Most, if not all, of these churches sing songs written by women. Here is something about today’s evangelical complementarianism that annoys me because it seems to represent a glaring contradiction. So what about experience? What does experience tell us? It tells me that many women are called by God to preach and teach-even to men. And we have the problem that what amounts to complementarianism in terms of authority and rule was taught and enforced by men. Tradition is also unclear there have always been strong women leaders in some Christian contexts. However, as a theologian, since I think scripture leaves this unclear, I turn to tradition and experience. My advice to complementarians is to listen to Piper and Grudem when they urge that true male “headship” is always and only selfless and loving. And if you are in a marriage where your husband appeals to complementarianism to exercise “headship,” simply refuse to obey if his decisions and actions are wrong. Of course, as always, my advice to women who are strongly dissatisfied with complementarianism is simply don’t go to those churches. Therefore, experience has to have some say in settling the controversy. Indeed, it does seem that both sides are supported by scripture. The two sides both claim to be supported by scripture. Also, according to egalitarians, women who are called by God to preach and teach should be free to preach to men and teach men-in any context (not just on the “mission field”). Exceptions to a rule always raise questions about the rule!Ĭomplementarianism gave rise to a contrary point of view sometimes called “egalitarianism” which holds that there is no such thing as “male headship” in the church or family and that leadership should be shared by men and women. And yet, most complementarians are perfectly happy for women missionaries to preach and teach men and women on the “mission field.” I have heard that complementarians allow exceptions to this rule-where and when there is no competent male teacher or preacher to do the work. What is it? That is not clear to critics of complementarianism.Īlso, according to complementarians, women are not supposed to teach men or preach the gospel to men. In what ways do women “complement” men in a Christian marriage, family, church? To “complement” would seem to imply needed contribution-that women contribute something to marriage, family, church, that men lack and need. Several questions come to mind about this complementarianism. Before commenting read the entire post and the “Note to commenters” at its end.* *Sidebar: The opinions expressed here are my own (or those of the guest writer) I do not speak for any other person, group or organization nor do I imply that the opinions expressed here reflect those of any other person, group or organization unless I say so specifically. Women are always to be submissive and subordinate to proper male authority, leadership, headship. Complementarianism robs women of any and all authority in relation to men-at least in the Christian home and church. Still, their emphasis is on loving leadership as true Christian “headship.” However, as anyone who has studied Piper’s and Grudem’s complementarianism will know, they leave unclear exactly what a woman should do when a “head” (male leader) is being abusive or selfish. To be fair, Piper and Grudem, if not all their followers, have always argued that what they mean by their complementarianism is that men should lead lovingly, with the best interests of the whole church and the whole family at heart, and women should follow and obey only when the male “head” is leading lovingly, not when or if he is leading in a sinful, selfish, abusive way.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |