"A brief note about terms: If one word must be used to describe our position, we prefer the term complementarian, since it suggests both equality and beneficial differences between men and women."
John Piper and Wayne Grudem (Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Preface, xiv)
Do you know the history of complementarianism? I thought I did until I began doing some in depth research. When I shared some of this information with Dee, she found it interesting, so we thought it might be helpful to put together a summary explaining the origins of complementarian movement.
This movement's foundational book (published in 1991) — Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism — provides the following background information in the Preface:
A controversy of major proportions has spread throughout the church.
It began over 20 years ago in society at large. Since then an avalanche of feminist literature has argued that there need be no difference between men's and women's roles—indeed, that to support gender-based role differences is unjust discrimination. Within evangelical Christianity, the counterpart to this movement has been the increasing tendency to oppose any unique leadership role for men in the family and in the church. "Manhood" and "womanhood" as such are now often seen as irrelevant factors in determining fitness for leadership." (page xiii)
In his Personal Reflections on the History of CBMW and the State of the Gender Debate, Wayne Grudem (who played a significant role in establishing complementarianism) provided some background information:
Grudem went on to share the following information:
The Danvers Statement
A number of individuals reacted positively to this announcement, and a month later a group of like-minded men and women met in Dallas, including Wayne Grudem, Wayne House, John Piper, Dorothy Patterson, James Borland, Susan Foh, Ken Sarles, and some others. Wayne House chaired the meeting, and they drafted a statement on what they believed about manhood and womanhood.
In his personal reflections, Grudem wrote:
"But we were still meeting secretly in 1987, not posting the meeting anywhere, not letting anyone know what we were doing. We just didn’t want to get involved in controversy and argument while we were still getting organized and deciding what exactly we would stand for."
With the next ETS meeting fast approaching, the group convened on December 2-3, 1987, at the Sheraton Ferncroft Resort in Danvers, Massachusetts under a cloak of secrecy. They put the finishing touches on their statement and called it the Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. During that private meeting, attendees voted to incorporate as the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.
One of the individuals who helped draft the Danvers Statement was Mary Kassian, who explained her involvement in a post called Complementarianism for Dummies. (see two screen shots below)
The comps must have really loved Mary Kassian's post because it was published by The Gospel Coalition (TGC) and the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW). We have pondered why Mary, who was fairly young in 1987 (around 27 years old), was involved with writing the Danvers Statement. The only thing we can figure is that it must have had something to do with her submission of Bible study materials to Crossway Books. Here is a screen shot from an interview published in the Women of God Magazine, that explains what happened.
Kassian's first book Women, Creation, and the Fall was published by Crossway in 1990. You can access it here. After perusing the book's contents and footnotes, I believe it took Mary a considerable amount of time to finish the manuscript, and this in all likelihood coincided with her involvement in the Danvers Statement.
Another Christian leader who has played a key role in the promotion of complementarianism is Dr. Lane Dennis, president of Crossway Books. According to Wayne Grudem, Dennis attended the Danvers meeting and was in on the meeting in which the Danvers Statement was finalized.
Two years earlier (1985), John Piper suggested to Lane Dennis a book that would include a compilation of essays on manhood and womanhood. They discussed the potential book, and in 1991 Crossway published Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism. I purchased a used copy through Amazon. It is also available on the Desiring God website here. Some of the key contributors to the book are John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Ray Ortlund, Jr., Thomas Schreiner, D.A. Carson, Douglas Moo, John Frame, Vern Poythress, Paige Patterson, Wayne House, Dorothy Patterson, Dee Jepsen, and Elizabeth Elliot. While this list of contributors is not exhaustive, these are the more recognizable names (at least to us).
In his personal reflections, Wayne Grudem went on to share the following:
We also talked during those meetings about the future of the ETS, and how important it was to show up at the ETS business meeting and vote for candidates for the nominating committee who held to our principles. So we began to show up and vote every year, and I think that has had a positive influence on the officers elected year after year to head the ETS.
(When I reflect on the fact that the incorporation of CBMW, the finalizing of the Danvers Statement, and the agreement to produce Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, all came out of that one meeting at the Sheraton Ferncroft Resort, I think it is one of the Lord’s pleasant acts of providence that twelve years later, on November 17, 1999, I had the honor of giving the ETS presidential address in that very same hotel. Those were the only two occasions in the sixty-year history of the ETS that the Sheraton Ferncroft was the primary hotel for the conference.)
The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW)
According to Wayne Grudem, the core group responsible for the Danvers Statement (which carefully defined complementarianism) was 'very secret' and 'by-invitation-only'. A year after the Danvers Statement was finalized, the group was ready to go public. They chose the 1988 Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) meeting at Wheaton College to announce the formation of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW). They handed out brochures and even held a press conference. Interestingly, only Christianity Today showed up. At that ETS meeting, A Texan named Dr. S. Lewis Johnson told Wayne Grudem that he thought some people from his church would be willing to fund a full-page ad in Christianity Today announcing for formation of CBMW. Lewis and/or his church friends put up the $5,000 to pay for a two-page ad. Grudem explained:
We were thrilled when the January 13, 1989, issue of Christianity Today arrived. They had given us the two center pages, and the magazine just fell open to that spot! The ad proclaimed, “We are pleased to announce the formation of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.” It was very text-heavy and included some questions and answers, the list of Council Members and Board of Reference members, and the entire Danvers Statement! No photos at all! But there was a clip-out coupon to mail in (this was pre-e-mail days). That one ad brought over 1000 responses, which, we were told, astounded the people at Christianity Today when they heard about it-that a single ad that was so text-heavy would bring that much response. People would write us saying, “I wept when I saw your ad. I didn’t know that people held this any more.” We began to sense that this was a big issue and that God was surely blessing our work.
Two years later, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (with its twenty-six essays by twenty-two different authors) was published by Crossway Books, which, according to Grudem, had been an ally of CBMW from day one.
Wayne Grudem then explained how the foundation book for biblical manhood and womanhood became Christianity Today's "Book of the Year".
In 1992 we found out that Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, by a vote of readers, was chosen as Christianity Today “Book of the Year,” meaning the book that had had the most significant influence on the evangelical world in the previous year—once again, a surprising blessing from the Lord! (I heard later that there was some frustration on the part of some staff at Christianity Today as they counted the ballots that poured in by mail, because our book did not represent a viewpoint that most of them favored. I don’t know if there is a causal relationship, but it was that year that they decided to stop taking readers’ votes for “Book of the Year,” and that honor has since been decided by a committee of experts that they have selected.)
However, Grudem's explanation about "Book of the Year" is confusing because as you can see from the cover of Deb's copy, it received this award in 1993. What we found particularly interesting from Grudem's above explanation is that in subsequent years a committee of experts would determine which books to recognize for this prestigious award.
So the ballots voting for this tome poured in by mail? Sounds eerily similar to what took place in Dallas back in 1979 to bring about the Conservative Resurgence of the Southern Baptist Convention. You remember that Paige Patterson and Paul Pressler orchestrated that denominational takeover. Oh yeah, both Paige and Dorothy Patterson were involved with this movement and specifically the "Book of the Year".
We found it interesting that in his Personal Reflections on CBMW, Wayne Grudem brought up a competing organization called Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE), which was established around the same time as CBMW. CBE believes in gender equality when it comes to spiritual gifting.
Grudem explained that in 1994, around six years after both of these organizations were established, the egalitarian group (CBE) initiated a meeting with CBMW to discuss points upon which the two organizations could agree. Three members of CBMW met privately in Chicago with three members of Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE). Those representing CBMW were Wayne Grudem, Dr. Ray Ortlund (CBMW president at that time), and Mary Kassian. According to Wayne Grudem:
We overcame some misunderstandings on both sides, and the Lord gave a measure of blessing to that time.
Grudem went on to explain that one matter upon which both organizations could publicly agree is that abuse within marriage is wrong. At the conclusion of the meeting, they agreed to come up with a joint statement on abuse. Mary Kassian drafted the proposed statement, and it was reviewed by those involved with CBE. According to Grudem, they were just about to issue the statement jointly, however…
On October 10, 1994, we received a letter from them saying that their board had considered it, and they would not join with us in the joint statement opposing abuse. I was shocked and disappointed when the letter came. I wondered then if their highest goal in this issue was to be faithful to Scripture above all and stop the horrors of abuse, or was to promote the egalitarian agenda. We ended up publishing the statement ourselves in CBMW NEWS (later renamed The Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood).
Based on Grudem's historical account, it appears CBMW was taking the high road regarding not only abuse in marriage but the Gospel….
In our upcoming post, we will share the rest of the story about complementarianism and how this movement, which began almost thirty years ago, has now extended its tentacles far and wide throughout Christendom.
Calvinjugend who are Utterly Completely Loyal to the Regime.
@ Jeff S:
Great comment, thank you!
It had to be tough to tell your story. Most abusers have an entitlement mentality and know how to play the victim card whether male or female. So glad Jeff and Barbara know how to navigate that minefield as most judges and pastors don’t even understand it!
I don’t doubt any of that. However, I was thinking in terms of garden variety marriages, where the husband is not abusive or controlling.
My parents had that kind of marriage. My mother believed that the wife should defer to the husband. She was June Cleaver SAHM to his Ward Cleaver.
My dad could be a tad emotionally abusive, but he did not strike her.
But it was the sort of marriage where him being “Head Phooba” didn’t appear to be that taxing on him.
In some marriages, how male headship can be played out can indeed be a big burden or danger for the husband and/or the wife, but I suspect in the vast majority of middle class American ones (average marriages, no abuse), the guy doesn’t find his headship role all that difficult.
I think in those types of marriages, male headship largely often comes down to things like-
The husband telling the wife he’d rather have meat loaf for dinner rather than pork chops, and the wife goes along with that, or the wife does stereotypical girly chores (like washing dirty laundry), while the husband takes care of the cars and lawn mowing.
So when I hear complementarians try to defend male headship, by saying men don’t REALLY want power and control over women, by saying what a hard, serious, stressful, burden it is for husbands to lead and control a wife, I sometimes roll my eyes.
Just makes little sense to me and many others. This was a big nail in the coffin of the SBC IMO.
There are many ways a woman can abuse a man (and vice-versa). If a women strikes a man, in most cases, the man will not fight back. There are lies that can not be disproven that will damage or destroy a man’s reputation and career ~~ If two women double-team a man, whoa boy, look out!
I don’t know if it would be labeled as abuse, but I have seen SAHMs play variations of the “poor me, if he loved me he would……..” card over and over in public to shame husbands into doing/giving them what they want. I’ve seen families file bankruptcy over nonsense like that. This stuff happens a lot with military families.
“Women have been picturing themselves in the male movie roles for many, many years now, so I don’t know why so many guys object to having to do that themselves when the roles are filled by women.”
speaking of said objecting guys only, what spoiled bratty 6 year-olds in adult bodies.
Also, the ‘it’s always the woman’s fault’ or always the woman’s responsibility to make sure the man feels like the man keeps men from dealing with what is really going on within their soul.
I’m not a Southern Baptist, but I have heard this report from many faithful Southern Baptists. It’s so sad that a wonderful denomination was taken over by such arrogant, bizarre NeoCalvinists.
That is a shame, because reading material by Non-Christians was far more helpful to me than most Christian-based stuff written by Christians, on a whole lot of topics: depression, boundaries, self esteem, work place abuse, etc etc.
One thing I like about most Non-Christian content is they get straight to the point, and they don’t dance around the topic.
I think even in a non-abusive marriage this teaching is harmful to men (though obviously not nearly as harmful, but that goes for women as well).
When you set men up to be responsible for their wives, you’ve now set up a very unhealthy dynamic that blurs boundaries. If your wife is unhappy, how can you be happy? If your wife has made a mistake, how can you be successful? If your wife is doing great, how can you complain?
It’s not that hard to be the submissive wife when a healthy marriage doesn’t require much in the way of submission, but damage is still done. The same goes for damage that is done by making another person the measure of your satisfaction and sense of self. Now whether the damage done to men is equal to that done to women? I surely cannot say.
Jeff S wrote:
All this stuff happened last year with someone and he told me had been abused. But he was lying about other things and I assume he was lying about that. Then I started reading these blogs this year and what you just said was one of the things that jumped out at me. So now I have a lot of questions I didn’t have before.
Jeff S wrote:
I’m sure that it did! My impulse is generally to believe people and to trust, but it’s gotten me into trouble. But I would hate to go the opposite direction and not trust anyone.
Sadly they would argue they are just making the denomination purer.
That’s what I was afraid of. This is so disgusting. And this is another way comp doctrine hurts men. It makes them think they are above the law, that the law doesn’t apply to them. And this destroys their souls, there very humanity.
@ Jeff S:
you are such a kind and humble person, who thinks and reasons. people over principle. you get the “Quite-The-Delight Badge” for the day (a daily verbal compliment i give my kids when they deserve it)
(I also have a “The Brat” badge, when necessary, to make a point)
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Preacher John Hagee of a church in San Antonio has told the story a time or two on his daily church program of how a guy came into his church to shoot him.
The guy shot from just a few feet away, and I think Hagee said the cops said he should have been hit and don’t see how he wasn’t at such close range. Hagee went on to say, IIRC, that he thinks angels stood by him and deflected the bullets.
(…a “That Brat badge”, when necessary, to make a point).
Money is the great equalizer in some respects. These days it is more likely that the man needs the woman’s income as much as she needs his for a decent living arrangement. I don’t see that changing anytime soon. But becoming the norm. Women have more options than ever before. That is why it was so important for the male subordinists to make kephale mean authority.
Here is one example of an early church theologian in history helping me. Chrysostom was a horrible misogynist. No friend to the female species.
