Saturday, 03 December 2011
-
Thinking about Submission in Light of Domestic Abuse
By Sharon at SheWorships
Earlier today, writer Rachel Held Evans posted a blog in which she issued a strong condemnation of Michael and Debi Pearl, authors of the controversial book To Train Up a Child. In case you’re unfamiliar with the book, Rachel offers a a summary of the controversy behind it, the center of which is its alleged role in child abuse and the deaths of several children.
What I want to address here is another book that Rachel mentioned on her blog, Created to Be His Help Meet, also authored by Debi Pearl. I have not read this book, but Rachel highlighted an excerpt contributed by Debi’s husband, Michael, in which he wrote the following:
“Has your husband reviled you and threatened you? You are exhorted to respond as Jesus did. When he was reviled and threatened, he suffered by committing himself to a higher judge who is righteous. You must commit yourself to the one who placed you under your husband’s command. Your husband will answer to God, and you must answer to God for how you respond to your husband, even when he causes you to suffer.Just as we are to obey government in every ordinance, and servants are to obey their masters, even the ones who are abusive and surly, ‘likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands’…You can freely call your husband ‘lord’ when you know that you are addressing the one who put him in charge and asked you to suffer at your husband’s hands just as our Lord suffered at the hands of unjust authorities…When you endure evil and railing without returning it, you receive a blessing, not just as a martyr, but as one who worships God.”
Again, I have not read this book and I don’t know whether this quote was somehow taken out of context to convey something other than what the author intended. What I do know is this: This excerpt is an excellent example of why we MUST talk about domestic abuse whenever we talk about submission.
As a result of numerous factors such as bad exegesis, mental illness, or basic, ugly depravity, Ephesians 5:22 has been used to trap women in abusive relationships. Believing that they are honoring God, witnessing to their husbands, and becoming like Christ, women have allowed themselves to be battered or emotionally assaulted.
This cannot stand.
What makes Ephesians 5:22 tricky is that there tend to be two different responses to this verse (although there really is a spectrum between these two poles): Some Christians reject it altogether as inherently patriarchal and oppressive to women, while others accept the teaching as a universal principle, perhaps making an exception in the case of abuse.
I think both approaches are problematic. For those who would reject Ephesians 5:22, I am sensitive to the stigma attached to submission. In our culture today, this word is nearly synonymous with oppression. It is a wholly unpalatable concept for women today, so I realize the difficulty some of you will have with what I’m about to say. Namely, this verse IS still relevant for women. It is the Word of God, inspired and authoritative, so we cannot simply discard it.
This verse clarifies the manner in which marriage reflects the love between Christ and the church. Given that our culture worships autonomy and individualism, the public imagination struggles to conceive of a love that involves surrender. The two seem antithetical, thereby making the gospel seem strange and even repulsive. Christian marriage, however, is our opportunity to display the freedom of submission to God by providing the world with a glimpse of it here on earth. That is why we cannot let go of submission, for men or women.
On the other hand, I disagree with those who would claim that submission is a universal principle for wives, even if they make an exception for abuse. The problem is that this universalizing interpretation makes the verse incoherent with the whole of Scripture. Although the marriage relationship reflects Christ and the church, it is an imperfect analogy. This state of imperfection is nowhere more clear than when a woman must sin in order to remain submitted to her husband. Those who universalize this verse must concede that women can sometimes sin in doing so, which makes no sense. Others avoid this pitfall by making exceptions, but they tend to do so arbitrarily. If this verse is “law,” so to speak, Paul provides no exception clause.
That is why Ephesians 5:22 must not be interpreted as law. Instead, verse 15 offers a better interpretational lens for understanding this teaching:
Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise.
Submission is a matter of wisdom. It is not a black and white issue but one that requires discernment and a heart after God. It requires that we consult with others to make sure we are not confusing wisdom with selfish motivations or blind obedience. It also means that submission is not an unbreakable command that seems strangely out of sync with the rest of Scripture. Submission to our husband is one way that we can honor them and glorify God, but not always.
Some of you will feel uncomfortable with this. It isn’t concrete enough. What if, you fear, women take advantage of that freedom and refuse to honor their husbands? That is why the community of the church is necessary. The Body of Christ helps us to live out our calls to honor God and one another, and to do so honestly.
Others of you might see this as a lost opportunity for women to witness to their husbands. As the Pearls seem to argue, women who endure abuse are mirroring Christ and thereby drawing their husbands closer to God. Here I must echo my sister Rachel in an unequivocal condemnation of this belief. Yes, there is a spectrum of situations in which a woman should persevere in a difficult marriage for the purpose of God’s redemptive work. But in situations of abuse where the husband is either mentally ill or simply a criminal (Remember, everyone, abuse is AGAINST THE LAW!) then both the church and the local authorities need to intervene. These women are not bearing abuse because of their faith; they are bearing abuse because their husbands are sick. Enabling that sickness and that sin is not helping anyone and it CERTAINLY isn’t glorifying to God.
I would also add that by remaining in an abusive situation, it sends a TERRIBLE message to the children. It teaches sons to abuse and teaches girls to accept abuse.
Sister, if you currently find yourself in an abusive relationship, please remove yourself from harm’s way immediately! Contact your church, call the police, and make sure your children are safe as well. Don’t hesitate to contact me if you need help finding local assistance. It is the role of the church to shield you, love you, and help you heal, but the church can do that for neither you nor your husband if you stay silent and continue to place yourself in danger. Let God do His work through the church. Please speak up!
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: sheworships
- Name: Sharon
- About Me: Sharon Hodde Miller is a North Carolina girl, born and raised! She is originally from Charlotte, NC, and she received her undergraduate degree and Masters of Divinity from Duke University. Sharon has worked for Proverbs 31 Ministries where she was a contributing writer to the ministry’s daily devotions and radio broadcasts. She has written for Relevant Magazine’s online articles, Lifeway’s Collegiate Magazine, Ungrind Webzine, and she continues to write and minister to women all over the world about being a Christian woman in an ever-changing culture. Sharon currently lives in Durham, North Carolina with her husband, who is currently pursuing a Master of Divinity at Duke Divinity School. If you would like to contact her regarding a speaking or writing opportunity, if you have any questions, or would like to submit a blog topic, please e-mail her at sharon(at)sheworships(dot)com.
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 1 321 Views: 220 246030 Comments: 1 2709 View all posts by sheworships
Comments (28)
Another good blog, as usual. I was given that book, "Created to be His Help Meet." It is on my book shelf beside me right now. Sadly, I've been too lazy to read it. I wish I could give a review for it.
It saddens me that we can take such verses-which are there for our instruction on how to be more like Jesus-and use them to trap women into staying in abusive situations. Hopefully, we will be more wise as to how we read and interpret Scripture.
The trouble with living your life out of a book is that you don't learn to think for yourself or apply common sense.
Every institution needs an authoritative leader or the institution with fall victim to divisions, factions and then disintegrate.
Marriage is an institution and according to Christian teaching, the man is the leader. Leaders need to be a special kind of person. As a result, marriage can bring out the best in a man.
For other reasons marriage also brings out the best in women and in children.
Consequently, the standards for marriage are very high and people should not get married unless they are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to achieve those standards.
Abuse renders a person unfit for married life. Women are under no obligation whatsoever to endure abuse in the name of marriage.
See the thing about just reading Ephesians 5:22 is that it seems to be the only verse that stands out. When in reality we should be reading it in context of Eph 5:21-33, go read it.
I was raised CRC and this verse was jammed down our throats all the time. I was glad when my youth pastor of a different church read the whole passage. There is so much more to it then "wives must submit to their husbands"
Yes, wives need to submit to their husbands. BUT husbands must love their wives as Christ loved the church, that He gave His life for us. Now any woman who has a husband who loves her so much that he'd die for her, would be willingly submissive. I know, I am one of those wives, I am blessed with a wonderful loving husband.
As for abuse, I will not post my opinion of men who are abusive (I was in 2 seriously abusive relationships. Praise God He delivered me from them unharmed). BUT wives can be just as verbally, mentally and emotionally abusive to their husbands. Women have a way of being terribly catty to their husbands, and that is just as much abuse as a husband hitting his wife. Abuse is abuse.We as wives need to be building our men up, not tearing them down.
Any woman who wants to be a better wife should go get the book "Have a New Husband by Friday" by Dr K Leman. This book changed my marriage.
It actually saddens me when women take hold of Ephesians 5:22 and set out to prove that it is a verse that any woman in 2011 should put any stock in. It is bad enough men want to take Biblical passages and prove they rule the roost over women, women don't need to reinforce it. Jesus died for all our sins, not to put men in charge.
