The Complegalitarian Agenda

The worst of both worlds

I found an article from TGC the other day, attempting to establish a vision for churches in Northern Europe. Upon reading the case for complementarianism made by Hanna and Carl, I realized that we are dealing with far more than a phenomenon of “strange.”

This isn’t “patriarchy, but with a different emphasis.”

This is “egalitarianism, but by a different method.”

The first problem you run into with complementarianism is that you have a model for church leadership where ruling elders don’t actually rule. It is an incomplete vision, built entirely upon half-baked adages about servant leadership.

“Complementarianism means the heavy responsibilities of the elder/pastor are carried out by qualified men, to serve and care for the congregation, never to rule over them.”

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/complementarian-egalitarian/

The complementarian church is one where every member “participates” in the ministry of the church. Emphasizing the church government as a matter of different “roles” nullifies its jurisdiction entirely. In this vision, “elder” becomes a matter of title, not a crucial indicator of office. When all the church members serve in “ministry,” the church loses all semblance of government. “…Although I’m no longer a pastor,” writes Hanna, “my calling hasn’t changed.” It’s easy to see from our experience: the fine line separating the practices of an egalitarian and a complementarian has been severed. Both ideologies subvert the church in their way.

Egalitarians destroy the government of the church by filling it with women. Complementarians destroy the government of the church by degrading the offices.

With this in mind, the “debate” between complementarians and egalitarians seems to be better understood as a strategic dispute between parties with a common vision. Both sides seek to invalidate the church's government, but the question of how best to do that still remains. Here, some complementarians may suggest that these issues are hardly different from the differences between Presbyterians and Baptists. In fact, the authors say as much in how they triage the severity of the issue.

"How can complementarian churches relate to those who firmly stand by the Bible, yet hold an egalitarian position on women in ministry? [...]

We want to emphasize that though we believe the theological debate between egalitarian and complementarian perspectives is important, it doesn’t strike at the gospel and doesn’t prevent us from Christian friendship with those who disagree. Therefore, it’s important to maintain a tone of respect and open dialogue with churches who differ with us on this matter, continuing to seek opportunities to partner together for mission and service."

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/complementarian-egalitarian/

Once again, the functionally egalitarian complementarian is portrayed as the ideal, able to hold the truth as a personal conviction yet able to seamlessly integrate with progressive theology in practice. Tim Keller would be proud.