As I said at the end of the last blog, I would be tackling the debate between complementarianism and egalitarianism.

Like many well-known authors who have written on women in the church, I will also not say which side I’m on. I’m not trying to persuade you to “be” one or the other.

A quick jump back to the beginning to get our bearings.   In Genesis 1 and 2 we are told how God created mankind. Male and female.  We are introduced to the work that God created man to do. We are told about the creation mandate given to both man and woman to be fruitful and multiply, to fill the earth and subdue and rule over it. God ordained marriage as he brought Eve to Adam, and we are told that they become one.  Full image bearers.  We also see in the creation account that God made man and woman different. Kevin DeYoung, in his article, “Death to the Patriarchy? Complementarity and the Scandal of ‘Father Rule’” says, “God created the world with sexual differentiation at the heart of what it means to be human beings made in his image. We cannot understand the created order as we should until we understand that God made us male and female.”  These differences are God’s idea right from the beginning!  We know that men and women act and react differently to the same situation because we are created uniquely. According to DeYoung, the most fundamental of human passions – here he lists them as sex, nurturing, and aggression, show up differently in each of the sexes. To ignore or reject these differences between the two sexes is to reject God’s creational design. And these differences are universally seen.

The question that comes up in the church now is one of identity and roles combined. I think a lot of it stems from history in which women were oppressed by men under the “headship” role.  History shows that within the “patriarchy” some men saw their wives, mothers, and sisters as inferior.  Good only for producing heirs and cooking for them. They were often seen as collateral, as objects to be sold and bartered with. They were seen as burdens. They often had no rights outside of the headship of their fathers, and later their husbands.  

Not only that, but this isn’t a “historical problem” – it’s present today. And as sinners all, we are prone to take what is good and make it sinful. Instead of fathers and husbands treating daughters and wives as equals, with inherent dignity as image bearers of God alongside them, they used their authority to belittle them, to keep them down. Taking the word submission and making it an ugly thing.  Abusing them physically, mentally, and emotionally.  Reminding them of their place in the hierarchy of family and church. And in modern times, it’s jokingly referred to as “pregnant and barefoot in the kitchen.” Lately I’ve seen another one: “go to the kitchen and make me a sandwich.” (some dude said that to me in an online discussion.) There’s also the other side, where women in the church are expected to be quiet, meek, and to submit.  While those are characteristics that we see in Jesus (in a different way perhaps) they do not define all that we are in our entire being as women, or men for that matter.

When Jesus came and turned cultural norms upside down by giving women status and privilege, and treating them with respect and dignity, he also defined submission to encompass both genders, as Paul wrote “submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.” (Eph 5:21) Submission is based on the gospel – on the “one another’s”. Submission Jesus’s way requires strength, tenacity, and patience.  In the post “Women in the Church -Part 2” we looked at women in the Bible who showed great courage, strength and servant leadership. These were not “one offs”, these women were used by God for his kingdom purposes – alongside men. Carolyn Custis James writes that male and female relationships are strategic.  That right from the beginning God created a team to do the work he set out for his image bearers to do. “Men and women working together actually predates men working with men and women working with women. It would be one thing if God confined this male/female team to home and family and then mapped out the remaining territory into separate spheres for men and for women. But he didn’t do that. Their mission – together – is to rule and subdue the whole earth on his behalf.” (Half the Church, 139)

She describes the relationships with God and with each other as “load bearing walls”.  Of God’s design. If this is true, and I believe it is, then each needs the other. Men need women in order to be who God created them to be and do the work God has called them to do, and vice versa. God created us to need each other. Hence why we are the Blessed Alliance, or necessary allies (Aimee Byrd’s term) in God. We are all called to gospel living – putting others ahead of our own interests as Paul writes in Philippians 2. We are all called to accept responsibility and take action in God’s kingdom – and not see men and women as leaders or followers exclusively. There is no room for the proverbial battle of the sexes. And as I wrote in the previous post “Part 3” we are all given spiritual gifts from God to be used in his kingdom, to his glory and for the benefit of all believers and the world around us. “For when men and women are allied together, richer discussions result in better decisions, the elimination of blind spots, and a greater kingdom force in the world.” (James, 149) This leads to, in a word, the church’s flourishing.

“Are you a complementarian or an egalitarian?” This question has caused division and strife in the church. Again, it’s helpful to start with definitions.

Complementarian is a term coined by John Piper and Wayne Grudem in their 1991 book “Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.”  The belief is that the Bible establishes male headship and authority over women, making male leadership the biblical standard. God calls women to submit to male leadership and take up supportive (note: not inferior) roles to their husbands and to male leaders in the church. The prevailing belief is that only men can be preachers and elders in officially ordained positions in the church. People who do not agree with complementarianism say that it is synonymous with tradition, the hierarchy and patriarchy.  But that isn’t accurate.  Complementarity suggests both equality and beneficial differences between men and women. Equal value with different callings.

Egalitarians believe that leadership is not determined by gender but by the gifting and calling of the Holy Spirit, and that God calls all believers to submit to one another. Therefore, egalitarians hold to the belief that women can preach and assert authority over men in the church setting.

The debate centers on whether or not God has placed limits on what women can or cannot do in the home and in the church – and to what extent.

My question is: Isn’t there a middle ground? A complemengarian? 😊

Here’s the challenge for all of us. Well educated, respected scholars cannot agree. We do well to begin with a huge dose of humility, and respect for each other who hold differing opinions. Interpreting THE passage – 1 Timothy 2:11-15 – leads to much debate.  Paul writes to Pastor Timothy, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man, she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived, it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing – if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.”  

Dr. John Stackhouse calls this passage “easily one of the most obscure of the classic passages on this matter. I remember quite clearly now…realizing this insight: Nobody could explain this passage.” (James,156) And as James herself writes, “Meanwhile, as the arguing continues, half the church is living in a debate zone, needing to make choices and to move forward with our lives with amber lights flashing caution at every intersection and respected leaders like traffic cops pointing us in opposite directions.”  (156)

For people in the egalitarian camp, that passage causes great distress. And maybe for all of us ladies it does.  Complementarians may read it with some trepidation.

But later in his letter to Timothy, Paul has this to say in 3:11, “In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.” This comes right in between Paul’s instructions to elders and deacons. So, it’s not so black and white.

Then note that in both camps there are different opinions and interpretations! Add in the fact that we live in an egalitarian culture. What women have in the world is not necessarily what we have in the home or the church. What is welcomed by the world regarding women’s contributions and expertise is often a subject of debate in the church. The gifts and talents we’ve been given and can use everywhere else may end up being somewhat of a problem, and possibly unwelcome in the church. Or limited.

Egalitarians have come to their conclusions because of the way women were treated in the past. So, let’s have a look at patriarchy. Patriarchy gets a bad name – I think for good reasons. But it simply means “father rule”.  Nothing in its etymology suggests abuse. Kevin DeYong says, “Every Christian believes in patriarchy because we affirm the rule and authority of God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth.” (Article: Death to the Patriarchy? Complementarity and the Scandal of ‘Father Rule’) Yet patriarchy is almost always used negatively with words such as domination, dominance, exploitation, control, and oppression. This is what is being fought against, for good reasons. “Gendered power” is an issue still today. Charlotte Higgins of the Guardian argues, “patriarchy conveys the existence of a societal structure of male supremacy that operates at the expense of women.”  Thus, in today’s world, patriarchy = male supremacy and female oppression. But this is NOT a Christian world view. While parts of patriarchy are justly removed from our society – such as fathers selling daughters, other parts remain from within a biblical perspective. (male headship as per creation).

The debate around women’s roles etc. in the church has repercussions on how we live for God in his kingdom. It affects how we relate to our neighbours, to our Christian brothers and sisters, to our parents. It affects our views on the value of women, our marriages, how we raise our children. It affects how we use and develop our gifts and how to be part of the Body of Christ. How we follow Jesus! So, we cannot ignore it.

In certain cultures where women are routinely treated with disrespect and outright violence, how would the Gospel come across to them if we maintain a strict view on “men lead, women follow”?  Think of women who have been abused by men in their lives – both within family and in the church, women who have been trafficked, or women who’s concerns about abuse done to them is swept under the rug by church leaders – does Christianity sound freeing when we teach them that the Bible’s “default message “for women is to submit to all male authority?  We do not live in an ideal world. We live in a broken world, and these things matter!  Of course, no one on either side should be okay with abuse, but James asks, “…are we interpreting scripture rightly when our conclusions create scenarios where abuse can thrive unchecked? Is Jesus’ gospel merely a kinder, gentler version of the world’s way of doing things, or does the gospel take us to a completely different, long-forgotten way of relating to one another as male and female? When Jesus said, ‘My Kingdom is not of this world’, did he include relationships between men and women?” (163).

