What do you think?
Rate this book
Partners in Christ: A Conservative Case for Egalitarianism
When it comes to understanding what Scripture says about men and women, those on both sides of the debate can and do marshal strong evidence from the Bible. Why are they able to do this? John Stackhouse boldly contends it is because Scripture in fact says both things. Does the Bible contradict itself then? Not so. Rather, in this revised and expanded edition of Finally Feminist, Stackhouse describes the single approach in Scripture that guides us with clear direction on these important matters of relationships in the church and the family. Are you looking for an approach that takes the whole Bible into account and not just bits and pieces of it? While treating Scripture with utmost seriousness, Stackhouse moves us all beyond the impasse in this important debate.
215 pages, Paperback
First published October 8, 2015
25 people are currently reading
380 people want to read
About the author
John G. Stackhouse Jr.
24 books89 followersA graduate of Queen's University (BA, first class), Wheaton College Graduate School (MA, summa cum laude), and The University of Chicago (PhD), he taught European history and then modern Christianity at postsecondary institutions in both the USA and Canada.
He is the author of eleven books, editor of four more, and co-author or co-editor of another half dozen. He has published over 700 articles, book chapters, and reviews, and his work has been featured on most major North American TV networks, in most major radio markets, and in periodicals as diverse as The New York Times, The Atlantic, Christianity Today, The Christian Century, The Times Literary Supplement, Time, and The Globe and Mail.
Dr. Stackhouse has lectured at Harvard's Kennedy School, Yale's Divinity School, Stanford's Law School, Hong Kong University, Edinburgh University, Fudan University, Otago University, and many other universities in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada.
He lives in Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada.
He is the author of eleven books, editor of four more, and co-author or co-editor of another half dozen. He has published over 700 articles, book chapters, and reviews, and his work has been featured on most major North American TV networks, in most major radio markets, and in periodicals as diverse as The New York Times, The Atlantic, Christianity Today, The Christian Century, The Times Literary Supplement, Time, and The Globe and Mail.
Dr. Stackhouse has lectured at Harvard's Kennedy School, Yale's Divinity School, Stanford's Law School, Hong Kong University, Edinburgh University, Fudan University, Otago University, and many other universities in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada.
He lives in Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews
January 12, 2016
I've been in pastoral ministry just long enough to see real damage done to women by views of submission which kept them locked in abusive situations. Friends who are female colleagues have had their search for a ministry placement frustrated by the so-called stained-glass-ceiling. Other women I know who are hurt by the imposition of narrowly defined roles for them in the home or the church. Yes, there are winds of change for the evangelical futures, but complementarianism remains the default position for many churches across evangelical landscapes.
John G. Stackhouse, Jr.'s most recent book, Partners in Christ presents, as its subtitle suggests, 'A Conservative Case for Egalitarianism.' Stackhouse is professor of Religious Studies at Crandall University and somewhat of a polymath. He is a humble apologist, historian and one of the foremost experts on Canadian Evangelicalism in the 20th Century, a theologian and religious scholar, and a public speaker and educator. He also plays a mean jazz bass. He brings all this to bear (with the exception of bass playing) on presenting a model of egalitarianism which draws on Scripture, experience, tradition, and general revelation.
Partners in Christ is a major revision of Stackhouse's earlier book, Finally Feminist (Baker Academic 2005). He uses the terms feminism and egalitarianism interchangeably, but a significant portion of conservative evangelicals regard 'feminism' as a man-hating attack on traditional (Christian) values. Jettisoning the old title makes this less off-putting for the complementarian evangelicals he hopes to convince through his argument
He begins with an overview of the contours of the debate (chapter 1) and the fuzzy way some people choose their side (chapter 2) Next, he share his move from his Brethren-roots-complementarianism to egalitarianism (chapter 3). In chapter 4, he describes his method of working back from a general hermeneutic of scripture back to particular texts. In chapters 5-9 he unfolds the principles guiding his model (chapters 5-9), which in turn suggests the interpretive grid he uses to makes sense of both the complementarian and egalitarian 'go to' passages (chapers 10 and 11). Chapter 12 provides a summation of hi position before he turns to tackling counterarguments (chapters 13-16).Finally he addresses issues that are pertinent to the contemporary gender discussion (chapters 17-20). Below is a somewhat more detailed walk through some of his argument:
The Case for Egalitarianism:
Stackhouse strives to listen well and incorporate insights from both sides of the complementarian/egalitarian debate. He dismisses un-thoughtful reasons for holding one position or the other: biblicism (saying 'the Bible tells me so' without acknowledging one's own interpretive grid) (22), the complementarian tendency to double-down on traditionalism when culture is moving in a different direction (or an egalitarian vice-versa) (23-24) and saying 'the Spirit says so' with no more than wooly-minded reasoning to back it up (24-5). Instead Stackhouse points to principles you need to know as you think through the gender issue theologically. These principles give Stackhouse a way to affirm the best arguments of both complementarians and egalitarians.
His first principle is equality. Women and men are of equal dignity before God (47). Stackhouse points to the co-equality of male in females in creation (Genesis 1:26-27; 2:18-24), the inclusion of women in Jesus followers, the pride of place of Mary Magdalene in being the resurrected Christs first witness, the Spirit's being poured out on all flesh at Pentecost, and evidence of prominent women ministers in Paul's letters. There is a push towards egalitarianism in the text.
However he also acknowledges overwhelming patriarchy throughout the entirety of the Bible. The imaging of God and Israel's relationship is depicted as 'a patriarchal marriage of non-equals,' Jesus' failed to include women among his inner circle, and Paul's occasionally silenced women's voices (48-49). This leads Stackhouse to his second principle: accommodation, "since somethings matter more than others, lesser things sometimes must be sacrificed in the interest of the greater" (50). Stackhouse argues that the impetus toward egalitarianism is blunted by the greater goal of the salvation of Israel and the nations. Because the Bible was written in and to a patriarchal culture, there is divine accomodation in the text toward patriarchy of the day. Jesus is not some a proto-feminist; yet the gospel of his kingdom paved the way for egalitarianism to blossom, in much the same manner in which the Bible didn't repudiate slavery wholesale but sowed the seeds of its demise.
The third principle Stackhouse suggests is eschatology. He acknowledges we live in a time where the Kingdom has come, though not fully. Stackhouse asks, "What would our understanding of gender look like, however, if we took the 'already, but not yet' principle seriously? What if we were to expect, instead of one extreme or the other, an appropriately paradoxical situation: a slow and partial realization of gospel values here and there, as God patiently and carefully works his mysterious ways along the multiple fronts of kingdom advance?" (54). This means inside Christian churches and homes as:
This provides space for a prophetic embodiment of egalitarianism as a sign of the Kingdom.
The final principle guiding Stackhouse's model is liberty. The gospel does set people free; however passages like 1 Cor. 8:12-13, 1 Cor 10:23-24; 1 Peter 2:16 make clear there are instances when Christian freedom is curtailed if it impedes the spread of the gospel. Thus Stackhouse concludes that in our culture, the emancipation of women is beneficial to all and worth striving for, but in other parts of the world (or other parts of our history) the 'social-disruption of feminism would come at too high a price. Disturbed families, churches, and societies might become more hostile toward the Christian religion--and likely with little or no actual gain in freedom for women"(63). Christians and missionaries in these cultures advocate where they can, but because patriarchy persists, they simple have to make the best of it.
These principles (equality, accommodation, eschatology, liberty) give Stackhouse a hermeneutic grid for reading the Bible. He writes:
Stackhouse answers this question by arguing that Paul, under the guidance of the Spirit, did two things simultaneously: (1) he set down prudent instructions for the church on how to survive in a patriarchal culture and to (2) promote the egalitarian message running throughout all of scripture. Stackhouse calls this 'the pattern of doubleness' and with it he sets the complementarian and egalitarian 'control texts' within a larger frame (for brevity sake, I won't walk through individual texts). This allows him to talk about the cultural constraints underlying head coverings and silent women, but also shine a light on places where Paul (and other biblical authors) extol mutuality.
Next Stackhouse tackles various counterarguments to his schema. He eschews appeals to the inner life of the Trinity as a model for either side (96-7), he addresses the complementarian appeal to the patriarchal images of God in scripture, and dismisses the idea that masculinity is an essential characteristic of priests or pastors(102). In discussing history, Stackhouse tackles the common arguments against women in spiritual leadership (i.e. women leaders arise in cultic and schismatic groups or their leadership was merely permissible because of the lack of strong male leadership) and the idea that Christian feminism is a capitulation to its secular counterpart (Christian egalitarianism predates its secular counterpart!).
Counterarguments from contemporary experience include the notion that egalitarianism legitimizes homosexuality and it causes the neglect of children. For the former claim, Stackhouse points out that there is no 'doubleness pattern' in the Bible regarding sexual diversity as there is with women and slaves. In the case of the latter, Stackhouse points out the lack of sociological evidence to support the claim of child neglect. But while Stackhouse is a card-carrying egalitarian, his principle of accommodation also chastens the egalitarian urge to fight patriarchy everywhere (i.e. traditional patriarchal cultures in the two-thirds world are beyond our scope of influence and mandating egalitarian values would frustrate the spread of the gospel in those cultures).
The rest of the book deals with various contemporary issues in the gender debate: inclusive language; the contribution of women to theology, the feminization of the church, the 'new machismo' backlash and what to do about it; the reasons why women are not leading as much as they should be.
I appreciate how Stackhouse affirms , where he can, both sides of the debate. Complementarians and egalitarians both read the same scripture, both have adherents which read it well. By incorporating insights from both sides means his position is somewhat of a mediating position. Some egalitarians would find his conclusions insufficiently radical (i.e. he doesn't interpret Paul and Jesus as protofeminist saints). Conversely, committed complementarians will find his conclusions rankling. Stackhouse does listen well but he can also be dismissive of viewpoints he finds insufficiently rigorous. If you aren't at least somewhat sympathetic with his aims, his tone may bother you in places.
Stackhouse was one of my teachers and I am an egalitarian by conviction, even choosing my denomination based on its openness to women in ministry. I agree with most of what he says here and and think 'the pattern of doubleness' he identifies in scripture is a way to read the relevant passages well. This distinguishes his approach from other egalitarians. He doesn't see a straight, upward movement towards egalatarian principles in scripture. He see both patriarchy and egalitarianism in the text form beginning to end.
I tend to demur from Stackhouse's larger project. He is an ethical realist (Making the Best of It!). I am more of an idealist with my overrealized eschatology, emphasizing the Kingdom come and the implications for life now. What I found refreshing was how Stackhouse demonstates his approach isn't just accommodationist, settling for the way things are. The is space he allows for eschatology in his schema means he is also pressing towards seeing the kingdom embodied more fully, even advocating prophetic stances. Egalitarianism is an example of a kingdom value which he thinks we should champion and work towards wherever we can. But if we can't, or working towards egalitarianism would wreak havoc on society, we shouldn't do it. That doesn't mean it doesn't remain an important goal to strive toward but in the larger scheme somethings matter more (i.e. the reign of Christ, salvation through him, the spread of the gospel, etc). I think egalitarianism provides a nice case study of Stackhouse's ethics, showcasing what his approach looks like in the real world.
