The relationship between authority and freedom, in the Kingdom of God, is symbiotic not oppositional. One of the directions I wanted to go in the gender issue debate was to point out that freedom is a primary goal in God's dealings with His human creation. Another primary goal is the restoration of right relationship between Himself and humanity. If we understand how important freedom is to God, and how freedom cannot exist without proper authority relationship.... we will be a long way further along the road to right understanding of the gospel, the person of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and our proper place in God's Plan. I believe.
In the Bruce Ware thread Sue says
Now that we have representative government, and the abolition of slavery and a general intention to seek equitable relations is society, some men and women believe that it is more honouring to God for men and women to treat each other with equal respect and those with equal God-given authority.in one of the many strands of the discussion on authority.
I would agree, but with even more emphasis. I don't think it is the cultural situation of our viewpoint of slavery or embrace of representative democracy that informs our view of women, but that the same force of truth that brought forth those realizations ( the wrong of enslaving fellow humans, and the superiority of government that recognizes God given equality ) also now engines the move of our focus on the right view of women: of their abilities, their status, their rights. And probably more than I can think of at the moment. But my point is that it is the impetus of these truths about the freedom of mankind, and the dignity of mankind, which drive us towards certain changes in our culture. While many find other sources( which is not a part of this discussion at the moment- but familiar to many) , for us as Christians it is imperative that we recognize and retain the knowledge that these came from the gospel, the teachings of Christ.
The views on slavery, the history of its abolition from modern democratic forms of government, are related to gender issues today. Giles addresses some of that in his work on the theology of the gender debate in the book, 'The Trinity & Subordinationism: The Doctrine of God and the Contemporary Gender Debate
What we have is the growing tension between the freedom philosophies of women in the secular world clashing with the archaic forms of traditions in the Church. Knowing this sounds the inner alarms for many... hold on while I explain that. In our democratic system, with the recognition of the equality of women in the area of civil rights women have risen to places of leadership based upon their abilities. ( I'm talking in idealized terms, but that is the consensus we work from). These women make their way into the Church to find, what? They are now chained to the pews, their voices unilaterally silenced de jure, while arbitrarily allowed expression under variable circumstances ( none of which is any too secure). That is one tension.
Another tension at work is the ancient one of the challenge of winning a lost world to Christ. On the one hand we risk losing souls to holding our own traditions, on the other we risk compromising the very message of the salvation found in the gospel. We want to do neither. We want to establish the Kingdom of God in our midst by aligning ourselves with the scriptures, the truth of the gospel light upon those, and the work of the Holy Spirit in and among us. Yet, when women are diminished in characterization, opportunity to exercise God-given gifts and callings all for the sake of the TRADITIONS OF MEN, there is a tragic loss in the making. This is sinful.
This situation is what the egalitarians see, and protest, I believe. At the same time they are willing to sacrifice essential doctrines in the struggle. This compromise, I believe is what the "complementarians" protest, yet all the while they then destroy some of that same essential doctrine, by falsely reading back into the theological concepts - some of which were anciently settled- for the sake of their own favored agenda. The egalitarians whittle away at the essential doctrines of authority, and the traditionalists disturbingly cast away the issues on the nature of the Godhead and His revelation which was settled admirably by Athanasius.
Here is one quote about Athanasius:
His chief distinction as a theologian was his zealous advocacy of the essential divinity of Christ as co-equal in substance with the Father. This was the doctrine of the Homoousion, proclaimed by the Nicene Creed, and elaborately defended by his life and writings. Whether or not Athanasius first suggested the use of this expression, he was its greatest defender; and the catholic doctrine of the Trinity has ever since been more identified with his "immortal" name than with any other in the history of the church and of Christian theology. (J.T.)Encyclopaedia Britannica
Ninth Edition, Vol. II
Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1878
Francis Schaeffer wrote some important thoughts on our present Western system of representative democracy and a culture that highly values women. His ideas of the "form and freedom" structure, and the importance of idealogical source explain some of this interrelationship between holding fast to essential doctrines and the outcomes.
This is why I defend both ideas of freedom of women in the Christian faith, including opportunities for ministry and the careful retention of the form of authority, as articulated within the scriptures ( and illustrated in the structure of the Church as explained by St.Paul).
But since this is where the conversation starts for many people, we will have to continue hammering out the theology on the text found in 1 Timothy 2:12, and other verse in the controversy.
As for my conversation here, I have a few more things to say concerning authority, that I hope might interest you all, and maybe take the conversation in a different direction. I also want to take a look more closely at what Denny Burk has to say, and some of the other defenders of the present complementarian interpretations.
