Unintentional Example
In short, LaBouf is caught on the horns of his own dilemma: was the dismissal because of internal dissension (a valid reason, I believe, for a dismissal in some situations), or was the dismissal because of a change in the church's beliefs regarding women as teachers? The American Baptist church normally does not hold to hierarchy teachings; that is a Southern Baptist distinctive. There seems to be more than a bit of waffling here as to just why all this happened.[via Blue Christian~On a Red Background, emphasis mine]
At any rate, I for one find it instructive that the Southern Baptists' Mohler would grab hold of LaBouf as a brave, biblical pastor. What I would point to is the unintentional example both men set for us.
LaBouf and his board used gender as a means to get rid of someone they (rightly or wrongly) felt was troublesome and divisive. Using gender that way illustrates just how evil and pernicious hierarchal teachings are, and how they often seem to blind those who hold them to their own true motives.
Mohler and those who preceeded him in the fundamentalist takeover of the Southern Baptists some years back have systematically stripped women in their denomination of preaching, teaching, and even most missionary roles. Could it be that the women often also represented a more moderate, less strident, version of evangelical Christianity to which the fundamentalists were so bent on removing from positions of influence? I strongly suspect so. A post-modern critique of language as power-mongering ("biblical" defined as disempowering women) might be quite applicable in this scenario.