I recommend this book for anyone wanting to think through their position on women in ministry. Soft complementarians may be convinced (hardliners likely won't). Egalitarians may also learn from Stackhouse a humble apologetics which seeks to listen to the other side. But regardless of whether you find Stackhouse compelling, he does a superb job of naming the contours of the complementarian/egalitarian debate. I give this book four and a half stars.
Note: I received this book from IVP in exchange for my honest review.
John G. Stackhouse, Jr.'s most recent book, Partners in Christ presents, as its subtitle suggests, 'A Conservative Case for Egalitarianism.' Stackhouse is professor of Religious Studies at Crandall University and somewhat of a polymath. He is a humble apologist, historian and one of the foremost experts on Canadian Evangelicalism in the 20th Century, a theologian and religious scholar, and a public speaker and educator. He also plays a mean jazz bass. He brings all this to bear (with the exception of bass playing) on presenting a model of egalitarianism which draws on Scripture, experience, tradition, and general revelation.
Partners in Christ is a major revision of Stackhouse's earlier book, Finally Feminist (Baker Academic 2005). He uses the terms feminism and egalitarianism interchangeably, but a significant portion of conservative evangelicals regard 'feminism' as a man-hating attack on traditional (Christian) values. Jettisoning the old title makes this less off-putting for the complementarian evangelicals he hopes to convince through his argument
He begins with an overview of the contours of the debate (chapter 1) and the fuzzy way some people choose their side (chapter 2) Next, he share his move from his Brethren-roots-complementarianism to egalitarianism (chapter 3). In chapter 4, he describes his method of working back from a general hermeneutic of scripture back to particular texts. In chapters 5-9 he unfolds the principles guiding his model (chapters 5-9), which in turn suggests the interpretive grid he uses to makes sense of both the complementarian and egalitarian 'go to' passages (chapers 10 and 11). Chapter 12 provides a summation of hi position before he turns to tackling counterarguments (chapters 13-16).Finally he addresses issues that are pertinent to the contemporary gender discussion (chapters 17-20). Below is a somewhat more detailed walk through some of his argument:
The Case for Egalitarianism:
Stackhouse strives to listen well and incorporate insights from both sides of the complementarian/egalitarian debate. He dismisses un-thoughtful reasons for holding one position or the other: biblicism (saying 'the Bible tells me so' without acknowledging one's own interpretive grid) (22), the complementarian tendency to double-down on traditionalism when culture is moving in a different direction (or an egalitarian vice-versa) (23-24) and saying 'the Spirit says so' with no more than wooly-minded reasoning to back it up (24-5). Instead Stackhouse points to principles you need to know as you think through the gender issue theologically. These principles give Stackhouse a way to affirm the best arguments of both complementarians and egalitarians.
His first principle is equality. Women and men are of equal dignity before God (47). Stackhouse points to the co-equality of male in females in creation (Genesis 1:26-27; 2:18-24), the inclusion of women in Jesus followers, the pride of place of Mary Magdalene in being the resurrected Christs first witness, the Spirit's being poured out on all flesh at Pentecost, and evidence of prominent women ministers in Paul's letters. There is a push towards egalitarianism in the text.
However he also acknowledges overwhelming patriarchy throughout the entirety of the Bible. The imaging of God and Israel's relationship is depicted as 'a patriarchal marriage of non-equals,' Jesus' failed to include women among his inner circle, and Paul's occasionally silenced women's voices (48-49). This leads Stackhouse to his second principle: accommodation, "since somethings matter more than others, lesser things sometimes must be sacrificed in the interest of the greater" (50). Stackhouse argues that the impetus toward egalitarianism is blunted by the greater goal of the salvation of Israel and the nations. Because the Bible was written in and to a patriarchal culture, there is divine accomodation in the text toward patriarchy of the day. Jesus is not some a proto-feminist; yet the gospel of his kingdom paved the way for egalitarianism to blossom, in much the same manner in which the Bible didn't repudiate slavery wholesale but sowed the seeds of its demise.
The third principle Stackhouse suggests is eschatology. He acknowledges we live in a time where the Kingdom has come, though not fully. Stackhouse asks, "What would our understanding of gender look like, however, if we took the 'already, but not yet' principle seriously? What if we were to expect, instead of one extreme or the other, an appropriately paradoxical situation: a slow and partial realization of gospel values here and there, as God patiently and carefully works his mysterious ways along the multiple fronts of kingdom advance?" (54). This means inside Christian churches and homes as:
those institutions over which Christians would have the most immediate and extensive control--one would expect to see kingdom values at work: overcoming oppression, eliminating inequality, sharing resources, binding disparate people together in love and mutual respect, liberating gifts and the like. We would expect to hear teaching that envisioned the day when all such barriers to human fellowship are removed and everyone can flourish together. We would expect, in short to catch glimpses of the kingdom and to feel its unstoppable momentum toward universal shalom, even while we also appreciate the way the Holy Spirit skillfully and patiently guides the church to make the most of whatever opportunities it has in this or that situation. (58)
This provides space for a prophetic embodiment of egalitarianism as a sign of the Kingdom.
The final principle guiding Stackhouse's model is liberty. The gospel does set people free; however passages like 1 Cor. 8:12-13, 1 Cor 10:23-24; 1 Peter 2:16 make clear there are instances when Christian freedom is curtailed if it impedes the spread of the gospel. Thus Stackhouse concludes that in our culture, the emancipation of women is beneficial to all and worth striving for, but in other parts of the world (or other parts of our history) the 'social-disruption of feminism would come at too high a price. Disturbed families, churches, and societies might become more hostile toward the Christian religion--and likely with little or no actual gain in freedom for women"(63). Christians and missionaries in these cultures advocate where they can, but because patriarchy persists, they simple have to make the best of it.
These principles (equality, accommodation, eschatology, liberty) give Stackhouse a hermeneutic grid for reading the Bible. He writes:
I suggest that Paul means just what he says about gender. But I make this suggestion in a radical way: I think he means everything he says about gender, not just the favorite passages cited by one side or another. The fascinating question here is this: How can Paul sound so egalitarian sometimes and complementarian--even simply patriarchal--at other times?" (66-67).
Stackhouse answers this question by arguing that Paul, under the guidance of the Spirit, did two things simultaneously: (1) he set down prudent instructions for the church on how to survive in a patriarchal culture and to (2) promote the egalitarian message running throughout all of scripture. Stackhouse calls this 'the pattern of doubleness' and with it he sets the complementarian and egalitarian 'control texts' within a larger frame (for brevity sake, I won't walk through individual texts). This allows him to talk about the cultural constraints underlying head coverings and silent women, but also shine a light on places where Paul (and other biblical authors) extol mutuality.
Next Stackhouse tackles various counterarguments to his schema. He eschews appeals to the inner life of the Trinity as a model for either side (96-7), he addresses the complementarian appeal to the patriarchal images of God in scripture, and dismisses the idea that masculinity is an essential characteristic of priests or pastors(102). In discussing history, Stackhouse tackles the common arguments against women in spiritual leadership (i.e. women leaders arise in cultic and schismatic groups or their leadership was merely permissible because of the lack of strong male leadership) and the idea that Christian feminism is a capitulation to its secular counterpart (Christian egalitarianism predates its secular counterpart!).
Counterarguments from contemporary experience include the notion that egalitarianism legitimizes homosexuality and it causes the neglect of children. For the former claim, Stackhouse points out that there is no 'doubleness pattern' in the Bible regarding sexual diversity as there is with women and slaves. In the case of the latter, Stackhouse points out the lack of sociological evidence to support the claim of child neglect. But while Stackhouse is a card-carrying egalitarian, his principle of accommodation also chastens the egalitarian urge to fight patriarchy everywhere (i.e. traditional patriarchal cultures in the two-thirds world are beyond our scope of influence and mandating egalitarian values would frustrate the spread of the gospel in those cultures).
The rest of the book deals with various contemporary issues in the gender debate: inclusive language; the contribution of women to theology, the feminization of the church, the 'new machismo' backlash and what to do about it; the reasons why women are not leading as much as they should be.
I appreciate how Stackhouse affirms , where he can, both sides of the debate. Complementarians and egalitarians both read the same scripture, both have adherents which read it well. By incorporating insights from both sides means his position is somewhat of a mediating position. Some egalitarians would find his conclusions insufficiently radical (i.e. he doesn't interpret Paul and Jesus as protofeminist saints). Conversely, committed complementarians will find his conclusions rankling. Stackhouse does listen well but he can also be dismissive of viewpoints he finds insufficiently rigorous. If you aren't at least somewhat sympathetic with his aims, his tone may bother you in places.
Stackhouse was one of my teachers and I am an egalitarian by conviction, even choosing my denomination based on its openness to women in ministry. I agree with most of what he says here and and think 'the pattern of doubleness' he identifies in scripture is a way to read the relevant passages well. This distinguishes his approach from other egalitarians. He doesn't see a straight, upward movement towards egalatarian principles in scripture. He see both patriarchy and egalitarianism in the text form beginning to end.
I tend to demur from Stackhouse's larger project. He is an ethical realist (Making the Best of It!). I am more of an idealist with my overrealized eschatology, emphasizing the Kingdom come and the implications for life now. What I found refreshing was how Stackhouse demonstates his approach isn't just accommodationist, settling for the way things are. The is space he allows for eschatology in his schema means he is also pressing towards seeing the kingdom embodied more fully, even advocating prophetic stances. Egalitarianism is an example of a kingdom value which he thinks we should champion and work towards wherever we can. But if we can't, or working towards egalitarianism would wreak havoc on society, we shouldn't do it. That doesn't mean it doesn't remain an important goal to strive toward but in the larger scheme somethings matter more (i.e. the reign of Christ, salvation through him, the spread of the gospel, etc). I think egalitarianism provides a nice case study of Stackhouse's ethics, showcasing what his approach looks like in the real world.
I recommend this book for anyone wanting to think through their position on women in ministry. Soft complementarians may be convinced (hardliners likely won't). Egalitarians may also learn from Stackhouse a humble apologetics which seeks to listen to the other side. But regardless of whether you find Stackhouse compelling, he does a superb job of naming the contours of the complementarian/egalitarian debate. I give this book four and a half stars.
Note: I received this book from IVP in exchange for my honest review.
January 1, 2023
I’ve been doing some deep study on the complentarianism/egalitarianism subject for a year or so.
Quite honestly, most egalitarian arguments I’ve heard haven’t been very convincing. However, this book is the best defense for egalitarianism that I have come across yet.
It is academic in nature and extremely tactful. Stackhouse doesn’t just try to reinterpret a few passages to counter complementarians, but offers up an entirely different interpretive lens through which to look at the Bible.
This lens is the “accommodation principle.”
Essentially, God works in a world (cultural situations) that aren’t good (sinful) in order to accomplish his best. God’s involvement with patriarchy in both Old and New Testaments (just like with slavery) is not an endorsement of it, but an accommodation in order to advance the most important good— the Gospel.
