Rachel Held Evans
recently made a splash with a blog post suggesting that
complementarianism is merely patriarchy masquerading under a less
offensive name. Her post generated a good bit of discussion not only on
her blog but on Scot McKnight’s as well.
Evans is riffing on remarks that Russell Moore
recently made about complementarians who are big on gender orthodoxy
but not so much on orthopraxy. Here’s how Moore expressed his concern, “What
I fear is that we have many people in evangelicalism who can check off
‘complementarian’ on a box but who really aren’t living out
complementarian lives.” Evans agrees with this statement and then
offers three reasons why she thinks complementarian practice is losing
ground among those who profess complementarian principles.
1. Because more and more evangelical
theologians, scholars, professors, and pastors are thoughtfully
debunking a complementarian interpretation of Scripture…
2. Because their rhetoric consistently
reflects a commitment to an idealized glorification of the pre-feminist
nuclear family of 1950s America rather than a commitment to “biblical
manhood” and “biblical womanhood”… Continue at Denny Burk
No comments:
Post a Comment