On Doormats
3 frameworks on how to view the idea of being a doormat as a Christian
"Don't let people treat you like a doormat."
We have likely all heard such a statement at least once in our lives. Perhaps it was advice given to a friend or a family member who never learned to say no. Perhaps we ourselves received such advice from well-meaning people in our lives.
'Being a doormat' is an expression that refers to the idea of being taken advantage of by someone. We say someone is being treated like a doormat when they allow other people to walk all over them or to take advantage of them.
What is the Christian view on being a doormat though? Over the years, I've come across different frameworks on how to view the idea of being a doormat. I hope to explore 3 such frameworks here.
Framework 1: A Christian is called to be a doormat
The Biblical basis for this framework is fairly straightforward. Turning the other cheek when being slapped is a trait that characterises a citizen of the kingdom of God, according to Jesus.
Jesus himself, in fact, became a doormat for us. John Stott famously said, "We have to see [the cross] as something done by us." In other words, we nailed Jesus to the cross. And he did not retaliate. We mocked and reviled him, and he bore it patiently. We walked all over him. And he let us.
The Christian attitude to being a doormat for others ought not to be one born out of weakness. It should be born out of tremendous strength. Strength that seeks not to be served but to serve and give one's life in service to others. When a Christian allows others to treat him as a doormat because he idolises the approval of others, that is not the same as being a Christ-like servant to others.
Framework 2: Don't be a doormat because you love other potential doormats
While a Christian may choose to be treated as a doormat out of a position of strength, other people may be treated poorly not out of their own choice. People exploit others in this world in which we live.
Now the Christian is called to care for the oppressed and vulnerable in society.
But if I let another person take advantage of me and walk all over me on a regular basis, I am encouraging a culture of oppression. This culture could cause people to be exploited. The person exploiting me may never be confronted about their behaviour and this could lead to other people being exploited by them. By my silence, I may enable the exploitation of people. This is unloving of me towards other potential doormats.
The loving thing for me to do would be to confront the person exploiting me and try and put a stop to it.
The Biblical basis for this framework is not so direct as the basis for Framework 1. Yet, when we seek to practically live out Jesus' command to love our neighbour, we may be drawn to the conclusion that we ought not to enable their oppression by another.
Framework 3: Don't be a doormat because you love the oppressor
The Bible calls me to love my neighbour. This also includes the person who is seeking to walk all over me and take advantage of me. I would be acting in an unloving manner towards that person if I let them take advantage of me because I would be enabling them to sin repeatedly and habitually.
Every time this person treats me poorly, they are reinforcing their own identity as someone who takes advantage of others. They are moving further away from living out their identity as a human created in the image of God. I do a huge disservice to this person by letting them descend further into sin. Therefore, it is unloving for me to let another person treat me like a doormat.
Although Framework 1 has more direct Scriptural backing, it does not automatically mean that the other 2 frameworks are necessarily unbiblical.
Moreover, these three frameworks are not necessarily in opposition to each other. I suppose each framework could be helpful for different contexts. An Indian living in the 19th century may not have been able to employ Framework 3 in his relationship with his colonial masters. He might have found Framework 1 more helpful. Or perhaps, if he was called to lead a freedom struggle, he might have found Framework 2 helpful as well.
What is common to all 3 frameworks though, is the idea of not counting oneself as important or significant. All 3 frameworks are outward-focused — love for neighbour, and not for self.