1) Paul did not actually know Jesus when Jesus was alive. He "thinks" that he has the Spirit of God, but only "thinks". (1 Corinthians 7:40)
2) Paul witnessed Jesus after he died and he says, "For Christ did not send me to baptize but to proclaim the gospel, and not with eloquent wisdom, so that the cross of Christ might not be emptied of its power." (1 Corinthians 1:17)
Clearly God's intended role for Paul was to spread the Gospels, not for Paul to create what Paul believed to be necessary rules and regulations. Though Paul freely spoke his mind to the people he came into contact with. Let us not forget we are Christians... who follow Christ and his teachings, not Paul's. Paul was a product of his time. His writings were his thoughts on how things should be, not necessarily direct commandments from God to be practiced for all time. That was the job of Jesus. The story of Paul is fascinating but simply a story of a man who helped to spread Christianity and begin the process of making it acceptable and not a crime.
@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - A religion defines itself, not outsiders. So a Buddhist has no authority to define Islam for Muslims and visaversa.
Your version of Christianity is purely personal and consequently has no authority to define the Christian faith to Christians.
Christianity was passed from Jesus to his Apostles. Jesus gave his teaching authority to them. We know that from what the Bible says. Roman and Eastern Catholicism and Protestants all accept the Bible as authoritative with respect Christianity.
Christianity understands Saint Paul to be an Apostle who taught with the full authority of Jesus Christ. Part of the Christian teachings concerning marriage are that the man is the leader. Leader does not mean dictator or slave driver or licensed abuser as you would have everyone think.
I would just like to THANK the author for posting this.
I grew up in an extremely abusive home...my father was physically, emotionally, and sexually abusive to my mother and to me. The sad part about this, is that in all of our years of attending church (we were LCMS Lutherans) not ONCE did we hear a sermon, or a word from a pastor or elder about how this kind of behavior was wrong. Instead we heard that verse in Ephesians. My mother stayed in the relationship for 15 years and had 4 children with him.
Even now, the current pastor at our church says that the Bible does not address DV (domestic violence) and that DV is NOT a reason to leave a marriage per Biblical standards. I don't feel that I should have to convince my Pastor who is to be shepherd of faith, grace, and salvation, why DV is wrong and why a woman should never stay in a marriage riddled with abuse.
I feel that this kind of attitude allows the church to justify these things to keep men in positions of power and oppression over women. That is not marriage.
It also allows them to blur the lines by saying that the Bible doesn't actually come out and say DV is *wrong*. But I've countered before with the following: the Bible doesn't come out and say that Slavery is wrong, and in fact, Abraham had many slaves, but it is the general belief now, that slavery is an injustice.
Or what about polygamy? How many of God's blessed in the OT had more than 1 wife or had a concubine on the side? Now, that is looked down upon and is even outlawed. And then in the NT Paul said that "it is better than a man should not marry..." but encouraged them to do so to avoid sexual immorality.
Also, marriage is to be a representation of Jesus' relationship with the church....and obviously, if you look at it that way, then domestic violence is not appropriate nor sanctioned by God.
So I know I just wrote a book and it's probably not very well articulated, but this is a little personal for me. Thanks, again, to the author for writing about this in such an eloquent way.
@homealivein45@xanga - I am far from the only Christian to question just what Jesus intentions for Paul were. Because the brand of Christianity that became popular includes viewing Paul as a sound person to take direction from, doesn't make it so. I'll stick to the teachings of Jesus only, thanks. Paul has some interesting points to make, but the son of God he was not.
@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - Paul was knocked of his horse and personally converted by Jesus. This happened in front of witnesses. Believing only those parts of the Bible that are agreeable to us is called cafeteria Christianity.
If we allow Christianity to be defined by our personal opinions then it can mean anything and everything according to an infinite number of personal opinions. And in that case it will mean nothing.
You may as well name your religion after yourself since you create it according to your own thinking. How then can it be truthful?
@homealivein45@xanga - Paul himself said that he thinks he has the spirit of God. Only thinking isn't good enough for me. He wrote letters to various churches offering up his advice, some of that advice is good and some is bad. Women don't have to submit to their husbands anymore than they have to never, ever cut their hair or wear it long and veiled in church. Jesus explained what we must do. Paul helped put Christianity on the map and spread the gospel, that is what only what Jesus asked him to do. Because men want to dominate women, they like to believe Paul has authority.
@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - You are equating yourself and your opinion with people who were instructed by Jesus himself.
You are passing judgement on an Apostle and rejecting his teaching authority. That is all well and good, but it isn't Christian.
Since you are a self-proclaimed non-christian your opinions have no bearing at all on Christianity which as I stated earlier, cannot be defined by outsiders.
@homealivein45@xanga - I am indeed Christian, I believe Jesus was the son of God. John 3:16 ensures me I'm correct. :)
@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - If you say so. But Christianity is defined by the Bible and the teachings that Jesus passed to the Apostles.
Since you reject the teaching authority of the Bible and the Apostles how can you say you believe in Jesus?
