Commentary: Clarifying complementarity biblically

“When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less,” says Humpty Dumpty, defending his misuse of the word “glory” in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass.

Meanwhile, on this side of the Looking Glass, some people use the term “complementarity” to cover a broad—and sometimes incompatible and oppositional—spectrum of beliefs, spanning from hierarchy to mutuality.

But a word cannot mean what we choose it to mean. So, how should we understand and apply biblical complementarity?

An overview of opposing viewpoints

At the more fundamentalist end of the spectrum, scholars identifying as “complementarians” argue that while women and men hold equal value, they perform different functions, and women must fill separate, specific roles divinely designed to complement men.

They believe God ordained a permanent hierarchy granting men unilateral authority and assigning women subjugated roles. This includes prescribing that a wife “serve as [her husband’s] helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation.”

Some theologians argue the term “hierarchy” would represent this position better, as it promotes an over/under dynamic between genders, rather than a mutual and complementary one.

In contrast, those identifying as “egalitarian” view complementarity through the lens of equality, unity and mutuality between the sexes. They argue hierarchical structures within complementarity mislead—and fundamentally contradict—the concept of complementarity.

Egalitarians decry that the trickle-down application of the fundamentalist perspective often perpetuates harm by affording women less voice, choice and dignity.

Since both the complementarian and egalitarian positions—and a wide array of ideologies in between—fall under the same banner of “complementarity,” the term requires parsing out.

The name says it all

Merriam-Webster defines “complement” as “something that fills up, completes, or makes better or perfect; one of two mutually completing parts.”

Based on this definition, true complementarity requires mutuality and results in the betterment of both parties, therefore rendering some usages of the term inaccurate and misleading.

For instance, any dynamic that—in practice—devalues, dehumanizes or disparages women falls short of “filling up” as true complementarity requires.

Likewise, any understanding of complementarity that fragments females and demands they live small, silent and subjugated lives proves incongruent with “something that … completes.”

And certainly, any ideology that perpetuates the harm, exploitation or abuse of another directly opposes “making better or perfect.”

Therefore, a construct that damages or divides cannot call itself complementarity.

And if the more theologically minded aren’t swayed or satisfied by Merriam Webster’s secular definition, the creation narrative and other Scripture passages lend further clarity to the proper understanding and application of complementarity.

The application of Scripture

The authors of Scripture lay down a path of wholeness, mutuality and unity wide enough for both men and women to walk along together, shoulder to shoulder. The path winds through the Old Testament into the New—from God’s perfect creation in the garden, through generations of human sin, and to his perfect restoration in the garden-within-a-city.

In Genesis 1:26–28, God creates man and woman—and thus all humanity—in his image. Jointly, man and woman exercise dominion and reflect the imago Dei. Together, they walk with God in the Garden of Eden—equal in dignity and purpose, though unique in form.

Sin and its associated curse enter the world and distort the God-human relationship and the male-female relationship. That tragic distortion fuels the narrative for the rest of Scripture but proves temporary.

Redemption ultimately will restore equality and flatten human hierarchy.

The prophet Joel describes an image of events that will occur in that time of restoring heaven and earth. Joel speaks for God, disclosing: “I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy … even on my servants, both men and women. … And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Joel 2:29–32, emphasis added).

The apostle Paul further confirms godliness neither is hierarchical nor tailored along gender lines. Thanks to Jesus, “there is neither Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, nor is there male and female” (Galatians 3:28).

Both men and women submit to God the Father, follow the example of Christ, and walk in the Spirit. As children of God, both sons and daughters share in his suffering and share in his glory. (Romans 8:16–17).

Paul especially stressed the need for mutual submission between husbands and wives to achieve unity in marriage (Ephesians 5:21). Jesus even prayed for oneness for all who believe in him (John 17:20-23).

In his God-given glimpse of heaven, the beloved disciple John describes a vision of wholeness: “Every nation, tribe, people, and language” stands before the throne and praises God. No mention of gender. The “old order of things has passed away” (Revelation 21:4).

God dwells with his people and his people with him. Finally, the curse brought about by sin is vanquished (Revelation 22:3).

Shifting back toward unity and wholeness

Prominent New Testament scholar N.T. Wright centers his philosophy on the idea God created the world in—and purposed it for—unity and wholeness.

Wright believes God divinely designed the dualities of creation—including heaven and earth, land and sea, male and female—to function in complementarity with one another. Divorced from the gospel’s overarching emphasis on unity, however, men and women will find themselves competing for power and dignity, rather than celebrating their unique differences.

Viewing the gospel as a narrative of God’s mission to redeem and unify creation, Wright posits Jesus’s life, death and resurrection inaugurated a new era for humanity. In this era, God has invited believers to partner with him in restoring creation to the wholeness—read: complementarity—he originally intended.

“Heaven and earth, it seems, are not after all poles apart,” says Wright. “[T]hey are different, radically different; but they are made for each other in the same way (Revelation is suggesting) as male and female.

“And, when they finally come together, that will be cause for rejoicing in the same way that a wedding is: a creational sign that God’s project is going forward; that opposite poles within creation are made for union, not competition; that love and not hate have the last word in the universe.” (Surprised by Hope, 116).

A full scope of Scripture—not merely a few proof texts—defines complementarity as a mutual partnership between men and women through which two parts together strive toward unity and wholeness. This definition and application of complementarity respects the dignity of both sexes and requires the subjugation of neither.

Biblical complementarity

Biblical complementarity reflects God’s image into the world, and while allowing for gender differences and individual identities, proves incompatible with hierarchy, patriarchy or sexism. Obscuring hierarchy as complementarity, then, proves misleading and can allow misogyny to masquerade under a more innocuous moniker.

Accordingly, we propose a clarification of terminology, the application of Scripture and a shift back toward a working definition of complementarity that compels mutuality, fosters the flourishing of both genders and promotes unity instead of hierarchy.

A word cannot mean what we choose it to mean. The definition we ascribe to complementarity determines the cultural connotation and trickle-down application. It also communicates our beliefs about the value and dignity of women and impacts their safety and status in the home, church, workplace and broader society.

Thus, if—as Scripture and Wright contend—God purposed the world for unity and wholeness and has invited believers to join him in creation’s renewal and restoration, we must accept God’s invitation to true complementarity.

Lauren Roberts Lukefahr is a life-long resident of the Houston area. Her household currently includes a handful of beloved pets, plants and people. She is a senior director at Alvarez & Marsal, a student at Dallas Theological Seminary and a member of Houston’s First Baptist Church Sienna.

Christine Crawford is an advocacy writer, theology geek and the founder of The Holy Shift, a ministry that explores the upside-down kingdom of God as the right way forward in faith and life.

The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the authors.