The latest issue of The Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood is now in print. The Spring 2008 edition offers a new format, which will include regular contributions in the following sections: Essays and Perspectives, Studies, the Sacred Desk, and Gender Studies in Review (click here for the table of contents). For a description of the new format, see the editorial by JBMW's new editor, Denny Burk.

Some highlights:

Mark Dever: "It seems to me and others (many who are younger than myself) that this issue of egalitarianism and complementarianism is increasingly acting as the watershed distinguishing those who will accommodate Scripture to culture, and those who will attempt to shape culture by Scripture. You may disagree, but this is our honest concern before God. It is no lack of charity, nor honesty. It is no desire for power or tradition for tradition's sake. It is our sober conclusion from observing the last fifty years" ("Young vs. Old Complementarians").

J. Ligon Duncan III: "The gymnastics required to get from "I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man," in the Bible, to "I do allow a woman to teach and to exercise authority over a man" in the actual practice of the local church, are devastating to the functional authority of the Scripture in the life of the people of God" ("Why ‘Together for the Gospel' Embraces Complementarianism").

Micah Carter: "Must Jesus, as the Christ, have been male? If Christian theology desires to place itself under the inspiration and authority of Scripture, then the answer must be yes" ("Reconsidering the Maleness of Jesus").

Ray Van Neste: "Our culture is infatuated with youth and encourages you not to grow up. . . . If you would be men, you must reject this siren song and swim against the tide. You must diligently seek to throw off immaturity and to grow up" ("Pursuing Manhood").

John Piper: "God designed the relationship between a husband and his wife to represent the relationship between Christ and the church. This is the deepest meaning of marriage. And that is why ultimately the roles of headship and submission are so important. If our marriages are going to tell the truth about Christ and his church, we cannot be indifferent to the meaning of headship and submission ("The Beautiful Faith of Fearless Submission (1 Peter 3:1-7)").

The essay by Ray Van Neste and the essay by Randy Stinson and Christopher W. Cowan are available online now. Click here for subscription information for the Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.

Cultural commentators have repeatedly observed in recent years that many of today's young men lack motivation and direction. It is not out of the ordinary for even thirty-something year-old males still to be living with (and supported by) their parents and lacking any real plan to pursue a vocation and provide for a family. For many men who do marry, it is more and more common to find that their wives are the primary bread-winners. While she is establishing herself in the workplace, he is often content in his low-demand, low-income job—with his video game appetite and other toys fully funded by her. He has no work ethic, no career, no future, no clue. The role of provider was once seen as an essential and noble aspect of manhood. But for too many of today's young men, being responsible to provide for a family is neither necessary nor desired.

Unfortunately, things seem to be getting worse rather than better. The Wall Street Journal recently ran a story entitled, "Men Receiving Alimony Want A Little Respect." The article reports that gender discrimination in alimony was ended by the Supreme Court nearly 30 years ago. However, in that time, "few male beneficiaries have stepped forward to talk about it." "But today's men," writes Anita Raghavan, "are shaking off the stigma of being supported by their ex-wives." Raghavan interviewed several of these men, and the article's subtitle says it all: "Modern males say living off the ex-wife is no cause for shame."

Apparently, we've come a long way, baby.

Alimony is the money that a court orders a higher-earning spouse to give to their husband or wife following a divorce. While divorce itself is a travesty that has ripped apart and scarred countless families, my focus here is on how modern men respond to yet another opportunity to abdicate their role as provider-even as provider for themselves.

One of those interviewed in the WSJ article is John David Castellanos, a Hollywood actor who receives alimony from his ex-wife—to the tune of $9,000 per month. According to Castellanos and a growing number of men, they sacrificed their careers for the sake of their wives' careers. Now they want some "payback" to maintain their marital standard of living. Others seek alimony—not due to marital sacrifices—but so they may continue to have their toys fully funded. After his divorce, Phillip Upton, a shop foreman, "couldn't have afforded the $20,000-a-year cost of maintaining his 1960s-vintage collection of cars with outsized motors." According to the divorce settlement, he receives about $40,000 a year from his marketing executive ex-wife. "Had I not gotten that," Upton contends, "I would have lived a different lifestyle."

Surely, our culture is rejoicing over this advance in gender equality, right? The fact that the relatives of one woman call her alimony-receiving ex-husband a "deadbeat" would seem to indicate otherwise. The woman herself says, "In some instances, alimony has become akin to a social-welfare program provided by working women to their ex-husbands." After the court ordered her to make sizeable alimony payments, another ex-wife was even more blunt: "Why the courts don't tell a husband, who has been living off of his wife, to go out and get a job is beyond my comprehension." Indeed.

How should Christians respond? As R. Albert Mohler Jr. has written, "We understand that men were made for work, and that a man's responsibility is to care and provide for his wife and family." It is not merely that men seeking to live off of their wives (ex- or otherwise) are "deadbeats"—more seriously, they are abdicating their God-given responsibility to work and be providers. Contrary to the men interviewed, this is undeniably a cause for shame. Men were not made to live off of the income of others; they were made to labor. Even if a man has no wife or children, his responsibility to work remains—not only to provide for himself but so that he might provide for others who are in need (note especially the biblical concern for widows and orphans).

Scripture attests from the beginning that man was created for work (Gen 2:15), and it consistently chastises the lazy (e.g., Prov 18:9; 19:15; 21:25). "If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat" (2 Thess 3:10). Beyond this general biblical expectation that men are to labor, Scripture assigns men the primary responsibility to be providers for others—especially a wife and family. After the Fall, it is Adam who undergoes pain and toil in working the ground (Gen 3:17-19)—understood as his primary area of responsibility. Paul commands husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her (Eph 5:25). While this involves more than provision, it can hardly include less. Concerning the care of widows, Paul writes, "But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse then an unbeliever" (1 Tim 5:8). While one may argue that the "anyone" includes both men and women, surely the husband bears the primary responsibility. Paul expected wives and mothers primarily to care for the home and nurture children (1 Tim 5:10; Titus 2:5). Thus, the apostle considers a man's role as provider to be so significant that he equates abdication with denying the faith.

This phenomenon reported by WSJ is simply a further symptom of a culture filled with men who have no idea what it means to be a man. And, unfortunately, the church has not remained unaffected. Christians must respond to this crisis of manhood by exhorting our young men to be men. We must be intentional in raising our boys to be providers—to accept primary responsibility to support a wife and family. I do not need to know (now) what specific vocation my six-year old son will follow when he grows up. What I do need to know (now) is that I'm raising a future provider, so that he may nourish and care for others who will depend on him.

May the church not merely decry the manhood crisis; may we confront it by bringing up godly, noble men. As we do, let us continually point our young men to the one whom they are to model, Jesus Christ: a divine Husband who sacrificially provides for his bride (Eph 5:25-27). And let us be eternally thankful that he expects no "payback" from her.

Editor's note: As reported Tuesday on Gender Blog, the Anglican Church in Australia has been fighting a battle over biblical truth on the issue of women's ordination for much of the past two decades. Anglicans there recently moved to ordain women as bishops, but one group of women known as ‘Equal but Different' (EBD) has organized to contend for biblical truth in Australia. EBD formed in 1992 in response to a push for female ordination by the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Australia (ACA). The organization exists to promote and defend the biblical pattern of relationships between men and women in both the church and home. Gender Blog interviewed Claire Smith, one of the group's leaders. Today is the second of a two-part interview with her. 

Gender Blog: How has your group been received among Anglicans in Australia?

Claire Smith: We are aware and have contact with Anglican women and men around the country who have remained faithful to the biblical teaching. As best we can, we try to represent, encourage and minister to those people - some of whom have had to leave their churches rather than sit under ministry they consider to be conflict with Scripture. They are grateful for the ministry of EBD.

Others who believe the Scripture teaches identical roles for men and women have not been so accepting. Robust debate is one thing, but regrettably, some members of the EBD Steering Committee have been verbally persecuted for their attempts to promote and defend biblical teaching.

Gender Blog: What do you see as being at stake with the issue of gender roles in the church and home? What are some of the mischaracterizations of complementarianism that you are hearing in your country?

Smith: What is at stake with the issue of gender roles is primarily the authority of Scripture as God's inspired Word, and beyond that, the temporal and spiritual welfare of individuals and the strength of families and churches, since these are matters of Christian obedience and the blessings that come from living according to God's wisdom.

Some egalitarians of course seek to justify their position from the Scriptures, but invariably they do not accept the plain reading of the text; and/or allow one text of Scripture to silence others they do not accept; and/or base their arguments on rare or novel meanings of Greek or Hebrew words; and/or depend on historical reconstructions as the background for NT texts so as to marginalize the text's application to the modern church; and/or overlook the non-culturally specific reasons the NT writers use for their teaching about the different responsibilities of men and women, such as Genesis 1-3, the relationship between Christ and the church, and the relationships within the Trinity.

The most recent misrepresentation of the complementarian view is that it justifies domestic violence and abuse. The Sydney Diocesan Synod in 2007 passed a motion saying that such aberrations cannot be justified by, and are entirely contrary to, the biblical complementary pattern of relationships for women and men. Domestic violence and psychological and spiritual abuse are contrary to God's Word and contrary to the loving headship of a husband, and intelligent, voluntary submission of a wife.

Gender Blog: Does the fact that the group is composed entirely of women take some of the heat off the issue? Do you find that you have more credibility in asserting this teaching among women in Australia or are they merely dismissive of your views?

Smith: A founding rationale of EBD was that this issue was one in which ‘a woman's voice' needed to be heard and that men who were seeking to oppose identical ministries for both genders could easily be dismissed as ‘sexist' or ‘misogynist.' In this respect, it has been helpful to be a ministry organized by and directed to women.

Increasingly however, as the not-unrelated question of homosexual and lesbian clergy and same sex unions appears on the horizon, often promoted by the same proponents of women's ordination, EBD may have to rethink our focus on ministering to and speaking only for women. Thankfully these innovations, although accepted in other Australian denominations, have not as yet gained sufficient momentum within the ACA to force legislative change. Praise God and may it ever be so!

Editor's note: As reported yesterday on Gender Blog, the Anglican Church in Australia has been fighting a battle over biblical truth on the issue of women's ordination for much of the past two decades. Anglicans there recently moved to ordain women as bishops, but one group of women known as ‘Equal but Different'(EBD) has organized to contend for biblical truth in Australia. EBD formed in 1992 in response to a push for female ordination by the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Australia (ACA). The organization exists to promote and defend the biblical pattern of relationships between men and women in both the church and home. Gender Blog interviewed Claire Smith, one of the group's leaders. Today is the first of a two-part interview with her. 

Gender Blog: Tell us more about the group and its activities.

Claire Smith: Since its inception, EBD has been involved in successive debates about the role of women in the church, both within the Diocese of Sydney and in the national ACA. We have presented Synods with statements signed by thousands of women opposed to unbiblical innovations of ordination of women to the priesthood and the consecration of women as bishops; we have spoken in Synod debates; we have made submissions to ACA committees and tribunals ruling on the question of women in the episcopate; we have contributed to the debate as it has spilled over into the secular media; and we have prayed the Lord will keep our church faithful to His Word, and have mercy on those faithful Christians who have to live with the consequences of these departures from biblical teaching.

EBD publishes a journal three times a year. This includes at least one major article of Bible teaching, interviews with women in various types of ministry (paid and unpaid), book reviews, ideas for ministry and updates on events or developments in the ACA or other denominations. EBD is also invited to run seminars in churches for women, and members of the steering committee speak at conferences, promoting and explaining the biblical teaching of complementary responsibilities for women and men. These opportunities arise within the Sydney Diocese, around Australia and internationally.

We have been involved in producing resources including a book, a documentary-style video/Bible Study program, a website (under review) and CD's of sermons covering the main Biblical texts.

Gender Blog: How many women are involved in EBD? Are most of them pastor's wives?

Smith: EBD is a Sydney based group that has a Steering Committee of eight women, ranging in age from their 30's to 60's; some are married; some are mothers and some grandmothers; some are clergy wives; some are in full time ministry positions (parish and university campus based); two are ordained as deacons; one is employed as an itinerate women's evangelist; one is pursuing doctoral studies in the NT; the majority of the steering committee has formal theological qualifications.

