Tag Archives: Marriage

How we live out submission and leadership in our marriage

22 Replies

weddingEvery congregation should have the right to work out their ways of living out the Christian faith. I firmly believe that. No one can come from Belgium and tell believers in Bolivia how to take the Lord’s Supper. Or in the case of what we’ve been discussing, how to put into practice the Bible’s teachings about men and women.

In the same way, I believe every marriage is different. Yet I think every marriage is strongest when the husband is making an effort to be the spiritual leader of his family.

So what does that look like in real life? I can only answer in our case. Carolina and I have been married for 25 years. Yesterday I was trying to analyze our decision-making process and checked with Carolina to see if I was remembering right. I asked her if she could remember a time when I put my foot down and decreed what the final decision was. She almost laughed and said no. We make our decisions together. I can’t imagine doing it differently.

But she feels that I am the spiritual leader and that I should be. I see that leadership played out in many ways. I once heard Glenn Owen, in a Herald of Truth workshop, say that Ephesians 5 tells us that when sacrifices are to be made, it’s the dad that is to make them. That has stuck with me and been one of the guiding principles of how I seek to lead my family. I think leadership is about setting a spiritual tone to the things that we do, about ensuring that we are on the right spiritual path.

It also means that my wife looks to me for spiritual guidance. Don’t get me wrong… Carolina is a very strong person spiritually. You can view her testimony on the Hope For Life website and note that quickly. But she doesn’t want to lead her husband. She wants to know that she can count on me to move us toward spirituality, rather than having to drag me in that direction.

In practice, I would guess that our marriage looks a lot like those who feel that Ephesians 5 stops in verse 21. But the difference is the attitude with which we approach it: I with an attitude of sacrificial leadership, Carolina with an attitude of submission… submission out of strength, not out of weakness.

What 1 Peter says about husbands and wives

16 Replies

Bible in the shadowI guess we could have discussed 1 Peter 3 yesterday, but it deserves some time of its own. Here’s the passage in question:

“Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives— when they see your respectful and pure conduct. Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair, the wearing of gold, or the putting on of clothing— but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious. For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening. Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.” (1 Peter 3:1–7)

Let’s look at immediate context. Following an admonition to live good lives “among the Gentiles” (2:12), Peter lays out a series of “submit yourself to” instructions: everyone submit to governmental authorities (2:13-17), slaves to masters (2:18-25), and wives to husbands (3:1-6). This final instruction is tempered by a warning to husbands to be understanding and show honor to their wives. Two reasons are given for that:

  1. They are co-heirs of salvation
  2. Mistreating one’s wife will be a hindrance to prayer

In Buried Talents, Jay Guin argues that this passage is specifically directed to women with unbelieving husbands. I don’t think that’s the case. Peter does feel that this behavior could lead to the conversion of non-believers, but note that he thought only some would be in a mixed marriage (vs. 1). Much of the language is similar to Ephesians 5, speaking of a relationship of submission and respect (the same word used in Ephesians 5:33). And the following instructions seem to be given to believing husbands (vs. 7); why wouldn’t we see them included in the discussion about wives living in submission?

Guin also points to the reference to Abraham and Sarah, reminding us that their marriage had a lot of problems. While I think that’s true, it’s no reason to disregard Peter’s point. Think about Abraham being continually held up as a person of faith. What if we merely focused on his weak points: moments of doubt, times of sin, disobedience to the Lord’s call, even falling on his face laughing at God. We could say, “Abraham is no model of faith; look at his failures.” I’d suggest instead that we trust that Peter (and Silas – 5:12) were guided by the Holy Spirit as they wrote these words.

Husbands are again warned not to treat their wives in a domineering way. Family leadership does not include high-handed, despotic behavior. That’s part of the curse in Genesis 3, not part of God’s original design. Women may be “weaker vessels” (Peter’s words, not mine), but they are by no means inferior. They are co-heirs with us and with Christ. No one can mistreat his wife and be right with God.

Ephesians 5 for husbands and wives

7 Replies

BibleEphesians 5:21 and following comes at an interesting point in the book of Ephesians. It seems to be part of the fleshing out of verses 16 and 17:

“Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, making the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil.” (Ephesians 5:15–16)

(The NIV Study Bible says that the grammar ties verses 21 and following to the filling of the Spirit in verse 18; I’ll trust them on that one. They indicate that Paul is saying that the Spirit’s power makes the following instructions possible)

Part of that fleshing out was to live lives of submission. Verse 21 states the principle that Christians are to submit to one another. Yet that principle needs some explaining. Wives are to submit to their husbands. Children are to obey their parents. Slaves are to obey their masters. In each of those cases, a limit is put on the other party. In reverse order, masters are to treat their slaves as people made in the image of God, not mere property. Parents are to avoid exasperating their children while training them in God’s way.

