"Complementarian" Christian Hate

Among those who believe that women should be restricted and hemmed in by boundaries set by males, there is a group within contemporary christendom who call themselves "complementarians," because they say they believe that the genders "complement" each other.  It's a recently invented label that they've chosen to attach to their system of beliefs, preferring that to the less desirable previous way they were identified, as "traditionalists."

They were called traditionalists because that's what they are, people who cling to Medieval Bible interpretations and attitudes toward women. However, with one difference. It's no longer popular among them to continue to say that female people are actually inferior to male people (though their actions would lead one to think that they still do believe that). They have, instead, modified their historic theological position to say that they believe women are equal to men "in essence," but not "in position."

This means that the restrictions are pretty much the same as they were back when it was fashionable to say that females were inferior to males because God made them that way, and that was the reason the male was to be the boss. Now they say that it's just one of those things, that God gave the cookies to the men, and who are they to argue with God?

I can't really be comfortable calling those traditionalists-in-a-new dress complementarians. After all, everyone, egalitarians included, believes that the genders are complementary to each other. So, it's sort of an obvious attempt to clean up their name instead of cleaning up their act.

"Complementarians," or "comps" as they like to refer to themselves, come in a rainbow of persuasions, sort of a continuum from blatant female haters to almost persuaded fence sitters who will grant that women should be able to have access to every position in ministry, except pastoring churches.

What they all agree on, though, and this is the central tenet regardless of what they claim, is that females are to be restricted in some way, by males, and the most dominant male in the group gets to decide in what way and to what extent they are to be restricted.

I've asked them point blank if this is not the case, and they fall away in silence. Because, they cannot answer the question, the answer is obvious and uncontestable.

Most comps will not come right out and reveal their fears of women, nor their hatred of the female. I don't even think they all do fear and hate women. But, many obviously do.

Here is a link to an item on the blog of a couple of the most extremely restrictive, see what you think.

And below is the link to the front page of the blog, so you can scan the rest of its offerings:

http://timbayly.worldmagblog.com/timbayly/

Comments

[Mary Rarden]

I've noticed many times in reading "Christian" patriarchalists' writings, that they're at best disingenuous in their claim to recovering traditional values in male-female relationships. Where is the chivalry they claim to cherish? The comments to and about women are blatantly misogynistic. They evidence little or no resepct for women, except perhaps some in token for those women who either agree silently with them or who parrot their philosophies. Their practice is to blast away quite rudely to any woman who challenges their preference for male privilege and power. It's boorish by any standards, including those they claim to uphold.

[Mary Rarden]

Here's another misogynistic pastor, from the "Mars Hill Church" in Seattle, who has constructed a strawman for use in furthering his anti-woman agenda (by the way, he opens this piece by relating the lies he told his son, in order to trash an unnamed denomination other than his own):

http://theresurgence.com/md_blog_2006-08-21_now_the_mainline_churches_make_sense

Take note of how he falsely blames the "denial" of what he says (but does not specify) are "distinct roles for men and women in the home and church" and the ordination of women, for all the evil things he rants against. And take special note of the outrageously BAD theology he appears to be spreading here in #10 of his "ten easy steps to destroying a denomination":

10. See Jesus pull rank, judge you, and send some of your pastors to hell to be tormented by Him forever because He will no longer tolerate your diversity.

JESUS is going to torment these unnamed pastors in hell????? Hello...since when does ANY Christian tradition teach that Jesus is the tormenter of the damned???? I suspect that this particular unchristlike "shepherd" is going to have a very rude awakening when HE arrives in heaven and has to answer for teachings like this, and for so deceiving his own son in order to trash other denominations. It is amazing to me poisonous the fruit of some misogynists can be.

[Jaggy]

I used to live in the city where [a particular misogynistic pastor] lives (and I've been trying to find some mindbleach ever since... extremists of all kinds live there). My former boss used to go to a church where [he] pastored and left as his views became more extreme and hostile toward women and anyone else he opposed. I can only wonder what damage he left behind in that church when he finally left for his current pastorate.

[Mary Rarden]

Mindbleach! LOVE it!

Discernment is such a good thing. I think with sadness about all the people willingly following people such as [that pastor], down the ugly paths of their own invention. I say again, patriarchalism is born out of misogyny, and it bears poisonous fruit in the church.

[TL]

For Mr. Driscol to tell his 7 yr. old son prejudicial metaphors, strawman argumentative tactics, and outright lies as truth is going to be incredibly damaging to this boys psychological makeup as he matures. He rejoiced that he was able to share his hatred with his son, but he wasn't loving his son by doing this. People who hate can be extremely self centered. Of all the things in the world to be doing with his son, teaching his sickness to his son is among the very worst.

Pat said: "They have, instead, modified their historic theological position to say that they believe women are equal to men "in essence," but not "in position."

The foolishness in that statement is that they base the womans required "position" to be BECAUSE of her essence. When people say that black people are equal with white people but their position in society is that of a laborer because they are black people, they are saying that "we'd like you to think that you are equal, but really you are not and we'll never let you be". Same thing with patriarchal thinking. They want women to think they value them equally, but will never allow a woman to function at her true abilities because they must contain women's involvement within highly restricted areas.

[Lori Buckle]

I used to attend a large comp. church for years, and most of the people I knew were kind, decent, and genuinely loved their wives. They just happened to believe that women shouldn't be pastors.

And then there are the strident, hateful comps, most of whom I've found on the internet. As you've pointed out, though, Pat, fundamentally it's the same thing. Restricting women is restricting women, no matter how benign the form it takes. As repugnant as it may be to think of it today, there were decent slave owners. There were masters who cared about their slaves and never sold them. That didn't change the nature of their relationship, though.

Mary, I'm sure you won't be the last person to equate today's struggle for equality for women in the church to the old civil rights struggle. I know the analogy occurred to me quite a while ago. I'm reminded of the great Thurgood Marshall, who argued that "separate but equal" inherently means that one party is unequal. Why can some people accept that for other minorities, but not see that it applies to women, too? I truly think the devil is blinding those who believe in comp. theology and are unwilling to consider something else.

[Mary Rarden]

Lori, I think people justify the "separate but equal" because there really are physiological differences between men and women, whereas there are only superficial differences between two people with different skin color (of the same gender). So they come up with all kinds of fanciful inventions about how men and women think so differently, want different things (re: "men want respect but women want love"--nonsense! Both want both!), need different things, and so forth. So when they can cobble together prooftexts from the Bible to justify historically acceptable prejudice, they make an industry out of it. People stand to lose a lot of money if the conservative church ever wakes up to the fact that patriarchy isn't godly.

[Mary Rarden]

Gosh, the false witness has really ramped up concerning biblical equality and egalitarians over at the linked blog--and from male clergy, especially! Unbelievable, but I suppose we should not be surprised. There's nothing to commend patriarchy as a Christian practice, certainly not in the Bible. So, the easiest way for them to deceive themselves into thinking they're superior to us egalitarians, is to lie about us and what we believe. Anything to soothe their readers' and their own itching ears. I thought the blanket denial of the Christian faith of all of us Christian egalitarians was a particularly telling little exercise. Too bad they forget that lying's not OK about (alleged) "non"-Christians, too.

If patriarchy is so all-fired commendable a practice, why is it that these so-vocal adherents expend so much frantic energy on silencing those who tell the truth. and spreading such outrageous lies about those who promote equality in Christ? If their authority is so godly, why the ungodly smear campaign and all the lies? Why is "christian" patriarchy always a matter of what its advocates stand AGAINST--biblical equality--instead of what they stand FOR? Isn't it significant that they can't agree together about what is entailed in "christian" patriarchy?

Follow the links in the original post only if your discernment is fully in place, friends! All's apparently fair in the christian-patriarchalists' battle in the war against women, especially the ammunition of falsehood. And remember: if you want to make an enemy of hard-core patriarchalists, all you have to do is tell them the truth about biblical equality. You, too, will be declared a non-Christian, angry, abused, Bible-denying, man-hating woman. Yeah, you betcha...that rhetoric is a sign of real "leadership" and "authority" and "headship" at its extrabiblical finest!

(It's a wonder any thinking Christian finds anything commendable in patriarchy, with such proponents showing such an appalling lack of character.)

[Lori Buckle]

"If patriarchy is so all-fired commendable a practice, why is it that these so-vocal adherents expend so much frantic energy on silencing those who tell the truth. and spreading such outrageous lies about those who promote equality in Christ? If their authority is so godly, why the ungodly smear campaign and all the lies? Why is "christian" patriarchy always a matter of what its advocates stand AGAINST--biblical equality--instead of what they stand FOR? Isn't it significant that they can't agree together about what is entailed in "christian" patriarchy?"

Mary, I've wondered this for years. My stars, I've never seen people work themselves up into such a lather of hatred. It's as if they're afraid of us. Do you think that's it? Do you think that in their heart of hearts many of them know that their theology is wrong, but they're afraid to admit it so they rant against us instead? That's the only reason I can think of for all their crazy behavior.

And I've certainly noticed that the people practicing the most ungodly behavior are the ones who claim the moral high ground and say they're also the holiest Christians. Now more than ever I have a greater appreciation for what Jesus went through with the Pharisees.

