I read the article, and was surprised by what stayed with me. (you should too if this post is going to make any sense to you, and while you're at it, you could get more details about the Elders and a variety of interesting (mostly female) perspectives here.)
.... What stayed with me wasn't the emphasis on women's issues, although that is an important topic. I was interested in the idea that our treatment of women in the North American church is at all tied to how women are treated in other contexts all over the globe. This is a valid connection that I want to think and learn more about.
.... Nor was it the fact that I completely identified with Jimmy's position about the questionable conclusions in scripture about female roles:
... It also wasn't because I learned about the Elders, which seems like a grand idea. What a concept.. using one's influence to ... INFLUENCE!
No, what ended up staying with me was appreciation for Jimmy's courage. Dare I say that he had bal... okay, I won't finish that statement, it might be crude. (and I'm NEVER crude.)
At the end of the day, he had the courage to stand up for something that he believed was important.
He had the courage to separate himself - generously, graciously, kindly, but also assertively and with authenticity - from something that he believed was more harmful than helpful. He didn't slink away quietly and retreat until everything blew over. He didn't gloss over the truth of why he was reconsidering his alignment. He was just plain courageous. He was just plain honest.
Maybe we should be asking why that is so very inspiring and refreshing.....





