The biblical writers do the same thing. Stackhouse agrees with complementarians that the biblical authors endorse submission of wives to husbands and male leadership in the churches they write to. However, he argues that God (and authors) instructed Christians in patriarchy of the day because the culture was not at a point that it would benefit gospel advancement to change that patriarchal structure. Basically, the biblical authors endorsed submission and male leadership so as to keep the main thing the main thing until a time when those things could be transformed on earth as in heaven. He shows that the biblical authors endorse and ameliorate three ways of life in both Old and New Testaments: patriarchy, slavery, and child/parent relationship.
I’m not going to explain all of that bc it’s complex, but that’s the gist of his argument.
I’m a person that wants to be the most faithful to the text— no matter what it reveals. This has been a very challenging and enlightening book. I’m not sure if I’m convinced of Stackhouse’s hermeneutic— I will have to think on this— but it actually makes sense of much of the Bible contextually, which I appreciate.
Quite honestly, most egalitarian arguments I’ve heard haven’t been very convincing. However, this book is the best defense for egalitarianism that I have come across yet.
It is academic in nature and extremely tactful. Stackhouse doesn’t just try to reinterpret a few passages to counter complementarians, but offers up an entirely different interpretive lens through which to look at the Bible.
This lens is the “accommodation principle.”
Essentially, God works in a world (cultural situations) that aren’t good (sinful) in order to accomplish his best. God’s involvement with patriarchy in both Old and New Testaments (just like with slavery) is not an endorsement of it, but an accommodation in order to advance the most important good— the Gospel.
The biblical writers do the same thing. Stackhouse agrees with complementarians that the biblical authors endorse submission of wives to husbands and male leadership in the churches they write to. However, he argues that God (and authors) instructed Christians in patriarchy of the day because the culture was not at a point that it would benefit gospel advancement to change that patriarchal structure. Basically, the biblical authors endorsed submission and male leadership so as to keep the main thing the main thing until a time when those things could be transformed on earth as in heaven. He shows that the biblical authors endorse and ameliorate three ways of life in both Old and New Testaments: patriarchy, slavery, and child/parent relationship.
I’m not going to explain all of that bc it’s complex, but that’s the gist of his argument.
I’m a person that wants to be the most faithful to the text— no matter what it reveals. This has been a very challenging and enlightening book. I’m not sure if I’m convinced of Stackhouse’s hermeneutic— I will have to think on this— but it actually makes sense of much of the Bible contextually, which I appreciate.
September 2, 2019
I would sincerely implore almost anyone to read this book. I was continually floored by how Stackhouse held in tension a high view of Scripture with admittance that our interpretations are imperfect, how he took the best and left the worst of all arguments along the complementarian <—> feminist spectrum, and did it all with magnanimity, scholarship, empathy, and exhortation.
Though my evolving thoughts on the specific gender issues in question were challenged by this book, my evolving thoughts on how I form my convictions and the Bible’s role in that process were challenged even more.
I am more persuaded than ever of the need for Christians to let go of fear, need for certainty, and tribalism that comes into play when forming doctrinal opinions. And I am more persuaded than ever that women need to rise up to equal standing with men.
Though my evolving thoughts on the specific gender issues in question were challenged by this book, my evolving thoughts on how I form my convictions and the Bible’s role in that process were challenged even more.
I am more persuaded than ever of the need for Christians to let go of fear, need for certainty, and tribalism that comes into play when forming doctrinal opinions. And I am more persuaded than ever that women need to rise up to equal standing with men.
April 14, 2020
I’ve been in the complementarian camp for the entirety of my Christian life. That said, I would consider myself quite open to ideas from the other side of the aisle. Indeed, my closest friend believes quite vehemently in the biblical justification for female clergy. I have dabbled in the literature only in limited fashion, but my discussions have been with a fairly large sample of people. And so I believe that I have a general lay of the land with regard to the popular arguments on both sides.
With that said, I found Partners in Christ to be a welcome addition to the debate. In fact, I can easily say that this book is the best I’ve ever read on the subject from the egalitarian perspective. There are several reasons for this. For one, Stackhouse is widely read on either side of the issue, and is not prone to offering up straw men to score a cheap rhetorical victory. Neither does he write with a chip on his shoulder. To the contrary he comes across as warm to those on the complementarian side, explaining how he started in that camp himself. There is no sense of cynicism or vindictiveness in his writing, which is a breath of fresh air in today’s hostile climate on such topics. His spirit is well expressed on page 132:
“There has been too much antagonism, even violence, in this debate. My prayer instead has been to follow the scriptural injunction: “Let us consider how to provoke one another to love and good deeds” (Heb 10:24). If you have been provoked, I pray God that he and you will channel that provocation into positive reflection and spiritual fruit from which many women and men will benefit, to the glory of his name.”
I also appreciate Stackhouse’s “conservative case” for egalitarianism. He does not simply dismiss a large chunk of the New Testament corpus as pseudepigrapha for being inconvenient to his points (as many others in his camp too readily do, e.g. Steve Chalke). Instead, he holds a very high view of Scripture, viewing the totality as inspired and authoritative. He thus contends with most of the “tough passages”, though he still carries a dismissive view of some (see footnote). He rejects liberal approaches:
“This suggestion that parts of the Bible should be read as corrections to other parts, and even that some parts could serve to provoke even God to reconsideration, will be nonsense for traditional Christians who understand God to be, in fact, the Author of the Bible behind and within all of the various human writers of its component parts.” (Page 146)
Page 71 offers a fair and concise summary of the book’s principal thesis:
“[W]hen society was patriarchal, as it was in the New Testament context and as it has been everywhere in the world except in modern society in our day, then the church avoided scandal by going along with patriarchy, even as the Bible ameliorated it and made women’s situation better than it was under any other culture’s gender code. Now, however, that our modern society is at least officially egalitarian, the scandal (ironically enough) is that the church is not going along with society, not rejoicing in the unprecedented freedom to let women and men serve according to gift and call without an arbitrary gender line.”
With this line of argumentation, I commend Stackhouse for keeping the gospel as priority in this debate. Taking a modern-day missionary as an example, he believes it appropriate to accommodate a traditional culture in order to reach them with the message of the gospel, rather than to scandalize them with egalitarianism that might turn them off to the message of forgiveness. This in fact is what he hypothesizes as the modus operandi of both Jesus and Paul: they could not be more feminist in their respective ministries because the culture at the time was not ready. They had no desire to jeopardize their primary mission by dying on the hill of an important, but secondary, issue.
Stackhouse is well-argued in his exegetical interpretations. He warns of the dangers of a simple “prooftexting battle”, and suggests that rather than digging our heals into a few supposedly ironclad passages that favor our position, we should instead take a bird’s eye view of the Scripture (and especially the New Testament) to determine what the preponderance of the texts are communicating with regard to gender.
While I appreciate his approach, I ultimately don’t find his interpretation of a “trajectory” ethic to be satisfying enough to dismantle the traditional understandings of the relevant passages and themes in the Gospels and Epistles. While I concede the idea of a “double message” implicit in many of these (and other) passages of the New Testament, I don’t find it to be enough to overthrow the seemingly clear instructions about church government or male headship. Indeed, even he admits on page 84 that the varied attempts by egalitarians to reinterpret the Ephesians “submission” passage come across as rather inadequate.
One issue I took with Stackhouse was his (apparent) presupposition that a role of subordination is tantamount to a status of inferiority:
“But then we have to consider this question: Why would God call entirely equal sexes to deeply different roles, ever and always, world without end? Why indeed would one role be that of leadership and the other of submission, if women and men are not only equal in status and dignity before God but equal in every other way as well?” (Page 89)
Though he seems to walk back that presupposition on page 98, it does feel as though this is a bedrock of his issues with male headship. A common reply to this proposition is to draw an analogy with the relationship between God the Father and God the Son, wherein all good Trinitarians can at once affirm the subordination of the Son to the Father as well as the ontological coequality of both.
Stackhouse responds to this: “The problem I have with the complementarian reference to the Trinity in regard to gender is that it is a bad theological move to attempt—by anyone, on any side of this issue. Any strong parallels between the inner life of the Trinity and human relationships just aren’t there.” (page 96)
But here he surprisingly misses the point. Of course any analogy between the inner life of the Trinity and any created thing will be of necessity a travesty. This I happily admit. However, the point being made is a bare one: that a role of subordination is not per se a status of ontological inferiority. That alone undercuts the aforementioned presupposition. While we may feel an instinctive revulsion of the idea of God-ordained hierarchical roles, we must, as disciples, submit to our orders rather than our instincts.
Although I wasn’t convinced by Stackhouse’s many points, I am willing to admit that he reveals several inconsistencies in my camp. I agreed when he stated that most complementarians approve of (albeit silently for many) the “missionary exception” for female church leaders. Further, our camp holds in high regard the underground church movement in China, whose congregations are largely led by women. I can admit that I don’t think the complementarian side has an entirely satisfactory theology for such work. Although there are some complementarians that are making attempts (e.g. Sam Storms has posted some recent articles in favor of calling certain women “pastors” but not “elders”, which seems to walk about as close to line as possible without jumping over).
In summary, I think Partners in Christ makes a fine addition to the debate. And while I was not convinced enough to leave behind complementarian interpretations, I think every complementarian should at least read this book and consider the arguments.
Footnote: e.g. his comment about 1 Cor 14 on page 96 that “virtually no defender of patriarchy in North America today” believes in head coverings, even though they might employ the passage in their biblical arguments for complementarianism. While this may be a fair point about inconsistency in many (even most) complementarians, there are indeed many today who favor head coverings in prayer contexts. Indeed much of non-Western Christendom and the majority report of church history up until 150 years ago would do so.
With that said, I found Partners in Christ to be a welcome addition to the debate. In fact, I can easily say that this book is the best I’ve ever read on the subject from the egalitarian perspective. There are several reasons for this. For one, Stackhouse is widely read on either side of the issue, and is not prone to offering up straw men to score a cheap rhetorical victory. Neither does he write with a chip on his shoulder. To the contrary he comes across as warm to those on the complementarian side, explaining how he started in that camp himself. There is no sense of cynicism or vindictiveness in his writing, which is a breath of fresh air in today’s hostile climate on such topics. His spirit is well expressed on page 132:
“There has been too much antagonism, even violence, in this debate. My prayer instead has been to follow the scriptural injunction: “Let us consider how to provoke one another to love and good deeds” (Heb 10:24). If you have been provoked, I pray God that he and you will channel that provocation into positive reflection and spiritual fruit from which many women and men will benefit, to the glory of his name.”
I also appreciate Stackhouse’s “conservative case” for egalitarianism. He does not simply dismiss a large chunk of the New Testament corpus as pseudepigrapha for being inconvenient to his points (as many others in his camp too readily do, e.g. Steve Chalke). Instead, he holds a very high view of Scripture, viewing the totality as inspired and authoritative. He thus contends with most of the “tough passages”, though he still carries a dismissive view of some (see footnote). He rejects liberal approaches:
“This suggestion that parts of the Bible should be read as corrections to other parts, and even that some parts could serve to provoke even God to reconsideration, will be nonsense for traditional Christians who understand God to be, in fact, the Author of the Bible behind and within all of the various human writers of its component parts.” (Page 146)
Page 71 offers a fair and concise summary of the book’s principal thesis:
“[W]hen society was patriarchal, as it was in the New Testament context and as it has been everywhere in the world except in modern society in our day, then the church avoided scandal by going along with patriarchy, even as the Bible ameliorated it and made women’s situation better than it was under any other culture’s gender code. Now, however, that our modern society is at least officially egalitarian, the scandal (ironically enough) is that the church is not going along with society, not rejoicing in the unprecedented freedom to let women and men serve according to gift and call without an arbitrary gender line.”
