The concept of authority is central to Bill Gothard’s teachings. So much so, that I remember performing a coronation ceremony crowning my dad “king” of our family as a Wisdom Booklet project. I was 16 at the time, and struggling with authority being defined as dad’s complete control over every aspect of my life. My father determined not only what was modest, but also which outfit was appropriate for most occasions where his children were seen in public. The standard was not modesty, but rather, his preference. I don’t remember my mother purchasing a single piece of clothing; dad bought it all and brought it home for her. I struggled to buy her Christmas gifts, as I had no idea what she liked. Considerable time passed with her deferring this basic choice, and soon she truly had no idea what she wanted. She only knew what pleased my father.
My mother had become a Christian at the age of 22. Her discipleship on the concept of submission consisted of Elizabeth Rice Handford’s book, “Me, Obey Him?” A single quotation from its pages is an apt summary: “The Scriptures say a woman must ignore her “feelings” about the will of God, and do what her husband says. She is to obey her husband as if he were God Himself. She can be as certain of God’s will, when her husband speaks, as if God had spoken audibly from Heaven!” The book had been a gift from her pastor’s wife. For decades it was the go-to book on “godly submission”, passed around in fundamental circles like a treasure that would negate the need for marital counseling and guarantee conjugal bliss.
It is no coincidence that the Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP) and The Advanced Training Institute (ATI) rose to such prominence in the same time period.
Submissive wives, in their misplaced desire to be in the will of God, never questioned the scriptural basis for the path their husbands chose. After all, his voice was the voice of God. Conservative Christian leaders failed to call out the inaccuracies, opting instead to be grateful for the counterbalance to the feminist movement it provided. Like the widow who gave her last two mites to a God who didn’t demand it via a religious system that scorned her, women everywhere suffered in silence, giving rise to unprecedented patrio-centricity and an “umbrella of protection” perched atop an iron rod. My mother believed with all her heart that this type of submission was the only way to please God.
In 2004, No Greater Joy ministries echoed this idea, recycling it in a book entitled, “Created to Be His Help Meet: Discover How God Can Make Your Marriage Glorious.” Across America, submissive mothers and well-meaning pastor’s wives bequeathed to the next generation this secret to a peaceful marriage. But is peace at any price really peace? Are wives truly acting as a help [fit] for their husband by not calling out the unscriptural nature of legalistic control?
Women with the backbone to disagree with Mrs. Pearl’s equating of submission and obedience were swiftly discredited, often labeled “Jezebels” and shamed into repentance for their pride and rebellion. In a later article, “Becoming a Multi-Colored Girl”, published on August 15, 2011, Mrs. Pearl makes a revealing statement. She declares, “As Adam was created in God’s image, Eve was created in Adam’s image. God could have shaped two clay figures and breathed life into both, but he chose to take the woman from the man’s own flesh and bone. I have come to see that tiered process as very significant, making it consistent with nature that the woman should be the helper in the chain of command.” This theological statement revealed what her instruction has said all along; that women are not an expression of the unfathomably complex aspect of God, but rather a creature ranking somewhere in the food chain between men and animals.
Where is the outrage?! Where is the indignation by Christian leaders at this inaccurate representation of God?! Is it any wonder that patrio-centricity has crept across all denominational lines? Any wonder that countless unmarried adult women have forsaken the example of godly women like Elisabeth Elliot and Amy Carmichael to become part of the stay at home daughter phenomenon?
That a prominent “support ministry” of families proclaims that women do not have a biblical right to vote? It is actually not surprising. Behind every modern day Pharisee is a woman who silently nods and smiles. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and never faster than when all parties believe it divinely sanctioned.
Despite the inevitable consequences of twisting scripture, “Created to Be His Help Meet” has ranked far higher than it should on Amazon.com in the marriage and family category for eight long years, endorsed by the silence of fundamental leaders. Then recently, out of the blue, something wonderful happened. Tim Challies, one of the most widely read, conservative, Christian bloggers in cyberspace and author of “The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment”, did something remarkable.
Here is his review of “Created to Be His Help Meet”, Part 1.
http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/created-to-be-his-help-meet
Part 2 may be found here:
http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/created-to-be-his-help-meet-part-2
May all my sisters who keep a copy of this heretical volume on their nightstands under their Bibles hear the truth. And may it set them free.
