Ek onthou nog hoe vrouens in ons eie tradisie rok moes dra kerk toe. Op grond van die Bybelse teks wat vrouens verbied om "mansklere" te dra.
Dit was 'n groot storie toe vrouens eenvoudig net begin het om die gebruik te ignoreer. Spoedig kon jy skaars onthou dat daar 'n tyd was toe rokke verpligtend vir kerkgang was.
Nou weet niemand skaars van daardie tyd.
Daarom was dit vir my 'n ervaring om die berig van vandag in die NYT te lees oor vrouens wat in Amerika being het om die Mormoonse afkeur van langbroeke as kerkdrag te bevraagteken. Hulle punt is dat die gebruik 'n dieper seksisme verberg.
En, uiteraard, was hulle optrede toe nie so onnodig nie. Nie net het 'n klomp mans snedige kommentaar te lewer gehad nie, maar, mirabile dictu, ook vrouens self.
As julle nie hou van die kerklike gebruik nie, gaan soek 'n ander kerk, het een kwaai vrou geskryf.
Dit weet ons al goed: die onderdrukker het dikwels die onderdrukte aan sy sy om sy vernederende dade goed te praat.
Dit is tog 'n dankbare ervaring om te besef hoe ver ons gekom het in ons eie land in ons eie kerklik konteks. Kerkgang is nie 'n saak van uiterlikhede nie.
Hier is wel twee dinge waaroor 'n mens gesprek kan voer: watter rol speel kleding (informeel of formeel) in 'n erediens. Hoe gee 'n mens in jou eie voorkoms uiting aan die wete dat die erediens tog maar nie net 'n kampeer-geleentheid is nie? Is daar grense vir hoe 'n mens kan lyk wanneer jy die kerkgebou instap? Die saak het niks met vroue te doen nie. Want 'n mens sou ook kon vra hoe die liturg op visuele maniere uiting gee aan die misterie van die erediens: hier en nou, in die bymekaar kom van mense, is meer as net nog 'n gesellige sakie aan die gang. Dit is die tyd waarin 'n mens op 'n unieke manier bewus word van die wonder-wekkende teenwoordigheid van God onder mense.
Ek dink hieraan terwyl ek al vir maande lank bewus bly van die juridiese sfeer se eise vir kleding. Selfs in die sobere Nederland het die regter en sy assessore hul tipiese uitrustings aan. Hier, in die hofsaal, vertel hulle met hul formele drag, is iets belangriks aan die gebeur. En dit pas mense in die hofsaal om eerbied te betoon aan die proses van regsspraak wat hom aan die voltrek is.
Ons onderskat te veel die simboliek van klere.
Waarmee ek glad nie dink dit is nodig vir vroue om rok in die kerk te dra nie. My vraag is: hoe wys ons klere wat ons van die kerkdiens dink?
Hier is die berig:
“Wear Pants to Church,” an event on Sunday, was meant to draw attention to the role of women in the Church of the Saints, using attire as a symbolic first salvo in a larger struggle over gender inequalities.
Dit was 'n groot storie toe vrouens eenvoudig net begin het om die gebruik te ignoreer. Spoedig kon jy skaars onthou dat daar 'n tyd was toe rokke verpligtend vir kerkgang was.
Nou weet niemand skaars van daardie tyd.
Daarom was dit vir my 'n ervaring om die berig van vandag in die NYT te lees oor vrouens wat in Amerika being het om die Mormoonse afkeur van langbroeke as kerkdrag te bevraagteken. Hulle punt is dat die gebruik 'n dieper seksisme verberg.
En, uiteraard, was hulle optrede toe nie so onnodig nie. Nie net het 'n klomp mans snedige kommentaar te lewer gehad nie, maar, mirabile dictu, ook vrouens self.
As julle nie hou van die kerklike gebruik nie, gaan soek 'n ander kerk, het een kwaai vrou geskryf.
Dit weet ons al goed: die onderdrukker het dikwels die onderdrukte aan sy sy om sy vernederende dade goed te praat.
Dit is tog 'n dankbare ervaring om te besef hoe ver ons gekom het in ons eie land in ons eie kerklik konteks. Kerkgang is nie 'n saak van uiterlikhede nie.
Hier is wel twee dinge waaroor 'n mens gesprek kan voer: watter rol speel kleding (informeel of formeel) in 'n erediens. Hoe gee 'n mens in jou eie voorkoms uiting aan die wete dat die erediens tog maar nie net 'n kampeer-geleentheid is nie? Is daar grense vir hoe 'n mens kan lyk wanneer jy die kerkgebou instap? Die saak het niks met vroue te doen nie. Want 'n mens sou ook kon vra hoe die liturg op visuele maniere uiting gee aan die misterie van die erediens: hier en nou, in die bymekaar kom van mense, is meer as net nog 'n gesellige sakie aan die gang. Dit is die tyd waarin 'n mens op 'n unieke manier bewus word van die wonder-wekkende teenwoordigheid van God onder mense.