With this line of argumentation, I commend Stackhouse for keeping the gospel as priority in this debate. Taking a modern-day missionary as an example, he believes it appropriate to accommodate a traditional culture in order to reach them with the message of the gospel, rather than to scandalize them with egalitarianism that might turn them off to the message of forgiveness. This in fact is what he hypothesizes as the modus operandi of both Jesus and Paul: they could not be more feminist in their respective ministries because the culture at the time was not ready. They had no desire to jeopardize their primary mission by dying on the hill of an important, but secondary, issue.
Stackhouse is well-argued in his exegetical interpretations. He warns of the dangers of a simple “prooftexting battle”, and suggests that rather than digging our heals into a few supposedly ironclad passages that favor our position, we should instead take a bird’s eye view of the Scripture (and especially the New Testament) to determine what the preponderance of the texts are communicating with regard to gender.
While I appreciate his approach, I ultimately don’t find his interpretation of a “trajectory” ethic to be satisfying enough to dismantle the traditional understandings of the relevant passages and themes in the Gospels and Epistles. While I concede the idea of a “double message” implicit in many of these (and other) passages of the New Testament, I don’t find it to be enough to overthrow the seemingly clear instructions about church government or male headship. Indeed, even he admits on page 84 that the varied attempts by egalitarians to reinterpret the Ephesians “submission” passage come across as rather inadequate.
One issue I took with Stackhouse was his (apparent) presupposition that a role of subordination is tantamount to a status of inferiority:
“But then we have to consider this question: Why would God call entirely equal sexes to deeply different roles, ever and always, world without end? Why indeed would one role be that of leadership and the other of submission, if women and men are not only equal in status and dignity before God but equal in every other way as well?” (Page 89)
Though he seems to walk back that presupposition on page 98, it does feel as though this is a bedrock of his issues with male headship. A common reply to this proposition is to draw an analogy with the relationship between God the Father and God the Son, wherein all good Trinitarians can at once affirm the subordination of the Son to the Father as well as the ontological coequality of both.
Stackhouse responds to this: “The problem I have with the complementarian reference to the Trinity in regard to gender is that it is a bad theological move to attempt—by anyone, on any side of this issue. Any strong parallels between the inner life of the Trinity and human relationships just aren’t there.” (page 96)
But here he surprisingly misses the point. Of course any analogy between the inner life of the Trinity and any created thing will be of necessity a travesty. This I happily admit. However, the point being made is a bare one: that a role of subordination is not per se a status of ontological inferiority. That alone undercuts the aforementioned presupposition. While we may feel an instinctive revulsion of the idea of God-ordained hierarchical roles, we must, as disciples, submit to our orders rather than our instincts.
Although I wasn’t convinced by Stackhouse’s many points, I am willing to admit that he reveals several inconsistencies in my camp. I agreed when he stated that most complementarians approve of (albeit silently for many) the “missionary exception” for female church leaders. Further, our camp holds in high regard the underground church movement in China, whose congregations are largely led by women. I can admit that I don’t think the complementarian side has an entirely satisfactory theology for such work. Although there are some complementarians that are making attempts (e.g. Sam Storms has posted some recent articles in favor of calling certain women “pastors” but not “elders”, which seems to walk about as close to line as possible without jumping over).
In summary, I think Partners in Christ makes a fine addition to the debate. And while I was not convinced enough to leave behind complementarian interpretations, I think every complementarian should at least read this book and consider the arguments.
Footnote: e.g. his comment about 1 Cor 14 on page 96 that “virtually no defender of patriarchy in North America today” believes in head coverings, even though they might employ the passage in their biblical arguments for complementarianism. While this may be a fair point about inconsistency in many (even most) complementarians, there are indeed many today who favor head coverings in prayer contexts. Indeed much of non-Western Christendom and the majority report of church history up until 150 years ago would do so.
January 4, 2018
Summary: A case by a convert to egalitarianism for why both complementarians and egalitarians find scriptural foundations for their views with a proposal for what can make the best sense of the diverse testimony of scripture.
There may be some of you who read this review who may wonder, "what's the big deal--of course women should be able to do anything men do in the home and the church--and perhaps more because they are also able to bear and nurse children." But in certain circles within evangelicalism, this is a live issue and subject of both popular and theological writing. John G. Stackhouse, Jr., who once held a "complementarian" position (one that recognizes role distinctions between men and women in marriage and limits the roles women may exercise in leading and teaching in the church), describes his own movement to an "egalitarian" position (that there are no fixed role distinctions for men and women in marriage, nor limits as to the role of women in leadership and teaching in the church) and the theological method that led to his conclusions, amid the diverse biblical texts and conflicting interpretations:
"We should not wait to come to a theological conclusion for the happy day in which we have perfectly arranged all of the relevant texts. Instead, we should look at all of the texts as open-mindedly as possible, and see whether among the various competing interpretations there is one that makes the most sense of the most texts and especially the most important ones. We should look, in basic epistemological terms, for the preponderance of warrants or grounds to believe p instead of q. If no such preponderance is evident, of course, then we should suspend making a decision. But if we do conclude that a preponderance is discernible, then we should acknowledge it--indeed be grateful for it--and proceed to act on that basis" (p. 31).
Stackhouse recognizes a preponderance in what would be considered "control texts" for an egalitarian view--from Genesis 1 to Galatians 3:28. He would understand the rise of gender role distinctions and patriarchy as a consequence, not of creation, but the Fall of humanity. Yet he also recognizes a certain "doubleness" in scriptures, sometimes within the same passage (as in Ephesians 5:21-33, where verse 21 commends mutual submission, and then the following verses commend distinctive role behaviors for husbands and wives) that serves as foundation for the concerns of complementarians. Is there a way to understand this "doubleness" that does not involve scripture contradicting scripture and that addresses the concerns of both egalitarians and complementarians for biblical integrity? Stackhouse thinks there is.
He finds this in the recognition of the church's missional priorities of proclaiming the gospel within Roman culture, and their expectation of the imminent return of the Lord. This is a culture with clearly defined role distinctions for men and women along patriarchal lines, as well as for masters and slaves. Stackhouse writes,
"So it would make sense—given gospel priorities, holy pragmatism and eschatological expectations—for the apostles to teach a policy of cultural conservatism (“Get along as best you can with the political powers and social structures that be”) in the interest of accomplishing the one crucial task: spreading the gospel as far and as fast as possible. And they do" (p, 56).
He would contend that, while we find in Paul and others the seeds of egalitarian relationships in marriage, and roles for women in teaching and leading, even in his own missionary teams, the presence of scriptures that recognize role distinctions reflect a kind of holy pragmatism that realizes that the advance of the gotspel is of higher priority than leading a revolution in gender roles, or upending slavery. However this also brings him to the conclusion that in a society that upholds egalitarianism, the opportunity is to practice the full liberty found in germ form in the testimony of scripture. Perpetuating gender role distinctions now may hinder the gospel, even as promoting egalitarianism would have New Testament times.
Stackhouse deals thoughtfully with counterarguments that may be posed from theology, church history, and contemporary experience and practice. He addresses fears about inclusive language in translations, and boundaries in terms of language used of God. One of his most thoughtful chapters is on why women do not lead. He concludes with a plea for women to continue to speak into his life about his "enduring sexism" while still assuming personal responsibility for it.
I suspect Stackhouse's book satisfies neither committed egalitarians nor complementarians. Egalitarians may feel the book opens the door to those who would advocate patient waiting, even in our present day. Complementarians may still be unconvinced that gender role distinctions exist prior to the fall. The book is silent on implications for parallel discussions within Catholic and Orthodox circles. Yet for others, who consider the impasse between the two sides in this evangelical discussion a scandal, Stackhouse's irenic and biblically grounded approach offers at least a meeting ground for those no longer interested in battling over gender roles. His tone of humility, both in matters of interpretation, and in coming to terms with the implications of his understanding of scripture for how he partners with women in ministry, is an example other men may wish to heed.
There may be some who wish to argue with the author in comments on this review. First of all, please realize that this is my summary of the author's argument, which I hope is an adequate reflection in much abbreviated form. Second, if you really care about this, I urge you to read his book and engage with him directly. Above all, I hope that wherever we come down in this discussion, we will practice the humility and openness to change modeled by this author.
There may be some of you who read this review who may wonder, "what's the big deal--of course women should be able to do anything men do in the home and the church--and perhaps more because they are also able to bear and nurse children." But in certain circles within evangelicalism, this is a live issue and subject of both popular and theological writing. John G. Stackhouse, Jr., who once held a "complementarian" position (one that recognizes role distinctions between men and women in marriage and limits the roles women may exercise in leading and teaching in the church), describes his own movement to an "egalitarian" position (that there are no fixed role distinctions for men and women in marriage, nor limits as to the role of women in leadership and teaching in the church) and the theological method that led to his conclusions, amid the diverse biblical texts and conflicting interpretations:
"We should not wait to come to a theological conclusion for the happy day in which we have perfectly arranged all of the relevant texts. Instead, we should look at all of the texts as open-mindedly as possible, and see whether among the various competing interpretations there is one that makes the most sense of the most texts and especially the most important ones. We should look, in basic epistemological terms, for the preponderance of warrants or grounds to believe p instead of q. If no such preponderance is evident, of course, then we should suspend making a decision. But if we do conclude that a preponderance is discernible, then we should acknowledge it--indeed be grateful for it--and proceed to act on that basis" (p. 31).
Stackhouse recognizes a preponderance in what would be considered "control texts" for an egalitarian view--from Genesis 1 to Galatians 3:28. He would understand the rise of gender role distinctions and patriarchy as a consequence, not of creation, but the Fall of humanity. Yet he also recognizes a certain "doubleness" in scriptures, sometimes within the same passage (as in Ephesians 5:21-33, where verse 21 commends mutual submission, and then the following verses commend distinctive role behaviors for husbands and wives) that serves as foundation for the concerns of complementarians. Is there a way to understand this "doubleness" that does not involve scripture contradicting scripture and that addresses the concerns of both egalitarians and complementarians for biblical integrity? Stackhouse thinks there is.
He finds this in the recognition of the church's missional priorities of proclaiming the gospel within Roman culture, and their expectation of the imminent return of the Lord. This is a culture with clearly defined role distinctions for men and women along patriarchal lines, as well as for masters and slaves. Stackhouse writes,
"So it would make sense—given gospel priorities, holy pragmatism and eschatological expectations—for the apostles to teach a policy of cultural conservatism (“Get along as best you can with the political powers and social structures that be”) in the interest of accomplishing the one crucial task: spreading the gospel as far and as fast as possible. And they do" (p, 56).
