11 Comments
User's avatar
Hannah Rowe's avatar

in the complementarian church i worked for until recently i would frequently do things that were “pastoral” but it was always labeled as something else since i of course could not be a pastor. the inconsistency in that area was so confusing. people told me to just get over it and be happy that they weren’t restricting me when they apparently should have.

Bonnie Hunt's avatar

Hey Dani!

I’m also concerned about the harm being done to the younger generation as they seek, but don’t find, consistency, predictability, and clarity in a workable model of complementarianism. Yes, it hits women in ministry hardest in the immediate term, but beyond that lie potential generational losses.

David Morgan's avatar

Hi Dani,

I'm also concerned about this.

Thanks for speaking up so clearly and graciously.

I find it quite strange that "pastor" a word that is only used once in the Bible has created such a storm.

I mean, I have full respect for those who see the word pastor as synonymous with the word "overseer" or "elder", but surely there is room within orthodox reformed evangelicalism for others to see the word "pastor" as having a different meaning than "overseer" or "elder".

One other helpful aspect of your engagement here is that you put Anglican polity on the map. The word "Deacon" means something very different to an Anglican than it does to a Baptist or a Presbyterian. We are all shaped by our polity in ways known and unknown, and I hope your voice here will help people appreciate that there are (polity wise) more than 1 option for looking at this issue.

David D's avatar

Thanks for your clear, measured response, Dani. I am a Reformed/Presbyterian believer, aspiring to pastoral ministry, and I hope to equip and encourage women in my church to exercise all their gifts. I do worry about people conflating function with office. There is far more teaching that goes on in Christ’s church than just what the pastor/elders provide. Rightly so! We should not create lists of do’s and dont’s, to hedge the Torah, as it were. (I believe one famous systematic theologian has done just this.) I would concede, as you do, that preaching is a unique exercise of verbal minister to God’s people, and that it should ordinarily be reserved to the shepherds of the Church. With that said, my own church has allowed me to “exhort” (being unordained) on four occasions, and I am grateful for that.

Italian Baptist's avatar

I first heard you on the Confronting Christianity podcast and was very blessed by the dialogue in your episode. I have yet to read in full, but I want to thank you for speaking out about complementarianism being a spectrum.

So many voices on Substack are rightly pointing out the dangers of some prominent complementarian thinkers, but in doing so they make the whole movement sound like a monolith that can only lead to abuse. We need complementarian voices to push back against the extremes on both ends.

David Morgan's avatar

Also... I think this debate will have significant impact on Sydney Anglicanism,

I see the word "pastor" being used increasingly in our context.

And some of us read lots of stuff from American Presbyterians and Baptists.

Another reason I think engaging this conversation is helpful

Philip Rademaker's avatar

100%. I haven't been in Sydney for a few years now, but when I was at MTC and doing post ordination training in the mid 2010s, Southern Baptists in general and Al Mohler in particular were often cited, and recommended by the faculty/trainers. I wasn't aware of the adoption of the term 'pastor' in the diocese.

Jenny Fealy's avatar

Hi Dani, i’m a reader with a long history in Sydney Anglican Church, Moore College and complementarianism - who has changed her mind after checking different exegetical approaches to the 3 (only 3) contested passages and reconsidering the whole Bible story. Feels like a window has been opened. I’m sure you’ll check out Preston Sprinkle’s recent Genesis to Junia; he took a slow careful path to the same conclusion. Come join us!!!

Andrew R's avatar

Come on, uh, spoilers.

I bought it but hadn't got around to reading it yet. As a firm complimentarian, I am disappointed to hear that he took that stance but I will still read his book to see how he got there. And while it is just three verse in scripture. They are very straight forward specific commands of the Apostle Paul, so its hard to imagine any evidence that doesn't go outside the literal interpretation of the scripture explain that them away completely.

Andrew Bartlett's avatar

Uncertainty is baked into complementarianism. The Danvers Statement was vague (“some governing and teaching roles within the church are restricted to men”). After fifty years of trying, complementarians remain unable to agree on the extent of the restrictions which they think Scripture imposes on women. Might that tell us something?

The SBC’s recent position on women “pastors” is remarkable, being put forward on the ground that there is only one view held by those who seek to be faithful and obedient to Scripture. That is a bold stance, given that our English versions of the New Testament mention the term “pastors” only once, in Ephesians 4:11, and in that passage there is not one word about a requirement that “pastors” be men.

(In the ESV, which appears to be the version most favoured by complementarians, the term “pastors” does not appear at all.)

LG McCary's avatar

Some SBC pastors on X are already coming for Lottie Moon and Annie Armstrong, claiming they were wrong to serve the ways they did. It baffles me that they think that debate will end well for anyone.