Denny Burk wrote a post about Christianity Today’s list of “50 Women to Watch: Those Most Shaping the Church and Culture.” The list ran the gamut in terms of theology and practice.
Burk’s biggest problem with the list was the mingling of complementarians and egalitarians. He writes:
The article doesn’t include much of a discussion about differences among evangelicals about gender roles. Even though there are both complementarians and egalitarians on the list, the article seems to assume an egalitarian framework. In general, it regards high-achieving women excelling in their respective fields as something to be celebrated. Make no mistake, everyone celebrates women excelling in roles that the scripture commends, but egalitarians continue to disagree with complementarians about what those roles are. In short, the report highlights the influencers without trying to sort out the differences that complementarians and egalitarians have over these issues.
In the course of the discussion in his comments, Burk makes clear that he doesn’t believe anyone should celebrate what a woman does if it is outside of the “roles that the scripture commends.”
As I read the discussion, the clear message I got was even if men and women are coming to true salvation knowledge of Christ, it is not to be celebrated if they are coming to Christ through the teaching of a woman. (Go read the comments yourself and come back and tell me if I’m misrepresenting what he was saying over there.) Burk clearly believes we should only celebrate the ministry accomplishments of women if they are functioning in what he deems is their Biblical sphere.
I finally stepped into the fray and asked:
Ten people are out on a boat. A storm comes up and they fear for their lives. The only person on board who knows Christ and can articulate the Gospel is a woman.
If I’m reading here correctly, it would be wrong for the woman to step out of her “biblical sphere” as defined by Mr. Burk and preach the Gospel to those who are about to perish. It would be better if they perish without hearing the Gospel rather than a woman step out of her “biblical role” and preach the Good News of Jesus Christ to the lost.
Is that really what I’m reading here?
No. I’m afraid you have a misunderstanding of the compelementarian position. I would encourage you to read some good books by complementarians so that you can get a feel for what we are actually saying. I recommend Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood by Grudem and Piper.
Thank you for your reply. I really don’t think you answered my question. It is a legitimate question based on the comments I’ve seen above. Are women called to proclaim the Gospel or not? If your answer was “No” then why can the woman proclaim/preach the Gospel in the boat but not elsewhere?
I’m very familiar with the comp/egal debate. I’ve been studying it for years trying to sort out my own beliefs and experiences. I write about it on one of my blogs when I’m able to get the time from the rest of my life. You might be surprised to discover how well versed in these issues many of us commenting on this thread are. But then I suspect that you probably don’t read blogs written by your brothers and sisters in Christ who hold to a different perspective. The fact that you automatically assume that commenters don’t know the topic and should read RBMW tells me a lot.
So, no, I don’t have a misunderstanding of the complementarian/patriarchal position. I can thoroughly explain it and believed it for many years. But I have to say that your responses here to some of the pointed questions you’ve received have surprised me even after all I’ve read over the years. Your views are much more troubling than most comps that I’ve read.
And, no, I’m not a flaming liberal feminist. I’m pretty conservative in most of my theology, worship preferences, and general lifestyle. I grew up Baptist and am now of the more Reformed persuasion, mostly because of the women in the church issue. But reading here what you’ve written, I wonder if I would even pass your test of being a true Christian. Your parameters are such that as a longterm comp who now leans heavily toward egalitarianism after spending many years wrestling with these issues from the Scriptures, I don’t even know if you would call me your sister in Christ.
And, frankly, I find it astounding that you can discern the validity of my walk with Christ, the Holy Spirit’s presence in my life, and God’s amazing works in my life time and again just because I don’t fully embrace complementarianism any longer.
Warmly,
Sallie
Ever heard of Elizabeth Eliot,she was the only woman who knew the gospel in the are she was ministering too.She taught the men there just like Priscilla.She ensured they became the leaders of the church.
That is complementarianism.If you get your definition from RHE she has basically tampered with it to promote her wicked agenda.
Akash Charles,
That is not complementarianism the way it is currently taught and promoted by many prominent leaders in the movement. The inconsistencies (such as the one you cited with EE teaching men overseas but not being allowed to teach men in America) are what finally forced me to really look at complementarianism and evaluate it. I saw WAY too many inconsistencies and theological gymnastics. EE is held up as an example of comp, but she did many things that young women today are either discouraged from doing or are told flat out they shouldn’t be doing.
My comp definition does not “come” from RHE. It comes from reading widely on both sides of the debate. I find it so funny how often people try to shut down this discussion by either saying someone needs to read RBMW or else they throw out a controversial name as if that will make it all go away.
My experience has been that the average lifelong complementarian (by default) in the pew can cite a few verses re: why they believe this way. They cannot accurately articulate the egal view because they have never studied it in any depth. They only parrot that egals are dangerous people who have thrown off the authority of the Scriptures. The average egal who came to that view by conviction can not only articulate the egal view in great depth, but can also explain the comp view better than 90+% of the comps out there.
Warmly,
Sallie
It’s a simple yes or no question.
The same could be asked about the church in China. If men aren’t taking the initiative, or if there are no men to do so, is it sinful for women to do it?
Refusal to answer the question suggests you find yourself in a sticky place. You’re not fooling anyone by saying they don’t understand the complementarian position.
