I find the comments of this post rather demeaning to women who are serving- Gentlemen (who have commented) May I say as a woman from a complementarian classis whenever I attend that classis meeting there are micro and macro aggressions at my reporting. I have been yelled at, inappropriately questioned and demeaned.
It is a silent steady cancellation of women’s participation in the broader assemblies (ie not delegating women to boards or to synod and not letting them even appear as delegates when they clearly have more experience or giftedness for the role than the men that end up being delegated ) these things are harmful to the broader assembly and the denomination as a whole.
Many men have been hospitable to me personally but some have been openly hostile in inappropriate ways on the floor of classis. The Messy Reformation podcasts have regularly demeaned women’s participation- and slandered woman delegates to assemblies ie COD—it is stunning to me that women can be treated horribly in so many ways but no one calls out the bad behavior as unseemly and not dignifying for the body of Christ.
I have even said i am not present to change your theological convictions and I appreciate your grace — but your cold shoulder does not make this a space any woman would care to serve in unless they truly feel called to the work. It is an insult to the church of Jesus Christ not just women when you don’t intentionally make space for their voices in the room and bring them in numbers where they can speak up. We all suffer.
Our churches consist of more woman than men? Where are their voices in our broader assemblies?
They were first at the empty tomb! Where are they in the CRC?!
I would guess that another contributing factor is less deaconal delegation. That said, as a woman I will wholeheartedly agree that the culture of Synod has shifted in ways that make women feel less welcome than in years past (not saying it was ever great...). And, yes, as the churches who tend to be more liberal and affirming who have women as pastors/elders/deacons have already disaffiliated, it makes other women feel even less willing to go, as their support system is dwindling as well. Why go shoulder to shoulder to plow through the work of Synod with men who don't think you should be there, and therefore don't respect your contribution?
The past decade had more women delegates than the previous decade, even while including the 2 years when zero delegates went because of canceled synods...
But 18 this year means that the sky is falling?
That said, would it be your guess that female officebearers tend to disproportionately support LGBT behavior, so perhaps more women are now bound to leave their names out of broader assemblies?
The sky isn’t falling; it’s just trending downward since 2018. My general thesis is that the number of women delegated to synod is a lagging indicator of the denominational vibe shift that started with the Belhar and culminated at Synod 2016. The number of women delegates is just another lagging indicator of the broader trend/phenomenon. There are others.
I don’t think many remaining officebearers—male or female—support full affirmation/inclusion of LGBTQ people, but I honestly don’t have anything more than hearsay to back that up. All those who do have either resigned or belong to churches that are disaffiliating.
From what I’ve heard, the main challenge women face is that it’s simply difficult to do good work when half (give or take) the delegates they’re working with don’t think they should be there. It makes for a pretty stressful week, I hear, on top of baseline Synod-level stress any delegate deals with.
"the main challenge women face is that it’s simply difficult to do good work when half (give or take) the delegates they’re working with don’t think they should be there"
One can just as easily counter that it's challenging for men to work with delegates who think your convictions are rooted in misogyny and in the context of a denomination that clearly grants preference to the egalitarian understanding and platforms those who regularly impugn complementarians as not simply mistaken but evil.
The reality of work at synod is more benign that either of those complaints, however. What typically happens is much more collegial than the picture that is painted. I am from Classis Minnkota and had my conscientious objection noted on the floor of synod. A moment of recognition of my convictions followed by a week-plus of preference given to egalitarian convictions and practice. Yet the reality of fellowshipping with and working with women was not some awkward or improper exercise. We worked shoulder-to-shoulder in gracious posture. No one treated me as a misogynist, and I treated no one as lesser-than. It turns out that people of opposing convictions can and do treat each other honorably.
The irony of falling for the "women can't work well in a context of men with complementarian convictions" line is that it treats women as too tender to do the hard work of grappling together with people of varying convictions that fall within our stated doctrinal bounds. That does not strike me as terribly empowering.
If what you say is correct, then what accounts for the decline in women being willing to serve?
Are you suggesting that it’s equally easy/difficult for a women to operate as a delegate in a context that’s historically male-exclusive and currently male-dominant as it is for a man from Minnkota to operate as a delegate in a context where they’re a victim of unfounded accusations of misogyny?
I don’t buy that, for 3 reasons:
1. I don’t think it explains anything, and leaves what’s happening unexplained.
2. When the women who’ve been to Synod tell me about their experience, I believe them.
3. If what you are saying is true, then the trendline would be tilted in the other direction: fewer men (not women) would be serving.
"what accounts for the decline in women being willing to serve?"
I won't attempt to offer a comprehensive answer to that, but I think it is worthwhile to challenge your phrasing. You ask about the number of "women being willing" but you are actually speaking about the number of women who have been delegated. The two are not necessarily the same.
