Kevin DeYoung picks apart John Stott’s chapter on “Women, Men and God” in the book Issues Facing Christians Today. Stott argues for a middle-way between complementarianism and egalitarianism, but DeYoung shows that Stott’s exegesis is not at all compelling. He writes:
“If anyone could present a strong case for women elders and pastors, or something less than full blown complementarianism, surely John Stott could. But in actuality, a close examination of Stott’s exegesis shows just how weak the middle-of-the-road position (not to mention the egalitarian position) really is.”
Part 1 of DeYoung’s critique appears today, and part 2 will appear tomorrow. Read it here.
While there are gradations of non-egalism, from extreme patriarchal to very soft non-egal, there are no gradations in egalism. Since I am egal and see the Bible as teaching this, the softer versions of non-egalism are much preferred to the harder. Every church that moves toward egalism even if they do not embrace it all today, I applaud for their courage.
Being a very soft non-egal in family matters can appear very close to being egal, but this is not the case with the church; either a woman can have a ministry of elder/overseer or not, I do not see a middle ground. So I do not see that there is much space to sit in a middle ground and wonder who’s fooling whom when someone tries to claim they are sitting on it.