For the past few months I’ve been hosting conversations about my most recent project, Elisabeth Elliot: A Life, which is the first full-length single-volume biography of that remarkable and complex woman. We started at the end of September with a one-time conversation
I just feel very sad that Elliot had such odd, mercurial husbands. Leitch does seem to have been a soulmate of sorts to her but it must have been very difficult to live with the jealousy and control and criticism ... and then to have it all play out again so painfully with her 3rd husband in different ways. It seems like EE really tried to do what was right and be a good person, wife, and Christian, but when your greatest trials are your own spouse that can't be easy.
I loved her wide experience in a variety of corners of American Christianity, and her respect for her brother’s conversion. Actually her brothers fascinated me and I’d love to read more about them too.
By contrast I really wrestle with the way her firm complementarianism in her writing is in such contrast to her lived experience in so many ways. And where she did actually live it out it sure didn’t look healthy. As Michelle mentioned above, in this sense she is a cautionary tale.
Yes, each of the Howard siblings has had such an interesting life! I think a good book could be written about each of them. Thomas Howard wrote several books over the years, if you're interested in learning more about his life from his perspective, and David Howard wrote Hammered as Gold about some of his time as a missionary.
And yes, that mixture is definitely part of wrestling with her life, for me, and thought provoking in regard to my own life.
I have actually had the Tozer marriage in my head in connection with Elisabeth and Lars because of my understanding that Tozer was an abysmal husband and father, and, while he might have been wearing out the knees of his pants in prayer, he was neglecting his calling to be a real person in a real marriage and a real parenting relationship. I've also wondered if EE ever had to deal with her own life by asking, "Now, what would Elisabeth Elliot do/say in this situation?"
It seems that Addison really was the love of Elisabeth's life. For alll her discipline and self-possession, she really functioned as a "fan girl" with Addison and with her brother Tom. They could do no wrong in her eyes. She seemed to excuse A's inappropriate advances with the same part of her brain that absorbed T's conversion.
I DO hope you will share some outtakes from the book. I'd be fascinated to know what didn't make it. And I want to thank you for your good work and perseverance in wading through Elisabeth's complicated life and producing the bio. It's on my list for a re-read (along with Winn Collier's bio of Eugene Peterson) because I see it as a cautionary tale as well as a tribute to a great woman of faith.
Great minds think alike! I never ran across anything phrased exactly that way in her papers, but there was a line in one of her family letters from Ecuador which says roughly, All these people who write to me expect me to be the voice of God to them, and so I have to pray that I may do exactly that or it would be better for me not to write to them at all.
It does seem that Addison and Tom (and I would argue Jim) could do no wrong for her to some extent, and I've wondered whether her understanding of distinct roles for men and women had anything to do with that.
Thank you for the vote for outtakes! I'll definitely comb through the cutting room floor after I get a few current projects off my plate, and see if there's anything that can be shaped up to post independently.
And thank you very much for your kind words! I'm so glad to know it merits a re-read for you. I've enjoyed talking with you over the past months!
It kind of annoys me that with the perspective of many years and two more husbands, she still allowed the portrayal of Jim’s pursuit of her to be so rosy and honorable in Passion and Purity. It feels like she should have been able to see his waffling as at least partly immaturity and lack of commitment to her rather than deep spirituality.
I tend to agree. It's been many years since I read P&P but I remember her giving advice to young women who don't know if a man is truly interested, "If he loves you, he'll pursue you." The underlying message seems to be "That wasn't what happened with us, of course, but we were unique"...
Yes, she literally says that, both in a letter to her mother ("But in our case, Mother--"Oh yes, I know--everyone says 'in our case...'--but that is all I can say.") and again in the book ("Can I recommend Jim’s plan of action to others? Never in a million years. I feel quite certain he would not have wanted anyone to build a doctrine on it. But the situation was unusual.")
Reading your comments it makes me think that she has a similar kind of response on a different subject in her 1973 Urbana speech in which she says that what she sees as Scriptural restrictions on women's roles don't get in the way of women doing the things she has done on the mission field. “I find clear guidance in Scripture about my position in church and home. I find no exemption from the obligations of commitment and obedience. My obligations have certainly varied from time to time and from place to place. ..." They didn't always “look to me like a woman's job but God’s categories are not always ours. I had to shuffle my categories many times...."
I’ve been thinking on the idea of pedestaling people, like it seems Elliot was guilty of in relation to these three men. I don’t have any solid conclusions, but I will say that, at least in my own observations, that those who give into the temptation (myself at times, members of my family) tend towards rigid/black and white thinking and also perfectionism/self-criticism. I wonder if there is a sneaky lie here that goes along with perfectionism: the lie being that the high-standard is reachable and thus, some have reached it. Once you believe someone merits the pedestal, then whatever problematic behavior they are displaying must be explained away to protect this view, and it takes a lot of egregious behavior to convince the believer otherwise (sometimes you can’t convince them, as seen in church members who refuse to accept the moral failures of prominent pastors despite copious evidence, for example). I’m not sure if this is what’s going on with Elliot, but I’m curious!
