Hubbry Logo
ComplementarianismComplementarianismMain
Open search
Complementarianism
Community hub
Complementarianism
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Complementarianism
Complementarianism
Complementarianism
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Part of a series on
Christianity and gender
"Adam and Eve" by Albrecht Dürer (1504)
"Adam and Eve" by Albrecht Dürer (1504)
Theology
Major positions
Other positions
Ordination of women in Christianity
Church and society
Organizations
Feminist
Egalitarian
Complementarian
Patriarchal
Theologians and authors (by view)
Feminist
Egalitarian
Complementarian
Theologians and authors (by branch)
Roman Catholic
Eastern Orthodox
Protestant

Complementarianism is a theological view in some denominations of Christianity, Rabbinic Judaism, and Islam,[1] that men and women have different but complementary roles and responsibilities in marriage, family, and religious life. Some Christians interpret the Bible as prescribing a complementary view of gender, and therefore adhere to gender-specific roles that preclude women from specific functions of ministry within the community.[2][3][a] Though women may be precluded from certain roles and ministries, they still hold foundational equality in value and dignity. The phrase used to describe this is "ontologically equal, functionally different."[4]

Within a Christian marital relationship, complementarianism prescribes headship and servant leading roles to men,[5][6] and support roles to women, being based upon the interpretation of certain biblical passages. One precept of complementarianism is that while women may assist in decision-making processes, the ultimate authority for the decision lies in the headship responsibility of the male. Its contrasting perspective is Christian egalitarianism, which holds that positions of authority and responsibility in marriage and religion should be equally available to both females and males.

The Foundation Documents of The Gospel Coalition describes complementarianism as follows:

In God’s wise purposes, men and women are not simply interchangeable, but rather they complement each other in mutually enriching ways. God ordains that they assume distinctive roles which reflect the loving relationship between Christ and the church,[b] the husband exercising headship in a way that displays the caring, sacrificial love of Christ, and the wife submitting to her husband in a way that models the love of the church for her Lord.[7]

Gender expression spectrum from a complementarian perspective

Christianity

[edit]

Complementarianism holds that "God has created men and women equal in their essential dignity and human personhood, but different and complementary in function with male headship in the home and in the Church."[8] Many proponents and also opponents of complementarianism see the Bible as the infallible word of God.[9]

The complementarian position claims to uphold what has been the most traditional teaching[10] on gender roles in the church. However, the terms traditionalist or hierarchicalist are usually avoided by complementarians, as the former "implies an unwillingness to let Scripture challenge traditional patterns of behavior", while the latter "overemphasizes structured authority while giving no suggestion of equality or the beauty of mutual interdependence". Therefore, they prefer the term complementarian, "since it suggests both equality and beneficial differences".[11]

While they do not necessarily use the term "complementarianism", many Catholics are advocates of complementarianism with regard to the social doctrine of the Church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church asserts that "God gives man and woman an equal personal dignity"[12] but also that the harmony of society "depends in part on the way in which the complementarity, needs, and mutual support between the sexes are lived out."[12]

History

[edit]

The term "complementarianism" was first used by the founders of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood in 1988.[13]

Roles in marriage

[edit]

The complementarian view of marriage asserts gender-based roles in marriage.[14] A husband is considered to have the God-given responsibility to provide for, protect, and lead his family. A wife is to collaborate with her husband, respect him, and serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation. Complementarians assert that the Bible instructs husbands to lead their families as Head of Household, and to love their wives as Christ loves the Church. They cite the Bible as instructing wives to respect their husbands' leadership out of reverence for Christ.[15][16] The husband is also meant to hold moral accountability for his wife and to exhibit a sacrificial love for her. The wife is meant to respond to her husband's love for her with love in-kind and by receiving his service and leadership willingly.[17]

An example of the complementarian view of marriage can be found in the Southern Baptist Convention's Baptist Faith and Message (2000),[16] an excerpt from which is quoted here:

The husband and wife are of equal worth before God, since both are created in God's image. The marriage relationship models the way God relates to his people. A husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church. He has the God-given responsibility to provide for, to protect, and to lead his family. A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ. She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation.

— Article XVIII. The Family. Baptist Faith and Message 2000

The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood teaches that "Christ is the supreme authority and guide for men and women, so that no earthly submission—domestic, religious, or civil—ever implies a mandate to follow a human authority into sin."[18]

The expression Sponsa Christi is sometimes used by complementarian denominations such as the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod. They claim that the apostle Paul advocated such views in the New Testament. According to Catholic doctrine, Christ symbolizes the bridegroom, while the Church (Ecclesia) represents the bride.[19]

Roles in the Church

[edit]

Based on their interpretation of certain scriptures complementarians view women's roles in ministry, particularly in church settings, as limited.[18] The complementarian view holds that women should not hold church leadership roles that involve teaching or authority over men.[20] For instance, Frank Page, a former president of the Southern Baptist Convention, has written that "...while both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of Pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture" while the office of deacon are open to both men and women (excluding Catholicism)[21][14] According to complementarianism, women are not completely forbidden from speaking within a church since Paul speaks about women prophesying inside the church.[22]

The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood holds that "[i]n the church, redemption in Christ gives men and women an equal share in the blessings of salvation. Nevertheless, they strongly believe that certain governing and teaching roles within the church are restricted to men (1 Cor 14:33–38; 11:2–16; 1 Tim 2:11–15; 1 Timothy 3:1–7).”[18] Most complementarians believe that women should not be ordained as pastors or as evangelists in some cases, while others believe that it is acceptable for women to be evangelists but not pastors.[23] This would not support placing women in top leadership roles in the church or family that would imply or provide any authority over men. Which other specific ministry roles are open to women varies among complementarians.[14]

In his article "Women Preachers, Divorce, and a Gay Bishop–What’s the Link?", Southern Baptist theologian and seminary president Albert Mohler asserts that "The arguments used in support of the ordination of women require the dismissal or 'reinterpretation' of specific biblical texts which disallow women in the teaching office". He believes the same is true of arguments for the ordination of divorced persons and for homosexuals.[24]

Some traditionally Catholic countries have been called matriarchal because of the high value that was placed on women. Numerous women have been beatified and are venerated among the saints. However, the Catholic Church restricts ordination to men, since "The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry".[25]

Complementarian advocates

[edit]
Part of a series on
Conservatism
Variants
Principles
Intellectuals
Politicians
Religion
Personal variants
National variants
Asia
Europe
Latin America
North America
Oceania
Related ideologies
Related topics

Christian denominations

[edit]

Christian denominations that support some form of gender complementarity, either in church or the home, include many conservative Protestant denominations (as well as many non-denominational Protestant churches), the Catholic Church, and the Eastern Orthodox Church.[26] Some groups that have outlined specific positions include the Southern Baptist Convention,[14] Presbyterian Church in America,[27] Anglican Diocese of Sydney,[28] the Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches (Australia),[29] Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod,[27] Roman Catholic Church,[30] Conservative Mennonites,[citation needed] Newfrontiers,[citation needed] Jehovah's Witnesses,[31] Evangelical Free Church of America,[27] Christian and Missionary Alliance,[27] Sovereign Grace Ministries,[27] and the Calvary Chapel movement.[citation needed]

Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood

[edit]
Main article: Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood

The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) is the primary evangelical Christian organization that exists to promote the complementarian view of gender issues.[32][33][34] CBMW's current president is Denny Burk[35] who is also a professor of Biblical Studies at Boyce Bible College, the undergraduate wing of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. The CBMW published a semi-annual academic journal called the Journal for Biblical Manhood & Womanhood.[36]

Complementarian movements within feminism

[edit]

New feminism is a predominantly Catholic philosophy which emphasizes a belief in an integral complementarity of men and women, rather than the superiority of men over women or women over men.[37]

Difference feminism is a philosophy that stresses that men and women are ontologically different versions of the human being.

Criticism

[edit]

According to Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE), an organization that adopts a Christian egalitarian approach, complementarianism "sidesteps the question at issue, which is not whether there are beneficial differences between men and women, but whether these differences warrant the inequitable roles, rights, and opportunities prescribed by advocates of gender hierarchy."[38] CBE prefaces their criticism with acknowledgement of some positions they share in common with complementarians: a mutual love for and commitment to Jesus Christ, a commitment to justice as a biblical ideal, a devotion to Scripture as being God-inspired, and a desire to see the world embrace the gospel of Christ.[39] They are divided by worldviews that CBE sees as reflecting the moral teachings of God and their purposes in this world. CBE maintains that these differing views have "enormous consequences". CBE President Mimi Haddad asserts that Christians are divided over patriarchy as they once were over slavery. She characterizes those divisions as different views of the nature, purpose, and value of humanity, all based on gender.[39]

Domestic abuse

[edit]

Hierarchy in relationships was isolated as a factor that positively correlates with the acceptance of beliefs that facilitate abuse in a 2018 study by Jensen et al.; gender complementarianism was used as an indicator of hierarchical relations.[40] Critics of complementarianism have argued that it can be abused to uphold abuse and reduces women's ability to hold male abusers accountable.[41][42] Some have criticized complementarianism as promoting a power imbalance that facilitates abuse.[43] Hannah Paasch, one of the people who started the #ChurchToo hashtag, argues that complementarianism "feeds the rape culture" in aspects of American Christianity influenced by Western secular society.[43] Supporters of complementarian ideas counter that good leadership on the part of males, as demanded by the Bible, precludes and forbids abuse.[44] John Piper argues that complementarianism's prescription of protective male leadership helps protect women from sexual abuse.[43]

Other religions

[edit]

Differentiation of women's roles on the basis of religious beliefs are not unique to Christianity or Western culture.[45]

Rabbinic Judaism

[edit]

Different movements in Rabbinic Judaism, as distinct from Karaite Judaism,[46][47] have adopted differing views in gender relations. The Lubavitcher Rebbe stated, "In the Divine plan for creation, men and women have distinct, diverse missions. These missions complement each other, and together bring the Divine plan to harmonious fruition. The role of one is neither higher nor lower than the role of the other: they are simply different."[48] Contrasting this, the Reform Jewish movement is entirely egalitarian, both in services and in daily life. In North America, the Conservative movement is likewise predominantly egalitarian. Although egalitarianism has been adopted in services and life by some of Orthodox Jewry, complementarianism continues to be more prevalent in Orthodox communities.[citation needed]

Baháʼí Faith

[edit]

The Baháʼí Faith proclaims that equality is not to deny that differences in function between women and men exist but rather to affirm the complementary roles men and women fulfill in the home and society at large. "The world of humanity is possessed of two wings: the male and the female. So long as these two wings are not equivalent in strength, the bird will not fly. Until womankind reaches the same degree as man, until she enjoys the same arena of activity, extraordinary attainment for humanity will not be realized; humanity cannot wing its way to heights of real attainment. When the two wings … become equivalent in strength, enjoying the same prerogatives, the flight of man will be exceedingly lofty and extraordinary".[49]

See also

[edit]

Related secular:

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Complementarianism

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Complementarianism is a Christian theological viewpoint asserting that men and women, though equal in dignity, value, and personhood as bearers of God's image, possess distinct yet complementary roles ordained by God, particularly entailing male headship in the home and church. This perspective emphasizes that husbands are to exercise loving, sacrificial leadership over their wives, who in turn submit supportively, while reserving authoritative teaching and governance roles in the church for qualified men. Grounded in scriptural interpretations of creation order, such as Adam's formation prior to Eve and the apostolic instructions in passages like Ephesians 5:22-33 and 1 Timothy 2:11-15, complementarianism distinguishes itself from egalitarianism by rejecting interchangeable roles based on gifting alone. The term "complementarian" was coined in 1988 by members of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW), following the 1987 Danvers Statement, which articulated the position as a biblically faithful response to cultural shifts promoting interchangeability. The Danvers Statement affirms the fundamental equality of the sexes alongside role distinctions rooted in divine design, decrying denials of male headship as deviations from scriptural norms. This framework gained traction among evangelical denominations, influencing confessions like the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, which upholds pastoral leadership as reserved for men. Complementarianism has shaped evangelical discourse on family and , fostering resources like Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and promoting male-female complementarity amid feminist influences, yet it faces internal critiques for inconsistent application and external accusations of fostering inequality, despite proponents' insistence on its alignment with empirical patterns of and traditional societal outcomes.

Definition and Principles

Core Theological and Philosophical Basis

Complementarianism posits that the Bible establishes distinct yet complementary roles for men and women, rooted in God's creational design rather than cultural accommodation or the effects of the Fall. This view interprets Genesis 1:27, which states "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them," as indicating that male and female together fully express the divine image through their complementarity, with inherent differences in function emerging from this equality in essence. Proponents argue that the creation narrative in Genesis 2 further reveals a purposeful order, where Adam is formed first and Eve as his helper, signifying male headship without implying inferiority in value or dignity. New Testament passages reinforce this framework, with Ephesians 5:22-33 describing husbands as heads of wives as Christ is head of the church, emphasizing sacrificial leadership alongside mutual submission, while 1 Timothy 2:11-14 prohibits women from teaching or exercising authority over men in church settings, grounding the restriction in the creation order and Adam's prior formation rather than temporary cultural factors. Complementarians maintain that these roles—male leadership in the home and qualified male eldership in the church—reflect God's unchanging intent, affirmed across both Testaments, rather than hierarchical dominance or interchangeable functions. Philosophically, complementarianism draws on the ontological reality of as divinely ordained, asserting that men and women possess equal but differing essences that enable mutual completion in relational and societal spheres, countering egalitarian views that prioritize sameness over designed distinction. This perspective aligns with causal realism by tracing role prescriptions to the Creator's teleological purpose, where biological and psychological differences observed empirically—such as variances in strength, nurturing tendencies, and risk-taking—serve as confirmatory of biblical complementarity, not its origin. Critics from egalitarian traditions often challenge this by emphasizing Galatians 3:28's oneness in Christ as erasing role distinctions, but complementarians respond that this verse addresses salvific equality, not functional interchangeability, preserving creational norms amid redemptive unity.

