Complementarianism and Biblical counseling questions

[sangtarah]

Okay, I need the Cliff notes on these two areas. I've seen them flying around Twitter and some FB groups, but I do not engage in discussions on those platforms. I'm not looking for a debate, just a brief outline on the history and current use of them.  I feel like they are two areas that go together - like those who  adhere to complementarianism would also endorse Biblical counseling efforts and approaches. Am I wrong in thinking that? 

[Katy]

You’re not wrong in thinking that, but beware if it’s in a nondenominational, evangelical, baptist, or other small denomination that doesn’t require graduate level education for their pastors and have a lot of denominational oversight of employees it’s likely the pastor will have really bad advice that encourages things like submitting to abuse.

There are conservative denominations that do have oversight and require advanced education (some include having pastors become licensed counselors), that can both follow those guidelines AND understand that it’s not biblical to have a wife stay in an abusive situation and where addictions will be equated with adultery and abandonment and will constitute Biblical grounds for divorce. 

If the family in question is in a denomination without educational requirements for pastors, or worse, is in a small independent church run mostly based on the charisma of the pastor alone, it’s best to encourage a couple to find a licensed Christian marriage counselor. There are three educational routes to this: a licensed marriage and family therapist, a licensed psychologist, or a licensed social worker.  In the initial meeting they should explain they have a complimentarian view of marriage and want therapy from a Christian. Even if the therapist is from a more liberal denomination, (s)he should easily be able to help the couple get to the relationship balance that they want without encouraging abuse. If the therapist acts as if this is a ridiculous thing to want, the therapist is a bad fit. 
 

ETA: while the idea that a wife should submit to her husband is biblical, so is the idea that they should both submit to the other. Obviously any such theology can and has been easily twisted to justify abuse.

ETA2: I forgot to say that those are the educational requirements in the USA.  I don’t know the requirements internationally.

Edited April 9, 2021 by Katy

[PeterPan]

Complementarianism is coming from Piper and Grudem. https://cbmw.org/2019/08/01/whats-in-a-name/

Biblical counseling, also known as nouthetic counseling, is coming from Jay Adams and MacArthur. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/reviews/biblical-counseling-movement/

So while some groups might, at this current time, hold both ideas, that represents more of a merging with time, rivers flowing into each other. And yes, Piper has some pretty repugnant views and things he has said.

Fwiw, while biblical counseling has *some* man worship involved, it's mainly a movement toward the texts, wanting to point people to the Bible. Not saying there aren't holes, but saying it's a very different movement from complementarianism in that sense, which to all appearances took old ideas and enmeshed them in personality. Once you bring Piper into the picture, there's definitely a Pied Piper thing that happens with people being all in and acolytes. Now some people are MacArthur acolytes, but I think it's more incidental and not essential for the biblical counseling, since that was mainly about the Bible. In other words, what's more telling is to look at who they're following or even who they're rejecting.

Adding: I *think* the complementarianism thing took hold more in the Southern Baptist church. Wasn't necessary in fundamental/independent baptist churches, as they already had the teaching. So you're talking very different movements from their historical sources, because back when biblical counseling was big with the independent/fundamental baptists, the southern baptists were still taboo. Now southern baptists have their debates about the movements changing their denomination (influx of these various ideas) and some of the independent baptists have gone toward Piper and some have not, just a lot of variety. So that's why I'm saying they're separate strands occasionally merging, depending on the denomination and what is happening. 

Personally, I don't have the time of day for Piper. He likes to use big language to bamboozle people and can't get out the Gospel in 6 minutes when Paul could do it in 3 verses. I'm tired of the man worship, the high falutin, etc. I'm just post on it. And I did grad work in biblical counseling and have just a few opinions on that too, lol. It's mainly just incomplete, with MacArthur adding to the Bible his own statements to the Bible. You notice the key trend of my complaint: men becoming worshipped, men setting themselves up. So there you go. Toss the men and see if anything good is left. Or let the women tell women how to be women, like the Bible says. Novel concept.

 

Edited April 9, 2021 by PeterPan

[PeterPan]

58 minutes ago, sangtarah said:

those who  adhere to complementarianism would also endorse Biblical counseling efforts and approaches.

You know, maybe in some movements, especially some southern baptists? But I would also expect some people who are Piper/Grudem acolytes to use that complementarianism language while possibly being post on biblical counseling. Remember, there's disenchantment once you leave the university where you were taught this and get into real like and have to deal with really hard things. A lot of what people were taught under it was very TRITE. Life is hard, sigh.

And also you're going to find people who started with biblical counseling, had to sort for themselves how to handle hard cases, and happen also to be more egalitarian in their theology. 

