 |
| Figure One: Some baggage. Not pictured are my copies of "So You're Thinking About Going to Seminary" and "How to Stay Christian in Seminary," because I think I might have burned those. |
NOTE: I am really good at angering people on both sides of an issue. So let me get these caveats out there.
Egalitarian friends, this is post is obviously not for you. Feel free to eavesdrop, and possibly judge this post, but there are plenty of good egalitarian responses to Dr. Piper's latest dictum. I have read many of them, and some of them are truly helpful (even to a complementarian such as myself). But this post is not one of those. I am attempting something very different here.
Strict complementarian friends, this post isn't for you, either. While I'm glad that you're reading this, it's also a little weird that you're here. "Inconsistent," I believe your Pastor John would say. So feel free to read along, and maybe even weigh in, but if you agree that women shouldn't be seminary professors, then you and I have actually less in common on this issue than I have in common with our egalitarian siblings. And that should tell you something.
And friends from both camps--don't worry. By the time I'm done, I'll probably have angered plenty of the in-between folks I'm actually writing to, as well. I'm an equal opportunity offender, and I've come to accept that. But I am also an equal opportunity grieve-er, and that is much harder to bear. So pray for us all.
Dear Siblings who Live in the Complicated Grey Area,
I spent the past week in a flu-haze, so I only caught snippets of Dr. John Piper's missive regarding the dangers of women as seminary professors. A few texts and conversations here and there, asking what I thought. Mostly commiserating that once again, Piper gets to set the agenda, call the shots, and further entrench the idea that either you're a (wildly liberal) egalitarian or you're a (staunch, faithful) complementarian, with room for neither nuance nor nonsense.
It seems that there are a lot of us in "conservative" circles who don't agree with Pastor John. But there aren't many of us speaking that truth (that I can find, anyway) online. And pretty much only women writers, at that. Yes, there were a lot of good egalitarian responses, many of which pointed out the ways in which Dr. Piper's words are hurtful, random, and themselves inconsistent.
So I won't be directly rebutting Dr. Piper's post here. Perhaps that will come another day. Today, I want to assume that we're on the same page--that we both thought the podcast was unhelpful, inaccurate, and misrepresentative of where we live and what we believe. Today, I need to believe--despite the lack of representative blog posts and articles--that I am not alone in inhabiting this marginal space of non-Piper complementarianism. Today, I don't want so much to convince anyone to believe differently at either extreme, as to ask like-minded siblings to consider acting on these shared beliefs a little differently.
In my requests below, I've tried to be gracious. I've tried to be honest. And I've tried to be vulnerable. Rather than trying to point fingers, I'm trying to reach out trembling hands and ask for partnership, for help. Because we're in this together, right? I hope none of you feel too targeted or shamed by what I'm saying below. Forgive me (or at least let me know!) if you do. But I can't help but hope that some of these small steps could actually make a big difference.
So if you fit in this centrist, awkward space with me, would you please consider the following three ideas?
One. Given his latest unkindness, please stop quoting John Piper in your sermons, talks, Bible studies, books, social media posts, classes, etc. Yes, his positive contributions to Evangelicalism cannot be understated in the areas of world missions, "Christian Hedonism," and the like. But he wasn't the first to say those good things, and he hasn't been the last. As good as his stuff is, I promise that you can find another quote to use when you want to talk about the glory of God and our happiness.
I've pleaded before for you to no longer allow the Three Female Ghosts that Haunt the Church to preach your sermons. No longer quoting Dr. Piper is a very specific way you can go about this. Not convinced that using Piper quotes is really that damaging? An analogy: Southern Presbyterian friends who care deeply about racial reconciliation, you've learned to stop using Robert Lewis Dabney quotes, right? Dabney had a way with words and some truly beautiful things to say, especially in the areas of ecclesiology and soteriology. But most folks I know who do want to avoid being lumped in with his segregationist ideals (and hateful, dehumanizing rhetoric) have still decided to look elsewhere for sermon anecdotes and inspirational quotes. So yes--I'm drawing a line in the sand--but at least to me, a Piper quote is as hurtful as a Dabney quote. At best, it's tone deaf. At worst, it communicates alignment with someone who thinks I am in direct sin by doing campus ministry. John Piper thinks that women should never have direct, personal "guidance and influence" over a man, in any sphere, ever. He thinks that when I sit down with a male student or faculty member to encourage, challenge, and pray for them, I am "violating their sense of manhood." If that's not a direct indictment of who I am and what I've been called to do, I don't know what is. If you agree with Piper on this, then go in peace, friend (but didn't we already discuss that this post isn't for you?). If you disagree, then please see how much it grieves me when Dr. Piper is quoted on a variety of subject matters.
Don't hear what I'm not saying. I'm not saying don't read, appreciate, or seek a nuanced understanding of Dr. Piper. (I'm not even saying that about Dabney, actually.) I'm not saying burn all his books and reject his teaching entirely. I did--in a fit of pique, I'll admit--shove A Hunger for God and Let the Nations Be Glad to the back of the bookshelf. But I've kept them. By all means, dig into his prolific library when you want to better understand the importance of missions, or read his website if you want encouragement in areas of daily faith and practice. Just please, please, don't quote him. If you want to show support for myself and women like me, find somebody else to quote who hasn't so very clearly articulated such a toxic (and I believe, false!) view of complementarianism.
