Comments on: Daddy Issues

By: lizziejank

lizziejank — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 17:45:13 +0000

Hi MG, thanks for the comment.
I think what you bring up would be a great topic for further discussion. Since a full blogpost might not come out of it anytime soon, I thought I’d give you a few brief thoughts about it in the comments.
First of all, a very important thing to remember is the full context of the whole discussion. The book Fidelity is written to christian married men. So, the assumption at the outset was (and was fully expressed in the book) that both the husband and the wife are believers. This means that both members of the marriage submit to the word of God. Many, if not all of the people truly up in arms about this whole discussion could have (and do) reach the same level of outrage over Paul saying “Wives, submit to your husbands.” If we have embraced God’s word, and wholeheartedly seek to apply it to our lives, we will be well aware that Paul also commands husbands to “love your wives as Christ loved the church.” The teaching on wives submitting is always hand in hand with teaching on husbands submitting to Christ.
The other thing to remember is that, the context of the passage being what it is, the assumption is that the woman involved loves this man, and married him willingly. This passage has more to do with men seeing the value of what they are doing, with focusing their loyalty on the woman they made vows to, on being the kind of man that a smart, capable, fiery woman would want to follow. Dad would never have used those words in a discussion of what “men” are to do to “women”. This was not about college guys and girls having a fling.
A few random other thoughts – the problem of bad marriages is not something Dad has not encountered. You can see from his quote about Nabal that he does not council women to submit nomatterwhat. Second, he has a lot to say about the getting married in the first place. He strongly opposes marriages that are not built on respect and love. Third, whenever he talks about marriage he always mentions some good ground rules for married couples. One of them is that you are never to make love out of fellowship. With that assumption – that this is a married couple living together in submission to the word of God, and in fellowship with one another, and that the marriage bed itself is a place of communion, fellowship, joy, and pleasure between two people who trust, respect, love, and value each other, then I think it would be hard to see his words (which were part of a hard hitting talk to men) as anything disconcerting. The people who were demanding that he recant those words are people who would have as much trouble with the language of scripture, who would object to a woman taking her husbands last name, who would not see anything fun or interesting or fulfilling in giving your husband children, in building a family with him. One last thing is that the passage did not intend at all to prescribe the exact process of sex. This is not about wives never initiating, or husbands always doing thus and such. It is a bigger picture about leadership, about building a house, about being a man. It should be one of the great delights of any christian woman’s life that her husband is masculine towards her. What a relief! I married a man!
Of course in a fallen world, things go wrong. That is a constant, but if we diligently apply the Word of God to our lives, he will bless it. I hope this at least in some way helps with your question.
Cheers,
Rachel

By: Phil

Phil — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 21:03:13 +0000

kb,

No, I wouldn’t do the same. I would defend my father, if necessary, but I’m quite sure he would never boast about it and link to it in his blog. And I can assure you that, if I had written cheap, nasty, tasteless posts like these, he most certainly would not have been proud. The vitriol that has come from this family is something I hope my own daughters and sons would NEVER consider, under any circumstances.

By: kb

kb — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 18:48:40 +0000

From the original post: “I can tell you right now that my dad isn’t going to knock you flat – not because he can’t, but because he’s a gentleman. But there’s a woman here who’s ready to take you on. Just give me one sec while I put on my pointy stilettos, my biggest rings, and call my sister . . . and then we can step down the alley here.”

yes.

By: kb

kb — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 18:42:42 +0000

Phil…really… I think you’re missing the point, my friend. I am a young woman whose own father has been misrepresented and treated with disrespect, though not on so large a scale. I have to say that no red-blooded girl is going to sit by with demurely folded hands while somebody aims pot-shots at him. Because he didn’t raise me to be a wimpy, sissy girl. I know when it’s time to roll up my sleeves and get into a good, honest fight. I’ll reserve the right to defend my father. Mr. Wilson didn’t put his daughters up to this, he really doesn’t care what the people thinks of him. He doesn’t NEED the defending, but his daughters have every right to honor him in this way. I certainly hope you would do the same if unjust accusations were brought against your own father.

