A couple of weeks ago, I critiqued the Together for the Gospel (T4G) conference leaders for underestimating the spiritual gifts and needs of women. Some readers have asked why go there – why did I pick on T4G and their take on Christianity? Why don’t I just go to a conference that invites women to speak and teach and leave T4G alone?
Here’s why. I’m an insider. For better or for worse, my church home is in the T4G sphere of Christianity. We attend a Southern Baptist church, and our pastor is completing his master of divinity degree from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (their president, Al Mohler, is one of the T4G leaders). We read books by several T4G speakers in our small groups and Sunday School classes. This means that I have a vested interested in what happens in conferences like T4G and in the churches who send people there. This is my church family, and these are my friends. I see what happens and what doesn’t, and all the ripple effects in church and individual lives.
What I see really concerns me. I see a failure to value the unique perspective of women. It is a significant blind spot that if unaddressed could have devastating results. Failing to seek women’s input erodes the overall health of the church and its ability to fulfill its God-given mission.
What’s surprising is that these churches teach a theology of men and women that should lead them to prize women and their perspective, to be proactive in seeking them out. These Christians teach that men and women have different strengths and weaknesses. They believe (and I agree) that God puts us together in such a way that my strengths complement your weaknesses (hence the term “complementarian”) and vice versa. They acknowledge that we all have blind spots and that part of living together as the body of Christ made up of many parts is that each part is necessary for the health of the whole.
But this belief hasn’t permeated their concept of church leadership. It appears that because they believe God forbids women to preach or exercise authority over men, they think that means they don’t need the wisdom and input of women in their preaching and leading.
I could be wrong. I want to believe the best — that they do value and seek the perspective of women. But it isn’t visible. It isn’t something they talk about. So as far as I can tell, they don’t.
I believe these guys desire to care for both men and women, and that they try their best. Most (all?) of them encourage women to study and engage one another. But sincerity doesn’t equal success, and encouraging women’s ministries isn’t the same as seeking female counsel. Our church leaders have taken on the massive responsibility of teaching, counseling, and leading men and women in church without seeking out, talking with, listening to, and addressing the specific needs and struggles and gifts of half of them – the women.
It is a mistake to assume that men and women are the same in matters of faith. This is especially true if you believe men and women must take on separate roles. A man’s view of faith and life isn’t the only valid one. Men and women think and process life differently. They take their faith into different spheres, they work at different tasks, and they rub shoulders with different people in different contexts. Men do not instinctively know how it is to be a woman, and thus they cannot know the specific challenges and needs women have as we try to live our faith. (And the same goes for women — we do not know how it to be a man.) We need each other to fill in the gaps and complete the picture.
Where men are solely responsible for leading and teaching, they must find other ways to incorporate the counsel and input of women into their decisions. Search the Scriptures – you will find countless examples of men (Paul is a great example) doing exactly this.
We should hear church leaders referring to how they integrated the input and counsel of women into their decision-making and teaching.
We should see sessions at conferences on how to do this.
We should hear keynote speakers and national leaders challenging pastors, church leaders, and husbands to proactively seek female input into the challenges they face and the direction they go.
Why don’t we?
***
Sponsor a child in Bolivia with World Vision today.
Click here to receive Joy in This Journey posts in your email.
Available for RSS readers and email
I love your graciousness in addressing this sensitive subject. We all have blind spots, and I agree we need someone else to point them out. But too often, we head to people who think just like us, who agree with our perspective, and stagnate in our beliefs. We need all perspectives, not just the one we want to hear.
Sarah@From Tolstoy to Tinkerbell recently posted..5 Reasons to Be Nice to Me
joy, this is such a helpful post. not sharing your background, i have sometimes though “why doesn’t she just LEAVE?” but i completely get the insider perspective. i’ve spent my life in two denominations on the brink of schism and have always been on the side of staying. change is rarely wrought externally but through those who are invested and will to do the painful work.
keep speaking up!
suzannah {so much shouting, so much laughter} recently posted..Breastfeeding, Baby Feeding & FPIES
I would like to hear more specifics about how you believe women can have more influence in your complementarian church. I attend an SBC church also, and we have women doing things and leading things all over the place (and I’ve seen this in… other complementarian churches as well). In our church, I don’t feel as though women are left out of decisions–if anyone is left out, it’s usually a result of no one asking for input at all vs. asking the men but not the women. I agree with the complementarian view but realize that sometimes we (complementarians in general) get so scared of crossing the fuzzy, unclear line that we miss out on opportunities to include women.
