TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Complementarian Threesome (meet the new man of the house)

Dalrock
January 18, 2016

Back in 2010 an unnamed pastor* at the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) explained how the complementarian model for marriage works in: Breaking the Marital Impasse: How Authority and Submission Work When Spouses Disagree

Breaking the impasse is critical to the complementarian model because having a “tiebreaker” is, along with the husband having sole responsibility for all failures of the marriage and most of the responsibility for failures by the wife, what distinguishes complementarian marriage from egalitarian marriage.  Often times complementarians will present the husband as the tie breaker, but this can’t really be.  In the complementarian model the husband’s responsibility is total, but should his wife feel on any issue that he isn’t “listening” to her, she has not only the right but the obligation to throw a godly tantrum.  Since the godly tantrum trumps the tiebreaking role, obviously someone else needs to be the tiebreaker.

Enter the CBMW, which explains that the tiebreaker in all decisions within the marriage is neither the husband nor the wife but the third person in the complementarian threesome, the couple’s pastor.  To illustrate how the complementarian model of marriage works, the CBMW pastor offers the example of a couple which has been discussing an issue for several weeks before the husband finally decides that the time for further discussion has passed and makes a decision:

…the problem concerned Elizabeth’s leadership of our church’s preschool ministry. Elizabeth loved the work, but life in their home was crazy. Ted was forced to work longer hours at work, their family was growing, and another ministry they shared in the church was quickly multiplying. Ted did not believe it was wise for Elizabeth to continue to supervise the preschoolers. They had been discussing this issue for weeks, but could not agree on a course of action. Finally, Ted “put his foot down” and made the final decision. Elizabeth would have to resign from the ministry.

Since the couple was at an impasse Elizabeth invoked the complementarian model of decision making, appealing to the couple’s pastor for a ruling:

Elizabeth was stunned, angry, and hurt. In her anger she told him she would never quit. After 24 hours of conflict, Elizabeth called me for help.

The CBMW pastor explains that this model is required not just for cases where a husband is sinning, but where a wife feels uncomfortable about her husband’s decision (emphasis mine).

What would wise, biblical counsel sound like in real-life situations where conservative Christian spouses disagree about the nature of submission and the parameters of marital authority? What is a wife to do when she feels uncomfortable submitting to her husband in an area, but cannot quote “chapter and verse” that it is a sin.

The pastor explains that Elizabeth was right to come to him, because even though her husband discussed the issue with her for weeks before making a final decision, she felt like her husband was committing the sin of not listening to her (emphasis mine):

Elizabeth began to sense that Ted was not really listening to her. She was aware that he had made up his mind before they talked. She discussed this issue with him, but he never really engaged the matter before making the decision that she must quit. Ted and Elizabeth thus made a fleeting and failed attempt at guidelines #2 and #3.

That is when guideline #4 kicked in and Eliz­abeth sought help from her pastor. She was right to do this because as a believer she is under pastoral authority as well as husbandly authority. She also had grounds because she believed she needed help in engaging a sin issue with her husband.

Therefore the CBMW pastor agreed to preside over the case of Eliz­abeth’s role in the children’s ministry.  After deliberating over the case, the pastor issued a split verdict.  Ted had the right to make the decision that he did, but although he discussed the issue with his wife for weeks, he was sinning because she didn’t feel like he was listening to her.  Ted also sinned by making the decision since making a decision his wife disagreed with was unloving and constituted demanding his own way.  Eliz­abeth on the other hand was right to refuse to do as Ted said and appeal to the third person in the marriage (because Ted was in sin), but she was wrong to not submit to her husband and appeal to the pastor (because this is rebellion).  In the end, two thirds of the marriage were found by the CBMW pastor to be in sin (everyone but the pastor himself), and the pastor ruled that Eliz­abeth was to quit her work in the children’s ministry (emphasis mine):

As I spoke with Ted and Elizabeth it became clear that they were both right, and they were both wrong. Ted was correct that he had authority to make a decision regarding Elizabeth’s ministry commitments that were doing damage to her and her family and needed to be streamlined. He was incorrect in the way he executed his leadership. In fact, Ted had not listened to his wife. He did not shepherd her well. Repentance for Ted meant con­fessing that he had been quick to speak and slow to listen, and that he had been unloving in demanding his own way, thus violating the law of love.

on the other hand, Elizabeth was correct that her husband had treated her in an unloving way, but was wrong in that she used his sin as a legal loop­hole to squirm out of submission. She approached the decision about her ministry as an exercise in personal autonomy, rather than glad-hearted sub­mission to authority.

In Summary:

Ted:

  • Was right to make the decision.
  • Sinned by making the decision.
  • Listened to his wife for weeks before making the decision.
  • Sinned by not listening to his wife before making the decision.

Elizabeth:

  • Was right to not submit to her husband and instead appeal to the pastor to overrule her husband.
  • Sinned by not submitting to her husband and instead appealing to the pastor to overrule her husband.

The pastor:

  • Has final authority in all decisions in the marriage.
  • Has no responsibility for the outcomes of the marriage, as assuming this responsibility would be usurping the role of the husband.

Hopefully this clears up any confusion as to how complementarian marriage works.  For those interested in practicing this alternative lifestyle, I would suggest buying a bigger bed, as things are about to get awfully crowded.

*Update:  Commenter David J pointed out that the name of the author/pastor is Heath Lambert, based on footnote #4 in the article.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the blog Dalrock.

Dalrock archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

Post Information
Title Complementarian Threesome (meet the new man of the house)
Author Dalrock
Date January 18, 2016 7:16 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Blog Dalrock
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/blog/Dalrock/complementarian-threesome-meet-the-new-man-of.7467
https://theredarchive.com/blog/7467
Original Link https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/01/18/complementarian-threesome-meet-the-new-man-of-the-house/
Red Pill terms in post
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter