Calvinists and Egalitarians
Recently over at The Common Loon the question was asked whether there is a Calvinist-Complementarian connection. With the rise of the “New Calvinists” often referred to as the “young, restless, and reformed,” the gender roles issue has taken on a new life. The blog author writes -
As an outside observer of the movement, I’ve noticed that in addition to Reformed soteriology (often summarized by the acronym TULIP), one of the key doctrinal distinctives for New Calvinists is complementarianism, the view that male leadership in the church and home is a Biblical imperative. It’s no coincidence that influential Reformed/Calvinist (I’m using these terms interchangeably here) leaders like John Piper, Al Mohler and Mark Driscoll are among evangelicalism’s most vocal opponents of women’s ordination. As a staunch egalitarian, I believe Scripture teaches that God gives the gifts of preaching, teaching and church leadership to both men and women, which puts me squarely at odds with the young, restless, Reformed camp…
Despite our disagreements on gender roles, I share a lot in common with my New Calvinist brothers and sisters. I am very much drawn to the Reformed tradition, its covenant theology, historic confessions and doctrines of grace (TULIP included)…
If I were capable of passing through the narrow doctrinal checkpoint affirming both TULIP and complementarian gender roles, I would find a community of New Calvinists refreshingly open to a range of positions on baptism, miraculous gifts, the Lord’s Supper and eschatology….
In light of such ecumenism, it’s perplexing to consider why egalitarians are not also welcomed to the New Calvinist table. Complementarianism may not be at the forefront of New Calvinist identity, but it nonetheless serves as a distinct theological boundary not to be crossed. From what I gather, egalitarianism is categorically rejected by the full spectrum of interdenominational networks, ministries and conferences home to New Calvinists (including Tim Keller and Don Carson’s Gospel Coalition, Piper’s Desiring God Ministries, Driscoll’s Acts 29 Network, Mahaney’s Sovereign Grace Ministries, Dever’s 9 Marks, R.C. Sproul’s Ligonier Ministries, Duncan’s Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals and MacArthur’s Shepherd’s Conference among others). I hope I’m mistaken, but the young, restless, Reformed subculture seems to have built an impenetrable wall to keep out those who are not both Calvinists and complementarians. One out of two is not enough, and thus I have failed to qualify.
His post is insightful in wondering why this is such an issue and wonders if there are egalitarian Calvinists. One of the leaders of the New Calvinists, Kevin DeYoung (co-author of Why We’re Not Emergent) responded to the post on his own blog. In it he graciously admitted that some egalitarians come to that position from the Bible, but that he thinks it is best if Calvinists don’t associate with them. His reasons include -
1. Those that accept egalitarianism, over time accept sexual immorality.
2. If we are confused about manhood and womanhood then we can’t minister to our culture.
3. Egalitarians don’t always affirm core doctrines like inerrancy, penal substitution, and eternal punishment while complementarians do.
4. If we want to work with other people/denominations Calvinists need to be clear on who is allowed to be in leadership or speak at those events. Its just easier to assert that women aren’t allowed.
I know here at Emerging Women we have complementarians as well as egalitarians, and I am sure at least a few Calvinists. So how do you respond to these assertions? Can a Calvinist be an egalitarian, or at least associate with them? Is it better to take a stand and not work with those who are different from you? Should we as Christians seek unity first, and denominational doctrine second (or the other way around)?
I admit that as an egalitarian, it is easier sometimes to simply not have to deal with the complementarians. I don’t want to be a part of a church that denies the call of God in my life or that tells me that I am lesser than men. It’s a position I struggled to come to through long biblical study, and I can’t place myself back into a world that actively oppresses me. That said, I have issues with saying that I would never work with a complementarian (no matter how much I disagree with his theology). I am for building the body of Christ and loving others even if I disagree with them or see them committing injustices. It’s hard, but I feel like that is the response I have to have.
So what are your thoughts? How as Christians should we interact?
Tags: Complementarian, Egalitarian, gender roles, Kevin DeYoung, New Calvinists, Reformed, The Common Loon
July 2nd, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Perhaps part of the answer lies in the Common Loon’s note, “Why do t-shirts declare that “Jonathan Edwards is my homeboy” and not Abraham Kuyper?”
While Abraham Kuyper was an “always reforming” Reformed theologian, Jonathan Edwards embodied the kind of “hyper-Calvinism” that the “New Calvinists” so eagerly grasp. The Reformed tradition has a lot to offer, but the “New Calvinists”, in my opinion, seem to have only latched on to the most negative of Calvinist doctrine.
