Mary and Me and Complementarianism (by Ruth Tucker)

Last updated on: May 12, 2016 at 12:03 am by Scot McKnight

Mary and Me and Complementarianism (by Ruth Tucker) 2016-05-11T20:26:18-05:00 Scot McKnight

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Mary and Me

On May 4, 2016, Mary Kassian published a review of my book, Black and White Bible, Black and Blue Wife. Her review was in many ways similar to reviews of others who hold fast to the doctrine of male headship. The final paragraph, however, was somewhat curious, unlike anything I have ever seen in relation to one of my books:

I’ll fly anywhere in North America at my own expense to meet you. We’ll hash out a Ruth and Mary personal statement. I suspect we’ll really like each other . . . [her ellipses] we’ll sip frothy cups of cappuccino, laugh and cry, share stories (and pictures of our grandbabies) and become friends. And perhaps that, in and of itself, will make a difference.

My initial reaction was that this is odd. It’s not as though I am an Oprah or Michelle Obama. Why would anyone make such an offer—requiring at least an overnight stay, plus a day or two of time, and the expense of an airline ticket? Who really cares about a personal Ruth and Mary statement?

If my book has done anything at all, it has exposed the correlation between the doctrine of male headship and domestic violence. Indeed, that is where the complementarian ideology is most vulnerable. I certainly do not try to make a case that all complementarian husbands beat their wives. Not at all. But the unequal relationship between the one holding headship and the one required to submit can make a marriage a very dangerous setting for the wife, as I testify in my book.

When advancing headship benefits such as the claim that marital decisions are better when there is both a head and a submitter, it might be tempting to say, fine, if that’s what the couple wants. (Egalitarians typically maintain that decisions hammered out by both husband and wife as equals end up better than those made by the husband alone). So, the frequently-raised issue of the husband as tie-breaker might be shrugged of with a whatever. Not so domestic violence. That is precisely where complementarians are most vulnerable. And that is why it would be so valuable for someone like Mary Kassian, a long-standing complementarian, to convince me to sign on to a joint public statement.

As it turned out, I did respond to Mary, outlining some critical questions that must be dealt with by those who hold to the doctrine of male headship. They can be found in the Afterword of my book, including some of the following:

If the husband is the head—the ruler—in the home, who regulates him? Who determines if his headship is actually comparable to the headship of Christ? The husband himself? Is he alone the interpreter of the biblical standard?

How do boys and single men prepare to rule a wife? Is headship training available?

How do girls and young women prepare for submitting to their husbands? Do teenage girls have full equality with their male counterparts? Do they have full equality when courting? During the engagement period?

Does headship allow the husband to physically prevent his wife from making phone calls, from leaving the house, from using a vehicle? Does his headship give him sole control over money and permit him to deny his wife access to financial records? Does it allow him to confiscate a manuscript or to make a major decision without her consent?

Who is the head when the husband is, sadly, deep into dementia?

I end the Afterword with this:

The burden of responding to these matters lies with those who preach male headship. Here I have asked some of the dozens of critical un-answered questions that relate directly to women’s stories of abuse. Sadly, there is little evidence that proponents of male headship are seriously grappling with them and speaking out publicly, and most women in such marriages are not being correctly counseled on matters of domestic violence.

Mary emailed back saying she would be happy to address some of these questions in a blog post. I truly hope she does that.

But her primary response was to send me a 10-point statement that was drawn up by her and Wayne Grudem more than twenty years ago—the statement she references near the end of her lengthy review of my book. I do not make a practice of publicly responding to book reviews; in fact, I do not remember ever doing so. I feel it is up to the reader to make a judgment, though I do believe she judged me very unfairly on many points.

But regarding the statement drawn up by Mary and Wayne, I responded back to her only on two points, one being that I could never agree to a joint statement that did not explicitly reference the criminal nature of domestic violence and that law enforcement must be the first line of reporting—not the church. And I made clear that the Statement posted on her review (and elsewhere) places the abused and abuser along side each other in needing counseling. That is unacceptable. The abuser, whether or not incarcerated for the crime, must undergo serious anger management through a certified Batterers Intervention Program (BIP). And even that doesn’t always succeed.

I have no doubt that Mary Kassian is opposed to domestic violence. The chasm that divides egalitarians and complementarians, however, relates to how the problem is addressed. Is a church that is headed by male elders the entity to determine how this crime is to be handled or is law enforcement and the criminal justice system? And is counseling to be done by the church elders and/or their own assigned outside counselors?

These are critical issues and little if anything is accomplished simply by publishing a joint statement against abuse

Love and Marriage

Previous Post

May 11, 2016

Share some good Stories

Next Post

May 12, 2016 The God of Abraham (RJS)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Acts of the Apostles Adam Advent Anabaptism Angels Anglican Apologetics Atonement Baptism BCP Prayers Bible Biblical Studies Birds Blogging Bloglossary Bonhoeffer Books Calvinism Christianity Church Church History Coffee Colossians Commentary Recs Conversion Creation Creeds Culture Death Ecclesiastes Economics Education Embracing Grace Emergent Emerging Movement Eschatology Essays Ethics Eucharist Evangelicalism Family Fasting Fathers Fellowship of Differents Footsteps Tour Fun and Whimsical Gospel Grace Happiness Heaven Hell Holy Spirit Irenaeus James Jesus Jesus Creed Job Justification Kingdom of God Law Lectures Lent Liberalism Love and Marriage Mabanteneni Manhood Mary Miracles Missio Alliance MissioLife Missional Missional Jesus Movies and Film New Perspective Northern Seminary OneLife Origins Project Orthodox Parables Pastor's Spouse Pastoring and Leading Pastoring and Preaching Patristics Paul Paul-John Tour Pharisees Pietism Political Theology Prayer and Formation Preaching Problems for Faith Psalm 119 Psalms Public Issues Purgatory Religions Resurrection Revelation Romans Rule of JCreed Science and Faith Sermon on the Mount Sports Ten Commandments Theology Third Way Top Ten Lists Translations Uncategorized Universalism University Ministry Way Out Weekly Meanderings Wisdom Women and Ministry Work Worship Writing & Blogging Youth Ministry

Select a Month July 2021 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 0000

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How did Jesus provide for the temple tax?

Select your answer to see how you score.

He borrowed from Judas Found in a tree A coin in a fish's mouth He multiplied bread