Girls will be girls.
Pruitt and La Diva have, as usual, pointed out the obvious: The problems of a culture where women are expected to have agonies of conscience over whether to give travel directions to a man who is lost, or whether to serve as a police officer, but where it is fine to share a gospel platform with a woman preacher (whose gender, incidentally, is probably the least of our concerns when compared to her theology). So out of Ref Pack loyalty, I add the following:
The whole Passion conference raises the obvious question about what complementarianism now means in practice. Is it merely ‘nothing at all’? Or is it ‘whatever the leaders of the movement find convenient on any given day’? Who knows any more?
The incorrigibility of the Top Men of the YRR has been obvious since at least the time of the Elephant Room. Once that was established, a few cut ties with the movement. Many more remained silent, and that silence of the fellow travelers on key issues has been an interesting thing to observe over time. And when it comes to complementarianism, what has been most fascinating during this last year has been the silence from a particular quarter.
I do not really have a stake in the evangelical complementarian game. Now, to be clear, I do not believe in women's ordination to church office and I do believe men and women are different. Anyone who doubts my belief that gender is tied to biology and that men and women are different should check my posts over at First Things. But the CBMW game is too much of a single-issue cause, too wide-ranging and micro-managing, and too shaped by reaction to feminism for my tastes. It does not really interest me and I have thrown my pennyworth in on the matter over the last year only because people in my congregation read and listen to such material.
There is, however, a constituency out there which surely has a deep concern about this matter: Self-described complementarian women. And what is stunning is that the Top Girls have remained publicly silent on the weird claims and inconsistent behavior of some of the Top Men on this score. La Diva has, as far as I can tell, been left publicly twisting in the breeze on these matters.
We do not need a replay of The Bacchae or even a public burning of denim jumpers. We simply need intelligent critique of the chaos that now is practical complementarianism. And it would be most powerful and constructive if it came from leading complementarian women. For they are the ones whose cause is made ridiculous by a leadership which promotes a culture of neurotic angst about simple career plans and yet which shares gospel platforms with people channeling Joyce Meyer. It is time to speak up.
Any takers? Anyone?