Dear Sir: Isn’t
marriage a joint partnership between two adults? Then why are husbands told to
be leaders over their wives? Signed: Want to lead with my husband.
Answer: Dear Want-to-lead-with-my-husband wife, you are correct.
Marriage is a joint partnership between two self-determined adults endowed
equally with intelligence and reasoning ability. I also believe that we need
both male and female leadership in government, church, community, and business.
I do not agree with extreme modern feminism that teaches that women do not need
men, thus they may choose to be lesbians. I also do not agree with men who say
that women are not to lead, but that their role is to assist men only. We are
made for each other and need each other. Remember Genesis 1:26 states that God
gave both Eve and Adam authority and dominion "over the earth . . . fish of
the sea, fowls of the air, and every creeping thing . . ." We were in
partnership from the very beginning. The Creator destined males and females to
live harmoniously, in full cooperation and collaboration, blending their unique
skills and characteristics, that are equally important, in forming well-balanced
characters and building healthy nations.
SOMETHING WENT WRONG
Sadly, equal partnership ended when Eve and Adam disobeyed God. Just as the
relationship between the Creator and His creatures changed, so did the
relationship between males and females. Alienation and the desire to dominate
each other became the norm. Progressively, males proclaimed themselves sole
leaders and have subordinated females to their leadership in all spheres of
life, including the home. In the home, some men have become authoritarian
military-dictator-husbands, while others have become passive, uncaring, absent
fathers. Women, on the other hand, have become submissive, passive wives relying
on the leadership of their husbands. This was God’s prediction (not
prescription) of the curse of sin as described in Genesis 3:16: "And
he shall rule over you." It is my humble opinion that feminism is an
outgrowth of male dominance, insensitivity, and uncaring spirit. I’ve noted
that many men use the Bible to support the notion that they are to be the person
in charge in the male-female relationship. Here are a few of the traditional
teachings regarding men as sole leaders:
- God called husbands to be sole leaders over wives and children.
- Man was created first; therefore, he has the most important
responsibility in marriage.
- If a husband is not main leader in the home, then there will be chaos
and trouble.
- Women are too emotional, illogical, and unable to lead effectively in
times of crisis.
Where do these ideas originate? Over the years we have developed our concept
of manhood and womanhood based on traditional interpretation of scripture. I am
encouraging men and women to take a second look at these traditions and Biblical
passages. Why? As stated in my previous article, "A Deadly Formula or
Violence," history shows that when rigid traditional family values are
combined with rigid religious beliefs, there is always abuse, whether it be
slavery, incest, communism, sexism, rape, or physical and emotional abuse.
To understand better what a particular Bible text really says, we must first
know methods and principles of Biblical interpretations. Without the following
principles we will always develop erroneous teachings and practices:
- Understand the context of the verses you are interpreting and the
primary purpose of the text.
- Understand the cultural setting under which the author wrote.
- Understand the usage of the words in their original language.
- Understand the passage in the broader meaning of the entire Bible.
- Be open to the Holy Spirit.
TAKE A SECOND LOOK
Here are two examples. 1) In the Book of Philemon verses 8-25, there is a
story of a runaway slave named Onesimus. Notwithstanding the evil nature of
slavery, the Apostle Paul does something very strange. He sends Onesimus back to
his slave master. Verses 12 and 17 say: "I am sending him–who is my
very heart–back to you. . .welcome him as you would welcome me . . .If he has
done you any wrong or owes you anything, charge it to me." Here are a
few key questions. Why would Paul send the slave back to his slave master? Is
Paul condoning slavery? Is this a text in support of slavery? Unless we
understand the basic thrust of Paul and the traditions and culture of the day,
we can misinterpret this text. Slavery was the norm in Roman culture. Paul at
the time was not intending to deal with the issues of right and wrong of
slavery, but while upholding the Roman law was admonishing the slave master to
be kind to his runaway slave. Today, Christians do not use this passage to
support slavery, because we take into consideration the cultural setting in
which the passage was written and Paul’s intent in formulating the letter.
This allows us to focus on the longitudinal meaning of the passage–exercising
tolerance and fairness even in less-than-ideal situations.
2) Another text is 1 Corinthians 14: 34, a clear directive to women says:
"Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak,
but must be in submission." Most Christian churches, applying the five
principles of Biblical interpretation to this passage, have concluded that Paul
is not telling women they cannot preach or lead out in anyway in worship
services. Today, there are many female evangelists, deacons, pastors, and
leaders of church ministries. However, when applying these Biblical principles
of interpretation, we discover that Paul was really talking about order in
worship service. These ignorant (uneducated) women would shout out for
clarification to their husbands sitting on the opposite side of the church for
things being said in the service . They were noisy women, disrupting a church
service.
This brings me to the key texts and words which deserve our second look:
Ephesians 5:22 & 25: "Wives submit yourselves to your husbands as to
the Lord," and " The husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the
head of the church." The key words are "submit" and
"head." If we found it so easy to take a second look at the previous
verses and apply cultural interpretations, why can’t we do the same to these
passages? Paul was speaking to people, who were under the legal requirement of
the Roman three-part codes dealing with wives, children, and slaves (Craig S.
Keener, Paul, Women, & Wives, 1992)One of these codes
stipulated that the husband was the head of his household. These laws and
practices originated from the erroneous teachings of women’s innate
inferiority taught by Greek philosophers such as Aristotle, Socrates, and Plato.
Whenever pastors or Bible teachers describe the "role" of husbands
and wives, they stress that the primary role of the wife is to "submit,"
while the main role of the husband is to be the "head."
Unfortunately, mutual submission is never mentioned. This creates a hierarchy in
marriage that is inherently corrupting because the balance of power is skewed on
one side.
Let’s look at the meaning of submission in the Bible. Note that Paul
reminds us that all believers are created equal before God in Christ regardless
of gender, race, social status, or language (Eph. 2:11-22; 4:4-6; Gal. 3:28; 1
Cor 12:13). Ephesians 5:21 states: "Submit to one another out of reverence
for Christ." Could it be that we are erring when we only stress the
unilateral submission of a wife to a husband? The texts are clear that the
husband should also submit himself to his wife.
We have narrowed the meaning of
the verse when we make it appear that wives are to respect their husbands only
and not to love them. Paul was speaking to women who were kept in the dark
because of a lack of education, and who were not allowed to engage in public
meeting, nor be seen with their husbands in public. We err greatly when we do
not place this text in the setting of mutual submission and love. If the women
were uneducated and unable to have gainful occupations like their Egyptian
counterparts, then it is easy to deduce that men had to be "leaders"
and responsible for their wives (who were of no more value than a man’s
garden, slave, or house–sexual property) since it they were educated and
"knew everything," and it was the law of the land.
Barrington H. Brennen is a marriage and family therapist and
board certified clinical psychotherapist, USA. Send your
questions or comments to
question@soencouragement.org or
write to P.O. Box CB-11045, Nassau, The Bahamas, or visit www.soencouragement.org or
call 242-327-1980 or 242-477-4002 WhatsApp.
