The CBE Scroll

Comment by Lori

October 31, 2006 @ 5:17 am

Here is an absolutely excellent article that analyzes different types of marriages, and shows that marriages based on comp./patriarchal teachings have higher rates of abuse and unhappiness. If you want to read a real-life example that will break your heart and make you angry, then here. (Click on the link to the right that says “New blog shining light on patriarchy.”)

Basically, it tells the story of a woman who suffered under her abusive husband because her pastor kept telling to go back home and submit and try to win her husband by her godly conduct. She ended up being killed by her husband, and the pastor sadly concluded “Maybe I gave her the wrong advice.” That woman is not alone; I have heard other abused women say they were given the same advice by their pastors.

I know that many complementarians would not tolerate abuse against women, and I’m glad that both sides are willing to take a stand against it. However, I don’t think that many complementarians grasp that their own teachings are more likely to produce abusive behavior, and why. A while back ago, I read an article in , written by a complementarian pastor. He addressed the issue of abuse in the church, and said that the answer was to educate men more about their responsibilities to love their wives like Christ.

He…just…didn’t…get…it. A man who is predisposed to hate women and to want to commit violence against them is not going to give a toss about any education he might receive. If that were true, we could empty our prisons by simply educating the prisoners. Instead, a man who wants to “punish” women, and who believes that he has the right to do so because God has made him the head of the house, will continue right on doing so. And women who are taught that it is their job to submit no matter what will continue to be victims, and fatalities.

Comment by Lainie Petersen

October 31, 2006 @ 11:05 am

Yes, and now there is “Christian” Domestic Discipline which advocates the corporal punishment of women (usually spanking) “for her own good”. There is a sexual subtext to it all, of course.

Now I believe that the vast majority of complementarians/patriarchalists are opposed to this sort of thing. In fact, most of them are likely quite aghast at the idea. But this is the sort of fruit that one gets from the belief that marriage partners stand in a hierarchical relationship to each other.

Comment by PS

October 31, 2006 @ 3:31 pm

Maybe more fundamentally, it would be good to educate people that they can’t get their happiness or fulfillment from other people. Other people can’t make us happy, sad, hurt, etc. We react with our feelings based on lots of things in our background, but other people don’t control these feelings.

Unfortunately, many of us never hear this except in therapy.

But my point is that this could be helpful to both the man and the woman in an abusive relationship. The abuser is trying to get something, some feeling, some control, etc. from what he/she does to the other party. And, yes, the woman can be the abuser as well. Perhaps she is less often the physical abuser, but remember, sarcasm is also a form of abuse, as is disrespect. But I agree that the “complementarian” philosophy feeds this in its most simplistic form.

Comment by Liz

November 1, 2006 @ 8:47 pm

I think PS is on to something. It’s always preferable to prevent rather than pick up pieces and it’s something that needs to be taught very early in life. Recently I mentioned to a friend that I had always known that I had to answer to God and not people and that this was a freeing thing. The other person was amazed that I knew this as a child. Maybe some of these truths are not plainly taught, just assumed, and children get the wrong idea as they try to fit into the big world.

Comment by sally

November 2, 2006 @ 8:48 pm

RE #2
I looked at your link and was thoroughly appalled by what I found - it was practically pornographic.

Surely this can’t be ‘Christian’ can it? Surely no Christians worth the name would go in for this sort of stuff? If they do, it’s a horror!

Comment by Lainie Petersen

November 3, 2006 @ 10:51 am

Sadly, it appears that at least some do, and justify their perversion by, you guessed it, the “headship” texts.

Think about it: If a man is the “head of his home” and he is justified in applying the “rod of correction” to his kids, why not apply it to his wife? Particularly if one has predilections in that direction.

AGAIN: I do NOT believe that the vast majority of complementarians or patriarchalists go for such things. Most are likely as appalled at the idea as we feminists/egalitarians are. However, I think that we need to consider how a “plain sense” understanding of Bible passages can lead to some very unintended consequences.

Comment by LJR

November 3, 2006 @ 11:25 am

Re: comment #5:
Sadly, what Lainie posted is true. I ran across these people several years ago on the Delphi forums. They hold extremely traditional Christian beliefs, so they back up what they do with Scripture. I’m not saying they use it correctly, but they do use Scripture to justify themselves.

Comment by Kathryn

November 3, 2006 @ 5:28 pm

I looked it up too, and pornography is the right word for it.

Comment by Lori

November 4, 2006 @ 5:56 am

I first heard about “domestic discipline” back on the old Egalitarian Christian Alliance forums. I, too, couldn’t believe it until I saw the websites myself. They say that practicing this stuff is supposed to be a mutual decision, but I wonder. When the wife has been, for a lack of a better term, brainwashed to believe that she has to submit to just about everything, can you really call that mutual?

Comment by Paula

November 4, 2006 @ 5:56 pm

If there’s anything that could make God puke, I’m sure this “domestic discipline” must be it. It reveals the depths to which pride and prejudice can stoop. It is unconscionable for any Christian to think of any other Christian as inferior or to treat adults as lower than slaves. At least the Quran is honest in openly admitting that it views women as on the level of animals or children at best, but the twisted belief that the God of the Bible would condone such a thing is more than just wrong, it’s evil. Shame on any Christian who would practice or accept DD.

Comment by LJR

November 5, 2006 @ 7:48 pm

Lori: It may start out a mutual decision; but once DD is embraced, there’s no way out for the wife. I’ve talked to some of the people in these relationships. I can’t give certain details on this forum about what these people have said, so let’s just say that the word “negotiation” no longer exists and leave it at that. Only the husband’s acceptance of Biblical equality (or at least a repudiation of DD in favor of a more mainstream comp marriage… I can give comps some credit when it’s due) can give the wife back her freedom (or at least some of it).