However, While I was researching the Greek word, authenteo, used once in the NT in 1st Tim and translated as “authority over’, I ran across something Chrysostom had written using the word authenteo which is a rare find.
He said a husband should not “authenteo” his wife. Huh? So, It was a bad thing husbands should not do to their wives, too?
Thus a horrible translation of one word had been used to shut up and subjugate over half the body of Christ for over a thousand years?
It blows my mind.
We need more female theologians and professionals to partner with their brothers to finsnce honest translations.
A wife who hits her husband, or slaps, or pinches, or throws something at him, or hits him with utensil/tool – is just as guilty of physical abuse as a husband who does the same.
The sin of physical abuse is not limited to the foot/pounds impact of the abuse.
There are women who physically abuse their husbands.
It doesn’t matter what the physical disparity might be, if the larger person being hit does not reciprocate.
Husbands that are abused are often even more hesitant to speak up about it.
A scattering of local pastors here and there, who love Jesus and are serving Him with all their heart; they are men of God who will not compromise the Word for the whims of the times. They do not seek position, but are obedient to what they are called to do where God has placed them. They may never see a national platform, nor lead a mega-church, but they are faithful. It’s been my privilege to have known a few such servants during my 60+ years as a Christian. You know them by their fruit. Every once in a while, God will raise them to national prominence, but I just don’t see any on the horizon right now – the church in its current condition is not worthy of them.
Is this it? It’s very short, he links to 2 different posts by Kassian:
Mary Kassian answers questions from an egalitarian about abuse
any at the national level?
sorry, i can see you answered that. and it is just as i expected.
Jeff S wrote:
One book that sort of gets into this is called “The Gift of Fear” by Gavin de Becker – who is a man, but he’s had decades of experience at protecting people and seems to be one of those few guys who understands what women are up against.
It’s been awhile since I’ve read de Becker’s book, but from what I remember, I think he explains scenarios such that male readers of it might be able to understand how things differ for a woman vs. for a man.
If a woman turns down a strange man at a bar for her number or a date, that man might kill her on the spot (there are news stories of this happening).
If the genders are reversed, you’re probably not going to see any, or many, situations of a woman attacking a man physically for turning her overtures down.
I was taught by my mother from the time I was a little girl to be careful about stuff, like checking in the back seat of my car, or under it, at night before getting in, in case there was a mugger or rapist hiding out.
Don’t walk alone at night if you can avoid it, was another. Any time a strange man got on an elevator on me, I would sometimes feel nervous.
Those are small details women live with on a daily or weekly basis that a lot of men don’t even think about – or have to.
Burk is a water carrier for the gurus. He has been rewarded. I doubt he even understands why he believes what he promotes. He certainly does not come off as someone who thinks too deeply about it. Most of what I have seen from him over the years is a parroting of the gurus. Most likely he was told to promote Mary K on his blog. I used to stop by his blog regularly to check out what was currently being promoted by the gurus. :o)
I view Miller at Voices the same way.
Jeff S wrote:
Is he the one whose daughter committed suicide? Or is another one in the bunch.
While mental illness brings down many dear people, you have to wonder what goes on in these guys’ families behind closed doors.
I would change that to the “crime of physical abuse”. It’s assault (the threat) and battery (a completed threat).
I disagree that physical disparity doesn’t matter. Certainly women can and do physically abuse men. As someone who has had things thrown at him by a woman, I understand this.
But the threat a bigger individual poses verses a smaller individual is not the same. Very often men can threaten women to a degree that is not reversible because of sheer size. Without a weapon in her hand, my ex wife would have never been able to physically intimidate me with the threat of a loss of life. That kind of terror matters, and evils men do use their physical strength for those kind of threats
Max IMO any Southern Baptist national leader that would step up and support Women in Ministry would find himself out of a job.
“…the “Quite-The-Delight Badge” for the day (a daily verbal compliment i give my kids when they deserve it)”
to clarify, for my kids it’s generally for a spirit of helpfulness without whining or complaining.
not all ‘delightful’ behavior is good — like, ‘keep sweet’ even when something is wrong, unfair, unjust. i encourage them to speak directly and plainly when they are unhappy or upset about something. i encourage them to stand up for themselves when needed. And to go after what they want in life (instead of waiting for life to happen to them).
**just to set the record straight**
I would assume there a cross-over here, that the sexist guys who were hating on the new Ghostbusters for having women, rather than men in the main roles, is that a lot of them probably play video games.
In a lot of video games, you end up playing as a woman character sometimes.
Granted, the woman character in many video games may physically appear to be a male fantasy (i.e., look like a bimbo in skimpy attire), but still, sometimes men play as women in video games.
If these men are pretty much okay playing as a woman character in a video game, you wouldn’t think it should be such a stretch or offense for them to identify with a woman Ghostbuster in a movie.
I’ve played as men in video games (including marines, army guys, Luke Skywalker), as women, and even as zombies, dinosaurs, aliens, and all kinds of creatures. It didn’t bother me.
No. Frank Page’s daughter committed suicide.
Paige or Page? Easy to confuse!
It will also isolate a good man from his wife. There is a great deal of comfort found in a marriage where the spouses are actual partners, instead of ruler and subordinate.
Husbands who would normally desire a partnership with their wives and yet are guilted into a ruling position are going to find themselves in a chronic untenable position.
That’s a WHOLE different subject- haha. I can think of exactly one female character in a video game that was actually treated like a fully realized human being instead of fodder for male fantasy (that would be Ellie from “The Last of Us”, a really incredible character all around). Almost all video game characters at least subtly are manipulated to appeal to men (how they sit, walk, whatever- Ellie actually walks like, *gasp*, a human being).
(I have not played a TON of video games lately, so forgive my ignorance if there are other good examples- mostly I was just very impressed with how well Ellie was done and how much emotional resonance she evokes by the end of the story, which was shocking to me for a video game experience).
Woah, I am way off topic.
Regarding the link at Denny Burk’s blog to 1995 CBMW Statement on Abuse, this:
“We believe that abuse is sin. It is destructive and evil. Abuse is the hallmark of the devil and is in direct opposition to the purpose of God. Abuse ought not to be tolerated in the Christian community.
We believe that the Christian community is responsible for the well-being of its members. It has a responsibility to lovingly confront abusers and to protect the abused.
We believe that both abusers and the abused are in need of emotional and spiritual healing.”
The abuser needs to be arrested and held accountable for a physical attack on the abused. It’s a police matter, once the attack has begun.
This ‘lovingly confront’ stuff is not appropriate if a spouse is being beaten.
That is a good point.
There is also something psychologically unhealthy, I think, about feeling you have to depend on other people to be or act a certain way before you can feel you have value, meaning, or an identity.
A complementarian guy wrote a blog post (which I linked to weeks ago on this blog) begging women to stop being so smart, independent, and competent because he needs to feel needed by women.
And he can only feel needed and feel like a masculine manly-man if the women around him are meek, passive, afraid, too reliant on men, and Damsels in Distress.
He’s wanting women everywhere to ‘be’ a certain, specific way for him to prop up his ego and erase his insecurities. There is something off about that – and his complementarianism is apparently playing a part in that sort of thinking.
And does Frank promote Comp, other abuses, women and girls as doormats or wall-to-wall carpeting?
With a dog biscuit and a pat-pat-pat on the head from his Elect guru.
Like Comrade Pol Pot made Cambodia Pure.
Amen and agree 100%!
Jeff S wrote:
I agree. I wrote a little bit about it (or something closely related) in a blog post or two at my Miss Daisy blog a few weeks ago:
I just don’t know how to reconcile an occasional claim I see by complementarians about married male headship with seeing marriages like my parents.
I see complementarians defend male control of women by saying how stressful or exhausting it is – it’s a noble task, they say. They say they really do NOT want to lord authority over men, but they MUST because God commands it and it’s a fearful, tiring thing, they say.
And to a point, I agree with them on that stuff. But that is of their own doing – husbands are not called to be a Savior to wives.
Jesus is a wife’s savior, not a mortal human man. Husbands are called to LOVE a wife like Jesus loves people, but husbands are not responsible for leading, redeeming, or saving wives.
What I don’t see about the male headship thing being so supposedly difficult and burdensome in a marriage (like my parent’s marriage) when my dad didn’t stress out over it, or exert much effort.
My father even let my mother make “final big decisions” in their marriage at times, like on car or home purchases. Those are areas complementarians say men should have the final say-so, but my dad didn’t much care – he let Mom have her way.
The rest of the time, their marriage was pretty tepid stuff. Dad mowed the lawn, Mom mopped the floors. She might bring him an icy, cold beer when he got home from work.
I’m trying to see where the great strain was on my father playing the ‘Male Head And Leader Of Wife’ in their traditional marriage (they believed in traditional gender roles), but I’m not seeing it.
My dad sort of believed in that gender role stuff but didn’t seem too concerned with living it out.
He didn’t sit around spazzing out and worrying that he wasn’t being a “godly” enough leader to my mom and what not.
I made a mistake in my typing here:
I meant WOMEN there, not men.
Then they should consider renaming it from SBC to “Ivory Soap Church” 🙂
So very true, Mara.
I’m sure YRR Calvinjugend cream their pants at the fantasy of being a Commander of Holy Gilead – the ultimate Godly Complementarian Utopia.
We’ve seen their gurus act like it (including Douggie ESQUIRE with his Handmaid).
@ Ken F’s wife:
Dear Ken F’s wife,
I have not read past this comment yet so I do not know what all has been said since you posted this. I am going to let go the original issue that I had with Ken F about trying to get him to name a Biblical truth that CBMW is capitalizing on, because you just hit a major nerve and I want to write before my current emotional status changes.
I did not feel empathy from Ken F anymore when he suggested that I (not singular pointing at me perse’, but people like me) might feel the way I do because of experience. Once again that makes me feel like all of my studies are null and void because I am acting from PTSD. Because that is a factor in my emotional reactions, I am ever so grateful to the people who never experienced horrific abuse at the hands of complementarians that speak egalitarianism. One such hero of mine right now is Jory Micah, a young Christian scholar, pastor, and now college professor.
I am so sorry for what you suffered at the hands of a rapist. I understand. I too am a victim of violent rape and a victim of what people might call not violent rape. The soul feels shredded all the same. One of my violent rapes would have been prevented had I and he not been taught complementarianism. I saw a professional therapist for the first time for PTSD this past year after running into him last summer. It helped tremendously.
And for the record, I was not attacking Ken F when I asked him to explain what his idea of an element of truth was. I understand how “please do” can be construed as that, but I had no idea of Ken F’s soft comp ideas. I thought he believed exactly as I do. But rather than explaining the element that CBMW is using as he saw it, he gave me a long list of differences that he sees between men and women, differences that can have separate debates as to why they are different. The CBMW mandate to train girls and boys to be different from the cradle is one such topic for discussion.
If there were shots fired and “the cops said”, there should be a police report.
This story dovetails too well with “Touch Not Mine Anointed” and Driscoll vs Machete Man that I get suspicious. When a MegaPASTOR claims this sort of Persecution Miracle, assume it’s bogus until proven otherwise.
I got that all the time from my mother – her variation was “be sweet” not “keep sweet,” but she was conveying to me that it was wrong for me to show or feel anger.
If I did feel anger, I was to suppress it. I was taught that it was wrong or un-ladylike to even politely disagree with someone, or politely assert myself and let someone know if they were hurting my feelings or angering me.
-And that is a sure-fire recipe for being cat nip to abusers and bullies.
I got that “be sweet” phrase constantly from my mother as I was growing up, any time I came home from school angry and/or crying because I was bullied while at school.
Jeff S wrote:
Yeah. The BOOB-barian in the chainmail bikini.
Only fantasy woman I remember who actually DRESSED like she was going into a serious fight was Eowyn on Rohan’s ride to Minas Tirith.
Like GigaPASTORS whining about what a hard stressful burden it is to preach every Sunday on all those franchise campus Telescreens; before being whisked away to their Furtick Mansion by a team of armed bodyguards.
Update about my ex-NeoCalvinist, authoritarian, abusive, Comp-promoting-women-obey-and-submit , 9Marxist, John MacArthur-ite church,
Several church members have contacted me and they want out of my ex-church. They know that that church, renting from the Seventh Day Adventists in Sunnyvale, CA, is out-of-control.
They are extremely concerned about the amount of authoritarian control (heavy-Shepherding) that the pastors/elders are exerting over them, which they said they have NEVER experienced at any other church. I told them that many faithful Christians left that church for the same reasons.
I gave them advice on how to leave: 1) say nothing; 2) just do it; 3) don’t take any of the pastors/elders calls; 4) send a certified/return receipt letter saying you are no longer a member; and 5) if the ex-pastors/elders don’t leave you alone to stop
added part of my comment: 5) call the police if ex-pastors/elders don’t leave you alone.
GB 2016 bugs me because not only is it a “let’s remake a 30-year-old movie!” old hat, it has a lot of “Just like… EXCEPT…” vibe. I wonder what the pitch session was like — “Just like 1984 Ghostbusters, EXCEPT all the Ghostbusters are women!” (At least this time they didn’t big-budget live-action remake some 40-year-old Saturday Morning TV cartoon from Filmation…)
Kind of like what the pitch session for Equestria Girls must have been like:
“Let’s do a My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic movie, EXCEPT make all the ponies HUMAN! And put them all into HIGH SCHOOL! Just like Monster High, Except…”
(I once saw an actual Hollywood pitch session sheet. SOUTH PARK WAS A DOCUMENTARY!)
He said this:
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
It’s lazy. And usually the product is not good. I haven’t seen this one, but the reviews have been mixed at best. So who knows. I don’t think that there is any way they could have lived up the original, no matter who was in it.