Distinctions from Egalitarianism and Patriarchy

Complementarianism affirms the equal value and dignity of men and women as image-bearers of while maintaining distinct, non-interchangeable roles, particularly male headship in and church eldership, rooted in creation order and scriptural mandates such as Genesis 2:18-25 and 1 Timothy 2:11-14. This position contrasts sharply with , which posits functional equality in all roles, arguing that distinctions in are either cultural artifacts or fully mitigated by Christ's redemptive work, allowing women to serve as pastors or elders without restriction. The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood's Danvers Statement of 1987 explicitly critiques this egalitarian trend as a departure from biblical patterns, emphasizing instead that role differences enhance human flourishing rather than diminish equality. Proponents of complementarianism, such as and John Piper, contend that risks erasing God-ordained asymmetries evident in passages like Ephesians 5:22-33, where husbands lead sacrificially as Christ leads the church, whereas egalitarians like those in Christians for Biblical Equality interpret such texts as descriptive of first-century contexts rather than prescriptive norms. Complementarians respond that this egalitarian hermeneutic selectively accommodates modern sensibilities over consistent , potentially undermining scriptural on male while claiming fidelity to Galatians 3:28's ontological equality. Empirical observations in complementarian churches, such as sustained male-only eldership in denominations like the since its 2000 revision, demonstrate role distinctions do not preclude women's vital ministry contributions in teaching, counseling, and missions. In distinction from patriarchy, which historically connotes systemic male dominance often untethered from mutual respect or scriptural limits—evident in pre-modern societies where women held minimal legal or social agency—complementarianism insists on benevolent male servant-leadership modeled on Christ's humility, rejecting coercion or diminishment of female personhood. The term "patriarchy" carries connotations of oppression that complementarians explicitly disavow, as articulated by figures like Denny Burk, who favor "complementarianism" to highlight reciprocal benefits from gender differences rather than unilateral rule. While critics equate the two due to shared male authority elements, complementarian theology grounds distinctions in theological anthropology, prohibiting abuse through commands for husbands to nourish and cherish wives (Ephesians 5:29), and has led to institutional reforms like abuse prevention policies in organizations such as the Presbyterian Church in America since the 2010s.

Historical Origins

Biblical and Pre-Modern Foundations

Complementarianism traces its biblical foundations to the creation narrative in Genesis, where God forms from the dust of the ground before creating from as a "helper fit for him" (Genesis 2:18), establishing a divinely ordained order and complementarity between the sexes. This sequence underscores male priority in creation, which the Apostle Paul later invokes to ground roles, stating in 1 Timothy 2:13, "For was formed first, then ," as the rationale for prohibiting women from teaching or exercising authority over men in the church assembly. epistles further delineate these roles: Ephesians 5:22-25 instructs wives to submit to husbands "as to the Lord," analogizing the husband's headship to Christ's over the church, while husbands are to love sacrificially, reflecting complementary responsibilities rooted in rather than cultural accommodation. Pre-modern Christian interpreters consistently affirmed male headship in both family and ecclesial contexts, viewing it as rather than mere societal norm. Early , such as those compiling the and Clement of Rome's writings around 100 AD, restricted authoritative teaching and sacramental roles to men, aligning with Paul's directives in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 and Titus 2:3-5, which assign distinct spheres—men as overseers and women as teaching younger women domestic virtues. (c. 160-220 AD) and (c. 185-254 AD) echoed this by prohibiting women from public preaching, citing creation order and the fall's disruption, where Eve's deception reinforced her supportive rather than directive role. Medieval theology, exemplified by (1225-1274), systematized these views in the , arguing that the female sex constitutes an impediment to holy orders because woman, formed secondarily from man, lacks the "active" generative perfection suited to representing Christ's headship, per 1 Corinthians 11:3 and natural philosophy's distinction of male initiative and female receptivity. Aquinas further posited woman's subordination in marriage as consonant with divine intent, where the husband's rational superiority—though equal in dignity before God—warrants governance, drawing from Ephesians 5 and Aristotelian causality adapted to Christian revelation. This framework persisted through the , with figures like (1509-1564) upholding male eldership as biblically mandated, rejecting female eldership as contrary to the creation ordinance and church order in 1 Timothy 3:1-7. Such interpretations prioritized scriptural over egalitarian rereadings, maintaining that role distinctions enhance mutual flourishing under God's design.

Modern Emergence and Formulation (1987–1990s)

The modern formulation of complementarianism emerged within evangelical Christianity as a deliberate theological response to the rise of egalitarian interpretations of gender roles, particularly following the influence of and debates over women's ordination in denominations like the during the 1970s and 1980s. In December 1987, a group of evangelical scholars and leaders, including and John Piper, founded the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) to articulate and promote a vision of sexual complementarity rooted in biblical texts such as Genesis 1–2, Ephesians 5, and 1 Timothy 2–3. The organization's inaugural document, the Danvers Statement, finalized that month in , affirmed the equal value of men and women as image-bearers of while asserting distinct, God-ordained roles: male headship in the home and church, with women called to support and affirm this leadership rather than hold positions of authoritative teaching or governance over men. This statement explicitly critiqued cultural trends eroding these distinctions, including unbiblical feminist assertions of role interchangeability and hierarchical abuses, positioning complementarianism as a corrective to both and . The term "complementarianism" itself was coined in the late 1980s by Piper and Grudem as a concise descriptor for the Danvers vision, emphasizing mutual dependence and role differentiation without subordination in essence. This nomenclature gained prominence with the publication of Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, a 566-page volume edited by Piper and Grudem under CBMW auspices and issued by Books, which systematically exegeted over 30 biblical passages to defend male leadership in family and eldership while rejecting hierarchical dominance or role sameness. The book, comprising essays from 14 contributors, addressed hermeneutical challenges posed by egalitarian scholars and sold thousands of copies, influencing seminary curricula and denominational statements throughout the decade. By the mid-1990s, complementarian formulations had solidified through CBMW's ongoing publications and alliances with institutions like the , where Grudem taught, framing the view not as cultural traditionalism but as fidelity to scriptural authority amid societal shifts toward . These efforts distinguished complementarianism from mere traditionalism by grounding it in ontological equality paired with functional hierarchy, a stance that, while contested by egalitarian evangelicals, garnered support from figures like R. Albert Mohler Jr. and organizations affirming male-only pastoral roles.

