The CBE Scroll

Not long ago we were alerted to an article written by the Rev. Dr Marie Fortune on her blog (see FaithTrust Institute) in which it was reported that a key spokesperson for complementarians stated that there were just two options for husbands whose authority was threatened.

“And husbands on their parts, because they’re sinners, now respond to that threat to their authority by either being abusive…..or more commonly to become passive, acquiescent and simply not asserting the leadership they ought to as men in their homes and churches”

Dr Fortune writes that this ‘insight’ was prefaced with the opinion that the problem begins with women who ‘rebel’ against their husbands who have been given authority over them by God; once again blaming the victim.

We could assume by these statements that here we have someone who has limited experience with domestic violence and has attempted to excuse behaviours which are obviously ungodly.

The third option of course is for husbands and wives to stand side by side as equal partners, faithful to each other and submitting to one another in love. No abuse here by either person and an opportunity to demonstrate true Christ-like qualities.

Some, complementarian or otherwise, may believe that we egalitarians don’t love our fathers. Well, I loved my father. I want to share some memories of my father to show why I loved him so much.

When I was twenty, I had to take some medicine. My father was worried that the condition I had would interrupt my studies. As a result, he asked me daily if I was taking my medicine. My mother asked him to stop. A couple of days later I received a phone call. When I picked it up I heard a very low voice say ‘Did you take your medicine today?’ I said ‘Yes, dad.’ My father said bye and abruptly hung up. This happened again two days later. I think my mother caught him, because he never did it again.

Another time, we couldn’t buy anything extra because money was tight. My mother wanted to buy a new dress, however because of our situation she decided to wait several months, until Mother’s Day. But, my father told her to go buy one right away. He said ‘The mother of the family shouldn’t have to wait until Mother’s Day to get a new dress.’

Both my sister and I lived hundreds of miles away from my parents at different times. I remember when my sister lived far away. Whenever she would call, my father would get excited. I told my sister about this and she said ‘Dad used to get that way whenever you called also (when I had lived far away).’

He’s been gone now several years, and there’s not a day that I don’t think of him.

I understand that not everyone is lucky enough to have such fond memories as I do. But, I ask those who do to share them. Hopefully, any complementarians and/or others who may believe that we don’t love our fathers will read our memories and understand that we do, just as they do.

We hear a lot about God speaking to women through men. But, does God ever speak to men through women? Let’s look at the biblical record.

‘After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men. The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.” So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. Suddenly Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me.”’ (Matthew 28:1-10, NIV, emphasis added)

‘There was also a prophetess, Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was very old; she had lived with her husband seven years after her marriage, and then was a widow until she was eighty-four. She never left the temple but worshiped night and day, fasting and praying. Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem.’ (Luke 2:36-38, NIV, emphasis added)

‘Then, leaving her water jar, the woman went back to the town and said to the people, “Come, see a man who told me everything I ever did. Could this be the Christ?”’ (John 4:28-29, NIV)

‘Many of the Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, “He told me everything I ever did.” So when the Samaritans came to him, they urged him to stay with them, and he stayed two days. And because of his words many more became believers.’ (John 4:39-41, NIV, emphasis added)

‘But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, and she said to Abraham, “Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.” The matter distressed Abraham greatly because it concerned his son. But God said to him, “Do not be so distressed about the boy and your maidservant. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. I will make the son of the maidservant into a nation also, because he is your offspring.”’ (Genesis 21:9-13, NIV, emphasis added)

‘Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time. She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites came to her to have their disputes decided. She sent for Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, “The LORD, the God of Israel, commands you: ‘Go, take with you ten thousand men of Naphtali and Zebulun and lead the way to Mount Tabor. I will lure Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his troops to the Kishon River and give him into your hands.’”’ (Judges 4:4-7, NIV, emphasis added)