Two. Please stop letting John Piper define the entirety of complementarianism. I am begging you, be vocal about your positive views on women leading in appropriate and healthy ways, and be very clear that you disagree with Dr. Piper's stances on the matter. It is not enough to try to define our own "robust," "moderate," or "soft" complementarianism, where we articulate what we believe is a Biblical view of gender. We must also articulate what it isn't. Really, we need a new term, so as to distance ourselves completely from what John Piper says about gender roles. So if anybody's got that, I would be incredibly grateful.
I've pleaded before, more obliquely, for leaders to be willing to graciously and publicly disagree with Piper's brand of strict complementarianism. After his podcast indicting the very idea of a female seminary professor, I'm willing to be more direct. I've heard some of you respectfully disagree with Dr. Piper on his views regarding mode and recipient of baptism. If you can lovingly say that you disagree with him about a sacrament, then I don't understand why you can't add his views on women to the list. If you're already saying, "I think my brother John is way off when he says that sprinkling infants is sinful," please, please, add "I think my brother John is way off when he says that women seminary professors are by nature sinful" to your repertoire. If you are already saying that women can be CEOs, can be seminary professors, can do campus ministry--and some of you have, and publicly--then please, please, also articulate that you respectfully disagree with Dr. Piper when he says that they can't. If you won't put two and two together to get four, then I start to wonder if you ever really did affirm me in my calling. I start to wonder if you meant it, or if you've changed your mind since then. And if you won't put two and two together to get four, please believe me when I tell you that too many of the men (and women) who are listening to you will put two and two together to make five. And that twisted math is devastating to me, women like me, and the church in general. It's the very reason why we need--and again, if you are a "robust" complementarian, you have already admitted that you agree with this--women seminary professors in the first place. We need the complementary nature of men and women, partnering together, to help the church thrive. We who are women need to know that men (under whose leadership we willingly submit ourselves) are listening, learning, and lamenting the ways that we sin against each other. You who are men need to know that women (whom you have been entrusted to lead as servant-leaders in the sacrificial legacy of Christ) are actually wounded when Dr. Piper's words go unchecked. We all need to be reminded that the embodied King Jesus came to earth as a man (and that's beautiful and it matters) to love and save men and women alike.
Again, don't hear what I'm not saying. I'm not saying you have to be hateful, or pedantic, or even very splashy about how Dr. Piper's brand of complementarianism is not your own. Just be honest, clear, and consistent about it. If I understand correctly, you and I believe that the complementarianism we see in the Bible is neither toxic nor harmful. We believe that certain boundaries aren't limiting, but rather freeing. We believe the opposite of what society tells us about gender roles, but we also believe the opposite of what Pastor John tells us. There is a third way, and I am so weary of it getting lost in the middle of false unity. I, myself, siblings, am so weary of being lost in the middle of this false unity.
Three. Finally, please support, bankroll, pray, advocate, and fight for the women in seminary that you know. Whether they are students or professors, it is not an easy thing to be a woman in a traditionally male-dominated field. I can ultimately only speak for myself, but it is a daily death to be the only woman in your program, in class, on a faculty, at a conference, or on a panel, or in any number of situations.
I've pleaded before for folks to understand what it's like to be the only woman in a theological setting. It's exhausting. And now, as I prepare to begin my seventh. year. in. seminary. (!) still the only woman in my MDiv program (and usually the only woman in my classes), John Piper's words are especially hard to bear. For the Lord's own mysterious reasons (no doubt part of which is my own sanctification and being humbled), I am at a seminary with only one female professor (and she not in the MDiv program). We've had women teaching MDiv classes in the past (and the Homiletics course, no less!), and the majority of my professors are supportive of my endeavors. But if Dr. Piper's rhetoric is allowed to continue to grow and influence others, then myself and women like me will still have to deal with a lot of vitriol and disdain. Whether my seminary hires female professors or not, or whether other women will join me in the MDiv program or not (please, oh, please! COME!) is secondary to (though of course ultimately part of) what the climate will be like. When Dr. Piper is allowed to blithely say that oh, sure--women can be in seminary or whatever, but he is not held accountable to what women in seminary need in the way of support, it's still harmful. And when Dr. Piper is allowed to offer hollow, nominal support for women in seminary without being held accountable to the hurt that his words cause, the damage is compounded.
So don't hear what I'm not saying. I'm not trying to change the minds of egalitarians to a complementarian position. I'm not even trying to change the minds of Pastor John supporters to reject what he's preaching. Yes, I'd love for egalitarians to be less alienated by and suspicious of the true complementarian position. Indeed, I'd be grateful if more folks stopped agreeing with toxic complementarianism and chose instead that arduous middle path to which I feel called. But what I'm really asking for is those who are already with me in orthodoxy to join me in orthopraxy. If you were angered by Dr. Piper's podcast but are in the complementarian camp, please speak up. If you disagree with the idea that female seminary professors can't be part of a healthy complementarian seminary, please, pray for those of us in the seminary trenches. And if you want to put your money, time, and emotional energy where your mouth is, then, please--fund more women in all areas of seminary. I am grateful for the scholarships that I do receive, and am not above accepting more. And I would be over the moon for an endowed chair specifically for a woman professor in my program!
And know that regardless, myself and women like me will persevere, because that's what God has asked us to do.
Robustly yours,
A Fellow Awkward Centrist.