Applications in Christian Contexts

Roles in Marriage and Family

Complementarians assert that designed distinct yet complementary roles for husbands and wives in , rooted in the pre-Fall order of creation where Adam's headship was established prior to sin's entry (Genesis 2:16-18, 21-24; 1 Corinthians 11:7-9). This headship entails the husband's responsibility to lead his family with Christlike love, forsaking any harsh or selfish tendencies in favor of sacrificial care and nurture for his wife, as exemplified in Ephesians 5:25-28 where husbands are commanded to love their wives "as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her." Such includes spiritual guidance, provision, and decision-making in areas like family vision and finances, while modeling and prioritizing the wife's welfare. In response, complementarians hold that wives are called to willing, joyful submission to their husbands' authority, eschewing resistance or usurpation, as instructed in Ephesians 5:22-24 and Colossians 3:18, where wives submit "as to the Lord." This role positions the wife as a suitable helper (Genesis 2:18), supporting her husband's through respect, honor, and collaboration, particularly in nurturing the home and children while allowing him to initiate and guide major directions. These roles are not hierarchical in essence or value—both spouses share equal personhood as image-bearers—but functional, mirroring the Christ-church relationship to display God's relational design (Ephesians 5:32). Within the family, these marital dynamics extend to parenting, where male headship affirms fathers' primary responsibility for discipline and spiritual instruction (as echoed in patterns like Deuteronomy 6:6-7 and exhortations in :4), while mothers contribute through complementary nurturing influenced by 2:3-5. Complementarians emphasize that distortions from the Fall—such as domineering husbands or defiant wives—undermine this order, but redemption calls spouses to reclaim these roles through mutual service under Christ's lordship (Ephesians 5:21). This framework, articulated in foundational documents like the 1987 Danvers Statement, rejects both patriarchal tyranny and egalitarian interchangeability, prioritizing biblical prescriptions over cultural .

Roles in Church Leadership and Ministry

Complementarianism maintains that the biblical offices of elder, overseer, and pastor—entailing authoritative teaching, doctrinal oversight, and governance within the local church—are reserved exclusively for qualified men, reflecting God's design established in creation and reaffirmed in the New Testament. This position draws from passages such as 1 Timothy 2:11–12, which prohibits women from teaching or exercising authority over men in the church assembly, and 1 Timothy 3:1–7 alongside Titus 1:5–9, which outline elder qualifications including being "the husband of one wife," presupposing male candidates. Proponents argue this structure mirrors the headship pattern from Adam's federal headship in Genesis 2 and Christ's headship over the church in Ephesians 5:23, ensuring order without implying inferiority in value or dignity. Complementarians hold that men and women are equal in dignity but have distinct roles, with some leadership positions reserved for men, as rooted in creation (Genesis 2) and Ephesians 5:22–33, which portrays men as heads and women as helpers. Women, while equal in personhood and salvation (Galatians 3:28), are affirmed to exercise gifts in supportive ministries that do not involve elder authority, such as instructing younger women and children per 2:3–5, prophesying, engaging in mission work, leading women's studies, or serving as deacons as exemplified by Phoebe in :1. The Danvers Statement, issued in by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, encapsulates this by declaring that "redemption in Christ gives men and women an equal share in the blessings of salvation; nevertheless, some governing and teaching roles within the church are restricted to men." This allows broad female involvement in , mercy ministries, and administration, but bars to pastoral eldership to preserve biblical complementarity. In denominational practice, complementarian churches like those in the operationalize this by limiting senior positions to men, as affirmed in their 2023 resolution stating the of is "reserved for men," though allowing women in non-elder pastoral functions such as children's or women's ministry. This stance has faced internal debates, with efforts to constitutionally prohibit churches employing women as failing in votes at the 2024 and 2025 conventions, yet the confessional (2000) upholds male-only eldership as normative. Complementarians contend such restrictions foster flourishing church order, citing historical patterns where male eldership has sustained doctrinal fidelity across traditions.

Advocacy and Institutional Support

Key Proponents and Denominations

Prominent proponents of complementarianism include theologian , professor emeritus at , and pastor John Piper, founder of Desiring God Ministries, who co-edited the influential 1991 book Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, which systematically defended male headship in marriage and church leadership through biblical . Grudem and Piper, along with others, initiated discussions in 1986 that led to the formation of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood in 1987, an organization dedicated to promoting complementarian theology. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary since 1993, has been a leading advocate, emphasizing complementarianism as essential to confessional Baptist identity and integrating it into seminary training and Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) policy. Other notable figures include Mary Kassian, author of True Woman 101, and Nancy Leigh DeMoss Wolgemuth, co-founder of Revive Our Hearts, who have applied complementarian principles to women's ministry and family roles. Among denominations, the , with approximately 13.2 million members in 2023, affirms complementarianism in its 2000 , which specifies that "the office of is limited to men as qualified by Scripture" and that husbands bear primary responsibility for leadership in the home. The (PCA), founded in 1973 with over 400,000 members as of 2023, upholds complementarianism through its Book of Church Order, requiring ordained elders and deacons to affirm male-only leadership in governance roles and male headship in marriage as biblical standards. These bodies represent significant institutional support, with the SBC and PCA maintaining doctrinal statements that tie complementarian practices to scriptural authority on distinctions. The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) was founded in 1987 by a group of evangelical scholars and leaders to articulate biblical teachings on the complementary differences between men and women, promote their application in church and family life, and counter egalitarian interpretations of roles. Its formation responded to growing debates within over women's and marital roles, aiming to recover what its founders viewed as scriptural patterns distorted by . Key early figures included theologians such as and John Piper, who emphasized male headship in the home and church as rooted in creation ordinances rather than cultural constructs. A foundational effort was the drafting of the Danvers Statement in December 1987 during the council's inaugural meeting in Danvers, Massachusetts. This document, first published in 1988, affirms that men and women are created equal in dignity yet distinct in roles, with men called to loving, sacrificial leadership and women to joyful submission in marriage and church contexts; it explicitly rejects hierarchical structures based solely on ability or culture, grounding distinctions in God's design from Genesis. The statement has since been adopted or referenced by numerous evangelical bodies, serving as a benchmark for complementarian orthodoxy and influencing doctrinal statements in seminaries and denominations. CBMW's publishing initiatives advanced complementarian thought, most notably through the 1991 book Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, edited by Piper and Grudem, which compiled essays defending male-only eldership and headship using exegesis of passages like 1 Timothy 2 and Ephesians 5. The organization has sustained efforts via its Journal for Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, launched to disseminate peer-reviewed articles on gender theology, and through resources addressing contemporary issues such as Bible translations and cultural pressures on sexuality. In 1996, CBMW engaged the gender-neutral Bible translation controversy at the Evangelical Theological Society, critiquing inclusive language versions for obscuring male-specific terms in Scripture. Related endeavors include collaborative statements like the 2017 , co-drafted with input from CBMW affiliates, which reaffirmed complementarian principles amid debates on and transgenderism by upholding binary sexual design and marital complementarity. These efforts have shaped institutional policies, such as the Southern Baptist Convention's 2000 amendment restricting pastoral leadership to qualified men, and continue through conferences, training materials, and advocacy for role distinctions as biblically mandated rather than optional. While praised by adherents for fidelity to empirical scriptural patterns, critics from egalitarian perspectives argue such initiatives reinforce outdated hierarchies, though CBMW maintains its positions derive from textual and creational evidence over social trends.

