My youngest daughter mentioned this talk called Mars and Venus at the Cross: Toward a Crucified Vision of Manhood and Womanhood on Christian roles of men and women and I thought it was excellent. Check it out if you want a clear and thorough overview of how these things should work.
He got a lot of great themes in. I loved his example of how women leading “just” women isn’t some lame second place thing and how it would be equally un-biblical for a guy to say he was “called” to mentor young ladies one-on-one.
He also emphasized how wives should submit to their husbands, but all women don’t need to submit to all men (except church leaders, to which all members submit as appropriate).
The only thing that might have rounded out the message would be how real wisdom and great leadership involves seeking the input of others (i.e., people like my wife). I’m responsible for the ultimate decision but it would be foolish not to get her perspective on some things. But that’s just a nitpick (you can’t cover everything in one lesson).
He also emphasized how wives should submit to their husbands
My wife (girlfriend, partner, whatever I call her) isn’t interested in this. She is constantly calling on me to assume my role as head of household and show something she calls “leadership”, but when I assemble a battle plan and say, “All right, fall in!” I am accused of trying to control her.
When questioned on the hypocrisy, she admits that she seems to think leadership is about consensus and group decision making. In my mind, leadership has more to do with an authoritarian setup – one individual makes the decisions while everyone below him in the hierarchy falls into line.
I’ve been around and around with other Christian males on this subject, too. After I quote the verse from Ephesians about wives respecting/submitting to their husbands (and husbands loving their wives) , these guys tell me I am wrong. Over and over again, many of them have tried to tell me that we’re to base our example on the arrangement (for lack of a better term) between Christ and His bride, the church. I’m told how He served it and sacrificed for it. Okay, but my mind keeps returning to the same three thoughts:
1) When I demand respect from her, I’m told I need to earn it first. However, I don’t think it is fair for her to be the judge of when I’ve done so, and secondly, nobody ever suggested that Christ needed to “earn” the church’s respect. Paul makes no mention of husbands needing to earn anything; the wording suggests that they are entitled to respect by birthright, for want of a better term.
2) In any case, nobody ever suggests that wives need to “earn” their husbands’ love, or that the church needs to “earn” Christ’s love. Both are to be given freely, not held hostage to someone else’s expectations.
3) Christian women seem happy to lecture me (and other men) on issues like sexual purity, but they aren’t interested in Bible verses which talk about their need to respect their men, submit to them, or obey them. Am I unrealistic in expecting to be able to lay down the law and end the discussion? And what in the world is “up” with the teaching that God’s going to hold me accountable for her spiritual walk, when I’ve no practical means of enforcing order in my household? This isn’t Saudi Arabia, or someplace else where I can just take her outside for a good thrashing if she mouths off.
Worst of all, I’ve run across posts from Christian women who do seem to “get it.” This tells me all the more than I am right and that she (and these pompous Christian males) are wrong.
Good point. It doesn’t say, “Husbands, love your wives when they are lovable” and “Wives, respect your husbands when they are respectable.”
Courtship has its own challenges. You aren’t married yet, so technically she isn’t your wife, but if one partner isn’t on board with the model that’s a concern.
I just don’t get why you’re the first fellow Christian male I’ve talked to, who admits there may be some validity to my opinion.
You aren’t married yet, so technically she isn’t your wife, but if one partner isn’t on board with the model that’s a concern.
She has given me no reason to think things would be any different if we were. This is a major reason why we aren’t married, actually.
I probably shouldn’t be airing my dirty laundry in public like this, but it’s a topic I’ve been wrestling with for years.
Further thoughts: when a man says, “Submit to me and I’m the head of the household,” women hear something that might be very, very different from what you are saying. We’re all very aware that men can bully us, run roughshod over us, and that some men are really vile to their wives.
We’re also aware (as per my previous comment) that even the best people make mistakes, and what a woman might hear is, “So I’m going to have to go along with a really bad idea because the Bible says so…? Whaaa?” (Think things like gambling away the kid’s college tuition, living beyond one’s means, moving the family across the country for no good reason, disciplining the kids in a way that may be counterproductive, demanding sex, etc. She could also be worried that the set-up would encourage her kids to disrespect her authority over them – “Hey, dad doesn’t respect mom, so why should we?”)
