Palin: An Interesting Twist

I was very intrigued from the moment I heard McCain's vice president nomination was Sarah Palin. I felt a personal connection immediately knowing she is a family friend of Derek George, who is my former roomie's now husband. They speak very highly of her and absolutely love what she has done in Alaska. My intrigue was further heightened when I read an unbelievable speech she delivered last night and researched on where she stands on certain issues. I don't remember seeing a candidate in my lifetime who actually has potential of being elected while holding to such conservative principles! She has definitely power-packed the campaign and my lingering apathy for politics resulting from utter discouragement has had dormant moments in the last week!

A woman in office? I have heard several raise cain about this idea ever since she was announced. I even read one person interpret 1 Corinthians 11:3 in a rather disturbing way:

"And to make matters worse, most people in the Christian community do not understand that it is just as much a heresy to put a man as head of Christ as it is to put a woman over a man."

Wow. I won't bore my readers with the long treatise I could write against this statement! I would argue, rather, that this statement is more heretical than what it speaks against. Implying there is the same difference between a woman and man as there is between man and Christ is not only theologically erred and wrongly interpreted, it is blasphemous!

I do seriously disagree with women being in any leadership role in the Church. However, when it comes to civil government, I do not see adequate biblical support against it. It is indeed wrong for a woman to be over a man in the Church as I believe Paul clearly explains. (especially 1 Corinthians 11:3) However, as Al Mohler says:

"Do I believe that a woman can serve well in the office of Vice President of the United States? Yes. As a matter of fact, I believe that a woman could serve well as President -- and one day will. Portraits of significant men of history hang on the walls of my library --but so do portraits of Queen Elizabeth I of England and former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

The New Testament clearly speaks to the complementary roles of men and women in the home and in the church, but not in roles of public responsibility. I believe that women as CEOs in the business world and as officials in government are no affront to Scripture. Then again, that presupposes that women -- and men -- have first fulfilled their responsibilities within the little commonwealth of the family."

In my walk through the primary documents of the History of Ideas program, I never read one Founding Father directly or indirectly claim women should not be in office. This argument is a fallacy known as "an argument from science." Just because the Founders never specifically mentioned women should be in office does not mean they believe they should not.

With that said, I am by no means a feminist who is thrilled by the very idea of a women being in office. Sarah's gender means nothing to me; her principles do. Do I wish she would stay home with her little ones and wait to run for office when they are older? Yes, I do. But, if the Lord can use her to change the direction of this nation, to Him be the glory!

As believers, we have the privilege of being part of the Missio Dei, or the "Mission of God." We are tiny yet useful specks in God's grand narrative of redemption. Thus, it is our responsibility is to engage the culture with the gospel. The point is not to make the Church or even the world "look" like it is supposed to. Rather, the point is to transform it from within. The anwer to this problem is not to preach "biblical womanhood" as a primary doctrine in order to make ourselves "whitewashed." Rather, our approach should be to engage culture for the purpose of transforming (not whitewashing) it with the gospel.