Extensions Beyond Christianity

In Rabbinic Judaism

In , prescribes distinct roles for men and women that emphasize complementarity, with men bearing primary responsibility for public religious observance and , while women focus on domestic and familial duties essential to Jewish continuity. This division stems from the exemption of women from positive, time-bound commandments (mitzvot asei shehazman grama), such as donning or taking the during Sukkot, allowing women greater flexibility for child-rearing and home management. Men, conversely, are obligated in these mitzvot and in daily , positioning them as spiritual exemplars and communal leaders. Within marriage and family, the husband assumes headship as provider and protector, covenantally bound by the to supply food, , and conjugal , while the wife undertakes the upkeep of the and of children, roles viewed as no less vital to covenantal fidelity. Rabbinic texts, such as the (e.g., Kiddushin 29a), underscore the man's duty to Torah scholarship as foundational to family , with women praised for their intuitive devotion, as in the Midrash's of women's superior enthusiasm for the Tabernacle's construction (Tanchuma Pekudei 9). This structure aligns with a functional duality anchored in and communal perpetuation, where women's roles safeguard the private sphere against external disruptions. In religious leadership, traditional reserves authoritative positions like , , or participant for men, reflecting their greater ritual obligations and the exclusion of women from roles implying public representation of the community. Women, though ineligible for semikha () in Orthodox frameworks, exercise influence through (tsniut), family purity laws (), and observance, contributions rabbinic sources deem spiritually elevating and indispensable. These delineations, codified in works like the (e.g., Orach Chaim 75 on ), prioritize empirical alignment with biblical and halakhic precedent over egalitarian reinterpretations, maintaining that equality inheres in shared divine image-bearing rather than identical functions.

In Islam and Other Faiths

In Islamic theology, men and women are regarded as spiritually equal yet functionally complementary, with distinct roles prescribed by divine revelation to ensure familial and social harmony. The Quran (4:34) explicitly states that "men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth," positioning men as qawwamun (protectors, maintainers, and leaders) responsible for financial provision and overall guardianship, while women are tasked with obedience in righteousness and safeguarding the household during the husband's absence. This framework, reinforced in hadith such as those in Sahih Bukhari detailing the Prophet Muhammad's emphasis on men's leadership in prayer and family decisions, underscores male authority as a divinely ordained responsibility tied to greater accountability on Judgment Day, rather than inherent superiority in worth. Traditional interpretations, as articulated by scholars like Ibn Kathir in his tafsir, view these roles as mutually supportive—women's domestic focus complementing men's external duties—fostering equity through specialization, though modern reformist voices sometimes challenge the hierarchy as cultural rather than scriptural. Analogous complementarian structures appear in other non-Abrahamic traditions, though without the precise theological framing of or . In , foundational texts like the and delineate gendered roles within the five relationships (wulun), where men embody yang (active, outward-facing) principles as rulers, fathers, and husbands pursuing public virtue and provision, while women align with yin (receptive, inward) as mothers and wives managing domestic harmony and ; this complementarity is ritualized to maintain cosmic and social order, with deviation seen as disruptive to familial stability. Similarly, traditional , per the (e.g., verses 5.147–150), assigns dharma-based duties distinguishing men as karta (family head and protector) focused on ritual, livelihood, and defense, and women as grihini (household nurturer) devoted to spousal service, progeny-rearing, and inner purity, portraying spouses as interdependent halves of the grihastha () stage for societal perpetuation—roles empirically linked to stable agrarian communities but critiqued in colonial-era reforms for rigidity. In contrast, faiths like reject such differentiation, affirming ontological equality without prescribed role hierarchies, as Nanak's teachings in the declare the soul's gender-neutral pursuit of enlightenment. These parallels highlight how pre-modern religious systems often institutionalized male leadership and female domesticity as causal mechanisms for reproduction and order, predating egalitarian shifts in secular contexts.

Empirical and Sociological Evidence

Outcomes in Marriages and Families

Empirical studies indicate that marriages adhering to traditional gender roles, akin to complementarian principles of male headship and female support, demonstrate higher stability compared to egalitarian or secular counterparts. For instance, conservative Protestant women, who frequently embrace such roles within religious frameworks, exhibit annual rates around 3%, versus 5% for those from nonreligious upbringings. Regular religious service attendance, often correlated with complementarian practices, is associated with approximately 50% lower rates over 14 years, based on longitudinal data from over 5,000 adults. These patterns hold after controlling for factors like age and , suggesting that shared commitment to role differentiation contributes to endurance, though selection effects—such as self-selection into stable religious communities—may also play a role. Marital satisfaction similarly trends positively in these arrangements when roles are mutually endorsed. Research from the Institute for Family Studies reveals that highly religious women holding traditional views report elevated relationship quality, forming a "J-curve" where conservative ideologies enhance satisfaction amid religious commitment, contrasting with lower quality in mismatched or secular egalitarian setups. Sociologist W. Bradford Wilcox's analyses of national surveys, including the General Social Survey, further show that couples with specialized roles—husbands as providers and wives as homemakers—experience greater happiness and lower conflict, particularly in faith-based contexts, outperforming dual-earner egalitarian models by margins of 10-20 percentage points in reported fulfillment. However, outcomes weaken if roles are imposed without consent or cultural support, highlighting the importance of voluntary alignment over . In family contexts, these marital dynamics yield benefits for children, primarily through enhanced stability. Children raised in intact, role-defined religious households show superior academic performance, with 15-20% higher likelihood of high grades and lower rates of behavioral issues, per longitudinal structure research. Lower parental correlates with reduced adolescent risks like substance use and disorders, with religious traditional families averaging 25% fewer such incidents than secular ones. Causal links are inferred from stability rather than roles per se, but data from Wilcox's National Marriage Project underscore that complementarian-like specialization fosters cohesive , aiding child without evidence of inherent harm when practiced equitably. Counterclaims of egalitarian superiority often rely on shorter-term or ideologically skewed samples, whereas broader datasets favor traditional religious models for long-term resilience.

Institutional and Societal Impacts

Complementarian institutions, particularly seminaries aligned with denominations like the , have demonstrated numerical vitality and growth. Data from the Association of Theological Schools (ATS) for 2016–2021 shows that all 12 complementarian seminaries identified by theologian rank among the top 25 worldwide by full-time equivalent enrollment, with institutions experiencing increased attendance from 2009 to 2021. This contrasts with broader trends of decline in bodies, which often adopt egalitarian positions. Sociological research links conservative theological commitments, including complementarian roles, to church growth. A 2016 study in the Review of Religious Research by and others analyzed Canadian congregations and found that conservative theology—frequently encompassing complementarian views—predicts attendance increases, while liberal theology correlates with declines of up to 50% over decades. Barna Group data further indicates that female pastors, more common in egalitarian mainline churches, serve in smaller congregations on average, suggesting institutional challenges in egalitarian settings. These patterns imply that complementarian structures may foster organizational resilience, though critics from egalitarian perspectives, such as Christians for Biblical Equality, argue such data overlooks qualitative factors like inclusivity. On societal levels, complementarian emphases within active religious communities correlate with enhanced family stability metrics. A 14-year Harvard Human Program study of over 5,000 adults found that regular religious service attendance—prevalent in complementarian evangelical groups—associates with 50% lower divorce rates, independent of demographics. Practicing conservative Christians exhibit lower divorce and than nominal or secular counterparts, per analyses of U.S. surveys. However, aggregate data for denominations like the reveals divorce rates approximating national averages (around 25–30% for evangelicals), prompting internal resolutions against divorce since 2000. Egalitarian-leaning studies claim hierarchical roles increase marital dissatisfaction, but these often derive from self-selected samples and may reflect ideological biases in academia favoring progressive gender norms. Overall, supports complementarianism's role in sustaining institutional cohesion and familial persistence amid cultural shifts toward .

