gengwall

“I’m not the boss in my house. I don’t know how I lost it; I don’t know when I lost it. But I’ve seen the bosees job…and I don’t want it!” – Bill Cosby

I know plenty of women who are perfectly happy letting their husbands “wear the pants”. I also know plenty of men who are perfectly happy letting their wives “rule the roost”. The better question is not “who is in charge” but “what does God want”. Does God really want only one side of the “two become one-flesh” relationship to make the decisions; to have the authority? Is such a scenario even a true reflection of the design of either the two individuals or the unified couple? I find no evidence of that in scripture (or biology). It just doesn’t make any sense to me, and “two are better than one” and “a cord of three strands” and so much more in scripture teaches explicitely against it. Even worse, to actually abdicate responsibility and grant another authority you, Cosby’s humor not withstanding, is to deny both God’s design (for the individual and for marriage) and even His sovereignty (over the individual and the marriage).

LOL – This soft comp approach is a pretty sweet deal for us guys. Let’s see, I get to redefine authority as “servant leadership” which sounds so much better than “king” or “boss”. I never have to actually punish my wife for disobedience which saves me from being labelled as an abuser, but I do get to shame her by claiming she is being sinful, which heeps all the condemnation on her and keeps me lilly white in the eyes of the church. And I get to be in charge even though God hasn’t told me I am because God tells her she has to let me be, which clears me of ever being viewed as an authority grasping tyrant. This is awesome! I can’t possibly lose! Sign me up.

Mark @227 – That was quite an eye opening post even though it was brief. All of Cheryl’s questions would be mine as well so I won’t clutter things up by posting extensively. I would just say that, without any license to “take” your authority, and without any means to enforce your authority, it seems what you have described is simply your and your wife’s individual marital decision making paradigm. It hardly qualifies as doctrinal and I suspect that you would have a hard time arguing that my and my wife’s egalitarian decision making paradigm is any less legitimate or blessed in God’s eyes.

“They see themselves as God ordained authorities as both teachers and husbands. (Except that they should see themselves as servants. But they have managed to redefine servant as authority)”

Hence the “servant leader” oxymoron

Good point Lydia, but they would probably accuse you of muddying the waters by bringing in things that don’t pertain to marriage.

Craig – I’m not sure you can get directly to “serve” from the Greek for “submit” but you are on the right track. I would note that the Eph 5 verses to husbands certainly contain the idea of service to the wife, wouldn’t you agree? Christ does serve us as well as we serving Him so the biblical concept is not lost.

I also would encourage you to not lose sight of the fact that head/body is a metaphor. Paul is asking us to look at the relationship between the anatomical head and body and derive from that how marriage should work. In other places through the same metaphor, Paul indicates the mutual honor and symbiotic relationship that head and body have. In keeping with your idea – head and body physiologically certainly do serve each other, need each other, and cooperate with each other for the good of the whole person. Marriage should mirror this relationship.

SM – the stock answer I have heard to your question is “God set it up that way and who are we to question why God did that”

Lydia @ 190 – exactly my experience. I have asked literally hundreds of men on forums, in bible studies, in my family, and even in church leadership, what the “playbook” is for “head of the house” or “spiritual leader”. I get nothing but vague generalities like “well, the husband should make the decisions” or “the husband should lead in spiritual matters”. But nowhere can they point me to scripture that outlines this concept, nor can they demonstrate in their own lives this concept being lived out consistently.

We also shouldn’t lose sight of pinklight’s comment @ 168. Ephesians 5 uses a head/body metaphor exclusively within the relationship between husband and wife. How we deal with our “household” is not addressed in the passage. Moreover, the concept of “kephale (head) of the household” is entirely foreign to the ancient Greek language. So, to assert that Eph 5 proves a position or role that isn’t in view and the original language doesn’t even recognize is really a stretch.

TL – I don’t think you were too harsh, and I certainly exercised a little hyperbole myself. I just don’t want us to jump to erroneous and unsupported conclusions about Mark’s marriage based on one little anecdote from him or our own negative personal experiences with similar situations.

“But would you actually take pride in not allowing anyone to leave the dinner table until everyone had finished eating? Maybe you might do that for a particular dinner, but my guess is not as a required routine. That could get really old and tiring. ”

This was the norm in our house. It may get old and tiring for the kids, but they are not in charge. I guess I have no problem with parental authority, which is what I believe Mark’s example shows. I do not see any inherent male authority in it.

“Which proves our point – it is not an exercise in authority…”

I should have added “…of one spouse over the other”

“This does give us a better idea of the extent of authority in a home arranged on the authority submission paradigm. The atmosphere that you described is one that many of us are familiar with.”

This has an accusatory ring too, and is a borderline straw man. I doubt Mark’s wife is cowering in the corner and engaging in “excessive honor to the husband” to avoid a beating, which is what I read implied in your comments.

I don’t think it moves the conversation forward to take an overly pessimistic view of Mark’s marriage. From everything I have read from him, which is all I and any of us have to go on, he and his wife seem to have a happy marriage with a decision making arrangement that works well for them. The point Cheryl and I and others have occassionally made is that on the surface, it sounds egalitarian. I would offer that we should assume the best and try to point out where we think he and his wife actually depart from comp theology and practice.

“But then Mark’s stubborn claim that he would never stoop to be lower than his own wife to lift her up in her need may produce an example that I could not think of.”

Hmmm – I don’t think he has ever claimed that, has he? That may be your conclusion, but are we putting words in Mark’s mouth?

Cheryl – I agree with you. Mark’s example does not at all show authority of the “head” over the “body”, but instead looks far more like egal mutual submission. I also agree with your parallel example where I suspect Mark would give equal deference to his wife to make a decision. Moreover, while being just a simple example which I appreciate, it can hardly be proven scripturally that the decision to let children leave the table (or any other such decision in the household) is the males unilateral role or that the male is somehow unilaterally gifted (and the female unqualifies) to make such a decision. Which means it boils down, as usual, to individual couples “doing family” in their own way.

In my house, the situation was actually reversed. My wife, coming from a stricter family, was more prone to expect the children to stay at the table until everyone was done eating. The kids, knowing I would be inclined to allow an early departure, would ask me first if they could leave. Out of respect for my wife’s views on the subject, I would defer to her to give the final release. Certainly, Mark would not claim that my wife was usurping my authority by “leading” in this family situation, nor would he claim I was shirking my responsibility. Or would he? I think such a position would be absurd, so I expect he agrees that the way we did the dinner thing was just as legitimate as the way he did. Which proves our point – it is not an exercise in authority.

Mark – what we need from you is something that you believe is universally and unilaterally within the husband’s sphere of authority. Something that only husbands are qualified and commanded by scripture to do within the marriage. Something that would consitute sin if either the husband deferred to the wife or the wife took the lead. Is there anything in your marriage or in comp theology that husbands must always do and wives are never allowed to do. And please, when you answer, give us the scriptural playbook to back up the theology. Your saying so doesn’t make it so – we must see where scripture says it’s so.

Mark – I like your example because it is simple and common. But it does not prove any of your points.

For one, your wife’s submission to you in this particular example does not establish in any way that you are in authority over her. Or are you saying that she also needs to get your permission to leave the dinner table? The only thing your example establishes is that your wife and you have mutual authority over your household. Or are you saying that you would not return the respectful gesture if your kids asked you first? Your example certainly does not establish you are the unilateral leave-the-table decision maker, for if you were, what would your wife do if you were out of town – call you to see if the children can leave the table? That would be absurd.

So, there is nothing authoritarian in your example at all (or even hierarchical). It is just an example of respectful behavior between parents. Admirable? Yes. An example of comp theology put into practice? Hardly.

*gengwall begins holding breath*

Mark – “Why will i waste my time explaining how my marriage works on this blog. It is quite clear that we are never going to agree since our ‘foundations’ are completely different. Practical implications flow from theology”

I agree. But I have never had anyone explain to me the practical “rules” and activities of daily living that entail my leading my wife or having authority over her. If the theology spawns the practical activites, then I think those activities would be at least roughly outlined, if not in scripture, then at least in doctrine. So, maybe you can help me out where no other men have been able.

So Mark, what are the practical, day to day activities that flow from this theology that I am to lead and have authority over my wife? What does Eph 5 exactly tell me I am supposed to do as a husband? What y-chromosome specific skills does the theology inform me that I have that enable me to fulfill my “role”? And if not in Eph 5, then where else in scripture are instructions for me that lead to these practical applications? Really, I want to know. Where does scripture tell me what I’m supposed to do to be a leader and authority in my marriage? I hear the theology of patriarchy loud and clear, but I find little to nothing practical flowing out of it.

Sorry Kay. Just being thorough. Soft comps would like to forget that there are these really abusive movements out there but you were absolutely right @101 – it is the abusive groups that are actually consistent in their application of Christ/church to husband/wife. They would view Mark and NN as betraying the patriarchy and acquiescing to us radical feminists.

And lest we forget, Domestic Discipline movement, as mentioned before, which maintains that the husband is not only in authority over his wife but is charged with disciplining her, even physically, to help her in her Christian walk.

