Secret Women's Business

Complementarian teaching in my view is such poor theology, it is quite frankly mock-worthy. Not that people who hold to such views are bad or stupid people. For many it is an issue which attaches itself to the issue of the authority of the bible, indeed, of the validity of their faith. The fact they have chosen such a bizarre issue as a test of orthodoxy is a topic worthy of another blog post altogether. My point is that this is an issue that has strong emotional attachments for some, therefore it is actually difficult for such people to genuinely look afresh at what the bible has to say on this topic. Let’s give out generous grace to the people who feel this way. No doubt all of us have massive blind spots on some topic or other. But the ideas themselves require no such grace, and Rachel Held Evans has written a cracker of a satire on her excellent blog. I have reposted a section of this article for your reading pleasure, the fine tradition of Complementarian mockery displayed her...

I’m trying to get my head around what Complementarians believe, and I think it goes something like this: Complementarians think there is a “headship” hierarchy in the universe. God the Father has always been “head” of the God the Son. When Paul wrote about Jesus being very nature God, and emptying himself in the incarnation, that was a pretty suspect idea… definitely not Paul’s finest hour. The Trinity is a chain of command, not some quaint idea of perichoresis of three Persons equally God. The man is “head” of the woman: this is why women can’t do church leadership, or speak in church. It seems that you can teach “down” in the hierarchy of the universe, but you can’t teach “up”. Therefore men can teach men about the bible, women can teach women (equal in the "headship" hierarchy), while men and women can both teach children (who are a bit lower in the hierarchy). However, I have heard that something magical happens to boys when they turn 16 (or 18), and God suddenly gets ...