To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
2 Comments
buddyglass
If I were Ruth my follow up question would be:
Despite husbands not having the “right” to force their wives to do these things, if a husband asks one of them of his wife, is she obligated to comply”?
So, for example, a husband asks his wife not to ever leave the house without him *with no implied threat of coercive force*. Should she voluntarily submit to his request? If he asks to keep her phone for the foreseeable future? Etc.
buddyglass
Denny, given you’re now leading the CBMW, care to field this one?
It’s always seemed to me that the version of complementarianism advanced by its more moderate proponents and that is, in reality, lived out by most “mainstream” complementarian couples, is almost indistinguishable an egalitarian system in which each partner is actively seeking his spouse’s good before his own.
Kassian uses the term “loving oversight” and rejects the model in which the husband is more like a general giving orders to a lower-ranking subordinate (presumably for their mutual benefit).
So, then, what is a possible example of a situation where a complementarian marriage operating in “loving oversight” mode looks different than a high-functioning egalitarian marriage in which both partners love God and prioritize their spouse’s good before their own? What is the functional difference between the two?
I go to an evangelical church; most of my friends there would consider themselves complementarian. When I consider their marriages, though, they don’t seem all that different from my own.