« Another really long one on pro-feminism and the sex industry: UPDATED | Main | Student crushes, part two »

March 28, 2006


Roger Overton

Thank you for you kind words about The A-Team Blog. I’m glad you’ve found at least some of our work useful.

“Precisely how "functional equality" damages the culture is not something Roger bothers to explain; apparently we are to take it for granted.”

It’s not taken for granted, but it’s my fault for not being clearer. This is only one in a series of posts I do every Friday on gender issues. I started with some Biblical distinctions between roles (http://ateam.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2006/3/10/1814098.html), and beyond that this Friday I will be looking at some of the damage Feminism has done culturally. So that comment was made both in reference to the prior post and in anticipation of posts to come.

“Creating dialogue with those whose understanding of feminism is based on distortions, half-truths, and fear.”

As a point of advice, anytime someone trumps the “fear” card that tends to discredit what they say. It’s an attack on the person you’re against assuming they don’t have reasons for what they believe. If you truly want to create dialogue, a good place to start is to back up your points with whatever facts you believe you have. Why is any of what I said distortions or half-truths? Why is any of what I said wrong? Simply telling me I was wrong isn’t helpful and isn’t dialogue.

I’m quite familiar with CBE, their scholars, and their beliefs. I have a lot of respect for many of the people involved in that organization, but I have no respect for the organization. I don’t believe their arguments stand up under scrutiny. I would point you to the Council for Biblical Manhood & Womanhood (http://www.cbmw.org) made up of scholars such as Wayne Grudem, Bruce Ware, and Andreas Kostenberger (see, I can name drop too). Their arguments for Complimentarianism, in my opinion, take the Bible more seriously than those of CBE. Mary Kassian did a great job of describing the bulk of my concerns with CBE in my interview with her (http://ateam.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2005/6/29/984944.html).

“I look forward to Roger's next post, where he explains why most of the faculty of Fuller Seminary have betrayed the fundamentals of Christian faith”

I’m not sure where you got that idea. I haven’t mentioned Fuller in relation to Feminism, nor do I have any intention to do so. Regardless, it would be kind of silly of me to single Fuller out when there are so many seminaries that have been infiltrated by Feminism.


Roger, thanks for a gracious response. Just as you are familiar with CBE, I'm familiar with the work of Grudem and the Council -- and my reaction to it is, not surprisingly, identical to your reaction to CBE. At points such as this, we've probably reached an impasse; I can rejoice, however, that so much of the evangelical world has opened up to egalitarianism!

All the best



The best preacher and administrator on our ministerial staff is, not surprisingly, the senior pastor, a woman. The best pastoral care minister, not surprisingly, is the one who has additional training in counselling (MCSW), a man. The best educator and motivator minister is a woman educated at Union Seminary. Our one non-ordained, non-assistant-level employee, the minister of music, is a man, appropriately enough a schools music teacher in his day job (so he has lots of experience with well-intentioned but non-professional singers with variable sight-singing ability). It all works.

Bill Ekhardt

Hugo, Thank you for entering this conversation. I appreciate the depth of your experience in this area.

Roger, thank you for interacting with Hugo. I appreciate your willingness to interact with fellow Christians with whom you disagree.


It contrasts the "good" nineteenth century feminists(Stanton, Anthony et al) who merely wanted legal rights for women with the nasty Sixties feminists (Friedan is singled out) who demanded actual equality with men.

I like the way you phrase this.

I think CBE is a very valuable organisation, but one serious problem I have with it is its complete opposition to 'secular' feminism. CBE frequently portrays 'secular' feminism as a malevolent force running parallel to hierarchicalism, which really irritates me. If they don't want to describe themselves as feminists, then fine, I wouldn't describe them as feminists either. But for them to rubbish feminists the way they do is hypocritical and deliberately ignorant. It appears they only behave in that way so as to keep up as non-threatening a front as possible for the benefit of conservative Christians.

I'd love to see them actually engage with real feminist works (and not just those by Susan B. Anthony or Elizabeth Cady Stanton) rather than argue against strawfeminists.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Regular reads

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004