I recently wrote a piece on marriage and sexuality that included this:
“12. What is the most important word in the marriage vows?
In our time, because of the peculiar form our disobedience has taken, the most important word is obey. And it is the most important word whether or not it is included in the vows. Like a father who has abandoned his family, that word can dominate through its absence.”
Since this kind of thing is almost guaranteed to cause a Facebook Freakout, which it did, not to mention a series of comments from the peculiar kind of misery on parade at CREC Memes, I thought a few additional comments in order. Cream invariably rises, but I am afraid crecmeme is not in that category.
First, a reminder. The New Testament — not the Old, mind you — repeatedly reminds us of the duty of wifely submission and obedience. “Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well . . .” (1 Pet. 3:6). “The aged women likewise, that they . . . may teach the young women to be . . . obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” (Titus 2:3-5). “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord” (Col. 3:18).
Confronted with such passages, one feminist technique is to get out the trusty eisegetical pliers and rearrange the verses into a shape more suitable to the 21st century, and more in line with human flourishing. But if there is not enough time for that, another trusty alternative is to utterly misconstrue what the people who still cite such passages actually have in mind.
Whenever I think of hierarchy in marriage, something like this is what comes to mind.
“Portia wished that for Bassanio’s sake, she might be trebled ‘twenty times herself.’ A thousand times more fair, then thousand times more rich,’ and protests that, as things are, ‘the full sum of her Is sum of nothing,’ ‘an unlesson’d girl.’ It is prettily said and sincerely said. But I should feel sorry for the common man, such as myself, who was led by this speech into the egregious mistake of walking into Belmost and behaving as though Portia really were an unlessoned girl. A man’s forehead reddens to think of it. She may speak thus to Bassanio: but we had better remember that we are dealing with a great lady” (Preface to Paradise Lost, p. 114).
But what a certain kind of mentality asserts I am arguing for is something more like this. Of course that kind of throwback sexism is perfectly appalling, but we have to remember that this stuff was being used in ads back then because that is what all the Mad Men cool kids were coming up with, and a certain kinds of Christians were in fact attracted to it back then, mouths agape. The same kind of gullible Christians have the same kind of approach to worldliness now, mouths still agape, with the only difference being the kind of flies that buzz into them.
And there were of course objections to this statement. “In our time, because of the peculiar form our disobedience has taken, the most important word is obey.” Different folks were huffy about this, because the most important word is obviously cherish. Well, yes, it is for normal people, but we are talking about feminism. Remember that my point was that obey is the most important word “because of the peculiar form our disobedience has taken.” This is the current epicenter of our current rebellion against the Word of God. We hate obedience. This is the point where we are defying Him. This is the place where, if repentance is to occur, repentance must occur. People in rebellion against the glorious duty of obedience — men and women both — can have no idea what it means to cherish.
Meanwhile others might insist that the most important word in marriage is communication, but let us be frank. It is hard to communicate with people who only hear every third word you say.
Don’t you know that you are supposed to teach “servant leadership” for men? When you do, make sure that it is with the understanding that it is the wife who he is to serve and keep the servant writ large enough that the leadership disappears.
“Well, yes, it is for normal people, but we are talking about feminism.” – Exactly, once again.
When you’ve shoved aside the givens for so long the givens have to be given again so that the willing to get it got it again.
I hope whoever writes those CREC memes keeps reading Pastor Wilson. The memes aren’t even a little funny. Really. Good humor should be able to make one laugh at oneself. Not even the hint of an upturned smile.
But with careful attention to the masterful humor woven throughout Pastor Wilson’s writings, there is hope that his wordsmithing can be honed.
“CREC Memes” might be a misnomer – the ones I’ve read all seem to be “Doug Wilson Memes”…
Well, to be fair, the people over at CREC Memes never claim that the memes are actually funny. I mean, c’mon, they couldn’t even satirize target-rich Kirk Cameron and make it funny. That’s a level of incompetent writing that is difficult to achieve without an endless well of bitterness to draw from.
Whether people love him or hate him, it says a great deal that there are actually people out there who go to the trouble of creating a website dedicated to a suspenseful following after Doug Wilson’s every word. Money could only hire this kind of loyal opposition with difficulty, yet they apparently do all this work for free. Not only this, but with each new meme the site provides helpful links back to what Wilson actually said. Unfortunately, I suspect most visitors to their site come by way of comment links from Mablog in the first place, so visitors arrive… Read more »
I checked out the “CREC Memes” page. Those people have a serious Doug Wilson obsession. The time and dedication that must be involved in reading everything he writes, and then responding with two or perhaps three posts is truly breathtaking.
“CREC Memes” is a personality cult. It’s not healthy.
So your comment induced me Bernard to have a look. The site seems odd in that it purports to be against CREC (and Doug) which it views as cultish, but the complaints are often antagonistic to Christianity generally and not to Wilson’s perspective. And he doesn’t appear to be able to read or take contextual clues. For example he mocks the nuance/ no-nuance statement but a generous reading of Doug here would assume that he is speaking into our supposedly “nuanced” culture which is incapable of seeing any sin. Ie. in a black-and-white culture nuance reminds men that their are… Read more »
This seems to be another example of “what I really meant” syndrome. Say something outlandish, and really really obnoxious. That drives people from Christ, and causes the Name of Lord to be spoken derisively. And then when called on it, say “what I really meant was [something that looks similar when you squint, and ignore all the details]. Jeez guys.” But you are accountable not for your “intentions” and what you really mean, but for every word. That is, it is the post itself and not “whether you hold the correct view”. But as the post is written, the Name… Read more »
Matt P.,
Just reread that portion of Romans 2, because I didn’t want to be unfair to you. But wow … that escalated quickly. You’re throwing Wilson’s blog post into the same category as first-century Jews who were perverting the Gospel itself?
If that’s what you meant, well, bully for you for going DEFCON 1 on him. Go big or go home, eh?
“Remember that my point was that obey is the most important word “because of the peculiar form our disobedience has taken.” This is the current epicenter of our current rebellion against the Word of God. We hate obedience. This is the point where we are defying Him. This is the place where, if repentance is to occur, repentance must occur. People in rebellion against the glorious duty of obedience — men and women both — can have no idea what it means to cherish.” Can I just hit “Like”…. This is something I have been trying hard to work through… Read more »
Hi @matt Petersen
By my reading, Pastor Wilson meant what he wrote; what did I miss?
thx