He would contend that, while we find in Paul and others the seeds of egalitarian relationships in marriage, and roles for women in teaching and leading, even in his own missionary teams, the presence of scriptures that recognize role distinctions reflect a kind of holy pragmatism that realizes that the advance of the gotspel is of higher priority than leading a revolution in gender roles, or upending slavery. However this also brings him to the conclusion that in a society that upholds egalitarianism, the opportunity is to practice the full liberty found in germ form in the testimony of scripture. Perpetuating gender role distinctions now may hinder the gospel, even as promoting egalitarianism would have New Testament times.
Stackhouse deals thoughtfully with counterarguments that may be posed from theology, church history, and contemporary experience and practice. He addresses fears about inclusive language in translations, and boundaries in terms of language used of God. One of his most thoughtful chapters is on why women do not lead. He concludes with a plea for women to continue to speak into his life about his "enduring sexism" while still assuming personal responsibility for it.
I suspect Stackhouse's book satisfies neither committed egalitarians nor complementarians. Egalitarians may feel the book opens the door to those who would advocate patient waiting, even in our present day. Complementarians may still be unconvinced that gender role distinctions exist prior to the fall. The book is silent on implications for parallel discussions within Catholic and Orthodox circles. Yet for others, who consider the impasse between the two sides in this evangelical discussion a scandal, Stackhouse's irenic and biblically grounded approach offers at least a meeting ground for those no longer interested in battling over gender roles. His tone of humility, both in matters of interpretation, and in coming to terms with the implications of his understanding of scripture for how he partners with women in ministry, is an example other men may wish to heed.
There may be some who wish to argue with the author in comments on this review. First of all, please realize that this is my summary of the author's argument, which I hope is an adequate reflection in much abbreviated form. Second, if you really care about this, I urge you to read his book and engage with him directly. Above all, I hope that wherever we come down in this discussion, we will practice the humility and openness to change modeled by this author.
March 7, 2021
This book is the *kind* of argument I like—moderate, reasonable, and respectful to all sides, addressing predicted counter-arguments fairly and thoroughly. It is a very thoughtful and compelling argument for egalitarianism. Ultimately, though, I am not convinced by his argument.
Stackhouse claims that complementarian and egalitarian statements are both found in the Bible because God was accommodating patriarchal cultures but meant for our application to be determined by our own culture, with an ideal trajectory towards egalitarianism. I found his attempt to explain apparently contradictory passages unsatisfying and less likely than other attempts at harmonizing that I have heard.
Stackhouse explains 1 Cor 11 (praying and prophesying) as egalitarian liberation and chapter 14 (silent in churches) as a prescription for the women specific to that culture, since they would have been uneducated and, “in the enthusiasm of their Christian liberty... it appears that some women would disrupt the meetings with inappropriate questions and other unedifying talk.” This to me is less likely the reading Paul’s original audience would have understood and is rather contrived in my opinion, since no educational standards are required of male participants in the assembly.
I did not agree in particular with his reading of Paul in 1 Cor 11 and 1 Tim 2, stating that Paul was “reading Genesis 1 and 2 through patriarchal lenses” and therefore “ignores” Genesis 1 since his interpretation “seems to fly in the face of Genesis 1:26-27.” Stackhouse’s conclusion is that though Paul himself misunderstood Genesis, he was led by the Holy Spirit to doubly affirm patriarchal societal norms for the sake of gospel spread as well as functional equality among sexes e.g. 1 Cor 11:11-12. I am not in the habit of interpreting and disqualifying entire sections of Paul based on a historically peculiar reading of Genesis 1-2. To reinterpret these passages in light of a very recent cultural shift and attribute the apparent contradictions to a mysterious leading of the Spirit which concealed the true meaning for its original readers (and every reader since then up until the last fifty years) is unsatisfactory.
That said, I am glad that I read this book, and I respect the way the author handles the topic as a whole, even though I remain unconvinced.
Stackhouse claims that complementarian and egalitarian statements are both found in the Bible because God was accommodating patriarchal cultures but meant for our application to be determined by our own culture, with an ideal trajectory towards egalitarianism. I found his attempt to explain apparently contradictory passages unsatisfying and less likely than other attempts at harmonizing that I have heard.
Stackhouse explains 1 Cor 11 (praying and prophesying) as egalitarian liberation and chapter 14 (silent in churches) as a prescription for the women specific to that culture, since they would have been uneducated and, “in the enthusiasm of their Christian liberty... it appears that some women would disrupt the meetings with inappropriate questions and other unedifying talk.” This to me is less likely the reading Paul’s original audience would have understood and is rather contrived in my opinion, since no educational standards are required of male participants in the assembly.
I did not agree in particular with his reading of Paul in 1 Cor 11 and 1 Tim 2, stating that Paul was “reading Genesis 1 and 2 through patriarchal lenses” and therefore “ignores” Genesis 1 since his interpretation “seems to fly in the face of Genesis 1:26-27.” Stackhouse’s conclusion is that though Paul himself misunderstood Genesis, he was led by the Holy Spirit to doubly affirm patriarchal societal norms for the sake of gospel spread as well as functional equality among sexes e.g. 1 Cor 11:11-12. I am not in the habit of interpreting and disqualifying entire sections of Paul based on a historically peculiar reading of Genesis 1-2. To reinterpret these passages in light of a very recent cultural shift and attribute the apparent contradictions to a mysterious leading of the Spirit which concealed the true meaning for its original readers (and every reader since then up until the last fifty years) is unsatisfactory.
That said, I am glad that I read this book, and I respect the way the author handles the topic as a whole, even though I remain unconvinced.
February 6, 2016
Best book I have read on gender equality within the church. The arguments are sound, each perspective is taken into consideration, and the plea for equality is heartfelt. So glad to have brought this text to my gender studies course and I hope all my students will enjoy it as much as I did. I recommend this book highly to anyone in the faith who is egalitarian or not, a simply wonderful read.
February 14, 2020
@everyone stop being afraid to read books like this and literally just do it, thanks.
November 29, 2022
I found this book frustrating and borderline dishonest in its handling of the topic. I came to the topic wanting to be convinced of egalitarianism. I was already biased toward whatever he had to present on the topic and I left it feeling sorely disappointed and honestly somewhat pushed back toward complementarianism.
For starters, Stackhouse conflates complementarianism with patriarchy early on and then proceeds to work to refute patriarchy, using both terms interchangeably. This is not a fair or accurate representation of complementarianism. Many of the points he argued against patriarchy (and conflated with being comp. beliefs) were actually things the complementarians too agree are in error.
He then gives a bizarre interpretation of the creation story and makes almost no real attempt to argue for how he got to this interpretation, but rather acts as if his two points are common, accepted belief in Christianity. Those two points being that there are two different creation recountings in Genesis (rather than a summary first and then a later fleshing out of that summary) and that Adam was originally both or neither male and female before being divided into the separate sexes.
Stackhouse also assigns to God a truly disturbing pragmatism to explain away the difficult seemingly pro-complementarian verses in the Bible. Namely that God would not only abide the oppression of women for thousands of years, but would actually command it in order to avoid anything too scandalous for the early church that might prevent the gospel going forward. He argues that women were commanded to submit and be silent so that society at large who weren't prepared for women being equal wouldn't be too offended and avoid the Christians and their message. Stackhouse's pragmatism repeatedly allows God to compromise his own character, his own goodness, his own justice, in order to get an end result... an end result that frankly does not matter if the God we are trying to get people to is okay with commanding the oppression of an entire people group for thousands of years. Indeed, Stackhouse shows his own sexism by being perfectly content to continue to force upon women (who he claims to believe deserve the same equality and equal opportunities as men) years of more oppression if it doesn't seem likely that that oppression will be lifted easily and without any fuss. He is willing to sacrifice thousands upon thousands of women's lives... telling them to continue to submit to oppression and being silenced...if the battle for equality is too uphill or faces too much resistance. And he has the audacity to claim that God and the early apostles did the same. I don't know what apostles or early church he studied, but the ones in the Bible had absolutely zero problem stirring up society at large or being downright scandalous where needed.
Stackhouse then gets toward his conclusion and basically apologizes if his position in this book offends anyone and asks they simply put it aside and ignore it if so. At least have the courage to stand by your position, dude. It comes across as a weak position if you're apologizing before the book is even done.
To be fair, one thing I did find very helpful in this book was how Stackhouse pointed out how in every key passage that seems to hold women back or prevent them access to certain roles or privileges, there is a corresponding verse close by insisting that women are 100% equals with men, (ie. fellow heirs, children of God, etc). This shows there is simply no room for sexism in a Biblical understanding of men and women whether you are egalitarian or complementarian. God has put a stop to any temptation toward a sexist understanding of those verses before you can even begin to get there. If your understanding of these issues is sexist, then you're not reading your Bible in context. And you're not a complementarian, you're a sexist. You have no Biblical leg to stand on to argue the inferiority of women. This takeaway is ironically not even close to what Stackhouse was arguing in presenting this information about the verses, but the fact of the "limiting" verses always being linked with other verses affirming the equality of women was enormously enlightening and helpful to me nonetheless.
As it stands, I don't know where this leaves me in terms of complementarianism and egalitarianism. I expected better arguments addressing the Scripture in play. I expected better logic in his egalitarian arguments. I expected less heresy about God. I had truly hoped to be convinced. I guess I will need to keep looking for the truth about these issues elsewhere.
For starters, Stackhouse conflates complementarianism with patriarchy early on and then proceeds to work to refute patriarchy, using both terms interchangeably. This is not a fair or accurate representation of complementarianism. Many of the points he argued against patriarchy (and conflated with being comp. beliefs) were actually things the complementarians too agree are in error.
He then gives a bizarre interpretation of the creation story and makes almost no real attempt to argue for how he got to this interpretation, but rather acts as if his two points are common, accepted belief in Christianity. Those two points being that there are two different creation recountings in Genesis (rather than a summary first and then a later fleshing out of that summary) and that Adam was originally both or neither male and female before being divided into the separate sexes.
Stackhouse also assigns to God a truly disturbing pragmatism to explain away the difficult seemingly pro-complementarian verses in the Bible. Namely that God would not only abide the oppression of women for thousands of years, but would actually command it in order to avoid anything too scandalous for the early church that might prevent the gospel going forward. He argues that women were commanded to submit and be silent so that society at large who weren't prepared for women being equal wouldn't be too offended and avoid the Christians and their message. Stackhouse's pragmatism repeatedly allows God to compromise his own character, his own goodness, his own justice, in order to get an end result... an end result that frankly does not matter if the God we are trying to get people to is okay with commanding the oppression of an entire people group for thousands of years. Indeed, Stackhouse shows his own sexism by being perfectly content to continue to force upon women (who he claims to believe deserve the same equality and equal opportunities as men) years of more oppression if it doesn't seem likely that that oppression will be lifted easily and without any fuss. He is willing to sacrifice thousands upon thousands of women's lives... telling them to continue to submit to oppression and being silenced...if the battle for equality is too uphill or faces too much resistance. And he has the audacity to claim that God and the early apostles did the same. I don't know what apostles or early church he studied, but the ones in the Bible had absolutely zero problem stirring up society at large or being downright scandalous where needed.
