submit to abusing husband

When We Can't Agree to Disagree
by Keri Wyatt Kent

August 7, 2009 |
The idea that men and women are created differently, in ways that complement each other, sounds okay. But often, this “equal but different” thinking results in a hierarchy that can lead to distortions of truth, or even emotional and physical abuse.

For years, I thought that as with many theological side issues, sincere Christians can agree to disagree when it comes to gender roles. Some churches let women lead and teach the whole congregation, others interpret the Bible to say that women can only lead and teach other women, and in some cases, there are limits beyond even that. (I’ve heard of one church that doesn’t allow a woman to be the head of women’s ministries.)

I disagreed with this view, known as Complementarianism, but I figured, well, if that’s how they roll, then okay. But now, I’m starting to change my mind: often, it is not okay. Because if you take Complementarianism to the extreme, it becomes destructive.


Last week I received an e-mail linking to a news story that alleges that Saddleback Church in California counseled a woman to stay in an abusive marriage and also scolded her for “gossiping” about her marriage when she tried to ask for help (this story was all over Twitter and Facebook this week too). Saddleback (led by Purpose-Driven pastor Rick Warren) teaches Complementarianism—the wife must submit to her husband and that divorce in this instance is not an option.

For the record, Saddleback pastor Tom Holladay told GFL he could not reveal specifics of confidential pastoral counseling, but that Saddleback always counsel a woman (or man) in an abusive situation to leave and find a place of safety. They would, however, urge couples to get counseling and try to reconcile.

In the family, Complementarianism plays out like this: the man is the head of the household, and the ultimate authority. They cite Ephesians 5:22, which says that a wife must submit to her husband, and the husband should love his wife. The woman must submit to that authority, which comes with the man’s protection and provision. There are plenty of women who obviously want protection and provision.

They conclude that the husband is the head of the family. I cannot find a verse in scripture that says a man is supposed to be the head of the family. What the Bible says is that the relationship between a man and his wife is like a head and a body.

Egalitarians (the opposite of Complementarian) like myself see the head and body analogy is an illustration of the unity, or oneness that God intended in creation. A husband and wife need to be a team, like a head and a body. A body needs the head, the head needs the body. We cite the same biblical passage, but we look at the wider context, starting with verse 21: “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (emphasis mine). While someone (likely not a female translator) put a subhead right after verse 21, in the original text there were no subheads. So the next verses explain mutual submission—wives, submit to your husbands, and husbands, love your wives. Paul is talking about unity and oneness. He concludes his teaching with a reminder of the oneness theme, and mutual nature of submission: “each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband” (Eph. 5:33).

In churches that embrace Complementarianism, women rarely have the right to exercise their leadership gifts fully. When a church says that the man has more authority, can use his gifts more freely, it communicates a value (intended or not) that men are of greater value. And so if a woman (who has less value) complains of abuse, it is easy in that system to discount what she says, or blame her. So in addition to being abused by her husband, the woman is also abused by her church.

Think that doesn’t happen? In 2008, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor Bruce Ware said that when women, “as sinners” try to usurp their husband’s authority and “do what they would like to do,” their husbands can “respond to that threat to their authority” by being abusive (http://equalitycentral.com/blog/?p=14). Ware blames the unsubmissive wife for the abuse. Abusers typically blame their victims—and many victims know that they cannot stop abuse by changing their behavior.

If marriage is understood as a hierarchy, then the person at the top of that structure can easily conclude that he has permission to do what is necessary to maintain power. We cannot simply say, “Well-intentioned Christians can agree to disagree” if those Christians argue that abuse is the husband’s prerogative, or worse, the wife’s fault. It is where we must stand up for true Christianity, which does not condone violence in any form, and which teaches mutual submission, not hierarchy.


Keri Wyatt Kent is the author of seven books, a freelance writer and speaker. She and her husband Scot have been married for 18 years and have two children.