Injustice in general, and against women, cannot be ignored. God loves justice. (Isaiah 61:8). It is linked to our identity as image bearers because God is Just. As Christians, we must be enraged by any kind of abuse!  We must be aware of and condemn areas “where the powerful prevail over the powerless and the privileged over the disadvantaged, when his image bearers are, in any way dishonored.” (163) Do we as a church – globally and locally – need to do some self-reflection on how we operate?

The other aspect that James writes about is how women, if faced with an authoritarian leadership in church, tend to downplay their talents and gifts, instead of stewarding them. How many competent female teachers do you know that are relegated to the school classroom, but not given an opportunity to use her gifts in the church setting? Are we encouraging and investing in women to use their gifts and talents for the good of the Kingdom? How many competent female musicians and vocalists do you know who are not allowed to use their gifts for the glory of God and the benefit of the local congregation?

Equality is a foundational truth that God extends to every human being – male and female. And it’s rooted in our ’image bearer’ identity. It’s not a suggestion, but a fact. Like I mentioned before, Jesus, and Paul both upended cultural norms.  A big part of their radical teaching was servant-leadership. And we have to be so careful to maintain this in the church and at home. There is no room for lording it over one another. There is no room for dominance and subjugation. We are all servants of Jesus. All are followers. Any leadership conferred on us is by God himself. And we are all called to be kingdom minded and to live out the gospel. A significant part of that is mutual submission.

Andrew Wilson, in his article “Beautiful Difference – The Complementarity of Male and Female Image” draws attention to how God has ordered things for the Church. He makes the case that first, elders (shepherds, pastors, bishops, overseers) are guardians of the church, and that throughout redemptive history – from the garden through to Jesus and beyond – the people charged with guarding God’s people have all been men. They have the significant responsibility of serving the church by protecting and guarding her from harm.

Think of “shepherd or pastor” – what does a shepherd do? He protects the sheep from enemies – even laying down his life.  He guides and cares and provides for them, leading them on right paths. And Jesus said, “I Am the Good Shepherd.”  The perfect Protector who laid down his life for his sheep.

Overseer or bishop may make us think of managing. Wilson says, “In Koine Greek, however, it had the sense of ‘guardian’. It may have been heard more like Ezekiel’s “skopos” – watchman.” John Calvin read that as “elders are the faithful watchmen who watch and take care of the flock, while other men sleep.” Like a look-out or a sentry on guard.  So, we have protector, guide, provider, watchman.

Historically, elders preserved doctrine in the church – quite noticeably in the period of the fledgling, early church. Paul appointed elders in each church on his missionary journeys to guard the church so that she wouldn’t be destroyed. (Acts 14:22-23) Wilson concludes with noting that the three D’s summarize the responsibility of elders: doctrine, discipline, direction.

Then Wilson shows us men in the Bible God appointed to defend and protect people and the church: Adam – in the garden to serve it and guard it (Gen 2:15). The patriarchs. Levitical priests (adding that they were men of violence considering all the sacrifices they had to conduct!). The judges and kings. The twelve disciples – apostles. The qualifications for overseers or elders in the NT church are directed to men. He goes on to look at 1 Timothy 3.  Paul’s directive towards elders is that they are to be “the husband of one wife.” That’s not gender neutral. There are other specifications given to prospective elders: to lead their household well, keep their children under control, able to teach. Now, to some women’s dismay, it has to be noted that Paul had just restricted women from doing any teaching in 1 Tim 2:12. Yet, right after the elder and deacon qualifications, Paul addresses women in 3:11. There is some debate about whether it should be translated as ‘wives’ of deacons or ‘women’ who serve as deacons, and Wilson notes, “it clearly distinguishes between overseers, deacons, and women/wives, making it almost impossible for Paul to have considered the latter to be a subset of the former. As such, even egalitarian commentators often agree that these requirements ‘present the overseer as a husband and father’ (Towner), and that ‘Paul refers to the bishop throughout as a man’ (Wright). In this text, at least, eldership is not sex neutral.”

