Critical Complementarian?
7 min read
22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 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. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her ….
Ephesians 5:22-26
CJ and I are doing pre-marital counselling with a couple, and we’re reading The Meaning of Marriage (again) by Timothy and Kathy Keller. It is a great resource, and I learn something every time I read it. But I came across something that I really felt compelled to respond to. Kathy Keller wrote the following:
"I will never be one to dismiss or make light of the horrible record of abuse suffered by women at the hands of men who wielded twisted and unbiblical definitions of “headship” and “submission” as their primary weapon." (p 99)
She makes this statement as a lead-up to a claim about the benefit of embracing complementary gender roles in the home (at least). And as a Christian, I agree that there is a great (and maybe even necessary) benefit to embracing complementary roles in our marriages. Simply put, complementarianism proposes that God made men and women to be equal, but different, to complement one another so that they may be united as “one flesh” in order to fulfill the purpose of God. But this blog is not about complementarianism, per se.
In this day and age, I think most people would be able to see how a person’s upbringing and education have a significant impact on who the person becomes. At the very least, in the great nature versus nurture debate, nurture is certainly not everything, but by the sovereign grace of God, it must play some role. And apart from God’s involvement in who a person becomes, liberal thinkers would especially agree with this point.
But what shocks me a little about Kathy Keller’s statement is how matter-of-fact it is given. There is no explanation or qualification or context offered at all. And so, not to discount the obvious abuses of men throughout history, but I'm a bit bothered by the assumption that the abusive behavior of men, historically speaking, is 100% the fault of men, considering that it is mostly women who raise the men (and even educate the men in our western culture).
And this is not to lay the burden completely on the women, either. But it seems to me that this statement by Kathy Keller simply buys into the assumption of critical theory that there are only two classes of people in this world--the oppressors and the oppressed. Now, that may be true from a certain perspective, but here is what I find to be wrong and unhealthy and maybe even dangerous about Keller’s matter-of-fact statement: it is the underlying assumption that the oppressed are by their very nature innocent and noble.
On the one hand, having this assumption of innocence absolves the oppressed of any responsibility and accountability. The Bible tells us that all people, whether oppressor or oppressed, are incorrigibly evil due to sin (Romans 3:23). On the other hand, having this assumption will never help anyone get to the root of the problem—sin—and the only solution—faith in Jesus Christ.
There is no doubt that Kathy Keller is a godly woman. If we had a chance to sit and talk about this issue, I’m pretty confident we would come to wholehearted agreement on the matter. But her matter-of-fact comment suggests to me how all of us are susceptible to the narratives that float around in the zeitgeist. So I am reminded to be vigilant and to ground my thinking on the word of God and not vice versa.
Father, I thank Your for teachers like Tim and Kathy Keller who speak so much wisdom into our lives with Your word. Yet I am reminded that we are all imperfect sinners in need of Jesus Christ. Help me, and help us, to ground our reality in Your word, as we should. In Jesus's name. Amen.
