Is It Bigotry to Say Only Men Can Be Pastors?

Is the position that only men are called to be pastors similar to racism and racial oppression?

Two things are colliding today for me. First, it’s Juneteenth, the celebration of the announcement of freedom to slaves on June 19th, 1865. It’s a holiday rightly remembered by our nation, a reminder of our past and a warning for our present. You may know that I pastored a majority-black church in a majority-black neighborhood for nearly a decade. That experience sent me digging for what the Bible and good, solid theology have to say about race, ethnicity, diversity, reconciliation, and justice. I’ve spoken and written a fair bit about racial reconciliation and relationships, multiethnic churches, and ethnic unity and diversity.

My passion for this theme has at times, on this theme, set me on “the side” of folks who believe a lot of other things that I don’t believe. At the same time it’s set on “the other side” of folks who believe a lot of things that I do believe. Case in point: last week I gathered with 13,000 of my closest Southern Baptist friends for the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). A main issue that came before the messengers (representative members of SBC churches) was whether or not our network of 45,000 churches would consider churches with female pastors to be “closely aligned” and in “friendly cooperation” with the SBC. I will try not bore you with the details of SBC polity, as earlier this year, several churches were removed from fellowship because of their practice of ordaining women as pastors. One church stood out prominently and publicly, Saddleback Church and its founding pastor, Rick Warren. The SBC disfellowshipped Saddleback because, after decades of having only male pastors (a theological position called “complementarian”), Saddleback has changed its theology and practice. Saddleback now calls women “pastor,” a belief out of step with much of the SBC’s theology and practice. Saddleback had the right to appeal the decision, which they did. Rick Warren appealed to the convention to restore Saddleback to fellowship. The convention voted with nearly 90% consensus not to restore Saddleback.

I was one of the nearly 90% who voted not to restore fellowship to Saddleback. This doesn’t mean I think Saddleback or Rick Warren are terrible, heretics, or even that I don’t appreciate their ministry. It simply means that our specific conventional conviction holds that God designed the pastorate to be filled by men. We base this conviction on two things. First, the Bible teaches in an overarching pattern that God intends humanity to function in certain ways as male and female (see Genesis 1-2, 1 Corinthians 11, etc). Second, the Bible teaches in specific places that God reserves the pastorate for men only (see 1 Timothy 2-3). Now, my point here isn’t to convince you to be a complementarian, although I’m happy to do that in another time and place. My concern here is the pushback I've received as I’ve explained my decision. That pushback has rhymed with a common theme: complementarian theology and practice is bigotry. They say complementarian theology oppresses women, and it is like racism, slavery, and “separate but equal” doctrine applied to men and women rather than black and white persons.

I understand the logic and the emotional power of this objection, and I resonate with it. The sin of racism and the sin of sexism are related, at least cousins and maybe brothers. In both cases, an intrinsically and uniquely valuable person and/or group of persons who bear the image of God suffer because of wicked, ungodly oppression. Maybe a biblical character who embodies both would be Ruth, both ethnically other and a women, doubly vulnerable in ancient Israel. I grieve that many sisters in Christ suffer because of insecure men who silence them at best and abuse them at worst. I grieve that many sisters in Christ feel that limiting the pastoral office and function to men oppresses them.

At the same time, I also know many women who feel just the opposite about complementarian theology. In fact, the folks in my own church who would be most likely to question my theology if I waffled on my convictions would be women. The people in my church who push back most forcefully against egalitarian theology and practice are women, strong women who know their own minds and speak their minds. I'm talking about women who will put the fear of God into you, and who will not wilt in the presence of any man. And, do you know what another form of misogyny and sexism is? Assuming these women don't really believe what they believe, that they're deceived and unempowered. That, too, is patronizing and dismissive. Both egalitarianism and complementarianism can be abused and weaponized.

At bottom, the easiest way to answer the objection that racism and complementarianism are the same might simply say: the Bible says racism is a sin but the Bible doesn’t say that limiting the pastorate to men is a sin. Or to say: the Bible says comprehensive ethnic equality and unity is his righteous purpose and the Bible also says that male leadership is his righteous purpose. So no matter how we work these two truths out, we have to hold them both at the same time.

Two problems pop up here. First, is the experience problem. Many who have been complicit in the systematic oppression of racial minorities have also believed that “women should know their role.” So in our experience, the two have often been mushed together in practice. Second, is the logic problem. We have been told by the logic of our culture that any limitation on anyone or anything is wrong. This flows, in part, from the logic of the gospel, which is radically equalizing: “There is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male and female; since you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). The cross puts all humanity on the same ground, humbling the lofty and honoring the lowly. Our culture has been so soaked with this story that equality has become a top-tier virtue. But our culture has gutted the logic of the gospel so that it often only echoes a zombie form of this virtue. So “equal means identical” becomes the virtue, not recognizing the biblical principle of unity and equality amidst forms of diversity.

So, back to my original question: is it bigotry to say that only men can be pastors? Is it like racism and other forms of oppression? I don’t think it is. Putting complementarianism (or historic views of sexuality/LGBT+ for that matter) into the same category as racial oppression makes sense in the categories set out by our culture. Our culture says that we determine our identity, so no identity can be the basis to (dis)qualify anyone from anything. The vision of human identity described in the Bible, though, has a better way. Identity is given to us by God. God gives us our human nature as those who bear his image in creation. He gives those in Christ a renewed nature as those who bear the image of Christ in salvation. So we determine the basis for our identity and what is proper for human beings from God’s intention. God in the beginning created them male and female, with human equality and specific intentions for both uniquely.

I’m a complementarian pastor who is passionate about racial justice and reconciliation. I don’t see any other biblical option.

•••

P.S. Let me make a quick note that I will be taking a short writing break until the second half of July. Grace to all in the meantime.