Thank you, Mr. Challies, for being brave enough to call out the error. I pray you are only the first of many to do so.
Leisl Fredric’s family joined ATI when she was in seventh grade. She gave one “mite” to legalism in the form of the first thirty years of her life. She wears the second around her neck and is grateful to have discovered that the God of grace does not expect to find it in the offering plate.
Challies win. I was so thrilled to see his review, and to see so many surprised affirmations in the comments.
This needs to continue, because the notions of "patriarchy" have outlived Gothard's specific influences over families (particularly homeschoolers). The "anything is good so long as it opposes feminism" concept continues even among those who would recoil from overt patriarchy if they saw it -- but they don't discern it, and thus this false teaching slips in quietly.
By the way, often this false teaching is simply cover for merely another, mutant strain of feminism. Leisl, while your family was at least more consistent with the "dad is king" un-Biblical notion, others have written about the father being only the titular, ceremonial "leader," like a modern king of England, while the wife as prime minister really does all the political and spiritual leadership!
"Behind every modern day Pharisee is a woman who silently nods and smiles. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and never faster than when all parties believe it divinely sanctioned."
Excellent quote. Unfortunately this type of blind susmission goes hand in hand with "the unspoken rules" and perpetuates abusive situations - oftentimes the women are more discerning and recognize error but are shackled by being "submissive".
What wonderful timing. Today, Challies continues his quest by reviewing the Pearls' To Train Up A Child (something the author of this RG column could not have anticipated!).
This book is Michael and Debi Pearl's supposed manual for raising a child right 100 percent of the time — a graceless and anti-Gospel approach which, when taken to its logical conclusion, has led to the deaths of children. Again, it's about time leading Christian voices took up the battle against such false teachers (who slip in unawares mainly because they speak so loudly against *other* false teachers!).
Were the teachings of the old testament taken to it's logical conclusion, rebellious children would be stoned to death. If some deranged parent actually did that in modern day America would you blame the Bible?
I've read the Pearl's writings for years, and have no idea what they could have possibly written that would end in the death of a child as it's "logical conclusion".
Disagree with their teachings on law, grace, whatever, I get that - fine. But show me how a child's death is the "logical conclusion" of their teaching to any sane and rational individual.
I have not read any of the Pearl's writings (nor do I wish to) but it's been alleged that at least 3 children have died because parents were following the precepts laid out in "To Train Up a Child."
While I cannot comment on the basis of what is actually written in that book (again, not having read it) my understanding is that the premise of the book is that you continue to discipline until the child "submits."
The "logical conclusion" part Stephen refers to, I think, is what would happen to a child who steadfastly continued in their refusal to submit?
While one would hope that the humanity of the parent would kick in and concede that a rebellious child is preferable to a dead child, in the case of those 3 dead children (assuming for the sake of argument the allegations are all true) that didn't happen. So either these parents were all insane/irrational, or there is some merit to Stephen's point.
The Pearls teach, "Never give in. Never surrender." They teach that the goal of parenting is to "win." Well, if you have a child who can't or won't submit, you keep going indefinitely.
The two cases that I have read about in detail were adopted children from orphanages. Probably suffering from severe attachment issues and learned behaviors where they had to refuse to give in to protect themselves in a hostile environment. Combine that with the conviction that the child's soul rests on your "winning," and yes, you have a recipe for beating (or in one case exposing) a child to death.
Even in a more "normal" family setting, the Pearls' teachings quickly lead to abuse. We had one child who not only just didn't get what the connection was between spankings and his behavior, but one who went hysterical when he was in fear. Spank him to get him to stop crying and you would only escalate his terror. On and on and on, if we kept following the Pearls. Fortunately we had the sense and love for our son to just stop. A teaching that is only safe and healthy when the parents have the sense to ignore it is not a healthy teaching.
As a child, I was exposed to the cruelty of the Pearls' doctrines off and on again. There were many teachings that were too extreme even for my extreme parents, but even so, the beatings I and my siblings got, were absolutely horrendous.
