The title is perhaps a bit of a mouthful, but it expresses what I want to say.
There is considerable debate today about the way men and women function together in marriage and church leadership and opposite views on this subject attract the terms egalitarian and complementarian.
In a recent book by Andrew Bartlett: MEN AND WOMEN IN CHRIST, he gives a helpful summary of the two positions. Rejecting older patriarchal views he says: Both egalitarians and complementarians now regard women and men as inherently equal and now affirm that women may be leaders in society. But complementarians insist on male leadership in the church and in marriage.
As I interact with social media the louder voices seem to be egalitarian. Others experience may be different or on my social media maybe the complementarians choose to keep a low profile. I've not wanted to be contentious on the issue so I've kept quiet myself. However, two things have recently happened. One is Covid-19 and the other is the provocation of a short clip I saw of some comments made by John Piper.
I think a problem arises with the complementarian view if the issue is seen only in terms of leadership. To risk howls of dissent I believe, if it's only about leadership, then all functioning marriages have finally to be complementarian, even those that claim to be egalitarian. Someone has ultimately to take the lead and to be frank in a marriage one can usually work out whether that's the husband or the wife. Either way it ends up complementarian!
What the John Piper clip reminded me of was that the complementarian view is really about responsibility rather than leadership. He said: (my words) that the complementarian view gives masculinity meaning in terms of the man caring for and protecting his wife. Interestingly, Andrew Bartlett who is totally egalitarian in his view of church leadership agrees that Paul's teaching on marriage in Ephesians 5 leans toward complementarianism in terms of the role that a man is given to care for his wife. He quotes with approval John Stott: His (the husband) headship expresses care rather than control, responsibility rather than rule.
Ephesians 5 clearly teaches mutual submission. That's how the relevant passage begins in Ephesians 5:21 - Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. Then the Apostle goes on to teach the detail of this mutual submission - Wives submit to your own husbands as you do to the Lord (vs 22). But - Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her (vs 25).
Chrysostom, the 'golden-mouthed' preacher of the early church who, in his time, would certainly have taken a more patriarchal view about marriage nevertheless commented on this passage in Ephesians 5 like this - Would you have your wife obedient to you, as the church is to Christ? Then take the same care for her, as Christ takes for the church. Yes, even if it be needful for you to give your life for her, yes, and to be cut into pieces ten thousand times, yes, to endure and undergo any suffering whatever - refuse it not.
What does all this have to do with the CoronaVirus? Simply this; the reported rise in domestic assaults at this time, almost always attacks on the wife by the husband during this period of lockdown is absolutely shocking. It is completely the opposite of what should be demonstrated in a marriage where the husband gives his lead in taking responsibility to care for and to protect his wife. And in a Christian marriage the husband must take the lead in caring for his wife as Christ cares for and loves the church.
About 10 years ago my wife and I were mugged in a remote area of a public garden. For a couple of minutes we were physically threatened and faced with the possibility of extreme violence. I knew as the husband it was my responsibility to protect my wife. I deliberately stood in front of her and shouted: 'Run'! As it happened she didn't need to as at that moment we had a kind of miraculous intervention and the situation changed. But in the moment I felt compelled to take the lead for the good of my wife. That, I believe, is how complementarianism should work. I can well imagine (and would hope that it's true) that husbands who espouse an egalitarian view of marriage would say: I would have acted in exactly the same way. But then all functioning marriages are complementarian...