I definitely agree that wanting to see everything in black or white seems like it can contribute to putting people on a pedestal. And your idea of explaining away behavior that doesn't match the pedestal, once someone is up there, really makes a lot of sense and is something I will be thinking about. Thank you!
It's always so fascinating and helpful to get a glimpse into your rigorous research and writing process!
I believe I mentioned this to you before, but I have a really hard time with Leitch actively pursuing her while his wife was dying of cancer (and other things Leitch did). I mean ... how could one love a man who'd do a thing like that? It boggles the mind.
I'm glad! Thank you! And yes, I do as well, re Leitch. The more I learn about it the sadder it makes me, and it's very difficult to understand EE excusing it.
Regarding EE's joining the Episcopal church. Throughout her life she began as a Presbyterian, was sent as a missionary to Ecuador by the Plymouth Brethren, and was part of a community church in New Hampshire. I was glad to see the progression of her church affiliations over the years explained in your book. I remember when Tom Howard became a Catholic and resigned from Gordon College by reading about this in Christianity Today. EE was questioned for the article and replied in a gracious manner about Tom's love for God and his seriousness about knowing God and being obedient. (If anyone has a Christianity Today subscription, you could go into the archives and find the article.) I do not know the numbers, but a number of evangelicals are joining the Anglican and Catholic churches in the last few years. I'm trying to find the part in your book when EE mentions becoming a Catholic, but her readers "wouldn't understand." I, too, was so grieved to hear the backstory of Lars and EE's marriage. I was able to visit her and Lars with my daughters, at their home in Strawberry Cove, after EE had stopped speaking publicly. Lars was a gracious host and when he suggested EE sign copies of the P and P books my girls brought, he brought her into the kitchen, where she could sign with her by then shaky handwriting. It appears that he had changed somewhat after the doctor told Lars she couldn't speak publicly anymore.
Constance, thank you for sharing. I'm glad you found the exploration of her doctrinal changes over the years helpful. The quotation you're thinking of about Catholicism is on page 495 of the printed book. And yes, by Thomas Howard's account it does sound as though he changed somewhat in those years, and it's very sad that it didn't take place years before.
Thank you for this post and thoughtful questions.
I just feel very sad that Elliot had such odd, mercurial husbands. Leitch does seem to have been a soulmate of sorts to her but it must have been very difficult to live with the jealousy and control and criticism ... and then to have it all play out again so painfully with her 3rd husband in different ways. It seems like EE really tried to do what was right and be a good person, wife, and Christian, but when your greatest trials are your own spouse that can't be easy.
Thanks for reading through the series and your good comments, Jeannie. It is sad and hard, I agree.
I loved her wide experience in a variety of corners of American Christianity, and her respect for her brother’s conversion. Actually her brothers fascinated me and I’d love to read more about them too.
By contrast I really wrestle with the way her firm complementarianism in her writing is in such contrast to her lived experience in so many ways. And where she did actually live it out it sure didn’t look healthy. As Michelle mentioned above, in this sense she is a cautionary tale.
Yes, each of the Howard siblings has had such an interesting life! I think a good book could be written about each of them. Thomas Howard wrote several books over the years, if you're interested in learning more about his life from his perspective, and David Howard wrote Hammered as Gold about some of his time as a missionary.
And yes, that mixture is definitely part of wrestling with her life, for me, and thought provoking in regard to my own life.
I have actually had the Tozer marriage in my head in connection with Elisabeth and Lars because of my understanding that Tozer was an abysmal husband and father, and, while he might have been wearing out the knees of his pants in prayer, he was neglecting his calling to be a real person in a real marriage and a real parenting relationship. I've also wondered if EE ever had to deal with her own life by asking, "Now, what would Elisabeth Elliot do/say in this situation?"
It seems that Addison really was the love of Elisabeth's life. For alll her discipline and self-possession, she really functioned as a "fan girl" with Addison and with her brother Tom. They could do no wrong in her eyes. She seemed to excuse A's inappropriate advances with the same part of her brain that absorbed T's conversion.
I DO hope you will share some outtakes from the book. I'd be fascinated to know what didn't make it. And I want to thank you for your good work and perseverance in wading through Elisabeth's complicated life and producing the bio. It's on my list for a re-read (along with Winn Collier's bio of Eugene Peterson) because I see it as a cautionary tale as well as a tribute to a great woman of faith.
Great minds think alike! I never ran across anything phrased exactly that way in her papers, but there was a line in one of her family letters from Ecuador which says roughly, All these people who write to me expect me to be the voice of God to them, and so I have to pray that I may do exactly that or it would be better for me not to write to them at all.