The Pearls, combined with ATI, is enough to crush anyone. Pure evil. There is one suggestion that I can remember, where they tell you to 'laugh at your child' if the child runs from them to prevent a spanking. While that may look fairly innocent on paper, consider it from the child's perspective: You, at 1,3,6,10,15 etc. years old are already accustomed to severe beatings/lashings ranging anywhere from 10-45 minute beatings, with so many swats administered that you lose count after awhile, and suddenly you see your parent coming toward you with their 'rod' in hand. (Rod being anything from a leather belt, to a stick cut off of a tree in the backyard, to an arrow shaft, to a flag pole, to a ruler, to a length of chain, or the dreaded plastic blind switches.)More often than not you are spanked on your calves, instead of your bottom, because your calves are more tender than your buttocks. Let me also add that often times, you are unsure exactly what you are being spanked for, and even if you are, the spanking outweighs the offense. So, your logical conclusion is to RUN! Now your parent starts to laugh (maniacally), and may chase after you, or simply sit in comfort while telling you how much worse your spanking will be if you do not come and take it. (Your spanking WILL be worse anyway.)
Imagine this type of treatment on a regular basis. This is only ONE example of their horrendous ideas. (And I know for a FACT that my parents were not nearly as extreme as quite a few families in our circle of ATI friends.)
I understand that you could have read the Pearls and never in a million years applied their teachings literally, (they way they intended them to be used), and I applaud you for having the sense not to, if that is the case.
But I must tell you that from my experience and witness, their teachings are evil to the core, and many children who grew up under their teachings are abandoning the faith completely. I am fortunate that God had mercy on me, and has led me away from that situation, and I'd rather die than use any of those teachings on any other human being; although I do sincerely wonder that if the parents had ever been forced to undergo the torture they put upon their children, if they would cling to these teachings so much, regardless of how 'Godly' they might have thought it was.
That thing about laughing is chilling. My dad was harsh and crossed the line in his spanking but never was there a laugh. That's the Pearl's advice (separate from Gothard) and it literally makes me ill to my stomach. Laughing like that is cold-blooded, like a torturer would do, seems to me.
Oy, I just reread my post and realized I did not clarify that I was giving a hypothetical example, and while writing, I mixed it up with my own awful memories. I apologize for not making it clear. Apparently I did not read it over before I posted, I would have caught the mistake. I shouldn't post when I'm angry and can't think straight. What I wrote IS real, true events. I do not remember my parents laughing at me, however I do not remember ever running from a spanking, so I do not know if they ever exercised that particular teaching. The laughing teaching is the first one that I could remember off the top of my head, which is why I described it. All the rest of what I described is 100% memory, including the terror at receiving such awful beatings for such a small misbehavior. Again, I apologize for allowing my emotions to get the better of my writing. Thanks for commenting Matthew, otherwise I probably would not have caught my mistake. I hope I made myself clear this time. :/
It is so good to see Christian folks speaking out against the Pearls. They seem to specialize in turning away from the Gospel of Jesus Christ in order to follow their own notions based on godless philosophies of men.
Thank you for drawing attention to Challies' reviews!!
Thank you :)
Wow! Thanks for writing the article. I also appreciated the insights offered by Mr. Challies. I haven't read that particular book and certainly don't plan too. That's just really messed up. In my opinion, the Pearl's teachings, like Bill Gothard's, have really hurt a lot of people.
I was thrilled to read Challies' reviews a couple of weeks ago. The Pearls are toxic and need to be exposed as such.
Also, I enjoyed this article very much. Thanks for writing it.
I never cared much for Tim's reviews--until now,
Love the comments to this article too. I'm going to use "Created to be his Doormat" from now on!
Wow...debating over whether or not I should share this review with my Facebook friends (some who are heavily into the Pearls, the Bachams, Doug Phillips, etc). I read "Helpmeet" a few years ago and felt so guilty and depressed, like I was the worst wife ever. My husband finally made me put it down, thank God! I can't believe I bought into this stuff, even for a little while!
Awesome article!!! It is so sad to see these women suffering the way us daughters did because we thought it was "honoring" to our parents to give them absolute power over our lives. And for them, it is until death. :( Hopefully many will read this or Challies review.
