eve.redefined











Last week I finished reading The Other Boleyn Girl, and I cannot get this story out of my head.  I’ve always been fascinated with Henry VIII, the stories surrounding his wives, his court, and his children, especially Elizabeth.  Reading this book renewed that old fascination.  Anne Boleyn, Henry’s second wife and Elizabeth I’s mother, was a very strong, intelligent woman.  She knew what she wanted, and she did everything to get it.  Granted, Phillipa Gregory’s novel is fiction, but after reading it, I did some research on the facts of Anne’s life and found that most of the events really happened or were rumored to have happened and even Anne’s character is based on historical letters and writings about the woman.

Anne’s story is one that shows the intense power a woman can have over a man.  That’s not to say that a man can’t have power over a woman; he can, but I think more often than not women tend to have the edge on manipulation.  We know that Henry was madly in love with her based on seventeen surviving love letters he wrote to her while still married to Queen Katherine.  Historically, Henry hated writing so that fact that he even wrote to her says a lot and even more so the content.  But Henry wasn’t just in love with Anne–he was so “bewitched” (as he often referred to it as) by her that he defied the Pope to marry her.  I always knew this from my history classes and such, but I had no idea how momentous this decision was until this book put it in perspective for me.  Historical fiction has a way of humanizing and animating history even though its been pumped with some extra character.  Henry sacrificed the national religious order, national security, allies, and an innocent woman’s integrity to marry Anne.  Anne definitely had a power over Henry.

In the book, when Henry starts to reveal his affection towards Anne, she refuses to give into him like her sister Mary and become his mistress.  She witholds from him, using his desire against him to achieve her own means, become the next queen of England.  She is ridiculously cunning in her ability to use her beauty, intelligence, and good old flattery to get what she wants.  There is no doubt that this woman is strong and wickedly smart, but Anne’s story blatantly exposes women’s power over men and how that can be used for evil.  Anne’s efforts do not end well for anyone.  No one is unscathed.  Henry loses Katherine whom he loved and the love of the people.  Elizabeth loses her mother and her safety.  Mary loses her place at court.  Anne and everyone involved in the scandal loses their life, dignity, and (if the worst rumors are true) their souls.

A woman using her power for evil is a scary and dangerous thing, but a woman using that power for good can have an incredible effect.  Through very very informal observation of couples I have encountered whether in real life or books and the media, I have developed this theory that women have been put on this earth to make men better.  I think this is what happens when a woman uses her power for good.  It challenges a man to be a better man, the whole idea that he needs to be worthy.  I know this makes it sound like women are on this high pedastol, but I don’t believe we are.  Women aren’t by any means better than men.  I think there is just this perception out there that we are, the whole “fairer of the sexes” concept.  And these women “making men better” are not limited to romantic roles.  I think women can do this in any relationship with a man whether it be mother, sister, or friend, just like anyone can push any other person to be better.  I think this feminine power is inspiring, and we should always keep that in mind when dealing with the men in our lives.

much love–char



I really hate it when people are labeled as ugly.  I just joined a book club and we’re reading C.S. Lewis’ Til We Have Faces, and the narrator, Orual, has been labeled as ugly.  Her father, the king, asks her to be veiled when meeting people for the first time so she doesn’t scare them off, and he tells her to her face how atrocious her face is.  No character even attempts to tell her she is beautiful. I hate that.

During middle school and my awkward years, I really struggled with the way I looked, and I would have died had I known my peers shared my belief that I was an ugly duckling.   That idea made me start trying to find something beautiful about every person I met–good bone structure, beautiful eyes, killer smile, gorgeous hair or flawless skin.  Everyone’s got something.  And have you ever noticed the more you get to know those people who are truly beautiful on the inside, the more beautiful they appear on the outside?

Even though I know I’m out of my awkward years and I’m definitely more comfortable in my own skin, it still bugs me when people call others or me ugly.  It’s just not nice.  Where’s the love?  Especially towards girls.  For some odd reason, beauty is important to us, even if we’re not sure what to do with it.  We feel our best when we look our best.   And if people around us try to tear us down in this department it can do some pretty significant damage, especially during those formative years.  I like to think every girl’s got some pretty in her.  Every girl is beautiful.

much love–char

*and yes I did just title this post after a Christina Aguilera song.



{August 10, 2008}   Judge Deborah

At the end of my last post, I mentioned Deborah, so in an effort to hopefully, better understand this topic, I decided to look into Deborah’s role as a female leader of Israel.  All I seem to come up with though is more questions.

