Article Series - Toward an Egalitarian Ecclesia |
The other day I listened to a series of sermons by Biblical Complementarians arguing for the traditional role of women in the home and church. Without fail, every sermon mentioned the fact that the Egalitarian position is influenced by secular Feminism, an influence which causes Christian Feminists to obliterate role distinctions and differences between the sexes.
To be sure, there’s no denying the cultural influence of secular Feminism. But does this necessitate that we disregard Egalitarianism simply because it’s been influenced by a culture? Could we not turn the same comments around on the BC position and protest that they’ve been influenced by 1700 years of theologically justified oppression of women? There’s no religious institution which has not in some way been tainted or influenced by secularism. None.
Thus, all sides of any theological/religious discussion have already been shaded by previous predispositions handed to us by culture. Being influenced by culture, then, is no reason to reject a theological position – indeed, if it were, there would be no theological positions to accept or reject.
Most often statements that accuse someone else’s position as being culturally compromised are fear tactics used to persuade people against a position before allowing them to examine the evidence for themselves. If I can convince you that someone is a misogynist bigot before you even talk to them, then I’ve won the argument. If you can convince someone that I’m a bra-burning wo-man, then you’ve won the battle without even allowing me a voice.
The goal, then, is not merely in labeling others as more influenced by culture than myself. The goal is in understanding and critiquing positions on both what they assert and where their logic might end up. How does my cultural influence help or hinder my exegesis or theological analysis? How does yours?
I fear certain BC’s repeatedly fail to understand that Christian Feminism is not the same thing as Liberal Feminism. Liberal Feminism emphasizes the similarities between men and women while downplaying the differences. Christian Feminism, on the other hand, appreciates God-given differences, but maintains that these differences need not necessitate hierarchy or subjugation. The failure of BC’s to understand this, or at least admit this when they do understand it, perpetuates stereotypes regarding their position.
Am I influenced by culture? Yes, but so are you and so is John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Ben Witherington and Michel Foucault. Let us acknowledge this fact and see where we benefit from it, where it hurts us and where to go once we’ve figured this out.
I think you are dead – on, Tom. It does work both ways. What do we do as egalitarians who have been raised in the midst of newer interpretations/applications of Jesus’ teaching when the Biblical writers were steeped in a cultural and gender logic that we all reject, comp and egal alike?
A lot of people who say this sort of thing aren’t seeing it as an independent argument, though. They try to establish on exegetical grounds that the egalitarian position is biblically indefensible, and then they state as a conclusion that evangelical feminism must be too influenced by the culture of feminism to recognize that. Or at the very least they try to establish on biological or psychological grounds that there’s something unhealthy or biologically inappropriate about saying any role differences are wrong, and then they conclude that it must be due to our culture’s acceptance of too much of secular feminism that we’re so resistant to biblical complementarianism.
If the people you’re complaining about give bad arguments, then it’s fair to challenge their arguments and explain why they’re bad. But I don’t think it’s quite as fair to complain about the conclusion that follows from those arguments as if it’s an argument in itself, because I don’t think they’re just saying that it’s wrong because someone in our culture thinks it’s right.
That being said, I think there probably are people at the popular level who commit the fallacy you point out. I’m just not sure the best theologians and biblical scholars working in the area have even come close to it. But just as there’s a parallel argument to the one you confront (that complementarians could just as easily be getting their views from the culture) I should also point out that there’s a parallel argument to the one you’re making (egalitarians saying complementarianism is nothing but holding on to outdated notions), and I think that’s (a) just as much a straw man as the argument you’re pointing out and (b) far more common in my experience.
Jeremy, thanks for the reply.
First, the people I’m arguing against are using feminism’s influence as a premise, not a conclusion. That may not be the circle you run in, but that’s arguments I hear – and many female pastors here (according to the enormous response on my facebook when I posted this there). So, whether or not it registers with you or anyone else from the BC position was not my concern. My concern was to say that this argument does not have the final say.
Second, I’m not making a larger argument here. I’m not arguing that either position is right or wrong. I’m merely saying that strawmen are not helpful. It is hard to deny that both sides are influenced by culture. The question is, what do we do with it?
Third, b/c I’m working and writing to people ‘on the ground’ the fact that people ‘on the ground’ here this is enough of an impetus for me to write this. It wasn’t intended to convince Kostenberger, Carson, or Grudem. It was for a different audience….really, a less academic one. (Hence no exegesis or theological analysis)
Finally, I never said BC’s were outdated. I said they could be influenced by outdated notions, but that doesn’t mean their position is outdated. That, you are right, is a strawman of the very type I defending against from the other side. It simply would go against the very fabric of this post to argue in such a way. So I believe you’re having this argument with someone else, not me.
Hope that somewhat clears up what I was trying to do here.
oh, and one more thing – evangelical feminists do not deny difference of roles. we merely disagree with the BC position on what the catalyst for those roles is – is it gender or giftedness?
[...] [...]