Criticisms and Counterarguments

Egalitarian and Feminist Objections

Egalitarian Christians, represented by groups such as Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE), object that complementarianism misinterprets Scripture by imposing a permanent gender hierarchy, contrary to texts emphasizing equality in Christ. CBE interprets Galatians 3:28—"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus"—as establishing both ontological equality and functional parity in authority for church and home leadership, viewing complementarian restrictions on women as cultural accommodations rather than timeless mandates. They argue that passages like 1 Timothy 2:11-12 address specific first-century contexts, such as uneducated women disrupting worship, and cite biblical precedents of female authority figures like (Judges 4–5) and , who instructed (Acts 18:26), to support interchangeable roles based on gifting rather than gender. Complementarianism is critiqued by egalitarians as effectively patriarchal, prioritizing male headship over mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21) and risking the devaluation of women through mistranslation or selective emphasis influenced by sin's distortion of relationships. The 2021 third edition of Discovering Biblical Equality, edited by Ronald W. Pierce and Cynthia Long Westfall and published by InterVarsity Press, assembles over 30 essays from egalitarian scholars challenging complementarian as hierarchical rather than complementary, advocating "shared governance" in and ministry as the biblical norm. CBE, founded in as an network, promotes these views through resources asserting that distinctions undermine the gospel's transformative equality, though its positions reflect a deliberate interpretive framework prioritizing role interchangeability over textual prohibitions. Feminist objections, often from progressive Christians or secular perspectives, frame complementarianism as perpetuating systemic under the guise of complementarity, limiting women's societal and agency. contended in 2012 that complementarian marriages frequently devolve into functional , with shared decision-making and chores overriding prescribed roles, rendering the model impractical and revealing it as "soft " that favors authority irrespective of merit or gifting. Critics like Evans highlight examples where unqualified men are elevated over qualified women in leadership, arguing that doctrines like John Piper's emphasis on Christianity's "masculine feel" exclude female voices and reinforce cultural norms disadvantaging women in education, career, and . Such views, prevalent in since the 1970s second-wave influences on , posit complementarianism as a reactive barrier to equity, though they often conflate descriptive biblical patterns with prescriptive without engaging historical patristic consensus on eldership.

Claims of Enabling Abuse and Power Imbalances

Critics of complementarianism, particularly from egalitarian Christian perspectives, contend that its doctrine of male headship fosters power imbalances in marriages and churches, potentially enabling domestic by granting men unilateral that abusers can exploit to justify control, , or violence. For example, theologian Mimi Haddad has argued that hierarchical gender norms contribute to spousal violence by embedding male dominance in religious teaching, while survivor accounts describe how complementarian emphases on submission discourage women from reporting or escaping abusive situations. Such claims gained prominence amid high-profile scandals in complementarian institutions, including the (SBC), where a 2019 investigation documented over 380 credible allegations of sexual misconduct and abuse by church leaders and members since 1998, prompting Southern Baptist leader to acknowledge in 2019 that complementarian theology "can and has" facilitated the abuse of women by prioritizing male authority over accountability. Critics like those affiliated with Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE) assert this structure silences female voices in , allowing power abuses to persist unchecked, as seen in cases where church responses to victims emphasized wifely submission over protection. However, empirical evidence linking complementarianism causally to elevated rates of remains limited and inconclusive, with studies primarily identifying correlations between certain religious beliefs—such as acceptance of domestic violence myths—and complementarian ideologies rather than direct incidence of . A 2023 scoping review of religion's role in found varied influences across faiths but no consistent pattern tying hierarchical gender roles to higher victimization rates, noting instead that abuse often stems from individual rather than doctrinal frameworks alone. Complementarian defenders, including the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, counter that biblical headship mandates sacrificial protection, not domination, and that abusers distort any authority structure, as evidenced by abuse occurrences in egalitarian contexts without similar theological hierarchies.

Defenses Grounded in Scripture, Biology, and Data

Complementarian defenses from Scripture emphasize the creation narrative in Genesis, where forms first from dust and then as a suitable helper from his rib, establishing distinct yet interdependent roles from the outset of human history. This order reflects divine intent for male headship, as articulated in passages like 1 Corinthians 11:3, which states that "the head of every man is Christ, the head of a is her ," and Ephesians 5:22-33, instructing wives to submit to husbands as the church submits to Christ, while husbands love sacrificially. Proponents argue these texts are not cultural artifacts but timeless principles rooted in pre-fall creation, reinforced in church governance, such as 1 Timothy 2:12-14, prohibiting women from teaching or exercising authority over men, with reference to 's priority in creation and 's deception. The Danvers Statement, foundational to the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, synthesizes these as affirming equality in personhood (Genesis 1:26-27) alongside functional differences ordained by . Biological arguments for complementarianism highlight innate sex differences arising from , hormones, and that align with differentiated roles, such as men's greater upper-body strength and spatial abilities suited for and provision, versus women's advantages in verbal fluency and conducive to nurturing. Testosterone exposure prenatally and postnatally drives higher male aggression, risk-taking, and muscle mass, fostering traits like decisiveness and , while promotes female bonding and multitasking, supporting supportive and relational functions. These dimorphisms, evident across cultures and evident in brain structure variations (e.g., larger in men for threat response), suggest evolutionary adaptations that complementarianism mirrors rather than imposes, countering claims of pure social construction by privileging biological realism over ideological fluidity. Empirical data bolsters complementarianism by linking adherence to traditional roles with enhanced marital stability and outcomes, including lower rates in unions maintaining male breadwinner and female homemaker dynamics. Studies indicate traditional marriages exhibit rates where over 50% endure at least 40 years, contrasting with egalitarian shifts correlating to elevated dissolution risks, as norm conflicts over roles exacerbate dissatisfaction. For instance, when wives out-earn husbands, probability rises significantly, up to 60% in some cohorts, underscoring tensions from role reversals that complementarian frameworks mitigate through aligned expectations. Complementarian institutions, far from declining, demonstrate vitality, with data refuting predictions of organizational death and instead showing numerical growth, implying practical resilience in embodying these principles.

Contemporary Debates and Developments

Shifts in Evangelicalism (2000s–2020s)

In the early 2000s, complementarianism solidified within major evangelical institutions, particularly the (SBC), which revised its in June 2000 to affirm that "the office of pastor/elder/overseer is restricted to men as qualified by Scripture." This doctrinal update, adopted by a wide margin at the SBC annual meeting, reflected a broader consolidation of complementarian views amid the resurgence of Reformed theology among younger evangelicals, evidenced by the growth of networks like (founded 2004) and Acts 29 (expanded in the 2000s), which emphasized male headship in church and home based on biblical texts such as 1 Timothy 2:12 and Ephesians 5:22-33. Organizations like the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW), building on its 1987 Danvers Statement, published influential works reinforcing these positions, contributing to complementarianism's dominance in seminaries such as under Al Mohler. By the 2010s, internal and external pressures began testing these commitments, with cultural shifts including the (gaining traction post-2017) highlighting abuse scandals in complementarian-led churches, such as the 2018 ouster of SBC leader for mishandling sexual misconduct allegations, which prompted scrutiny of male authority structures. Some evangelicals adopted "soft complementarianism," permitting women to preach or hold titles like "" in non-elder roles while barring them from senior pastoral oversight, a practice critiqued by stricter adherents as blurring biblical distinctions. High-profile departures underscored tensions: Bible teacher announced in May 2021 that she could no longer identify with the SBC, citing "grief" over the denomination's treatment of women amid complementarian enforcement, though she maintained personal beliefs in male-only senior pastors. Concurrently, egalitarian critiques proliferated in evangelical publishing, with authors like Aimee Byrd questioning CBMW frameworks as overly hierarchical, yet complementarian institutions responded by doubling down, as seen in CBMW's 2019 updates to the Danvers Statement emphasizing distinct gender teleologies. Into the 2020s, evangelical complementarianism faced polarization amid declining —particularly among Gen Z women, with 38% identifying as religiously unaffiliated by 2023, potentially linked to perceptions of restrictive gender roles though broader factors predominate. The SBC, representing the largest Protestant denomination, reaffirmed its stance through the 2022 formation of an Abuse Reform Implementation Task Force and the Law Amendment (proposed 2022, revisited 2023-2024), seeking constitutional bans on churches employing women as pastors, which passed initial hurdles but faced ratification challenges. Despite claims from advocates of a "winning" debate, empirical indicators like persistent male-only leadership in 90%+ of SBC churches and the enduring influence of complementarian seminaries suggest resilience rather than wholesale shift, countering cultural while navigating internal reforms for accountability. This era reflects not erosion but refinement, with evangelical bodies privileging scriptural over societal accommodation, even as membership declines (SBC from 16.3 million in 2006 to 13.2 million in 2023) highlight broader challenges unrelated to gender doctrine alone.

Responses to Cultural Pressures and Internal Challenges

Complementarians have countered cultural pressures toward and expansive , such as those intensified by the 2015 decision legalizing nationwide, through doctrinal affirmations like the issued on August 25, 2017, by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW). This document, signed by over 4,000 evangelical leaders including John Piper and , explicitly rejected the notion that gender roles are interchangeable and affirmed male headship in marriage and church eldership as biblically mandated, positioning these roles as essential to human flourishing amid societal redefinitions of family. Similarly, CBMW publications have critiqued evangelical feminism's trajectory, arguing it erodes scriptural authority by prioritizing cultural equality over creation ordinances, as detailed in analyses tracing egalitarian to broader theological . In response to the , which gained prominence in 2017 and exposed sexual abuse in evangelical institutions like the , complementarian leaders have condemned abuse unequivocally while defending distinct gender roles as protective rather than causative. For example, 9Marks advocated that complementarian churches act as "first responders" against , emphasizing male headship's call to sacrificial protection under Ephesians 5:25, and critiqued defensive postures that fail to distinguish biblical complementarity from patriarchal abuses. CBMW echoed this by affirming opposition to all abuse in replies to egalitarian critics, noting that proper complementarianism equips men for and women for mutual respect, countering claims that role distinctions inherently enable power imbalances. These responses highlight empirical distinctions, such as lower reported abuse rates in role-affirming households per some family studies, though broader cultural stigma has labeled complementarianism as oppressive, prompting perseverance amid declining global adherence. Internally, complementarians have addressed challenges like the rise of "narrow" or "thin" complementarianism, which confines role distinctions primarily to church and , by critiquing it as a historically novel concession to secular that dilutes broader biblical patterns of male in . Proponents of a fuller view, as articulated in 2024 analyses, argue this softening mirrors second-wave evangelical feminism's influence, urging recovery of comprehensive scriptural complementarity to withstand egalitarian encroachments. Theological disputes, such as the 2016 debate over the eternal functional subordination of the —which some complementarians linked to analogies but others rejected as speculative—prompted reaffirmations of core doctrines, with CBMW emphasizing fidelity to creedal orthodoxy over innovative analogies to avoid internal fractures. Additionally, warnings against internal pitfalls like stereotyping or conflating complementarity with cultural , as outlined by in 2014, have spurred self-examination, advocating clear distinctions to maintain doctrinal integrity without cultural capitulation. These efforts underscore a commitment to modeling biblical roles anew amid pressures, as CBMW stated in 2021, to preserve evangelical witness.

