For those who might not be aware, a Christian blogger named Lori Alexander published an article that garnered a lot of controversy over the last week on her blog The Transformed Wife. If you haven’t read it already, you can find it here. This is my response both to her and to those who have reacted extremely negatively over these last few days.
Dear Lori,
It’s been a crazy week, hasn’t it?
I am so, so sorry you’ve been so suddenly thrust into the limelight in such an unloving way. I’m certain you’ve read some of the responses; the vast majority of them contain terribly snarky lines such as
“[This article] is in fact a legitimate piece of (advice? wisdom? knowledge?) endowed to us by devout
crazy personChristian Lori Alexander…”“My bad. I have to say as a young woman, I was more striving for a Proverbs 31-type vibe, mixed with some serious fruits of the Spirit.”
and this lovely reaction GIF from a scathing article:
These are terrible, terrible responses that don’t come anywhere close to the root issues most of us are concerned with. If there’s a way to tastefully correct someone’s interpretation of Scripture, this sure isn’t it. I want to come right out and admit that I don’t agree with the main message of your post, Lori–but I am very surprised, as you probably are, that people are so… well, surprised at what you’re saying.
It’s not a new idea that the “ideal woman” is one who raises the children, keeps the home, and lives a lifestyle that respects both her husband and God–it’s only recently that Western society has moved away from that. It’s also not a new idea that Christianity values the concept of sexual purity or that society as a whole values money. What is novel is the adamant expression of these ideas in today’s day and age; and Lori, I’m afraid people are reacting more to the certainty with which you’ve expressed your convictions than they are to you as a person, so I am deeply apologetic that so many of the responses have been so personal to you.
You are a beautifully- and wonderfully-made woman striving to follow God, and people certainly aren’t treating you that way. For that, I extend my deepest sympathies. No one should be subject to the amount of ad hominem attack you’ve been sustaining for something as small as a short blog post.
Taking a Closer Look
That being said, the ideas you’ve expressed in your post should be carefully scrutinized, because they’re about God’s word. Anything involving the interpretation of scripture should be taken seriously because God should be taken seriously, so I’d like to do that with some of the points you’ve made and the way you’ve made them.
My first point of interest is just the title and opening statement of your article. It’s clear you were going for something eye-catching and that you knew would be controversial to draw attention–but is that really the right way to present this particular message? When you’re trying to teach women, especially young women, about God’s calling on their life, it’s not helpful nor loving to make girls feel guilty about past failures. It’s also not helpful to frame what God wants in the context of what men prefer. If our motivation is serving God, framing this article under what men want seems like a method to get more clicks and views while lessening the importance of what God wants. All in all, Lori, I don’t think setting your article up as being controversial from the get-go was the proper way to share what you believe about God’s calling for women; if you understand that your message might be hard to hear for some, consider whether the rap-on-the-knuckles approach is appropriate or whether something more loving and understanding will reach hearts better.
My second thought centers around a few of the ideas you’ve shared about biblical womanhood. You state, “Young women learn nothing about biblical womanhood or what it takes to run a home when they go to college.” I actually agree with a bit of that–it’s very true that college doesn’t explictly teach you about how to run a home or how to live out what God calls women to be. However, to say that women cannot or will not learn to serve others or to seek God while at college is to discredit God’s ability to work everywhere.
Keep in mind that a woman with a firm foundation in Christ is going to take initiative to follow him no matter where she is. Pursuing biblical womanhood–regardless of what you believe that is–is not limited to location or vocation. If it was, and we agreed that abiding by God’s calling was limited by physical proximity to somewhere (like a woman’s home) or by a woman’s career path, what does that say about women who are physically unable to do as you’ve suggested and stay at home, a caveat you briefly alluded to but didn’t expound upon (“some young women have no choice but to live away from their families and some have had their hearts broken by men they thought was ‘the one.’“)?
What is Biblical Womanhood?
Lori, I guess we’ve hit a disagreement about what God calls women to. I believe wholeheartedly that God can and does call women to the workforce, to not have children, or to go to college. I’m certain you’ve heard many times over these last few days what others think God’s calling for women is, so I won’t go into many of my thoughts here–but what I will say is that saying God’s calling is limited to a bullseye in the center of a target doesn’t line up with what God has called women to in Scripture. Was Deborah a housewife? Did Lydia work only in her home? Was Abigail loved any less by David because she’d been previously married (and therefore wasn’t a virgin)? We don’t see God confining women to a single calling even in scripture, so I don’t agree that we should today, either.
You’ve said, “I will never understand how women prefer careers over having precious babies”–and you know what? I understand where you’re coming from. I will never understand how some women prefer certain things over others, either. We may never understand a desire that we’ve never had; and that’s okay. You don’t need to understand what having a different calling feels like to support those who are called differently. I’m certain you would support a woman who has been called to serve on the mission field–Jesus himself gave the Great Commission, and we see women like Priscilla in Acts living out that calling. So why should a woman being called to serve in a different workplace than simply the home be any different?
A Call to Better Correction
We see in Acts 18 the story of Apollos teaching at the temple. Scripture says he “was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures”, but that, of the Gospel, he only knew the Baptism of John; so his teaching about Jesus was enthusiastic, but not entirely accurate. When he began teaching these things publicly, it says
He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately.
Church, this is how we are meant to address false teaching from fellow believers! Other passages urge us to take further action when the teaching continues on longer–but when someone is spreading words we believe to be false in the manner of Apollos, it’s so much wiser to pull them aside, to address them personally, and to “explain… the way of God more adequately” rather than slander them or talk badly about them without providing a better alternative. Is there a time for rebuking? Yes. But in this case, when it’s over the internet and towards someone we likely don’t know personally, the proper response is not to take on a role more effectively filled by a friend (Proverbs 27:6).
A Request to Consider
Lori, I really hope what I’ve said so far doesn’t feel like an attack on you so much as a gentle request to consider the implications behind what you’ve said. I hope that, in the manner of Priscilla and Aquila, I’ve been able to explain what I believe is God’s teaching without hurting you personally.
I don’t believe that God’s only calling for women is to stay in the home to raise kids and manage the household; I believe he can call women to that and more–so it concerns me to see your convictions being taught as though they should apply to everyone. A favorite YouTube creator of mine, Katie Emmerson, shared in her own response to your article that the teaching that girls cannot be independent nor voice their opinions was incredibly damaging to her growing up. I would encourage anyone reading this who is feeling discouraged about their own value or worth, especially within the church, to watch her; and I would encourage you, Lori, to consider Katie’s words and realize that the message you’re teaching might not line up with God’s design.
I know a single letter like this likely won’t change your convictions; and I don’t expect it to. I just want you to know that I’m concerned with the way you’ve interpreted God’s calling for women, but I wanted to let you know in a way that was not scathing or sarcastic. I hope that you’ll consider the words of those around you that are asking you to reconsider your take on biblical womanhood.
I’m in the middle of writing a second part to this letter to address the three hot topics you supply in your title–debt, virginity, and tattoos!–that you’ll find a link to below once I’ve finished; I hope you and others might find some of God’s wisdom through that post, as well!
God bless you, Lori–and all of the others who might be reading this!
Sincerely,
Kimberly Horton
[part two: in progress]