Way to jump into the fray, girls, I’ll cheer you on.

By: MG

MG — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 05:27:44 +0000

Thank you, so much, for this post. I have several daughters who attend a classical school that has been heavily influenced by your family’s vision. My husband is a reformed pastor. I attended The Gospel Coalition Women’s Conference. Of course I immediately saw through all of the arguments. Right?

Well, not exactly. I was also an abused little girl without a daddy to protect me. So, while everything in me wanted to wrap up my convictions with a neat little bow, there was something about your father’s wording in the much-lauded quote that kept sucking me back into the blogosphere, desperate to reconcile my own doubts regarding the issue. Your post was a large step in accomplishing that. I pray that, with a daddy who loves and instructs them, and a heavenly Daddy who does the same, my daughters rise up and praise their father as you have done.

As I’m not able to post on your dad’s blog (not a registered user), one thing that would be very, very helpful for those of us who consider ourselves complimentarians but still wrestle with his wording would be a follow up post extrapolating what exactly (okay, not EXACTLY) that looks like in a Christian marriage bed.

Thanks again for your post. It spurs me to go give my own husband a hug and thank him for the daddy he is to our daughters. Grace and peace, sister.

By: Phil

Phil — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 00:19:36 +0000

Pentamom,

Are you serious? It’s like, well, I don’t know how to fight back on that, because kids SHOULDN’T have to fight their DAD’S battles, so I’m just going to make something up here to make it sound like he’s wrong and we’re right. Please re-read my comments.

By: pentamom

pentamom — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 22:16:06 +0000

Phil, the point is to train your kids to fight *their* battles — the ones God calls them to.

You’re not under the impression that they have and will have no battles to fight, are you? It’s not loving to fail to train them to fight what needs to be fought.

By: Carolyn Wilson

Carolyn Wilson — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 21:35:34 +0000

Soooooo… apparently Mt. Vesuvius of the blogosphere erupted. Hoiks. Let me make sure I get this straight: Mr. Jared Wilson quotes Doug as he gives a review against a book entitled 50 Shades of Grey. (And if the title didn’t let you know where the moral compass was, what will? ) Said book is promoting the ‘bad boy’ literature that I like to refer to as mental porn for women. The purpose of this review was to help us see how this sort of literature is hurtful to women. Mrs..Ms.? Evans explodes into life and rains down fire and ash upon both Mr. J Wilson and Mr. D Wilson. For, let me get this straight, being hurtful to women. Um…..okay….
With that particular stage set, I have now read all the blogs on this as well as waded through the pyroclastic flow of the comments. I am not going to make any of my own arguments here–others have done a terrific job and that’s just dandy. What I am most AMUSED about however, are the numerous comments that begin with a variation of the following: “I’ve never read Doug but clearly he is Beelzebub” “I don’t really know what patriarchy is but I shall wade into the fray armed with my little shovel” “I haven’t ever read Femina before, but I wanted to make sure and get on to spout” “I don’t know what I’m arguing against but it had Doug’s name attached” “I’ve never read or met Doug, but I’ve read all these blog posts so now I’m an expert” And so on. You get the idea. And lest anyone think all I’ve read are the blogs, fear not, I’ve read the books as well.
So here’s my own little bit of magma to throw into the flow: If Doug and Jared are indeed the enemy (and Rachel, and Bekah, and Nancy, and Heather and so on) then KNOW your enemy. Read at least a good chunk of their writing (outside of this issue) formulate intelligent and well thought on responses (probably not while you’re still hopping mad) and actually discuss this. Privately email them or request a phone call if this issue is truly one that means something to you personally and is not just a reaction because your feminism got burned a bit.
In the meantime, in the words of Bertie Wooster, “Tally ho Wilsons all!”
Blessings!

By: Phil

Phil — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 19:28:20 +0000

Sorry, I don’t train my kids to fight MY battles. I’m their father, and I actually love them.

By: Gabe Rench

Gabe Rench — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 18:51:40 +0000

Phil- we don’t “use” our kids for battle. We train them for battle. Your kids are either sharp arrows or blunted willow sticks.