Posted by Caryn Rivadeneira on August 7, 2009


Comments
My prayer is that eventually the entire Body of Christ will understand the TRUTH about submission! I am currently separated from my abusive (minister) husband who uses the passage in Ephesians and other Scriptures to dominate, intimidate, control and guilt me into submission to him (which is called spiritual abuse). I went to our head pastor and the woman who leads womens ministries - both viewed me as the problem and proceeded to tell me what my faults supposedly were (I was in un-forgiveness, had a hard heart and was walking in anger)! I was truly shocked! I have had to pull away from my church at this point and am in deep prayer with several of my friends who know and love both my husband and I. This wrong attitude and interpretation of the Scripture MUST be eradicated from the Body of Christ! I don't believe there is any room to "agree to disagree" on this particular subject! So many love to quote the verse that says, "God hates divorce" but how many have actually found that particular Scripture and read it in context? Read Malachi 2:16 (AMP) - "For the Lord, the God of Israel, says: I hate divorce and marital separation AND HIM WHO COVERS HIS GARMENT (HIS WIFE) with violence. Therefore keep a watch upon your spirit[that it may be controlled by My Spirit], that you deal not treacherously and faithlessly [with your marriage mate]." The context of that verse involves God's judgment! Husbands and wives are to submit to one another in ultimate submission to Christ! HE is the one who should be leading the marriage - LOVE and TRUTH need to guide the home, not force. Ultimately, as Christians, we must obey God and not man and if you are in an abusive marriage, the good news is: God has called you to peace and He loves you because you are His precious daughter! Sometimes separation is the catalyst for change - sometimes not. Sometimes divorce is the only way to freedom because the man chooses to harden his heart to the Holy Spirit. Abuse is NEVER okay with God!

Posted by: michele on August 8, 2009

Keri,
I agree with you completely. Complementarianism, which would be more appropriately called, "Gender-Based Hierarchy in the Body of Christ" is not an acceptable "alternative" view for followers of Christ. You state, "If marriage is understood as a hierarchy, then the person at the top of that structure can easily conclude that he has permission to do what is necessary to maintain power." POWER is the key word in understanding the complementarian position.

Everything this position teaches is centered on maintaining men's power over women: physical, emotional, spiritual, and, if possible social power. The fact that society in the west has legally eliminated that social power means that the complementarian position works even harder to hold on to the other realms of power.

Yet it is hard to find any teaching in Scripture that validates, let alone commands, one believer to exercise power over another. Quite the contrary: Jesus instructed his followers NOT to be like the Gentile rulers who "lord it over" others (Mat. 20:25).

Complementarians are quick to argue (nowadays, at least) that men who abuse their wives are misusing their power. But the power itself is never called into question. In fact the male power view comes from a culture of patriarchy, a system God neither set up, commanded nor prescribed for God's children.

There are many more reasons in addition to abuse why the hierarchical view is unacceptable for followers of Jesus. It puts a male human mediator between a woman and God. It teaches women that God will somehow hold them less responsible for their actions than men. It values women less than men (despite all the "equal but separate" rhetoric. We know how well that worked!) Most importantly, it teaches that above all else, women's lives as believers are predetermined because they are women. Every other factor from calling to gifting to experience to training is of secondary importance next to her permanently unchangeable gender. Sociologists call this determinism, and it has been used historically to maintain slavery and a host of other social ills.

You are right, Keri, gender-based hierarchy is destructive, and not only to women but to the men who promote and practice it.

Posted by: lmb on August 8, 2009

Agree!

My husband has always seen him and I as equal in our marriage - thank God! For a time, I struggled with that thought, because all I knew was the traditional way of viewing men as the head. Over the past few year, I've come to know about (and feel) the love of our creator in a new way. All humans are made in his image - so why would they not be equal and/or why would one type of humans be 'under' the other?

At times, I had a hard time explaining myself to others,so thanks for these thoughts to help me more clearly voice my viewpoints when asked.

Posted by: Janet on August 8, 2009

Keri,
Thank you for your thoughts on this matter. I respect your input as a faithful servant of God.

I would have an initial question about some of what you stated. You said:

"Egalitarians like myself see the head and body analogy is an illustration of the unity, or oneness that God intended in creation. A husband and wife need to be a team, like a head and a body. A body needs the head, the head needs the body... Paul is talking about unity and oneness. He concludes his teaching with a reminder of the oneness theme, and mutual nature of submission: “each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband” (Eph. 5:33)."

I shortened all of your quote to help fit this comment, but it can be read above.

The text you site says this: " 22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything."

If head and body emphasize oneness/sameness/unity as you state, then Christ would be the same in authority as the church. The comparison is husband to wife as Christ to church. Head to body, husband to wife, Christ to church. I don't think that you would be suggesting that Christ and the church are equal in authority as would be the logical conclusion. Could you please offer me your thoughts on how this all fits together.

Obviously, it is hard to discuss all sides of these verses in a blog, but you have attempted to show a view based on some thoughts and I am curious how you and others would carry that argument based on those verses.

Thank you for your faithfulness to God, His Word, and your family. Gracefully, KG.


Posted by: KG on August 8, 2009

Dear Keri,

Whenever I hear stories of abusive relationship like the one you mentioned, my heart trembles and I can’t help but praying for our Lord to come again soon, so such evil against our fellow sisters can be ended forever! I too feel angry, and want justice done. Nevertheless, in my attempts to voice on this important subject in various occasions, I gradually noticed a couple of things that could potentially weaken our well intentioned messages:
1) Labeling and “fighting” against anyone labeled as the opposite. In fact, from my study on the subject “women in ministry” so far, I found that the term “complementarianism” has a very broad definition and people don’t necessarily mean the same thing when they call themselves by this label. For example, I think you will be delightfully surprised if you read Dr. C. L. Blomberg ‘s essay on “Women in Ministry” collected in the book Two Views on Women in Ministry (2nd ed., 2005), in which he provides a careful survey of OT and NT scriptures in support of women in ministries, including preaching. Yet he calls himself a “complementarianist”. Should we dismiss him or his writing just because of this label, we would be missing treasures that could better equip us to dialogue more effectively with those who misinterpret the Bible and devalue women in marriage and/or ministry.
2) Let our emotions get too much in the way for us to truthfully seeking to understand the Scripture. It indeed is almost impossible not to get emotional as so much is at stake when someone denies our identity and purpose as God so created and intended. Yet when we let our emotions get out of hand, we could potentially take scripture out of context to support our own opinion. For example, I would agree with KG that your interpretation of Eph 5 is indeed questionable. Just as some of the Christian men we are criticizing here, when we use the Scripture in partiality for our own agenda instead of the will of God, we become just like them and will potentially lose credibility in front of God and our fellow Christians.
With that in mind, perhaps what we need to question is not the “headship” of husband to wife but the nature of it. If we read on to Eph 5:25-30, I would say the real meaning of “headship” becomes pretty clear--“Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her…In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body.” Do you strive to be a good Christian husband? Then don’t worry about maintaining this humanly conceived notion of “authority”; rather, cherish and nourish your wife and love to the point to give yourself up for her. And you will be amazed as to how willingly your wife will submit to your leadership! Same thing for us wives, as long as it is not about anything against God’s will (being abusive is definitely against God’s will, when we are to love even our neighbor as ourselves, let alone husband or wife!), let’s make effort in the Spirit-given strength to submit our individualistic will and preference to our husbands’ and bring peace to the family!


Posted by: Helen on August 9, 2009

Helen,

I'm not following your final points of your post. You clearly understand that the husband is called to give himself up for his wife, yet you then turn around and say that women are "to submit our individualistic will and preference to our husband's and bring peace to the family."

So what about a man's individualistic will? And where did the man's "giving himself up" go? In your last sentence, you set the man in a position of power to which a woman must give in, whereas the verses you quoted teach that a man is to be in a position of servanthood to his wife, in which he "gives himself up" for what is best for her.

A peaceful family does not consist of a wife submitting her individualistic preferences to a husband's whims. A peaceful family consists of two responsible, mature adults, neither of them acting out of their individualistic wills, but both of them acting out of what is best for everyone in the family. And generally what is best for the family is for every family member to have the freedom to wholly submit to the call that God has placed on his, or on her, life.


Posted by: Sue on August 10, 2009

Thank you for writing this, Keri! I'm glad that more and more people are no longer dismissing this issue as a matter of taste. I agree that gender equality, rather than hierarchy, is a biblical teaching.

Posted by: hollie on August 10, 2009

KG, you asked Keri how her understanding of unity could be right since you think it would mean that Christ and the church are equal in authority, which is clearly not true. I think there are a couple of things that help explain why this is not a problem.

1. The head-body example is an illustration or a metaphor. Language uses these all the time to show how things are similar. One of the first rules for understanding a metaphor is that it does not apply exactly in all of its aspects. You have to look at the context to see which part of the metaphor the author is using to make his point.

Verse 23 says, “For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.” Then verses 25-27 define what Christ did for the church: loved her, gave himself up for her, made her holy, washed her, made her radiant and without blemish.

Paul is clear: he is talking about loving and caring. The word “authority” is nowhere in the whole text. The only way to find it here is to assume beforehand that “head” stands for “boss, ruler or authority” and nothing else. But is that what it means?

In this verse, and in 1 Cor 11:3 and Col 1:18 the phrase “head of” is used to describe relationships: Christ is the head of the church, or the head of man, the husband is the head of his wife, God is the head of Christ. But Eph. 1:22 says, “And God placed all things under his [Christ’s] feet, and appointed him to be head OVER everything FOR the church, which is his body. . . .” See the difference? Here is a power or authority structure: Christ is head OVER all things FOR the church, not head over the church. It’s a different kind of relationship entirely.

2. In order to understand the idea of authority in marriage, we should look at the passage about marriage where Paul actually does use the word and explain the concept, in 1 Cor. 7. Alvera Mickelsen explains this very well in the July 30 issue of Arise published by CBE. You can subscribe here: http://www.cbeinternational.org/. Her article is excellent. I would quote it here but I’d be breaking copyright laws.

KG, I don’t know if Keri would have a different answer, but this is the reason why I think the answer to your question is no, there is no message here that the church and Christ are equal in authority: because the idea of authority isn’t even in the passage at all!


Posted by: lmb on August 11, 2009

Yes, Keri, I agree wholeheartedly, and so does my husband. The wife is to put the husband before herself. The husband is to put the wife before himself. In fact, Paul commands believers to consider others more important than themselves and Jesus clearly teaches that a "leader" is one who gives up everything to SERVE another. Funny how these principles seem to go out the window with some men the minute they are married.

Posted by: Robyn on August 11, 2009

Complementarianism occurs when people look at the Bible throught the sin-filled lenses of the world. I've always found that complementarianism goes up when people ignore the Holy Spirit.

By the way, the verses in Ephesians are about love, not authority.

Posted by: K. on August 11, 2009

My Deacon has a great take on why God made men the spiritual heads of the house, he says "well if God didn't make'em, they'd never do it" (O:

Posted by: Michael McCleary on August 11, 2009

Keri-
THANK YOU! I have just finished an abusive 36-yr marriage to an ordained ministry leader. Until this last year, all the counsel I received was as you described. When my husband added unfaithfulness to the mix, I finally understood the truth you describe. When, after 9 months of couples' counseling, he still believed I was the problem, the Lord said to me "The reign of terror is over"(Ps 10:18 The Message),and I took the hardest stand of my life and ended my marriage, with the Lord's sad blessing.
How can we reach into the hidden suffering of so many of our sisters, so that healing and grace can be poured into their lives, and into the lives of husbands willing to change?

Posted by: martha on August 11, 2009

It is interesting to me that we believe Jesus Christ is God, equal in essence to the Father, but yet He submitted to the Him. Does that submission communicate "a value that the Father is of greater value" than the Son?

Posted by: Mike on August 11, 2009

Dear Sue,

Thank you for the thoughtful response! And you are asking some real important questions for us to ponder further on the great challenge of being able to obey God’s will for husbands and wives according to the Scripture.

The truth and fact, as we all know, is that, although originally created in God’s image, we are all sinners, fall short of God’s glory, and have the strong tendency to be self-centered. Ideally, as you stated, when both my husband and I have individualistic will (desires), he would realized his problem and thus opt to satisfy mine in an effort to live up to his own godly standard for being a loving husband. Yet just like myself, he is still in the process of being sanctified and could fail (miserably) from time to time, not to mention that both of us could simply be misunderstanding the other (plus being judgmental) as finite beings. Therefore, if I insist that he live up to the biblical standard for a self-sacrificing husband, I could be hitting a stone wall at the very moment, and worse, he could cite his Bible just as well and insists on my perfect submission. Where do we go next? Often a dead end, in my personal experience, and someone has to turn around first, so that God’s grace could work us toward mutual confession and reconciliation.

My final point was just that--both husbands and wives should be reading the Bible for themselves, and we are not to hold our spouses against God’s will for them while underestimating and even letting go of our own mistakes and responsibilities. In other words, we are to submit to God’s will even when we have to suffer significant emotional distress to be the first to admit our own weakness and/or reexamine our own desire in light of God’s word.

The real amazing thing I found is that, whenever I was willing to eventually take up this challenge with Spirit-given strength (often after my argument with God in regards to the unfairness of the situation and what He wants from me), God has always been faithful to grant us grace, bringing my husband down to awareness and willingness to also fulfill his obligation for us to work toward a true reconciliation. I’m sure he has similar stories to share, in which I was the “stubborn-necked” one in the pair, and I am sure there will still be stories like down the road. But again, as long as we both (taking turn) strive to submit to God’s will with the Spirit-given strength, we regain the peace God promised to all who loves Him. Praise God!

Just like what you said, “A peaceful family consists of two responsible, mature adults, neither of them acting out of their individualistic wills, but both of them acting out of what is best for everyone in the family.” What a great way to put it, Sue, can’t agree with you more! And I’m sure God has called us into His Kingdom as teams of husband and wife for a wonderful purpose!

Posted by: Helen on August 11, 2009

I think that Complementarianism is simply the traditional Christian view of the divinely-mandated authority of the husband over the wife, with all that this implies, including the position taken by the Baptist theologian you mention. As a liberal Christian--if there can be such a thing--I don't believe I have to take Scripture with complete literalness. My wife and I have what we regard, but which an evangelical Christian who understands the Bible literally would not so regard, as a Christian marriage. Using this column's terminology, we would be Egalitarians.

However, I do not believe that Egalitarianism has any Scriptural basis; it is a secular moral view that many Christians would like to be able to find in Scripture. It is not there.

Posted by: Jim on August 11, 2009

Dear Keri,

I appreciate you voicing your concerns. I, too, despise abuse, and have several friends who have been in abusive relationships. However, I am concerned about your quote from Bruce Ware: you made him say exactly opposite what he was intending. In the link that contained the longer quote, Ware clearly calls abuse sinful. He lists it as an example of a husband's sinful response to a threat to his authority; when he says "can" he's not saying abuse is legitimate, but rather simply that it exists. I completely respect your difference of opinion with Ware on the roles of men and women in marriage, but please quote him accurately. I had him as a professor and know that he deplores abuse. Dr. Ware is one of the most humble, godly men I know. He loves his wife dearly and strives to help men treat their wives with honor and Christ-like love. Please don't slander his name by misrepresenting what he believes.

Posted by: ih on August 11, 2009

Great discussion. And I appreciated the comments defending my position--the verses about head and body are not about authority, but about love and care. Thank you, LMB.
And Jim, I'm glad you are an egalatarian in practice, but I must tell you, it does have a scriptural basis. just read through the comments on this post and you'll see it. You have to separate traditional interpretation from what the text actually says.
And IH, i did wonder about Dr. Ware's quote--what he meant by "can"--was he observing what does happen, or giving it his approval? i can see your point that he was not condoning it--however, in the text of that talk, I saw nothing where he said, 'abuse is wrong,' straight out. I wish he'd been more forthright. Not just because people like me might misinterpret his meaning, but because people who are prone to abuse might do so as well.
there are other Christian leaders who have said similar or worse things about domestic abuse, and plenty of churches who counsel women to "stay and pray" in abusive relationships. That's just wrong, no matter what you think the Bible says.

Posted by: Keri Wyatt Kent on August 11, 2009

I really do feel this is a very unbalanced perspective in terms of complimentarism and its effects on leadership within the church.

The "likely not a female translator" statement made about verse 21 made me feel very annoyed. The same verse in the Amplified Bible translation reads the same and that translation was in large part done by a woman (not to mention the countless eyes that have translated the original text the same way and verified to the best of their abilities that you would also need to rebut).

I think the part about complimentarism that gets people so irate is when they equate their experience with it (done in the wrong way) as a revelation from the Lord. Its as if when it doesn't work out, 'I must have it wrong' so if we can back it up with scripture then (Egalitarianism) it must be right (correct, prefered way etc).

For sure, you must be a team in a marriage and their must be leadership in a marriage but to say that 2 can be leaders in a marriage or in the case of a woman to lead in the same men appointed positions of church settings is counter-scriptural (12 disciples, Paul, David etc etc) I have heard the cultural arguement for why men were prefered to deliver the gospel but Jesus shook so many people's persepectives, why not female leadership when he had the chance (e.g. choose a female disciple/s)? There has to be a reason for the lack of compulsion to speak on this but just his silence on this begs the question: was there anything wrong with men chosen as leaders?

The complimentarism view can go too extreme like you've said (a man leading women's ministry is just crazy) but done properly, complimentarism and women in leadership can be done within the church environment AND be fulfilling, not oppressive to women. Unfortunately you seem to have found quite a lot of times when it was not done properly.... a trend that I find increasingly concerning.