Dorothy Patterson has been one of the leading complementarian female writers and speakers among evangelicals for many years. She is the author of A Woman Seeking God among several other books. She also co-edited the Women’s Evangelical Commentary on the New Testament and is editing the second volume on the Old Testament. Patterson is the wife of Paige Patterson, president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas. She serves as professor of theology in women’s studies at the seminary. Gender Blog caught up with her at the national meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society in New Orleans this week.

QUESTION: You travel and speak a lot at schools and churches around evangelicalism. What major gender-related issues do you see on the horizon right now?

DOROTHY PATTERSON: One big issue that is always with us is what is the authority of Scripture? You have two polar opposite positions: egalitarianism and complementarianism. Both claim that they are standing under Scripture and that they are doing exactly what Scripture says. Now, when you start debates, you can narrow that down very quickly, but that’s the broad response. But a basic ongoing issue is: Does the Bible mean what it says and are we going to follow it? That has always been the big issue.

Q: It seems that we always need more female complementarian writers and scholars on gender issues. How can we encourage women to be studying and writing about gender issues?

DP: We are doing our part at Southwestern Seminary, starting with a certificate and going all the way to Ph.D. We even have a homemaking track in our college now. We need to get past the notion that women are incapable of learning certain things and that we really don’t need these extra things for women. Paul said we should learn, and I take that very seriously. I think the key is for women to get a vision for the importance of learning because we have to teach women. We need women teaching women. We need it in every discipline, and we need it across the board because the women of this nation, whether they are single or married, they have in their DNA this matter of maternal nurturing. That’s in the DNA of a woman. That’s why you find so many women in helping and teaching professions who have that gift, and we need to encourage women in whatever they are doing, whether it’s homemaking, as I am doing, or something else, because they will be molding the next generation whether it’s raising their own child or teaching in a classroom. It may be in a church setting or a community setting or a neighborhood setting. As evangelicals, we need to make training for women available.

Q: What do you say to those who dismiss a great number of women by saying, ‘Oh, they’re just stay-at-home moms?’

DP: I’m going to write on the homemaker next year because I’ve been told that since I travel with my husband and do all these things, that I’m not a homemaker. But I do these things to support my husband because I am a homemaker. Every homemaker is a helper, every homemaker is different, and that’s a vision we’ve lost. I think we need to see that homemaking is a professional pursuit in that you need to prepare for it and give yourself to it with all your energy and all your creativity and with all your commitment. And you must bring to it all the preparation you can because it is an overwhelming task. It’s not just keeping the home. It’s helping your husband, it’s rearing your children, it’s doing volunteer work. We’ve lost a lot of our volunteer workers because we’ve denigrated homemaking to the point that every woman thinks she has to have a paid job, and this is true in churches and schools and communities.

The Fall 2009 issue of the Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood has arrived. Select articles are available to read online at this time, including:

• Editorial: A Critical Look at the Barna Study on the Religious Life of Homosexuals by Denny Burk
• You've Come a Long Way, Baby by Mary A. Kassian
• "Son of Man" or "Human Beings"?: Hebrews 2:5-9 and a Response to Craig Blomberg by Barry Joslin
• Finally Unconvinced: A Review of John G. Stackhouse Jr., Finally Feminist by Robert E. Sagers
• New Testament Theology and a Biblical View of Gender: A Review of Thomas R. Schreiner, New Testament Theology by Christopher W. Cowan

All of the articles will be available online on February 15, 2010. If you would like to subscribe to JBMW you may do so here.

This is Part 2 of our series on Richard Baxter's instructions for the Christian family. You can read Part 1 here.

It is important to realize, when reading Baxter and the Puritans, that there was no guarded language when speaking of how the Christian household ought to look like. They simply assumed the clear, biblical teaching of a husbandʼs authority in the family and a wifeʼs joyful submission. So then, at one level, Baxterʼs direction for women wouldnʼt sound too different than John Piperʼs or Wayne Grudemʼs.

However, Baxter, in a way that Puritans are known for, approaches the heart of the wife. What would cause a wife to rebel against the biblical mandate to follow the leadership of the husband? Baxter gives a few reasons:

1. Failure to believe Godʼs will is best. Godʼs design for the Christian family, which includes the structure of authority and submission, is best! God is wise and we, as sinners, need divine wisdom. He writes, "Who are you to assess Godʼs Word in a way different than his own qualifications." What Baxter means is, we are to allow Godʼs Word to explain itself in its own terms. We must not explain away difficult, but clear, instruction. As Christians, we must trust Godʼs counsel for the home. Failure to trust Godʼs will can only bring turmoil and unrest.

2. Discontentment. There is something about the sinful heart that is always wanting something other than the place in which God has placed him or her. When something other than God is the desire of the heart, it begins to desire more than the portion granted. The sinful cravings of the heart are deceitful and can justify sin or can explain away divine instruction. Baxterʼs appeal to wives is to find your contentment and treasure in Christ and you will recognize the joy in resting in his purposes.

3. Distrust in the leadership of your husband. Following the leadership your husband is not first and foremost based upon his merits, but upon the design of Godʼs intentions. Baxter recognizes the failures of husbands, since he was one himself, and there is no biblical expectations for women to follow their husbands in sin or submit to abuse. Yet, many may see the husbandʼs imperfections as an opportunity to exchange roles, as if he has lost his chance to lead. Baxter encourages wives to put away their fears of following their husbands, for it is not in him that you place your trust, but in the Lord who has given you good and perfect instruction for your joy. Rebelling against Godʼs instruction for the home will never bring peace or contentment.

For Baxter, submitting to Godʼs will for the home, whether it be for men or for women, is fundamentally a heart issue. Baxter wrote in a day when feminism didnʼt exist as a movement. There were no books to argue for egalitarianism. No one was attempting to re-interpret Ephesians 5. Yet, he understood that men and women have always had sinful impulses to rebel against Godʼs instructions.

Much could be said about Richard Baxterʼs, the 17th century puritan, instruction for the Christian family. He is deeply practical and has the actual family in mind when writing. What I mean is that he is not speaking to academics, scholars, or, even other pastors. He is mainly speaking to fathers, mothers, and, also, children. For the Puritans, every home was a small church, with the father as the shepherd. So then, Baxter has two concerns when writing to families: perseverance in the faith and growth in godliness. He begins his directions for the family with the husband.

Directions for Husbands

The husband has the authority in the home. Baxter doesnʼt argue for the husband's headship in the home, but rather assumes it as biblical. There is a question, however, of first importance that every man should ask of himself: Am I fit for task? The purpose of the question is not necessarily to see whether or not one should start a family (though it may be a good one to ask before you begin), but ultimately to know exactly what to repent of and, then, seek godliness. Out of all the qualities a man needs in leading his family, godliness has pride-of-place. Baxter writes:

And if God shall not govern in your families, who shall? The devil is always the governor where Godʼs governments is refused; the world and the flesh are the instruments of his governments; worldliness and fleshly living are his service. Undoubtedly he is the ruler of the family where these prevail, and where faith and godliness do not take place. And what can you expect from such a master?

According to Baxter, an ungodly man is the chief stranger and enemy to Godʼs design for the Christian family. A godly governed home “is an excellent help to the saving of all the souls that are in it.” Men, fit yourselves for the task!

Why is godliness so important to the task of leading the home? For Baxter, the husband is responsible for the normal teaching and instruction in godliness. Therefore, the husband must hunger and thirst for the knowledge of Godʼs Word. Baxter writes, “Those husbands that despise the word of God and live in willful ignorance do not only despise their own souls, but their families also.”

Because the husband is responsible before God for his family and all this included in it, apathy is not an option. An apathetic husband has authority over his family in name and image only. Husbands, do not be marked by a couch and a remote control. Do not lie to yourselves, thinking that your work is done at 5:30 pm. Too many young husbands, today, spend more time on XBox than instructing their families in godliness. Men, if your children relate you with video games more than service and care, then you should repent.

Tomorrow, we will look at Baxter's directions for wives.

Here's an excerpt from David Jones' 2003 article examining whether or not there is a connection between egalitarianism and homosexuality.

Evangelical Christian organizations that hold to a complementarian view of gender roles, such as The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW), have expressed concern over a possible connection between an egalitarian view of male/female gender roles and homosexuality. For example, in the list of central concerns stated in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood-perhaps the most thorough defense of complementarianism-the authors declare, "We are concerned not merely with the behavior roles of men and women, but also with the underlying nature of manhood and womanhood themselves. Biblical truth and clarity in this matter are important because errors and confusion over sexual identity leads to ... homosexual tendencies and increasing attempts to justify homosexual alliances."¹ Furthermore, later in this same list of central concerns, the editors of this book note, "We believe that the feminist minimization of sexual role differentiation contributes to the confusion of sexual identity that, especially in the second and third generations, gives rise to more homosexuality in society... . It is increasingly and painfully clear that Biblical feminism is an unwitting partner in unraveling the fabric of complementary manhood and womanhood that provides the foundation not only for Biblical marriage and Biblical church order, but also for heterosexuality itself."²

Evangelical feminists,³ however, have asserted that the notion of a possible connection between egalitarianism and homosexuality is both an unwarranted concern and an unfair allegation.⁴ For example, Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE), arguably the leading evangelical egalitarian advocacy organization, has repeatedly noted that they do not affirm homosexuality, and the CBE Statement of Faith clearly states, "We believe in the family, celibate singleness, and faithful heterosexual marriage as the patterns God designed for us."⁵ Additionally, several prominent evangelical egalitarians have written works that report their opposition to homosexuality.⁶ Indeed, the fact that egalitarian organizations such as CBE do not directly affirm homosexuality has been recognized by a number of complementarian authors;⁷ yet, a concern that evangelical feminism ultimately leads to the embrace of homosexuality still persists among those who champion a more traditional model of gender roles.

In view of the foregoing discussion regarding the possibility of a connection between egalitarianism and homosexuality, this work will address and attempt to answer a very important question in the gender roles debate-that is, "Is there sufficient historical evidence to support complementarians' concern over a possible connection between egalitarianism and homosexuality?" If this concern is warranted, the final part of this essay will begin some introductory work with a view to a second important question-that is, "What is the nature of the link between these two ostensibly unrelated ideologies?"

You can read the rest of this article here .