Ah – in the S/D movement we heard about Miriam on several occasions…
Always about her REBELLION against Moses, wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know what I mean?
The underlying point of it was that we pewishioners had better not get uppity (as did Miriam) against our leadership (making themselves our Moses), unless we wanted to find ourselves outside the camp covered in leprosy.
With no help in sight – unless we greatly repented and unless Moses – oops, I mean – our leaders prayed for our healing.
Speak against the leadership? Find yourself cursed and covered in leprosy!
Of course, had we stopped to compare what our leadership was doing to what Moses DID – it should have had us rolling in the aisles.
Instead we fell for their false teaching, by eliminating everything but the emphasis on *authority* and the importance of not *rebelling*.
And we heard a lot of teaching on Jezebel – probably more on her than on any other female referenced in the Bible.
Thanks for that article, Lydia, about Frank Page. What a sick cookie. No wonder the SBC is going down the tubes and is crashing onto the rocks with “captains” like him at the helm.
No wonder sane Southern Baptists are fleeing the denomination (a whopping 200,000 living members a year, fed up and leaving).
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
I can buy criticism of Ghostbusters. What I cannot buy is stuff like its trailer being marked as the worst trailer of all time on youtube. Stuff like that indicates that there was an agenda going on (even if it wasn’t understood).
When addressing something that is a known evil (like abuse) it is rarely a good idea to attack the motives of people bringing it up. It just makes you look like a terrible person who doesn’t care. You may actually be a terrible person, but I wouldn’t think you would want to look like one.
Anyone who feels the need to qualify these statements goes on my suspicious list.
ISBC = Ivory Soap Bubbles Church
@ Jeff S:
I have heard *OF* that game but not played it. I’ve not really bought any new video games in several years now.
Even some of the tough, capable female characters I’ve played are obviously meant to visually appeal to men. One such character – the game was so much fun – I went online to look up a cheat sheet (I was stuck in one level, couldn’t figure out what to do).
It was then on, that cheat sheet site, I learned the game makers put in a secret code (after you beat the game at least once) that would cause the main lady character’s cleavage to jiggle a lot, if you plugged that code in on a main screen.
I can about guarantee you that was not put in there to appeal to female gamers like myself.
They took an otherwise decent, tough female character and made her a bimbo in some ways, to turn on younger male players.
My other pet peeve – comic artists and Hollywood dressing women heroes in stiletto heels or boots. In real life, most women fighters would wear more practical shoes.
I find your post to me odd. Did you even read the article about Frank Page and how he blamed groups advocating for child safety as being opportunistic?
The abuse of children are FELONY crimes. There is nothing funny about that. There is nothing funny about the epidemic of child abuse in the conservative evangelical church, which is the No. 1 reason that conservative churches are sued every year (cite: Richard Hammar, attorney, Church Law & Tax; Church Mutual, the largest insurer of churches in the U.S.).
I work in law. I changed California law for crime victims.
And if you think less of me for doing the right thing by children, I consider it an honor.
What?? I was talking about Page. I did read the article.
Maybe I shouldn’t be talking today. Clearly I’m coming off all wrong!
So if I understand you correctly, even if a person or family just stopped showing up, the pastor(s) and/or elders would harass them?
Like I said earlier this about keeping the sheep in their pens, 100% about control. They don’t want new members, just want to keep the current members in. Much like the Iron Curtain.
You must value freedom very much. How anyone can keep in the faith after such an experience is really something. Although I imagine the faith you have now is different than the faith you had then.
Thanks for the clarification.
The prevailing attitude toward women in their teachings/beliefs does not exhibit any similarities to Jesus and His attitude towards women.
When I read the earlier writings, I do not read for a greater understanding of Jesus Christ. I read to see what they were teaching, what they emphasized, how they responded to those with whom they disagreed.
Anyone claiming that the patristic church leaders were in peaceable agreement will find that was not so. Weirdness entered early and stayed late. Power-seekers were quick to rear up their superior heads. All kinds of extra rules and activities became ‘standard’.
And when factions of the church alined themselves with the state, people died.
Or plastic… One of the last times I was actually in a churchianity bookstore, I was surrounded by a sea of unnecessary plastic or resin obejects loudly proclaiming religionny things.
There were more of those than there were of books.
Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:
Maybe we need to consider that perhaps the writers of Scripture and the ante-Nicene, Nicene, Gothic, Medieval, Reformation, Counter-Reformation, etc., etc. simply got it wrong when it comes to women. It is one of the elephants in the room.
Yes, I realize this could be a bombshell for some people. However, I am at the point now where I don’t feel like I have to respect *men* who came before me and said some pretty harsh things about women AND I can look at what they wrote on other subjects with a critical eye.
Well, the hook used to sell this ideology to men is that they will have a compliant wife who will do what they want. The hook used to sell it to women is that they will have a husband like Jesus, as if. It is a scam. A totally unnecessary scam because it cannot deliver what it promises and keeps people from doing things that actually do work for relationships like the list of One Anothers that Victorious posted.
Ken F wrote:
I can relate, but from a slightly different angle. I grew up in an alcoholic home where appeasement was a learned skill.
Always, always standing on red alert in case some inadvertant word or action (not just your own, but anyone else’s) would start the family-chaos ball inevitably rolling down the hill.
You develop an inordinate sense of responsiblity.
You become an observer rather than an be-er in your own life.
You learn skills of distraction or entertainment to insert at the critical juncture.
You learn to avoid potential ‘bad’ paths and stifle your own emotions and responses.
Skills that might have been necessary for a child given the situation, but which you (hopefully) discover are not beneficial as an adult.
“Compliant Wife” or “Domestic Animal With Benefits (nudge nudge wink wink know what I mean know what I mean)”?
They’re called “Jesus Junk Stores” in the trade for a reason.
So before they get around to pushing membership covenants for new attenders, they first make pastors’ wives sign their own covenants promising to submit to their husbands? Like whatever their wedding vows were aren’t enough?
“Pens” or “Pastor’s Slaughterhouse Chute”?
Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:
I don’t recall anyone posting that they should be ‘dismissed’.
It seemed more along the lines of ‘don’t read them with rose-colored glasses’.
Only fantasy woman I know who dressed for a serious fight was Eowyn of Rohan, for the ride to Minas Tirith. Mail hauberk (with cuirbolli cuirass over), Spagenhelm with aventail, and boots. No chainmail bikini for her!
Which is the straw that proves this movement is not of God. It’s all about appeasing the flesh.
I believe there are complementarians that are trying to follow God with incomplete information, but pushing extreme complementarianism is only for the benefit of sinful desires for power, control, and even lust.
That anything like nudity cheats or “Hot Coffee” in GTA San Andreas?
Sunday was my day. Last night wasn’t so great, either. 🙂
The store had put manly-man products from ‘Old Spice,’
“Old Spice was orinally created for women. So was the Ford Mustang muscle car.
Get over it and grow up, boys!”
Interesting. I’d never heard that before about those products. My husband and I happen to prefer Old Spice, especially the original, although I will sometimes get him the Denali or that shampoo/body wash combo. As for the Ford Mustang, I’ve wished I had a ’66 or ’67 convertible since I was in high school. Preferably in red, although my dad thinks they’re cop magnets. Maybe one day…
Frank page also participated in writing a book in cahoots with Mohler, Platt, Akin, and some others. Don’t remember what the book was about …….
Sorry, busy canning garden veggies today. Checking in on TWW between chores!
That’s correct, Jack, members who leave the authoritarian, heavy-Shepherding cultic church are harassed.
My ex-senior pastor and the elders lie about that good Christian, who wants a sane, healthy church, before everyone. The pastors/elders apparently think that adults who are voters and taxpayers, with Constitutional rights (U.S. and the State of California where I live) don’t have rights.
I do think these churches want new members, because of the old members who’ve wise up and left. The pastors/elders want the money coming in.
Yes, my faith is different now, after this horrific bad church experience. I came away from it knowing that I know more than I thought I did and actually far more than many of these pastors/elders.
I had a relationship with God before then and I still do. God has seen me through so much.
BL wrote a wonderful post on this subject on May 26, 2016, which I will quote in part here:
“Sometimes you discover, when you’ve been officially excommunicated, or coerced out, or just spiritually beaten and thrown outside the ‘church doors’ – that Christ is also outside the ‘church doors’.
As He was for the blind man in John 9, who was kicked out of the synagogue after Jesus healed him. Mr. Formerly Blind Guy, brought into the synagogue for QUESTIONING, kept giving the credit to Jesus and would not submit to his religious leaders’ authority and instructions.
So, the Religious Keepers of the Keys to the Kingdom wielded their authority and shut him outside the door – and then…
Jesus heard that they had put him out, and finding him, He said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”
(Keep in mind that Mr. Formerly Blind Man had never seen Jesus, so he could not visually identify that his Healer was speaking to him.)
He answered, “Who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him? Jesus said to him, “You have both seen Him, and He is the one who is talking with you.” And he said, “Lord, I believe.”
And he worshiped Him.
This is one of my favorite chapters in Scripture.
And I believe that it is the first record in Scripture of someone worshiping Jesus after He began His ministry.
Not bad for an excommunicated, outside the church, former blind guy…”
Well, it’s a zombie horror game; if that’s your taste, it’s really worth investing the time into. The developer deserves a LOT of credit for how they characterized Ellie. It appears from the “making of” footage that they gave the actress a lot of leeway in changing the script on the fly, and she definitely wanted the character to behave in ways that were how she would react, not a male perception of how she should act. So where they wrote in “Ellie cowers in the corner”, instead she has Ellie beating on Zombies with a coke bottle (or something like that- I made the example up, but you get the idea).
It’s true that Ellie is young (like 14), but that hasn’t stopped game developers from sexualizing in the past (ugh). But more to the point, while she is clearly vulnerable in the story, she isn’t so much the “damsel in distress” as she is the ‘young person in distress’. And while it’s still a man’s story (the majority of the time you spend playing her protector, Joel), her part in it is far from insignificant. The part of the story where you actually control her character just takes it to a whole different level, and you really, really identify with her fears, hopes, and general attitude. You also are the one empowered to save yourself, not waiting on a man for rescue.
It’s important, because part of the story arc really needs you to care about her for it to resonate, and they pull it off. But they pull it off without resorting to typical tropes. You resonate with the story not because she is an object to be protected, but a person who is valuable.
And the subtle animations work in favor of this. When she moves, she is confident and controlled. She runs like a person (not “like a girl”). She doesn’t sit down in an awkward style with her legs to the side like nearly every video game female does. All in all, I was just very impressed by this game because of her character.
But, the game is violent and crude in a lot of parts (fair warning).
No worries. We’ve all had them.
I’ve had mine before here too, friends.
Have a great day Lea, Gram3, and fellow friends.
We’ve got a whole pack of wolves shepherding the sheep.
Agreed – thanks for the correction!
After reading an actual Hollywood Pitch Session sheet, I had this idea for a TV game show called “High Concept”:
The game is “Just Like A Pitch Session, Except” instead of pitching to an “I’m an M.B.A. and..” suit, they make the pitch to contestants (and possibly studio audience participation) who have to vote on best or worst with special awards such as “HAVE YOU GONE STUPID?” Mix a couple bogus pitches in (like Gong Show used to do with their acts) and have the contestants (and audience) guess which ones were genuine.
I watch the cop shows …… NCIS, Crimnal Minds, Blue Bloods, etc., and I wonder, sheeeshhhh, how do those women run in those shoes???
Lydia, thanks for the tip. My oldest just recently started marching band camp, and I still remember what that was like back when I was doing it. Good socks are critical, along with decent shoes.
Jeff S wrote:
Or a bunch of Trolls colluding behind the scene Being Clever(TM).
A good example is John Calvin translating authenteo closer to its meaning than the King James guys. Calvin translated it as “domineer” which is closer to its meaning. That does not negate the historical fact that Calvin was a tyrannical despot in the Name of God. :o)
The lady on Castle is always running in heels. I think they interviewed her and she used to a model so she said she’s used to them.
I do love her coats.
If you don’t mind me asking, how old were you when you realized that what was going on in your family was not normal? Who helped you to cope as a child and how? I would like to pass that information along to someone who came to mind when I read your comment. I do not have any abuse in my family background, and the posts on alcoholism made me realize how much I do not know about the dynamics in an abusive home, especially on the children.
Mary Kassian has posted this in response to Ruth Tucker
And here are some thoughts on the subject from someone called “Pastor Dave”
What struck me about researching Luther is he wanted to Reform the Catholic Church in selling indulgences with doctrine to prove his point. Ergo the name: Reformation. It is not like he was protesting the state church position or even the caste system although some of that came later. He would not have survived without the princes and electors on his side who were tired of all that money going to Rome. So there was a political aspect to this too.
He was very Augustinian, IMO. Which I find problematic for many reasons. On a more ironic note considering what he wrote about women, his wife, former nun Catherine Von Bora ran the family businesses including a brewery which freed Luther up to write horrible screeds about women, Jews and peasants. :o)
Just to be clear, I was talking about my verbal problems in real life, not anything I or anyone else said here at TWW on Sunday or last night.
Oh, I know that’s what you were talking about Gram3.
I have my own blind spots that others have to point out to me, and that I have to remind myself of.
I didn’t realize that it *might* not be normal until my mid-teens. That initial ray of light hit when visiting with a friend at their home. Observing the interactions between the friend and her parents, I noticed that there was an ease, a lack of tension.
I think it was the first time that I realized that not every family experienced chronic tension punctuated by turmoil explosions.
No one helped me cope, because one of the primary realities of an alcoholic family is that nobody talks about it – not with extended family, friends, neighbors, or school mates.
Or that was true at the time (1950s-1970s) – things may be different now with the ready availability of information.
Different types of alcoholics will cause different types of family dynamics. I’ll be glad to go into further detail – just let me know.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
I just googled for it and found a page or two on it – previously, I had only heard him talk about it on his TV show:
John Hagee Says Man Tried to Kill Him as He Was Preaching About Demons and an Angel Saved His Life:
Right. I know for a fact that the wives of potential NAMB church planters must sign contracts agreeing to being their husband’s helpers …….
I assume the IMB is the same way.
From the article:
“All of Ruth’s questions pertain to the issue of whether a husband has a right to force his wife to do something against her will. I believe that the Bible teaches that a husband’s position as head of the home does not give him the right to rule, but rather the responsibility to provide loving oversight. A husband is not imparted with privilege; he is entrusted with obligation—the obligation to love, cherish and shepherd, in emulation of Christ.”
Read enough history and you see the same non reasoning and deflection to shore up the concept of the divine right (responsibility) of kings and popes. Same rehashed stuff over and over.
One thing about Martin Luther: some of the negative things about women were apparently written before his marriage to Katherine. In later years, he had nothing but praise for her.
I know a preacher’s wife who has a blue hardtop. She flies low, but the cops let her slide.
I did not know this. How sick. Think of all the women who were wives of acts 29 church planters. Think of some of the things the Driscoll taught when it comes to women including sodomy in his last book on marriage.
That is bizarre. You’d think they had some problem years ago with missionary or pastors’ wives asserting their feminism en masse.
Eh, I’m more into to semi-autos with the attached LED lights on Criminal Minds. In hot weather, the snakes really do crawl at night, (coons in the chicken house and garden, etc.). it’s hard to hold a light and aim a snake popper at the same time.
Well, to each her own!
Nancy2, a deep blue would be my second color of choice for a Mustang.
Many years ago, one of my cousins had a red Mustang. His mom needed to borrow it because her car was in the shop. She gets pulled over by a cop who was obviously surprised by who was actually driving it. When she asked why he’d pulled her over, he hemmed and hawed and finally said something lame before letting her go without a ticket. So maybe my dad was right, but I still wish I had one. 😀
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
Please don’t flame me too much for this, but I’m thinking I might want to see the new Ghostbusters at the theater in the next couple of weeks.
I hardly ever go to the theater to see movies. I did see the new Star Wars in December 2015, but that was the first time I was in a theater in about five or six years.
Not as an equal but as a dutiful wife who kept them from starving! Did you read what he wrote concerning the possibility she might die in childbirth ? Very simple. You can always get another female to bear children.
Gah! This is just semantics. I also didn’t like that she mentioned authority being given by god FIRST in her little list of things. Submission is voluntary, but god gave your husband authority over you, so if you don’t do what he says you are in sin. That’s not helpful.
Ha! it took me a second to realize what you were talking about.
… but Jesus would go looking for him.
To dance between calling it a “right” or calling it an “obligation” is little more than an obfuscation.
Why not just rephrase the question then, if Kassian wants to change out the words and THEN see if it gets answered?
Does a husband have the OBLIGATION to insist his wife to do something against her will?
Get rid of the word “force” because that would be the next term that would be tap-danced upon.
So, we’ll just change “force” to “insist”.
Obligation: an act or course of action to which a person is morally or legally bound; a duty or commitment.
Swapping “right” with “obligation” is of no help to her point.
How much more righteous does it sound to have an abusive spouse declare that he is OBLIGATED to require this from, or do that to, his wife?
Or as C. S. Lewis said:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.”
Whether it is defined as a “right” or an “obligation” ultimately makes no difference.
Tyranny: a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler.
I read things like that keeping in mind what childbirth mortality rates were at the time; for mothers as well as babies. Remarriage would be especially important where there were existing children to care for.
Many years ago I bought a copy of the Tabletalks of Martin Luther. He spoke on many subjects during meals and in his letters. There is enough material in there on Katie for the reader to pick up on the fact that he adored her.
This is very true, even if it sounds a little strange. I used to attend one of the mega-churches that is frequently discussed on this site. One of the youth leaders had scratches and bruises up and down his arms. His wife had accused him many times of abusing her, but after much investigation, it was learned that he was regularly having to defend himself from her attacks, but was too humiliated to speak of it. Both individuals were small in stature.
This was a largely patriarchal church. In the end, he resigned, dropped out of seminary. They divorced. Went to different churches. Both remarried. I believe he is happier now.
Elastigirl, from my vantage point, I don’t see any SBC leader at the national level who has not compromised in one form or other to be in that position. We essentially have two sorts of leaders now in the SBC national theo-political arena: (1) New Calvinist celebrities who have maneuvered themselves into key positions, and (2) non-Calvinist notorieties who have surrendered the battle to the reformed movement. Neither should be representing the majority of Southern Baptists.
Why is it so hard for these guys to say, “if there’s a physical attack, call 911 first and the pastor second?”
Because it might send their bff/pastor/elder to prison? And she was probably asking for it anyways.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
I think this is the best of the best of the Jesus Junk:
Jesus figurines, Jesus playing soccer, karate, and other sports:
Notice in the second photo, some kid is tackling Jesus during a football game.
Oooooh, buddy! Here’s how this wife found it all out:
My husband started taking classes on line at a Bible college. No biggie, he planned on going into emergency rescue mission work – hurricanes, floods, etc.
He change his major without telling me – evangelical ministry. He decided to start a planter church without telling me. His last year of college, he decided we were going to move 250 miles so he could attend classes on campus. …., without telling me. All of the men at church knew about his plans, but I didn’t. I found out when I overheard my husband talking to our pastor.
When we got home, I blew. Seething mad doesn’t even come close to describing how I felt. He apologized. He said he didn’t mean for me to find out that way. I asked him how he meant for me to find out: “We’re you planning on boxing me up and putting me in the moving van, or were you just going to haul me in the back of the truck in a pet carrier?”
He wouldn’t talk to me at all. He just packed up and left. We almost divorced. When we went to a counselor, he admitted that he had come to view me as a “tag-along”. Whhaaaaa????
I don’t know if he developed that view because of church teachings, my illness, or a combination of the two.
Ps: all of this sent me into researching NAMB, etc., and it led me to TWW.
GO BLOG QUEENS!
Wow. That’s awful.
Me, too. But, I’m way to practical. Living in such a rural area, sometimes taking people places, and shopping for a weeks worth of groceries at a time (including 50 lb. bags of dog food), a 4-door sedan is much more convenient for me.
“…but rather the responsibility to provide loving oversight. A husband is not imparted with privilege; he is entrusted with obligation—the obligation to love, cherish and shepherd, in emulation of Christ.”
Here are the questions, slightly rephrased in order to fit within Kassian’s paradigm:
Does a husband have the obligation to insist his wife give him her phone, preventing her from making calls he, through love, does not think she should make?
Does a husband have the obligation to insist that his wife give him her car keys or house keys if she is trying to go somewhere he, as her shepherd, does not think she should go?
Does a husband have the obligation to physically prevent his wife from leaving the home if she is going somewhere he, in concern, does not think she should go?
Does a husband have the obligation to insist that his wife accompany him when he leaves the home, because sheep should follow their shepherd?
Does a husband have the obligation to prevent his wife from entering the home if, through his loving oversight, he believes she should not?
Jeff S wrote:
I am a big fan of the Resident Evil series and other zombie games, so definitely! I just haven’t been into games the last few years.
One game – maybe one of the RE ones – the primary character you played as was a man in his 20s or 30s, but for at least one level, you were switched automatically as a teen-aged girl and had to play as her to retrieve some widget or another to make the story go forward (while dodging zombies).
Once you completed her tasks, you were automatically shifted back to play as the male.
It’s just hard for me to grasp why some men (especially nerdy fandom types*) balk at women in ‘Ghostbusters’ movie reboots but don’t seem as bent out of shape playing as girls or women in video games.
I would like to think that playing as women in video games would make them more open to women being on TV shows or in movies, and playing more competent or tough roles. But I guess it doesn’t work out that way.
*(I’m a bit of a nerd myself. I like video games, Sci-Fi movies, and super hero characters, so I am not using “nerd” as a put-down there.)
Nancy2, I am still shaking my head over your post. I hope your marriage is much better today.
“We’re you planning on boxing me up and putting me in the moving van, or were you just going to haul me in the back of the truck in a pet carrier?”
I probably would have said something like that, in your situation. As for being a tagalong spouse, I still remember Doug Wilson teaching pretty much just that in his book Reforming Marriage that an elder in our first PCA church once recommended to us. Something about how it’s the man’s calling to face his future, and the woman’s to face him.
OK, this is just a very weird sentence. Being head means authority but it is not a right? His responsibility assigned by God is loving OVERSIGHT. Caps totally intentional. Overseers are tasked with…being the boss and making sure everyone does what they should be doing. Where in the world is she getting this? (Rhetorical question.)
If submission/obedience is her God-ordained Role, then how can a wife disobey/refuse to submit without being in sin? Further, how is submitting/obeying voluntary if the alternative is sinning against God’s ordained hierarchy? Non-rhetorical questions for any “Complementarian” to answer.
Great minds, and you beat me to it.
I gotta go pick up my oldest from band camp and run errands. Be back later.
I’ve enjoyed chatting with you on here.
I’m feeling a little left out to be one of the few who’s not clobbered you for anything lately. Do you want me to pick a fake fight with you? 🙂
How about if I start with, “you smell bad and your mom dresses you funny.” ? 🙂
Can you imagine what life with him would have been like for her if he had not “adored” her considering his view of women in general? Whew! Bullet dodged! :o)
Thanks so much for your transparency. I imagine you must have felt very alone and vulnerable. If someone had known what you were going through, how could they have helped you? Would you have believed your family was disordered before you saw it as a teen?
It just sounds so much more holier to say that it is an OBLIGATION.
It’s not that they WANT to, it’s that they HAVE to.
See how that works? 😉
Yeah, that too. Women police and detectives are also frequently decked out on pumps or heels – and there are sometimes scenes of them running after bad guys.
Remember the ‘Moonlighting’ TV show where Maddie Hayes (Cybill Shepherd) would wear sneakers into the office? I can’t remember if she changed into pumps or not, but I remember she’d wear sneakers into work every day. I think she played a detective on that show. Bruce Willis was her partner on that show. He had hair back then.
You too! I think I’m all out of fight today. Maybe I’ll take a walk this afternoon even though it’s a million degrees…
As far as I can tell there is no difference between a stalker and one of these *Christian* controlling husbands with *oversight* of his wife. Very scary.
I’m glad that so many of these guys are single.
The flowery semantics drive me nuts. Think of all the years and women or men did not stop to analyze the unicorn and rainbows semantics to reveal the ghastly underbelly of their true meaning or compare them to patterns of behavior! Think Piper!
This tactic fits right into one of Liftons Thought Reform characteristics of Toralism.
They cannot speak or write plainly, directly or forthrightly. It wouldn’t work!
They need to drop the adjectives. Saying I want to ‘lovingly’ or ‘winsomely’ dictate your life doesn’t make it any better!
This reminds me of the original ‘Stepford Wives’ movie, with the ‘Men’s Club’ where the husbands would all go in the evenings and where the women were not allowed to come …. lots of secrecy, and then . . . WHAM! the wife gets taken out and replaced by a robot perfectly programmed to ‘perform’ …..
oh yeah, straight out of the Stepford Wives film. Wow!
‘I genuinely feel sorry for women’: Men are left in agony after wearing high heels for a day in a hilarious social experiment that sees them struggling to walk
What I find interesting about BL’s post about that is that it is how I was raised, but my parents were not alcoholics: but my mother’s father (my grandfather) and one of her brothers (an uncle of mine) were.
My mother passed on the maladpative coping skills and traits she learned to use to deal with living with alcoholics on to me (many of which BL outlined in his post).
I think my Mom rationalized those coping skills (some of which fall under codependency) as being taught as being good or true for Christians, especially for women, in the Bible (even though they’re not there).
OK, let’s look at this passage absolutely literally and pretend we want to be complementarians who follow the Word:
Even if you take “head” as leader, the only way you can interpret this passage literally is that nowhere does it say that the husband is giving his wife “oversight”. There’s no enforcement of authority listed as part of this passage. The only direction on leadership is that of Christ giving up His rights and dying as a sacrifice.
If you widen that just a little to all Christ’s ministry, the only time Jesus acts as an enforcer is when he casts the money-changers out of the the temple. In every other instance, he just talks things out with people and lets them make their own decisions.
So put Jesus as “husband” – this is where I default to the tired marketing gimmick “What Would Jesus Do?” I can’t see “authority” or “oversight” are biblical answers, even from a complementarian perspective.
We were constantly told comp doctrine makes the men more protective and concerned for women’s welfare. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Two ways that I can think of.
I had extended family that knew dad was an alcoholic. What they didn’t know was how that worked out at home. I’m sure most of them had no idea.
It would have been possibly helpful if any of those family members had said to me something like, “I know your dad drinks too much sometimes. I know that that can sometimes be hard for the family. If you ever need someone to talk to, if you ever have any questions, I’m here for you. Whatever we discuss is between the two of us. ”
I don’t *know* that I would have acted upon such an open door, because there was, along with the turmoil, a deep empathy for my dad, and a strong, protective love for him and my family.
And as a second point to the first one – the offer of a sanctuary.
There were a couple of times I attempted to leave (to walk to a nearby friend’s house) during one of the episodes only to be physically stopped by my mom. I’m sure that fear and embarrassment were impacting her – again the secrecy that is such a part of alcoholism. I never would have discussed what was going on at home to my friend or her mother, but my mom didn’t know that.
