Dear friend,

 

 

I sat quietly in my office trying not to eavesdrop on Josh's phone call a few feet away. I strained my ears, sipping my coffee in unadulterated nosiness. He'd been asked to offer feedback to a feature writer for an upcoming piece about Every Woman a Theologian. I couldn't help but overhear his response to a question about our marriage, ministry, and unique position as a co-working/co-homeschooling couple:

 

Years ago I did a deep dive into the history of the terms and ideologies behind “egalitarian” and “complementarian". Essentially, complementarianism as a term arose in the 70s and 80s as a way to define a more conservative theology opposed to what was then called “biblical feminism”. Both terms were (and still are) on a spectrum in regard to their actual tenets. Biblical feminism was not just egalitarianism; in some ways it laid the groundwork for LGBTQ+ affirming theology that erased gender distinctions completely. But egalitarianism was not (and is not) universally affirming; some egalitarians simply define it as equal and interchangeable roles in church and home. Similarly, complementarianism has come to mean everything from patriarchy (e.g. Dale Partridge) to the kind of “soft complementarianism”  John MacArthur eschewed in his famous “Go Home” speech to Beth Moore.

 

One of the most important steps to both discernment and healthy theological conversation is definition of terms. When we don't understand the layers of meaning someone brings to a word we're likely to misinterpret what they're trying to say. This happens constantly in the egalitarian/complementarian debate, especially since the two views DO hold an incredible spectrum of theological belief. At this point they really aren't “camps” in the gender role conversation; they're more like nations housing hundreds of individual “gender role” tribes! And within those tribes, some people arrive at their conclusions exegetically (rightly dividing the text and its intended meaning) while others arrive at it eisegetically (reading their own negative experiences or biases into the text; this happens among both conservatives and progressives). Our job as astute, thinking, theological people is to hold both sides in cupped hands, understand them as well as their constituents, compare to Scripture, and through the guidance of the Spirit find a place to land - all while bearing the fruit of love, kindness, patience and self control (Gal. 5-6).

 

When Josh finished the call he came in my office to tell me about it. “I called it gentle complementarianism because I thought I remembered you describing us that way,” He said.

“I actually haven't used that term, but I love it,” I replied. And I do.

 

When I wrestled this issue out with the Lord several years ago, I could not come away with a consistent egalitarian interpretation. And I tried. I was forced to be consistent in my exegesis. If I viewed the “gender role” texts - and the holistic arc of Scripture - the way I do any passage, through the “Wesleyan quadrilateral” of Scripture first, then reason, tradition, and experience, I still could not force a conclusion other than the one I found. (And that is not to say my experience is king; the egalitarian position was too inconsistent in terms of the whole arc of Scripture for me to buy in).  I pored over church history, the primary texts, the Greek and Hebrew scholars who have divided the debated passages. And at the end I landed where I continue to land: Men and women are incredibly different. They are also incredibly similar. Their differences are God-designed, from how their minds and bodies function to their unique gifts in marriage. They are indeed designed to complement one another… a complementarity that translates to every culture, not just the western American ideal. Man was created first and commanded to build beauty and goodness. Woman was created as the ezer-kenegdo, the Helper and right-hand “man” fit to accomplish the mission. And when the two work in unity, in complementarity, no one is left behind.

 

 

I've said before that a healthy complementarian marriage looks egalitarian. People have asked me: Why then be “complementarian”? Here's my answer: because, of the two, a gentle complementarianism - or perhaps better said a “Spirit-led complementarity” - is more consistent with both Scripture and church history. It was a Spirit-led complementarity that led John Wesley to promote women into leadership of his Methodist bible studies while holding to an orthodox sex ethic. It was Spirit-led complementarity that led the men of Israel to respect Deborah and Huldah as God's prophetesses. It was Spirit-led complementarity we see in Priscilla's ability to run a business with Aquila and correct Apollos' theology with her husband. These women did not become men, or man-like, to accomplish God's purposes. They didn't try to “usurp” a man's role nor were they put there because God – whose sovereignty somehow took a break? – “couldn't find” a man for the job.

 

They were given a position and had character to uphold it. But they did it in deference and honor. Because of them, I believe it is possible - and powerful - to live as a woman fully immersed in and embracing her femininity… while also immersed in and embracing the call of God. 

 

And my husband believes the same. What if it is possible to honor my husband, to defer, to grow in my ability to respect and love him well (and him, me), to teach, preach, and evangelize without sacrificing either, or both? I think it's possible, powerful, and - in my experience - peaceful.

 

A gentle complementarianism, by definition, can never control, domineer, or coerce unity. It is the act of choosing deference and honor; Josh honoring my leadership gifts while I honor his leadership “role”. 

 

You'll have to do your own wrestling and maybe you're land somewhere other than me - praise the Lord, this is not a core doctrinal issue. But it DOES affect where and how you minister, what your marriage looks like, and how you view your own role in God's kingdom. I've found great peace in this “gentle complementarity”. Maybe you will too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

A little glimpse of what's bringing us joy at home: routines, books, kitchen and home life.