Although quiverers are certainly conservative and traditional, I am not sure that strict authoritarian patriarchy is a talking point of the movement. Maybe, but that hasn’t been my experience in discussions with them.

You may be thinking of Christian Reconstructionists, who want to return society to Old Testament law and family structure.

“gengwall, your wife is a persuasive woman, but I doubt that you find it necessary to question her every motive, right?”

Correct. In fact, I would say her motives are often driven by intuition and that is something I have learned through hard lessons to trust implicitely. Most of all, I know she is a good willed person who loves and wants the best for me and our marriage. In light of that, I find her efforts to “influence” me toward a particular decision, action, or position to be a wonderful blessing.

I should add, in order to maintain my fragile male ego, that I have my own unique gifts to contribute to our marital “dance”.

TL – I would love to but as the author so politely points out – there is no debate allowed.

Indeed TL. Of course, here in the 21st century they are more subtle and crafty in the way they communicate.

I read one author who said that the woman’s good, God given ability to “influence” was corrupted at the fall and therefor it was the man’s “responsibility” in the new God initiated heirarchy to “rule” over her FOR HER OWN GOOD so she wouldn’t fall to the temptation to “inappropriately” use her “influence”. What is clear from a full reading of the author is that this “influence” he speaks of is in fact willfull deception and that it is inextricably tied to the serpent’s deception of Eve. Oh for the days of Matthew Henry when men would just out and out say that women are beguilers.

Now, I know first hand what kind of influence my wife can exert over me (she is a very persuasive woman, I want to please her, and she knows exactly how to make me dance). I can even accept the possibility that it is a gender oriented, God given gift. I also am certain it can be abused. I am not necessarily against the notion that the fall had something to do with its corruption – after all, the fall corrupted much of what was originally “good”. But I do not think for a minute that the serpent’s deception of Eve has anything to do with any of this any more than Adam’s silence and his corrupt, post-fall rule are intertwined.

Actually, NN I think. Mark hadn’t joined in yet. But really, it was simply directed at the comp argument as a whole.

Now Kay. Don’t you know that you are too deceived and deceptive to know that what you perceive as a contradiction is actually perfectly logical? Thank goodness we rational men choose to ignore your triffling and meddling facts…ah…I mean…mistakes.

I mentioned waaaaaaaay back in the original post that the problem for comps who want to extend Christly authority to the husband even though it isn’t in view in Eph 5 is that you have to take a “in for a penny, in for a pound” approach. Either Christ/Church as a marriage is just one form of Christ/Church relationship and is limited to the parameters outlined in the actual Christ/Church marriage passages, or Christ/Church is a single, all encompassing relationship which always contains every parameter regardless of context. You can’t have it both ways.

“The full blown neo-Patriarchists are actually being more consistant in their theology. <–that is not an endorsement of any kind!”

LOL – nor would I mistake it for one. But best you make it clear.

And so the story goes. Since Eve was deceived, and Eve is “every woman” according to their interpretation of 1 Tim 2, then all women are either easily deceived, or the even more ingenious take – they are all deceptive. Hence the need for any and all males, who are the rational and logical and honest and astute gender, to ride herd over those dangerous women.

“How about the ability of Christ to discipline His church? If He can tell the church at Ephesus in Rev. 2:5 that unless she repents, He will come and take her lampstand from its place (note that in Rev. 1:20 the “lampstand” is identified as the church itself– so Christ is warning the church that she will cease to exist as one of His churches)– can the husband tell his wife how she has displeased him and how he is going to discipline her if she doesn’t repent?”

There is even a worse Rev vs. that I have heard used to justify domestic discipline (i.e. physical discipline of the wife).

Rev 3:19 “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.”

So Mark, NN, since Christ can physically discipline those He “loves”, and the husband/wife relationship is identical in every way to the Christ/Church relationship in your view, is it ok for husbands to spank and otherwise physically discipline thier wives if, in the husband’s (Christ perfected) view, she is being sinful?

Mark – “Now the question is, wihtin the Christ/Church model, does auhtority exist. I believe it does. I’m not denying that we are co-heirs with Chirst etc- they are glorious truths, but rather also affirming that we will all bow down and worship Jesus as Lord (Phil 2). ”

This is the entire problem with your argument. Phil 2 is not a marriage or head/body metaphor. Nowhere in the bible does it say that Christ’s bride will bow down before Him. Christ has many different types of relationships with humanity and they can not be morphed into one all encompassing top-down gierarchy. Eph 5 is one; Phil 2 is an entirely different one. There is no way to draw a parallel between the two. They are describing totally different relational paradigms.