This is my third article responding to the accusation that complementarianism discriminates against single people. I want to look at how this works out in practice. I want to say at the start that this is not an attempt to claim that the churches I’ve been part of as a member or as a leaderContinue reading “Complementarianism and Singleness – in practice”
Tag Archives: complementarianism
Complementarianism and Singleness -what does the Bible say?
The other week, I wrote about complementarianism and singleness in response to the claim that Complementarianism gives no space for single women in the church or society because women are required always to relate to God and others through the authority of a man. In that article I explained that this is a misunderstanding ofContinue reading “Complementarianism and Singleness -what does the Bible say?”
A woman’s work
This tweet from Owen Strachan has been causing a bit of a stir on social media I wanted to respond briefly here but also to link to something a bit more detailed. I’m a complementarian which means I believe that men and women are made equal but different (in other words we are meant toContinue reading “A woman’s work”
Christian Patriarchy may be following the wrong trajectory
Patriarchy seems to be a dominant word at the moment. It’s being used as a term of accusation and abuse against complementarians. For example, Beth Allison Barr whose book I reviewed recently identifies this as the big problem with conservative evangelicalism. It is also being used as a badge of honour by some who sayContinue reading “Christian Patriarchy may be following the wrong trajectory”
(Not Quite) The making of Biblical Womanhood
The most recent contribution to the conversation about the role of men and women in the church and in the home is The Making of Biblical Womanhood by Beth Allison Barr. Barr argues against complementarianism and claims that it is in fact a modern attempt to re-impose patriarchy. Furthermore she argues that complementarianism is aContinue reading “(Not Quite) The making of Biblical Womanhood”
Complementarianism and Singleness
I want to engage a little bit further on the question of complementarianism and its implications for church life. I want to pick up particularly on a question raised by someone on twitter which was to the affect of “what does complementarianism have to say to single people?” They used themselves as an example, theyContinue reading “Complementarianism and Singleness”
You are not meant to be autonomous.
Out of recent conversations about church culture in the light of recent abuse scandals we’ve seen a renewed debate about complementarianism. It’s a little confusing as to how this has happened because in the cases primarily linked to complementarian leaning churches the victims of abuse tended to be young men whereas in at least oneContinue reading “You are not meant to be autonomous.”
Fathers and mothers – implications of family models for the church
In my posts about church culture and in my recent article about complementarianism, I’ve argued that we need to seek a church culture that functions more like a family and less like a club, institution or business. In that context, I want to suggest that elders in the church function a bit like the fathersContinue reading “Fathers and mothers – implications of family models for the church”
Made for each other
If Genesis 1 introduces us to the creation of humanity, chapter 2 fleshes it out giving us a bit more detail about the creation of man and woman. At this stage we are told that there was no bushes and small plants of the field, a reference here I believe to cultivated plant life becauseContinue reading “Made for each other”
In defence of complementarianism
One of the things I’ve seen coming up again and again is the suggestion that part of the problem with conservative evangelical culture that needs to change is complementarianism. Indeed, you will notice that the push is to argue that complementarianism is not only a risk factor for creating abusive cultures but furthermore is, inContinue reading “In defence of complementarianism”