Ek dink hieraan terwyl ek al vir maande lank bewus bly van die juridiese sfeer se eise vir kleding. Selfs in die sobere Nederland het die regter en sy assessore hul tipiese uitrustings aan. Hier, in die hofsaal, vertel hulle met hul formele drag, is iets belangriks aan die gebeur. En dit pas mense in die hofsaal om eerbied te betoon aan die proses van regsspraak wat hom aan die voltrek is.
Ons onderskat te veel die simboliek van klere.
Waarmee ek glad nie dink dit is nodig vir vroue om rok in die kerk te dra nie. My vraag is: hoe wys ons klere wat ons van die kerkdiens dink?
Hier is die berig:
LAS
VEGAS — A call for Mormon women to wear pants to church, begun this
month by a small group of women, has stretched across the globe, but not
before creating a backlash and even generating death threats.
“Wear Pants to Church,” an event on Sunday, was meant to draw attention to the role of women in the Church of the Saints, using attire as a symbolic first salvo in a larger struggle over gender inequalities.
Though
the Mormon Church has no official policy against women wearing pants to
church, many say they feel peer pressure to wear a dress, particularly
in the Western United States, organizers said. So on Sunday, thousands
of Mormon women arrived at church in pants in places like Cambridge,
England; Heidelberg, Germany; Austin, Tex.; the Marshall Islands; and
Kotzebue, Alaska. A number of the women posted their photos on Facebook and other Web sites. Others said they could not participate because they were fearful of ridicule or reprimand.
A
Google map, begun so women could show they participated, included posts
like this one, from Kari White, in Sheboygan, Wis.: “felt free to be an
authentic me for the first time in my nearly 5 years of membership in
the church.”
Joanna Brooks, a professor at San Diego State University and the author of “The Book
of Mormon Girl: A Memoir of an American Faith,” called it “the largest
concerted Mormon feminist effort in history.”
A church spokesman, Eric Hawkins, declined to comment on the event.
Organizers
hope the dialogue will now expand to include issues like the ordination
of women, or women taking on more responsibilities at church events.
They
also cited the pronounced role of the Boy Scouts in the church — boys
routinely become troop leaders in the organization, but girls have no
similar outlet with the Girl Scouts — and the fact that young men are
required to go on two-year missions to spread the faith, but young women
are not. The result: the vast majority of Mormon missionaries are men.
“Wear
Pants to Church” was the idea of Stephanie Lauritzen of Salt Lake City.
She and some fellow Mormon women who belonged to a group called All
Enlisted posted an events page on Facebook on Dec. 9. Within days,
thousands had pledged their support, but one person threatened to shoot
women who showed up in pants. Ms. Lauritzen, 26, also received threats
on her own Facebook page that are being investigated by Facebook and the
local authorities, she said.
On Dec. 11,
the Salt Lake City-based church leadership issued a statement:
“Generally church members are encouraged to wear their best clothing as a
sign of respect for the Savior, but we don’t counsel people beyond
that.”
The All Enlisted “friends” page has
drawn hundreds of posts, both for and against the idea. JoEllen Swarts
of Las Vegas wrote: “What is wrong with all you women??? If you’re not
happy with the LDS church, move on, find another place of worship. You
will not change Mormon Doctrine.”
At a
suburban church in Green Valley, Nev., less than 10 miles from the Las
Vegas Strip, women filed into church on Sunday morning, most wearing
dresses (most men wore coats and ties). Bishop Michael Durham was
somewhat dismissive of the pants idea. “I think wearing pants is not
liberating,” he said. “Liberation comes from inside. I’m not sure they
have a clear understanding of the church’s position on gender.”
Soraya
Cordeiro said she wore pants because she had to take a long bus ride to
her job at the Venetian hotel after church and found wearing a dress to
be “a hassle.” She said she had never faced rebuke for her choice of
attire.
On Monday, a private All Enlisted
Facebook page had collected about the same number of “negative
experiences” as “positive experiences” from women across the country.
Julie Tuovi Baker Hansen, a lawyer in Burbank, Calif., who participated
while visiting a Salt Lake City suburb, said she was surprised to see a
man raise his hand and say, “Women who want to wear pants, they just
don’t know how to follow the Lord.”
Ms. Hansen, the only woman wearing pants in a room of about 50 people, said she felt “pretty irritated.”
Aimee Hickman, the editor of a Mormon feminist magazine called Exponent II,
said she originally had reservations about the event. But then she saw
the negative reaction by church members online. “This made me rethink my
original position,” Ms. Hickman said. The attention drawn to the
effort, she added, “has people talking about Mormon gender roles more
than anything I’ve seen.”