I never got an answer from Denny Burk although he responded to many other comments after mine. The only answer I got was that I didn’t understand complementarianism.
So I ask again. Should the woman in the boat proclaim/preach the Gospel to the men about to perish?
If so, why can’t she proclaim/preach the Gospel elsewhere (like from a pulpit)?
If not, are you honestly telling me that Jesus would really rather see men damned to hell for eternity than to hear the Gospel from the lips of a woman? The same Jesus who sent the women forth from the tomb to tell the men that He was alive?
Thank you for standing up to him, making yourself vulnerable to attack, and articulating the problem so well directly to him (and those who agree with him). I have given up trying to argue about this within the power structure, but I am happy to shepherd women who feel as if they’ve been misled. I am comfortable with my egalitarianism and think that my outrage at posts like these once was my trying to convince myself that I was right even though they were throwing scripture at me and challenging my right to express myself. I see now that if I take a step back, it’s a small but noisy insular community that thrives on controversy. I don’t want to feed that. That being said, I’m glad that you can do it with more equanimity than I could. But I doubt, sadly, that anything will change.
Hi Karen,
Thanks so much for your comment. I try to avoid the discussions in the power structure as much as possible. You are right that it is a small but noisy insular community. But every once in awhile something is written that bothers me so much I have to say something.
I agree that I don’t think anything is going to change in terms of the entrenchment amongst complementarians. They have elevated complementarianism to a near gospel issue and test of being a Biblical Christian. I know not all comps believe this way. But the self-proclaimed comp leadership is heading steadily in that direction and they won’t tolerate anyone who disagrees with them.
In the meantime I’ll keep posting good links and info on my little site and trust God will use it to help people who are searching for answers. 🙂
The answere is yes, and I am sorry the learned gentleman was unable to reply to your actual question. While I don’t like to speculate, I believe that he was unable to reply because the answer would have turned his stated beliefs into a house of cards.
Hi Katy,
Thanks for your comment. I agree with you. I think to answer “yes” to an obvious question would have opened up a can of worms he didn’t want to open.
But that’s the problem. In order to maintain his view, he either has to avoid questions or give an answer that should be obviously wrong to anyone who has read the Bible with any sense of objectivity.
And that’s why they end up with lists like this: But What Should Women Do In The Church?. I’ve linked to it before and I continue to link to it every time it is appropriate. It just proves the gymnastics they have to go through in order to maintain their view. Marg has written a post about this as well on Ranking the “Authority” and “Influence” of Ministries that points out some disturbing thinking in his lists.
I guess Mary Magdalene and all should have thought twice before stepping out of their role and telling *men* that Christ had risen.
I know. Somwhere someone probably labeled them the first uppity women usurping authority.
And I’m being serious.
It would be an interesting research study to find people who have tried to explain away the fact that Jesus himself chose to send women to the men rather than the other way around.
Thank God for uppity women! I read the comments on Burk’s blog days ago but wasn’t quite uppity enough to wade into the fray myself. 🙂 You did well, Sallie.
Hi Meg! Thanks so much for stopping by and your words of encouragement. 🙂
Well done. Do they not even see the racism in the idea that it’s OK for a woman to preach to darkies but not to white men back at home? I smelled that particular rat a while a student in the Midlands at a church which was popular with the other students, but way different from the church I attend today.
Very interesting link. What disturbs me is that the internet presence of this little clique gives a skewed view of Christianity. How many agnostics or atheists are repelled by them, perhaps running shy of the gospel for years?
PS
Mr Burk (Shall I? Nah …) said that everyone was happy with one view of women in the church, until the mid-20th century and feminism …
Er, except the Salvation Army, and the Methodists, and the Baptists(Uk), and the modern Pentecostal movement …
A little parochial, methinks.
PPS I came here from thatmom.
It’s only since my blog (somewhere in the last 10 months) where I first heard the word complementarian. The more I read of these guys and now after reading the 83 rules for women written by Grudem, I can’t believe these guys are have the audacity to publish their own work. Do they realize what it looks like? They are trying to make the Bible say things that is not there and making fools of themselves. Is God the author of confusion? Does he want men to be ranting about such a thing and creating long lists of dos/don’ts for women, yet they fail to produce a list for themselves? Why can they not see this? God can work through whomever He chooses. It’s too bad that men are trying to come between God and women in an attempt to stop His work.
Anthea – Sorry for the late response to your comments! You are absolutely right about the racism in these views. A woman can teach uneducated, illiterate men overseas, but not a thirteen year old suburban white boy in the USA. Ugh.
Julie Ann – I understand. It boggles the mind, doesn’t it?
I just stubbled across this page and could not resist commenting. I know this is an older post but still.
The problem with complimentarism and heirachy is that this attitude DENIES that Christ Jesus died for us. Our Lord’s sacriface was for everyone, not just males. He died for all peoples. To deny equality to just one person in regards to race, gender, or age is discrimanation and judgemental. The whole ball of wax rest on the fact that Jesus came to RESTORE ‘in the beginning’. To bring us back to God through Him. And this thing about ‘scripture’ and Paul. Remember, what Paul wrote WAS NOT scripture when he wrote it. He NEVER refered to anything he said as being scripture. And anything said that is in contradiction to what Christ Jesus said – well, I know Who I’m going to believe and put my faith in.