Moore Egalitarian than Complementarian
As I have shared a few times, I began my faith journey in the Roman Catholic Church, where the first women I saw in leadership were the Sisters. Though their influence was profound, their roles were often positioned within the margins of ecclesial authority, while priests and brothers occupied the visible and celebrated centers of leadership. The Sisters taught, served, and nurtured communities, modeling compassion and discipline, yet their leadership was framed as support rather than governance.
When I later entered Protestantism, my understanding of leadership broadened. For the first time, I encountered women preaching, pastoring, and shaping the spiritual direction of congregations. This transition expanded my theological imagination and deepened my awareness of how context determines opportunity. The same dynamic exists in the corporate and secular world, where women often begin in supportive roles but must navigate systemic barriers to reach executive leadership. Just as churches wrestle with theology and tradition, organizations wrestle with culture and structure. In both spaces, equitable leadership requires more than talent; it demands intentional systems that recognize competence, while promoting access, and the dismantling of the visible and invisible ceilings that still define who gets the opportunity to lead.
Reading Anna Morgan’s Growing Women in Ministry: Seven Aspects of Leadership Development was quite interesting and insightful. Morgan proposes seven aspects of leadership development (three internal and four external), bringing together how women grow into authority and influence: [1]
- spiritual calling
- giftedness
- emotional intelligence
- home-life supports
- ministry leadership contexts
- leadership relationships
- communication
These seven facets promote Egalitarianism, the belief that all people are inherently equal in worth, potential, and the right to lead regardless of gender, race, or social status. In the church, it critically challenges patriarchal structures that have historically restricted women’s roles in leadership, asserting instead that spiritual gifts and callings are distributed without gender bias. Morgan’s seven aspects framework affirming women’s full participation in ministry as a divine right.
Doctrinal gatekeeping has plagued women in ministry since its inception, with many using scripture and doctrine to hinder the advancement of women in leadership in both the church and the corporate sector. When the walls have been breached and women find themselves in the driver’s seat, Moore makes an interesting observation: when women in hindering environments do get challenging opportunities, those opportunities can be impossibly difficult, leading to failure, burnout, and stress. [2]
As it relates to the church, women’s ordination and pastoral authority were part of a contentious debate at the Southern Baptist Convention in limiting the office of pastor and leadership to men only. The structural barriers are in full force in many areas, arguing to define the role and scope of women. As these barriers are both substantial and intentional, many perceive women in ministry through a complementarian lens and would disagree with much of Morgan’s synopsis on policy and polity grounds.
In our context, I am reminded of the Rev. Gina Stewart, who just last year became the first woman to preach the keynote sermon at the Joint National Baptist Convention. Her theologically impactful sermon and thoughts were later removed from the convention’s Facebook page. This ignited a huge public debate concerning systemic gender bias in denominational churches that still lingers.
If I had more time, I would love to explore women in leadership versus the rise of men in the church. Post-pandemic multiple analyses in 2025 report that men are now outpacing women when it comes to self-reported regular church attendance in the United States. This is the first time in decades. Notwithstanding the trend, I believe that, where women in church leadership do exist, given both the aging clergy and near-record numbers of retirements, there is a need for their leadership formation. In our very own context that affirms women in leadership, I am a personal witness to the fact that we have our starters on the front lines but no strong bench to support when succession is called.
One of my favorite books that I read early in my pastoral ministry was Boundaries by Henry Cloud and John Townsend. Cloud says, Boundaries define us. They define what is me and what is not me. A boundary shows me where I end and someone else begins, leading me to a sense of ownership. [3] An area that resonated with me was Moore’s perspective on the boundaries many women face in leadership. These women want to maintain their freedom and flexibility above all else, and if accumulating more power means they have to lose their freedom, they are far less interested in a promotion. [4]
As Moore touts the lifelong process of Leadership development, she also has a vision for women leaders as full ministry partners in the church. She doubles down on this idea, saying, The church loses its strength and reach when women leaders who can’t flourish in the church focus their gifts instead on business, academia, non-profits, or para church ministry. [5] When I shared with a friend what I was writing about, they mentioned how the debate over women in ministry will forever be a lifelong issue, equating it to a wicked problem. The question I pose is what points can an egalitarian see and agree upon from a complementarian perspective, and what points can a complementarian see and agree upon from an egalitarian perspective?
[1]Anna R. Morgan, Growing Women in Ministry: Seven Aspects of Leadership Development, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2024).
[2] Morgan, 105.
[3] Cloud, Henry, and John Townsend. Boundaries: When to Say Yes, How to Say No to Take Control of Your Life. 25th Anniversary ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017)
[4] Morgan, 117.
[5] Morgan 181.
About the Author
Daren Jaime
7 responses to “Moore Egalitarian than Complementarian”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Daren,
There is little agreed upon by both complementarians and egalitarians as the starting point of division is right at the beginning of Genesis and whether or not there was mutuality of Adam and Eve in the garden. But, with that divide, we all can agree on the Great Commission and the need to share the love of Christ with those who do not know it yet. This is one thing that we all should be able to rally behind.
Hi Daren, you touched on my question for the author when you quoted her saying that the church loses when women who can’t flourish focus their energy in other areas, such as para-church, academia, business, and nonprofits. I think of it as bringing the Gospel into the world, and even in those settings, souls can be won for Christ. Where does your local congregation and then denomination land on including women in pastoral leadership roles?
Daren, I appreciate the journey you’ve been on and how that has shaped you and your imagination.
Of the 7 aspects of development, which one is the strongest in your context, and which one needs the more work? How might that the strength in the system be leveraged to address the weakness?
Daren, thank you for sharing your journey in this post. You talk about the boundaries issues as defined by Morgan. In your role, where do you see yourself and others making difficult choices with regard to, as Morgan writes, maintaining “… freedom and flexibility above all else, and if accumulating more power means they have to lose their freedom, they are far less interested in a promotion.”
Hi Daren, Kadi Cole has a book called “Developing Female Leaders.” It is absolutely not the research based work we have read this week, but she does take the standpoint of developing “Leaders” regardless of what tradition they are in, to the maximum expression of gifts supported in their context. It can be a place to start for common ground.
Hi Daren,
Julie mentioned Kadi Cole already, but I’d like to add to that.
In her book, “Developing Female Leaders” Cole encourages churches to bring utmost clarity on where the line is, “…Most godly women are very aware there is a line somewhere, and because they are concerned about overstepping that line, they will often stay way below what you believe they have an opportunity to do.”
I found this incredibly helpful. Some people fight for additional women’s rights in ministry, which isn’t necessarily bad, but another approach is to maximize women’s contributions, up to the “line”. Even this, would be a huge gift to the church.
Hi, Daren, that is still the same situation in our Island Churches, doctrine and roles of female gender that limits them from being pastors. They can have any positions in the church but being a pastor. Thank for sharing that.