Stackhouse then gets toward his conclusion and basically apologizes if his position in this book offends anyone and asks they simply put it aside and ignore it if so. At least have the courage to stand by your position, dude. It comes across as a weak position if you're apologizing before the book is even done.
To be fair, one thing I did find very helpful in this book was how Stackhouse pointed out how in every key passage that seems to hold women back or prevent them access to certain roles or privileges, there is a corresponding verse close by insisting that women are 100% equals with men, (ie. fellow heirs, children of God, etc). This shows there is simply no room for sexism in a Biblical understanding of men and women whether you are egalitarian or complementarian. God has put a stop to any temptation toward a sexist understanding of those verses before you can even begin to get there. If your understanding of these issues is sexist, then you're not reading your Bible in context. And you're not a complementarian, you're a sexist. You have no Biblical leg to stand on to argue the inferiority of women. This takeaway is ironically not even close to what Stackhouse was arguing in presenting this information about the verses, but the fact of the "limiting" verses always being linked with other verses affirming the equality of women was enormously enlightening and helpful to me nonetheless.
As it stands, I don't know where this leaves me in terms of complementarianism and egalitarianism. I expected better arguments addressing the Scripture in play. I expected better logic in his egalitarian arguments. I expected less heresy about God. I had truly hoped to be convinced. I guess I will need to keep looking for the truth about these issues elsewhere.
April 12, 2020
Some good thoughts. Probably nothing new here as far as thoughts and reasoning from both sides of the coin. But it was well written and was good to be challenged again. I also liked chapter 20 where Stackhouse talked about the gender roles/differences even in the mainstream workplace.
November 28, 2016
I read this book together with Kathy Keller's book, "Jesus, Justice, and Gender Roles: A Case for Gender Roles in Ministry". I will offer a single review of both. These two books were chosen deliberately as a combination for two reasons. First, both authors changed their position over time. Keller is unusual as a seminary trained female who moved from an egalitarian to a complementarian position with regards to female leadership in the church. Stackhouse is unusual as a male theologian who moved from a complementarian to a more egalitarian position. The second reason I chose this combination is that both authors are scholarly in their presentation but also irenic in spirit and respectful of those who disagree. As I look not only to clarify my own position further but also to offer good resources to fellow Christians thinking through this issue, I wanted sources where the authors do not shout their own convictions so loudly that they are tone deaf to other well argued positions. I though both did admirable jobs in this regard.
It is not completely fair to compare both books across the board. Keller is much more focused in making the case that the role of women in church leadership is a theological issue than it is a justice issue. The point is made compellingly. Stackhouse's book is considerably longer and addresses a broader range of issues. His strength is in taking the reader through the interpretive process to adequately understand this matter not just in a biblical sense but in a fully biblical sense. He does an exceptional job of bringing all the interpretive factors to bear.
It is not completely fair to compare both books across the board. Keller is much more focused in making the case that the role of women in church leadership is a theological issue than it is a justice issue. The point is made compellingly. Stackhouse's book is considerably longer and addresses a broader range of issues. His strength is in taking the reader through the interpretive process to adequately understand this matter not just in a biblical sense but in a fully biblical sense. He does an exceptional job of bringing all the interpretive factors to bear.
December 19, 2023
A contribution to the case for egalitarianism/mutualism from a different angle, much like Webb's Slaves, Women and Homosexuals. Rather than contest the interpretation of passages that complementarians/hierarchicalists often point to to justify their position, Stackhouse Jr and Webb borderline-concede that ground to their opponents and instead argue based on the hermeneutical method – how does what the Bible say translate to our lives today? Take, for example, the issue of slavery – it is trite that the Israelites had a system of slavery, and that the apostles commanded the obedience of slaves in the New Testament. But how does that translate to modern application? Hardly any Christian would argue for a 1:1 exact transfer of those laws into today's world. Webb thus argues for a redemptive movement hermeneutic where the Biblical position is more redemptive than the cultural background that the Bible is written in (and against), and, in light with the spirit of redemption and character of God, as well as the redemptive ideal/vision painted in Scripture, the application in our world today goes beyond that of scripture towards the redemptive ideal. This explains the slavery issue, since the Biblical commands concerning slaves grant slaves more rights than the surrounding Ancient Near Eastern/Greco-Roman culture, and there is an ideal in the creation story that all men are created in the image of God. Stackhouse Jr's thesis is similar, and his framework works in a similar way. In fact, it reads almost like a simplified version of Webb's Slaves, Women and Homosexuals. Stackhouse Jr sets out a model which, when applied to issues such as slavery and the mutualist vs hierarchicalist issue, show that God is working through structures while also providing the foundation of removing those structures.
The first principle of his model is that "men and women are equal in dignity before God", that both genders are created in God's image. The second is that "since some things matter more than others, lesser things sometimes must be sacrificed in the interest of the greater", namely, "furtherance of the gospel message". This second principle is often called "the principle of accommodation", where God "works within human limitations [...] to transform the world according to his good purposes."
The third principle, building off the second, is an "already, but not yet" eschatology, where one recognises the inbreaking of the kingdom of God with the coming of Jesus at the incarnation and the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, but yet we are still waiting for more – a final redemption. And as we wait, we wrestle with the effects of the fall, which includes social structures that might not embody fully realised gospel values.
The fourth principle builds off Paul's instructions concerning Christian liberty and his underlying concern in those passages – namely, the greater good of the spread of the gospel and the edification of the Christian community. This also links back to the second principle by showing that Paul had no qualms of allowing a secondary concern (Christian liberty) to take a backseat when a primary concern (spread of the gospel/mutual edification) was on the line.
The fifth principle concerns gift, calling, order, and edification. Stackhouse Jr submits that the fact that women are involved in the apostle Paul's ministry such as prophecy and some women teaching (like Priscilla) and offering leadership through their social standing and wealth (like Lydia) point towards the hierarchies in the Pauline epistles not being permanent.
The sixth and last principle is what Stackhouse Jr terms a "pattern of doubleness", where positions that are in tension with each other are both present in scripture. This allows him to recognise that "longstanding Christian defenses of slaveholding and patriarchy" are not rooted in "some evil agenda", but rather that "there were biblical arguments available to Christians of both these views". Nevertheless, it also allows him to argue that the egalitarian reading should be preferred to the patriarchal one (and mutatis mutandis for the issue of slavery) because it "makes better sense of the presence of both kinds of texts alongside each other in Scripture", namely because it was an accommodation to advance God's mission, but once the accommodation is no longer needed (since there is now no scandal that would ensue with the functional equality of women (italics emphasis mine)), the secondary concern can come to the fore without compromising the primary.
I have not summarised Stackhouse Jr's entire case, and he does address various counterarguments and develop his points more fully than I have above. I simply aim to give a broad overview of his thesis and aid the potential reader in identifying the general direction that Stackhouse Jr is heading towards/arguing for.
In conclusion, a welcome addition to the discourse and defence of the mutualist/egalitarian position. To my mind, Stackhouse Jr's argument operates in the alternative to traditional mutualist arguments concerning the interpretation of the disputed passages. If the mutualist interpretation of the passages is/are correct, the mutualist conclusion naturally follows. Even if the interpretation of those passages is conceded, however, Stackhouse Jr (and Webb)'s framework still allow(s) for a mutualist application of scripture taken as a whole, including passages that seem to favour the hierarchicalist position. Either way, the mutualist position succeeds.
The first principle of his model is that "men and women are equal in dignity before God", that both genders are created in God's image. The second is that "since some things matter more than others, lesser things sometimes must be sacrificed in the interest of the greater", namely, "furtherance of the gospel message". This second principle is often called "the principle of accommodation", where God "works within human limitations [...] to transform the world according to his good purposes."
The third principle, building off the second, is an "already, but not yet" eschatology, where one recognises the inbreaking of the kingdom of God with the coming of Jesus at the incarnation and the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, but yet we are still waiting for more – a final redemption. And as we wait, we wrestle with the effects of the fall, which includes social structures that might not embody fully realised gospel values.
The fourth principle builds off Paul's instructions concerning Christian liberty and his underlying concern in those passages – namely, the greater good of the spread of the gospel and the edification of the Christian community. This also links back to the second principle by showing that Paul had no qualms of allowing a secondary concern (Christian liberty) to take a backseat when a primary concern (spread of the gospel/mutual edification) was on the line.
The fifth principle concerns gift, calling, order, and edification. Stackhouse Jr submits that the fact that women are involved in the apostle Paul's ministry such as prophecy and some women teaching (like Priscilla) and offering leadership through their social standing and wealth (like Lydia) point towards the hierarchies in the Pauline epistles not being permanent.
The sixth and last principle is what Stackhouse Jr terms a "pattern of doubleness", where positions that are in tension with each other are both present in scripture. This allows him to recognise that "longstanding Christian defenses of slaveholding and patriarchy" are not rooted in "some evil agenda", but rather that "there were biblical arguments available to Christians of both these views". Nevertheless, it also allows him to argue that the egalitarian reading should be preferred to the patriarchal one (and mutatis mutandis for the issue of slavery) because it "makes better sense of the presence of both kinds of texts alongside each other in Scripture", namely because it was an accommodation to advance God's mission, but once the accommodation is no longer needed (since there is now no scandal that would ensue with the functional equality of women (italics emphasis mine)), the secondary concern can come to the fore without compromising the primary.
I have not summarised Stackhouse Jr's entire case, and he does address various counterarguments and develop his points more fully than I have above. I simply aim to give a broad overview of his thesis and aid the potential reader in identifying the general direction that Stackhouse Jr is heading towards/arguing for.
In conclusion, a welcome addition to the discourse and defence of the mutualist/egalitarian position. To my mind, Stackhouse Jr's argument operates in the alternative to traditional mutualist arguments concerning the interpretation of the disputed passages. If the mutualist interpretation of the passages is/are correct, the mutualist conclusion naturally follows. Even if the interpretation of those passages is conceded, however, Stackhouse Jr (and Webb)'s framework still allow(s) for a mutualist application of scripture taken as a whole, including passages that seem to favour the hierarchicalist position. Either way, the mutualist position succeeds.
January 4, 2019
Something I’ve set out to really explore is the dichotomous discussion of “complementarianism,” meaning the belief that men and women are equal in value but with hard-fast, exclusive roles to play, and “egalitarianism,” the idea that men and women are (or should be) equal in value and able to apply their abilities as such: both views are discussed in regards to the church and home in this book.
As I take this journey of learning about how these stances (for lack of a better term) play out in my faith, I have found John G. Stackhouse Jr.’s detailed and logical book to be helpful.
He approaches the “arguments” —and really—the logical reasoning of each side of this discussion with precision and ethos. As a Canadian who makes several denominational rationalizations and assumptions, I found some chapters to be more helpful than others—but all of them at the very least interesting (even academically). Some of the conclusions he comes to, while making perfect sense to me (or others who are generally open to critically examine how they are raised in faith), may go further than many are even capable of going or may be ready to comprehend/explore (again, I think of the extremely conservative evangelical background my own faith tradition has inhabited).