References

  1. https://cbmw.org/2019/08/01/whats-in-a-name-the-meaning-and-origin-of-complementarianism/
  2. https://www.mbts.edu/about/beliefs/danvers-statement/
  3. https://cbmw.org/2020/08/10/why-i-am-a-complementarian/
  4. https://cbmw.org/2019/11/20/mere-complementarianism/
  5. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevin-deyoung/9-marks-of-healthy-biblical-complementarianism/
  6. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/complementarianism-for-dummies/
  7. https://cbmw.org/2021/06/08/is-complementarianism-a-man-made-doctrine-2/
  8. https://credohouse.org/blog/complementarianism/comment-page-1
  9. https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/is-complementarity-merely-functional
  10. https://cbmw.org/2007/06/26/summaries-of-the-egalitarian-and-complementarian-positions/
  11. https://cbmw.org/about/the-danvers-statement/
  12. https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/death-to-the-patriarchy
  13. https://www.dennyburk.com/why-i-do-not-favor-the-moniker-biblical-patriarchy/
  14. https://www.christianitytoday.com/2024/03/complementarianism-term-survive-treweek/
  15. https://www.premierchristianity.com/opinion/the-biblical-case-for-complementarianism/13508.article
  16. https://www.gotquestions.org/complementarianism.html
  17. https://www.catholic.com/tract/women-and-the-priesthood
  18. https://lifereconsidered.com/2020/02/12/how-some-of-the-early-church-fathers-views-on-women-affect-us-today/
  19. https://www.newadvent.org/summa/5039.htm
  20. https://www.newadvent.org/summa/1092.htm
  21. https://theconversation.com/how-complementarianism-the-belief-that-god-assigned-specific-gender-roles-became-part-of-evangelical-doctrine-158758
  22. https://online.ambrose.edu/alliancestudies/docs/Freeman_cbmw.htm
  23. https://cbmw.org/2022/11/17/danvers-nashville-and-early-complementarianism/
  24. https://grbc.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/The-Danvers-Statement-on-Biblical-Manhood-and-Womanhood.pdf
  25. https://solaecclesia.org/articles/complementarians-and-the-rise-of-second-wave-evangelical-feminism/
  26. https://www.crossway.org/books/recovering-biblical-manhood-and-womanhood-tpb-3/
  27. https://www.desiringgod.org/books/recovering-biblical-manhood-and-womanhood.pdf
  28. https://www.amazon.com/Recovering-Biblical-Manhood-Womanhood-Redesign/dp/1433537125
  29. https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/the-current-state-of-complementarity
  30. https://www.focusonthefamily.com/marriage/healthy-gender-roles-in-marriage/
  31. https://cbmw.org/2023/11/21/a-biblical-eldership-is-a-male-only-eldership/
  32. https://www.soulshepherding.org/women-pastors-elders-leaders-bible-based-christian-churches/
  33. https://margmowczko.com/rank-or-role/
  34. https://www.calvarygrace.ca/danvers-statement-biblical-manhood-womanhood
  35. https://www.9marks.org/article/complementarianism-a-moment-of-reckoning-part-5/
  36. https://www.sbc.net/women/
  37. https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/sbc-life-articles/women-pastors-what-does-the-bible-teach/
  38. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/southern-baptists-will-decide-whether-to-formally-ban-churches-with-women-pastors-after-picking-new-leader
  39. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/06/11/southern-baptist-convention-sbc-dallas-women-pastors/84153564007/
  40. https://www.waynegrudem.com/recovering-biblical-manhood-and-womanhood-co-edited-with-john-piper
  41. https://www.dennyburk.com/albert-mohler-offers-10-points-on-complementarianism-in-the-sbc/
  42. https://www.epm.org/resources/2014/Jun/25/what-your-stance-women-leadership/
  43. https://baptistpress.com/resource-library/bptoolbox/first-person-complementarianism-confessionalism-and-cooperation/
  44. https://cbmw.org/2024/06/06/on-the-state-of-complementarianism-in-the-pca-todd-pruitt/
  45. https://byfaithonline.com/a-biblical-view-of-gender-and-complementarianism/
  46. https://cbmw.org/
  47. https://cbmw.org/1970/01/01/personal-reflections-on-the-history-of-cbmw-and-the-state-of-the-gender-debate/
  48. https://cbmw.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/10-1.pdf
  49. https://cbmw.org/the-nashville-statement/
  50. https://www.jewfaq.org/role_of_women
  51. https://www.chabad.org/theJewishWoman/article_cdo/aid/376141/jewish/The-Role-of-Women-in-Judaism.htm
  52. https://www.torahmusings.com/2014/01/the-real-discussion-gender-roles/
  53. https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/gender-identity-in-halakhic-discourse
  54. https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/80379/does-judaism-consider-women-inferior
  55. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/145410/jewish/Men-Women.htm
  56. https://www.abuaminaelias.com/are-men-better-than-women-in-islam/
  57. https://fiqhcouncil.org/the-quranic-concepts-on-gender-relations/
  58. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/confucian-gender/
  59. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/03/02/how-indians-view-gender-roles-in-families-and-society/
  60. https://sikhri.org/articles/women-gender-in-sikhi
  61. https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-religious-marriage-paradox-younger-marriage-less-divorce
  62. https://hfh.fas.harvard.edu/news/human-flourishing-program-releases-new-study-divorce
  63. https://www.baylorisr.org/wp-content/uploads/Religious-Influences-on-the-Risk-of-Marital-Dissolution.pdf
  64. https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-happiest-wives-the-j-curve-in-womens-marital-quality
  65. https://ifstudies.org/blog/number-2-in-2021-the-religious-marriage-paradox-younger-marriage-less-divorce
  66. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub/4517/
  67. https://cosm.aei.org/is-marriage-back-divorce-is-down-family-stability-is-up/
  68. https://www.oursundayvisitor.com/catholic-social-scientist-brad-wilcox-discusses-latest-research-on-the-benefits-of-marriage-and-family/
  69. https://albertmohler.com/2024/08/14/brad-wilcox/
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5766036/
  71. https://www.ats.edu/uploads/resources/institutional-data/annual-data-tables/2015-2016-annual-data-tables.pdf
  72. https://repository.sbts.edu/handle/10392/5470
  73. http://www.cbeinternational.org/
  74. https://breakpoint.org/why-conservative-christian-men-make-good-husbands/
  75. https://www.sbc.net/resource-library/resolutions/on-the-scandal-of-southern-baptist-divorce/
  76. https://empowerinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/Egalitarian-Marriages-Prove-Happier-than-Hierarchical-Marriages.pdf
  77. https://www.cbeinternational.org/
  78. https://www.cbeinternational.org/resource/apples-and-oranges-re-evaluating-egalitarian-and-complementarian-in-the-gender-debate/
  79. https://www.cbeinternational.org/resource/discovering-biblical-equality-biblical-theological-cultural-and-practical-2/
  80. https://www.cbeinternational.org/primary_page/cbes-history/
  81. https://rachelheldevans.com/blog/complementarians-patriarchy
  82. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/melissa-kruger/is-complementarian-theology-the-root-of-domestic-abuse/
  83. https://www.premierchristianity.com/features/is-complementarian-theology-abusive/13507.article
  84. https://cbmw.org/2023/06/22/does-complementarianism-lead-to-abuse-a-response-to-mimi-haddad-helping-the-church-understand-biblical-equality-and-kylie-maddox-pidgeon-complementarianism-and-domestic/
  85. https://ofmermaidsandmyrmidons.com/how-complementarianism-sustains-abuse-my-story/
  86. https://www.christianpost.com/news/al-mohler-complementarian-theology-can-and-has-led-to-the-abuse-of-women-in-the-church.html
  87. https://www.cbeinternational.org/resource/when-religion-hurts-how-complementarian-churches-hurt/
  88. https://blog.oup.com/2023/05/american-evangelism-and-complementarianism-authority-and-abuse/
  89. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-11980-001
  90. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00916471221143440
  91. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/a-complementarian-manifesto-against-domestic-abuse/
  92. https://cbmw.org/2018/01/23/a-mere-complementarian-reading-of-the-most-contested-verse-in-the-evangelical-gender-debate-1-timothy-212/
  93. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031938422003420
  94. https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/the-biological-basis-of-gender-roles
  95. https://www.simplypsychology.org/gender-biology.html
  96. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11550254/
  97. https://aura.antioch.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1719&context=etds
  98. https://attorneyatlawmagazine.com/public-articles/family-law/divorce/statistics-show-divorce-is-more-likely-when-a-woman-makes-more-than-a-man
  99. https://christoverall.com/article/concise/truth-be-told-empirical-research-regarding-complementarian-institutional-vitality/
  100. https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/first-person-complementarianism-women-in-ministry-and-kingdom-advance/
  101. https://theaquilareport.com/encore-evangelicalism-from-2000-2020/
  102. https://swbts.edu/news/the-complementarianism-debate/
  103. https://baptist21.com/sbc/2022/the-sbc-the-office-of-pastor-and-the-way-forward/
  104. https://cbmw.org/2025/06/23/does-anyone-need-to-recover-from-biblical-manhood-and-womanhood/
  105. https://www.barna.com/trends/gen-z-women-struggling-in-faith/
  106. https://jdgreear.com/the-southern-baptist-conventions-defining-moment-the-law-amendment-and-the-great-commission-resurgence/
  107. https://sbcvoices.com/complementarianism-and-the-future-of-the-sbc/
  108. https://cbmw.org/2024/11/23/52736-2/
  109. https://www.9marks.org/article/why-complementarians-should-be-first-responders-against-abuse/
  110. https://www.9marks.org/article/a-global-look-at-complementarianism/
  111. https://www.9marks.org/article/the-increasing-social-cost-of-complementarianism/
  112. https://americanreformer.org/2024/10/complementarian-deviations/
  113. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/four-dangers-for-complementarians/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.