It sounds like you have some specific ideas about how complementarians can include women more deliberately, and I am very interested in hearing about them if you can state them freely (I don’t want to encourage you to say something that would leave a bad impression with your fellow church members). I am not trying to challenge you, but to sincerely understand what this would look like. Churches are so different from one another, and since we tend to commit to one and stick it out, we don’t always have a broad base of experience to draw from.
Hi Kelly. I suspect that including women will look different in each church since as you said, churches are made up of very different people and have different personalities. It could be that in one church the men leading are able to communicate openly with their wives and seek their counsel, while in another church the women want to remain ignorant of all the garbage that goes on (and as an eye-witnesss, there is a LOT of garbage that goes on behind the scenes). So wives of pastors/elders/deacons could play a key role in this, or not. I know some churches allow women to serve as deacons, and there they have a built-in body of men and women available and willing to participate. Our church has taken a hard line and does not have female deacons, so that won’t work in ours. I think a key is to be proactive in seeking out broad-based input. If you are forming a search committee, or a building committee, or a team to figure out the logistics of a major change, ask women to join as well as men. Some churches may want to form an advisory body of men and women with whom they can brainstorm and bounce things off of so they can think through the ramifications, pros, and cons of various decisions.
I’d love to learn more about how other churches do it, too.
Now this post, I pretty much agree with. I would wonder, though, if it’s not a case of overt omission, and there are just “enough other things on the spectrum/agenda/table” that it just hasn’t bubbled to the surface yet? I do appreciate the new tone you’ve taken… I didn’t want to believe that you actually thought these men were taking this tack with overt sexist intentions.
Perhaps these issues will begin to be addressed… perhaps your posts will be a catalyst. I think I didn’t have as much issue with the substance of your post, as with the tone, and I think you’ve set things much more graciously and helpfully now… I hope your thoughts DO catch the ear of someone in a position to include some of these things in future conferences…
Are you turning into a big softie on us?
it’s always in the (self) interest of people in power to hold onto power. whether or not the resulting sexism (racism, etc) is intentional doesn’t matter: the resulting disenfranchisement is the same. there will always be other things on the agenda unless people work together to create a new agenda.
it’s sad when this happens in the the world but so much worse among a Church who recognizes the inherent worth in every image-bearer of God.
suzannah {so much shouting, so much laughter} recently posted..Breastfeeding, Baby Feeding & FPIES
Tom,
Maybe I’m reading you the wrong way but your comment here seems really patronizing. So, Joy isn’t allowed to speak up about things unless she does it in a “tone” you approve of? Puh-leeeze! The fact that women are missing from sessions and keynotes is PRECISELY the very evidence of sexism. Sexism doesn’t have to be “intentional”—many times the worst kinds of sexism is a silent omission. An unquestioning acceptance of the way things have always been done is its own kind of sexism, too. Joy is asking really important questions, here. And it’s downright infuriating to see you pat her on the head for saying it in such a nice way without being willing to see the heart of what she’s driving at.
Elizabeth Esther recently posted..Book Giveaway! “The Muir House” by Mary DeMuth
You wrote: “Where men are solely responsible for leading and teaching, they must find other ways to incorporate the counsel and input of women into their decisions. Search the Scriptures – you will find countless examples of men (Paul is a great example) doing exactly this.”
Does this equate to a COMMAND for church leaders to do this? Could you please list those verses? I’m trying to understand where you’re coming from on this.
You also wrote:”Failing to seek women’s input erodes the overall health of the church and its ability to fulfill its God-given mission.” This is certainly your opinion. And it may be true. But is this taught in the Bible? I’d love to read where this is taught in the New Testament’s teaching on how church leaders guide the church.
Please know that I AGREE that women have invaluable knowledge and experience and wisdom. I think the men who lead the church ought to consider this source of support and wisdom. But your statement seems to be an opinion stated as a fact, when I don’t remember reading such in the Bible…
Ok, Ray? Some truths are self-evident and don’t need to be spelled out explicitly in Scripture before we accept them as true. The negative effects of failing to seek a woman’s input is one such self-evident truth and you demanding chapter and verse to back it up is, well, straight up avoidance. You’re asking Joy to “prove” something that is so patently obvious that to try to back it up with “proof” is nothing short of silly.