I grew up in a Reformed church (PCA) where women could not be ordained. Yet I was never taught that I couldn’t be whatever I wanted to be. (It was even suggested that if I wanted to be ordained, I should just move on over to the EPC.) I was never taught that men and women needed to behave in particularly sterotypical ways in the family. I, as an egalitarian, feel comfortable engaging my Catholic and Orthodox friends who believe that only men should be priests because, as DeYoung notes, they don’t hold to a specific theology about gender roles.
The problem begins when you link hyper-Calvinist determinism (the world MUST operate this way) with complementarianism. Now it’s not just a matter of “this is how we’ve structured part of our church” – it’s a matter of “the world necessarily works in such a way that men and women’s roles must look like our idea of men and women’s roles.”
Anyway, that’s my opinion, shaped by being an egalitarian at a Reformed (but not New Calvinist) and complementarian church.
July 2nd, 2009 at 7:06 pm
I don’t want to speak for anyone else, but through trial and error, I’ve come to the following conclusions for myself when it comes to dealing and working with Christians (or anyone else) who see things very differently from me: I will work with anyone who wants to make the world a better place, who wants to work for social justice, participate in the broader community or explore spirituality. I’m definitely not evangelical, and some of my closest friends are evangelical (albeit of the social justice oriented variety). As a freelance grantwriter and development consultant, I work with many kinds of non-profits – both faith-based and not- and if the evangelical organizations don’t care that I’m not evangelical, neither do I.
However, I won’t pretend to be something I’m not,or hide who I am and what I believe, and if someone wants me to jump through theological hoops or sign a statement of faith, it’s a no go.
I’m an unapologetic feminist who doesn’t believe in hell, original sin,or sola scriptura, I lean politically left, I talk about yoga more than I talk about Jesus, and I have a lesbian therapist. I think it’s safe to say that complementarian Calvinists and conservative evangelicals want nothing to do with me – and I’m okay with that.
I don’t feel like it’s my responsibility to go out of my way to forge relationships at any of the above-mentioned calvinist organizations and ministries – and frankly, I think they would probably be relieved to know that I will not be darkening their door anytime soon.:-)
July 2nd, 2009 at 9:17 pm
It is entirely possible to be Calvinist and egalitarian. The Presbyterian Church(USA), the Reformed Church of America, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, and (perhaps to a lesser extent) the Christian Reformed Church are all examples of thoroughly Reformed branches of the church that either enthusiastically support or at least allow that women can serve in ordained positions in the church. There is nothing inherent in Reformed theology AT ALL that precludes women’s ordination. How the young, restless and Reformed camp comes to the conclusion that it does baffles me.
I am someone who has been marinated in Reformed theology for 40 years (including a Reformed Kindergarten through college education.) I believe I can say with some authority that the new Reformed camp is guilty of inconsistency in applying their Reformed ideas. When it comes to women serving in the church (or to egalitarianism,) the new Reformed folks certainly do not consider “the whole counsel of God.” They pick and choose what scriptures to emphasize and they ignore a lot of church history. Of course, none of them are going to pay any attention to what I say. As a woman who is pursuing ordination I am of course being misled and not following the Holy Spirit.
Reformed theology at its best has a lot to offer the Christian community and to the world. It saddens and frustrates me that such an angry, antagonistic and arrogant group of men has become the voice of this new version of being Reformed. But of course, an angry, arrogant man is a better representative of and has a better understanding of Christ than any woman, so I will not hold it against you if you disregard my voice.
July 2nd, 2009 at 10:15 pm
I think the question, perhaps, is not so much “whether” Calvinism and egalitarianism can coexist (Sue gives plenty of good examples that they can, and personally I see no inherent contradiction – or even much of a connection – between the two issues at all), but why these “New Calvinists” seem to think that they can’t. What does “complementarianism” have to do with their brand of “Calvinism”? What’s the connection? I just don’t get it.
Perhaps this is incidental, but I do find it interesting that many of the New Calvinist leaders (e.g. Piper, Mohler, etc.) are not actually from historic Reformed denominations, but are in fact Baptists who also happen to be Calvinists. I wonder if that has anything to do with it.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:56 am
I read that post earlier this morning and was frankly stunned.