It does seem that Addison and Tom (and I would argue Jim) could do no wrong for her to some extent, and I've wondered whether her understanding of distinct roles for men and women had anything to do with that.
Thank you for the vote for outtakes! I'll definitely comb through the cutting room floor after I get a few current projects off my plate, and see if there's anything that can be shaped up to post independently.
And thank you very much for your kind words! I'm so glad to know it merits a re-read for you. I've enjoyed talking with you over the past months!
It kind of annoys me that with the perspective of many years and two more husbands, she still allowed the portrayal of Jim’s pursuit of her to be so rosy and honorable in Passion and Purity. It feels like she should have been able to see his waffling as at least partly immaturity and lack of commitment to her rather than deep spirituality.
I tend to agree. It's been many years since I read P&P but I remember her giving advice to young women who don't know if a man is truly interested, "If he loves you, he'll pursue you." The underlying message seems to be "That wasn't what happened with us, of course, but we were unique"...
Yes, she literally says that, both in a letter to her mother ("But in our case, Mother--"Oh yes, I know--everyone says 'in our case...'--but that is all I can say.") and again in the book ("Can I recommend Jim’s plan of action to others? Never in a million years. I feel quite certain he would not have wanted anyone to build a doctrine on it. But the situation was unusual.")
Reading your comments it makes me think that she has a similar kind of response on a different subject in her 1973 Urbana speech in which she says that what she sees as Scriptural restrictions on women's roles don't get in the way of women doing the things she has done on the mission field. “I find clear guidance in Scripture about my position in church and home. I find no exemption from the obligations of commitment and obedience. My obligations have certainly varied from time to time and from place to place. ..." They didn't always “look to me like a woman's job but God’s categories are not always ours. I had to shuffle my categories many times...."
I’ve been thinking on the idea of pedestaling people, like it seems Elliot was guilty of in relation to these three men. I don’t have any solid conclusions, but I will say that, at least in my own observations, that those who give into the temptation (myself at times, members of my family) tend towards rigid/black and white thinking and also perfectionism/self-criticism. I wonder if there is a sneaky lie here that goes along with perfectionism: the lie being that the high-standard is reachable and thus, some have reached it. Once you believe someone merits the pedestal, then whatever problematic behavior they are displaying must be explained away to protect this view, and it takes a lot of egregious behavior to convince the believer otherwise (sometimes you can’t convince them, as seen in church members who refuse to accept the moral failures of prominent pastors despite copious evidence, for example). I’m not sure if this is what’s going on with Elliot, but I’m curious!
I definitely agree that wanting to see everything in black or white seems like it can contribute to putting people on a pedestal. And your idea of explaining away behavior that doesn't match the pedestal, once someone is up there, really makes a lot of sense and is something I will be thinking about. Thank you!
It's always so fascinating and helpful to get a glimpse into your rigorous research and writing process!
I believe I mentioned this to you before, but I have a really hard time with Leitch actively pursuing her while his wife was dying of cancer (and other things Leitch did). I mean ... how could one love a man who'd do a thing like that? It boggles the mind.
I'm glad! Thank you! And yes, I do as well, re Leitch. The more I learn about it the sadder it makes me, and it's very difficult to understand EE excusing it.
Regarding EE's joining the Episcopal church. Throughout her life she began as a Presbyterian, was sent as a missionary to Ecuador by the Plymouth Brethren, and was part of a community church in New Hampshire. I was glad to see the progression of her church affiliations over the years explained in your book. I remember when Tom Howard became a Catholic and resigned from Gordon College by reading about this in Christianity Today. EE was questioned for the article and replied in a gracious manner about Tom's love for God and his seriousness about knowing God and being obedient. (If anyone has a Christianity Today subscription, you could go into the archives and find the article.) I do not know the numbers, but a number of evangelicals are joining the Anglican and Catholic churches in the last few years. I'm trying to find the part in your book when EE mentions becoming a Catholic, but her readers "wouldn't understand." I, too, was so grieved to hear the backstory of Lars and EE's marriage. I was able to visit her and Lars with my daughters, at their home in Strawberry Cove, after EE had stopped speaking publicly. Lars was a gracious host and when he suggested EE sign copies of the P and P books my girls brought, he brought her into the kitchen, where she could sign with her by then shaky handwriting. It appears that he had changed somewhat after the doctor told Lars she couldn't speak publicly anymore.
Constance, thank you for sharing. I'm glad you found the exploration of her doctrinal changes over the years helpful. The quotation you're thinking of about Catholicism is on page 495 of the printed book. And yes, by Thomas Howard's account it does sound as though he changed somewhat in those years, and it's very sad that it didn't take place years before.