Complementarian vs Egalitarian in the Western Church

Why are we talking about this?

The Western church is currently going through a major shift that needs to be acknowledged. Pastors and church leaders, denominations and fellowships are deeply engaged in conversations about the role of women in church leadership. They’re striving to establish a standard on when and how women can teach, preach, and lead in the local church. At the heart of the struggle is finding the theological dividing line between Complementarian vs Egalitarian leadership.

If you’re still in the beginning stages of regular church attendance, this discussion might seem dated at best and offensive at worst. If you’ve grown up in the Church, you likely have a basic understanding of how contentious this issue can be. Historically, there has been a well-established divide between two camps:

1. Complementarianism, where men and women serve different but complementary roles in the church.
2. Egalitarianism, where men and women serve equal roles in the church.

This divide is often centred on the interpretation of specific chapters from the Pauline Epistles (1 Cor. 11, 14, Gal. 3, 1 Tim. 2, 3, and Tit. 1), and the intent of each passage. The discussion simplified down to a couple of questions:

• Did God lead Paul to write these as absolute rules for all time, in every church, for every context, in every culture, regardless of church health, membership, structure, or situation?
• Or is there grace within these Epistles to adjust the rules based on the church, context, culture, etc.?

Why is this issue so divisive?

Historically, there was an underlying push toward extremes that were always debated. There were always variations (women can lead worship, pray, lead a meeting, teach a class, etc.). In our current moment, however, the variations have become more centralized. Something has shifted in local churches over the past few years. A third, untitled distinction has emerged as the dominant one, which sits in the middle of the two extremes.

Again, it’s not defined or even named as of yet, but more and more churches, even conservative evangelical ones, are moving toward the middle of Complementarianism and Egalitarianism. In this middle camp, women are permitted to hold pastoral roles in shepherding, counselling, teaching, preaching, and leading, as their spiritual gifting aligns. And yet, all under the authority of men, serving in senior leadership roles.

Related to the fellowship that I belong to, Complementarian/Egalitarian lines were getting blurred a couple of years ago. That’s when I discovered that our national convention voted on an official statement of their position a decade prior. (Ahead of the curve in my opinion.) It stated that women could serve in pastoral roles as long as the lead or senior pastor was a man. I communicated this finding to our church membership when I discovered it. This statement seemingly sat dormant until recently. Now it’s a key discussion point; so, what changed?

Why is this shift happening now?

There are lots of theories on why this shift is gaining steam. Some say it’s because the church is just following culture. While others say it’s the church being lazy and not adequately training men. And yet, they all attribute the shift to present-day leadership decisions.

I bought into most of these theories until post-pandemic evidence suggested that this shift was and is more organic. And that it potentially started decades ago. This shift may have originated in the home before it ever entered the local church.

Ask any Christian Gen-Xer or Millennial about their upbringing, and a common response would be that their mother was the primary spiritual leader at home. This shift didn’t occur overnight. It began after World War II but gained momentum throughout the 1960s and 1970s. (This is when most Gen-Xers were born.)

In Western Christianity, it became customary for mothers to attend to the spiritual and emotional well-being of their children. Fathers tended to focus on their physical and financial needs. Unfortunately, this trend resulted in fewer men praying over their children, reading Scripture with them, and leading devotional times with the family.

CAVEAT: This isn’t meant to be a criticism; just an assessment. Most fathers and mothers did what was believed to be the correct model of parenting for Christian homes. If you happened to have grown up with a spiritually engaged father, you are blessed because it was not the norm.

Why didn’t Gen-X men take the mantle?

By the 1980s (when the first Millennials were born), it wasn’t just that mothers had assumed the primary role of spiritual leader in the home. Gen-X men had other factors that would impact their ability to carry the mantle of church leadership. To start, they had the lowest generational birth rate in recorded history. This was due to several factors: increased access to birth control and abortion, the normalization of dual-income households and divorce.

Specifically related to the increased acceptance of divorce (even among Christians), many mothers were given majority custody of their children. This made them the sole leaders in almost every aspect of life. A higher percentage of Gen-X men grew up without fathers than ever before. Those men were raised by women who were forced to lead, provide and protect in capacities that they never would have chosen. And yet, they accepted for the well-being of their children, leaving an imprint on that generation.

As time progressed into the 1990s, Gen-X started reaching the age of 30. This is a typical age to begin taking on church leadership roles in previous generations. Many of these Gen-Xers were spiritually led by their mothers, while their fathers (or fathers of their friends) led the church.

This may be one factor (among many) related to the disconnect and disengagement among Gen-X adults in the Western church. They became the first generation to establish what is now known as “deconstruction.” They withdrew from organized church or, in the worst cases, they walked away from their faith.

What was the result of losing Gen-X?

Sadly, by the end of the 1990s, for many Christian families, the long-standing tradition of church attendance ended when their Gen-X children reached adulthood. In simple math, based on their low birth rates and how many Gen-Xers left the church, there weren’t enough qualified men to take the mantle of leadership.

The result? Boomer men in leadership would receive another decade of leading as elders and deacons on church boards. In the periphery, however, women started to lead more ministries, and some enrolled in seminaries.

I believe this was the hinge moment that shifted the trajectory of church leadership in the 2000s. As I look back, I wonder if this was the beginning stages of a generational Deborah situation (Judges 4 & 5), for lack of a better term. I wonder if God was preparing women to sustain the Church in a future deficit of qualified men. I have no theological backing for this concept. I’m simply musing in an attempt to find a spiritual explanation for the shift that we’re faced with today.

How do Millennials fit into the shift?

The first Millennials hit adulthood in the early 2000s. The majority of these adults were spiritually raised by their mothers, potentially to a greater capacity than Gen-X. The difference? There were way more of them! Birth rates had started to climb in their generation. And so, during the 2000s, Millennials would become the largest adult demographic to enter the local church since the Boomers.

At the same time, many Boomers were becoming empty-nesters and looking forward to retirement. Gen-X men and women who remained faithful to the local church had now reached their 40s. They were well-established in their gifting and calling. Many evangelical churches had already changed their leadership structures to give more opportunities for women. It became normative for women to serve as board members and ministry leaders, sharing oversight responsibilities.

How did the leadership transition unfold?

Related to pastoral leadership, the first wave of Boomer pastors began retiring from long-standing positions about this time. Some of them had led the same church for 20 or 30 years. They left behind elders and deacons who had served alongside them for most of their pastorate. (Due to that Gen-X deficit stated above.)

Finding pastoral replacements became more challenging than ever before. Denominations and fellowships grappled with filling the demand, as qualified pastoral candidates were not in abundant supply. Some churches succeeded in finding a replacement. But many struggled to secure a new pastor or cycled through a few candidates before finding the right one.

By the 2010s, the remaining Millennials reached adulthood, but some church boards were still cycling through the same candidates. Due to the Gen-X deficit, some of these elders and deacons had served more consecutive terms than ANY other generation before them. Potentially in church history! (Let that sink in for a moment.) As already highlighted, there simply weren’t enough qualified men (under the age of 60) to fill the void.

How did this widen the generation gap?

Related to congregations, this situation caused a very wide generation gap between church leadership and the incoming generation of adults. Historically, based on life expectancy factors, the 2010s saw the widest generation gap in church history. (Let that one sink in as well.) Specifically, consider how the Boomer boardroom thinks vs how the Millennial church attenders think: vastly different! Then there’s this minority of Gen-Xers stuck in the messy middle.

The shift of increased women in leadership that started in the early 2000s gained traction in the 2010s. To sustain the health of the church, many evangelical churches shifted their leadership structures. They gave more opportunities for women to serve on boards and leadership teams. That being said, the role of preacher and teacher was still sustained by male pastors and elders throughout the 2010s.

Many of these pastors were Boomers, who remained in their pulpits in their later years. Or they came out of retirement to serve because the need for pastoral care was so significant. The need may have been felt to a greater capacity in smaller, rural communities. These congregations had fewer options to find and sustain a full-time pastor.

As the 2010s came to an end, no one could have predicted what would happen next. The catalyst moment happened in 2019 with the pandemic. It was the hardest, most divisive season of ministry in modern church history.

How did the pandemic change leadership?

During and after the pandemic, the local church saw more pastors, elders, and deacons step down from leadership than ever before. Most of them were Boomer men without any replacements. Many of these leaders would have stayed for 5-10 more years under regular circumstances. But now they were completely overwhelmed and exhausted and wanted out. As it turned out, many Boomer congregants wanted out as well.

Following the pandemic in 2022, Church analysts predicted that Boomers would be the first to return to church. In truth, a large portion of them didn’t. And they still haven’t (Carey Nieuwhof, Church Attendance Statistics). Contrary to predictions, Millennials weren’t the ones who ended up staying on the couch watching church online. They all came back and brought some friends! (Barna, A New Chapter in Millennial Church Attendance)

A review of 2023, showed that more Boomers stayed home than Millennials. For the first time in 40 years, a new generation of adults is the majority in the local church. This may be the crux of our shift. Potentially for the first time in Christian history (outside of times of war), the majority of church attenders were spiritually led and guided in a higher capacity by mothers (and women) than fathers (and men).

Due to several factors leading up to this moment, the average adult congregant is more willing to listen to and learn from a woman, related to spiritual and Biblical matters, than ever before. (Another item to let sink in.) There are simply fewer people with fewer barriers to female leadership. This has pushed the conversation to the forefront in every denomination and fellowship. Local churches are striving to determine a standard for the future.

Has Pastor Jeremy gone Egalitarian?

No, I have not. And yet, I’m increasingly aware that I’m not a full Complementarian either. I’m increasingly struggling to find a line that might not exist. But in the meantime, I will continue my support of our fellowship’s statement on women in leadership. I believe it carries a balance of truth and grace in approaching Paul’s Epistles. At the same time, charting a productive way forward in this current cultural moment.

For my fellow Complementarian-leaning friends and colleagues, this reflective journey should solidify an important lesson for us. We should focus on our homes before we ever call out standards for the local church. If a man is not spiritually engaged with his wife and children, I see little value in his position on a woman’s role in the church. From my study of Scripture, including Paul’s Epistles, the Gospel lived out in marriages and families is an essential component of the Gospel being lived out in the local church.

In this season of ministry, perhaps we should focus on the re-engagement of Christ-centred fatherhood over the role of women in the church. Considering many of our men didn’t have an example to cling to, it might prove to be a far more productive endeavour.

Where do we go from here?

The shift in how the Western church sees women in leadership is not going away. At the same time, it’s not a straightforward path either. We have to figure out the history that brought us here, realizing that we’re standing at an intersection. There’s a well-established road in one direction, holding tightly to what they’ve always done. There’s another well-established road in the opposite direction, rejecting everything that’s been done in the past.

We’re going to try something new, realizing that this road has just been roughed in with gravel. And it’s not as frequently used. The future is not clear yet, but I’m thankful for our national and regional leaders. Regardless of our position, we should be praying for them and showing understanding for the difficult journey they’re travelling.

If you’re willing, I’d love to hear your thoughts. If you’re local, we can meet up for coffee and chat about it. Otherwise, we can connect through Zoom or FaceTime. Reach me at (867) 335-7524 or drop me an email at jeremy@leadbiblically.com. Your thoughts and questions are important; I believe that talking openly strengthens our community.

Join the Conversation; Share Your Thoughts

• How has your own church navigated the Complementarian vs Egalitarian debate?
• What role did your parents play in shaping your view of leadership?
• How can we re-engage fathers in spiritual leadership at home?