(Missed part 2? Read it here. Or start from the beginning.)
Unity, Interdependence, and Service
After spending a chapter attempting to introduce the ideas of authority and submission, Rachel Green Miller moves on to talk about unity, interdependence, and service. I want to be clear right from the start that I agree that unity, interdependence, and service are key elements of relationships — especially Christian relationships. However, I believe Miller misunderstands these, as well, leading to further breakdowns in logic and exegesis (biblical interpretation based on drawing out the meaning of the text).
Beyond Authority and Submission
First we see the argument I addressed in passing in my initial review: that authority and submission are not the focus of the Bible. As I pointed out then, that isn’t really accurate.
This section of the chapter has additional problems, though. First, it tells us that “many conversations about women and men start and end with authority and submission,” before pointing out that “the Bible doesn’t start and end with authority and submission.” (p. 36) This thought progression doesn’t even make sense; it’s a non sequitur.
Conversations about men and women do not generally claim to be discussions of the whole Bible. They claim to be discussions of those portions of the Bible that talk about men and women.
Do you see how the author is making many small twists and leaps so that her arguments seem compelling on the surface but don’t hold up under scrutiny?
Division? Or Diversity?
In the following section, she talks about the multitude of ways that we humans often divide ourselves. “In contrast,” she says, “the Bible teaches us about what unites us.” (p. 37) She goes on to discuss marriage — and men and women in the Church — in ways which suggest that the concepts of masculinity and feminity (of differences between men and women) are at odds with this unity.
This is a conflation of division with diversity. At first blush that might seem insignificant, but it’s quite significant because division is contradictory to unity, while diversity is complementary to unity. The Bible teaches unity with diversity, for instance when it describes us as “one Body” with “many members,” and goes on to make it very clear that one member cannot adequately substitute for another. They’re different. (1 Cor. 12:12-2)
If diversity of gifts does not undermine the concept of unity, why should it be presumed that diversity of gender undermines the concept of unity?
Interdependence and Service
The concepts of interdependence and service are not approached with the same heavy dose of faulty logic. However, they do seem to uphold a narrow view of what constitutes these things. As will become evident later in the book, the author does not appear to have any sense of the interdependent nature of a common household vision as is embraced among the more traditionalist crowd.
What she describes as interdependence in fact comes across as independence (with only lip service to the idea that we need each other), and service seems only to be valid in her worldview if a wife’s service is completely separate from that of her husband.
A key element that is lacking here is a robust understanding of the common purpose of a household — which, unfortunately, is beyond the scope of this post. (But if you want to see this more fully fleshed out, The Household and the War for the Cosmos is excellent, ‘though largely theoretical, not practical.)
Forgive me if I just quote my own article, rather than retype and restate it:
But note that this command for “wives to obey their own husbands” is entirely aimed at wives, and does not address the husband at all. Scripture does not say “Husbands, see to it that your wives obey you”. In other words, while wives are told to obey their husbands, scripture nowhere say that husbands must make, or even demand that their wives obey them. It is left entirely to the wives to “submit to their husbands, as unto the Lord” and if they don’t? Well, scripture says nothing and prescribes nothing? Why? Because the matter is between those wives and their Lord. Wives failure to obey husbands is not a matter given to the husbands to correct. Nor is a husband’s failure to love and provide for his wife the wife’s responsibility to correct. It is the work of the Holy Spirit, just as it is the work of the Holy Spirit to convict and rebuke ALL believers, both men and women. The authority (and not just the authority between husbands and wives, but between all people) in the bible is based strictly upon a voluntary submission which is not enforceable by either party. It is enforceable only by the Holy Spirit.
Ultimately, the whole purpose behind God’s ordained order of headship and submission is that it is the mechanism whereby the husband and the wife can maintain unity, even where there might be disagreement. Because of submission, being in disagreement doesn’t mean that you cannot be in Unity.
This is a really important point. I’ve pointed out something similar in my discussions on courtship. Unless a father literally has his daughter locked in a tower or something (which is a whole other issue entirely!) a father’s ability to approve or disapprove a suitor in a practically effective way is ultimately dependent upon the daughter’s willingly accepting that aproval or disapproval.
So, yes…unless abuse is brought into the picture — which becomes a whole separate question (and cause for legal action and church intervention), the authority of a husband and father can only become “controlling” with the acceptance of the wife/daughter. The godly authority/submission relationship is one of mutuality.