Had there been a part 2 to my imaginary extended family convo above, it would be “I will come and get you anytime you need me, just call me.”
Children of an alcoholic do not know what normal is – they have no plumb line. If my protective instincts didn’t kick in, it would have been very helpful for an adult to open the door so that there was *somewhere* to which I could compare (searching for normal).
And secondly, knowing that someone would come and get me if crazy-time cranked up again – that there would be an *adult* who would provide protection & safety, allowing me to be a child, instead of a small adult carrying a larger burden than I should have.
I glanced her page over earlier today.
I am willing to bet that some complementarian man somewhere will disagree with one or more or her responses she gave.
Regarding this part of Kassian’s post:
I’ve said those same things before on older complementarian threads.
(But many complementarian men demand that, and try to argue, Christian women into submitting to men).
If more and more Christian women/wives refuse to submit to their husbands (as comps define the word “submit”), what are comps going to do about it?
Much of the way Kassian discusses submitting and authority on that page is how egalitarians also understand those words and concepts.
A Christian gender egalitarian could have written the entire, or much of, that page.
So you’re down to wondering, what exactly makes Kassian’s complementarianism, as described on that specific page, so different from Christian mutuality / egalitarianism?
It is all based on the old premise that the wise merciful hereditary king knows best for us. It’s not that far from what King George said after our revolution. He just did not see how we were going to last without a monarchy
It also makes me wonder if her response was vetted, and if she’ll get kickback on it from CBMW. Because that’s not what most of them teach.
Thank you again. I’ll pass this along. It seems to me that the dynamic of shame is similar in alcoholic homes as it is in homes that are abusive without alcohol. I’m thankful you were able to see your way through what must have been a very difficult childhood.
Mary has told me she will be sending these questions to CBMW for their purview. But apparently the Pope of CBMW is out, so I’m not sure who will receive it. I’d be happy if she sent it on to her boss at the seminary, Al Mohler himself.
And if you look at that new Kassian page*, she was just saying that complementarian wifely submission is to be voluntary.
Clearly, it’s not voluntary in some churches – they pressure women to sign agreements to be submissive.
I guess you could argue that the women’s signing of such as page is voluntary, but if the whole concept is voluntary, why have women sign agreements about it???
*The Kassian page I am referring to:
So women are, in his view, interchangeable widgets.
Jesus of Nazareth, in contrast, says every hair on my head is numbered and that he would leave the 99 sheep to seek me if I were lost.
Here’s my country girl simplified distinction:
>Patriarchists demand that women submit.
>Complementarians demand that women voluntarily submit.
Absolutely, but do you actually believe for one minute that complementarians are concerned with understanding or obeying the word? Rather, they have a social construct they want to promote, and try to find a way to justify it from the Bible.
Ruth Tucker wrote:
The pope resigned. Is ther white smoke coming out of the chimneys?
I had a professor who is a founder and extremely active in CBMW say he made his daughters sign contracts that they would submit to him until marriage and that he would pick their husbands.
I think only the women are saying it’s voluntary.
Of course, the Calvinistas seem very big on contracts in general. They want everyone to sign a contract to submit to their leadership. I bet they’d enforce them on men just as much as women if those men were refusing to accept Calvinista leadership.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
From my own person experience, they (comp. men) read it as, “I’m going to do what I want to do, and as long as my plans are not sinful, my wife has to cooperate with me!”
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
I think there are a lot of church members who are more concerned with the Bible than with the leadership propaganda, which is why I wanted to show that.
No words …….. At least none that would make it past moderation!
I hope when they turned 18 they skipped town fast as their legs could carry them.
@ Patti, I’m sorry for what happened to you. May the Lord stand by you as you go through the recovery process.
@ Ken F’s wife:
Hi, Anne. Good to see you back with us!
@ everyone who wrote me nice things :
Thank you for your kind words. It cost me emotionally to write what I wrote. I know my husband’s heart so I did what I felt was right before the Lord, but the whole evolution has been painful and leaves me with a knot in my stomach. The last thing I want to do is to accidentally trigger somebody else. So I think I would prefer to go back into the shadows. Ken usually reads me interesting posts and asks me my opinion and impressions, so when you read what he writes, there are some of my thoughts included. I think that it is a good thing for him to be involved with this blog/forum, and I also enjoy some of the posts and in general find the forum intellectually stimulating. But I have difficulty with the projecting mechanism that sometimes happens. Pin the Donkey has happened to me too many times and none of us need to be stirred up unnecessarily. Maybe someday I will post again. In the meantime I will take a page from the hypercalvinistic complementarianistas and “demurely defer to my husband’s umbrella of protection” by telling him what I think about a subject and then he can decide whether or not my comment could be useful to the general conversation happening on this board. I think what Dee and Deb are doing is a wonderful thing, and a forum like this is sorely needed, but having to talk about this stuff in such a public way never gets any easier, especially in the cyberworld with people I don’t know. I’ll go back into “lurk mode” and continue to follow all y’all’s posts.
This gives me some ideas in how to help some teens in less awkward ways. Thanks so much for articulating this!
Ruth Tucker wrote:
Lol! I dont think it works that way. He has layers of paid and u unpaid people to do his bidding.
Lol! Thing is you are ostracized, church disciplined and in sin if you dont. It is a lot like the old Soviet Union as everything was labeled as the “Peoples” this or that committee, building, etc.
@ Ken F’s wife:
Sweet. Take good care of yourself. And thank you so much for your transparency.
You and Ken are a good match.
Just saw the announcement at the top of the page that David, a TWW supporter from England, lost his father.
I am praying for him and his family.
thank you for your kind words. They are doing me good.
That’s accurate. 🙂
Demanded Submission – kind of an oxymoron like “Jumbo Shrimp”
Comps say submission is voluntary but then beat up women who dispute that the Bible is calling for them to (one way) submit to a husband at all. If it’s voluntary and/or a woman refuses to submit to her husband, why do comps fight and debate with women about it so much?
Why do they spill so much ink trying to convince women that Eph 5.21 isn’t really about mutual submission, or that women are to submit to a husband?
Ken F’s wife wrote:
Welcome, friend. We look forward to your thoughts via Ken or whenever you feel comfortable to come back and share again.
Time to “obey” the complementarianistas and go stand barefoot in front of the stove and cook dinner, while Ken reads me whatever everybody is posting. Again, I really do appreciate all the kind words. They do my soul good. May the Lord repay you all for your kindness.
@ Ken F’s wife:
There may come a time when Ken and I disagree on something or have a misunderstanding, but I want you to know ahead of time that I have the utmost respect for both of you. Ken’s inputs are very valuable, and I know it took a tremendous amount of courage for you to make the statement that you did.
Amazing how you and Ken can come from such opposite backgrounds, and still be such a great team, isn’t it! 25 years isn’t enough – keep counting! 50 sounds good.
It was actually a good bit worse than that. His oldest daughter was in her 20s when he said this, and he was saying as if reinforcing that this was the process they were currently going through.
Furthermore, he said he had to choose her husband for her because he had to make sure he was a “good Christian”. He defined “good Christian” as “someone from a well-known Christian family”. This is someone who taught pastors, and his idea of being a Christian had nothing to do with Christ.
Apparently, people who professed Christ from non-Christian families like me, or those who weren’t “famous” in the little evangelical world, did not qualify as “good Christians”.
A girl stood up and started quoting verses about how to get saved, and basically obliterated him theology-wise. I was so incensed that I could barely see who she was, and I wish I had thanked her.
Thanks for praying. David is in regular communication with us via email. He often provides us with important information and links that we sometimes use to write blog posts.
That’s wonderful that David assists you and Dee with research. I am always amazed at the quality of the blog articles.
In the past few days, I have received several alarmed messages from extremely concerned Christians at my ex-NeoCalvinist church. They know that something is terribly wrong with that abusive leadership and they want out.
So I told them about the Wartburg Watch, all of the coverage here on these topics, and how to get out: don’t explain anything to them, leave, send a certified/return receipt letter to the church, and if the pastors/elders or anyone else contacts you on their orders to harass you — call 9-1-1 and see an attorney.
People were so relieved.
Thank you and Dee for starting this blog. You ladies have helped so many of us with these destructive churches and abusive teachings.
You ladies and the posters here helped deprogram me of so much nonsense. And other hurting Christians now turn to me…and I have something solid to offer them.
As I was saying earlier:
Aimee Byrd (who is a complementarian herself) tweeted this recently:
Glad Kassian answered Ruth’s ?’s, but differs frm Ware’s teaching that the husband must rule
[link was in Tweet]
Dee, Deb, GBTC,
I made a comment at 6:13 that isn’t through yet. I didn’t think a certain word I used until after I hit post.
Edit or delete, as you wish. Sorry.
No harm, no foul?
Ugh …. I didn’t even think about a certain word/phrase that I used in the comment
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
That’s the tail wagging the dog, or however that expression goes. 🙂
I’ve been reflecting on the impact of my recent comments on this thread and I think I need to write a few short closing thoughts. I never intended to write comments that would hurt anyone, but I failed in that regard. I also did not intend to write comments that would derail the main topic. But I also failed in that.
I was once taught that in any form of communication the sender is responsible for how the other end understands what is communicated. Another way of saying this is “do not communicate in a way that can be understood, communicate in a way that cannot be misunderstood.” I’ve been pressed for time lately and have been wondering if I’ve been spending too much time following this site. I thought I had some useful thoughts to post on this thread, but in my rush I did not carefully consider whether my comments could be misunderstood. My comments were not as clear as they should have been. My bad.
I was also taught that when digging a hole for yourself the first step is to stop digging and discard the shovel. I was thinking about how to reply to the various comments directed toward me. I want to honor everyone who responded, but I think at this point it would be better to put down the shovel and leave unanswered the various comments and questions directed to me. I think there is too great a risk that I will make the misunderstandings even worse.
I’ll take a risk and post this article again: http://www.lynneforrest.com/articles/2008/06/the-faces-of-victim/#victim. I ran across this a few years ago and found it to be very insightful, but it can be hard to read if you have close experience with victims. I don’t claim to be free from dancing on the victim triangle, but in this thread I was feeling the pressure to jump back in. I don’t want to jump back onto this vicious triangle Out of respect for the people who have been so badly hurt by complementarianism and other abuses, I am thinking that it would be best for me to go back into the lurking mode and post only when I have the time and inclination to write in a way that has much less chance of hurting people.
Ken F’s wife wrote:
I’ve been traipsing around barefoot all day canning garden veggies. I’m not a complementarianista ~ that’s just how I roll sometimes. ; > )
Complementarian Man Abandons Firmly-Held Beliefs At Sight Of Big Scary Spider
JOPLIN, MO—A local complementarian man, who firmly believes and often espouses that it’s his job to protect his family and love them like Christ loves the church, made an exception to his role of leadership Wednesday morning as a “big scary spider” was spotted under his bathroom sink, sources confirmed.
The man, identified as 44-year-old Ivan Rogers, immediately abandoned his deep-seated beliefs and asked his wife, Judy, to take care of the horrifying creature while he hid in the other room.
Ken F wrote:
IMHO, no matter how hard we try, misunderstandings are going to happen. We are all from such different backgrounds, with different experiences, and different ” trigger” words. ….. Sometimes we just have to work through it.
Ken F wrote:
You have done so much work and have so much information to share ………
I think you help more than you hurt.
Real Life Event:
Once upon a time, we had this incident with a bat that managed to get inside the house ~ it came in through the chimney. …….. I’ll bet you can guess how the story ends.
Ken F., I’m agreeing with Nancy2 as well about your contributions. I mean we have all, it seems, disagreed or misunderstood each other (or made gaffes) at one time or another.
Well, I’ll speak for myself. I have.
But we learn and move on.
I just was reading an article about fundamentalism and that people don’t know how to disagree in a healthy way, it’s not allowed in the churches (usually) and people leave.
So in some situations, that aren’t unhealthy, we have to learn to disagree and stay.
(P.S. You’re a good thinker and I’ve saved several of your posts on another thread, along with Gram3’s, Lydia’s, Max’s and a few other folks’, so I can retrieve them at a later date and share the nuggets of wisdom.)
Well I’m still confused! I’m just gonna watch Netflix for a while. Marco Polo is pretty.
Some men really don’t, and they also end up with wounds as they try to remake themselves into another man’s idea of what a ‘real, biblical’ husband should be.
Me too. I had to crawl on my stomach to the front door as the angry bat swooped around. Then I propped open the front door with an ornamental tree on the porch. And the bat did its sonar thing and went flying out the open front door. Pretty amazing creatures.
Lea, Are you ok healthwise? Tell somebody else.
Enjoy the movie.
Our stupid bat flew into our bedroom and latched onto a curtain rod. I caught with a bath towel, took it outside, and told it to go eat some mosquitoes. My he-man Green Beret husband wouldn’t go near the thing!
As has been abundantly proven whenever sexual abuse perpetrated on women and children in their churches has come to light.
The opposite has occurred, in that there is greater protection and concern for the perps!
He did put a new screen over the chimney top after that.
It's there now. 🙂
Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:
Oops, did not mean my response to be italics…starting with “my dad was hyper-critical too.” Oh well.
Nancy, are you a milspouse?
Oh my gosh! Was the David who lost his father Wondering Eagle? Whether it was he or another, so sorry for his loss! Prayers!!
@ Ken F:
oops, this is Ken’s wife… I messed up and posted under the wrong name. Please don’t hold Dear Hubby responsible…. mea culpa, mea maxima culpa….
@ Ken F:
Thanks Ken. I figured there was a huge misunderstanding and I wanted to assure you Patti is not a troll. In the past I spent so much time on the comp issue, I am sure I come off condescending. Much of that time was digging into the whole nature vs. nurture debate concerning the sexes. Other than obvious physical biological differences, the other so called social/psychological/spiritual differences are not that simple to put into pink and blue categories. Not to mention the rise of machinery and technology which takes the brawn issue off the table even for female firefighters! . And we are just now learning so much more about brain development/ nurture as it relates to adult responsibility/behavior.
I want to thank you for sharing so much for sharing your research. The bit on accountability as it relates to scripture was something I had not even thought of digging into. So much to learn so little time! I hope you won’t stay away too long. You are blessed with an Ezer wife, too!
I am seriously anti bat. I would be hiding with the Green Beret.
Ken F wrote:
‘Fraid so. My husband retired in ’06. He was with 5th Group Special Forces, Ft. Campbell, Kentucky.
@ Ken F:
What if we all just cut each other some slack and forget about it? No one can communicate 100% of the time without making some errors.
So sorry to hear of David’s loss, he’ll be in my prayers.
Definitely. How many times have I learned something from someone with a totally different perspective! And also I’ve tasted my own delicious foot on more than one occasion here.
Ever got into trouble on this forum for being a milspouse? Please tell your DH thank you for his service and to you and your kids thank you for your sacrifices….
Ken F wrote:
I don’t imagine for a single second that you had any intention of causing hurt.
And thread drift happens!
Neither of the things you referenced qualify as failures.
It’s comparable to being seated in the middle of a row at the theater. On your way to buy some popcorn, you manage to squeeze by 10 people with room to spare, only to accidentally step on the 11th person’s foot.
And that 11th person might inadvertently kick you with their other foot in reaction.
That’s not a failure, it was an accident – the kind of thing that can happen to anyone.
Ken, we can strive for it – but the above standard is an impossible one.
People of good will, participating in open group communication, are going to inadvertently step on toes, as well as having their own toes trod upon.
Should you decide to stop your participation, my hope is that the decision would not be based on the sense that you have been a ‘hurtful failure’ here – because that is not an accurate assessment of your participation.
I totally understand where you’re coming from, I didn’t mean to sound like I was accusing you. I’m sorry if it came across that way.
Mary Kassian’s post makes no sense.
A quick look at the word authority:
noun: authority; noun: auth.; plural noun: authorities
1. the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.
“he had absolute authority over his subordinates”
synonyms: power, jurisdiction, command, control, charge, dominance, rule, sovereignty, supremacy; influence;
Is the man or is he not in “authority”?
Ken F’s wife wrote:
Trouble for being a mil spouse? Tee hee! No, I get in trouble just for being me! Special Forces are a bit different from the rest of the military, anyway.
Will relay your thanks!
I removed a three foot snake from the children’s play area. Walked it down the street and threw it into an empty lot. No need to kill a rodent exterminator 😉
I agree too. Nicely stated. We’d miss you Ken F. (I have copied and saved so many of your posts. Good stuff.)
Out here we call it voluntold
I don’t understand what they’re going on about. Thanks to complementarianism, IMO, there is too much masculinity in churches, or too much focus on it.
‘The Liberation Project’ Podcast Redefines Masculinity and Manhood for a Fatherless Generation (Interview)
“…started their program after observing what they describe as an absence of masculinity among men in the Church.
“I was absolutely grieved,” Reynolds said in an interview with The Christian Post. “When I became a Christian I was saddened by the lack of masculinity in the Church. It baffled me how passionless and passive so many men were.”
“I had a professor who is a founder and extremely active in CBMW say he made his daughters sign contracts that they would submit to him until marriage and that he would pick their husbands.”
oh good grief. what year did this professor state this in your presence? would this professor be willing to shed light on his perspective here?
deb, would this professor be willing to be interviewed?
mary kassian: “Though complementarians have consistently upheld this view, this truth deserves to be stated and restated with clarity: It is not the husband’s right to force or coerce his wife to submit. Submission is voluntary on a wife’s part, and her choice entirely.”
i have a hard time believing her statement, for starters. but considering submission, it appears in CBMW-land it is not limited to husband/wife relationships but also impacts father/daughter relationships. it appears some daughters have no choice. it is required, mandated. what does that do to a tender, young human being?
seems to me that the capacity for freedom to voluntarily submit is being programmed out of them.
deb, this is definitely something to explore and bring into the light.
Who are all these people who are not seeing “masculinity”? What is it that they are not seeing, that they define as “manhood”? What is it that they expect to see? I really do not know what they are talking about.
What I see missing in churches is critical thinking, knowledge, and spiritual maturity and that is across the board, it has nothing to do with man or womanhood.
@ Ken F’s wife:
time to obey no one & no social construct — cook for joy! (excuse me… i hope it’s alright i said that)
i’m sure your dinner will be prepared with love and be all the more nourishing & tastey because of it!
cheers, to you and ken f! and freedom, joy and peace. i wish you an evening of quiet comfort and quality togetherness.
Okay. I hate snakes. I would have personally exterminated it. Don’t mind the non-poisonous ones so much, as long as they stay away from the house and the chicken coop ~ wouldn’t tolerate one in a children’s play area, for sure!
Naw. All this CBMW stuff about the “Fall” happening because Adam failed to lead? I don’t buy that. I think Adam was a hyper-comp who took Eve’s cell phone and her 9 mil away. She couldn’t exterminate the serpent, and she couldn’t call Adam for help. So, there ya go! The serpent had her! ; > )
“A girl stood up and started quoting verses about how to get saved, and basically obliterated him theology-wise. I was so incensed that I could barely see who she was, and I wish I had thanked her.”
WOW! what a drama-filled class that day! how did the prof react to the verses quoted back at him? how did other students react to it all? was he trying to get a reaction out of the students by challenging you all with something this extreme? was he enjoying poking you all with the big stick of his extreme-ness?
who is this guy?
Carpet and pew upholstery in a Mossy Oak pattern?
I would have burst out laughing at the prof ~~~ after I jacked my jaw up off of the floor, of course.
Wow. For that you deserve a reward! How about an apple?
Critical thinkers/Bereans are kicked out. And I’m serious.
No, Duck Dynasty Camo.
@ Ken F:
NO! I love your posts, your comments! they are intelligent, deep, and kind. do not go into lurk mode!
And don’t forget to look at the tasty recipes at the top of the page here under the Interesting tab, the Cooking tab. Nick’s Yorkshire Pudding is there. GovPappy’s Sour Cream Pound Cake. Gram3’s Key Lime Pie. Other wonderful recipes from our group too.
Shooting Guns, Picking Fights, and Getting Laid.
“I CAN BEAT YOU UP! I CAN BEAT YOU UP! I CAN BEAT YOU UP!”
Yes, because then we’d have to track down his IP address.
Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:
As far as I know, Eagle’s father is still around. He had a bout with cancer (brain tumor) a couple years ago, but pulled through it.
Amen siteseer! You’ve hit on the concern I’ve had for years regarding the condition of the American church. I call it Christianity Lite. Most church folks don’t read their Bibles and pray as they ought and don’t have the level of discernment they need to test what they hear from their leaders.
So not only are you dropping a dime on them with the Sherriff & AG, you’re also starting a little Underground Railroad. Let’s see if it ends with the Pastor/Dictator alone in the pulpit, screaming the Word of Calvin to an empty building.
Who was this prof?
Tywin Lannister or Walter Frey?
It is helpful in the discussion of manhood and womananhood to consider the fine but significant distinction between complement and supplement. A complement is “something that completes, makes up a whole, or brings to perfection.” For example, one might say, “His tie complements the suit he’s wearing.” The suit in itself is a complete unit, as is the tie.”
If he’s going to compare manhood and womanhood to a suit and a tie, will somebody please tell me which sex is the suit and which sex is the tie? Think about it. … Suit or tie …. which one can you slide by without?
And if there is a discerning woman in the midst, she is gagged and bound. She is not allowed to even try to remove the scales from their eyes.
My first car was a ’65 Stang hardtop.
Custom painted — light metallic blue with black side & rear panels & black vinyl top. Interior was black with blue trim, opposite of the exterior.
Wheels were black with chrome Baby Moon hubcaps & beauty rings — the effect was a chrome wheel with a black band between the center & rim.
Not even Wolves.
Feral junkyard dogs.
Wolves have more class than that.
Jeff S wrote:
“Legs to the side” as in crotch shot?
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
The ex-pastor is feeling the heat. I’d also asked the Seventh Day Adventists, whom this church plant rents from, to ban my ex-church from all SDA properties and no longer rent to them because of the church’s gross abuses against countless people.
The church insiders sent me a copy of his latest email about me. Being the insightful person that you are it is not a shocker to you that he called me — mentally ill, told people that law enforcement thought that about me (no they actually don’t), and that I’d been texting (no I haven’t) church members and emailing them (no I haven’t), and to ignore me and it would go away. Oh, he also asked for prayers for church. Said I’d been “gossiping” about them. And…yes, they were under “persecution”. I think my ex-pastor must be Mark Driscoll’s long lost twin brother.
It must be an incredible disappointment to my ex-pastor to discover that I am not a doormat (like his wife or the other elders’ wives) or wall-to-wall carpeting.
In vetting his story about his credentials:
*pastoral job he said he had at big church in Southern California the senior pastor said was not true and he was ONLY a volunteer like scores of others;
*teaching credential he told us he had the State of CA Teacher Credentialing said
was completely untrue and supervisors said they’d NEVER given a credential to anyone with his name to teach;
*his *Ph.D.* (cough) was $299 and is from a diploma mill in Missouri (which LawProf double-checked my work just to make sure I got my facts correctly).
And on and on. One untruth after the next after the next.
I did copy and paste his “mentally ill” email into a new email that I sent to the district attorney, all of the police departments, all of the internal affairs’ departments, the San Jose Mercury News (newspaper here), the YWCA (deals with womens’ issues) and Next Door Solutions (deals with domestic violence).
So now the heat is really on.
Hanging Out the Lamp
for the Underground Railroad,
Velour, Free, Free, Free at Last!
I thought Wayne Grudem knew his Bible. Surely he knows that *true Biblical men* wear dresses and sandals, because after all Jesus did.
Suits and ties? Heresy.
Frank Page was also part of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force ………. documents sealed for 15 years.
I guess they could use the ties to “gird up their loins”.
I don’t know what the GCRTF was about and I’m not a Southern Baptist. But this much I’ve gathered: Whenever they all meet at some hotel to craft some document, disaster comes about.
You are ON FIRE!
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Song that Harriett Tubman sung to runaway slaves.
“Wade In the Water
Harriet Tubman sang this spiritual as a warning to runaway slaves. To escaping slaves, the song told them to abandon the path and move into the water. By travelling along the water’s edge or across a body of water, the slaves would throw chasing dogs and their keepers off the scent. “
Does “striving to be more like Jesus” mean they should trade their Mercedes for donkeys? At least on Palm Sunday?
First if they wanted to be more like Jesus, they’d walk everywhere. (A donkey is a luxury item.)
There must be a list of other things we could come up with to make them more like Jesus.
That’s funny. A lifetime of men getting spiders for me is about the only thing I might trade in my egalitarianism for. But I have to get the earwigs for my husband, so no deal even if he wanted to be the boss man.
Maybe he’d be far happier in say Pakistan?
Yes, that is what I always heard. So, when I started a serious study on the issue over 20 years ago with my trusty Strong’s 4 inch thick concordance and lexicon and found out what the Bible really said about the issue for myself, I thought my complementarian male friends would be thrilled that I thought women had more responsibility than was thought they did and that the heavy burden of responsibility that the men always complained about should mutually be shared. My husband sure seemed to relax a bit more and wasn’t so anxious. None of them had the time to study the Bible like I did while the kids were in school so I didn’t feel like I was being a know-it-all. But that was when I found out that the men LIKED the sense of being in control and being the boss and being the head and all that that the preacher told them they had. They became angry at me for my findings and wouldn’t even sit down and look at the scriptures with me. I cried and cried. This was all before I knew there was anything in Christianity besides complementarianism (no one had capitalized on the name yet though). I thought I was alone until the internet came along. I cried and cried again after reading Catherine Bushnell’s God’s Word to Women. And for the record, I think a man would have cried and cried too if he had lived my experience.
Oh, and my female friends were angry also. They literally said they didn’t want to look at it because they had no desire for more responsibility. They said they liked it that even if they followed their husbands wrong decisions that they wouldn’t be held accountable by God.
And all I could think of was what happened to Saphira.
Here’s a start!
2. Braai (bbq) fish for breakfast.
3. Be provided for financially by … wait for it… women.
4. Ask people ‘How can I help you?’
I totally agree with Christiane
Why can’t Mr. Burk, Phil Johnson, JM, Dr. Molher or any of these other people just say we affirm mandated reporting of child / spousal / abuse to authorities. It really is simple.
Mini rant what is it with all this “we affirm” tripe? Do they think they are all mini Martin Luther’s or something?
finished mini rant
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Neither of those, but I checked the CBMW website last night, and he’s still actively there.
I don’t want to put his name because maybe his views have changed since then. His continued presence in CBMW would make me think otherwise, but maybe it’s gotten a little better.
Bill M wrote:
Sort of like servant leader.
Knowing the name of this individual is not necessary, so let's not even speculate. It's the umbrella of authority all over again — this time in the form of a written contract. 🙁
I understand a LOT of spirituals contained coded messages on how and where to go North.
The example I heard was “Follow the Drinking Gourd” which included coded directions on how to find an Underground Railroad contact and how to recognize him.
It’s really worth it if you can get the chance.