Elizabeth Esther recently posted..Book Giveaway! “The Muir House” by Mary DeMuth
Maybe God thought that men seeking the counsel and opinions of, you know, THE OTHER HALF OF HUMANITY was so obvious that he didn’t need to put it in writing.
You raise some interesting questions. Questions I’ll definitely have to think about a lot before even trying to provide a “T4G-esque” answer.
I would consider two things:
1) Perspective. From most of what I’ve seen of T4G, The Gospel Coalition, The Acts 29 Network, The Resurgence, etc, it’s apparent that one of the main points in their message is that men need to step up and be men. Period. While I certainly agree, and value, the validity of women’s perspectives, I don’t think that they’re denigrating that value by teaching men how to lead the church by owning the role and not always running to women for guidance. They may have gone overkill and come across as saying NEVER seek out women’s counsel, but I don’t think that’s their intent. And if it is, they should be corrected.
2) Practical ministry. Real, deep, in the trenches ministry, in my experience, isn’t done at the organizational level. That’s where teaching and preaching happens, but genuine care happens at the small group level. So, a man and his wife leading small groups are going to work together to lead and love their group, as the pastor should his church. I go to The Village, and I know that just because Matt Chandler doesn’t come out and say “Well, my wife and I think this…” doesn’t mean he didn’t talk and pray with her about it before making a decision. Granted, that may not be the same across all T4G churches.
My question to you would be: How do you see incorporating women more actively in decisions working out?
Scripture’s clear in that they can be deacons, but not elders. They do have valid roles and gifts within the church, and many are on staff in various capacities. So how would you want the men to engage the women to obtain their in put in an organizational capacity (publicly at the church level” vs the organic capacity (as wives and mothers in the home)?
Don Sartain recently posted..Here in Your Presence
Hey Don!
I get what you’re saying about these particular groups focusing heavily on motivating men to man-up. It seems to me that they’ve gone overkill. There has to be a way to encourage men to use their gifts and strengths without discouraging women from joining them as partners in the work. And that has been the sad effect. I know I don’t feel free to volunteer my thoughts.
As far as what this might actually look like, I’d love to hear more preachers mention their wives the way you describe. I’d love to hear about conversations about theology or how they’ve discussed the big decision about xyz together. I’d love to hear how their wives brought up something that the men hadn’t considered — this would be an excellent example to the other men in the church.
I also commented on Kelly’s comment above with some other ways it could work or look.
P.S. I attend a church that won’t allow women to serve as deacons. I know there is great variety on this particular thing, but it’s a mistake to assume that women sit in those groups in every church.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment!
Hey, Joy, sorry it’s taken so long to reply back. Life got hectic for a few days.
One thing I like is how Mark Driscoll occasionally brings his wife on stage with him to answer questions from the congregation about the topic/message. Granted, he does just about everything different than every other church, lol.
Another concept I’ve heard from his leadership coaching videos is the Vote, Voice, View method of conducting meetings. Obviously, it’s too chaotic to get everyone’s opinion, so it has to be whittled down, without making others feel excluded. So, ministry interns who need to know what’s going on may be invited to a meeting in a “View Only” capacity. They need to know what’s being discussed, but not necessarily always throw their opinions on the table. Then staff members who aren’t critical to the project/mission’s success would have a “Voice Only” role, where they are invited to put their concerns, opinions, and objections on the table, but they can’t vote on the topic being discussed. Then we come to the critical members who have the role of voting. They take into consideration the mission objectives, concerns and opinions of other voters and of those who have a voice, and then prayerfully vote on the topic.
In the interest of incorporating women into important decisions, but not violate the Biblical mandate for men to lead the church, this may be a good option. Allow key women in a ministry, pastoral search board, etc to have a voice in the proceedings, and trust that the men who vote will prayerfully consider their concerns as they vote.
There isn’t always an easy, satisfactory solution to all of this that will make everyone happy, but I think that may be a good place to start.
