Merayakan “Allah” dan “Kemanusiaan” Dalam Semarak Idul Fitri

Berada di tengah komunitas Muslim dan hidup berbaur dengan mereka tidak sekedar menjadi konsekwensi dari pilihan residensi ketika memutuskan untuk berada di Yogyakarta, melainkan sebuah anugerah untuk belajar secara lebih hidup dan dinamis untuk mengerti bagaimana kehidupan keagamaan yang sebenarnya terjadi di kalangan grass root setelah hampir dua puluh lima tahun hidup dan bertumbuh di tengah komunitas yang homogen secara religius apalagi dalam konteks Maluku era dan pasca konflik yang tersegregasi secara parmanen oleh garis agama. Sebelum melanjutkan tulisan ini, saya hendak menyampaikan bahwa refleksi ini saya persembahkan kepada seluruh komunitas Muslim di Indonesia, secara khusus di Maluku yang sedang berada dalam suasana perayaan hari raya Idul Fitri 1 Syawal 1433 H.

Beberapa saat yang lalu saya memilih untuk mengelilingi kompleks di sekitar rumah tempat tinggal saya dan beberapa kawasan ramai di Jogja, tidak terkecuali Malioboro. Aktifitas yang terjadi hampir semuanya mirip di setiap kawasan itu, dimana banyak orang yang secara komunal diatur dalam barisan parade untuk menggelar apa yang dikenal dengan nama takbiran sebagai proses yang menandai bahwa puasa telah berakhir dan dimulainya bulan Syahwal. Setiap perempuan dan laki-laki yang terlibat di dalamnya memiliki perannya masing-masing; laki-laki melantunkan lagu Islaminya (Allahu akbar, Allahu akbar, Allahu akbar. la ilaha illa Allah. Allahu akbar, Allahu akbar. Wa li-illahi al-hamd), sedangkan para perempuan menuntun anak-anak dengan ornamen musikal yang dimainkan sehingga membuat bulu kuduk semua orang yang mendengarnya berdiri, termasuk saya, dan saya harus jujur mengatakan bahwa nyanyian-nyanyian itu begitu mempesona dan memiliki potensi untuk membuat orang akan memandangnya penuh kagum. Nyanyian-nyanyian itu semakin lagi menakjubkan ketika diiringi dengan suara Adzan dari Masjid yang mengumandangkan secara terus-menerus kalimat syahadat “asyhadu an-laa ilaaha illallaah, wa asyhadu anna muhammadan rasuulullaah”.  Proses ini menjadi puncak dari rangkaian sholat Tawarih yang dilakukan selama bulan puasa. Saya kemudian mencoba membangun makna dari apa yang terjadi dan kemudian tiba pada interpretasi personal berdasarkan keterbatasan pemahaman tentang Islam dandialog yang hidup bersama mereka. Memproklamirkan kapasitas Allah menjadi sesuatu yang sangat esensial dari peristiwa ini, tetapi yang kemudian harus mengarah pada pengalaman riil kemanusiaan. Disini titik berangkat saya untuk memahami semarak Idul Fitri yang sadar ataupun tidak sedang digaungkan.

Oleh karena setiap aktifitas yang terjadi dalam arak-arakan perayaan Idul Fitri tidak lain (jika tidak, mungkin salah satunya) ialah mengumandangkan identitas dan eksistensi Allah, maka saya mencoba memahami persitiwa sakral ini dari perspektif ini.  Tindakan pengungkapan identitas dan kapasitas keilahian Allah yang tunggal sekali lagi memberi impresi kuat bahwa Idul Fitri sebagai puncak dari selebrasi Ramadhan harus menempatkan Allah sebagai sentral (teosentris). Tindakan ini sepenuhnya menuntut setiap orang yang terlibat di dalamnya untuk mengakui eksistensi ini, dan pengakuan seperti itu harus dilakukan dengan sepenuh hati dan jiwa. Saya rasa, dalam perspektif kekristenan ada kesamaan yang absolut dari konfesi syahadat ini dengan tradisi taurat dalam Perjanjian Lama yang menghendaki komunitas Israel sebagai representasi dari komunitas iman untuk tetap konsisten dengan Allah ketika ditegaskan “jangan ada padamu Allah lain di hadapan-Ku” (Ulangan 5:7).  Bahkan juga dalam tradisi Perjanjian Baru dapat dijumpai upaya Yesus untuk kembali menguatkan asumsi ini ketika mengajar dan mengajak pendengarnya untuk mengasihi Allah dengan segenap potensi kemanusiaan yang dimiliki (Matius 22:36).