In the Old Testament, before Israel was ruled by kings, God appointed judges to watch over His chosen people.  Judges 2:16-18 explains how God appointed a judge to deliver His people from bondage and lead them.  The Bible also says that the Lord was with the judge, and during a judge’s lifetime, the people were safe from their enemies.

In Judges 4, we meet the only female leader of Israel, the judge Deborah.  We know from the Bible that she was married, a mom, and a prophetess, delivering the word of God to His people.  She’s got it all, a career and a family.  It seems that the Israelites’ willingness to come to her as a judge shows that they did respect her authority even though she was a woman.  But then the questions start.  Deborah summons Barak (a general of Israel’s army) and tells him that the Lord wants him to lead an army to defeat Jabin’s army and free the Israelites from Jabin’s oppression.  Barak says he will only obey this command if Deborah comes along, and Deborah agrees but says that the victory will now be given to a woman and not Barak.

What is Barak’s doubt?  Does he not trust God, or does he not trust Deborah’s delivery of God’s instruction because she’s a woman?  Or is it a little of both?  Is he using her presence as insurance against her lying and sending him to his death?  I feel like I’m reading a lot into it, but I have to at least ask and consider the question.  Our attitudes today towards female candidates for president and female pastor’s and deacons proves that women leaders tend to make many people, especially men, uncomfortable.  Why should a general of Israel’s army be any different?

But is Deborah’s role in Israel’s history any indication of God’s attitude towards female pastors? All I can clearly gather from Deborah’s story is that God is fine with women delivering His words to the people.  He also seems fine with a woman leading people politically, and while passages about deacons and elders in the church specifically reserve those roles for men, I have yet to find a passage outlining the qualifications one must have for a pastoral position.  If you know where one is, please leave a comment.  But if one does not exists, then do the qualifications for deacon and elder extend to pastor, or is that a line we’ve drawn on our own?  Was Deborah just a special case, called specifically by God and therefore only women specifically called should serve as pastors?  But how do church bureaucracies regulate people’s callings?  Should they?  That seems kind of bold and controlling of a man-made establishment.

I do think God blesses female political leaders and ministry leaders, and as we see with Deborah, He definitely speaks truth through them.  I don’t think a ministry, whether in a small church or a big organization, should die because a man can’t be found to be in charge of the women.  I don’t think women should be limited to only serving in ministries serving children.  But as far as women leading a whole church, I’m still unsure.

much love–char



{August 3, 2008}   should we or shouldn’t we

A friend of mine passed along this link to a blog on Relevant Magazine’s website: http://relevantmagazine.com/releblog/ashleywolpert/the-role-of-women/

This blog post got me thinking about this topic.  I didn’t want to regurgitate what Ashley has said here, but I have been confronted this week with the topic of women in church.   This morning my husband, his mother and I tried a new church, a Southern Baptist one.  To our great surprise, not only did this church include deaconesses but a female associate pastor as well.  The deaconesses did everything the deacons did–served communion, took up the offering, sat at the front of the church.  You never see this in a Southern Baptist church.  At least I hadn’t until now.  I thought it was so weird that I had just read that blog, thought I could ignore it, and then here it was in my face.

The truth is I’m not sure what I think about women in the church, especially pastoral positions.  My philosophy on women in leadership roles has always been that God’s perfect plan was for men to lead and be supported by strong women, but in this imperfect world sometimes men do not step up, and capable women must take their place.  It’s not that I think women are incapable of leading.  I do believe that women are just as capable as men, but I don’t think that’s God’s perfect plan.  But should we be ordaining women just in case the men can stand up to the job?  And what about women who feel called to be pastors?  Do we tell them they’re wrong?  It’s just the late night pizza talking to them not the Holy Spirit.  I don’t know.  I don’t think we should walk out on women who do speak in church and lead.  That’s disrespectful and not reflective of Christ’s love.  And if a woman wants to start a new ministry inside or outside of a church I don’t think it should fall a part just because a man wouldn’t lead it.  But how do we handle verses like 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 when Paul says women shouldn’t speak in church or 1 Timothy 3 where Paul specifies that only men should be elders and deacons?  Do we brush those Pauline commands as cultural specific to that century and that place or do we hold it to be infallible like we do the word of Christ?  In the Old Testament, God only allowed men to be priests, leading the people religiously, but then we have Deborah the judge who lead Israel politically.  So is a woman barred only from spiritual leading?  I don’t know.  The woman in me cries, “That’s ridiculous!  We can lead just as well as men.”  But then I read those verses in the New Testament, and I wonder if my attitude is in line with the world or with heaven.  What do you think?

much love–Char



et cetera