Don Sartain recently posted..Here in Your Presence
Don, since when have SBC men EVER “always run to women for guidance”? Far as I can tell, that would be a pretty historic day in the history of the SBC!!
Elizabeth Esther recently posted..Book Giveaway! “The Muir House” by Mary DeMuth
Hey, Elizabeth.
My comment about that was less history and more concept. Guys today aren’t men. They aren’t getting out of the house, getting jobs, putting down the game controller, finding wives, raising families, and leading the church. Sure, some are, but not nearly enough. Just because the men who are leading the church aren’t actively running to women for guidance doesn’t mean that the men who aren’t stepping up aren’t passively allowing women to lead the church because men aren’t there to fill the role.
Additionally, even if all the men are doing everything right (which they’re not) there is still certainly validity in preaching to ourselves what our roles in the church and in the home should be. So if we’re not running to women for guidance all the time, there isn’t anything wrong with reminding ourselves that we shouldn’t rely on the women to lead the church for us.
OK, wow. Don, could you have overgeneralized any further? “Guys today aren’t men”? Huh? IMO, this is a trumped-up “problem” that really only exists inside your narrow definition of proper “male roles and behavior.” Sure, according to your definition of What Makes a Man, then maybe men aren’t being manly enough. But what really bugs me about your bias, here, is that being a “manly man” includes NOT seeking guidance from women. If that’s not sexist, I don’t know what is.
Elizabeth Esther recently posted..Book Giveaway! “The Muir House” by Mary DeMuth
I never said not to seek guidance from women. In fact, I said earlier that “…I certainly agree, and value, the validity of women’s perspectives…”
The bottom line is that while we do want/need women’s perspectives, it’s the Biblical mandate for men to lead the church. And if you look at my comment to Joy’s reply above, you’ll see I’ve even provided a working method of trying to meet both those requirements.
Darrin Patrick sums up much of what I believe Biblical Manhood to be in his intro video to his book, Church Planter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnN2PrIQijw
Don Sartain recently posted..Here in Your Presence
See, I just disagree with the very premise of that video. The church has a “man crisis”? Come on. IF that’s true (which I highly doubt), then it’s nothing new. Remember that ALL THE MEN deserted Jesus and who was left? The disciple John and the women. THE WOMEN. So, let’s stop pretending that there’s some new, nefarious “man crisis” and stop acting like the way to fix it is by promoting “Biblical Manhood” (as if moving out of your parent’s house by age 20 is being a “Biblical” man). if we’re going to talk “bottom line” then how about remembering that the first person who saw the Risen Christ was a WOMAN? see, this is what i really dislike about these conversations because it’s NOT about the bottom line. It’s NOT about “mandates” and trumped-up ideas of roles and rules. Joy’s post is about the dire necessity of HONORING the ENTIRE human experience and to ignore the VITAL input of women is to harm ourselves and our children.
Elizabeth Esther recently posted..Book Giveaway! “The Muir House” by Mary DeMuth
Orthodoxy has the Sunday of the Myrrh Bearing women during Lent, no less. (And St. Mary of Egypt has a Sunday as well.) And it’s important to remember who the apostle to the apostles actually was. (Hint, that first apostle lacked certain outward body parts.)
Scott Morizot recently posted..Saturday Evening Blog Post – October Edition
Elizabeth, I think you’re missing the entire point of my original comment. I’m not negating the fact that men should value women’s perspectives, I said that they should. I was attempting to offer an explanation, in part, of why we don’t see more direct teaching on this inside the context of T4G.
You say it’s not about mandates, but we can’t divorce the mandates from valuing/seeking women’s counsel. The mandate is for men to lead the church, and in doing so they should value their wives’ opinions.
As far as the “man crisis” being trumped up, I’ve seen secular articles agreeing with this, so it’s not something that a handful of pastors in a particular context are seeing. It’s a cultural trend, and it’s killing us. And I can’t remember the article off the top of my head, but I saw an article written by a woman actually blaming the rise of secular feminism for being partially responsible in men not stepping up and leading homes and society as they should.
You may disagree with my definition of Biblical manhood, and that’s fine. But don’t assume that the problem is fabricated or trumped up just because you have a different view.