Regarding men playing as female characters, I fear that your answer might be less egalitarian than you like. While I’m sure many males play female characters innocently enough (I have one female character in the current MMO I play), for those men who cry out against movies like Mad Max, I’d be concerned that they see playing a female in a video game as an opportunity to have complete agency over a woman. I doubt they identify with her.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
No, no, no! Nothing like that.
Just more “dainty” like.
I was specifically of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPOla9SEdXQ&feature=youtu.be&t=1m24s
Yes, and emotional maturity and active participation. I did not read the link, but I do believe that fatherlessness (or at least lacking the influence of a good father) is a big problem in our society as a whole. That takes nothing at all away from good single moms who are doing an impossible job. It just means that a good mom is not a good dad.
Jeff S wrote:
That’s how you sit when you’re wearing a skirt, mostly. Not necessary in pants.
Yet again, they make being a women all about what they can do for a man. The suit doesn’t complement the tie. These people are focused entirely on men. They cannot see a woman as a full person on her own.
Yeah! What exactly happened to *her* ‘umbrella of protection’ that supposedly spiritually appears whenever women are properly submitting to their husband’s authority?
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Thanks, H.U.G. I saw that one on youtube and I will listen to it later.
LOL. Great list!
What a moving post. Thank you so much. I escaped a Comp church. Well, I was kicked out for not being wall-to-wall carpeting.
There are so many beaten down women in these churches, including in my area bright Stanford University educated women. The Comp church started a Bible study on the Stanford campus to get undergraduates and graduate students, and to get them to invite their friends on campus.
And the NeoCalvinist, Comp church wants high earners. The NeoCal church completely bypassed the poorer state university, San Jose State, for a Bible study. And that was quite intentional.
Bushnell changed my thinking and belief system about much in the realm of Christianity.
“They literally said they didn’t want to look at it because they had no desire for more responsibility. They said they liked it that even if they followed their husbands wrong decisions that they wouldn’t be held accountable by God.”
what shining examples of strong character & mature adulthood.
the more specific religion gets — the more the bible or any holy book is drilled & mined for rules — the more immature, neurotic, and unbalanced people become. & the potential for cruelty is activated.
“A donation is suggested.”
“The suggestion is mandatory.”
“They returned from the tomb and announced all these things to the eleven and to all the others. The women were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James; the others who accompanied them also told this to the apostles, but their story seemed like nonsense and they did not believe them” (John 20).
Sometimes, women have something very important to say to the church! It’s best not to keep them silent.
I realize that I’m coming into this topic quite late but… I imagine that, in many cases, the strictly emotional and verbal abuse can become entrenched, and escalate to adopt a violent component. Even when the victim is a man.
Caution: Potentially triggering descriptions ahead.
A few years ago, I saw a program on Japanese TV that re-enacted an actual case of domestic abuse which took place in Britain, I think. As I recall, the man met this woman late-ish in life, perhaps when he was in his late 30s or his 40s. I’m not sure whether they married, but not long after they started living together, his partner started becoming abusive. She threatened to leave him if he ever did a thing to displease her, and convinced him that no woman but her would even bother to look at him, and he’d wind up dying all alone and forgotten. (In the dramatization, the actor chosen wasn’t small, but was portly and balding. I don’t know whether that accurately reflects the real man’s appearance, but if so, poor self-image offers some possible insight into why he believed her.)
Eventually, his partner came to control his life in the minutest ways (“Pick up the phone whenever I call you. By the second ring, or else!“). By the time anyone in the neighbourhood started to get wise to how miserable he was, she had turned to physical violence to control him. Finally, the police were called in. When they arrived, the woman had beaten him half to death with something like a wrench. Thankfully, they saved the man in time, and the woman was caught dead to rights. But I can only imagine how this might have shaped his relationships from then on.
Just one example of how violence by a woman against a man is possible.
Sound like the end of the battle in “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”:
Lord Beckett: “It’s just… good business…”
Everyone Else: “ABANDON SHIP!!!”
Yes it is pathetic. This view of the Bible is not much more than 40-45 years old and almost exclusively American in origin.
Why are people who claim to be Christians so worried/frightened about how men and women deem themselves? If there’s a job to do, doesn’t our LORD Jesus Christ call all of us to do it whether we are a man or a woman?
To me, this whole charade reeks of power, control, manipulation and just plain stupidity. In Sharia, a woman’s intelligence is only half of the man’s supreme being, thus the woman is considered basically mindless. It seems as though the visible Christianity as portrayed by these so called ‘scholars’ isn’t much different than Sharia.
Perhaps we need to bring back the donkey our LORD used to talk some sense into a man back in the Old Testament.
Hmmm. When you think about it, there are numerous similarities between Calvinism and Islam. Both have an imbalance of the sovereignty of God vs. human responsibility. Both profess a predestined eternal destiny. Both claim their adherents to be God’s chosen people. Both demonstrate little tolerance of other beliefs. Both produce arrogant self-righteous followers: “We alone possess truth.” Both treat women as subordinate to men, defending that practice by Scripture.
Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
Thank you for weighing in. Some people seem to want to turn this into some kind of a contest about which gender has it worst. I don’t know if any of us can state that one gender has it better or worse than another because one can always find great counterexamples to shut up the other side. I hate to see the arguments about how one side has it worst. The real problem is that both genders suffer abuse by both genders. I wonder how much of this complementarianism is due to abuse boys got from their moms when they boys were not physically strong enough to resist. Is it these type of men who grow up to become abusive husbands, as a way to get back at mom? And does that cause their wives to abuse their sons, as a way to get back at their husbands? And so it passes down again to the next generation? Victims always have what seems like great rational to retaliate. Getting off the victim triangle (see my post above) might be the only way to stop this insane cycle.
I’m still thinking about this. I’m finding myself unable to keep up with all the comments lately (has the pace sped up?). And I really do think that I need to be much more careful in how I write about sensitive topics. I normally think about the stuff during my workday and respond in the evenings. But in some cases I don’t have much time to type. I probably will weigh in, but less often, and after I’ve had time to think it through well enough that I can write in such a way that will greatly reduce the probability of being misunderstood.
Here’s the irony. I don’t have a thick enough skin to engage on sensitive topics with no emotion. I need to de-sensitize myself from the blowback I get so that I won’t let myself fall into reacting to accusations. But not being sensitive enough is part of the blowback. So are men supposed to be sensitive or not?
Ken F wrote:
I think this is the true meaning of the “Sins of the Fathers” phrase. Not that God stomps on us for our ancestors’ sins, but that it sets up destructive chains of events and behaviors like this which pass down through the generations.
I’ve claimed that for a long time. Both Calvin & Mohammed emphasized God’s Sovereign Will and Omnipotent POWER to the exclusion of other parts of His nature; both were heavily into Predestination; I would expect such similar theologies to bear similar fruit.
“Take your workbooks and turn with me
To the chapter on Authority;
Do you top the chain of command?
Rule your family with an Iron Hand?
Because a Good Wife learns to cower
Beneath the Umbrella of POWER;
Under cover of Heaven’s gate —
— Steve Taylor, “I Manipulate”
Ken F wrote:
All of the abusive Comp men that I’ve known – from my ex-NeoCalvinist pastor to Mark Driscoll to Voddie Baucham to John Piper and many others – all had abusive fathers, alcoholic fathers, drug addicted fathers or absent fathers.
I think that they don’t know how to be real men, aren’t comfortable, haven’t faced their own losses in a healthy way, overcompensate because they don’t know what they’re doing, and so we get their game of “I’m-Going-To-Pretend-I’m-A-Real-Man”.
Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
Yes, sane Southern Baptists are quietly walking to the exits of the SBC NeoCalvinist Titantic, putting on life jackets, getting in to life boats, and rowing away from The Disaster course that Captain Al Mohler has set.
Ken F wrote:
Or a young reformed pastor who can use (twisted) Scripture to subordinate women because his mama was mean to him? I’m sure there’s a psychology at play with some of these whippersnappers.
Including the best-known abusive son of an abusive alcoholic father: Adolf Hitler.
(There are probably a lot of men like him out there, just he rode a Perfect Storm into absolute power.)
This “I’m-A-Real-Man” is also called “Hypermasculinity”. It’s type example is the same A.Hitler mentioned above, when his Post-WW1 “Fuehrer” persona ended up taking him over with Germany along for the ride.
You are remarkable! Hope many from your X cult read your review and escape from that hellhole of a prison.
Thanks, my friend!
Here’s my revised YELP review of my ex-church with a few more details for those escaping that NeoCalvinist/Comp gulag.
“It was very disturbing to be a member of this church and to see the level of mistreatment shown by the GBF pastors/elders to adult Christians, an iron-fisted authoritarian control over adult Christians’ lives and demands for “obedience.” There were excommunications and shunnings ordered of dear Christians for any independent thought.
Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley is one of the growing number of authoritarian, NeoCalvinist churches spreading across the U.S. and it’s not *Biblical*.
*Heavy Shepherding. GBFSV practices the 1970’s heavy-Shepherding movement’s un-Biblical control of Christians’ lives by the pastors/elders. The Florida founders repented for its abuses and un-Biblicalness. The GBF pastors/elders have not repented and the damage is growing in the lives of the Body of Christ at GBF. GBFSV copies the model of Mark Dever (Capitol Hill Baptist Church, Washington, D.C. 9Marks organization. It is a heavily criticized model, including by conservatives, who have said that there is only ONE Biblical mark of a healthy church: Love. The other 9Marks are un-Biblical and it’s the Heavy Shepherding Movement all over again with new language.
*Membership Covenants. Members are told to sign them because they’re *Biblical* and back to a Biblical basic. In point of fact they aren’t Biblical and are used to exert authoritarian control over members’ lives. Jesus required people to sign how many pages to follow Him? Correct answer: 0 pages.
*Congregational vote. GBFSV wants your money but doesn’t believe in a true Biblical church honoring the Holy Spirit’s work in Christians lives and giftedness. It is more authoritarian control exerted by a few yes-men over the Body of Christ, hobbling the power of the Holy Spirit to truly work. I will never go to a church again that is run like GBF. I will never give money to one again.
*Women. GBF pastors/elders promote Complementarian/Patriarchy doctrine and that women are to “obey” and to “submit” and be 2nd class citizens. At GBF they live under the old Covenant and not the new one in Christ. GBF pastors/elders espouse the Council on Biblical Manhood Womanhood which teaches a Semi-Arian Heresy by Bruce Ware and Wayne Grudem called the Eternal [a lie] Subordination of the Son to justify the subordination of women. It is untrue and is trinatarian heresy. GBF has put this man-made doctrine on par with The Gospel. If you reject Comp you reject The Gospel. Nonsense. Read: Wartburg Watch blog for more info.
*Teaching. GBFSV does not permit Godly women to teach the Word of God. They base this on the writing of the Apostle Paul. Paul wrote Timothy about one woman — original text in Greek said “the woman” — teaching one man error. Paul wanted her to learn correctly first. The issue wasn’t her being a woman, the issue was error – and that would be true if it was a man in error. Manipulative anti-woman Bible translators conveniently changed the text to something Paul never said.
*Nouthetic Counseling. GBFSV pastors/elders believe that Bible is sufficient counsel for everything. They have no training and licensing, do not follow California law, and frequently cross over the line into the Unauthorized Practice of Medicine (a crime in California that can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor or a felony). This bogus form of non-counseling comes from the un-trained Jay Adams and his books. It should be called what it is: malpractice. Examples of the GBF pastors/elders doing this: not getting an older woman alcoholic to the care of a physician to supervise her treatment and spending months with members discussing “gossip” and drawing pictures on the blackboard. In the end this woman, her adult children, and church members were harmed.
Additionally, the GBFSV pastors/elders held me responsible for the genetically inherited brain disorder – Dyslexia – of a woman church member who refuses medical care. She can’t remember entire events and accuses other people like me of lying. Dyslexia isn’t just a reading problem but a memory problem involving short-term memory problems, working memory problems, and auditory memory problems.
Excommunications/Shunnings/Stalking. A godly woman left GBF for a saner church and was harassed by church members on the orders of the GBF pastors/elders. A godly doctor was excommunicated for dissenting in private. I was excommunicated because the GBF pastors/elders blamed me for someone’s memory problems. A truly bizarre church!!!
*Credentials. Snr pstr’s *Ph.D*. is from a MO. diploma mill.
GETTING OUT: Don’t tell them. Send a certified/return receipt letter & resign, no details. Call 911 and contact an attorney if they bother you. Read: Wartburg Watch blog for details.
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: Women – call domestic violence shelters/support groups for help getting out. Call 9-1-1. Read: A Cry For Justice blog by pastor/cop.
I learned that I know more than I thought I did & I will never listen to authoritarian men again!”
Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
@ Ken F:
“So are men supposed to be sensitive or not?”
men are supposed to be human beings. (but i prefer not to use words like ‘supposed to’ and ‘should’). bottom line: it’s good for human beings to opt for kindness and generosity of heart toward their fellows.
[for the simple and wonderfully practical fact that it is contagious. one act of kindness or friendliness or positive upbeat-ness has an impact to 4 generations (per Harvard research in psychology, it motivates the 1st recipient to extend the same kindness/joy/cheer to another person, who in turn will be motivated to do the same to someone else…. & onwards to 4 generations) –saw this on “This Emotional Life” on PBS — it was life-changing for me]
you are you. the unique diamond of you, forged through challenge and pressure into the one-of-a-kind glimmering assortment of facets that are you. no one can be you but you, and creation sings when you are you — like a well-tuned guitar ringing out from a hearty strum because you are you.
should’s and supposed to’s from christian culture are not you. they are nobody. they are plastic masks.
and here’s the kicker: all such overlays can be summed up with kindness. treating people the way oneself would like to be treated.
