scripture just means we need to love our husbands and our kids. If you're not a woman, you've probably not been exposed to that.

I think one of the struggles I have with this conversation is that I have a masters degree from a seminary degree and am passionate about pouring into college students and young adults, but in order for our family to do well, I need to stay at home with our three tiny kids (3, 2, and 10 months). There's a season for everything, and sometimes that means evangelical women (and/or men, my husband stayed at home with the kids while I went to school) are going to invest in their young children wholeheartedly. But, the next season (when they get to school) may be a start of a new career. Or a new project. Why can't we just honor the life seasons and temperaments of different women instead of pitting them against one another?

And the comment section lights up!!

I have nothing to say that hasn't already been said, but I thought I would mention:

1) great post
2) so excited for Rachel's book!!

Tiffany, Bravo! I'd like to declare an immediate cease-fire in the "Mommy Wars." A woman who works outside the home is not automatically "putting her career first and letting her kids raise themselves." A woman who stays home with her kids full time is not automatically a "helicopter mom." Women should be given the benefit of the doubt as to their life choices and parenting decisions, just like men are. There's more than one way to be a mom.

Loved what you said, Tiffany.

I married at 35, had my first child at 37, and am a full-time self-employed actor (I've actually been the primary breadwinner most of this year to allow my husband time to grow his own freelancing business). I've had some recent frustration with our church but I'm feeling incredibly fortunate right now, so thanks everyone! :) All the years I was single I didn't really feel that anything the church did left me feeling marginalized or discomfited much ... though I did indulge in the comparison game sometimes, got momentarily huffy if I was asked to teach the kids ("what, they think just because I'm single I have all the time in the world to teach?! How do they even know if I'm good with kids?!" and even while enjoying my singledom I certainly got moody from time to time and wondered if the whole husband-plus-family thing was going to pass me by. Now that I'm married with baby I just find it a different page in the book, the different season Tiffany wrote of. Though now it's me asking for volunteers to help teach and serve, because I didn't realize that there are few and people are tired.

Practically, I think our small church is benefitted by not breaking out classes and such by age and life situation. In all truth, I'm feeling more pressure now in the church than I did when I was single... I still work and travel, now have my husband and daughter, and have taken on more responsibility at the church as I've become more committed over time.

I've encountered some pockets of hardcore stay-at-home-mom-itis, but I generally feel no real pressure from other Christians in that regard... though I have had to limit my intake of awesome domestic mommy blogs that leave me wondering 'how in the world did she have time to do all of that... and then BLOG about it?!. :P In my case, what I do is necessary to help support my family and I do work hard to weigh my time for my daughter's sake and the kind of relationship I desire with her... I'm happy for my friends who stay at home (they've got their challenges), and I'm happy for my hybrid life. Motherhood has taught me to squint even harder to see through to the other side of things and assume that others are doing their best, that people everywhere are just making it up as best they can given what they have. I'm so blessed to have the support of other women who are varying shades of different than myself, and I want to robustly battle the 'us vs. them' game as though women are only interested in fighting for our own 'kind' of woman. I mean, is it really hard for me to be genuinely interested in my single friend's life? Is it overbearing to ask her or my married/childless friends to put up with me talking about the stresses of commuting with my 14 month old and the inexplicable 24-hr mystery sickness that kept me up all night? My real friends will be gracious and glad with me that the woman who had so many years to do her own thing has a new topic to talk about. Maybe we can all agree to try to shoot for general kindness & compassion across all of the valid, rich seasons of ladydom, the sort you show your grandma when she just needs someone to let her talk about her arthritis.

I'm fairly new to the site, and am enjoying it immensely. best, everyone!

I notice that some people think that the post is somehow pitting sides against one another. That's not the case. What I'm trying to point out is that all stereotypes are flawed, even if there's a measure of "truth" within them. So, yes, moms of small kids (like me) spend a huge amount of time caring for kids. But that doesn't mean that the role of "mommy" defines the entirety of their being. And, further, my point is that it's unfair to generalize about evangelical women as "primarily interested in motherhood." Yes, that is true of some. But to take the parts for the whole overlooks important women whom God has used in very different ways.

