There were several things I had to repeat to myself over and over while reading Women and Men in Ministry by Saucy and TenElshof -- and they worked for a while (a statement I'll explain more fully toward the end of this post).

I had to remember that

• This book was written by God-fearing people who've studied, fought, struggled and prayed about this as much as have I.


• These people are only seeking God's will for their lives and for the church.


• I have biases and presuppositions and even different connotations for certain words, too, which may or may not be as great or greater than are theirs.

However, I also have to remember that:

• This book is not the Bible; it's a tool, not an inspired mandate on high. Rejecting it is not, as the authors would have the audience believe, rejecting God.


• God has given me the ability to think critically and some intelligence; he's given me the ability to discern a good source from a bad source and strong logic from faulty leaps


• I don't have all the information yet. I won't have the answer at the end of the book, regardless of what number book it makes that I've read by then.


• Regardless, in the end I have to decide for myself and trust in God to give me the wisdom to pursue ministry in whichever venue he desires.

---

Anyway, those are some things I had to keep flipping back to for the duration of the book. And it helped for the most part. Unfortunately, it became harder and harder to remember that these are simply God-fearing people seeking the will of God as the tone of the book grew sharper and the not-quite-hidden barbs grew more and more frequent. The book is a revision of the position that women must submit to men because God created us second and made us for the sole purpose of completing and submitting to man, that women are ill-fit for autonomy of any sort because we possess weaker physiology, psychology, spirits and intellect. The point of this book is not that if you disagree that you are wrong, but is instead that if you disagree, there is something wrong with you. It's not a faulty belief within you, it's a fault, an expression of sin.

As a separate post, I want to highlight particular sections of the text and my responses (in the margin) to them. The tactics of rhetoric employed in several of the chapters are beneath contempt and hurt the credibility of the book and its authors without ever having to encounter the theology of the writing. The theological holes and leaps are great and their stand is only hurt all the more by the shameful way in which the authors communicate these beliefs.

One should always have the fortitude to stand behind his or her assertions; a failure to do so communicates one's doubts in the strength of the truth behind them. I am given the distinct impression these authors aren't fully persuaded of the truth of their position on any level other than feeling.