But as a whole, this book is helpful, respectful, and earnest. Stackhouse explores the concepts and thoughts within this discussion with tact, and as a “conservative” himself, in terms of how he interprets scripture. Still, with that background, he puts forth many in-depth ideas that are worthy of consideration and the inspiring of necessary changes, should certain faith traditions in Christianity stay relevant and the gospel capable of working to its greatest extent in the culture we live in. A large part of this is acknowledging and accepting the healthy idea of feminism in our faith (something that—at its core—is vital to God’s work in us).
Stackhouse does well by the concept that our eternal nature—the one that we will find in the new heaven and earth—is what will last/is most important to who we are, as children of God, and that until then we are to do what we can to bring about God’s will in the best, most adept way possible for our time, which includes assessment and adjustment for the place we find ourselves, including a conciliatory attitude for the sake of the gospel’s reach and unity in the body to the benefit of each one’s dignity.
The book was very helpful (especially chapter 10 for those looking to get to the meat of the scriptural discussion)—and I do recommend a read for those wanting to explore their own thoughts while learning more. The relevancy of this discussion is not one to brush off, overlook, or avoid for the sake of comfortable complacency—it is one to celebrate and learn from.
As I take this journey of learning about how these stances (for lack of a better term) play out in my faith, I have found John G. Stackhouse Jr.’s detailed and logical book to be helpful.
He approaches the “arguments” —and really—the logical reasoning of each side of this discussion with precision and ethos. As a Canadian who makes several denominational rationalizations and assumptions, I found some chapters to be more helpful than others—but all of them at the very least interesting (even academically). Some of the conclusions he comes to, while making perfect sense to me (or others who are generally open to critically examine how they are raised in faith), may go further than many are even capable of going or may be ready to comprehend/explore (again, I think of the extremely conservative evangelical background my own faith tradition has inhabited).
But as a whole, this book is helpful, respectful, and earnest. Stackhouse explores the concepts and thoughts within this discussion with tact, and as a “conservative” himself, in terms of how he interprets scripture. Still, with that background, he puts forth many in-depth ideas that are worthy of consideration and the inspiring of necessary changes, should certain faith traditions in Christianity stay relevant and the gospel capable of working to its greatest extent in the culture we live in. A large part of this is acknowledging and accepting the healthy idea of feminism in our faith (something that—at its core—is vital to God’s work in us).
Stackhouse does well by the concept that our eternal nature—the one that we will find in the new heaven and earth—is what will last/is most important to who we are, as children of God, and that until then we are to do what we can to bring about God’s will in the best, most adept way possible for our time, which includes assessment and adjustment for the place we find ourselves, including a conciliatory attitude for the sake of the gospel’s reach and unity in the body to the benefit of each one’s dignity.
The book was very helpful (especially chapter 10 for those looking to get to the meat of the scriptural discussion)—and I do recommend a read for those wanting to explore their own thoughts while learning more. The relevancy of this discussion is not one to brush off, overlook, or avoid for the sake of comfortable complacency—it is one to celebrate and learn from.
May 27, 2017
The book kind of starts out dry but builds from there. I especially like the conclusion of the book. I must agree witht the author when he states, "We men will not cane until we want to change, and one of the most powerful motives we will have for changing our minds is to alleviate the sufferong of the women we admire and love-suffering that is obvious to women but often unseen by us men. I know it may seem incredible to women that men can be so obtuse." (pg. 174)
Then he goes on to say, "But I have come to see, at least a little more clearlyh over the years, just how deeply entrenched are the gender scripts that I have tended to follow all along. I have not arrived at entire sanctification and I do not dwell in the New Jerusalem. I continue to mistreat women despite my sincere intention not to do so, and I have concluded that only women can help the situation by notifiying me that yes, John, you're doing it again, or, no, John, you failed this time to do what was approrpriate." (pg. 175) To which I must confess my name could and can be inserted. Here is hoping that we are making progress in this world.
Then he goes on to say, "But I have come to see, at least a little more clearlyh over the years, just how deeply entrenched are the gender scripts that I have tended to follow all along. I have not arrived at entire sanctification and I do not dwell in the New Jerusalem. I continue to mistreat women despite my sincere intention not to do so, and I have concluded that only women can help the situation by notifiying me that yes, John, you're doing it again, or, no, John, you failed this time to do what was approrpriate." (pg. 175) To which I must confess my name could and can be inserted. Here is hoping that we are making progress in this world.
December 2, 2022
A disappointing book. Not because he was incompetent in making his case. In general, he's not. But because his case is—to put it tersely—that Scripture is sexist, but God is not. And that Scripture is sexist because God compromised his integrity by supporting—indeed commanding—sexism in order to focus on getting the gospel out. Then. There. But not now. At least here. It's pragmatism at it's worst. It's uncompelling because blasphemous.
As far as his argument, it's weakness is that he uses the terms complementarianism and patriarchy interchangeably. Even after recognising that the two are separate. So his whole arguments ends up addressing sexism instead of complementarianism. Which makes it, fundamentally, a straw man. Mitigated only by the fact that he's admitted that complementarianism isn't sexist. It's awkward.
I'm a Christian feminist. And, at this stage, complementarian. I enjoyed and agreed with much of what he said. But the fact that I could agree with so much of what he said as a complementarian highlights the fact that he's conflated complementarianism with sexism.
As far as his argument, it's weakness is that he uses the terms complementarianism and patriarchy interchangeably. Even after recognising that the two are separate. So his whole arguments ends up addressing sexism instead of complementarianism. Which makes it, fundamentally, a straw man. Mitigated only by the fact that he's admitted that complementarianism isn't sexist. It's awkward.
I'm a Christian feminist. And, at this stage, complementarian. I enjoyed and agreed with much of what he said. But the fact that I could agree with so much of what he said as a complementarian highlights the fact that he's conflated complementarianism with sexism.
April 11, 2018
A thoughtful approach to egalitarianism, Stackhouse expands on the methodology found in his original book “Finally Feminist.” Similar to the redemptive movement hermeneutic most famously argued by William Webb, Stackhouse finds the texts in the OT and NT to be accommodating the cultural necessity of patriarchy and primogeniture present at the time. Stackhouse distinguishes his approach by placing the highest priority on the advancement of the gospel, arguing that in cultures where society has yet to embrace egalitarian values (which can occur for a variety of reasons), the complementary approach should remain until such time as its implementation would not be a hindrance to the gospel.
January 30, 2020
I love Stackhouse's take on passages which are typically so narrowly interpreted. He illuminated many areas of confusion for me including supposed Scriptural endorsements/acquiescence to slavery, polygamy, and patriarchy. We are living in a world that is already and not yet: already redeemed, but still awaiting the fullness of time in which Christ will heal all wounds, wipe away all tears, right every wrong, and make all things new and beautiful. In the meantime we wait, we relinquish our rights, we take hope in Christ's finished work, and we press on toward His Kingdom come, His will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
February 17, 2024
I bought this book for a research paper I am preparing to write. I am complementarian myself, but want to represent the egalitarian view fairly. This book was not much help in that regard. It seemed that Stackhouse was frequently conceding that the complementarian exegesis of Scripture relevant to this topic was correct, but would then deny that Scripture means what it says. It drove me crazy. I have to think that many egalitarians would have the complaint. I was looking for a good presentation and defense of the egalitarian position and this book was a major disappointment in that regard.
July 4, 2022
Well written, irenic, and thought-provoking. As a "lifelong" complementarian (I first learned that term in seminary back in 2007 or so), this book was written in such a way that I was able to read and hear what the author was trying to get across. I'm probably a long way from (and may never get to?) an egalitarian position but at the very least, I've been challenged in a kind way to look at and be willing to rethink my default position.
January 18, 2018
Stackhouse done a tremendous job of presenting various theological and practical implications about the place of women in ministry. It is a nuance and humble presentation worthy of a read regardless of one's position.
August 21, 2018
I agree with Baukham’s endorsement of this book. Stackhouse offers a hermeneutical approach that gives a different lense to this complex and divisive issue that is worth reading. I must say his arguments are strong.
February 6, 2019
Very helpful discussion on an important topic; I felt some lines of logical development were left unfinished and I would have liked to have read more to that end. A nevertheless accessible start to a needed conversation.
January 2, 2020
Perhaps Stackhouse's arguments are reasonable, but they are certainly unsubstantiated in this oversimplified analysis of a very complex issue. I left the book interested yet with few questions answered because of Stackhouse's failure to fully exegete a text and craft a robust argument.
September 17, 2016
John G. Stackhouse Jr. is Samuel J. Mikolaski Professor of Religious Studies and Dean of Faculty Development at Crandall University in Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada. Stackhouse received his M.A. from Wheaton College and Ph.D. from the University of Chicago. He is probably most well-known in the United States for his contribution to the ongoing debate regarding the nature of Hell, namely through his work with Rethinking Hell. Stackhouse has published more than a few peer-reviewed articles on a variety of subjects, and authored, co-authored, edited, or co-edited numerous books—one of the most recent of which is a revised, expanded, and newly named edition of his influential work Finally Feminist.
Partners in Christ: A Conservative Case for Egalitarianism evenhandedly explores the contours of the evangelical gender debate. As the title and subtitle suggest, Stackhouse advocates for an egalitarian position of biblical gender equality. However, Stackhouse’s approach therein gazes past the polemic tenor typically associated with the debate to provide a hermeneutical basis for recognizing the issues amid a diverse corpus of writings. For Stackhouse, the cultural movement towards egalitarianism seems to become a resting place for his argument. Certainly, he is more nuanced in his presentation, but much of his presuppositions as he approaches the subject appear to be rooted here. He covers almost all the standard objections to the egalitarian position as he builds his case. However, strangely enough, he doesn’t seem to interact much with the claims that Paul grounds his argument in creation rather than culture.
There is much to be praised about this book. First, and probably foremost, the reader will truly appreciate the level of honesty that Stackhouse brings to the discussion—even affirming both sides of the debate at points. Second, Stackhouse does well to identify the so-called “pattern of doubleness” throughout the biblical narrative. This “pattern of doubleness” usually involves “a complex interweaving of both the standard privileging of men and of the affirmation of men and women as equal to each other” (p. 81). It affords a Stackhouse the ability to honestly examine the cultural limitations of the biblical text, while at the same time illuminate the equality underlying the biblical authors. Third, Stackhouse is a gifted communicator and his work on this subject is clearly established and well-executed. It’s an evenhanded and enjoyable read that is sure to be recommended for years to come.
Partners in Christ: A Conservative Case for Egalitarianism by John G. Stackhouse Jr. is a truly exciting treatment of an age-old debate. The reader will get what they expect and so much more. This book should be engaged from either side of the discussion as a model of intellectual honesty. If you are interested or engaged in the gender equality debate, please don’t pass this book up. It comes highly recommended from this complementarian!
I received a review copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
Partners in Christ: A Conservative Case for Egalitarianism evenhandedly explores the contours of the evangelical gender debate. As the title and subtitle suggest, Stackhouse advocates for an egalitarian position of biblical gender equality. However, Stackhouse’s approach therein gazes past the polemic tenor typically associated with the debate to provide a hermeneutical basis for recognizing the issues amid a diverse corpus of writings. For Stackhouse, the cultural movement towards egalitarianism seems to become a resting place for his argument. Certainly, he is more nuanced in his presentation, but much of his presuppositions as he approaches the subject appear to be rooted here. He covers almost all the standard objections to the egalitarian position as he builds his case. However, strangely enough, he doesn’t seem to interact much with the claims that Paul grounds his argument in creation rather than culture.