In sum: yes, we don't need to pick sides! God has gifted us all in unique ways and entrusted us with wisdom to use those gifts in serving others.

Those who are concerned that I'm pitting sides against each other: I agree with you! We need not pit sides against each other in this discussion. My concern is actually that: that we learn to recognize that none of us is reducible to one dimension.

I think the divisive issue is not what WE as WOMEN think about ourselves, but what is found on conservative Christian radio shows and in preaching. Honestly, from what I hear, most of it is pitched to the stereotype of the "good Christian wife and mother." Its about how to be a good member of that stereotyped group. As a member of a conservative mega-church, the women's ministry is all about that same stereotype. There is very little comfort room for those who don't fit. A token talk, study or such here and there, but definitely tokens. Should we wonder that others pick up on this as in Graham's article?

Now, from the individual woman perspective, I find much more variation and acceptance as voiced in these comments. But from the Christian press and bureaucracy much less.

Most Christian communities (of the sort Rachel Evans imagines herself addressing with this new project) have in-depth and well-thought out systems that take into account the relationship of the Old and New Testaments. Isn’t that really the issue here?

It seems to me that Rachel doesn’t realize this is an issue. I don’t know anyone(except maybe Reconstructionists) who believes OT law should be followed unequivocally.

If she puts all of Scripture on equal footing (which is not what literalists do), she is not really examining Christian teaching that has “left her confused” but rather conflating important distinctions in Biblical interpretation and mocking viewpoints that seldom actually exist.

Rachel Stone said:

"And, further, my point is that it's unfair to generalize about evangelical women as 'primarily interested in motherhood.'"

True. But as far as I can see, it is a very real fact that much of evangelicalism itself tells women that motherhood is what they are supposed to be primarily interested in, and that if they are not, they are not truly following their Christian calling. This teaching, this attitude, is pervasive. If the world notices, who can blame them? And if it's not what we believe, then the teaching and attitude need to be addressed, and addressed strongly. The scriptures show motherhood as a value for Christian women. They certainly do not show it as the primary value. Jesus told Martha that it was Mary, in sitting at His feet as one of His disciples, who had chosen the better part, which would not be taken away from her.

Many prominent evangelical preachers today seem to want to take Mary's portion away from women, telling us that Martha's part is the one God has chosen for us-- the traditional female role of serving in the home. The Reformation fathers asserted as much, and their attitudes and ideas are still influencing evangelicalism today. Motherhood is part of that package-- and there's nothing wrong with the package, nothing wrong with wanting to be, and being, mothers and homemakers-- but we must refute the message this is all we are, and all we're meant to be, in Christ.

This is where the real issue lies. Not in Slate's generalization, but in the reason why Slate makes the generalization in the first place. However over-simplistically, Slate is picking up on something that really does need to be addressed.

Anonymous, I believe Rachel Held Evans realizes there is no such community that puts all Scripture on equal footing, and that literalists do not, and that is exactly what she is trying to highlight.

It's because there are "systems" that such a project is needed. We weigh different parts of Scripture differently and then forget that we do. We then turn around and present ourselves as people who are just being careful to "do what the Bible tells us to do" and those who disagree with us are not doing what the Bible tells us to do. They are dismissing parts of it. Not so fast. If that is the game we are playing, doing what the Bible tells us to do, we are not very good at it. What are we really up to? What's behind the way we validate some Scriptures and not others? I'm hoping to hear a really good critique of how "in depth and well thought out" our systems really are.......

Hopefully, RHE's project will shed light on some of the actual systems we use to decide which biblical principle or directive is in or out. I suspect there are areas to be poked and prodded in those systems.

Also, there is a link provided above to her "ten commandments," which means the 10 directives or womanly ideals she has chosen to explore in her project, and I noted that she has pulled pretty broadly from both the Old and New Testaments, almost always presenting several verses from both "Old" and "New" for each of the ten commandments.

I suspect she is very aware of our systems for dealing with OT matters. Why spend a year showing us that we no longer follow OT laws when we already know that? That's not what she's up to.