They're separate streams that merged in some denominations but arrived at different times (and hence are old and post and being modified) in others.

[kirstenhill]

1 hour ago, PeterPan said:

 

They're separate streams that merged in some denominations but arrived at different times (and hence are old and post and being modified) in others.

The churches that I've been a part of (a tiny association of churches not affiliated with any major denomination) have been into complementarian beliefs but I've never heard anything at all about that specific kind of "Biblical counseling".  People I've known who have seen counselors have seen various types of licensed mental health professionals. Or for more run of the mill "counsel with a pastor" situations that don't require a mental health professional, it isn't this counseling philosophy specifically.

So it's possible to have just the one and not the other. 

Edited April 9, 2021 by kirstenhill
Clarity

[Spy Car]

This so-called "biblical counselling" is a huge part of of the cycle of spiritual and emotional abuse as practiced by cult leaders such as John MacArthur and his Grace Community Church here in Los Angeles.  

Really scary stuff. It breaks families and breaks lives. 

If you are anywhere near it, flee. Nasty business. 

Bill

 

 

[kbutton]

I am very anti-Biblical counseling, and yes, I have a fair amount of exposure to it on and off over decades.

It's been a thing in fundamentalist circles. It is VERY MUCH becoming a thing in Southern Baptist circles, and is one reason I am hoping to find a church outside the SBC (there are many SBC churches where I live). At least some SBC seminaries have been ripping out their counseling departments (psychology-based Christian counseling) and replacing them with Biblical counseling. 

As the SBC has absorbed some Christian colleges, they are doing the same things at the college level. Cedarville is not officially SBC, but it's board, presidency, and Bible department are now all SBC. They had a big scandal about hiring a professor who'd been credibly accused of voyeurism and let go from a previous church job on that basis (google Anthony Moore and Cedarville University--Julie Roys, The Wartburg Watch, and Righting America covered it--RA went so far as to create a resource list from university employees! https://rightingamerica.net/resources-on-the-cedarville-university-scandal/). Why do I mention this? There was some idea they could rehabilitate Moore--in Biblical counseling, sin is sin is sin; mental health issues are seen as sin and not mental health issues. So something like voyeurism would be seen as the same as having an affair in their minds (except they dismiss professors for that, not recruit them). I think they were hoping to use him as a "trophy of God's grace" by restoring him to a position of leadership. Instead, they got caught red-handed, and the president of the university appears to have lied big time, but he's gotten away with it (and they built him a big house).

CU used to have a robust counseling department and a psychology major. Not sure if the psychology major is still in or not, but I would be it's in the crosshairs. The SBC-loyal crowd brought a major purge a few years ago that made small waves. The more recent scandal made bigger waves, but I think it's all been largely forgotten.

CU is also falling in line with the SBC adopting complementarian views. They gutted a lot of roles for women in leadership, and they basically cannot teach in the Bible department in any meaningful way now. I grew up in an independent church, and while there was some fundamentalism (much less than in many similar churches), women were not considering universally inferior to men like they are in this new complementarianism. They were not seen as eligible for elder or pastor, and they were to submit to their husbands (with lots of emphasis on a husband's duty to love, mutual submission, etc.). SBC complementarianism has women basically just inferior to men. In this view, women should not run for public office, etc. Sometimes they are told they shouldn't make more money than their husbands, etc. It's a different animal. I have relatives that are super conservative in the independent fundamentalist movement--they might have women in dresses, jumpers, and culottes, but those women would be encouraged to run for office if they so desired, lol! Or run community organizations. In many SBC circles, this role is getting smaller by the day.

I am very much not impressed.

22 hours ago, PeterPan said:

Complementarianism is coming from Piper and Grudem. https://cbmw.org/2019/08/01/whats-in-a-name/

Biblical counseling, also known as nouthetic counseling, is coming from Jay Adams and MacArthur. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/reviews/biblical-counseling-movement/

So while some groups might, at this current time, hold both ideas, that represents more of a merging with time, rivers flowing into each other. 

Adding: I *think* the complementarianism thing took hold more in the Southern Baptist church. Wasn't necessary in fundamental/independent baptist churches, as they already had the teaching. So you're talking very different movements from their historical sources, because back when biblical counseling was big with the independent/fundamental baptists, the southern baptists were still taboo. Now southern baptists have their debates about the movements changing their denomination (influx of these various ideas) and some of the independent baptists have gone toward Piper and some have not, just a lot of variety. So that's why I'm saying they're separate strands occasionally merging, depending on the denomination and what is happening. 

I mostly agree with this, but I think that how IFB and SBC use complementarian vary a LOT.