There isn’t much more than that to figure out.
what a relief, i say!
and we make mistakes. and so what.
re: “…all the comments…”, “being misunderstood”
yes, lots of comments lately. at a certain point no one can read them all with a holistic understanding. and because text on a screen only communicates so much, every commenter here is misunderstood on a regular basis. we do our best. we step on each other’s toes, but we recover from it (both parties).
all this extemporizing to say, ‘Share your thoughts. They are interesting. Like iron on iron they spark new thoughts. We are all better for it.’
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
I didn’t remember that. I read Alice Miller’s (the psychotherapist) book more than a 15 years ago. I remembered that the Hitler’s father’s wife was very sick, her younger sister came to take care of her sister, Hitler’s father attacked his young sister-in-law and impregnated her.
When Germany developed weapons of war, Hitler had them do target practice at his village and destroy the cemetery where his family was buried.
Wasn’t he also part Jewish?
And a vegetarian?
Correct me on any of these details if I’ve gotten anything out of order and you know more about the details than I do.
@ Ken F:
a further thought: when the are tons of comments but i want to respond to something or someone, sometimes i use the search function on a person’s name or a keyword. Helps me target the right things, so I can more quickly get a handle on understanding what’s being communicated. Helps me in my own responses.
Someone who comments here sometimes and over on Twitter said that Comp almost destroyed her marriage. Her husband was not making good decisions, she wasn’t speaking up as the Comps would have her do “her role”, and they ended up thousands upon thousands of dollars in debt.
Ken F wrote:
IMO, everyone should be sensitive. It’s part of being genuine. It’s what we do when our senses have been hurt that is an issue with me. I do not understand ever hurting anyone’s feelings on purpose. But I know some people do. My husband for example has a real hard time of admitting when I’ve hurt his feelings. I think men have been taught that that is weakness. He never learned how to deal with hurt feelings constructively. So usually by the time I find out that I hurt his feelings, he has done or said a number of mean things to “get back at me” for what I am completely clueless about. When he hurts my feelings, I simply tell him. I never want him to feel the same way he has made me feel when he attacks me or gives me a cold shoulder. He admits that he does hurt people’s feelings on purpose by lashing back and cannot understand how I don’t. So I always tell him that if I have hurt his feelings he has to know that I did not do it on purpose and I am unaware. But that he should still tell me all the same so I can learn or have a chance to apologize. But once he has attacked me on purpose for what ever reason, he has started a fight. He too is sensitive when I misunderstand his communication. The way I see it is that we can never be sure whether it was the ‘splainer or the listener or both where wires got crossed so I admit that I don’t understand a defensive sensitivity enough to go on the offensive. So when I am being misunderstood, I just try to explain it another way. Blogging is good practice for constructive dialogue IMO.
I hope you are not offended, but honestly, as a fellow rape survivor your public reply to me “uncovering my flank” to speak the truth about the man who has stood by my side for 25 year – unflinchingly might I add – seemed dry, unemotional and almost “one-up-manship-like”. Honestly it shocked me how emotionally detached your post sounded and it actually hurt me pretty badly and resuscitated the emotions I felt when I went to seek help from fellow christians in authority (both spiritually and legally) over me after I got raped and their reaction was even worse than the initial assault. Honestly, as I posted previously before I chose to go “dark”, your post is, at this point, the main reason that I do not feel like posting anything at all. I don’t know if you are aware how what you wrote to me made me feel. I thought that rape survivors would be able to relate to each other and have each others back. I apologize if me defending my husband’s honor after being scolded for being insensitive accidentally triggered something in you. But it is not ok for you to then turn around and scold me in a round about way. I had planned on just simply disappearing into the woodwork, but perhaps, if I take my courage into my hands one more time, it might be useful for you to read my post and maybe be a little bit more kind and less dismissive and perhaps stop projecting whatever people have done to you unto other innocent people you have never met. Your comments towards both my husband and then me, were “not very kind” if I want to go into Southern indirect understatement. It is not ok to carelessly project false accusations in a public forum unto people who never targeted you to begin with. If I knew how to contact you privately via e-mail, you can rest assured that I would have done so. Praise in public, reprove in private. But you wrote what you wrote very publicly and what you wrote on this blog made me feel invalidated, dismissed, scolded and lectured to. I don’t think I deserve this, and I didn’t expect you as a fellow multiple rape survivor to react with this kind of harshness and emotional detachment/coldness/scolding.
By the way, for the record, I did not run this post by my husband, so folks, please give my husband the grace that all of you profess. I wish none of this had ever happened, but it did and now my husband and I have to figure out how to deal with what was said, and how much each one of us individually wants to and decides to run the risk of posting publicly. We will see how Dear Hubby feels about what I just wrote when he comes back from walking the dog. If both of us “go dark”, then you will know why. Personally, I realized that some parts of my soul have not yet healed up enough to be able to cope with somebody else’s projected undeserved anger. Sorry…. Maybe some day….
@ Ken F’s wife:
I hope you and Patti can straighten out your disagreement.
We have valued hearing about your story, your transparency and candor, and posters here have said so. We also value your husband Ken F.’s many contributions and insights here and have said so.
There are many different styles of marriages and you and Ken F. are a good match, as are other good matches that we hear about from posters and how their marriages work.
We also sometimes hear how spouses had problems and how they have solved those problems, grown. Patti seems to be doing that in her post.
Regarding AH, I was working off a copy of the 1943 OSS psych profile (which was published later with corrective notes) I found during a used-bookstore crawl years ago.
It seems well-established that as a kid AH was seriously enmeshed with his mother, who protected him from his abusive father until she died of cancer. Enmeshed with mother, abused by father, loses mother at relatively-young age then father’s abuse continues. That sounds like a recipe for one screwed-up head.
There are accounts of AH saying (to a couple personal secretaries) that he endured his father’s beatings by “numbing out (detaching?)” and counting each blow dry-eyed. If he didn’t start out as a psychopath, looks like he was trained into it.
Woo. That I didn’t know. Guy sounds like a real piece of work.
Didn’t know that, either, but it fits the other info.
Though he did have some living relatives, primarily a sister or half-sister who went under the name “Frau Wolf” (“Wulfy” was young AH’s nickname, and “Wulf” is a shortening of “Adolf”; “Adolf” itself is a shortening of “Adelwulf” — “Noble Wolf”.) And some cousins, including one in Britain. (This is the source of those “Descendents of Hitler — living in your town?????” tabloid headlines.) There’s also later ancecdotal evidence that he might have had a bastard son in France from WW1; said possible bastard was a Resistance fighter in WW2.
Wasn’t he also part Jewish?
And a vegetarian?
The OSS profile said the “part Jewish” was an unconfirmed rumor.
The vegetarian is somewhat accurate, but AH was not a teetotaler; he did drink specially-brewed very-low-alcohol beer.
While reading the book, I was struck by how ORDINARY in many ways AH was. Slacker, militaria fanboy, had at least one breakdown — I’ve seen similar stuff in fandoms. And one thing was his decision-making process — slack and fiddle along until he gets the answer; the book said “this is how an artist makes decisions”, and it struck me that I make decisions the same way — slack off and get the answer intuitively.
As I said above, there are probably hundreds to thousands of people like he was, just AH rode a Perfect Storm into power and took Europe along for the ride.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Thanks for convo, H.U.G., about AH.
I’ve given so many good books away over the years, including the ones that had this info, that I don’t have them on hand to quote. I think Judith Herman also wrote about AH.
It seems like many of our abusive pastors – Mark Driscoll, my ex-pastor – have had similar backgrounds, including to A.H.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
So I was doing some reading to double-check my facts about AH’s relatives, since I gave away the books years ago.
What I found online was very confusing about his dad, number of wives, affairs in the family, relationships between close family relatives, pregnant servant girls, etc. I’m still scratching my head about it all.
Take away: It was one seriously messed up family.
Well, AH WAS a cult leader.
Cults don’t have to be based on a religion per se.
Nazism and Communism were POLITICAL cults.
@ Ken F’s wife:
hmmm… i really think Patti’s comment (not far above here) is simply her thoughts about sensitivity in general and aspects of her relationship with her husband. i don’t think it has anything to do with you, Ken, or anyone else.
Are you suggesting that only men do this? Here’s an interesting article by a women: http://www.xojane.com/issues/why-you-ll-never-hear-me-use-term-mansplain
Ken F’s wife wrote:
Sorry, that was me that posted, not my wife. This is what happens when we both use the same computer…
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Ken F’s wife wrote:
I noticed that Daisy qualified her post with “a lot of men” and she didn’t say “all men”.
She also never said that women weren’t guilty of bad behaviors, and she’s cited many examples of women who have behaved atrociously in various posts.
Daisy was raised in the world of oppressive Complementarism (family and church), she’s a conservative Christian, she’s a social conservative, but she figured out on her own that Comp was wrong. She writes from that perspective.
My wife asked me to clarify that her above reply to Patti was in relation to Patti’s earlier comment directed toward my wife much further up this thread (Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 01:57). My wife wanted to think on it for couple of days before replying.
What bothered me about it was several women asked me to explain what I meant in my earlier comment. So I did. And then the mansplaining word was used as a reply to me, which seemed to have the implication that I should have not offered the explanation. But it’s possible that Daisy’s insertion of mansplaining had nothing to do with my explanation.
@ Ken F:
oh, ok. i understand.
Ken F wrote:
Thanks for explaining what you meant.
I’ll let Daisy speak for herself, as I don’t know what she meant. But I do know her overall style and she is a thoughtful, kind, gracious person. A good researcher too, I might add.
I remember understanding, and I think, defending what you said.
Also, when you felt like going back to being a lurker, the posters here from all over said that we didn’t want you to do that and that we valued you input.
Thanks for your feedback. I am thinking about making a series of posts on the open discussion page concerning practical critical thinking skills. Siteseer made a good comment about this not long ago, but I cannot find anything on this site that actually describes critical thinking skills. I agree with siteseer, critical thinking skills seem to be sorely lacking among evangelical Christians (maybe other Christians as well, but I have less experience there). My work forces me to use critical thinking skills, so maybe this would be a good way for me to contribute. But I think it will be best for me to only post after I have had time to carefully put the words together. I plan to use sensitive topics as examples because those are the ones where critical thinking is most needed. I know I will be entering a minefield, so I will plan to be careful rather than running right into it.
@ Ken F:
i would enjoy reading that. i fancy myself skilled at critical thinking, but just in case…
i feel christians tend to be like a cognitive leaf on a stream, carried down and away wherever the person of influence wants them to go. they’re better than that.
it’s just amazing to me how the pursuit of God can dumb people down, turn them into freaks and jerks, and generally bring out the worst in them. usually stamped with a smile. i’m sure it’s down to money and power in the institution.
Ken F wrote:
That would be terrific, Ken F.
Thanks for this rich picture of the fullness of our Christian life apart from gender. I have wondered for so long why a few verses in scripture should take on such monstrous proportions in my marriage and in my church. Somehow I had the “opportunity” of being friends/student of some of the CBMW leaders plus being a member of a CBMW leader’s church. It has been a long road of recovery.
Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:
Well, my mother, God rest her, dismissed Luther on precisely those grounds……
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Ken F’s wife wrote:
I mostly don’t have issues with you or Ken, but I think both of you sort of attacked me the other day and neither responded to my response or explained. I am a bit leery of you both, as a result. Not mad. Not wanting you to go away. But leery.
It’s ok to be leery. I am still a neophite when it comes to figuring out how to directly respond to people because it is different from FB and other forums that allow a reply to be posted directly under the original post. I understand that folks here often know each other personally in real life and not just cyberspace, so it would also go without saying that if one person feels attacked and voices it here, their real life friends would probably have quite a difficult time not jumping into the fray to defend them, Likewise it was hard for me to have to sit on my hands while various ladies posted assuming the worst version of what my husband was writing. I did not want him to be mislabeled as an insensitive man, which he was accused of being (if you care to reread all this stuff). So in summary, in my opinion, you showed loyalty to your friend snd I showed loyalty to mine. I sat on posting for two days straight and prayed about it, but the general tone was getting harsher and harsher overall and it bothered me trememdously, IfI had had a way to address the matter in private I would have done so, but as it stands this forum is exclusively public. So I decided to post my second post and wrote what I wrote. Please don’t underestimate how much courage it took me to write about what happened to me to begin with. Typically,the LAST thing a survivor wants, is to be known as “that raped woman”, and I therefore tend to stay in the closet about that kind of stuff. I’m sure you can understand that I also feel quite leery about posting, not knowing what kind of reaction I am going to get in reply. I hope this explanation satisfies you.
so,case in point : I forgot to add “@ Lea”. One more reason to go back into lurking mode, Sorry for the technical ommission….
@ Ken F’s wife:
Never mind. Don’t worry about it. Just didn’t know where you two were coming from on this as regards to me. If this was a general, lots of comments response maybe it makes more sense?
Probably just as well….My friend Phyl told me about the night a bat flew into their bedroom. She pulled the covers over her head, punched her husband & screamed until he jumped out of bed & did the thing in with a whack from his belt. When she came up for air, he had thrown it out the window, only to realize that the neighbors had been wakened by the row, & were watching him jumping & belt-snapping. Stark naked.
What an exciting story.
Ken F’s wife wrote:
Having been reading here and posting here for a few years, I think that most posters do not know each other in real life.
There may be a few that do. Most don’t.
I have become friends with some women I met online and we now email and chat by phone every week.
I’ve dismissed Calvin on similar grounds.
Ken F’s wife wrote:
By the way, I want to thank you again for your courage and transparency. I think it will help others – women and men – who have been the victims of sex crimes.
Pingback: Best of Summer Link-Up | The Beautiful Kingdom Warriors