Complimentarianism and egalitarian are two positions taken by churches.

The first sees women’s roles in the church as separate but equal, the second sees the role of women in the local church that should open to women or men based entirely on calling and gifts.

I am an agalitarian, although I went to a complimentarian church. I found very strange, out of step with scripture and out of step with my culture and understanding of ministry and calling.

People fight bitterly about these two points of view. David Gushee has an excellent column that asks complimentarists a couple of important questions.

1. Are you successfully communicating to young men the conviction that a complementarian perspective must elevate rather than diminish the dignity of women, and therefore inculcating a moral commitment on their part to act accordingly?

It has been my experience that a context of male leadership, and steady teaching that reinforces it, can sometimes lead young men to a rather boorish attitude toward the women in their midst. While perhaps church leaders are teaching a highly nuanced complementarian view stripped of classic male chauvinism, this is not always successfully transmitted to the next generation. Many young Christian women, and even some sensitive young men, come to associate the complementarian position with outright sexism and male chauvinism, and therefore reject it. How can you prevent this outcome?

2. Are you absolutely clear on which positions of Christian service (you believe) are barred to women?

3. Once you have determined what positions of Christian service are barred to women, you have therefore also determined which positions are permitted. Are you active in encouraging women to pursue the positions that are permitted?

4. When women occupy positions of church leadership that parallel those of men, are their positions named equally and are the individuals involved treated equally?