Obviously, this is not what you are saying – your goal is to create a stable, functional household wherein everyone is treated with dignity. But most women want to square Ephesians with avoiding the various bad scenarios I outlined above.
Does that make sense?
Excellent points on both comments. Thanks!
“So I’m going to have to go along with a really bad idea because the Bible says so…? Whaaa?” (Think things like gambling away the kid’s college tuition, living beyond one’s means, moving the family across the country for no good reason, disciplining the kids in a way that may be counterproductive, demanding sex, etc.
I understand where you’re going with this, but if a husband has no authority to make such decisions, then his authority (“respect”) is essentially meaningless, isn’t it?
Of course, in my case, it’s more that I can’t get cooperation on stuff like: “Let’s go for a family bike ride”, “I think we should have dinner together tonight”, “Stop leaving things piled on our dining room table”, “Tell our child to pick up her toys instead of leaving them for me to trip over”, “I want you to go to the introduction-to-firearms course I bought you for Christmas”, “Stop nagging me”, and “I think we should go to church this Sunday.” Not “I think we should move across the country…but before we pack, sleep with me.”
Protestant women do not recognize the authority of priests, and some go their lives without getting married. There’s ample indication in the Bible that God’s kingdom has plenty of room for people who choose to remain single.
If a woman has a problem with the concept of submitting to a husband, wouldn’t it be simpler to just not get married?
The President has absolute authority in some areas, but that does not mean that he has absolute authority, period: he is constrained by the Constitution. I would argue that a husband in a Christian marriage has authority over any judgement call regarding how to head a Godly, Christian household, but lacks the authority to lead that household into sin, trouble, or the like.
For a man’s authority is constrained by the very next verse of Ephesians: love your wife like Christ loved his Church. Christ came into human form for his Church and he was crucified (i.e. tortured to death) for his Church.
I understand that I’m playing Devil’s Advocate, which may be slightly annoying, but let me get back around to where I started, with a bit more conclusiveness: there are instances in which it is absolutely permissible for a wife to disobey her husband, but those circumstances are ones that trigger a divorce or living apart. The Catholic Church will permit annulments (or living apart) in various scenarios, under the belief that a husband does not have the authority to order his wife to use birth control, not attempt to procreate, etc. Nor may he abuse her. But such remedies are for extreme situations, and the basic thought is, “If you’re married, obey him, and if he’s doing something that you cannot, as a Christian, abide, then leave him.”
Getting back to my President example above, the President’s every decision is not reviewable by the People (analogous, perhaps, to the wife), but it is reviewable by the Supreme Court (analogous, perhaps, to the Church and/or a divorce court).
Yes, it comes down to “we must obey God, rather than men.” You must obey God ultimately, so if a man (even your own husband) tells you to do something which violates God’s commandment, you have not only the right but the authority to disobey the man so that you can obey the Supreme Ruler of the universe. Just like when the High Priest and Sanhedrin commanded the early disciples to stop preaching in the name of Jesus, they were constrained to obey the higher command of God *to* preach, and to disobey their earthly leaders who were commanding sin.
Not to stick my nose where it doesn’t belong, but here are a few thoughts:
Neil said, “He also emphasized how wives should submit to their husbands, but all women don’t need to submit to all men (except church leaders, to which all members submit as appropriate).”
That, IMHO, is what makes Ephesians acceptable. One Catholic blogger that I frequently read says, “If you’re not my husband, my priest, or my father, I don’t have to listen to you.” That verse does NOT tell women to submit to random men, their boyfriends, their uncles, their brothers, or anyone but their husbands. (Obviously, at work, you should do what your bosses tell you to do, and you obey laws, and all that stuff, but the only human that an adult women submits to is her husband.)
