Like Button

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Safer Ground

Having thoroughly offended most of the women who might read this blog, I thought perhaps I would spend a little time on safer ground. The topic of marriage is important to me ... primarily because it's important to God. The various roles in marriage are important to me ... primarily for the same reason. The requirements of wives is often a subject of much discussion, I suppose because it's so ... politically incorrect. It runs counter to our society's norms today (one of the reasons I think it's so right). I think I did a satisfactory job on it. Clearly, however, one of the big problems ... is husbands. The "safer ground", perhaps, is in talking to husbands about what is required of them.

Husbands have no light role. We've managed to pick one out, but it's the wrong one. We're the ones that get to sit around the house, watch TV, and do as little as possible while our wives wait on us. We do the "manly" things like fix stuff while our wives do the other menial stuff (like everything that is required to make a house run). That's such a popular view, at least among men. It isn't the view in Scripture. And Scripture, being the Word of God, seriously outweighs "popular".

Women complain that Scripture is too tough on them. They question the "submit" requirements and really balk at the "keep silent" comments. I'm not arguing their merits here. My point is that men have it far worse. Take, for instance, the thought process of Eph. 5:22-6:9. Women are told one thing: submit to their husbands. Men, on the other hand, get the lion's share of responsibilities. They are to love their wives "as Christ loved the Church". This carries several implications, but it doesn't stop here. People often view men as responsible for making the money and women as responsible for the home and children, but God holds fathers responsible for their children. And it doesn't stop there. It is males in view when Paul tells masters how to act toward their slaves. Yes, it is a difficult burden laid on women to submit to their husbands, but it is a far lighter burden than that laid on men. God holds men responsible for most everything that occurs in their world.

It has ever been thus. Eve was the one that ate the fruit, but Adam bore the responsibility. Sarah was the one that encouraged her husband to sleep with her maid, but Abraham bore the responsibility. Moses's wife had to save his life because his sons weren't circumcised and God was going to kill him for it (Exo. 4:24-26). And on and on. It is part of the God-given structure in life. The Father is head of the Son, and the Son is head of the husband, and the husband is head of the wife (1 Cor. 11:3). Now, we can play around with the concept of "headship". Everyone assumes that "head" refers to "chief", "master", "the one in charge" ... until it comes to the question of submission. But the word means just that. It is used to refer to the physical head, but also the topmost part. It is that which is between God and the rest of the body. Without it there is no life. It is irrefutably used often in Scripture in figurative reference to the chief, the king, the one in authority. It is also the first one that God goes to when He is displeased with what is occurring under it. It is the one that bears authority, yes, but also responsibility.

Husbands have a great deal of responsibility. And, let's face it, men, we're often guilty of shirking it. Look at some of the things we are responsible for. We are responsible for raising the kids. That doesn't mean we have to be the ones doing it day and night, but we are indeed the ones responsible for it. We are the ones that must provide for our families. Again, that doesn't necessarily mean that we are the ones actually doing it (I'm thinking of a wife that wrote that her husband was disabled and she was the primary bread-winner), but we are responsible for it. Here's a tough one, guys. According to Paul, our wives are supposed to ask us their questions on spiritual matters. Are you prepared for it? Are you prepared to disciple her and teach her? It's your responsibility. Oh, here's one ... are you ready for this? "Live with your wives in an understanding way" (1 Peter 3:7). Guys are forever bemoaning the fact that women are beyond our comprehension. Husbands ... it is your responsibility to understand your wife. Peter also tells us to treat her with honor. That's much easier to comprehend than "in an understanding way". It is your responsibility!

Husbands, examine yourself. Don't examine your wives. Don't look around at other husbands. Examine yourself. You have a huge responsibility. You are the one that God expects to manage yourselves, your homes, your income, your family, your wife, their spiritual well-being, and on and on. You are to treat her with honor and live with her in an understanding way. The only way that husbands who are intent on carrying out their God-given responsibilities can come across as overbearing, selfish, self-absorbed creatures is if they're doing it wrong. It is not possible to properly and successfully discharge those responsibilities in an overbearing, selfish, self-absorbed way. Examine yourselves, husbands. I would recommend you start with that big one ... "Live with your wives in an understanding way." How are you doing with that one? Then work from there to "honor" and you'll have a start. I'll go to work on my end. How about you?

15 comments:

T. F. Stern said...

Wow, where to begin? First off, you are to be commended for acknowledging that marriage is ordained of God. I read your personal data, the part about being a moron and having a loving wife. Maybe you should try adding an “m” to moron, somewhere in the middle :).

The Mormons have scripture that further explain the Holy Bible, scripture that point out that marriage is sacred and that it can be taken past the “death do you part” clause as given in mortality. Marriage for “time and all eternity” is an ordinance which has been authorized of God and holds the answers which make a husband and a wife as “one”, being in tune with the mind and will of God. I would invite you to “do your homework”, investigate the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price and lastly, the archives which contain talks given by the General Authorities of the Church. These are all easily available through the search engines provided at the official site of the Church.

A husband who holds the Priesthood of God with honor and full intent also holds his wife with such respect as to create a celestial marriage. In such a marriage, even while facing the challenges here in mortality, both the husband and wife are actively working to follow all the commandments of our Father in Heaven and have no desire to do anything which would be harmful to each other or their children. Isn’t that the purpose of finding the love of your life, to build upon that foundation of love until it produces and grows without limit or end?

Stan said...

"Maybe you should try adding an 'm' to moron, somewhere in the middle :)."

Ummm, okay ... but what's a momron? =)

On the agreement side, I think few people today realize the vast significance of marriage.

On the disagreement side, unfortunately I have done my homework.

So maybe we can stick with the agreement side that we both consider marriage of great importance.

Samantha said...

Isn't is "Mormonism" that condones polygamy?

Stan said...

The LDS used to be polygamists, and some still are, but the "mainstream" of Mormonism has kicked that one out.

Anonymous said...

Ummm to comment on the above...all Christians hold the royal priesthood of God, that is not just given to men. That is a position of every member of the body of Christ.

Anonymous said...

While I don't entirely agree with you on some things dear brother, you do not thoroughly offend me by any means. You are one of the few big brothers in Christ that the Lord has blessed me with to keep me in constant rememberance that their are men whom I can disagree with, yet who still treat me as their precious little sister in Christ. I read your blog even when I know we won't agree more times than I care to admit, yet it is a constant reminder to me that there are HEALTHY brothers out there who do love their wives!!! Of course I see that in my own father with my mother, but I long to keep a healthy attitude for the sake of my daughters, so I force myself to keep connections with "safe" brothers in Christ who have no objective other than to know Christ, love their wives, and build up the body.

Blessings to you dear brother and your dear wife!!! Your bratty little sister

T. F. Stern said...

The best part about being a Mormon is we get a discount on covered wagons. lol

Samantha,

The doctrine of sanctioned polygamy, key word is sanctioned, goes back to the time of Abraham as recorded in the Bible. It should not be a surprise to anyone familiar with the scriptures. There was a time in the history of the LDS church when having multiple wives was sanctioned; however, that was a very long time ago. Those who claim to be practicing polygamy in this day are not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; but are members of independent organized churches which refused to accept the fact that such practices are no longer sanctioned. In other churches, such as the Catholics, to stand in defiance of a standing church policy and openly flaunt the leadership is grounds for excommunication; it is no different in the LDS Church.

A greater understanding of the spiritual nature of such unions can be gained by reading those limited Biblical accounts along with Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants.

Stan said...

"Anonymous",

Just to let you know, my "thoroughly offended" comment was tongue in cheek. I received no death threats. I wasn't accosted by anyone. No one complained a lot. I was just being humorous, as the suggestion by a male that wives should submit to husbands is often met with stiff resistance from females.

Anonymous said...

