As with several of the other chapters, Chapter 12 contains both good and bad. The title of the chapter is "By Divine Appointment," and the subtitle reads

The only position where you will find real fulfillment as a woman is as a help meet to your husband.

As I wondered in Chapter 6, I wonder what she'd say to women who are being obedient to God and are *GASP* still single. For MARRIED women, YES, the only position in which they will find real fulfillment as a woman is as a help meet to their husbands. But there again...just what does "help meet" really mean? I have found that the Bible paints a very different picture of a help meet than Mrs. Pearl does.

But I think I'm getting off track here, so let's begin. :-)

She begins the chapter by quoting 1 Corinthians 11:3:

But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of the Christ is God (her emphasis)

and Ephesians 5:23:

For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body

and then basically says that the husband is in charge, even if he's a dud, and this is how God set it up for our protection. Which to some extent is true, since that is what the Bible says. I just disagree with what Mrs. Pearl says that LOOKS LIKE.

She emphasizes that it doesn't matter if our husband is saved, not saved, etc., when we submit to them, we are modeling the same "heavenly pattern" that Christ did when he submitted to God the Father. Which again, is true, to a point.

God tell us that we are to be help meets: We are to submit, obey, and even reverence our husbands.

So that is her "definition" of help meet. We do need to serve, honor, submit, reverence, etc., but at times being a true help meet means NOT "submitting" (note the quotes). Sometimes going along with a husband's whims would NOT actually help him.

Now, at the same time, we cannot get on our spiritual high horse and be expressing our righteous indignation or whatever. As with EVERY situation, we must take everything before the Father, weigh it against the whole of Scripture, etc. Sometimes He just might have you go along with something stupid your husband wants to do, so that ***HE*** can bonk your husband up side the head about something. Or sometimes it's not even about what your husband wants to do as much as it is about the relationship between you and him. It just depends on the situation, where God is leading, what the Word says on the matter, what has happened in the past, etc. There is no way that any author can say definitively, "This is what you need to do when your husband wants to xyz."

As Christian women our ways should be gentle, generous, humble, cheerful, loving, etc.....ANYWAY!!!!! And of COURSE that should extend to our husbands. We DO need to serve our husbands. And our children. And our neighbors. So I guess that's where I disagree with Mrs. Pearl - I don't think that the world should revolve around my husband, his desires, his demands, etc., and I have yet to see anything in the Bible saying so.

On page 118 Mrs. Pearl explains that

[God] also tells us WHY we are assigned the role of helper.
1. We came forth from man's ribs and were created for him. We are a part of him. "For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image a glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man" (I Cor. 11:7-9).
2. Our position in relation to our husband is a picture of the Great Mystery, which is Christ and the Church. We, as the body of Christ, are for Him, our living Head. It can be no other way! [She quotes 1 Cor. 11:3 again] "This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church...and the wife see that she reverence her husband" (Eph. 5:32-33).

She's right about point number 1 - woman was taken from man. We are to be their helpers. Period. However, in her explanation of the 1 Corinthians 11 passage, she leaves out verse 11:

Nevertheless, in [the plan of] the Lord and from His point of view woman is not apart from and independednt of man, nor is man aloof from and independent of woman;

So while a woman isn't free to "do her own thing," neither is man. They need to answer to one another.

Her 2nd point is true as well, but not in the way that she means. I find it interesting (yet not surprising) that she skipped the first part of verse 33 in her last quote. The entire verse says

Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

Some would argue that it doesn't matter since this book is written to wives, not to husbands. While I agree that a woman's reverence shouldn't depend on how her husband treats her and that her submission shouldn't depend on what he does, in the BIBLE these two things go hand in hand. The husband's role and the wife's role are interwoven, and the assumption is there that both are saved and doing right. We can't just isolate one spouse's role and chunk the rest of the verse as irrelevant.

Now I hear some saying, "But Mrs. Pearl isn't throwing out verses calling them irrelevant." Her next sentence indicates that she does:

God tells us WHY our husband is to be the one who rules the home.

Nowhere in this passage in Ephesians that Mrs. Pearl is quoting from will you find anything even remotely resembling permission for the husband to RULE the home. While YES, he does have a position of authority, He is also instructed to lay his life down for her as Christ loved the Church.

And on the flip side, we can't just take the husband's role out of these passages and ignore the wife's - otherwise we'd have the husband doing everything he could to please his wife and the wife doing whatever she wanted.

IT'S A BALANCE. It is designed to be such. BIBLICALLY marriage is both people serving each other, giving to each other, laying down their wants for one another. It is NOT about which one "rules" and which one "obeys."