I will snarkily say: if you don’t respect a guy, don’t marry him. If you don’t love a woman, don’t marry her. Respect and love are both earned, but they are earned before marriage. By tying the knot, you say, “I love you and respect you and will give 100% to this union, because you are special amongst people.” (This is when I usually go on my rant about people expecting things from their casual dates that are really things that you can only ask of a spouse, e.g. sex, submission, ‘will die for you’ love, etc.)
That said, the reason people follow Jesus is because they believed He is Lord, which is a lot different from being a human – prone to error, sin,anger, folly, and all the rest of the bad stuff. Moreover, people went to Jesus freely, not because He browbeat them into submission.
I’ll also point out that Ephesians was written in a time wherein women were illiterate, didn’t wok, did not have property, and, often, were not responsible for their own torts. If it’s a man’s livelihood, property, house, or bank account on the line, listen to him and do what he says.
That, IMHO, is what makes Ephesians acceptable. One Catholic blogger that I frequently read says, “If you’re not my husband, my priest, or my father, I don’t have to listen to you.” That verse does NOT tell women to submit to random men, their boyfriends, their uncles, their brothers, or anyone but their husbands.
What do you do with a woman who does not recognize the authority of any of those?
The problem is that neither her nor I were raised in homes with men who demonstrated leadership. Her father walked out when she was about three, and mine (while a good dad) simply did what he was told. I made up my mind at an early age that I wouldn’t allow any woman to push me around like my dad allowed himself to be.
I’ll also point out that Ephesians was written in a time wherein women were illiterate, didn’t wok, did not have property, and, often, were not responsible for their own torts. If it’s a man’s livelihood, property, house, or bank account on the line, listen to him and do what he says.
Do you believe we should take Paul’s teaching literally today, or not?
Don’t marry her. (It’s my response to a woman who says, “What do I do about a man who is not prepared to die for me the way Christ died for his Church?”)
As per above, I do not believe that a man has absolute authority in a marriage. First, he’s fallible, unlike Christ. Second, even Christ submitted to the Father. You simply cannot get from ‘literal Ephesians” to “absolute authority.”
I will also point out that if Ephesians is to be interpreted literally, then two things follow:
1. Men must be ready to be tortured to death for their wives.
2. Look at the writing. It does not say, “Men, tell your wives to submit to you.” Nor does it say, “Women, tell your husbands to die for you.” It does not tell masters to berate their slaves about obedience, nor does it permit slaves to browbeat their masters about proper treatment. Ergo, there is an implied requirement to find a husband whom you can submit to, a wife whom you would die for, but there isn’t any basis to demand that of the other.
A question for you: under Ephesians, would I be able to demand that a husband give me his kidney (assuming I needed one to survive and that he were a match)? After all, Christ died for his Church, and he’s supposed to love me like Christ loved his Church, and I’m only asking for a kidney. (Alternatively, would a priest be able to demand of him, on threat of excommunication, that he fork over the kidney?)
My question is why you’re even still with this woman when you have these basic problems? It sounds like you’re living with her without being married — is that the case? — and that you’re not going to marry her because of these relationship issues. So… what’s the point? Just holding on to her to have *someone* to hold onto? You seem to be in limbo — not married, not moving toward marriage, but not moving away from marriage with her either. The whole situation stinks, imo.
I think you’re basically right in what you’ve said about leadership and headship, but perhaps you need to season your speech with more love. There is an element of servant-leadership that you may be missing [I don't know, of course, having only your version of your relationship to go on, not being able to observe for myself, or even to get your girlfriend's or another outsider's opinion], which makes it easier for a woman to follow a man’s leadership.
She may change if she sees you acting in a sacrificial, loving way, because then it makes it easier for a woman to trust that you really do have her interests and your combined interests at heart, so even if she doesn’t think that something is right, she will trust your judgment.
However, I think you need to “fish or cut bait” — make a move toward marriage or move away from marriage. You seem to be living together without being married, and I think that needs to change immediately — either get married or live apart. And stop sleeping with her without being married (assuming you are).