Banyak orang dari kalangan fundamental baik Islam ataupun Kristen seringkali menggunakan teks-teks yang senada untuk menjustifikasi gagasan bahwa Allah komunitas Islam berbeda dengan Allah yang diyakini oleh orang Kristen, sehingga ini awal dari dosa sejarah yang panjang dalam perjumpaan dua agama Abrahamik ini. Yang benar-benar terjadi ialah apa yang diyakini oleh Islam melalui syahadat ini adalah kebenaran mutlak adanya, dan keyakinan kekristenan mengenai identitas keilahian juga pada dasarnya merupakan kebenaran yang tidak dapat terbantahkan. Keduanya sama-sama meyakini Allah dalam identitas ketunggalanNya tetapi dengan bertolak dari pengalaman menjumpai yang berbeda dimana yang dari padanya juga muncul berbagai keragaman refleksi  dan teologi. Jika posisi ini dibalik dalam batasan argumentasi eksklusif mengenai eksklusifisme Allah yang hanya untuk suatu golongan tertentu, maka menurut saya ini cara yang kita tempuh untuk membatasi luasnya jangkauan interventif Allah yang bekerja dalam sejarah kemanusiaan yang terkotak-kotak karena pengalaman, ruang, dan waktu. Pengingkaran bermotif eksklusifisme ini sebetulnya juga melahirkan makna kontras bahwa Allah yang diyakini tidak sepenuhnya otoritatif dan tunggal sebab disamping eksistensiNya ada juga allah-allah lain dalam frame agama-agama tertentu. Yang hendak saya katakan disini ialah bahwa kecendrungan menganggap agama sendiri benar dan yang lainnya tidak sekaligus menekankan bahwa Allah hanya menjadi Allah atas sejumlah manusia tertentu, tetapi jika mengakui peran kreasionis Allah sebagai yang bertanggungjawab atas penciptaan manusia dan alam maka kita akan mengakui bahwa Allah yang satu-satunya itu juga menjadi satu-satunya Allah bagi suatu komunitas berkeyakinan lain. Saya merasa sangat berterima kasih kepada para ilmuwan Muslim yang pada Oktober 2007 turut memperkuat asumsi ketunggalan Allah dalam kekristenan dan Islam dan menjadikannya sebagai common ground bagi perjumpaan keduanya, tetapi sekaligus pada sisi yang lain tetap mempertahankan keunikan masing-masing tradisi sebagai kekayaan.

Kembali pada esensi rangkaian proses menyambut Idul Fitri di atas, saya melihat bahwa dengan mengumandangkan posisi sentral Allah aktifitas ini sekaligus menjadi kritik terhadap kekuatan-kekuatan anti kehidupan yang berupaya untuk mengendalikan totalitas kehidupan manusia dan memposisikan diri seolah-olah sebagai ‘Allah’. Proklamasi ketunggalan Allah sekaligus menjadi kritik terhadap kekuatan koruptor dan para elit politik bangsa ini yang tidak adil yakni yang harus bertanggung jawab atas penderitaan dan kemiskinan yang merajalela, sebab tindakan korupsi sebetulnya juga merupakan tindakan untuk mengambil peran sebagai ‘alah-alah’ kecil bagi rakyat kecil yang menderita. Perayaan hari raya Idul Fitri 1 Syawal 1433 H yang dilakukan selepas peringatan Proklamasi Kemerdekaan Indonesia hendaknya dimaknai sebagai kado ulang tahun bagi bangsa ini. Dimana di dalamnya kekuatan religius yang terwakili oleh Islam mengungkapkan bahwa kemerdekaan yang sejati belum ter-manifest dalam kehidupan keindonesiaan, sebab kekuatan-kekuatan kolonialisme kontemporer masih begitu menguat dalam kehidupan berbangsa dan bernegara. Korupsi, kemiskinan, penderitaan, kekerasan, terorisme dan pelanggaran HAM, serta pembatasan kebebasan beragama adalah wajah dari perbudakan yang diciptakan oleh manusia-manusia yang hendak menjadi allah. Oleh karena ini, gerakan kemerdekaan sejati harus dilandaskan dan dimulai dengan mengakui bahwa hanya ada satu kekuatan yang sejati dan itulah kekuatan keadilan dan keadilan itu sendiri memiliki akar yang tidak dapat dicabut dari Allah.

Dengan ini saya pikir bahwa dimensi teologis dari perayaan Idul Fitri akan mengarah dan bermuara pada dimensi humanitas. Merayakan Allah melalui peristiwa ini sebetulnya juga adalah merayakan kemanusiaan, dan dengan demikian proklamasi keallahan ialah juga proklamasi kemanusiaan. Salah satu hal penting dalam merayakan bulan puasa ialah tradisi infaq dimana kesadaran sosial menjadi sangat penting. Dalam tulisannya yang membahas tentang pergeseran perilaku Ramadhan pada koran Kompas edisi 13 Agustus lalu, Ali Mustafa Yaqub mengungkapkan bahwa salah satu perilaku nabi Muhammad SAW yang sangat menonjol selama bulan Ramadhan adalah sikap kedermaannya yang sangat tinggi. Sahabat Nabi, Abdullah bin Abbas menuturkan bahwa apabila datang bulan Ramadhan, nabi sangat dermawan ibarat angin yang kencang. Hal ini berarti bahwa sang Nabi menempatkan ‘solidaritas sosial’ sebagai hal yang juga sama pentingnya dengan proklamasi ketunggalan Allah, oleh karena itu semarak Ramadhan ialah semarak perjuangan nilai-nilai kemanusiaan. Saya rasa ini point yang paling menyentuh totalitas kehidupan manusia sehingga menjadikan Idul Fitri berjasa bagi kemanusiaan melintasi batas-batas sosial yang dikonstruksikan.

Saya hendak menutup tulisan ini dengan mengatakan bahwa dalam konteks keindonesiaan, bukan hanya Allah dalam eksistensiNya yang sedang terancam, tetapi juga kemanusiaan orang-orang Indonesia sedang tercabik-cabik. Perayaan Idul Fitri menuntut bukan hanya komunitas penganut Islam untuk berjuang bagi keadilan dan perdamaian manusia dan semesta Indonesia, melainkan semua orang yang menjadi bagian dari bangsa ini.

Selamat Merayakan Semarak Idul Fitri I Syawal 1433 H.

Kampung Klitren, Yogyakarta.

“Feminism and Interreligious Life in the context of Protestant Church in the Mollucas”

Diversity is the face of Indonesia. Bhinneka Tunggal Ika which means “Unity in Diversity” (literally; many, yet one) clearly shows that we are living in the context of pluralism, and it is even the identity of the state. As a part of Indonesian, Mollucas has also the same identity, for people live in religious, social, language, and ethnic diversity. As an identity, it has ever been problematic in the history of Mollucan people when they were struggling to killed each other, especially those who were different with their religious community. As we know, the riot was over and the community was reconciled, but I am skeptical to say that the current situation will guarantee the future, where people will live peacefully among them. I see that in the grass root community the conflict potential still be preserved. In this context, I am going to say that reconciliation should be striven continuously by involving the whole community, including women.  

In the context of conflict, women played an important role for making peace and harmony. They began in the public space, such as traditional market which was opened in the borders between Moslem and Christian where they were actors in the economic transaction. Such transaction was more than economic activity, but a part of encountering the other to talked and to reconciled. So, conflict resolution cannot be separated from women’s participation. The question now is; is there any place for women in the context where conflict is over? I absolutely agree with Anna Marsiana that said that they are sent back to home with their domestic roles, even if they have public role but it does not guarantee that they will be the decision makers. The later symptom can also be found in the church. Almost 50 % of the total ministers in GPM (Gereja Protestan Maluku) are women, but the leadership positions are dominantly controlled by men. I think that giving the opportunity for the women to be ‘the leaders’ is one of the holistic ways to bring peace. For me, when women are the leaders, they will not only lead and make a decision with ‘their brains’ but also with ‘their heart’ as their emotional characteristics. They will act as mothers who care to every member of the family. They love to unity them, and not to separate. So, I am emphasizing again and again that women leadership, either in the social or religious community is very important, not only to oppose the patriarchal system but also to the harmony in the context of interreligious community.

I also suggest that: (1) women empowerment has to become priority. Its focus is socio-economic aspect. Their basic skills should be improved, getting better education and occupation, and being ready in economical market competition. I think that one of the conflict’s causal factors is joblessness. When people are lacking of occupation, the crime will be very potential to occur. Conversely, when they get opportunity to work, the crime or conflict then can be reduced. Here I am not saying that ‘the jobless women’ are the causal factor of the conflict, but what I am trying to stress is that by getting the opportunity to work or to be empowered, they can also empower the other and creatively making the opportunity to them for working. (2) The Mollucan women have to work together to return the cultural values back to their places and at the same time trying to strengthen ‘the motherhood principle’ in the socio-cultural system within the community where women especially mothers are seen as the most important figures in the family (ina-centred; ina means mother).

Women Leadership in the Church: Approaching the Text using Asian Feminist Hermeneutic

I.       Introduction: Women Leadership in the Church

Discrimination against women has been occurring since a long time ago. It threats women in many aspects of life and making them experience double-suffering. They are not considered or regarded as also ‘human’ who have ability which is equal to men or to the other creatures. They always become victims, facing violence and trafficking within the society. They also cannot get an access to the better education and occupation. The later phenomenon is something which is common where they are limited to the public roles. What has been described here could be clearer when we conceive it in the frame of the Patriarchal System which has to be responsible to the discrimination cases. Throughout the history, even the history of the church such a cultural construction has been growing and bounding the community of faith.

In church, women are also seen as the second-class people. If we want to be honest, we have to say that this discrimination is supported by theology and doctrine which have been developed. It influences church’s attitudes toward women that are discriminative. In some churches, they are not allowed to be ordained as priests or ministers, but for some they are allowed but without any opportunity to be the decision makers. It means that they lack of access for leadership. By this I am going to say that they cannot easily be involved in the structure of the church as the decision makers, i.e. Bishop and the other important roles. So, we can see that the way of patriarchal thinking still bounds the church. Another thing that I found here is that such discrimination is not only caused by male in the church itself, but also by women themselves. They are not really free of the patriarchal construction. In this context, I am wondering about the causal factors are. Based on my colleague’s investigation, we can see that it is also influenced by their understanding of about leadership in the church which is only for men. It is contributed by the interpretation of the scripture, especially I Timothy 2:8-13. So, I am going to put my attention to this text in order to find what the problem of the text is, and how to make in sense in our context today through deconstruction effort. For this project, I will use the Asian hermeneutical approach proposing by Phyllis Trible who divides it into three parts; identifying cases, discerning critiques toward patriarchal, and retelling it creatively.

II.    Discrimination Against Woman in I Tim. 2:8-13

Using her approach should be begun by identifying the cases of discrimination against women in this passage. The text is begun by stating about the manner of praying that has to be taken by men, and even women.  They can pray everywhere while lifting up their holy hands without wrath and doubting, and with the same manner women should pray (v.8-9a). This two verses do not show anything about gender injustice, for women and men are allowed to bring a pray, even in the same manner. It sounds very positive for the equality in doing worship. Through this verses, the author of the letter wanted to instruct the local church at that time about what the right manner of pray really is and the “prayer” itself. Constable says that the way of praying that the author proposes here is the public praying as the Christians practiced commonly in his day (cf. 1 Kings 8:22, 54; 2 Chron. 6:13; Ezra 9:5; Ps. 28:2; 63:4; 134:2; 141:2; Lam. 2:19; 3:41; Isa. 1:15). This posture was also common in the pagan mystery religions and early Christians of the first century. Commonly they raised their palms upward and open to heaven evidently to symbolize their inner openness to God and their desire to offer praise to God and to obtain a gift from Him. So, I repetitively state that there is not any indication of discrimination in verses 1 and 2a (first line).

In the following lines of the same verse (8b) and v.9 we can see that he talks about how women can dress in local meetings (church services). He concerns on the issue of the appearance then followed by the attitude. For him, a woman who attends that meeting should dress appropriately. It should be prosperity and moderation, not braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing (v.9). He neglects such an appearance of the women in order to replace it with ‘the appropriate attitudes’. By this he is trying to distinguish appearance with attitude. I see that it will not be problematic, for I also agree that attitude is more important than our physical appearance in worship. But, it will be so when he tries to limit it only for women, as if their attitudes are not appropriate compared to men. What has been emphasized here also indicates that women concern only to something which is not important as long as the service is held. With the other words, women are really busy to think about how to be looked very well than how to do the good. Constable clearly says that the author saw that “Women like to look good, so they need to remember that good deeds are more important than good looks”. In this context, I see that it is the first indication within the text which shows that there is an unjust thinking of the author toward the women. In short, there is a case about discrimination against women in v.9. The question will be raised here, “does it mean that the men at that time were right and the women were not?” For me, it is relative to be answered depending on people themselves.