‘Then Deborah said to Barak, “Go! This is the day the LORD has given Sisera into your hands. Has not the LORD gone ahead of you?” So Barak went down Mount Tabor, followed by ten thousand men. At Barak’s advance, the LORD routed Sisera and all his chariots and army by the sword, and Sisera abandoned his chariot and fled on foot. But Barak pursued the chariots and army as far as Harosheth Haggoyim. All the troops of Sisera fell by the sword; not a man was left.’ (Judges 4:14-16, NIV, emphasis added)

Sociologist Michael S. Kimmel discusses the role of ‘masculinity’ in violence. He finds that ‘in societies where masculine bravado - the posture of strength and the repression and denial of fear - was a defining feature of masculinity, violence was likely to be high. It turns out that those societies in which bravado is prescribed for men are also those in which the definitions of masculinity and femininity are very highly differentiated’ (Kimmel, 245). So, in cultures where gender roles are distinct, levels of violence by males towards females (and other males) are likely to be high. One of the most significant correlations with violence, then, is what we call gender polarization.

Does our culture polarize gender? Look at this short list of characteristics that are often applied to men and women. They are, in most cases, opposites.

Men: Protective, Strong, Leader, Initiative, Aggressive, Rational, Active

Women: Protected, Weak, Follower, Responsive, Passive, Emotional, At Rest

Instead of focusing on Christ-like attributes we should all have, we try and split this into ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ behavior. This takes us away from focusing on what is good and what we as brothers and sisters should all exemplify, and we move to trying to satisfy cultural norms.

The trajectory of biblical equality is not that we will all be the same, but that we will be free to encourage the unique gifting of each person. Androgyny is a much more likely outcome of polarizing gender roles, and placing a higher value on one role, as we currently do.

When we see humanity as polarized groups of ‘others,’ we place boundaries in the way of unity. Before we even meet someone we know it will be harder to relate to them because they are of the ‘opposite’ sex. And, we know that the less like ourselves we view someone (and the more ‘other’ they are) the easier it is for us to treat them as if they are not human at all.

Brad Wilcox is at it again. Chrisitanity Today interviewed him regarding his new sociological study, “What’s Love Got to Do with It? Equality, Equity, Commitment, and Women’s Marital Quality.” First as Megan O’Rourke points out in her article on Salon “this study is based on surveys done between 1992 and 1994.” Of course he found that women who stay in “traditional” roles were happier, and that even egalitarian women were happier when their husbands brought home at 66% of the income. I do agree that women want emotional engagement from their husbands–of course we want them to want to be a part of our lives and interested in who we are and what we do. But I do not agree with it doesn’t matter how much housework he does as he is emotionally engaged. For me and a lot of my female friends these are two sides of the same coin. If he is emotionally engaged and paying attention to us, then he won’t mind helping when we ask, or even help without being asked.

Here is a gem of a statement regarding the egalitarian “sub-sample” he studied:

I reran all of my analyses with a sub-sample of women who had more egalitarian attitudes. Even for these women, they’re more likely to be happy when their husbands earn the lion’s share of income, when they share religious attendance with their husbands, when they share a strong, normative commitment to marriage with their husbands, and when they don’t work outside the home.

I think his sub-sample is very limited. Also according to him:

“But this study certainly does suggest that when it comes to different emphases in the family, the complementarian side seems to be, shall we say, more in touch with how the average American married couple experiences family life.”

My secular friends would roll over laughing at this. They all have egalitarian marriages or relationships, and look at the complementarian marriage as ancient and out of touch with today’s world.

It wouldn’t be so bad if he stuck with the complementarian group, but he doesn’t. He insists on taking his beliefs and trying to apply them across the board. As one of my favorite quotes says, “If you torture data sufficiently, it will say anything.” I think this applies to this study. I think his egalitarian and “American married couple” is a very limited, tightly controlled group used to back up his pet theories. Which is unfortunate because it makes me doubt if the other part of his study is skewed as well. I’m hoping that the part about couples who attend church regularly not divorcing as much as the general population (as opposed to Christians who attend church nominally) is true. But I can only hope because of the rest of the article.

I wonder if Christianity Today will allow the other side of this story to be told?