There is much to be praised about this book. First, and probably foremost, the reader will truly appreciate the level of honesty that Stackhouse brings to the discussion—even affirming both sides of the debate at points. Second, Stackhouse does well to identify the so-called “pattern of doubleness” throughout the biblical narrative. This “pattern of doubleness” usually involves “a complex interweaving of both the standard privileging of men and of the affirmation of men and women as equal to each other” (p. 81). It affords a Stackhouse the ability to honestly examine the cultural limitations of the biblical text, while at the same time illuminate the equality underlying the biblical authors. Third, Stackhouse is a gifted communicator and his work on this subject is clearly established and well-executed. It’s an evenhanded and enjoyable read that is sure to be recommended for years to come.
Partners in Christ: A Conservative Case for Egalitarianism by John G. Stackhouse Jr. is a truly exciting treatment of an age-old debate. The reader will get what they expect and so much more. This book should be engaged from either side of the discussion as a model of intellectual honesty. If you are interested or engaged in the gender equality debate, please don’t pass this book up. It comes highly recommended from this complementarian!
I received a review copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
March 31, 2016
I have read many books on this topic, but Stackhouse's view was a new, unique perspective for me. He differs from other egalitarian, feminist theologians in that he does not start at the book, chapter, verse level, but considers the overarching, general biblical principles first (deduction vs. induction). For that reason, there is very little exegesis of popular "control texts" (e.g. 1 Tim. 2:11-12, 1 Cor. 14:33-35). Stackhouse assumes that the writers meant exactly what they said when they wrote such texts. He also assumes, however, that they also meant texts such as Gal. 3:28 and the 1 Cor. 11 accounts of women praying and prophesying in assemblies. This is not a contradiction, he claims, but an example of what Stackhouse calls a "principle of doubleness."
This principle supports his first major claim that if patriarchy were meant to be a forever and all-time mandate from God, then there would be no exceptions throughout scripture. Since we do see anomalies in the regular patriarchal pattern, these are glimpses of the original pattern of equality for men and women that we will eventually experience fully in the kingdom to come (the creation ideal before the curse of the fall). A fitting example of this is the distinction Stackhouse notes between the "teaching" spoken of in 1 Tim. 2 and the equal bestowing of the spiritual gifts. While the former reflects the lack of education for women due to the patriarchal culture, women who pray and prophesy in 1 Cor. 11 are doing so through divine inspiration, which does not discriminate by gender.
Another major claim is the general principle that whatever furthers the gospel takes first priority over secondary matters. For that reason, Jesus' time on earth was not primarily focused on abolishing slavery and dismantling an oppressive patriarchal culture. These accommodations to culture cannot be ignored. Stackhouse states, "God gives all he has, and does all he can, within the situation he has sovereignly allowed to develop."
The most significant counterargument he addresses is the one regarding homosexuality. Couldn't these principles be applied to that situation as well? Stackhouse says no, primarily because we see no pattern of doubleness applied to homosexuality like we do slavery and patriarchy. Instead, the Bible is "univocal, from cover to cover, on the matter."
While I agreed with Stackhouse's ultimate conclusion, and liked the book overall, I felt that it was much stronger in the first half than the second. His overall case is hard to argue with, as he agrees with several complementarian rather than feminist arguments and is very fair, so much so that sometimes it is easy to forget that he is an egalitarian at all. As the title of the book suggests, this is a much more conservative argument than most, and he admits that there are other views that make sense. However, he says, his case makes the most sense given the information we have, and NO argument on gender roles will fit together perfectly, like a puzzle.
Just an FYI, this book is a revision of his previous work "Finally Feminist," so don't buy both unless you want to read much of the same material twice.
This principle supports his first major claim that if patriarchy were meant to be a forever and all-time mandate from God, then there would be no exceptions throughout scripture. Since we do see anomalies in the regular patriarchal pattern, these are glimpses of the original pattern of equality for men and women that we will eventually experience fully in the kingdom to come (the creation ideal before the curse of the fall). A fitting example of this is the distinction Stackhouse notes between the "teaching" spoken of in 1 Tim. 2 and the equal bestowing of the spiritual gifts. While the former reflects the lack of education for women due to the patriarchal culture, women who pray and prophesy in 1 Cor. 11 are doing so through divine inspiration, which does not discriminate by gender.
Another major claim is the general principle that whatever furthers the gospel takes first priority over secondary matters. For that reason, Jesus' time on earth was not primarily focused on abolishing slavery and dismantling an oppressive patriarchal culture. These accommodations to culture cannot be ignored. Stackhouse states, "God gives all he has, and does all he can, within the situation he has sovereignly allowed to develop."
The most significant counterargument he addresses is the one regarding homosexuality. Couldn't these principles be applied to that situation as well? Stackhouse says no, primarily because we see no pattern of doubleness applied to homosexuality like we do slavery and patriarchy. Instead, the Bible is "univocal, from cover to cover, on the matter."
While I agreed with Stackhouse's ultimate conclusion, and liked the book overall, I felt that it was much stronger in the first half than the second. His overall case is hard to argue with, as he agrees with several complementarian rather than feminist arguments and is very fair, so much so that sometimes it is easy to forget that he is an egalitarian at all. As the title of the book suggests, this is a much more conservative argument than most, and he admits that there are other views that make sense. However, he says, his case makes the most sense given the information we have, and NO argument on gender roles will fit together perfectly, like a puzzle.
Just an FYI, this book is a revision of his previous work "Finally Feminist," so don't buy both unless you want to read much of the same material twice.
May 16, 2016
For the record, I'm not egalitarian. But this book is by far the most irenic discussion on the topic, despite its question-begging throughout.
The basic premise of Stackhouse is this: Jesus and his apostles were clearly, undoubtedly "complimentarian" at times and "patriarchal" at times and "egalitarian" at times, but the ideal trajectory has always been from patriarchy to egalitarian, from childhood to adulthood, from slavery to liberty, from immaturity to maturity. No model is perfect this side of death, so work together toward complete maturity.
I'm not convinced that all his analogies are entirely helpful. And I certainly disagree with what he portrays as God's "ideal" (in light of scripture and tradition).
Nevertheless, I appreciated his willingness to be clear about one thing when approaching this topic: You're not just approaching a topic. You're ministering to human beings. And as human beings, enforcing one paradigm above all the others ("Patriarchal" vs "Egalitarian") is not guaranteed to "solve" relational problems between the sexes. Some patriarchal relationships work very well, as do many complementarian and egalitarian ones. Stackhouse thinks we can work with all three, meeting people where they are; but in order to make progress, we ought to follow the trajectory of scripture (which he presumes, instead of proving, is "egalitarian").
The largest setback of the book is that it utilizes stereotypes, none of which are helpful when discussing "biblical models". By no means are all complementarians equal-minded in their application of the "biblical principles." But neither are patriarchalists or egalitarians. There is plenty of room for maturity among them all
The basic premise of Stackhouse is this: Jesus and his apostles were clearly, undoubtedly "complimentarian" at times and "patriarchal" at times and "egalitarian" at times, but the ideal trajectory has always been from patriarchy to egalitarian, from childhood to adulthood, from slavery to liberty, from immaturity to maturity. No model is perfect this side of death, so work together toward complete maturity.
I'm not convinced that all his analogies are entirely helpful. And I certainly disagree with what he portrays as God's "ideal" (in light of scripture and tradition).
Nevertheless, I appreciated his willingness to be clear about one thing when approaching this topic: You're not just approaching a topic. You're ministering to human beings. And as human beings, enforcing one paradigm above all the others ("Patriarchal" vs "Egalitarian") is not guaranteed to "solve" relational problems between the sexes. Some patriarchal relationships work very well, as do many complementarian and egalitarian ones. Stackhouse thinks we can work with all three, meeting people where they are; but in order to make progress, we ought to follow the trajectory of scripture (which he presumes, instead of proving, is "egalitarian").
The largest setback of the book is that it utilizes stereotypes, none of which are helpful when discussing "biblical models". By no means are all complementarians equal-minded in their application of the "biblical principles." But neither are patriarchalists or egalitarians. There is plenty of room for maturity among them all
February 13, 2018
Skip chapter 20. Other than that I thought his position was well represented and his case humbly made.
December 31, 2019
My takeaway...
Despite the title, this isn’t a very conservative case. I feel the author actually makes a fairly liberal case or at least what would be considered liberal to those who consider themselves to be complementarians. I did appreciate how the author did not shy away from the fact that the Bible is a complex source document so to speak and did not try to explain away passages in the Bible that people claim promote patriarchy. Instead he attempted to take a larger or more narrative view in order to show the bigger picture of God, sin, and His plan to redeem the world. I do appreciate when biblical scholars attempt to honor the narrative of the Bible or the Bible as a narrative. I feel like he missed perhaps some elements of the narrative maybe out of concern for pressing something beyond what he felt it could bear. But I feel like there is much to be said about God creating male and female in His image and what that really means in light of not only the narrative and reality of the Garden of Eden but also Jesus’ life and statements, as well as Revelation and the “New Earth”. I guess the greatest benefit of this book to me was that it helped me bring into focus what are the key elements of this issue within my own mind almost due to the fact that he did not explore them in detail if at all.
Despite the title, this isn’t a very conservative case. I feel the author actually makes a fairly liberal case or at least what would be considered liberal to those who consider themselves to be complementarians. I did appreciate how the author did not shy away from the fact that the Bible is a complex source document so to speak and did not try to explain away passages in the Bible that people claim promote patriarchy. Instead he attempted to take a larger or more narrative view in order to show the bigger picture of God, sin, and His plan to redeem the world. I do appreciate when biblical scholars attempt to honor the narrative of the Bible or the Bible as a narrative. I feel like he missed perhaps some elements of the narrative maybe out of concern for pressing something beyond what he felt it could bear. But I feel like there is much to be said about God creating male and female in His image and what that really means in light of not only the narrative and reality of the Garden of Eden but also Jesus’ life and statements, as well as Revelation and the “New Earth”. I guess the greatest benefit of this book to me was that it helped me bring into focus what are the key elements of this issue within my own mind almost due to the fact that he did not explore them in detail if at all.
March 3, 2021
Indeed, as Howard Marshall pointedly suggests, the very term complementarian may be nonsense: two classes of people are equally capable, but certain leadership roles are reserved to just one of those classes, yet everything else can be done by members of either class—what is “complementary” about that arrangement?
Patriarchy is, I say again, a result of the fall.
This was the first book by Stackhouse I have read and I appreciated his theological and practical approach to this contentious matter.
Patriarchy is, I say again, a result of the fall.
This was the first book by Stackhouse I have read and I appreciated his theological and practical approach to this contentious matter.
November 30, 2015
(Доста) ревизирана версия на предишната книга на автора по същата тема - Finaly feminist. Като цяло много честна в лично отношение книга, на добър учен. Нивото на аргументация е повече популярно отколкото научно, а позицията се доближава доста до моето собствено виждане.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews