Para-Feminism on the Defense

https://julieroys.com/john-pipers-position-women-should-not-lead-parachurch-organizations-sparks-controversy/

I think it safe to say that I'm not a fan of John Piper but on occasion I can appreciate something he says. In this case, it's not really about anything remarkable coming from Piper's pen. Rather, what piques my interest is that such a statement has generated controversy.

It would be an understatement to say that ecclesiology has been a messy topic throughout Church history. So often the debates are meaningless from the standpoint of one arguing for Scriptural Authority and Sufficiency. Often the disputes are more in the realm of style versus substance and it is not uncommon to find both sides utterly wrong in their assumptions.

The rise of para-church ministries has proven thorny as the structures lie outside Scriptural boundaries. The New Testament doesn't speak of them and so therefore it's harder to argue for things like mandated or exclusively male leadership – so clearly commanded in the New Testament itself in reference to the Church.

As such, the para-church world has generated numerous slippery slopes – in the realms of finances, doctrine, accountability and the like, which have led to widespread corruption. And we've also witnessed the para-church function as a vehicle and cover for feminism to work its way into otherwise conservative circles.

By extension, there are related questions in the realm of academia, publishing and of course online publishing that are able to exempt themselves from direct New Testament and ecclesiastical authority. And it must be granted these questions are further complicated by the role played by denominations and denominationalism – which usually prove unhelpful.

The para-church sphere has created doors and opportunities allowing people to circumvent commands – and this is especially true when it comes to women leading and teaching in what is (effectively) the context of the Church.

Some have used the present reality as a means to attack the very validity of para-church organisations – wanting to bring them into the denominational fold and place them under the ecclesiastical authority of say a regional presbytery (as per Presbyterianism), or at the very least a local one (as per the New Testament). Some would make the same argument concerning weblogs and personal websites. I can think of more than a few Presbyterians who would (if they could) shut me down and remove my pen as it were.

Sometimes it seems as if the para-church realm is just a free for all, essentially an array of entrepreneurial ventures that hide under the non-profit designation – which is what many of them are. If this is just about personality, a type of guru-marketing that results in the massive acquisition of wealth, then these are 'ministries' New Testament Christians must reject. And to be frank, this designation applies to many of them – maybe even most. And I would include a great many 'conservative' teachers and their 'ministries' under this label. Their megalomania and mammonism deserve condemnation.

If the para-church exists to come alongside the Church (as is often said) then it is functioning as a kind of ad hoc assistant at large – but one that is still (in some kind of general terms) accountable to the Church and certainly the authoritative doctrinal standards of the Church. This would not need to be a Confession but rather the New Testament itself. At that point it would be up to congregations to evaluate said 'ministries' and determine if they are in fact in compliance. Good men can disagree over parts of the New Testament and despite disagreements still benefit from teaching. That said, there are points of departure that represent a fatal compromise.

Unless the ministry is one specifically targeting women, it goes without saying that it should be led by men. There are many loopholes that some would create – loopholes an elephant can fit through. We've seen women's ministries focusing on women – but then when the camera pans out we see men in the audience. That's a problem because you have a woman teaching doctrine to men in violation of the Scripture. Some have seen this and made the argument but are rejected because it's a para-church ministry.

How to deal with this? The only way would rest on the assumption that local elders command respect. They could forbid their congregation from listening to or watching the programme or supporting it financially. Assuming their congregation complies, in theory these so-called 'conservative' women's ministries which are back-doors for women teaching doctrine with authority – would dry up.

If not, then press on but people should be held accountable. I'm not advocating (as Confessional Presbyterian clerics might), that elders should search our homes and browser histories to discover if we have any books or perhaps have watched a YouTube video. No, there has to be trust and respect. Authority absent these dynamics degenerates into a kind of ugly tyranny and inquisition. Parents should understand this larger point, but many don't – and even fewer elders do. And if that respect exists, there's no need to search homes, because there's honesty between brothers and sisters in Christ.

I have always been put off by these women in ministry that run a big para-church organisation and preach conservative values even while they effectively abandon their husbands and families so they can travel around and speak at conferences and the like. It's not honest and it's not in accord with New Testament imperatives regarding shamefacedness, domesticity and the like. I'm sorry they don't like what the New Testament teaches and it doesn't surprise me that they start questioning its normative authority in other spheres as well. These are hardly women with a meek and quiet spirit and their normalisation of feminist behaviour certainly opened the door to the Church embracing the likes of Sarah Palin, Lauren Boebert, and others – and vice versa it must be said.

Will obedience on these points mean that the Church will take a cultural hit (as it were) and vastly shrink in numbers? Probably, all the more since the contrast is amplified by longstanding previous disobedience. In other words the harm has been made worse in some respects by the Church being disobedient on this point for almost a generation now. Even a slight correction appears harsh by contrast and provokes a reaction – one that would not have taken place had the Church simply been more obedient all along.

At the end of the day, the very existence of these sundry para-church organisations is an admission that the Church isn't doing its job – it's leaving a gap to fill.

But such failures don't mean all ecclesiology or scriptural regulation should be abandoned. It's not an empty space. If it's an expression of or supplement to the Church – then it's the Church and the same basic structures and polity expectations should apply.