 Concerning this verses, I also think that I can say that if the author does not make any instruction dealing with the appearance of men, I can suspect that he deliberately avoids the speaking of men’s adornment in order to let the men look very good than women. So, it is also possible to say that men should be look good and be adorned with gold, pearls, and costly clothing, whereas the women are disallowed. Is not it patriarchal construction? Yes, that’s it.

The next verses (vv.10-11) strongly indicate that there is a gender injustice here. The author says that, “let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence”. It is really patriarchally constructed. These two verses explicitly emphasize two things at the same time that are about “teachings” and “leadership”. These mean that (1) they cannot stand in the public spaces to teach or to give an instruction; even they have ability for that. What is meant here should be understood in term of teaching the scriptures. For the historical community in the early century, the role or function of teaching is only limited for a male because of the assumption that he is an authoritative figure chosen by God to do so. He is also seen as a mediator between Him and His people. Here we see that a woman can only be “the subject of learning”, but not “the object of learning”. What I mean with the later term is that they can ‘learn’ but cannot ‘be learnt’. They have to learn with all ‘submission’ (Greek: Hypotage). If they are able to teach, what is the problem? The author gives an answer in vv.13 and 14 which will be seen later. (2) Someone who will be the decision maker or “leader” should not other than a man. He has an absolute right to instruct the people in the family, the church, and the society. Consequently, a woman has not an authority over a man. I can guess that the author said so in order to prepare a foundation for the church as institution. At that time, the church had been organized institutionally changed from its traditional form that was “house church”. In House Church, a woman played an important role for leading the worship, but (I just guess that) when the situation was changing and the very strong leadership was needed to the institutional one, the author then promoted the men’s leadership. From these verses, I am going to say again that no matters what the arguments are, I think it still remain unjust.

Verses 13-14 give two reasons as basis for the author’s instruction in the previous verses. He says that “For Adam was formed first, then Eve (13). And Adam was not deceived; fell into transgression (14)”. It is not just a reason, but an unjust one. He refers to the creation passage which was constructed in the patriarchal circumstances too. He then adds that woman was the trouble-maker or tempter who caused the falling in sin. About the later, he forgot that not only woman who ate the fruit of the tree, but also man. That sin was the sin of both man and woman. So, I can categorize this reason as discriminative.

If we read the last verse at glance we may think that it sounds very positive because of women are involved in God’s salvation work. It is indicated by the verb ‘be saved’ (sozo). For me, a statement in this verse includes two assumptions. Firstly, it repeats what has been stressed in previous verses about women’s domestic role. But I see that it becomes interesting because of the ‘apology tone’ he gives here. Somehow giving birth or child bearing is spiritual thing which causes blessings. So, all women should be prior to this kind of role, for it is important than many others things, including “teaching” and “leadership”. Secondly, this statement about women also discriminates the other women. How about the women who cannot bear children? Will they be saved also? The text answers, No! In this case, there are double-discriminations against these people. So, I can conclude that there are three aspects of discrimination; appearance, teaching and leadership. I will concern on issue about leadership.

III. Some Critiques to the Patriarchal System in the passage

Here I am going to discern some critiques to the patriarchal system, starting by trying to answer the question, “is there any critic of it here?”. In analyzing the text, I did not find anything about the critique made by the author toward the unjust system within the community. He sounds quite positive when begins his words in the earlier verse (v.8), but it is not the critique! So, I will quote some others texts as the counter-points to what have been stated in this chapter.

It is common to say that men’s leadership is proposed by the author. As I said before, it might be the manner for strengthening institutional church at that time. Hyunju Bae says that in the period of the New Testament women had an important role to be played; even the dominant culture was patriarchal. The world where the Roman Empire and Early Christianity existed together gave opportunity to involve them in public spaces with so many roles they had. For instance, in the class structure of Roman Empire which consists of (1) royal family (Aristocracy), (2) merchants soldiers, civil servants, traders, and other entrepreneurs, and (3) slaves, former slaves, urban working people, rural farmers, and laborers (non-citizens). Women involvement was in all the sections, for they had a variety of places in it. Whereas in early Christianity, we can also find references which show that they were involved in its development. Bae also mentions Mary Magdalene, Joanna, the wife of Herod’s steward Chuza, Susanna (Lk. 8:1-3), Mary the Mother of Mark (Acts. 12:12), and Lydia who was a woman merchant or trader (Acts. 16:14). Some of them were financial supporters for Jesus’ movement. The other woman is Nympha who held the church in her house (Col. 4:15). Ramon Jusino in talking about the authorship of the Fourth Gospel indicates that Mary Magdalene, for example, was the very famous and important figure at that time. She was the founder and leader of the Johannine community who saw the life and works of historical Jesus. No matter whether appropriate or not, he has shown how woman played a public role. What I mean here is that the others parts of scripture which are about women’s participation can be the counter-points to such discrimination in this I Timothy 2:8-13.

In v.12, a woman are disallowed to teach or to give instruction. But in other text with the same author, we can see that he talks about this talent which possess not only to man, but also woman. In I Cor. 12:7, everyone has their own talent; there is talent to heal (v.10) and even to speak wisely. In this context, perhaps we can say that woman can also teach and having authority to be learnt and to instruct men, not only in secular institution, but also in the church. Paul says that both man and woman have ability for that given directly by God, their Creator. Nowadays, we find that they are more able to learn and to teach about what they have been learnt, they dominate the educational institutions as teachers and lecturers.

The author grounds his instructions on the idea that God created woman later after man, “Adam was formed first, then Eve” (v.13). In another passage, Paul also states that woman came from man, and man comes from woman (I Cor. 11:12). This correction is made by him immediately to posit the problems altogether. He wanted to complement the idea of woman being second in the order of creation (Gen. 2) with the idea of man being second in the order of birth. Bae adds that by doing this the historical Paul attempted to lay bare a more fundamental theological principle of God as the ultimate author of all life. He emphasizes that human being comes from God. The implication of his idea is that woman and man are equal in their existences before God, so none powers over the other. In short, there should not be “inferior” or “superior” based on the chronological time of creation, for God is the first of every created thing.

In verse 14 he says that woman is source of sin, they tempted the man and then falling in sin. I can understand that he wants to implicitly state that man was holy and made no mistakes, but woman did. For this idea, I will argue that (1) sin is not about who causes it, but who wants to do so. The serpent came to both man and woman and offered possibility to eat it. Woman then took an initiative but man finally also ate it together with her. So, it was their mistake, not only woman. (2) In Rm. 3:9-20 Paul talks so much about sin. For him, everyone is sinner because none is right before God (10). If the idea of sin in Timothy is based on Genesis which tends to mean that that man was holy, we could use this argument to counter it and stating that everybody are potential to do mistake.

I actually want to discuss it more here, but I am limited for two until three pages of paper. But what I am saying here means that the argument which Paul gave for limiting woman’s role is unreasonable. Women have ability to sit together with men in the same table and to think about what the problems are and then how to solve it with men as their partners. So, the first thing that should be done is liberating our church’s mindset about women’s leadership while criticizing patriarchal construction preserved in it. Women should be empowered to be ready for empowering the other.

IV. A Letter to the Leaders of the the Churches in the World

Dear Brothers and Sisters,  I thank God for the communion created by God as churches in the world, the God’s. I appreciate your leadership very much, for it should be so. If you give me a chance to ask for something, I will ask you for acting like a mother who cares their children very much. Your other children and I need your attention and a warm hug. We miss the motherhood figure that cares about us, and hopefully you can be so. But…, if it is allowed I may want more than it! “…PLEASE GIVE A SEAT TO WOMAN FOR SITTING NEXT TO YOU…”; to embrace and to care about us! They have also ability for that, for God has created them and filled them with the same talents He put on you. They should not be women only in the margin lines or to be led by you. They are not only people who bear a child of man, but who bear the children of God. It is the time for stopping the patriarchal construction in the body of Christ. They are under discrimination now; discriminated because of they are women, and not men. They are inferior, and the men being superior. I am so sorry for this… I hope that the church became realize that in God we can find “Equality”. Through this, I just want to invite you to empower women by giving them a chance to stand as you stand and sit as you sit. I do believe that they will be the great leaders whose emotional and intellectual capabilities. Thank you, God Bless.

---