I want to be clear. I’m an egalitarian. I have a lot of problems with the whole basis for complementarianism. That said, I’ll work with complementarians as long I’m not required to change my perspective or given any sort of ultimatum about my behavior, etc. I have a live and let live attitude.
I was stunned by the lazy, sloppy reasoning of DeYoung’s arguments. Really? I’m going to become immoral because I’m an egalitarian. I don’t know anyone like that. Not one. That was ignorant at best and mean-spirited at worst. I could go through the rest of them but I won’t. Has DeYoung read any of his New Testament imprecations for the body of Christ to live together at peace with one another?
He has a lot of explaining to do. That was divisive and awful.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:02 pm
If I was less tired I’d think up a more thoughtful response, but right now my only answer is:
WHAT. EVER.
July 5th, 2009 at 11:54 am
I think this post reminded me of my own questions about who I want to work together with in ministry. Using the general divides of conservative and liberal, (which complementarians and egalitarian often fall into, respectively) I struggle with the idea of Christian unity because I don’t want to be associated with or enabling harmful theology and practices.
As a moderate to progressive Christian, I think conservative’s emphasis on evangelism through reaching out to people through bookstores, concerts, and speakers is a good thing. But I define the gospel and discipleship differently from them and so I’m hesitant to want to have anything to do with their ministry. Yet more liberal Christians aren’t doing much in this area. I think I could partner with more conservative folks on charity and justice work, maybe even some worship. But when it comes to providing spiritual formation to new believers, I’m hesitant to give organizations my money or hand. I’m sad about that, but I think it might be best.
July 7th, 2009 at 6:48 am
“In it he graciously admitted that some egalitarians come to that position from the Bible, but that he thinks it is best if Calvinists don’t associate with them.”
Julie, your characterization of Kevin’s post — that he said Calvinists ought not associate with egalitarians — is too strong. Kevin ministers in an egalitarian denomination, and made it clear that he has no intention of leaving that denomination over this issue. More accurately, he said that it is a good thing for the new Calvinist movement to have a “complementarian plank” in its platform. This doesn’t mean that the “new Calvinists” ought not “associate with” egalitarians any more than the Democratic party’s pro-choice plank means that Democrats ought not associate with pro-life people.
Also, your truncated summary of Kevin’s “four reasons” does not do justice to Kevin’s actual comments, which is far more nuanced. I would therefore encourage anyone, especially those inclined to respond here, to read Kevin’s actual comments.
Cheers,
David
July 10th, 2009 at 2:44 am
@ David–I read the entire post summarized in the 4 points above and did not find Julie’s summary inaccurate or unfair. In fact leaving out the phrase “some egalitarians are just knee-jerk following the culture…” was actually more kind than I would have been. In fact, Mr. DeYoung did not say complimentarians should avoid associating with egalitarians. Instead he said, “I can live in a church environment without this doctrinal boundary (a plank declaring a complimentarian POV), but I think it would be better to have it.” And, while he is happy (or perhaps merely content) to be making his living in a denomimation that officially holds an egalitarian POV he is very willing to say that his church does not comply with the demoninations official stance and they can’t put pressure on him to comply. In truth he is free to promote from his pulpit a complimentarian POV any time he chooses.
To the question, “How as Christians should we interact?” In so far as we are able we should live at peace.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
@David … I read Mr. DeYoung’s piece before Julie posted it here. I read it in full on his website. I found it insubstantial, illogical, unBiblical and lacking the basic foundation of a good argument. In short, it was poorly written from the standpoint of being persuasive. It was quite emotive and did a good job of “preaching to the choir” (if you will), but his argument (or lack thereof) is full of fallacies. To wit: strawman, spotlight, false dilemma, slippery slope, questionable cause, and special pleading. You may read about all of them here: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
July 10th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
One of the things I’ve noticed is that there is less emotion generated by the soteriological aspects of this debate and much more by the gender issues. (Personally, I am a staunch egalitarian.) Even though I attend a church that is officially egalitarian, no new pastor (other than the women’s pastor) has been appointed who is other than a guess what? a man in the seven years that I’ve been there. An open complementarian I can openly disagree with, but how does one handle the closet variety?
July 14th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
I grew up in the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America which has never permitted women elders or pastors. Women were sometimes permitted to be deacons depending on the congregation. With regards to the New Calvinism and complementarianism it seems like it is old wine in new bottles. It is discouraging to see how the New Calvinism seems to have mounted a rearguard action of sorts regarding women.