BUT, for the sake of argument, let's assume that the Bible does talk about the man "ruling." What kind of ruler does the Bible teach is a good one? How did Christ lead and rule? He washed His disciples' feet. He told them that if they wanted to be first, they must be last. He served others. What about other rulers? Over and over we see that wise and good rulers are ones that are humble, giving, gentle, generous, willing to serve, etc. Quite a different picture than the type of "ruler" that Mrs. Pearl writes about when she speaks of a husband ruling his home.

"But Keer, this book isn't about what the husbands are supposed to do." I know that. But this book is based upon the faulty assumption that it's OK for a husband to boss his family around, even if he does so in a polite manner. It's based on an unbiblical portrait of what a husband should be like. So since the underlying assumption is wrong, that does affect the advice to the wives as well.

OK so then she switches gears and discusses "Limitations God Put Into Place," beginning on page 119.

God expresses a clear and sure mandate when he tells us:"But I suffer not [do not allow] a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, [that includes your pastor] but to be in silence" (I Timothy 2:12).

She points out that just because a woman may be QUALIFIED to be an effective minister doesn't mean that she is AUTHORIZED to be one. I actually have to agree with her here, based on what I've read in Scripture - women are not to be in spiritual authority over men. I'm fine with women teaching other women or children. I'm not fine with women teaching men, and DEFINITELY not with women pastoring churches. Scripture makes it clear that women are more easily deceived than men when it comes to spiritual things.

But what about Deborah?

If you actually read the story, you would know that the text makes much of the fact that the men were shamed by allowing a woman to take the place of prominence. There is no question that Deborah performed the job well, that she saved Israel, that God used her; that is just the point. When the men allowed a woman to take their role and perform the job successfully, it resulted in shame to the nation of Israel. Deborah knew this to be the case and warned the men as such. To build a doctrine on this story, while ignoring the majority of the doctrinal passages on the leadership of women, is as foolish as Deborah leading the armies of Israel instead of a man.

I'm sorry, I just have to chuckle at several of her comments there. First, "if you actually read the story" - she assumes we haven't and therefore have no idea what it really says.

And second, building a doctrine on one story while ignoring other passages....ROFLOL!!!!!!!!! Hello!!! Pot calling the kettle black!!! ;-)

Anyway....

So I did go back and actually read the story, which is found in Judges 4. What is it that brought "shame" upon Israel - Deborah judging? No. The men being wimps is what brought shame upon Israel. It had nothing to do with her sitting under her palm and judging disputes between people - it had everything to do with Barak saying he wouldn't do what God had told him to do unless Deborah came with him. And according to the text, Deborah didn't "lead the armies of Israel." Barak did, but Deborah went with him at his request.

So while I do agree that we can't use Deborah as "proof" that it's OK for women to lead men, Mrs. Pearl pretty much twisted this story to prove what she was saying: that since Deborah led Israel, it brought shame to the nation.

She also wonders, "What about Priscilla and Aquila?" I personally have never heard anyone use Priscilla as "proof" that it's OK for women to lead men spiritually, but I just may not have been exposed to it - I find that I learn something new everyday. ;-) So I'll believe that people do use that argument. I agree fully with what Mrs. Pearl says:

...as if the inclusion of the woman with her husband somehow negates the hundred or so doctrinal verses that teach about a woman's role as a helper to her husband. On the contrary, although they are mentioned five times in the Bible, Priscilla is never mentioned alone. She is always with her husband

Mrs. Pearl goes on to emphasize that a woman is not a second-class citizen of the kingdom.

I know that for you to be happy - really happy - as I have been happy, you must follow and abide in God's role for women.God has spoken frankly as to why he made us as he did and what our role is to be.

I agree 100%. EXCEPT that I believe what the BIBLE says about women and their role. NOT what this book says the Bible says about women and their role.

Yet so-called Bible teachers today tear apart what God has said and make the average young wife reading these Scriptures feel as though what God has said to her is an insult.

I guess you could say that I'm an "average young wife reading these Scriptures." I find the SCRIPTURES empowering, enlightening, and life-giving. I find Debi Pearl's interpretation of the Scriptures to be insulting.

After almost 35 years as a wife, counseling ladies, reading thousands upon thousands of letters, and chalking up my own life experiences, I have concluded that what the Bible says on this subject is rock-solid truth, and it works! I have also seen the sad results of the teachings that reject the plain sense of Scripture.

I have to chuckle that she had that second sentence following the first. ;-) She is right on that what the Bible says on this subject works. The only problem is that what she is teaching isn't what the Bible teaches. And so yes, I agree with her second sentence as well. ;-)

If you want what I and thousands of women have, then you must follow the plan the way God wrote it in the Bible.

There you have it, straight from Debi Pearl herself. Throw this book in the trash (if you have it), and just read the Bible yourself. ;-)