Changes

earlier used by theological liberals to advocate the ordination of women and to reject male headship in marriage."  And in addition, "that many prominent evangelical feminist writers today advocate  

earlier used by theological liberals to advocate the ordination of women and to reject male headship in marriage."  And in addition, "that many prominent evangelical feminist writers today advocate  

positions that deny or undermine the authority of Scripture, and many other egalitarian leaders promote their books",  with recent trends suggesting that egalitarianism is heading toward  

positions that deny or undermine the authority of Scripture, and many other egalitarian leaders promote their books",  with recent trends suggesting that egalitarianism is heading toward  

a denial of anything uniquely masculine, an endorsement of God as Mother, and ultimately an endorsement of the moral legitimacy of homosexuality. <ref>http://www.cbmw.org/images/jbmw_pdf/9_1/ef_new_path.pdf</ref>  

a denial of anything uniquely masculine, and toward "an endorsement of God as Mother, and ultimately an endorsement of the moral legitimacy of homosexuality."<ref>http://www.cbmw.org/images/jbmw_pdf/9_1/ef_new_path.pdf</ref>

 

As is the case with the latter issue, the traditional position may often be minimized or censured by liberals and their institutions and churches. In "Is Evangelical Feminism the New Path to Liberalism?,  Grunden recalls a letter received in May 1987 from a New Testament professor at the (formerly conservative) Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California.  As a result of presenting the traditional position as part of a course on the Pastoral Epistles, the professor reported, "For two and a half weeks I was slandered up and down campus. I was the major subject on the declaration board, etc. It was a real mess. . . . The vast majority of the letters were from students  who were not in the class. . . ."  The Womenʼs Concerns Committee sent a letter to all his students, arguing against him being allowed to teach on this position, and that they would seek to censor any further teaching along traditional lines of interpretation. The dean never said that anything was mishandled except in regards to professor being allowed to teach what he thought, and accused him of presenting his personal views with more force than the other views.<ref>Grunden, ''Is Evangelical Feminism the New Path to Liberalism?'', p. 37, Personal letters from William D. Mounce May 14, and July 23, 1987.</ref>

==Historical position==

==Historical position==