Recently I had a great conversation with a woman who having spent years happily in a strong complementarian church was thrown into a bit of a spin by being in a soft-complementarian church where women had more freedom. This new setting prompted a major rethink on the whole issue and she was coming to the conclusion that it was either egalitarianism or full-on strict complementarian. None of this namby-pamby soft stuff where elders are men but women preach and do everything else. Interesting. Her church leaders asked if she could have a chat with me not particularly to try and persuade her one way or another but more just to try and explain how we’ve landed in a fudge.

As a way of trying to give some structure to the conversation, I asked her if she could send me a list of ALL her questions and she asked some crackers. Here are the key ones (shared with permission):

Key questions

1. I feel that the egalitarian argument is supported by the narrative of the bible as a big story without having to rely too heavily on any specific verses. Can the same be said for the complementarian argument? Can we still make a good argument for this theology without a heavy reliance on 1 Cor 11 and 1 Tim 2?

2. I feel often the complementarian argument starts by bringing up the issue of transgenderism (see my comment on that in the document) but I don’t really see the link that clearly.  Why, by giving men and women the same role or office, would that suggest to the world that we think there are no differences between the sexes or that these differences are not important?

Theological questions – 1 Tim 2, 1 cor 11

1. What do you think of eternal subordination of the son? Is that what 1 Cor 11 is saying? If a doctrine on the trinity is central to this issue, does it become a primary issue and not a secondary one?

2. Is it the 1 Tim 2 passage that leads you to think that the thing women are restricted from doing is protecting doctrines (but Sunday “preaching” is ok)? Why does the passage lead you there? I am not clear at all on where this distinction is coming from in the bible.

Practical questions – teaching

1. In our movement (Newfrontiers), it tends to be men that have the experience and developed gifting in teaching, how can this be passed on to women? I feel there is still a massive fear of men and women being together for discipleship and so it is easier for men to meet up with men, so men continue to receive more regular training and investment. But I don’t see a problem with men and women meeting together as “co-labourers” (most of us are managing to meet up with colleagues of the opposite sex in the workplace without any issues – wouldn’t it be a similar dynamic?), and we are supposed to be brothers and sisters.  If I agree to serve the church in this way, will any of my brothers help train me like they train their brothers or will I be given fewer opportunities or even left to muddle through alone?

Marriage

1. Does headship in marriage mean some degree of authority? Where can we see this in the bible?

2. Will husbands have an extra responsibility (that wives won’t) of having to give an account before God of how they led their wives and households? Where is the biblical evidence for this?

3. Someone told me recently that husbands are effectively “elders” of their households which is why they will have to give an account. Where does it say that this is what husbands are in the bible?

4. Does this authority extend to sex? If not, why not, what is the logic?

Sex and headship

1. Are men knowingly or unknowingly putting pressure on their wives (in an effort to lead them, their marriage, and their households well) to have sex when they don’t want to, because of this theology – do wives have full agency if their husbands are in authority over them? At what point does that cross a line and start to be more like rape/sexual abuse due to coersion/spiritual abuse?

2. I think some women are having sex when they don’t want to because their husbands want to and they feel like they owe them. I think headship theology is partly what leads them to do this. He’s the head so he must have a special perspective on what’s right for the marriage and they don’t want to disappoint him or God with their lack of submission.  I think this is what results from a power imbalance in a relationship and can do a lot of damage.  If we want to hold on to complementarianism, how do we stop this from happening?
   
3. If the situations described in the above two questions are happening (and I think they probably are in some marriages), how do we go about teaching headship/authority theology to the whole congregation in a way that men cannot fall into a position where they are harming their wives, either on purpose or by accident/ignorance?

---

Leave a comment below on which questions you think are the most significant or how you would answer any or all of them. I’d also like to recommend you check out my friend Stef Liston’s new book Gender Quality¹

1. Affiliate link – I’ll get a small commission if you click the link and then buy the book [↩]