Ugh! Are you as a man trying to tell me that wives need to submit??? ;-)

Well, you and I don't share the same view on those passages, but I did when I was still in the same home with my husband and it did not profit us anything. Only since the separation have I come to see those verses somewhat differently.

I am thinking about your comment about how could a person be perceived a certain way unless they are doing it wrong? That may be true in many cases, but I think when you live with somebody who is truly sin sick in their mind do the point of delusional at times...it is entirely possible to do something right and still be accused of not doing it.

Just as I did not care to be falsely accused, I am sure there are brothers who are falsely accused too of not doing their job when they are giving it 100% for God's glory and it is still NEVER enough for a person of a sick mind.

Stan said...

You know, Julianne, it's funny. No one seems to balk at the commands God gives husbands. "Amen!" we all shout. I mean, we husbands might say, "Wow, that's tough", but no one seems to say, "No, that's not what it means. It's not telling husbands that at all." And yet, it appears that a growing number of women have decided that the commands to wives don't mean that at all. Why do you suppose that is?

Anonymous said...

Let me see, Paul tells husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the Church, but John also tells all of us to love one another and to lay down our lives for each other. Seems male and female are given that command.

Paul tells women to submit to their husbands according to the translation of some, yet he also tells us to submit to each other in that same translation. Seems male and female are given that command. He also says to give preference to one another, again male and female.

You see, in my personal opinion, we all admit we are called to love each other and to lay down our lives for one another, but I don't hear much about the mutual "other stuff." What is laying down our lives? Giving preference? Is that not of the same flavor as that other word that some think only applies to women?

Could this be in part why there is a question?

Stan said...

I believe that we are to have the same rules in principle. I believe that these rules operate differently in practice. It's foolish, I know, but I have come to believe that God designed men and women to be different, so that they complement one another, not the same.

I've come to believe this by observation, experience, and Scripture. I've noted that men and women act differently, think differently, operate differently. When I was in the military, I had several women I worked with tell me to treat them the same as men, but when I did so, it was disastrous. So when I read in Scripture that the Father is head of the Son and the Son is head of the husband and the husband is head of the wife, I thought, "Well, that's consistent." When I read that God places all that responsibility on men, I thought, "That's consistent."

Now I'll have to rethink. Perhaps God places all that responsibility on men but gives them little authority to carry out what He requires. Perhaps God intends that men and women be the same, without differentiation. I suspect, from experience and practice, that this would be a pitiful state of affairs, but if that's what God intends, who am I to fight it?

You can see, I hope, that the suggestion that everyone has all the same things to do just doesn't make any sense to me. (And nowhere do you find a wife commanded to love her husband "as Christ loved the Church", or to understand him.)

Anonymous said...

First, I do not see where ALL responsibility is placed on men, what am I missing? I am accountable before God for my choices as well as my stewardship of my children and any and all other gifts I am given by Him. I, alone, will face the Lord for my decisions and choices.

Second, I do not see how having a lot of the same responsibilities takes away from our roles.

You are correct about men and women being different and yes, God intended that and I do see it can complement each other beautifully, as I have seen it in action in other marriages. Today I sat and observed this very thing about the natural differences among the genders.

As for the Trinity, I do not see see disagreement, so where is the issue of who gets the final say? There is no disagreement between them. They are UNITED in purpose. Yes the Father has a role, the Son has a role, and the Spirit has a role, but they are ALWAYS in agreement. I have now seen this work in marriages and jobs where two or more (in cases of jobs and elders) people can both have equal say if they are both/all surrendered to God and His will. Bosses have different roles for the sake of the function of the company, each serving in the area of their gift and strength, yet both have equal say and come to agreement via the Lord for any decision made. And the company works beautifully.

I do see where the wife is commanded to love her neighbor as herself, she is to love one another as he has loved us, wives are to love their husbands, and to lay down her life for one another (again including her husband) via other Scriptures we all must obey. I do see where we are all to be full of goodness and filled with understanding to be able to admonish one another. That sounds like a wife is commanded to understand her husband as well. So just because commands don't specifically say "husband" or "wife" in one passage, in others many of these same commands are given for believers to all show one another. How much more should it be in the home in front of the children?

Stan said...

"First, I do not see where ALL responsibility is placed on men, what am I missing?"

This one's easy. You're missing a pronoun. I didn't say that ALL responsibility is placed on men. I said, "Perhaps God places all that responsibility on men but gives them little authority to carry out what He requires." I didn't say, mean, or even intend to imply that men carry all responsibility. I said (in the post we're commenting on) that God has placed a great deal of responsibility on men.

"Second, I do not see how having a lot of the same responsibilities takes away from our roles."

What roles? The idea is that men and women are equivalent. Why would there be different roles? (That is intended as a "Socratic question". If you can answer it, you might begin to see that different roles mean different requirements, responsibilities, etc.)

"As for the Trinity, I do not see disagreement, so where is the issue of who gets the final say?"

Jesus said that He was subservient to the Father. In the Garden, Jesus said "Not My will." Jesus had a difference of opinion, so to speak, with the Father, but submitted to Him. Throughout Jesus's ministry on Earth, He repeatedly said that He was doing what the Father told Him to do. And agreement or not, Paul said that God was over Christ.

"So just because commands don't specifically say 'husband' or 'wife' in one passage, in others many of these same commands are given for believers to all show one another."

I don't want to misrepresent your view. It appears as if you're saying that it is the command of God to all husbands and wives that they submit to one another. For that to work, they must also always agree with one another. If there is ever a disagreement, one must give in to the other, which would be a violation of mutual submission, so it is only possible if they always agree (as the Godhead does). It appears that there is no authority in a marriage.

On this I have two somewhat unrelated things to say.

First, I've been there and done that. I've been in situations where I am given full responsibility for things with no authority. This is an unacceptable, irrational condition. I cannot be held accountable for things if I have no say. If I am to be under my wife (the definition of "submit") and still responsible for her, it is an unfair, unwise, unacceptable requirement. That's just from personal experience.

My second comment, and my primary point, is not that I'm denying that we are to love one another. I've said all along that husbands submit to their wives by loving them as Christ loved the Church. I've said all along that fathers set aside their authoritarian tendencies and not provoke their children. I've said all along that masters are to set aside their rights as tyrants to their slaves and be kind to them. That doesn't mean that fathers obey their children, masters obey their slaves, or husbands obey their wives. The underlying command, "submit", may be the same, but the different roles of human beings carry these out in different ways. The underlying command, "love", may be the same, but different roles of human beings carry these out in different ways. We know this to be true. I love my wife, for instance, and I love my mother, but I had better not love them both in the same way. That would be sick.

I know. You had a bum deal. Your husband stunk to high heaven. People who called themselves "Christian" abused Scripture and abused you with Scripture. I know. But your experience doesn't mean that "Wives, submit to your husbands" doesn't mean "wives, submit to your husbands". Certainly we need to expand the concept of "submit" to something far beyond "doormat". Absolutely sometimes "submit" means tough love. But Paul said, "Wives submit to your husbands as to the Lord." He said, "As the Church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands" (Eph. 5:24). He said, "Christ is the head of every husband, and the husband is the head of the wife, and God is the head of Christ" (1 Cor. 11:3). Trying to work that into "There is no head, no one in authority over the other, no one surrendering to the other, but a purely mutual submission" doesn't work at all in my head. I cannot begin to fathom in what sense Christ submits to the Church, which would be mandatory if this perception of mutual submission were true. So bad experiences notwithstanding, I cannot seem to bend Scripture around mutual submission and make it stick.

The Schaubing Blogk said...

You said
Men, on the other hand, get the lion's share of responsibilities. They are to love their wives "as Christ loved the Church".

Don't neglect the rest of this verse, since it adds greatly to our burden:

gave himself for it;

26That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 28So ought men to love their wives

One area I have been convicted in recently is family worship... which enables me to work on 'washing my wife in water by the word'. It is only thus that we can present ourselves a glorious bride.