Great article Rachel! It seems some of this may be semantics. My question is not "Are evangelical women primarily interested in parenthood?" As your article you points out this is patently untrue! However---- a more accurate question may be "Are evangelical women being TOLD they should primarily be interested in parenthood?" In my experience at literally every evangelical institution I have been involved with (Bible colleges, women's ministries, churches, conferences, and my experiences as a pastor's wife) the answer to my question is yes. While a numerical count of the numbers of books written by women about parenting may be low--- a greater question is how are those books being used? in what context are they used? what are the other messages women are hearing from the systems in churches that they are a part of? Conversely, if church culture is pushing women's roles as tied to parenthood, then why are all the parenting books written by white men? there are some odd dichotomies in this. thank you for your article. i enjoyed it.

The Slate article found Rachel Held Evans to be one of the "rare PROMINENT evangelical women who isn't primarily interested in parenthood." (Emphasis added.) It wasn't making a point about ALL evangelical women or even evangelical women in general. So, the whole stereotyping issue is completely overblown.

There's no doubt, as Kristen Rosser makes clear, that what the world outside evangelicalism sees from the evangelical community (both historically and currently) is that women are SUPPOSED TO BE primarily concerned with parenthood. Denying this does nothing to solve the problem.

The Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Focus on the Family (especially Glenn Stanton), the Southern Baptist Convention, the Quiverfull Movement, the Stay-at-Home-Daughters Movement, the home-schooling movement all teach that evangelical women at the very least SHOULD BE primarily concerning with parenthood:

"The younger women ... need to get married and bear children and keep house. That's their domain. That's their area. That's their responsibility. That's their calling. That's their place."
-- John McArthur article (c. 2000) posted on the CBMW website -- https://www.cbmw.org/Resources/Sermons/The-Character-of-a-Healthy-Church-Part-4

Is it any surprise that the Graham sees most PROMINENT evangelical women as part of that historical tradition?

The idea of pointing to long-dead women such as Stowe and Mears to disprove Graham's point is just silly. The two most prominent evangelical women on TV in recent years are "Kate Plus 8" and "20-some Kids and Counting" (or whatever number they have at the moment). And, Michele Bachman's telling the story of how she went to school to become a tax lawyer because her husband told her to, even though that wasn't really something she wanted to do, demonstrates that the debate over whether the husband is master of his wife really isn't over in the evangelical world. (The 12-yr-old journal article Stone cites for the end of this debate doesn't support her assertion either.)

BTW, Ruth Graham's most devastating assessment wasn't the "primarily concerned with parenthood" point. She also writes about the "insular world of conservative Christianity." Isn't "insular" actually the antithesis of what "evangelicalism" is supposed to be about?

We need more "renegades" like Rachel Held Evans, whose blog has broken through the evangelical bubble.

I'm part of Generation X, and though I grew up in the church, it wasn't an evangelical one. Marriage and motherhood were not emphasized as important things I should prioritize. College and career were pushed, and I did those well. When I finally became a mother in my 30s, I was struck by what a great fit it was for who I actually am, and where my energies/passions lie. It was much more fulfilling than the career I'd left behind--much to my surprise! As I took care of children and home, I felt that I was finally in sync with my essential nature. Perhaps I appreciated it more because I'd already done the grad school/career/travel stuff. In a sense, I felt as if I had been lied to. I thought homemaking and motherhood were drudgery, certainly not something an intelligent woman would aspire to. I wanted kids (someday) but didn't look forward to the ins and outs of raising them. I feel very very grateful that I am a mother, and very relieved that when I tried to conceive, I had no fertility issues. I even feel some sadness when I think of the kids I could have been bearing in my 20s if I hadn't been consumed with work. Anyway, all that to say, of course women can do more than be mothers, but for most women, it is a very central role in their lives. I would encourage women not to leave it too long--it may just be the greatest joy you've ever known. Besides, kids grow--it's such a short season where they need us so much.

Julie, you make an excellent point. Motherhood is a good thing, and there is nothing about motherhood or homemaking that are demeaning or less than outside-the-home careers. Part of the essential message of Christianity is that all forms of service and giving are good-- and janitors and sanitation workers should also not consider their service demeaning or that they are lesser than those in higher-paying careers.

This is what Jesus meant by "not so among you, but the one who would be greatest among you shall be servant of all."

But when a person chooses janitor or sanitation work, no one then tells them to lock the broom cupboard door behind themselves for the rest of their lives. No one says, "This is your place, and if you're going to be a good Christian, you should be happy to stay here." But when Christian women enter motherhood, and find themselves happy in homemaking and childrearing, the church tells them that to be good Christians, they'd better lock the kitchen and nursery doors behind themselves, know their place, and be content.

The truth that no form of service is demeaning and that motherhood and homemaking should be honored, is the spoonful of sugar that keeps the medicine down-- and the medicine is that males have the divine right to rule over females in the church and home, and that the females are in rebellion if they don't turn that key in the lock themselves, to keep themselves in their place (and the men in the places above them).

I believe that whenever the world disparages motherhood and homemaking, they are buying into the very patriarchalism they wish to turn away from, in believing that those things traditionally done by men are inherently superior to those things traditionally done by women. The church recognizes that this is a lie-- but the answer to that lie is not to glorify the patriarchalism that the lie came from! I have seen the fruit of patriarchalism, and it comes from a bad tree. Patriarchalism is a product of the Fall: "he shall rule over you." Christ's kingdom comes against the effects of the Fall: "there is not male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Paul and Peter taught the church to act within the patriarchalism of the cultures in which she was birthed, to bring about internal change that would raise up the lowly and teach the proud and privileged to let go of those things. The church has too long acted to keep down the lowly and maintain the privileged in their places, all the name of "biblical roles." It is time we stopped capitulating to cultural baggage from the first century, just because it makes us feel counter-cultural today. Instead, let's raise up the kingdom where no one has a divine right over anyone else-- except He Who alone is Lord.

Okay, I'm getting in a little late on the discussion here. Very interesting post indeed and something worth discussing because it is such an important issue in the church.

I will say that the "mommy wars" or "single vs. married" are only two of many issues that divide women in the church. The problem is that those divisions work against the unity that God desires for his people, and certainly it does not give us women (no matter our assigment in life) the opportunity to share and learn from each other.

Biblically, older women (both in age and spiritual maturity) shoulld be teaching and training younger women. That's the foundation for our Godly interaction with other women in the church body. For that reason, I have intentionally worked with women leaders in my church to establish a Women's Mentoring Ministry that is diverse. We intentionally placed women in small groups who are single and married, working professionals and stay-at-home moms, young and old, etc. The women involved in these mentoring smaller groups range in age from young 20s to beyond 65. In such a short time, we are already seeing the women bond and unite in spite of their differences because they have the same focus, to love and grow closer to God and each other.

I highly recommend Helen Lee's "Missional Mom" book to moms who are wrestling with these issues and women who are struggling with these concerns in their churches. Helen reminds us that we all need to keep the main thing, the main thing.

Blessings, Natasha Robinson

Love talking about this issues, the questions raised in this article, and the discussion that has followed.

I'm one of the "atypical" evangelical women. I have felt God's call to pursue medicine since early in my childhood. So I did. My personal relationship and pursuit of the kingdom of Jesus Christ remains paramount, but the decade + of training has certainly been a significant earthly priority for me. So I ignored the husband-hunting activities that most of my peers pursued at my large undergraduate Baptist University and was a bookworm. A fantastic partner/marriage fell into my lap during medical school. I intentionally deferred pregnancy throughout my studies/training, and when I did get pregnant it was unplanned (thus, in my view, obviously God's perfect timing). My baby is still cooking, but I have already experienced an onslaught of unsolicited commentary from (likely) well-meaning evangelical women of all ages. To share some of the less critical comments - "Wow, so what are you going to do about finishing your residency?" "How will you pay off your loans if you don't work?" "If you go back to work, who's going to raise your child?" Etc. Etc.

Thankfully, I don't feel I have to "choose" between these two very beautiful callings that God has given me - one, to be a physician that tries to bring healing through my prayer for and love of those who are suffering, combined with the wisdom God has given to modern medicine; and two - motherhood. As I will soon be the "primary breadwinner" in terms of income, my husband approaches his career with a greater degree of flexibility and feels the "pressure" to support us financially is off so he can actually pursue what he's interested in (which wouldn't pay the bills if I weren't working). So who will raise my children, as some wonder? I was always taught that raising a child "takes a village" - so the answer is ME + my husband + my parents + my sister + my cousin + my grandmother + my best friends + the school. But ultimately, modeling for my children the path to which God has called me is the best thing I could do as a mother.

I hope that we do break down the stereotypes discussed above, and that it in turn allows evangelical women called to focus on homemaking to be more accepting and supportive of women who feel resolutely called by God to work outside the home while remaining simultaneously devoted to their children and marriages.

Well, I think we have to have a balanced perspective. I agree that it's problematic when Christians say that "biblical womanhood" means women need to stay in their homes with their children. And it's problematic when marriage and motherhood are devalued, and people who truly long for both are told to be content, while the truth about fertility is swept under the rug, and little attention is given to the cultural forces producing so much singleness and infertility.

I think that the church, in many areas, needs to exercise a lot less judgment and a lot more understanding. There is no one right way to be a Christian woman, wife, mother, worker.

The relationship between a woman and God is personal.

I for one am totally sick of the constant nosing into what other women are choosing (OR BEING LED by the Lord) to do with their lives. How many of us look at what other Christian women do and either judge what the other (totally different) woman is doing OR compare/contrast our God-directed paths to what the other woman is doing?

I don't care what anyone, including my Christian brothers and sisters, think of the path I feel that the Lord is leading me down. If my Christian brothers and sisters care about me and if I care for them, we should be supporting one another in endeavors after the Lord's heart (not for me to direct those). God uses us all if we let him.

As for the degrees of practicing "biblical womanhood", I don't spend my time worrying whether one denomination has got it going right. It doesn't bother me if my friends feel they must wear head coverings or sleep in a tent during their periods. And I haven't felt judged by them for wearing jeans or not homeschooling the kids. I just don't get hung up on it. Such a waste of time when the span of life on this earth is so brief. . . Don't get nosy; get busy! God's got a purpose for you, and it's going to be individualized.

I'm always amazed at those who say that women can do one thing and one thing only, and that's be a wife/mother. Now, there's nothing wrong with that at all, but to say that women can do just this one thing while men can do many, many things is ridiculous - and not biblical! I look to God and not to evangelical leaders to tell me what my calling is.

Great comments on a great post. I know that I know that I know that one of my biggest, most important jobs is to make sure my kids grow up knowing about Jesus and seeing in me the value of living for Him. That being said, this means I need to live a full life as Jane. I am a much better Mom when I am using my gifts as a woman and they see this. They see I am not just the lady who cooks and cleans and takes care of them. When they get focused on themselves and start seeing me as the food machine I know it is time to take some time away (if it is just going in my bedroom and shutting the door) and making them do some stuff on their own! We do a disservice to our children if they don't see us as vibrant men and women. I go to a lovely church. I love my church family but I don't agree with the theology of limiting women's roles, but that is okay. It is where God has me and He does use me and other women in the church. But I haven't allowed the "women be silent" mentality have a real role in my family's life (either has my husband).

Personally, I think there are just as many women out there who are interested in "thorny theological questions" as there are men. The difference is that evangelical culture considers "family issues" to be the one place where it is universally acceptable for a women to write and teach. Rachel Held Evan's blog is one of the only places (possibly the only place) on the internet where both women and men talk theology as equals. Go to any other theology blog on the internet and both the posts and comments are probably 95% male.

I don't think that women aren't reading these blogs, they just don't feel comfortable trying to crash the boy's club. I think I would agree that it SEEMS like evangelical women are primarily interested parenting, but what "seems to be" is not always the case.

Love the discourse and discussions here. What is obvious is that there is clearly emotion, feelings, frustrations, miscommunications, and posturing-all wrapped into a single subject. The one thing I have adopted is I will not engage in any "mommmy war" discussions. I have been a stay at home, worked part-time, and worked full time. Some of this is just white western philosphies and freedoms that economics have given to US women. In the majority of the world, women and men work along with their children to barely put daily food on their table. All these discussions are a mute point to them. For me I just no care what any other woman does-she stands before her God with her choices. We need to give each other freedom, space, honor their choices,and listen to their stories.
I want to model a level of leadership that points women to their Lord for their guide-His Word, and to listen to His Spirit. I would challenge all men to do the same.

Julie - you encourage women not to wait too long to have children. Well, we can't make babies by ourselves. What should we do if there are no eligible men or if all that we have in our churches are uneducated bubbas? I hear this a lot: women get moving or your time will run out! People need to remember that it takes two to tango. Should I forget about love and just reproduce with just any guy? No thank you.

I hear you, P. I married in my late 20s when I wanted to be married earlier. Of course, you shouldn't reproduce with just anyone. I know from experience how hard it is to find a compatible Christian man who is marriage-minded. It's a real problem in the church! They're out there though, and should you find him, then knowledge about fertility could be useful. For example, once I was married, we didn't wait very long to start trying. I would also encourage you to expand your search for a mate beyond your church if there are few eligible men there.

I feel like there are two distinct camps:

"Women's 'highest calling' is to follow Jesus in whatever capacity he calls, which will vary throughout their lives."

"Women's 'highest calling' is to marry, have children, and focus solely on raising them to the exclusion of anything else."

I fall in the first camp, as do most of my friends and my church.

But I have heard, in person and online, the second stance most vehemently stated. I've heard it on blogs, in comments, on Facebook, from the pulpit, in a small group, and in casual conversation. I tend to separate myself from the people and contexts who say such things because 1)it makes me so angry, 2)it's not biblical, and 3)engaging those who believe that isn't productive.

Caryn, remember all the flak we took in comments on The Mommy Revolution when the first few posts came out?

So I think the stereotype is *somewhat* justified, particularly when exposure to "evangelicals" equates to people who subscribe to the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood's statement, which is a lot more than I would like. It is a big chunk of people.

Here's to defying the stereotype!

I loved the post. Yes, evangelical women are concerned with the care of their children, as all mothers should be, but we are also interested in so much more than that! I am active in my college's honors' council and student government, play four varsity sports, and plan to one day balance my responsibilities at home with the external work God calls me to.

In response to Robyn's comment, I believe that any person's "highest calling--man or women--is dependent upon the Lord's plan for that one individual. Your "highest calling" may be to work as CEO of a major company, while your neighbor's may be to take care of her children.

Let's be careful to not also stereotype those moms whose primary role is at home, as their call is just as important as any call to business, law, education, etc.

It seems to me that there are few women who seek to be solely interested in motherhood, but that's the path they end up on because of the push from the church. It's the only option so they take it.

As a mid-30s, unmarried, childless wonder, I also feel the push for that path and since I refuse, I have been largely pushed to the side. A tough situation to be in.

Tough for both the mothers and the non-mothers.

This entry devolves into a petulant teenage girl, wailing "And you know what else?" Seriously, I expect better from the contributors on this blog. I for one come here to read intelligent commentary and comments from the readership because the majority of women in my church, in my Bible studies are the stereotypical evangelical, suburban, three kids, a dog, and a SUV type. The prominent women you list are not the majority of the women in the church. The majority of the women in the church are Beth Moore, Joyce Meyer and Kay Arthur groupies, all of whom use family and "folksy" illustrations in their teaching as much as they use the Bible.

Dear Robyn and Other Commenters/Bloggists,

While I am a stay-at-home mother to five children (and yes, I do homeschool ONE of my children, our first year doing this), I do not believe that a woman's highest calling is necessarily as homemaker/child-rearer/wife-y extraordinaire.

I am utterly frustrated by my Christian lady peers about this matter. I have received pressure from both camps to the point I want little to have to do with either. . . but in all honesty, the pressure I have received the most from is the camp decrying motherhood as a high calling at all. How dare I immerse myself into motherhood and the task at hand of rearing my children?!? How dare I focus TOO MUCH on my children and family?! I'm cheating God and have made an idol out of my family! according to many on the motherhood-not-a-high-calling camp.

Perhaps some of you who take offense to motherhood-high-calling folks need to re-examine why you might feel offended. Are you offended for God's sake? Or your own? Does it step on God's toes that some Christian mothers are convicted to immerse themselves into their ministry at home in HIS NAME? Are they wasting their time and talents and resources? Are these moms wrong? Is it okay for them to seek out the support and encouragement of women in like circumstances?

Or do you just feel left out and/or the need to obliterate their path in life so that you feel better about your own path in life?

We are not enemies, or at least I do not think God wants us to be.

I believe God equipped me to do whatever He desires to use me for in this life. I believe He has made me capable, and I personally have wrestled with understanding if I was meant to be in the stay-at-home motherhood camp. This is MY calling. Just like some are called to be foreign missionaries, some find themselves employed in the insurance agency office down the street - placed in that position by the Lord. Are you going to tell me that the office position is of less purpose and import to God? Ha.

On one hand, I'm glad this is dragged out into the street for all manner of vultures to peck over it and strip it clean. But please, I wish Christian women would get over themselves about this issue.

Whatever you are at in life, do it with your best to glorify Him. Don't get mad, offended, distracted or jealous if He has placed you on another path. Quit looking at the person next to you and focus on Him.

I might be one of these stay-at-home moms that some of wrongly judge me to be perpetuating the "motherhood as highest calling" thing, but you DON'T EVEN KNOW MY HEART. Don't be quick to be offended unless it's offensive to God.

I personally am in awe of what other women can do for God and the many, many ways He can and does uses us. But do God a favor, and quit attempting to make those who feel called to focus on ministry in the home and family as if we are deficient and making an idol out of our families.

One thing is for certain: if God made you parent of children, then I'm pretty certain He's going to hold you quite accountable for your parenting of these precious gifts. That's not to say that parenting is the only and highest calling.

How many of you have poured yourself into a job for 18 years and would relish being recognized for a job well done, that what you did was just as worthwhile perhaps even more worthwhile than other jobs? After 18 years, surely you deserve a bit of recognition and admiration.

Motherhood. You blink and its done. There are no pay raises. No kudos. No special awards, no promotions to validate you. You pour your life and soul into your children because they are your children. You blink. And its over. So if there are women in your life who chose to take that moment and make it their entire focus don't deny them the recognition and admiration it takes to do it simply because you do not choose to make it your sole focus. You have the right to choose otherwise, but stop demeaning and mocking those who make mommying their careern (even in denim jumpers). There is room in the church and in this world for both. I don't think haughtiness, scornful inuendos or back door complements are becoming to any godly woman. And women seem to be very good at tearing each other down. Maybe what is needed is for the Mom to befriend a woman outside her realm or world and seek to build her up. The same for the career woman or the single woman. All of us seeking to understand each other. Seeking to say things that encourage and uphold our sisters. What a wonderful world that would be.

Hey, wait a second!!!

I NEVER said that motherhood was not a legitimate calling! I said that I believe that a woman's "highest calling" is "to follow Jesus in WHATEVER capacity he calls." How does that not include motherhood?

I also said it could change throughout a woman's life. Which means it is totally possible that God may "call" a woman to focus on home and childraising for a time and then, when that is complete, to focus on something else.

Let's read more carefully before calling someone out on something s/he NEVER SAID!

I think Graham's stereotype is about as correct as a stereotype can be. That is why it's so crucial that blog's like Hermeneutics and Rachel Held Evans' exist. It is not terribly difficult to think of Evangelical women who wield influence apart from their role as mother because those seem to be the only types of women who have much of a voice in Evangelicalism--because they think a woman's voice matters is public discourse and theology. Even so, that list of women is far too short and you would be hard pressed to find them making statements like that of Evans'. Furthermore, Beth Moore's audience is women. Rachel thinks a woman's voice should be heard not just among women, but among men also. This is why she is making a splash.

Robyn, my apologies if I came across as calling you out in particular about something you did not say. Maybe I should've been more succinct in sharing with you what exactly bothered me about your reply.

I think what bothered me a bit about your post is how you pointed out that you think that the "mommy is highest calling" bloggers and so forth have been the most vehement. I don't agree with that. There is a backlashing trend against Christian motherhood from within the Christian camp. And perhaps it is a result of some over-hyping "motherhood as a high calling". But regardless, some who feign to be intellectual Christians are actually doing more harm than good with their discussions on the matter. Face it, some people are not going to understand what is truly important as the vibe is passed on that "we're taking motherhood too seriously". To some Christian women who have spent their lives as stay-at-home moms, the message is demeaning and is like pulling a rug out from under them. (Although, many of them that chose to stay home during the advent of feminism will tell you that they had already been treated thus.)