The diversity in our life situations is deliberate, since it enables us better to represent, minister and communicate with the different women in our diocese and the national church. Beyond the steering committee, the involvement of women is expressed through readership of the journal, and as signatories to statements defending the biblical view of gender relations during Synod debates.

Gender Blog: What is the situation in the Anglican Church of Australia? Are the majority of its members and leaders calling for all Anglicans there to embrace the ordination of women?

Smith: Many dioceses have proceeded to allow women to be ordained to the priesthood. Others, such as the Sydney Diocese, have sought to remain faithful to scriptural teaching and the Anglican tradition and have not changed the nature of ordained ministry; others, whilst having no real objections, have not as yet introduced women priests.

The Sydney Diocese, where EBD is based, is a large metropolitan diocese with evangelical leadership and a strong evangelical theological college. Over one third of active Australian Anglicans live in the Diocese. It is well known for its complementarian view of gender relations but also has churches, clergy and parishioners that would demur from the diocese on this matter and others.

In Sydney, there are growing numbers of gifted women pursuing theological training, and taking up ministry positions in parishes, university campuses, youth and children's ministries, chaplaincies in hospitals, schools and prisons, and being sent out as missionaries. Some of these women are ordained as deacons, or commissioned as Diocesan Lay Workers, and others are licensed pastoral workers. The strength of women's ministry in Sydney is testimony to the goodness of God in raising up women who are gifted and called to ministry, but also testimony to the goodness of God's pattern of relations between men and women in his church, and an indication it is not necessary for women to have identical ministries to men, for their ministry to be effective or appreciated.

In the ACA as it now stands, women can be ordained as priests, and can preach and lead parishes in most dioceses. A recent controversial decision by the ACA Appellate Tribunal has ruled there is no constitutional barrier to women being consecrated as bishops. The appointment of a woman as bishop in Perth is a consequence of this decision.

In dioceses which have not accepted these innovations, however, the ministry of women who have been ordained as priests is not always welcome or recognized, and even within those dioceses where women are ordained, there are individual churches that do not believe women should have identical ministries with men and would resist the appointment of a female priest, and within individual churches, there are people who believe the same.

Acceptance has been far from uniform. At every level from the national church right down to the person in the pew, there are those who have remained faithful to the scriptural teaching of differing ministries for men and women and not departed from this biblical pattern or Anglican tradition.

The innovation of women in the priesthood, and now women in the episcopate, means we are a church divided, without a common ministry and more significantly, without a common understanding of the word of God.

Anglicans in Australia recently embraced the ordination of women as bishops and asked Archbishop Jeffrey Driver to "help" conservative members who oppose female ordination to accept them.

According to a news report from an Australian news service, the Anglican general synod met in Canberra late last fall and adopted a proposal to ordain women and then charged Driver with bringing dissenters on board.

"While I have been a supporter of women for 30 years, I understand that for some this development in the church has difficulties and even confrontation," Driver said. " I look forward to the consecration of a woman as a bishop in the Anglican Church of Australia. I am also committed to that happening in the spirit of unity."

Women have been able to be ordained as priests, deacons and archdeacons since 1992, but could not become a bishop. The ruling was accepted in some, but not all diocese of the church. In South Australia, for example, two of the three dioceses allow female ordination, but a third does not.

Female minister Tracey Gracey speculated that some will leave the church over the issue and acknowledged that men and women possess different gifts. Gracey said she hopes members will recognize her ministry "complements male leadership."

Elsewhere in Australia, the resistance to female ordination appears to be more robust. In the Anglican Diocese of Sydney, the issue of women's ordination again arose this year after being overwhelmingly defeated two years ago. Working within this diocese is a strong group of conservative women who are advocating for the maintenance of biblical gender roles in the church known as "Equal but Different."

Over the next two days, Gender Blog will run a two-part Q&A with Equal but Different to better inform readers as to how the issue is playing out in the land down under and what Equal but Different is doing to assert biblical authority.