The most obvious (at least) partial explanation for fewer women delegates to Synod 2025 is the fact that there are fewer women officebearers in the CRC than recent history. That speaks to availability, not necessarily willingness. It is fairly evident that among those pastors currently leaving the CRC, women are disproportionately represented. Additionally, churches that are disaffiliating are quite likely to have a greater preponderance of women elders and deacons than remaining churches, again reducing availability and not necessarily speaking to willingness.
Edit: I don't think I worded my reply very helpfully (not my other reply, but my previous iteration of this comment), so please allow me to try again.
I wonder if you got stuck on my opening paragraph of response and didn't fully understand what I was getting at after that. I was actually disabusing the notion that complementarian men are unlikely to go to synod because of challenges in doing so.
Is there still an objection to women serving as delegates read at the beginning of Synod? That was certainly off-putting at Synod, 2019, even though I had been warned that it would be read. To go from hearing that to my first committee meeting with members of Classis Minnkota sitting across the table from me felt ugly, to be honest.
The delegation this year plays into your thesis, but I don't know how much weight you should put on it? I heard reports that many Classis had less willing delegates to serve, because they didn't have a passport? In fact, I see one Classis that didn't even delegate a single minister this year (I don't know how often that has happened before, nor what reasons played into that specific case). So, is this confirming a trend, or just an off year? My guess is that it could be some combination of the two, but Synod 2025's data could just be an outlier too...
The passport requirements are not materially different between men and women: women who have changed their last names need to submit a marriage license along with their birth certificate, I think. But I don't think this would predict fewer women delegates willing to serve than men.
On a different note, I find the passport requirement obstacle baffling. Getting a passport is not difficult, expensive, or time consuming. And Canada is among the easiest countries for Americans to enter (no visa application, no fees, etc.). I cannot for the life of me understand how someone can get an M.Div. and go through the ordination process and be willing to spend a day at Classis—but not go through the minimal effort of getting a passport. It just feels like Being An Adult 101, in the same category as registering to vote, getting an oil change, mowing your lawn, etc.
I agree that women are just as capable of obtaining a passport as men (and I certainly was not suggesting otherwise), I was just recognizing the reports and evidence that Synod being held at Redeemer is potentially impacting the delegation this year. Perhaps there are even more women delegated in 2025 than would have been if it was at Calvin like usual? I'm not saying we can tell one way or the other, just noting the potential piece of the puzzle, and suggesting it might be premature to confirm a specific trend.
I find the comments of this post rather demeaning to women who are serving- Gentlemen (who have commented) May I say as a woman from a complementarian classis whenever I attend that classis meeting there are micro and macro aggressions at my reporting. I have been yelled at, inappropriately questioned and demeaned.
It is a silent steady cancellation of women’s participation in the broader assemblies (ie not delegating women to boards or to synod and not letting them even appear as delegates when they clearly have more experience or giftedness for the role than the men that end up being delegated ) these things are harmful to the broader assembly and the denomination as a whole.
Many men have been hospitable to me personally but some have been openly hostile in inappropriate ways on the floor of classis. The Messy Reformation podcasts have regularly demeaned women’s participation- and slandered woman delegates to assemblies ie COD—it is stunning to me that women can be treated horribly in so many ways but no one calls out the bad behavior as unseemly and not dignifying for the body of Christ.
I have even said i am not present to change your theological convictions and I appreciate your grace — but your cold shoulder does not make this a space any woman would care to serve in unless they truly feel called to the work. It is an insult to the church of Jesus Christ not just women when you don’t intentionally make space for their voices in the room and bring them in numbers where they can speak up. We all suffer.
Our churches consist of more woman than men? Where are their voices in our broader assemblies?
They were first at the empty tomb! Where are they in the CRC?!
I would guess that another contributing factor is less deaconal delegation. That said, as a woman I will wholeheartedly agree that the culture of Synod has shifted in ways that make women feel less welcome than in years past (not saying it was ever great...). And, yes, as the churches who tend to be more liberal and affirming who have women as pastors/elders/deacons have already disaffiliated, it makes other women feel even less willing to go, as their support system is dwindling as well. Why go shoulder to shoulder to plow through the work of Synod with men who don't think you should be there, and therefore don't respect your contribution?
It's a sad "development," really.
The past decade had more women delegates than the previous decade, even while including the 2 years when zero delegates went because of canceled synods...
But 18 this year means that the sky is falling?
That said, would it be your guess that female officebearers tend to disproportionately support LGBT behavior, so perhaps more women are now bound to leave their names out of broader assemblies?
The sky isn’t falling; it’s just trending downward since 2018. My general thesis is that the number of women delegated to synod is a lagging indicator of the denominational vibe shift that started with the Belhar and culminated at Synod 2016. The number of women delegates is just another lagging indicator of the broader trend/phenomenon. There are others.
I don’t think many remaining officebearers—male or female—support full affirmation/inclusion of LGBTQ people, but I honestly don’t have anything more than hearsay to back that up. All those who do have either resigned or belong to churches that are disaffiliating.
From what I’ve heard, the main challenge women face is that it’s simply difficult to do good work when half (give or take) the delegates they’re working with don’t think they should be there. It makes for a pretty stressful week, I hear, on top of baseline Synod-level stress any delegate deals with.
"the main challenge women face is that it’s simply difficult to do good work when half (give or take) the delegates they’re working with don’t think they should be there"
One can just as easily counter that it's challenging for men to work with delegates who think your convictions are rooted in misogyny and in the context of a denomination that clearly grants preference to the egalitarian understanding and platforms those who regularly impugn complementarians as not simply mistaken but evil.
The reality of work at synod is more benign that either of those complaints, however. What typically happens is much more collegial than the picture that is painted. I am from Classis Minnkota and had my conscientious objection noted on the floor of synod. A moment of recognition of my convictions followed by a week-plus of preference given to egalitarian convictions and practice. Yet the reality of fellowshipping with and working with women was not some awkward or improper exercise. We worked shoulder-to-shoulder in gracious posture. No one treated me as a misogynist, and I treated no one as lesser-than. It turns out that people of opposing convictions can and do treat each other honorably.
The irony of falling for the "women can't work well in a context of men with complementarian convictions" line is that it treats women as too tender to do the hard work of grappling together with people of varying convictions that fall within our stated doctrinal bounds. That does not strike me as terribly empowering.
If what you say is correct, then what accounts for the decline in women being willing to serve?
Are you suggesting that it’s equally easy/difficult for a women to operate as a delegate in a context that’s historically male-exclusive and currently male-dominant as it is for a man from Minnkota to operate as a delegate in a context where they’re a victim of unfounded accusations of misogyny?
I don’t buy that, for 3 reasons:
1. I don’t think it explains anything, and leaves what’s happening unexplained.
2. When the women who’ve been to Synod tell me about their experience, I believe them.
3. If what you are saying is true, then the trendline would be tilted in the other direction: fewer men (not women) would be serving.
"what accounts for the decline in women being willing to serve?"
I won't attempt to offer a comprehensive answer to that, but I think it is worthwhile to challenge your phrasing. You ask about the number of "women being willing" but you are actually speaking about the number of women who have been delegated. The two are not necessarily the same.
The most obvious (at least) partial explanation for fewer women delegates to Synod 2025 is the fact that there are fewer women officebearers in the CRC than recent history. That speaks to availability, not necessarily willingness. It is fairly evident that among those pastors currently leaving the CRC, women are disproportionately represented. Additionally, churches that are disaffiliating are quite likely to have a greater preponderance of women elders and deacons than remaining churches, again reducing availability and not necessarily speaking to willingness.
Edit: I don't think I worded my reply very helpfully (not my other reply, but my previous iteration of this comment), so please allow me to try again.
I wonder if you got stuck on my opening paragraph of response and didn't fully understand what I was getting at after that. I was actually disabusing the notion that complementarian men are unlikely to go to synod because of challenges in doing so.
"All those who do have either resigned or belong to churches that are disaffiliating."
That seems a bit optimistic. One need only look at Voices to find examples.
But, still, thank you for the thoughtful response.
Is there still an objection to women serving as delegates read at the beginning of Synod? That was certainly off-putting at Synod, 2019, even though I had been warned that it would be read. To go from hearing that to my first committee meeting with members of Classis Minnkota sitting across the table from me felt ugly, to be honest.
The delegation this year plays into your thesis, but I don't know how much weight you should put on it? I heard reports that many Classis had less willing delegates to serve, because they didn't have a passport? In fact, I see one Classis that didn't even delegate a single minister this year (I don't know how often that has happened before, nor what reasons played into that specific case). So, is this confirming a trend, or just an off year? My guess is that it could be some combination of the two, but Synod 2025's data could just be an outlier too...
Lloyd
The passport requirements are not materially different between men and women: women who have changed their last names need to submit a marriage license along with their birth certificate, I think. But I don't think this would predict fewer women delegates willing to serve than men.
On a different note, I find the passport requirement obstacle baffling. Getting a passport is not difficult, expensive, or time consuming. And Canada is among the easiest countries for Americans to enter (no visa application, no fees, etc.). I cannot for the life of me understand how someone can get an M.Div. and go through the ordination process and be willing to spend a day at Classis—but not go through the minimal effort of getting a passport. It just feels like Being An Adult 101, in the same category as registering to vote, getting an oil change, mowing your lawn, etc.
I agree that women are just as capable of obtaining a passport as men (and I certainly was not suggesting otherwise), I was just recognizing the reports and evidence that Synod being held at Redeemer is potentially impacting the delegation this year. Perhaps there are even more women delegated in 2025 than would have been if it was at Calvin like usual? I'm not saying we can tell one way or the other, just noting the potential piece of the puzzle, and suggesting it might be premature to confirm a specific trend.
Lloyd