You are not married, so right now you do not have the responsibility for her spiritual walk; and while you do have the right to insist that things be done a certain way in your household, she’s not your wife so not really a member of your household, even if she lives in your house. This is the kind of confusion that reigns from living together without being married. Live apart, show servant-leadership, study her to find out whether she is the sort of woman you would want in a wife [this doesn't mean that she must obey your every whim; you're not married so you don't have the right to insist on that; even if you do have a right, a wise man will use that right sparingly, and will be like Christ, and woo with love, not govern with an iron hand], and move toward marriage if at all possible, but move away from marriage if it seems that she is not willing to be a Christian wife and that you will be incompatible.
I know you mean well, so please don’t take my responses personally…
My question is why you’re even still with this woman when you have these basic problems?
Because we’ve been together for ten years, we have a child together, and I don’t want to lose her contributions to our household budget, much less pay out hundreds of dollars/month in child support….especially when my father has already given her thousands and thousands of dollars in freebies.
It sounds like you’re living with her without being married — is that the case? — and that you’re not going to marry her because of these relationship issues. So… what’s the point? Just holding on to her to have *someone* to hold onto?
Yes…see above. You seem to be under the impression that I’m afraid of being alone.
You seem to be in limbo — not married, not moving toward marriage, but not moving away from marriage with her either. The whole situation stinks, imo.
At present, she’s made it clear that she doesn’t want to marry ME because she is afraid someone will figure out how to hold her responsible for my credit card debts. She has all these stories about friends of hers who got sued or taken the cleaners after their former husbands defaulted on debts. I told her that’s absurd, as credit cards are unsecured, but she will not listen. There are other problems she has with me that I won’t go into.
I think you’re basically right in what you’ve said about leadership and headship, but perhaps you need to season your speech with more love.
My opinion is that I’ve already done my part and that it is time for her to step up. I pay most of the bills and do all sorts of things to attempt to demonstrate affection.
She may change if she sees you acting in a sacrificial, loving way, because then it makes it easier for a woman to trust that you really do have her interests and your combined interests at heart, so even if she doesn’t think that something is right, she will trust your judgment.
That is a core problem – she does not trust my judgment on pretty much any matter of importance. (My character either, really.) Would you enjoy being involved with someone who is highly critical, immediately assumes the worst possible motive if caught in a compromising position, presumes raw stupidity on your part if you land in a jam?
However, I think you need to “fish or cut bait” — make a move toward marriage or move away from marriage. You seem to be living together without being married, and I think that needs to change immediately — either get married or live apart. And stop sleeping with her without being married (assuming you are).
None of this is new information.
You are not married, so right now you do not have the responsibility for her spiritual walk; and while you do have the right to insist that things be done a certain way in your household, she’s not your wife so not really a member of your household, even if she lives in your house.
This is where you and her would probably agree – that there’s going to be some magical sea change in the way she relates to me, just because we went down to the courthouse one afternoon and got a marriage license, or borrowed a preacher for a half hour. My contention has always been that if she doesn’t respect me or submit to me NOW, there’s little chance of it after the fact. I don’t know even one couple whose ways of seeing one another changed after they got married, for good or ill. I know plenty for whom everything stayed the same.
This is the kind of confusion that reigns from living together without being married. Live apart, show servant-leadership, study her to find out whether she is the sort of woman you would want in a wife [this doesn't mean that she must obey your every whim; you're not married so you don't have the right to insist on that; even if you do have a right, a wise man will use that right sparingly, and will be like Christ, and woo with love, not govern with an iron hand], and move toward marriage if at all possible, but move away from marriage if it seems that she is not willing to be a Christian wife and that you will be incompatible.
I can’t afford that. Every month I keep her under my roof, is one less month I have to pay child support after the relationship eventually crumbles. There is a finite number of months between today and our child’s 18th birthday.
I know you mean well, so please don’t take my responses personally…
I won’t, though I think you sound rather nice in your responses, even if I may disagree with them.
…she is afraid someone will figure out how to hold her responsible for my credit card debts…. There are other problems she has with me that I won’t go into.
Is she talking hypothetical credit card debt or real CC debt? Maybe you need to clean that up first, as well as perhaps some of these “other problems” you won’t go into. Maybe she disrespects you [she does not trust my judgment on pretty much any matter of importance. (My character either, really.) ] at least in part because she has seen things in the past and is still seeing things in the present that you do that undermine her respect for you.
As I said, you’re in an untenable situation at present, because you don’t really have the right to demand respect from her [actually, I don't think you have the right to *demand* respect at any time, though I *do* think she should respect you; this is the whole "servant-leadership" thing I was talking about before, which tends to engender respect in the woman on whom it is practiced] since she’s not your wife, but you’re treating her like she’s your wife in some instances and not in others, and that makes the whole thing very messy and difficult.
My opinion is that I’ve already done my part and that it is time for her to step up. I pay most of the bills and do all sorts of things to attempt to demonstrate affection.
…except work on those areas that are thorny to her, am I right? The areas she has expressed concern, such as credit card debt and these “other problems” you won’t go into? Men and women see things very differently, so what you may interpret as stellar instances of demonstrating affection, she simply doesn’t take as such — OR, she takes them as instances of affection, but they are marred by these other problems, and she may even see them as contributing factors to the problems.
Example: you have credit card debt, which she doesn’t like and which scares her; you feel like you’ve got a pretty good handle on it, so you ignore her when she complains about it, especially since it’s *your* credit card debt, and not really any of her business. Then you buy her an expensive gift (which goes on the credit card) as a sign of affection, but she struggles to accept it as it was meant, because all she sees is you adding to your credit card debt, which actually ends up increasing the space between you two, because instead of showing her affection, you have actually increased her fear level by increasing your level of debt.
This is where you and her would probably agree – that there’s going to be some magical sea change in the way she relates to me, just because you got married.
No, actually, I almost wrote yesterday that I didn’t think it would really change the way the two of you related, except perhaps for the worse. Don’t get me wrong when I write of things that I think I see in you and your relationship that may be changed, that I am seeing faults only in you; I see plenty of faults in her which are contributing to the problems the two of you are having. But I’m not talking to her, so it really doesn’t do any good for me to tell you what’s wrong with her, since you already know. If I were talking to her, I would tell her that she needs to respect you (even “fake it til she makes it”), despite your faults, sins, and shortcomings; I would agree with you on a lot of what you have said. But I would tell her that she needs to step it up, even if you never do, simply because that’s the right thing to do. And that’s what I am telling you — you need to step it up, even if she never responds.
My opinion is that I’ve already done my part and that it is time for her to step up.
I’m sure you’re right that it is time for her to step up, but that doesn’t mean that you get to do wrong just because she is doing wrong. I think of the OT prophet Hosea, who was called to marry a prostitute, and was told that this woman was going to be unfaithful, yet he was called to be faithful and loving to her. His life was a depiction of how God loved Israel/Judah, and was faithful and loving even though they were unfaithful to Him (serving false gods, etc.). I think of how I as a Christian am so fault-prone, yet Christ is ever faithful, and always loving, and always draws me back. He has the right to demand love, fidelity, and respect by brute strength, but He never does — never did in His earthly life, and does not now to His people, His bride. It’s easy to be a Christ-like husband if you had a perfect wife; the difficulty comes when you have a sinful wife. [Likewise, it's easy to be a church-like bride if you have a perfect husband; but much more difficult when you have a sinful husband.]
God doesn’t say, “wives, respect your husbands IF they are perfect and always treat you right…”; it’s given as a command regardless of how the husbands act. Likewise He doesn’t say, “husbands, love your wives IF they respect you and treat you right; and if they don’t, you have the right to act in an unloving manner toward them.” In short, you are to treat your (can I call her your fiancée) like you want Christ to treat you, and to do that regardless of how she acts, regardless of how disrespectful she is to you, and regardless of what she does. That is a tall order; believe me, I know [I'm stepping on my own toes, here, as I apply this to myself towards my own husband who being human has many faults himself, just like I do].
“If you keep doing what you’ve been doing, you’re going to keep getting what you’ve been getting.” I see running through your comments extreme frustration at your current relationship and a desire for better, but I DON’T see a willingness on your part to change. You’ve said you’ve done your part, now it’s time for her to do her part. Not the right attitude. You do not love her as Christ loves the church.
Think about it — He gave EVERYTHING, stepping down from heaven to live as a human, in the dirt and filth of the world; living among sinful people for 30-some years; spending three years of preaching in which He drew large crowds of believers, but also of those who mocked Him, accused Him of being demon-possessed, tried on multiple occasions to trap, trick, and even kill Him; finally betrayed by one of His closest disciples, then beaten beyond recognition, His beard pulled out by the roots, a crown of thorns beaten into His head, and finally nailed to a cross for agonizing hours of pain and thirst. Why? To save His sinful bride, us.
And He loved us when we were unlovable and unloving. He didn’t wait for us to “do our part”; He gave His all, submitting to humiliation, pain, and even death, for US. The Bible says that “for the joy set before Him” — what joy? the joy of having His people, His bride with Him forever — He thought nothing of the shame. Right now, what I see in you is thinking much of “the shame” or the pain or the difficulty of your current situation, and thinking it’s not worth it to go through all that, in order to have the kind of relationship you want. You may think you’ve done all you ought to have to do, and in a way I agree with you, but then I look at Jesus, the Perfect Example of what a loving Husband is and ought to be, and I don’t see that you’ve gone through any beatings, and you certainly haven’t given your life for your bride, and though you may have gone through some pain and some humbling, it is nothing like what Christ went through.
I set before you a choice — keep doing what you’ve been doing and continue to have an unhappy life, or change what you’re doing and model yourself after Christ, and ultimately have joy. I can’t *promise* that your fiancée will change, but I think it is likely that she will (even if she never changes, you can grow in joy by being more Christ-like; God will reward you, even if she doesn’t).
You said in another comment something about your determination not to be a wimp, not to let a woman tell you what to do; I’m not suggesting that you do become a wimp, believe me. However, you may find that your determination to be “manly” comes across as being harsh and abrasive, engendering disrespect, and not being truly manly which commands respect from both men and women alike. I urge you to read the gospels and see how Christ lived, then to read the epistles to see how Paul and the other writers urged Christians (especially the men) to live; if you need more practical examples of Christian manliness which engendered respect, read biographies of and writings from godly Christian men of old, like George Washington and others.
And as you do these things, don’t think about your girlfriend’s faults and failings and how she doesn’t act right. For one thing, she’s human so she will always have problems; and as you change for the better, she may be thrown off-balance, and not know how to act, and may even get worse for a time, though I think she ultimately will get better, and be the kind of woman you want. But for another, if you focus on HER problems, you are not focusing on how YOU need to change. I see you both focusing on the other’s problems, and you’re in a staring contest, waiting for the other to blink — waiting for the other to make the first step. I tell you, this is part of true manliness — taking the first step, and being the bigger man by humbling yourself. It is a conundrum, even a paradox, but God is really good about rewarding things like this. “Humble yourself in the sight of God, and HE will lift you up.”
I know it’s tough; I think it’s tougher for a man to be what he ought than for a woman to be what she ought. But this is where true manliness shines through. It takes strength of character, of mind, and of will to do what you need to do. I know you can do it. It’ll be tough, but you can do it.
In California, the general rule is that debt incurred before a marriage is, after divorce, the obligation of the party who incurred the debt. But the rules are very tricky in community property states, because there are a lot of ways that a spouse in a marriage can end up signing onto the debt (e.g. maintaining a joint back account and paying the debt out of that). Alternatively, if you continued to accrue credit-card debt during the marriage, and it was not clear that it was not for necessaries, then the matrimonial unit could be responsible for the entire credit card debt.
There is also the harsh reality that a lot of people and companies will do things that are not legal, simply because it will cost the defendant more to fight it than to pony up. A credit card company has nothing to lose, except for filing fees, for suing a former spouse for the other person’s debt. Either the innocent ex-spouse pays up (company sez, yay!) or hires a lawyer and litigates her right to not be responsible for the debt (at which point, the company would drop the suit, with little loss to themselves).