I’d go 2.5⭐️ if Goodreads allowed. The extra half star goes to the generally open and warm tone of the writing
***this is a new listing of the book on Goodreads. The page ref in this review are for the paperback print edition***
This book is generous with respect to what ministry convictions it acknowledges might genuinely rest within the bounds of Complementarianism. The book has a generosity of spirit, and it often takes care to differentiate between what is essential to complementarian thinking, and the expressions it can take in different contexts.
1. Ch1 had some helpful and humble insights on the dangers of complementarian culture expression.
2. Ch2-5 explored the principle of gender equality/distinctions from multiple angles. Despite the stated aim, the authors struggled to identify *essential, normative, and scriptural* differences between men/women (beyond the biological).
Apart from personality tendencies and sociological averages, I’m not at all clear on what gendered differences the authors are concerned we don’t “play down” (to use their term). For example on p. 57-58 they write…
“…while we are all called to show compassion to one another, that compassion will be expressed with different words, actions, tone and expression.”
But what is a gendered “word” or “tone”?
Could I as a man express my compassion in actions that are not sufficiently *masculine* or reflective of my gender? My acting, speaking, and expressing will always be the expression of a male human. However the book did not identify how I might establish when I’m failing to express sufficient gendered difference in my words, tone, or expression. I’m not clear which *essential* differences the authors have in mind.
3. At the end of ch3 the authors contrasted selfish/argumentative male “traits/tendencies” with emotional female “traits/tendencies” (p.48 & 59). This is an unfortunate comparison of gendered difference. Argumentativeness and being “clueless” are in and of themselves ungodly characteristics/traits. Being “emotional” is not. I’m certain (!) the authors didn’t mean to make such a comparison, and I hope it could be corrected in a new edition.
4. Ch5 is titled “the GOODNESS of men leading in ministry”, but I’m not sure which particular goods the authors have in mind? In order to speak substantively about the topic, we should be able to identify *what* specifically is good, and not simply the bare fact *that* it is good. Which specific goods are lost when comp convictions are played down? This would be a helpful addition.
5. Ch5-7 unfortunately spoke a lot about “male leadership” (eg p.69 and p.103). A better way of speaking (and one more reflective of the author’s convictions) might have been to say “overseers are to be male” rather than to speak of “male leadership”. Overseeing and “Leadership” are not equivalent phrases.
6. Ch8 had some great reflections on how women actually *experience* bumbling (inauthentic? careless?) applications of so-called complementarian principles. The two authors both include their own (differing) visions of what such complementarian application may look like.
The book was a huge (!) step up from Kevin De Young’s book, but the authors still struggled a little to express HOW to define and describe *difference* in complementarity, as opposed to simply affirming THAT such difference in complementarity exists
Merged review:
I’d go 2.5⭐️ if Goodreads allowed. The extra half star goes to the generally open and warm tone of the writing
***this is a new listing of the book on Goodreads. The page ref in this review are for the paperback print edition***
This book is generous with respect to what ministry convictions it acknowledges might genuinely rest within the bounds of Complementarianism. The book has a generosity of spirit, and it often takes care to differentiate between what is essential to complementarian thinking, and the expressions it can take in different contexts.
1. Ch1 had some helpful and humble insights on the dangers of complementarian culture expression.
2. Ch2-5 explored the principle of gender equality/distinctions from multiple angles. Despite the stated aim, the authors struggled to identify *essential, normative, and scriptural* differences between men/women (beyond the biological).
Apart from personality tendencies and sociological averages, I’m not at all clear on what gendered differences the authors are concerned we don’t “play down” (to use their term). For example on p. 57-58 they write…
“…while we are all called to show compassion to one another, that compassion will be expressed with different words, actions, tone and expression.”
But what is a gendered “word” or “tone”?
Could I as a man express my compassion in actions that are not sufficiently *masculine* or reflective of my gender? My acting, speaking, and expressing will always be the expression of a male human. However the book did not identify how I might establish when I’m failing to express sufficient gendered difference in my words, tone, or expression. I’m not clear which *essential* differences the authors have in mind.
3. At the end of ch3 the authors contrasted selfish/argumentative male “traits/tendencies” with emotional female “traits/tendencies” (p.48 & 59). This is an unfortunate comparison of gendered difference. Argumentativeness and being “clueless” are in and of themselves ungodly characteristics/traits. Being “emotional” is not. I’m certain (!) the authors didn’t mean to make such a comparison, and I hope it could be corrected in a new edition.
4. Ch5 is titled “the GOODNESS of men leading in ministry”, but I’m not sure which particular goods the authors have in mind? In order to speak substantively about the topic, we should be able to identify *what* specifically is good, and not simply the bare fact *that* it is good. Which specific goods are lost when comp convictions are played down? This would be a helpful addition.
5. Ch5-7 unfortunately spoke a lot about “male leadership” (eg p.69 and p.103). A better way of speaking (and one more reflective of the author’s convictions) might have been to say “overseers are to be male” rather than to speak of “male leadership”. Overseeing and “Leadership” are not equivalent phrases.
6. Ch8 had some great reflections on how women actually *experience* bumbling (inauthentic? careless?) applications of so-called complementarian principles. The two authors both include their own (differing) visions of what such complementarian application may look like.
The book was a huge (!) step up from Kevin De Young’s book, but the authors still struggled a little to express HOW to define and describe *difference* in complementarity, as opposed to simply affirming THAT such difference in complementarity exists