[Jaggy]

Amen, Mary! If patriarchy is so true, why must it be defended by lying about what egalitarians believe? I see exactly the same behaviors in the patris that I see in the extreme King James-only movement. It's like they rip off each other's playbooks... the lies, the distortions, the attacks, you name it. The KJOs are also woman-bashers, right in the same style as we've seen in that other blog. I know, because Mr. X's comments toward an egal look just like what was aimed at me. God forbid a woman tell them the Scriptural truth when it goes against their cherished pagan-but-baptized beliefs.

[Mary Rarden]

But NO! It CAN'T be that they're afraid of women or that they hate women! Why, they SAY so! They LOVE their daughters and wives, and they're not afraid of NOBODY! HRMMMPH! ;)

But I still think a basic fear and hatred of women IS behind all the lies and posturing and silencing. There's too much to lose by biblical equality being true:
*Men lose their place of privilege
*Men aren't exempt from submitting to others, including their wives
*Men have to be more thoughtful and less aggressive
*Men can't be selfish anymore
*Authors must recant their lies and stop selling their fictitious works of misogyny
*Pastors have to stop claiming to be authority figures over non-clergy
*Husbands have to stop claiming to be authority figures over their wives
*The second Great Commandment will suddenly apply to men as well as to women.

Yep, the patri world as they know it would come crumbling down. Gotta defend the status quo, even if lying is the price to be paid. Way too much to give up.

Funny how many egalitarian men (who tend to be perfectly manly men, FTR) say they gained so much more than they lost by embracing the Bible's standard of equality.

As for their despicable behind-the-scenes attempts to discredit people who reject their worldly patriarchal distortion of Christianity, Jesus himself makes it clear what's going on: "And this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil. For all who do evil hate the light and do not come to the light, so that their deeds may not be exposed." (John 3:19-20)

[Kathryn H.]

Thank you for shining the light on false shepherds such as the Seattle pastor and the "world" bloggers. The lies on those blogs are so obvious, I wonder they have any parishioners left. I'm afraid it's a matter of Christians abdicating their responsibility to discern the truth. They lazily expect their "pastors" to do it for them, tickling their itchy ears and feeding their own prejudices. They forget that when you give up your own brain, you won't be able to tell the "pastor's" lies from the truth anymore, and you'll get more and more false witness from them. Before you know it, you'll be a clone of them: hate-filled, lying, self-worshiping, ravenous for more power and influence, and not caring what it takes to "win."

You're doing a valuable service here. If even one of these "pastors'" followers wakes up and starts to question what's in the kool-aid, I hope you'll think it's worth it. I know I will. Thanks again for shining light on a dark, smelly pit of deceit.

I used to live in Seattle (home of Mars Hill Church and that disgraceful lying pastor). It's a beautiful city with wonderful people. On behalf of Seattlites, then, I'd like to apologize. That church and its despicable pastor put a blot on the city's good name.

I'll tell you something that scares me, though. I read on the old ECA forum that Mars Hill is hugely popular with young people. Evidently, a lot of the "emergent church" crowd who normally wouldn't darken the doors of a traditional church attend there. The thought of all those young people being brainwashed with comp. lies makes me ill. It's not enough that the old fogeys of the comp. movement preach hatred of women. They're teaching the next generation to do it, too.

[Lori Buckle]

Whoops! Sorry, the above comment was mine.

[TL]

Well, dear sister Pat, your post was prophetic. Now, the patristic extremists are preaching that husbands should treat their wives wombs in the same way they tithe, expect God to pour out an abundance.

http://timbayly.worldmagblog.com/timbayly/archives/026792.html#more

“Take sex.
How faith-full are we with that gift? Do we use it to worship and glorify God or do we use it only for our own selfish purposes?”

Now sex cannot be about loving one another but it must be about production. He with the most kids wins!

This attitude enables some men to divorce themselves from adoring their wives in sex, from being there only to fulfill her desires, to doing it for someone else – themselves (they have to climax remember) and God. It reminds me of the faithful traditional headofhousehold husband who never gave his wife a climax their entire marriage.

[Headless Unicorn Guy]

"Now sex cannot be about loving one another but it must be about production. He with the most kids wins!"

Ever heard of the phrase "Our Duty to The Party", TL?

I'd like to think there's SOME difference between "Praise the LORD!" and "Long Live Big Brother!", but these "patristic extremists" attitude about sex and women are just a part of a much larger whole -- Christ as Cosmic Dear Leader, God as Power, where love is reduced to power trip and all is reduced to power struggle.