And husbands are to love their wives. Paul expounds on what this love looks like. It’s a sacrificial love, with the husband giving of himself in order to help his wife be more spiritual. He is to love his wife as he loves his own body.

Paul’s final word on the subject is: “However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.” (Ephesians 5:33)

The word respect is the same one that Peter uses in 1 Peter 3:2 when discussing wives’ submission to their husbands. It’s also used of the attitude Christians should have toward government officials (Romans 13:7) and toward God himself (Ephesians 5:21; Philippians 2:12; 2 Corinthians 7:1). It’s also used of slaves’ attitudes toward their masters (Ephesians 6:5; 1 Peter 2:18).

We can go far beyond this basic analysis, looking at the meaning of “head” and “submission” in this passage. (I will mention that Jay Guin does a good job with that in Buried Treasures, although he puzzlingly applies things to both men and women that are only addressed to one or the other) But I think this is more than enough to begin the discussion.

This passage does not directly address men and women in the church. However, so much of what is said about the genders seems to hinge on the marriage relationship, this seems to be a good place to start.

One of my key points is this: this teaching does not seem to precede Galatians 3:28 historically. The equality of men and women as regards the spiritual inheritance does not eliminate the differences between husband and wife.

Divorce court in church?

2 Replies

weddingIn reaction to my suggestion about divorce yesterday, I got some interesting pushback on Facebook. Since it was in a closed group, I’ll refrain from making direct quotes or naming the source. But this person said that, while my idea was nice in theory, divorce involves too many issues (property, issues with children, inheritance) that require legal enforceability.

At first I said, “Let the judges of this world sort out the property issues, etc.” But then I added, “Although I think Paul might have said let the church deal with those issues too. (1 Corinthians 6).”

Later I admitted that this man was absolutely right. And I think the church needs to be willing to address those issues as well.

Let me say, I think that the divorce rate in the church would plummet if couples thought they had to go before their Christian peers to request a divorce. And I hope that, in many cases, church leaders could help the couples resolve their problems, staving off a divorce.

In the few cases that would remain, I think the Bible tells us that we are better off having spiritual men judge such issues than to leave it to non-believers. We’re not used to dealing with such issues in the church, but in the ancient world that’s exactly what elders did. (“elders” in the sense commonly used back then, not just the church office) The church eldership was modeled off the concept of elders who served as civic leaders and judges. (See Ruth 4 for an example of that)

Obviously, this only works with Christians who value their Christianity more than their possessions, their rights, etc. It would require that both parties be committed to following the leading of the church leadership.

Is it ever going to happen in the U.S.? Seems doubtful. But it seems to me to be a spiritual approach to a spiritual problem.

Putting divorce into the church’s hands

4 Replies

weddingOK, I had an epiphany. (Calendar says that should have happened in January, but it hit me late.) I was listening to the news about the gay marriage fight and thinking over the ridiculous situation the church has put herself in by joining hands with the State in the whole question of marriage.

Considering the benefits of separating church marriage from civil marriage, I realized one of the biggest advantages for the church: divorce. By allowing the State to determine who marries and who doesn’t, as well as who divorces and who doesn’t, we’ve placed ourselves in an extremely awkward situation when it comes to divorce.

Imagine this scenario. What if the church defined for herself who is married and who isn’t? What if, like in many countries, civil marriage was one thing and church marriage was another? Then, whenever people wanted a divorce, they would have to go through the church. If not, they would be plainly admitting that they were rejecting the church’s teachings on divorce and choosing to live in adultery.

“But that would put church leaders in the position of deciding whether or not people can legitimately divorce!” That’s nothing new. They are thrust into that situation time and again. Only problem is, they usually are dealing with that subject after the fact.

Two members get a divorce. The elders (or other leaders) have to decide whether those people remain in good standing with the church. Or people who have remarried come to place membership. The leaders have to ask some questions about the divorce(s) to determine how to receive these people. And in each of the cases, the leaders face the disadvantage that the State has already allowed the divorce.

If people had to go through the church to divorce, there would be more opportunities for counseling and ministering to hurting couples. More opportunities to stave off the travesty of divorce. And much more social cost in terminating a marriage. It would allow us to teach people that divorce is an absolute last resort, reserved for extreme cases. It would get people’s minds off of the legal side of things and back on the spiritual nature of marriage and divorce.

It’s too late to fully take back marriage, at least in countries like the United States. Even if the church begins to take a more active role in this area, we’ve given the State free use of terms like “marriage” and “divorce,” allowing it to apply those terms to whomever it sees fit. But we can make plain to our children and all our members that it is God, not Congress, who defines who is married and who is not.

Let’s stop rendering to Caesar what rightfully belongs to God.