Anyone emember that diagram taught in the basic/advanced seminar, showing the father as a hammer, beating the wife as a chisel? What a terrible and messed up picture to teach to young, impressionable minds!
I don't recall the Wisdom Booklet project calling for a coronation ceremony for fathers. We didn't do that project for my dad.
And, as a father myself now, I find the entire concept outrageous. Allowing my wife and children to "honor" me this way seems to fly in the face of Jesus' words in Matthew 20:
"It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant."
Based on Jesus' example, I'm thinking that fathers who truly want to follow Him should be more than happy to SERVE their families, even if that means performing lowly tasks like cleaning toilets and changing diapers!
I can't give you a hearty enough AMEN. Husbands/fathers are to serve their families and "give ourselves" for our wives (Eph 5:25. A true shepherd serves. It frightens me how this whole patriarchal movement is sweeping some circles, I was very close to getting swept in but the Lord used several factors (including RG) to open my eyes to the deception. Don't be fooled by the psuedo-biblical sounding rhetoric, it is a trap - look for the fruit. I feel sorry for the worn-down women and also for the children.
Funny enough, I think my wife was given this book by someone in our church when we first got married. When I mentioned it off-hand to our pastor he stopped and said "yeeahh...make sure you read that book first. Let me put it this way, I read it, and told my wife I never wanted her to read it....ever".
I was given 'Created to be his Help Meet' by my mother a few years into my marriage. I read a chapter or two but never got around to really reading it till a few months ago when I found it while cleaning out our garage. I was curious so I started reading it and was absolutely horrified. It was the worst marriage advice I have ever heard of, I didn't even finish it, I threw it out about halfway through. There was no love, no grace, just judgement, blame on the woman and stupid stories that I am convinced she either made up or hugely embellished.
Unfortunately, Tim Challies chose to endorse Nancy Leigh DeMoss at the end if his article and her views aren't much different in terms of submission. She lists "Me? Obey Him?" as recommended reading for women.It seems like complementarianism is more and more confusing all the time:
http://www.thatmom.com/2012/07/13/will-the-real-complementarian-please-stand-up-2/
I went onto Gothard's website and couldn't find any material from Mrs. Pearl. Is she endorsed by Gothard or uses the ATI curriculum?
No. They have spoken at some functions but that's been about it. However there is a lot of crossover both in general philosophy and adherents. No official or even informal ties between the organizations I am aware of though.
Mr Gothard and the Pearls have had significant contact though, and copies of/discussions on their letter to each other have been published more than once at least in their magazine publications.
Some of that writing being significant disagreements (particularly on the Pearl's part). There is no question there is some commonality and contact, but they are very independent organizations. Its just that they appeal strongly to and draw their support from a lot of the same people.
I have read the book 'Created to be his Help Meet' because a friend recommended it. I was shocked by the way the sick twisted view of marriage that they seem to have. I read parts of the book to my husband who said "that book has nothing to do with God's will for anyone's marriage!"
I then told my mom about the book and she said that someone had given it to her years before and she never finished it for the same reason.
I feel sorry for anyone that believes what is written in that book!
It's scary to think of how many woman could be trapped in horribly abusive situations that could lead to death, just because they think they're being a godly wife!
It's so very sad!!!
I am cheering the amount of testimonies from people who said their pastors or husbands practiced Biblical discernment and unequivocally condemned the Pearls' doctrinal disasters. Let's hear it for leadership, from Godly men and women, that points to God our Father and Christ our King, not self!
Pingback : Discussing Tim Challies’ Reviews | Why Not Train A Child?
I personally found Challies’ book review of “Created to Be His Helpmeet” to be (at various points) illogical, self-contradicting, non-objective, theologically suspect, presuming more than his quotes could sustain, and poorly written. While, I do not say this to defend all the Pearl’s teachings (I have several disagreements with them), I do believe (from what the book review portrayed) that Debi’s teachings are more or less acceptable as an appropriate biblical interpretation of the role of women within marriage. I find this review largely biased and suspect.
Brian, you are certainly free to believe so. I think you must be seeing the review and the book through very different eyes than I am. And honestly, I think you enjoy playing devil's advocate - not that there's anything wrong with that.
I'm curious to know specific examples of where the review proves to be illogical, theologically suspect, and poorly written.