The church needs men and women, fathers and mothers. And it’s important to recognize the significance of women in the Bible, which I wrote about in the blog titled, ‘Women in the Bible, part 2’.  Wilson notes that women in the patriarchal period both hear from and talk to God, and frequently outsmart their foolish husbands, sons or both! Think of Sarai, Hagar, Rebekah, Leah, Rachel.  And a slave woman – Hagar – is the first and only person in Scripture to “name” God! (Gen 16:13 – “She gave this name to the Lord who spoke to her: ‘You are the God who sees me,’ for she said, ‘I have now seen the One who sees me.’”)

Numerous stories of redemption in the Bible begin with women: Eve, Hagar, Leah, Shiphrah and Puah, Miriam, Samson’s mother, Ruth, Hannah, Esther, Elizabeth, Mary – all while Israel is being oppressed by foolish or evil men. Women judge Israel and gain victories – Deborah and Jael. Women save their husbands and children – Abigail and Jochebed. Women save their city and nation – the wise Tekoite woman and Esther. Priscilla explained the word of God to Apollos. Many, like Chloe, hosted churches, ran businesses (Lydia), served as deacons and patrons (Phoebe)…and of course – Mary, who carried the Messiah in her womb.

What’s the purpose of these examples? God uses women. All the time. We are all equal as children of God. And we are different. Women can do things men can’t do and vice versa. None of the women listed were ministers or elders in office. But they were actively serving the Lord in significant ways– enough so that Paul calls many of them co-workers. Many women in the NT church helped establish local churches, were delegated by Paul in the work of carrying the gospel abroad.  What does this lead to? Genuine complementarity. Women need men, and men need women – the Blessed Alliance. Take away one or the other and the church is incomplete. Impoverished. Romans 16 is a beautiful vision of working together. Many female models there for young women to aspire to!  I love what Wilson says,

“One of the downsides of championing eldership while (often) failing to appoint or recognize deacons – and there are several – is that of implying that serious Christian ministry, and the vast majority of our leadership development opportunities, formal ministry roles and salaries, are basically for men. IF we do this while making all our major decisions in male only groups and keeping gifted women at a distance out of concern for purity and/or collegiality in our teams, we end up replacing the glorious complementarity of Romans 16 with a jobs-for-the-boys environment in which women can serve as kids workers or backing singers, but not much else. We need to do better.”

The Church is a family. And a family functions best when everyone is involved. Balancing the roles in church leadership with the male/female discussion can be difficult, but it is necessary. Men and women bring different things to the table. From just a brain viewpoint, we are wired differently. You know, women’s brains are like spaghetti and men’s brains are like waffles – boxes for everything. 😊 Women tend to be more emotional, while men have a tendency to be, well, less prone to tears. There are exceptions, of course.

Now, that said, the question could be asked: what keeps us from working together side by side? Men will often say they’re concerned about purity. From a woman’s perspective, I appreciate this. However, fear is an underlying factor. There’s a fear of female dominance because of the various phases of the feminist movement. And – fear of moral failings. And of course, boundaries and wise rules must be in place. We should not be driven by fear, nor be kept back by fear. We all need to remember who we are in Christ, and who we are as brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ. Relationships are to be built on mutual respect and mutual submission. In her article “Family Partners: Men and Women Working Together in the Church”, Denise Hardy says, “We need a theological vision of brothers and sisters working side by side, together, for the sake of the Gospel.” This is based on things discussed already in this series, such as how we were created to work together from the start with both sexes being tasked with the work of dominion over the earth. All our gifts are to be used together with the same goal of God’s glory. And it’s just good for the health of the church.

I believe that women are not allowed to be in roles of preaching leadership, or guarding the flock from harm as is the case in the role of elder. But female voices need to be heard by leadership – because our gifts are given to us by God for the functioning of the church. There is great benefit in having women leading women in the church! The entire church benefits. Men can even learn from women – which has nothing to do with authority or leadership.

Complementarian or egalitarian?

Or maybe complemengarian?

My prayer is that this series has given you much to think about and discuss!

Grace and Peace!