As far as your Biblical examples, we could even go back to Adam and say that he wasn’t being a Biblical man because he let Eve be tempted by Satan when he was standing right there with her. The whole premise of Biblical manhood is following Jesus, not Adam. Yes, the woman who went to mourn Jesus’ death at the tomb saw Him first, I don’t have a problem with that at all. But what happened after the ascension? Then men, having been filled with the Holy Spirit and now being able to follow Jesus, rose up and led the church.
The Biblical Manhood emphasis isn’t denying that it’s been a problem in the past, it has since The Fall. It’s saying that it’s gotten even worse. And to make it clear, part of Biblical manhood is leading the home and sacrificially loving our wives, laying our desires down to love her well. How are we supposed to do that if there isn’t conversation and really valuing their perspectives, opinions, and desires?
I hope none of this comes across as sexist or chauvinistic, because that is definitely not my heart or intent. I do believe that men should value women’s perspectives, because they help us see the other side of things. I also believe there is a man crisis, and that T4G is right to focus on that critical issue.
Don Sartain recently posted..Here in Your Presence
One of the many reasons why I’m not a Southern Baptist. I’ve been to complementarian churches (although I, myself, am an egalitarian), but they don’t seem to have an extreme Boys Only Club mentality that a lot of Reformed Christians have.
Travis Mamone recently posted..Rolling Away My Stone
Thanks for the clarification of your concerns for the previous T4G post. (It did sound like you were bashing them). This one makes your concerns more evident. After reading the responses, I think your followers make a lot of great points. As disciples (those of us who love what God loves and hate what God hates), we must take all of our question and weigh them against Scripture. What does God say to us in the Bible about women’s roles?
God grants me wisdom and discernment in some things and it is my job to go to my pastors and present my (Biblically backed) input and then submit to their authority. If they don’t listen to me, then I am driven to prayer, depending on God to change my mind or theirs, but trusting in His goodness and timing in all things. How I submit to my husband and my elders is how I submit to Christ. That is the gist of Ephesians 5. I think, as a woman, it is my responsibility to go to my pastor rather than wait for him to come to me.
I agree with Don that the main mission of these pastoral ministries is more focused on men needing to fulfill their calling…to lead. I don’t think they are intentionally trying to exclude women. I also don’t believe that our goals for sanctification are that different than men’s goals. Even though our circumstances are different, we are all striving to attain Christ-likeness (selfless, love and obedience to the Father). Whether we do that in the workplace or in the home, we are all striving for that thing. Want to be a good employee? Work as Christ would for the Father. Want to be better with the budget? Know that the Father has given you all things and out of your love for him, use it for HIS glory not your comfort. Want to fight sin? Know that sin is what separates us from the Father and and hate that thing more than anything. This will help you to confess it and flee from it. Men and women have the same tasks as believers. The job of the pastor is to lead us to these truths by correctly teaching us Scripture.
The question I have is, “What is it you are looking for? What type of input do you have for the leaders of the church? Do you feel you should have a leadership role? Why? What are your ideas for a healthy church? I would love to hear your hopes for the church rather than just the failures…and remember we are a body of self-professing, vile, evil-doers who by the grace (unmerited favor) of God have been forgiven and given new life. Even with the power of God with us, we will still stumble. Our goal (as disciples) is not to shine light on our self, but on the God who is changing us, day by day.
Thanks for the transparency of your post! It is wonderful to experience your heart. Forgive me for the length of my response and any other grammatical errors. I am a lousy writer!
This is interesting & I thank you for writing on this topic, and being so invested in this topic, as well as being so invested in your church. As someone who is more apt to just leave, I admire your strength to stay and to speak.
thank you for writing on this Joy. I really appreaciate you!
erin recently posted..God Speaks to Me (the question is, Am I listening?)
I am right there with you on the wanting to help from the inside rather than just saying, “forget it” and walking away from church family. It’s hard. It’s painful. But I hope, for both of us and for our churches, it will be worth it. All love to you, my friend.
Tamara Out Loud recently posted..Guest Post: “Cool Like That”
Great, clarifying post Joy,
My husband is a Southern Baptist associate pastor, and we have always served alongside of one another. So, even though I do not have an official title or pastoral role, I have influence in the church, as his wife. We talk through issues together. I see needs in the ministry, and I am heard—through him.