But far and away more than that, I'm curious to know how it seems to you that Debi's teachings are more or less acceptable as an appropriate biblical interpretation of the role of women within marriage. What specific passages from Scripture aligned with what specific elements of the book do you have in mind? Another way to get at it: Can you say in good faith that Debi is practicing good exegesis (illustrated with specific examples)?
I thought I’d jump in with my perspective. An “outsider’s” perspective. I did not grow up in the ATI movement (thankfully!), and have never attended a “fundy” church. I am not an uneducated doormat who was shipped out into a controlling marriage at a young age. Rather, I married a marvelous, loving man after working hard to earn my Bachelor’s degree from Moody Bible Institute.
That being said, I believe Leisl Fredric’s article above to be an overreaction to Bill Gothard’s control issues. Because of the spiritual abuses promoted by one man, any other teaching that even hints at authority/submission is labeled unbiblical. The quote from “Me, Obey Him?” is truly nuts, but lumping in every other pro-submission author with Ms. Handford is unfair. Discounting what Scripture says about wifely submission because one group claims women should not vote is a terrible case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater!
God does require wives to submit to their husbands, provided they are not asked to violate God’s express commands. Period. Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church, but that’s another topic. :)
As an insider - who was raised surrounded by these teachings, I can assure you that Leisl's article is NOT an overreaction. Have you read any of the Pearls books? I assure you, if you do you will see that many things are promoted that are detrimental to women and children.
My own family did NOT buy into the Pearls I believe largely because my mother was raised in an abusive home so she taught her daughters to stand against abuse.
Rachel, I have read "To Train Up A Child" (a long time ago) and "Created..." (more recently). I can't speak properly to TTUAC because it's been a while, but I've found Created to be mostly very helpful. I do not agree with EVERYTHING in the book, but certainly don't find it detrimental or demeaning in any way. I'm sure I'll be labeled as having drunk the Kool-Aid, but God DOES say submit to my husband, so I do... And I find great joy and contentment in doing so!
I'm truly sorry for the spiritual abuses you and others have suffered, and I pray God will bring healing so that former-ATI gals can submit to their husbands like Sarah, "Without being frightened by any fear."
Kristen, thank you for taking the time to comment.
I’m truly sorry for the spiritual abuses you and others have suffered... that's kind of you to say. If I could be honest, your comments here seem a little dismissive to me. I don't mean to be rude, I'm just being honest with how it comes across to me.
submit to their husbands like Sarah, “Without being frightened by any fear.” Here is what 1 Peter 3:5b-6 says: "They submitted themselves to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear." Sometimes, "do what is right" means truth in love, even if the man in power does not want to hear the truth. Sometimes truth in love means confronting an abuser, sometimes it means putting a safe distance.
This is also addressed here in the section about "Wives, submit - even if it kills you": https://www.recoveringgrace.org/2012/07/the-subtle-power-of-spiritual-abuse-chapter-8-revictimizing-victims
Learned helplessness is a real thing, and it's a real problem for many who were raised in homes where abuse was justified with twisted Scripture and a misrepresentation of God.
By the way, your earlier comment says this: God does require wives to submit to their husbands, provided they are not asked to violate God’s express commands. Period. But this statement goes beyond Scripture. First Cor 7:3-4 says, "The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife." There are other, more general passages, but when it specifically comes to the bedroom, Scripture teaches "mutual submission" without one person being in authority over another in the bedroom.
Kristen,
Well spoken. I did grow up with the Institute and have been "recovering" for about 10 years. While Bill does go way beyond Scripture and many of his teachings can lead to abuse, I found Mrs. Pearl's book to be largely helpful. However, I am married to a godly, humble man. My husband feels that as the Spiritual leader he is called to serve. So he is up at all hours of the night changing diapers, comforting children after nightmares, he works all day then comes home and makes dinner when I'm sick and pregnant. Since that is my situation, the book provides balance to my natural, selfish tendencies. God says to submit to and honor my husband and sometimes I don't want to, but I need to.
If my situation were different, however, I might feel differently about Mrs. Pearl's book because she does not allow for women in abusive situations to leave to get help. Nor does she provide more direction for such women than to just "be sweet." A better book, in my opinion, is The Excellent Wife by Martha Peace. She has a chapter on Biblical submission (it IS Biblical) and also a chapter on wives confronting sin in their husband.
As another insider, I consider your comment regarding overreaction similar to Clayton Williams saying "If rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy it." Ridiculous. What action is an overreaction to a child being beaten in Christ's own name from teaching that may have a correct statement in it now and then? Jesus himself understood the issues of the heart, and that there is balance and spectrum to all things, including submission, instruction and discipline. I seem to recall a woman caught in sin that he did not allow to be stoned. Christ, who we are to mirror, meets us where we are. And if He isnt a big enough God to understand the trauma of being beaten into our 20s, and to draw us to Him in the way we need it, then you are serving the wrong Christ.
Further, what percentage of wrong teaching is permissible in a book or sermon before we are to throw it out? Or is only teaching on adoption and other such issues required to be 100% correct, while we can let slide the horrific teachings of many authors on submission. I would elucidate, having followed my parents to the highest ranks in national homeschool leadership in america, that the most vocal woman on submission and other teachings, were the most controlling and non-submissive themselves. Unfortunately, it was an acceptable platform for them to teach from.
And lastly, God help anyone who argues for arguments sake against material that has wounded and permanently scarred the lives of countless helpless children. We can differ in our opinions now as adults, but the children and wives under this teaching had no voice, and were allowed no advocates. And some of us who tried to find a voice were beaten all the more for our pride and rebelliousness. I encourage you to lay any pride and indignation aside, brother and sister, and find Jesus true heart on this matter.
Debi Pearl teaches not only submission (of a very specific type), but promotes the idea that a woman's identity comes from whatever her husband needs her to be. She also believes that while man is made in God's image, woman is made in man's image. Both of those views are toxic enough to disqualify her as a useful teacher of women. If you're looking for a complementarian teacher, you can find others.
"I'm truly sorry for the spiritual abuses you and others have suffered, and I pray God will bring healing so that former-ATI gals can submit to their husbands like Sarah, "Without being frightened by any fear."
You're being gracious here (far, far more gracious than Debi Pearl ever is to those she disagrees with), but you seem to assume that those of us who object to Pearl and/or strict complementarian marriage roles suffer in how we relate to our husbands. Or maybe it's the husbands who suffer! Anyway, this isn't true for many of us, myself included. When my husband and I moved away from enforced gender roles and instead simply worked as a team in the way that best suits us, our marriage improved.
Avoid this book.
Matthew, Thank you for your invitation to elucidate further. However, I must graciously decline. I have already spent a couple of hours reading and processing these articles and do not wish to take the time to compose a detailed analysis as I have other things I wish to accomplish with my day off. I feel my purpose of expressing disagreement with the competency of the book review was duly met through my statement above. My intention was simply to encourage others to critique the critique for themselves.
Brian, we normally do not take your thoughts lightly, but your post shows no purpose other than being disagreeable. If you want us to give your words weight, you know you have to do better than that.
I personally know of children who were raised in an abusive way under the direct influence of following the Pearls' book, with only marginal ATI input. The children are now grown, and the family is largely destroyed. The parents will spend the rest of their lives blaming God for the result.
Leaving the Pearls teachings specifically and moving to the topic of submission itself, I wanted to throw this out there...
The teaching of wives submitting to their husbands is not a deviant theology specific to BG or the Pearls, etc. It is a mainstream Christian belief (Pulled, I believe, accurately from the scriptures themselves) which in the course of normal family life ought to be followed. I say normal, because I do not mean wives being accomplices to sin, wives submitting to sexual or physical abuse, etc.
Recovering Grace has a pattern of attracting people with abnormal (many horrific) home situations. I do believe that there are ways of escape for these victims. (those who are truly victims, not those who simply want autonomous liberty – something which the scriptures do not necessarily defend as a right).
I am a Southern Baptist. I realize that many of you are not. That’s okay. I also admit I have many disagreements with my Baptist brothers. However, I want to prove that the idea of submission is not cultic but mainstream theology. Here is a quote from our Baptist Faith & Message 2000. This was written by leading Baptist scholars, theologians and pastors. It was ratified by the entire SBC convention:
“The husband and wife are of equal worth before God, since both are created in God's image. The marriage relationship models the way God relates to His people. A husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church. He has the God-given responsibility to provide for, to protect, and to lead his family. A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ. She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation.”
I’m curious, in what ways do you agree or disagree with the quote above?
Brian, I don't know about anyone else but for myself, I am hesitant to cooperate with your hijacking of this thread. I tried to engage you yesterday after you made comments that I felt were uncharitable and unsupported. I take you at your word that you are too busy on your day off to support the assertions you made but now you return with an attempt to redirect the conversation...
Challies himself would be an example of someone who teaches submission but rejects the Pearls.
If this is a subject you feel strongly about, perhaps you should start a blog about it. It's a hot-button issue. You are a pastor and are widely read. You might have a helpful voice to add to the conversation at large.
I'm non-ATI and grew up SBC, so that phrasing doesn't bother me. I do see how it can trigger others...but they are careful to include the beauty of equality in creation and mutual submission.
Going back to the Pearls, who are the subject of this article, it seems you would have a hard time reconciling their teachings with this SBC statement. They view women as a lesser image, and they seem to miss the key phrasing of "servant leadership." One would expect a nurturing by the husband that would lead to a more loving outlook on life than she expresses.
Brian, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU!
Although I do not agree with the Pearls view of submission due to reading the book and finding that she counseled a woman who's husband was trying to kill her that all she needed to do was be submissive.
I think too many women have swallowed the feminist view of submission as somehow enslaving women.The reality is that submission done God's way(which doesn't mean staying in an abusive situation etc...just as you mentioned above) is a beautiful picture of Christ and the church!
Plus to be honest...a great deal of responsibility is on the husbands shoulders. My husband and I joke about the quote "submission is ducking so that God can plaster your husband" But,truly my husband and I believe that he will stand before God and give an account for how he has lead our family.
A wise couple will work together as a team with Christ as the ultimate head...and just as the body of Christ we have different roles but none the less important!!!
The quote you gave did not come from the Pearls, and is not what the original article is about. The Pearls do not teach that woman is in the image of God- they teach that woman is in the image of her husband and that her self-value and worth come from honoring him, not God. I read "Helpmeet" years ago, and I don't remember her teaching anything about the husband being a "servant leader" either.
I don't think anyone here is saying that true Biblical submission is wrong. We are saying that what Debi Pearl teaches is not true Biblical submission.
And I too would be curious as to specific examples of where the original review was illogical and biased, as well as examples of how what Debi Pearl teaches is Biblical. I'm surprised you didn't have time to post those the other day, but you had time to come back and try to re-direct the conversation over to what the SBC teaches about submission.
Those who believe the Pearls' teachings are at best only slightly skewed from mainstream Christian teaching -- I, as a "complementarian" RG supporter (who dislikes the un-romantic and confusing term) have a challenge for you:
Please defend Michael Pearl's belief that children are not sinful from birth and must be taught "the rod" as a Gospel replacement.
For more details, see Challies' review of To Train Up a Child.
Surely someone can make time for that. :-)
One thing I have never understood about modern-day teachings on marriage roles: why is the command for men to love their wives as Christ loved the church not held up or enforced as much the command for women to submit? It seems like if anything goes wrong, it's blamed on the wife because she isn't submitting properly, or she has a "rebellious spirit." Why are men not called out for not laying down their lives for their wives, as the Bible says?
Let me add that I understand that our doing good should not be dependent on others doing good, or on them performing their assigned roles. I'm not trying to say wives shouldn't submit if their husbands don't love them properly. It just seems to me that the wives are called out for their behavior more than husbands are called out for theirs.
Yes, there are pastors who will always corner the wife on "submission" when the husband brings her to him for "straightening out". Abusive men love pastors like that. The man gets what he wants with no accounting for how he is doing in loving his wife
once heard a preacher's message that the ma's biggest sin was lust and the womans' main sin was rebellion....after the message i put it all in perspective for the women of the church with this quip..."the woman is rebelling against man's lust!"
oops....it was MAN'S biggest sin, not ma's
(poor ma never had time to sin, taking care of pa and all the younguns!!!!)