John Piper’s influence is, he says, ‘irrespective of competency’

John Piper’s influence is, he says, ‘irrespective of competency’ February 4, 2013

John Piper shall, henceforth, be referred to as John “Irrespective of Competency” Piper.

Piper despises competency, dismissing it as folly:

Suppose, I said, a couple of you students, Jason and Sarah, were walking to McDonald’s after dark. And suppose a man with a knife jumped out of the bushes and threatened you. And suppose Jason knows that Sarah has a black belt in karate and could probably disarm the assailant better than he could. Should he step back and tell her to do it? No. He should step in front of her and be ready to lay down his life to protect her, irrespective of competency. It is written on his soul. That is what manhood does.

And collectively that is what society does — unless the men have all been emasculated by the suicidal songs of egalitarian folly.

No. There is no such thing as an enduring society that operates “irrespective of competency.”

Any society that tried to function “irrespective of competency” would quickly fail due to, you know, incompetency.

How does someone like Piper say such clownish things and yet become so influential in so many evangelical churches? Why is such buffoonery accepted as a credible lecture on the meaning of “manhood”?

Apparently those churches abide by Piper’s rules and chase after leaders “irrespective of competency.”

At least Piper has finally admitted why he fears women’s leadership in the church — because if the church began choosing its leaders based on competency instead of arbitrary hierarchies that operate “irrespective of competency,” then he’d be out of a job.

“Irrespective of competency.” He said that, voluntarily. He admitted that out loud. Oy.


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Tapetum

     Huh? There was a tire changing in my life less than twelve hours ago. One person, a jack and the other standard tire-changing stuff. I don’t recall any third limbs coming into play.

  • Tapetum

     Weirdly enough, this is exactly the contingency plan my husband and I have. He’s left handed to my right, and he’s a big and obvious hazard, while I’m merely big for a woman.

    In an attack situation, I don’t expect him to sacrifice himself for me. I expect him to follow my orders, and I’m going to be severely pissed if he doesn’t, and gets hurt as a result. He’s the big, strong male, but I’m the self-defense instructor with a decade’s experience.

  • Carstonio

    No, I think there’s general agreement here that Piper’s argument is ridiculous. Using that label for his argument like saying that the surface of the sun is a little warm.

    When pro golfer Annika Sorenstam played in a men’s tournament, one sports radio show whined that any male golfers finishing behind her would be emasculated. If Phil Mickelson played in a women’s tournament, would these hosts fret that the women lower down on the board would lose their femininity? Highly doubtful.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Oh. Sorry.

    I think my point was to point out that big strong manly man such as whatsisface there obviously considers himself shouldn’t need assistance changing a tire, and not-dumbshit such as whatsisface there presumably considers himself should know that not needing assistance changing a tire is a common state of affairs regardless of gender, despite how people insist on gendering basic auto maintenance.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Oh. With that context, your remark looks much different. Sorry for snarky.

  • EllieMurasaki

    It’s not rape if she knows the guy, because she has for certain done something to indicate her willingness to sex him, even if she didn’t say she wants to this time, even if she has never ever said she wants to. And even if it is rape, Jason’s a fine upstanding community member, wouldn’t want to ruin his life by pressing charges, would we Sarah? and never mind what he did to you, it’s not important.

  • EllieMurasaki

    That many novels with that much going on, it’d have to be either TV (at least five episodes per novel, I’d hope) or a whole bunch of movies. With really good CGI budget because Nimitz. And not whitewashing anybody, not Honor or her mother, not the royal family, nobody, and to hell with “it’s too hard to find good actors of color” because that’s bullshit anyway. And paying attention to how the background characters from the Star Kingdom are fifty percent female!

  • EllieMurasaki

    If the non-heroic act keeps one alive and the heroic act gets one dead without keeping anyone else alive (who’d presumably be dead if one had gone for the non-heroic act), then praising the heroic act is dumb.

  • EllieMurasaki

    *thinks about Chuck Norris jokes*


  • EllieMurasaki

    the person who wants to be first in God’s eyes

    I suspect the very fact of having that desire makes it impossible for it to be fulfilled by first-shall-be-last-and-last-first God.

  • EllieMurasaki

    a female police officer

    Internal contradiction. /Piper

  • If the non-heroic act keeps one alive and the heroic act gets one dead without keeping anyone else alive (who’d presumably be dead if one had gone for the non-heroic act), then praising the heroic act is dumb.

    I would say that the dumbness of praising an act depends primarily on whether future acts in the same class (given the likely categorization strategies used by whoever is observing the praise) have a positive expected effect, not on whether the act itself had a positive effect, since the primary effect of praise is to reinforce the act and therefore make it more likely in the future.

    But, yes, if heroic acts typically leave the world worse off, praising them is dumb.

  • reynard61

    No, because I think that Piper’s fantasy is just that: A fantasy. Piper might imagine himself to be on a par with the mythological Warrior-Heros of old, but I think that any modern non-RTC woman would see him as a pathetic, egotistical lout — and rightly so!