I did see this modeled through my time serving with Campus Crusade for Christ. The National Campus Ministry Team consists of all the National Directors AND their wives. They have an equal seat at the table. They give input at every team meeting, though their husbands are the ones with the titles.
This husband-wive team input still leaves room for blind spots, as the pastor’s wives may not truly have their finger on the pulse of the women in their church; and it potentially excludes single women. But for those wives who do have a good sense of the needs in the church, it is a great and strong partnership—though the man has the position—in which women do have influence in the church.
Just one thought.
Katie Orr recently posted..“What do you think about the Messiah?”
See, Katie, this is what bothers me: the only way wives are heard is “through” their husbands? I just don’t agree with this. Why can’t women speak for themselves without needing the mediation of their husbands? Honestly, this is the kind of silencing that is so easily abused and misused and is precisely how and why women’s voices are NOT being heard.
Elizabeth Esther recently posted..Book Giveaway! “The Muir House” by Mary DeMuth
I agree. Yet, I’ve never felt silenced. I think every church is different, obviously, and I have been blessed to always feel as if I have a voice.
For example, I am currently serving at the Discipleship Training director, so I am over that area of church , choosing discipleship materials and working alongside our head pastor to lead this area of the church.
I am not trying to say that this is the only way, but just trying to make the point that it is one way that women are heard. Not a perfect way, but I would expect (hope) that many of the men in HEALTHY complementarian churches are seeking the opinion of their wives, and they are a bit of a mouthpiece for the women in the church.
Not the answer, for sure, but one piece of the puzzle.
Katie Orr recently posted..“What do you think about the Messiah?”
I’m glad you’ve never felt silenced, Katie, and it’s wonderful that you’ve always felt heard. Understand, though, that you’re still promoting the same thing; ie. women working in subordinate positions within the church. Until women are decision MAKERS instead of just being sought for their “opinion,” and until our wisdom is fully respected (without being viewed suspiciously), the church will still be missing an integral, important component of the human experience.
Elizabeth Esther recently posted..Book Giveaway! “The Muir House” by Mary DeMuth
Hmmm. If someone told my wife she should be heard through me, I really wouldn’t want to be in the same room. Just sayin’
Scott Morizot recently posted..Saturday Evening Blog Post – October Edition
I’m an “insider” in this too. A few things stood out to me: “But this belief hasn’t permeated their concept of church leadership.” Exactly. I think one of the bumps I have with the SBC consistently (and my father gets an ear-full of this all the time, bless him) is that for all the “non-hierarchy” we preach, we end up making it. It’s the nature of incorporation, surely, but if I take issue with the idea of a woman as being the sole leader of a local church (not with her preaching, serving, teaching, administering Communion, or anything else mind you) and even on that issue I’m still praying and questioning, than why would I blink to think a woman would be in charge of something else? Baptist pride ourselves on autonomy, so I have serious issue with the idea of not putting a woman in a position higher-up because the implicit reasoning is she is now “over” men in authority. How? All Baptist positions outside of the local church are supposed to be partnerships, advisory. (My Father, as a Director of Missions, for instance, refuses to be aligned with a particular state convention for that very reason. It’s not his place to be authority but companion and he holds a tight tension on it.) So for a woman to be in a role of “authority” in Baptist life makes as much sense to me as a man doing it. If we nit-pick over men ministry, alright find, it should be a man, but for things concerning Believers corporately, as Paul says: let the one given prophecy preach!
A second issue beneath it all is one I wrestle with a lot. The solution, and I know this isn’t what you’re saying, is not to put more women into things for the sake of putting them there. I have known a handful–and this is what I hate, how small the pool has been–of strong women of faith who, in turn, bring the confidence to speak boldly. I’m still thinking on how this fundamental gets changed, how the women at the well don’t get left there. I think it starts with educating our children well, but I’m still wrestling about what’s to be done for those beyond the formative years.
Preston, you da bomb.
Elizabeth Esther recently posted..Book Giveaway! “The Muir House” by Mary DeMuth
Hey! I don’t remember posting HERE!! Joy! You ARE a trouble maker!!! I’ve got too much going on to read and respond to everything here… I just had to check why my e-mail had a message that people had responded to me here! (LOL!!!!) I LOVE Joy in this Journey (and that lady that writes it!)
muahahahahahah!!!!