July 25th, 2009 at 10:05 am
The reason egalitarianism is not accepted by New Calvinists is because of the nature of the so-called “Doctrines of Grace”
Tyranny has always, and will always, be at the core of Calvinism. THe doctrines lead to death in the individual, brought about by the gradual loss of freedom, ability, and faith in the life of the believer.
As religious leaders (including men) continue to control the masses, including women in particular, complimentariansim will continue to be sold as the biblical model and therefore “orthodoxy”. The problem with egalitarianism is that it returns to women what is rightfully theirs: freedom, ability, and power through faith. Those who see to control others (tyrants) always look for doctrines and teachings that support their ultimate goal to create a mindset in the people that enables such control: if women are the weaker vessel, how can they have faith? If they are subordinate to men, how can they have freedom? The progression is clear, and the logical conclusions of Calvinism fit nicely with complimentarianism..which is really just subordination of women redefined and labeled as orthodoxy.
Same ol’ same ol.
August 1st, 2009 at 7:14 pm
In line with the very serious and intelligent conversation going on here, I think I can answer your question:
If you have an iphone and type in “Neo-Calvinism”, it will automatically change it to “Bro-Calvinism”. And you can re-type it, it will change it back. Again. And Again. And…
I haven’t yet gotten it to type it out properly.
And, well, I think that’s funny
Funny, and i think Emerging Women needs to put a call in to Steve Jobs.
=)
December 3rd, 2010 at 9:28 pm
I’m a visitor to this site. I just want to say briefly that there are a few Reformed egalitarians out there. And some of those who aren’t egalitarians are at least comfortable with having associations with egalitarians. For example there are some Reformed egalitarians in the Association of Vineyard churches. A couple of notable examples in the Vineyard are Rich Nathan and Don Williams. In fact, they are the ones who led the charge for the Vineyard for the ordination of women. R.T. Kendall and Andy Stanley seem to be comfortable associating with egalitarians as well. Marilyn Hickey wrote the foreword to one of Kendall’s books and both Kendall and Stanley have been featured on Joyce Meyer’s television program.
May 5th, 2011 at 9:20 am
Effectively marvelous! I’ve labored within the financial field myself (interned at Morgan Stanley so I have been previously within the spot of watching a whole lot of shareholders and underwriters going by means of IPOs. Given that then, I’ve moved from hedge funds to a business start-up so I’m still in the remarkably vivid position to see or watch human actions. Though I wouldn’t say that i am an master at investing in any way, I recognize that although you’ll be able to develop a killing from stock trading, your chances of competing with other informational traders (people who truly have in mind the stocks) are slender..and don’t even discuss the dealers and brokers who have their particular status and assets vulnerable! My suggestions: if you’re looking to invest for asset management factors, accept the a quick read at an award-winning article by Delos Chang that details the S&P 500 as a more stable and simple return than any kind of day trading. While using the inflation, drug wars, stock bubbles, property loan housing crises right now, you can not just keep spending transaction costs or even the capital benefits tax will surely allow you to bite the bullet (even in the event you’ve made a bad benefit from inflation!). Opportunity cost – business economics 101.
August 25th, 2011 at 8:29 am
What are the most popular blog sites in the Philippines where I can submit my blogs for others to read?
August 29th, 2011 at 10:19 am
Helpful info. Lucky me I found your web site accidentally, and I am stunned why this accident didn’t took place earlier! I bookmarked it.
August 31st, 2011 at 2:07 pm
Hey this is somewhat of off topic but I was wondering if blogs use WYSIWYG editors or if you have to manually code with HTML. I’m starting a blog soon but have no coding know-how so I wanted to get guidance from someone with experience. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
September 3rd, 2011 at 3:33 am
I will be sure to bookmark your blog and will eventually come back in the foreseeable future.
September 11th, 2011 at 3:26 pm
Great paintings! This is the kind of info that are meant to be shared around the internet. Disgrace on the seek for no longer positioning this publish higher! Come on over and visit my website . Thank you =)
September 11th, 2011 at 10:47 pm
Hi! I just wanted to ask if you ever have any trouble with hackers? My last blog (wordpress) was hacked and I ended up losing many months of hard work due to no back up. Do you have any methods to stop hackers?
November 16th, 2011 at 3:51 am
BRATVA Common Sites, Inc. – http://bratva.name/forum/
January 25th, 2012 at 2:34 am
Thank you for a nice share you have given to us with your an large collection of information. Great work you have carried out by sharing these to all. Simply superb.