What You Don't Know About Complementarian Women
Earlier this year, when I listened to John Piper address pastors and argue for Christianity's "masculine feel," I was outraged.
Weeks later, when I picked up the book Junia Is Not Alone, in which Scot McKnight reclaims the story of Junia and other lost historical Christian women, I sobbed.
So it may come as a surprise that I am a complementarian. I believe that men—not women—are commissioned by God to lead churches and families. Raised Southern Baptist, I learned that women should submit to their husbands. My childhood home hummed with the principles of submission, although if Dad were to ask how much Mom had spent on the new drapes, I was not to tell.
I was first exposed to the diversity of Christian opinion about gender roles while in Christian college. I heard credible, convincing egalitarian interpretations of Ephesians 5 and 1 Timothy 2. Soon, I enthusiastically abandoned my (albeit confused) models of male headship. And so did my fiancé.
Egalitarianism "worked" for us in the early years of our marriage. But we eventually returned to complementarianism, and not for the reasons you might think. We did not return because we had trouble resolving arguments in the egalitarian mode. Instead, we read Scripture, and theological convictions took shape. We found ourselves asking whether we had rejected complementarian theology in order to accommodate our preferences.
It is this same suspicion of bias that Rachel Held Evans brings to her yearlong experiment in biblical literalism. In A Year of Biblical Womanhood, Evans intends to expose the exegetical gymnastics we all use to contort the Bible. "We all go to the text looking for something, and we all have a tendency to find it," writes the popular blogger.
It's with great interest that I've been reading Evans's recently released book. My interest is twofold: I share some of her suspicions about modern hermeneutics, and as a wife, mother, and theological writer, I have a genuine stake in the "biblical womanhood" debate. I do not, however, intend to review the book here. Rather, I'd like to address the misconceptions about complementarians that emerge around the book and because of it.
A recent Facebook comment drew my attention to these misconceptions. "Do you think the absence of a more substantive type of Christian female blogger like Evans is due in part to the complementarian position that women shouldn't be teaching men?" the commenter asked. "In other words, [are] complementarian women being told that godly women should be blogging about parenting and homemaking and loving their husbands and not worrying so much about theology?"
Stay Sexy or Else? Well, Please Forgive These Mommy Hips
Desperate for Their MRS. Degrees
'The Office' Shows Even TV Romance Isn't Picture-Perfect
The Double Shock of Unexpected Pregnancy
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Pinterest
Comments
Displaying 1–10 of 46 comments
See all comments
Yohanna Puric
If domestic duties were taken out - if couples were able to afford domestic help - and both have careers and have the luxury of time to spend with their children because someone else cooks, washes up, picks up and drops off the kids, etc. would complementarian, egalitarian models matter much in Christian marriages? May I suggest that if couples can afford it, and if neither are inclined to housework, to take housework out of the 'equation' - and also help create jobs - by hiring a housekeeper? I think couples can better enjoy child rearing and each other that way. Just my thoughts.
Yohanna Puric
Hmm...I now better appreciate my background where housework and other domestic work were never an issue because of cheap labour. It freed us from domestic chores so we could freely have a career and also be active in church with teaching, evangelism and discipleschip. I can now also better appreciate the church governance model we had where women can aspire to be deacons and all members have a voice and be part of decision making through their votes. It must have been both egalitarian and complementarian. I must say since there were more women in the church, the vote usually went our way. The Southern Baptist church I now attend is certainly complementarian which suits my middle-aged self. I'm now happy to leave everything to men. More so I guess when I retire.
Lynn
When Jen Pollock Michel said, "Earlier this year, when I listened to John Piper address pastors and argue for Christianitys masculine feel, I was outraged", it made me think about "What Does the Bible Teach About Men/Women Relationships?" a Seven-part series (debate) by Berkeley and Alvera Mickelson and John Piper. It appeared in The Standard magazine and is available from Christians for Biblical Equality (cbeinternational.org). It's a wonderful resource for both Complemantarians and Egalitarians.
T
Christine - Glenda brought up corporate women in an argument against complementarian abuse and I heard her compare SAHMs to corporate women. Of course abuse comes from abusers, but I have seen what happens to men who expect to be the breadwinner and aren't but still believe in a traditional marriage model. It changes them in a bad way. I know plenty of SAHMs who are egalitarian - that was my point. Complementarian women can be in the workplace and egalitarian women can be at home.
Stan Guthrie
T - I don't think Glenda was saying she sees abuse in marriages both where women work in the corporate world and where wives stay at home. I took her "both sides" to mean both in homes where the marriage follows an egalitarian model and a traditional one. (BTW, I'm personally tired of the assumption that all complementarian women must be stay at home wives or at least earn less than their husbands. And - I thought - that was part of the point of this post. We're not all the same and we're not all homemakers.) Regarding abuse, it happens because the husband (or the wife) is an abuser. This has nothing to do with the marriage model followed. I have also known plenty of "strong, independent," feminist women who would be the last to sign up for a complementarian marriage who have been victims of abuse.
T
Glenda - I hear what you're saying but corporate women are not necessarily egalitarians. I've seen first hand where there is abuse in such relationships because the woman is more successful than the husband despite the complementarian model of their marriage. They may put on a "power couple" front but sometimes powerful women in business have little or no power in their own marriages.
Phillip
There is the "gentle whisper" of the Spirit of Christ; "God's established order of things.".
Glenda
Janet As a Women's Bible study leader, stay at home Mom for 20 + years and now back at work in the corporate world, I can tell you you are wrong. Abuse comes on BOTH sides. Abuse reigns where Christ does not. People always find what supports what their point of view - Personal experience is anecdotal not data.
Stan Guthrie
KatM - Jesus himself said that anyone who would lead must be servant of all. And anyone who makes marriage all about power and who gets how much is doomed to misery.
KatM
"Servant leader" is a fictitious term invented to hide the fact that it's only the male who has power. 'Servant' is the fig leaf over the whole thing, as if anyone with an above average IQ would fall for a ploy wherein the party who grants himself all power and authority pretends that he uses that power only to serve others.
*