I was watching a 7 minute video snippet of a recent Mark Driscoll sermon (source) that was brought before me through an article criticizing an interpretation of a Proverb (which was unfair). In the sermon he speaks of Ephesians 22-33 and how women submit to their husbands in love and respect.
I always try to hear Driscoll fairly and to give him the benefit of the doubt since I know I disagree with some of his major theological views. I owe it to him, myself, Christ, and the body to give him the benefit of the doubt so that I can ensure that my love for my brother is not tainted by ignorance, pride, lies, or any other weapon that can be used against me by the enemy. Unity is important and I don't want to give the enemy a foothold.
With that said, Driscoll's view of men and women often baffles me. I'm not saying he's definitely wrong and I'm not insulting him, I'm just saying that I don't see what he sees and what it is that he sees in this world baffles me. Let me explain.
Starting at about the 2:20 mark of the video he instructs women that they need to be respectful, which is true, and that wives must feel and speak in a way that doesn't "pick a fight with him, declare a war, and start the crazy-cycle." I agree that wives and husbands need to not fight when they disagree but rather respectfully work through conflict. This isn't a command just for women but for spouses, and as I'll later explain, people in general. Also I don't think Driscoll is saying "crazy-cycle" in a way that demeans the female gender. Unfortunately, it can easily sound like he is saying women are typically the ones who start the "crazy-cycle" and we all know that's not true. This is the biggest problem with Driscoll's sermon. Sure, he's working off a teaching meant for wives and such but this is wisdom for all God's people, not just married females and that isn't expressed in any form.
Driscoll states emphatically that it is good and right for wives to express their thoughts and feelings to their husbands because Jesus expressed thoughts and feelings. He goes on to say that women shouldn't disrespect their husbands in public because it encourages others to do so. This is a big part of his teaching; the public nature of the wife's "disrespect" and how it affects the husband socially in the realm of being respected. Next he states, "You can disagree with your husband but respectfully, privately." Here's an issue for me, and I'm not sure if he intended it but, it seems Driscoll is making respectfully and privately into synonyms. Now, disagreement with the husband can only be a private matter, otherwise it's disrespectful. Earlier he was saying to just be respectful but now it's to be respectful and to be private.
I don't disagree that most conflict needs to be settled privately (again this goes both ways for husbands and wives). This is not the case for all conflict. Some smaller conflicts can happen in public. Anyway, Driscoll continues this thought and it's the next point I'm actually focused on.
Around the 4 minute mark he says to the women, "...you ladies don't perhaps understand this but when you disrespect, cut down, your husband in front of others, he is in a lose-lose scenario because if he argues back he is being mean. If he doesn't argue back he is being weak. He's in a lose-lose. Men with men, it's not like this.You disrespect me, we can talk about that. Right? We can actually have a bit of a debate about that. But with your wife? 'I'm in a bad position. Either I respond and I'm a mean husband or I don't respond and I'm a weak husband.'"
I 100% agree that disrespect is harmful to the person in a personal way and in a social way. We should never disrespect one another be it in private or public. That's just flat out loving others. Husbands should respect their wives and wives their husbands. However, I still worry Driscoll is operating under the idea that disagreement in public is disrespect. I hope not because I couldn't say disagreement in public puts a spouse in a lose-lose situation. This brings me to my next thought.
Why must the dichotomy be mean v. weak? Who says it is weak to refuse to engage in conflict publicly and opt to settle the matter privately? Isn't this, more or less, what he was teaching the wife to do only moments earlier? I think this is the third way out of the situation if it arises. Respond, in love. That way you're not "mean" or "weak." This scenario will inevitably happen and the proper reaction is to respond in love. Don't be passive, don't be aggressive, be kind. Step to the side and settle the matter in love or agree to resolve it later alone. Back to the dichotomy.
There is nothing weak about being disrespected. If it is weak then it's probably the type of weakness we see when Jesus is spat upon (to a much smaller degree). That is, it is an appropriate weakness. It is better to be wronged to than to wrong. Christians don't fight back to uphold a reputation. Christians have no interest in their own pride or looking good in the eyes of others. No, their aim is to be loving, patient, and kind. They want to be like Jesus and thus they don't need to worry about appearing weak to others (especially if the others are a bunch of guys).
I also don't think engaging in the disagreement and having an argument, even in public, constitutes being mean. The wife isn't mean when she publicly disagrees and the husband isn't mean when he disagrees in public. How one disagrees determines whether or not they are being mean. If it's insulting or done in an unloving manner then it can be classified as mean but arguing in and of itself, even in public, is not enough to constitute being mean. So I find the dichotomy to be unreasonable on both ends.
Furthermore, the notion that men get to hammer out differing opinions in public but women (or a particular woman) can't hammer out differing opinions with their husband in public is a bit silly. Sure, there is a different intimacy. I get that. Again, most matters should be handled privately if possible BUT anytime a Christian man is disrespected, be it by a wife or another man (be he Christian or not) then the Christian man ought to respectfully, patiently, kindly, seek to resolve the conflict in a way he would with a beloved. That might mean saying "Can we talk about this later in private?" instead of fighting for his reputation or pride in front of the guys. But, like with the wife, sometimes the issue must be handled in the forum it is proposed and the matter must be solved in a loving and respectful way. I don't think we need too different an approach to conflict with wives and bros (and this is the context I think Driscoll presents as opposed to a context which has within it a personal enemy).
Also on that note, I don't want to assume Driscoll is saying women are incapable of engaging in debate when men are capable of it. I don't at all think he is proposing them women are of weak mind and unable to intelligently debate with men. That wouldn't be fair to him and his intent. So let's not go there, let's respect the man and give him the benefit of the doubt.
Either you are mean to people and a bad lover of neighbor/spouse or you're like Jesus. Why must we say the dichotomy exists with the wife and not fellow men? To me, it seems like Jesus wants us to be the same person for everyone, consistent in our conduct. Yes, context (even socially) plays a part but I don't see how it plays as big a role as Driscoll seems to think. Both men and women need to be respected by the Christian man (and woman) in the same way. Our conflict resolution skills in marriage can, for the most part, work off the same principles in public with those we are not bound to in marriage.* Maybe I don't understand marriage very well as a single man but I do understand conflict resolution pretty well and this is something I've found to be true in my experience.
Here's the real question: Am I misreading Mark Driscoll? Do I not understand his view of how men and women are different or am I misunderstanding what he is teaching here and the implications of that teaching? I'm working hard to hear him rightly.
*A great book for conflict resolution in marriage which has a ton of carry-over principles for conflict resolution in general is Fight Fair! by Tim and Joy Downs.
No comments:
Post a Comment