I think you and I, or so it seems, ultimately agree on what is important. . . To quote you: "to follow Jesus in WHATEVER capacity he calls". I totally agree.

But when you say "Here's to defying the stereotype!", I would like to understand more about what you mean by that. Do you mean that Christian women should purposely seek to avoid Christian motherhood because it feeds into this idea of "motherhood as highest calling"? I personally am not sure how that leaves room for listening to God on the matter if one has already determined that we must defy a stereotype for religious-political sake.

Because I immersed myself into motherhood and staying at home to care for my family, does this mean I have not defied some stereotype that is meant to be avoided? It takes courage to tune out culture (and even church culture at that) and diligence to take time to listen to God. And when others around you, whether well-meaning or not, are providing friction and questioning the path you believe God is calling you to, it takes even more courage to keep down that path. Societal culture tells women to work and be like a man. Church culture is now as confounding to women as societal culture.

What exact stereotype do you think we should be defying? I wonder if we agree on that. I hope we do. I'm not sure all these "Christian feminism" style arguments are communicating peace. I'm glad we can talk about them, but do we have to have a war? It ultimately will not matter.

By "defying the stereotype" I mean the one that says that the one and only way to be a godly woman is to stay in your house and not participate in the wider world because you are a woman. (General "you," not you, Anonymous.)

The sterotype that "good, Christian women" do what their husbands tell them to do. That the only interest they have is their children. That they are not FIT for ANYTHING except wife and motherhood. Ever. Even when their children are grown. That women's place is "in the home" and never to stray.

I'm glad it seems like you haven't been exposed to this tripe. Unfortunately I've had it thrown in my face numerous times. I honestly think it is because women who are stay-at-home mothers feel threatened. I do think they feel under-valued and diminished. And I don't want that. That is not my intent. It is a completely valid and God-honoring place to be!

And so I think the vehemence against me (a working mom, active in my greater community, who has no problem leaving my kids with someone else when necessary) occurs more often. I have seen mothers brag that their children never leave their side. They say that anyone who allows someone else to care for their kids isn't really raising them and doesn't even deserve to be a mother. They won't ever hire a babysitter because that would be abandoning their children. Yes, I have actually been told this personally.

I suspect that you are more sensitive to the other extreme of rhetoric because that is the side that denigrates YOUR
life's work. I actually haven't had much, if any, exposure to people denigrating stay at home moms. I've had much experience with frowns and/or shock when I tell church people that I have a job. That's why I said that the other "side" is more vehement. In my experience, it is. But I am probably more sensitive to it because those are the words that devalue ME.

When you say, "It takes courage to tune out culture (and even church culture at that) and diligence to take time to listen to God. And when others around you, whether well-meaning or not, are providing friction and questioning the path you believe God is calling you to, it takes even more courage to keep down that path." THAT IS EXACTLY HOW I FEEL.

I do believe that God has called every single one of his sons and daughters to be in the world. To speak the truth. To be salt and light.

I do know women who do nothing if it is not related to their children or their church. They are so isolated and insulated from the world that they are neither salt nor light. They don't associate with anyone who is not a Christian. And they rarely associate with anyone who is not also a SAHM. I honestly don't think that is biblical.

Everyone can affect the world of people who are hurting and need Jesus. There are a million ways we can do that no matter what our stage in life or choice of work.

That is what I mean by defying the stereotype. I hope that is a better explanation of how I feel.

Hey dude, was just looking through the internet looking for a bit of information and came across your site. I am very impressed by the information that you have written on this page. It tells me how good you understand this subject. Bookmarked this page, and will come back for more. My friend, YOU ROCK!!

Your style is so unique compared to many other people. Thank you for publishing when you have the opportunity, guess I will just make this bookmarked.

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Hermenuetics

twitter updates

What Is Her.meneutics?

interests

writers

Free Newsletters

books we're reading

blogs we're watching

Are Evangelical Women Primarily Interested in Parenthood?

Comments

recent posts

Archives

Hermenuetics

twitter updates

What Is Her.meneutics?

interests

writers

Free Newsletters

books we're reading

blogs we're watching

Are Evangelical Women Primarily Interested in Parenthood?

Comments

recent posts

tags

Archives