Related articles and links |  1 of 8

When one broaches the topic of "women in missions," heroic icons like Mary Slessor, Amy Carmichael, Lottie Moon, and Helen Roseveare come immediately to mind. One does not form a picture of Jane Biles, an ordinary homemaker, who sensed a call to mission in 1699. In the book Wilt Thou Go On My Errand? author Margaret Hope Bacon recounts how Jane felt the Lord calling her to return to her native England as a Quaker missionary, but her husband William resisted the idea. Jane submitted to him, but her sense of calling persisted. She sought guidance from the General Meeting of the Ministry of Friends, which told her to pray about it. Months passed and her husband continued to resist. She eventually convinced him to go before the General Meeting with her and the board encouraged them both to wait "for further assurance of the mind of the Lord in it."Jane waited another six months. When the board members met again, they grew convinced that her calling was legitimate and that William's resistance was not, so they gave Jane their blessing to proceed. The next day, William agreed to "give up" Jane to her calling and decided, in fact, that he would join her. This decision seemed spur of the moment to board members, who told him to wait another six months. Jane waited with him. They finally set sail in 1701. The ship's scribe recorded their passage in the log as that of "William Biles and his wife."The story of Jane Biles captures the picture of women in missions today in several respects. First, she was an ordinary homemaker who heard a call. Second, she faced a culture of resistance that pulled her, like gravity, away from the sphere of missions service. Third, while honoring her husband, she did not give up and allowed God to pave the way for her to answer her God-given calling.If there has ever been an arm of evangelicalism where women have been given a wide berth to express their gifts, it has been the missionary arm. Many were cut from the cloth of the heroic "matriarchal" missionary pioneer (like Slessor or Carmichael) who paved the way for generations of like-minded female (and male) servants to answer a similar call. But the days of the heroic missions matriarch are over. The picture of missions is changing generally; no longer does an authoritative Western icon who introduces Western sensibilities to an indigenous context. The days of the heroic "patriarch" are similarly obsolete.Still, other forces are shaping the missions picture and, in some cases, are creating obstacles for women who hear the call. It isn't that women are intentionally excluded as much as a blind spot in the largely male-run evangelical subculture. In other cases, missions are being redefined in a way that de facto squeezes women out of active service.Susan Perlman, associate executive director of Jews for Jesus and president of the board of the Interdenominational Foreign Mission Association of North America (IFMA), once asked Billy Graham, "If a woman feels the call to mission, is gifted for ministry and leadership and comes up against a solid wall of resistance, what advice would you give her?"He said, "If God is leading her, she shouldn't take no for an answer."Therein lies the good news in this otherwise troubling picture. Lots of women are refusing to take no for an answer. And where front doors are being shut, they are walking around to the back and finding another point of entry. As a result, the picture of missions is changing today, and those women who seek will find that the opportunities to serve have never offered more excitement or challenge.

next page... |  1 of 8

August 7 2000, Vol. 44, No. 9