Amy Beach

Today we'll finally begin to look at ministry to women, specifically Bible studies.

But first, a word from our sponsor: Amy Beach (1867-1944). Amy began taking piano at age four, and by thirteen was a published composer (yeah, one of those child prodigies--funny, you don't hear about child prodigies as often in women as you do in men). She spent her early life focusing on performance but at eighteen shifted to composition. She composed over 150 works, many of which were performed by high-profile organizations. Her style was marked by lyricism, intensity, and passion.

So ends today's history lesson.

Bible studies. There are a number of good ones geared for women out there, including, but not limited to Kay Arthur (Precept Ministries), Beth Moore (Living Proof Ministries), Priscilla Shirer, BSF (Bible Study Fellowship). (I'm not including Sandi Glahn's studies in this list because I don't think they're specifically written for women, although numerous women's groups do them.) Bible.org also has a women's focus on their site. I'd like to point out that all of these were began by and for women, most have expanded to groups that include women, men, and children.

So let's talk about training and gender issues.

The question is, does Bible training need to be done gender-specific? Is the Christian life different for men and women? I'd like to point out that I know of no women's Bible study that believes that the Bible or theology is different for men than women. I think the question relates to two different issues: (1) Does femininity affect learning style (in other words, do women learn differently than men)? and (2) Is the essence of the sin struggle different for men than women?

Historically, women's ministry is young. I'm not talking about the natural mentoring that happens between mother and daughter or other such things. Mentoring relationships have always been around, both gender-inclusive and gender-exclusive. I mean an intentional pursuit of Bible study and events done by women for women. I don't know why it began. I suspect that women wanted more Bible knowledge and training than what they are able to get in church. 

That makes me wonder: why? If women are not excluded from sermons and Sunday schools, why did they feel like they were getting less training than the men? It seems to me that men's ministry is rarer and later than women's ministry, but perhaps I'm wrong.  If you have any theories about this, I'd love to hear it.

Fundamental, I think, to this is your definition/understanding of femininity. Anciliary to this is your stance on the role of women in the church. A quick note regarding the women: there is not simply "complementarian" and "egalitarian." There is a spectrum. Two people who consider themselves complementarian may have different reasons for believing it and may have different boundaries. For example, one complementarian position states that men and women were created equal but with different roles. Another believes that we were created egalitarian but as an effect of the Fall (namely related to the struggle for power), hierarchy is needed. In this view, at the resurrection, men and women will be egalitarian again. The same goes with the egalitarian view. One more quick note: you can be complementarian and believe that women can preach--yes, even preach a sermon on a Sunday morning--to men and women. This is a more moderate complementarian view that sees this woman preaching as under the authority of male leadership (i.e. the senior pastor, the elders). Likewise, you can be egalitarian and at times think a male is more suited for a specific role.

Regarding femininity, I'd like to talk about epistemology (how we learn) within femininity. In other words, do you think that women fundamentally learn differently than men?

Honestly, there are several answers to this, I think. Some of it is the superficial area of illustrations. Typically, sports and war illustrations are used to reach men. Crafts and chick flicks are used for women. And then there are some that I don't know where they'd fit: career, child-rearing. There are some problems with this: different women enjoy different things. Not all women like crafts. Not all like chick flicks. Some like sports and war illustrations. Hear me: I'm not saying what women should and shouldn't like (for example, I enjoy watching sports and movies like Braveheart and I've taken up knitting). I'm not saying that we should then just say, to heck with it, let's focus on the sports and war illustrations. There are a number of people, men and women, who don't resonate with those, and so with the interest of connecting with all people, we should have a number of illustrations. It sounds like I'm talking in circles here, but really, all I'm asking is can and should illustrations be gender-specific?

Then there's the question of learning style. I learn differently than my husband does, but is that because I'm female and he's male or is that because I'm right-brained and he's left-brained? Is it because of the belief that women are more holistic thinkers while men compartmentalize? (I say "belief" meaning that there is some scientific data saying women have more synapses connecting left and right brains than men do, but I also know of women who compartmentalize and men who easily flow between right- and left- brained functions and thinking.)

In the interest of keeping this post from lasting until the cows come home (and considering the fact that we don't have cows, that could be a long time), I'll save the rest of my thoughts on learning styles and Bible studies for Monday. For now, I'd love to hear what you guys enjoy from women's Bible studies (those of you that do them) and what you wish they did more of.