What you believe in actually, are your own personal opinions. And personal opinions are not Christianity since personal opinions could be anything, everything or nothing at all.
@homealivein45@xanga - My personal opinions on Christianity are just as Christian as Paul's personal opinions are his opinions too. Perhaps I think I have the holy spirit in me too! Ha!
@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - And yet Peter affirmed Paul's teachings as Scriptures, so how do you hold to your views in light of this?
2 Peter 3:15-16 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear
brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these
matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand,
which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do with OTHER SCRIPTURES, to their own destruction.
To Peter, Paul's writings were just as quotable as scripture (He quotes Romans 2:4 here) and just as equal to other scriptures in the matter of what people distort and twist TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION. Don't know about you, but to me it sounds like Peter placed Paul's stuff on the same level as other sacred writings for which God will judge men by.
As to your other comments regarding Paul in 1st Corinthians 7 --- I spent a full year studying just that chapter by the way, literally one year --- Read the verse in context please and then tell me you think Paul has not the spirit. For you carefully omit ONE WORD which changes the whole context away from your argument.
1 Corinthians 7:40 --- and I think that I TOO have the Spirit of God.
Paul is defending himself against people who, like you, would state that he has no business addressing the Church with any authority. By omitting the word "Too" (which is in the greek, by the way) you change the thought of the verse from the sense of defending himself to something sounding like he's questioning his own position in Christ. Nothing could be further from the truth.
But why would Paul end this chapter in this fashion? What prompts him to make this statement. Look back for a moment to where this whole chapter began --- take a look at these verses and things become clearer as to why Paul might have to make a defense of his Ministry.
1 Corinthians 7:10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord):
Ok, he's quoting scripture and cites his proof --- this is the Lord speaking.
1 Corinthians 7:12 To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): if any of you have a non-believing spouse....
Hold right there. Did God, anywhere in all of Scripture, talk about having NON-Believing spouses? There are no commands about this sort of mixed marriage ANYWHERE in all of Scripture. So Paul is telling us not that he doesn't have God's Spirit, but rather IN EQUAL AUTHORITY, he lays down principles for us to follow since this is now a new situation that requires new understanding.
In the old times you had Judaism and paganism. Rarely (Ruth and Rahab come to mind) did a pagan come to Judaism --- and when they did, they weren't given separate commandments, they were given the Torah just as every other Jew was. BTW Ruth and Rahab became Grandmother and Great Grandmother to King David. God honored their flight from paganism by including them in the lineage of Jesus.
Now, here in our "Gentile" time, we have situations arise where someone can become a believer, a follower of Christ, and yet already be married. Does His newfound convictions negate his previous PAGAN marriage? Does her newfound faith require that she leave all things behind and abandon husband and family? Does his newfound passion for Christ mean that all old things are now put away --- including his wife who follows Venus, Apollo and the horde of other pagan gods and goddesses?
Paul addresses the matter with conviction, laying down principles just as though he had apostolic authority.... which he does and did, and defends in his very next letter to the Corinthains --- 2 Corinthians 10 and 11.
He follows those two passages up with this one
1 Corinthians 7:25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy.
Again showing that while the Old Testament stood silent, questions were arising and as "God's apostle to the Gentiles" (Romans 11:13) Paul stood to give answers to the questions that Judaism had never considered --- gentiles following God. The Covenant was to Jews who were faithful to Judaism.... but we're no longer under that, are we? Thus, Paul wrote his letters to address matters of faith to us Gentiles and even Peter understood clearly Paul's role, function and position within the church.
If This were true of Peter --- then why do you reject him so thoroughly? Have you a beef with God? Have you something in your heart you're unwilling to surrender and so you rail against the teachings that you can't stomach? The trinity offends many --- should we therefore decry it and open ourselves up to anyone who'll come, belief in a triune God not necessary? If you become the arbiter of what is and or isn't truth --- Since when did God anoint you His new apostle? And why did God wait 2,000 years to have you come along to have to explain it all to us? Why did God leave men in darkness for 2,000 years --- with noone else in Church history taking your position? (Save maybe the Jehovah's Witnesses who also cry foul of Paul's teachings) I likewise studied Church History and world history for 6 straight years.... I know quite a thing or two about what I am talking about.
Seems to me, you're the one on shaky ground here.... not us. And I would counsel you to carefully consider the WHOLE counsel of God, not just those parts you find pleasing to your personal thoughts.
@JulieMillerFan@xanga - Peter, a wonderful man I'm sure, but still not Jesus. So, I accidentally forgot the word "too", not on purpose. The focus on that quote is that Paul "thinks" but doesn't "know".
My faith in God does not waiver. Paul's job was to spread the gospel and he did. I believe Jesus was the one meant to teach God's word, not a list of other people. I will decide what makes sense of Paul's teachings and what seems to be more a product of his time. I am free to do that and God hasn't struck me down yet.
Yes, all these unanswered questions arose in the early church. I have no doubt that if Jesus were to come back now certain issues (I'm not going to list a bunch of them) would be changed including women must submit to their husbands. Clearly men have taken the upper hand for the last 2,000 years and are very happy for women to also believe it. Men have had complete control over what has been put into the Bible.
If Paul had said, "XYZ people can't make it into heaven so you can be mean to them". Guess what? I'm going to read that and see that although Jesus sent him to spread the gospel, being mean to someone is not something Christianity should promote and I'm not going to do it. If God stood before me now and said that I should submit to my husband, I'd have more than just a few words to say to Him. Because I believe in Him and trust in Him doesn't mean even He has a right to doom women as subservient and submissive. It would be about time He changed His mind on that! And God created me, so He already knows.
@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - WOW.... I had heard tell as a joke of people looking for vacancies in the trinity, but man... to actually meet one? That's a pretty big ego you have there to arrogantly suppose that you can tell God what to do with His own creation... yourself included. How's pride treating you these days? Perform any noteworthy miracles oh mighty prophetess?
No, sarcasm aside, your reply was the worst case of arrogance I have encountered in my 35 years journey as a believer. To presume that you could tell God off as to what he decides is or isn't truth.... that just takes the cake.
Humble yourselves before the Lord and He will lift you up.
I guess that part follows submission in your hack & slashing of which verses to keep, eh?
@JulieMillerFan@xanga - Guess what, I'll get into heaven just fine. I believe in God and He knows it.
I'm encouraged and glad to hear your words in respect to understanding that these teachings are meant to become a testimony to the world of the Church and its submission to Christ.
I've experienced the opposite side of the spectrum where my mother had completely usurped the authority and become overbearing.
There are serious problems with either brushing these verses aside and refusing to address them or rejecting them altogether as irrelevant.
I think what has been mentioned on this post is the starting point for teaching the issue of authority within the Church- it begins with Christ and that includes His testimony of marriage within the church.
Child abuse is wrong!
So glad I'm an atheist.
@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - considering it was the church that validated both the gospels and Paul's writings as scripture, how do you take one and not the other? If you think the church made a mistake in viewing Paul's writings as scripture, what makes you confident that the words of Jesus that you read in your bible today are what he actually said?
Considering "the church", whichever church that may be, has no more credentials than any other group of men deciding that they want women to submit to them, I'm going to go with what I read. Of course, no one person (male or female) can be assured of what exactly in the Bible is undeniable truth, so we all take what we read and interpret it.
IMO, Jesus is the final authority, I follow his examples. Paul's job was to spread the gospel and he did. Nothing tells me that his opinions are meant to usurp or add to what Jesus taught. In Paul's era, women were nothing at all... it was a sign of his times. I highly doubt if Paul went around teaching that men and women were equals in marriage and both had to submit to God and only to God, 'the church" would have given him any credence. There are lots of other biblical writings that "the church" decided wasn't worthy, maybe they were wrong at some points. Anything decided solely by a group of males that includes teachings that say women must submit to husbands and cannot teach men is subject to my scrutiny. Nothing that I recall off the top of my head, suggested that Jesus felt the same way.
@JulieMillerFan@xanga - i don't even have the energy to get into a long debate about this with you, but i just felt the need to say that as someone who believes that god is good and loving, i cannot believe that god supports patriarchal oppression. it is really easy for men in the church to condemn women for refusing to buy into the sexism that is so rampant in christianity and society as a whole, but i think it's no coincidence that the bible was penned by men in a time when men were in charge of EVERYTHING. you can call me a heretic or a cafeteria christian or any other name under the sun, but i will never give up believing in god and also in my own equal worth as a human being to all other human beings, male, female, transgender, what have you.
"re-examine all you have been told at school or church or in any book, dismiss whatever insults your own soul, and your very flesh shall be a great poem and have the richest fluency not only in its words but in the silent lines of its lips and face and between the lashes of your eyes and in every motion and joint of your body" - walt whitman.
the idea that i need men to lead me because women are inherently incapable of leadership offends my soul.(and no, i don't hold walt whitman higher than god by any means, i just hold him higher than chauvinistic jerks.)
Amen. If he's not loving you as Christ loved the church, maybe it is not your call to stay and submit to him.
@corporatecrow@xanga - I totally agree with you!!