“It’s the feel of a great, majestic God who is by His redeeming work in Christ inclining men to humble Christ-exalting initiatives and inclining women to come alongside those men with joyful support, intelligent helpfulness, and fruitful partnership in the work.” – John Piper
Okay, to recap: Men, so say Piper, should not merely lead in a way someone else may have led before, but come up with “humble Christ-exalting initiatives.” The man who comes up with this “Christ-exalting initiative” can have no “joyful support” or “intelligent helpfulness” from another man, but only from women.
And since there is, in his view, such a clear difference between the helping people (leaders have male genitals, helpers do not.) and the lead person, nobody could ever start by following and get groomed for leadership. And no male leader could ever take a break, or go on holiday, because none of those who usually follow him could take the lead in his absence.
In real life, one leader could actually lead a lot of people. In almost any project, more followers than leaders is required. If men should not take the role of follower, if it the church indirectly call a following male – one who participate in a project without leading – unmasculine, there will be room for very few men in church.
And what about the church outsider, the unconverted man or backslider who comes back to God? Should he start leading the day of his conversion? On the one hand, that could damage the body of Christ with very immature leadership.
On the other hand, this man could come back to church and not start leading right away – and hear (indirectly) that he is a woman for not leading. But the church simply have no place for him to lead. He may disappear from church again, rather than having no purpose, or “acting like a woman” and support other men’s initiatives.
When “leader” and “follower” is set in stone, the church moves very slowly.