An interesting discussion arose on Facebook a couple weekends back surrounding the following status update posted by Patrick Watts.
In context, Watts was blurbing comments made at a Lifeway event by another speaker. After some criticism, he went on to expound:
This was in the middle of talking about loving your wife as Christ loved the church. He was pointing out how husbands have ignored their responsibility for spiritual leadership in their household. While it is true that the relationship between your wife and Christ is solely hers, most men assume that the only choices are to oppose it or support it, but we tend to forget that the other option is to abdicate it and assume that it is someone else’s responsibility, when it should be an essential part of the lifelong commitment that you make in marriage.
I understood what he was getting at the first time and interpreted the sound bite how it was initially intended. Nevertheless, Watts was banged on pretty good, both in that thread and elsewhere. His challengers’ main beef went something like this:
A wife can handle her own spiritual development and doesn’t need her husband to do so. Thank you very much.
For the record, I’m not a huge fan of Lifeway and believe their ultra-conservative approach to art, culture, and religion has a stranglehold of sorts on the evangelical community. One only need revisit the Blindside debacle to catch a glimpse of the “militant isolationism” inherent in much of evangelical culture, which Lifeway enables. Part of that, from my perspective, consists of a fairly staunch patriarchy (i.e., men are the “prophet, priest, and king” of their home). Watts’ FB update, whether intended, evoked some of that sentiment. And thus the pushback.
Despite feeling outside the Lifeway target audience and denouncing the heavy-handed, even heretical, patriarchy wielded by some Fundamentalist-type groups, I find myself stuck in the middle of this discussion. So I wanted to share some of the reasons I think both sides have a point.
For over a decade as a pastor, I was privileged to counsel married couples at various stages of growth and togetherness and/or separation. I quickly learned that one party’s spirituality did not always guarantee the spirituality of the other. In some cases, it even made it worse! I can recite dozens of examples of men who, in an attempt to lead spiritually (whether that effort was tactful, clumsy, or totally forced), did not always see the “results” they expected. Of course, some of that came from wrong expectations of what “spiritual growth” was supposed to look like. I mean, if baking bread and making babies was a husband’s idea of a “godly wife”, then it was his expectations which needed changed, not his wife’s spirituality. The opposite was also true: some of the most godly women I knew were married to spiritual doofuses. Point being, there was just way too many different personalities, scenarios, and factors in a marriage to be able to corroborate the following formula:
- Spiritually deficient husband = spiritually deficient wife
- Spiritually healthy husband = spiritually healthy wife
Another takeaway from my pastoral years: Men DO tend to abdicate spiritual leadership to their wives. Some trace this all the way back to the Garden of Eden and Adam’s “following” Eve into sin. As a result, they suggest, men have inherited a tendency to cede spiritual leadership (and women have a tendency to take it). Of course, this all assumes that men have spiritual leadership TO abdicate, which I’ll get to in a sec. Whatever the case, if my experience was any gauge,
- Women were usually more spiritually involved in the life of their families than were their husbands, and
- They wanted their husbands to join in and assume the reins of leadership.
What inevitably resulted was a large contingent of “spiritually single wives and moms.” As a result, praying for spiritually AWOL husbands and fathers became a regular occurrence in the life of our church, far more than the reverse (praying for AWOL wives and moms). Again, this was my experience. My relationship with other pastors and churches seemed to confirm these observations.
So I’m definitely approaching this with preconceived ideas based off anecdotal evidence. There simply isn’t a formula for spiritual growth, especially as it relates to the role spouses play in each others’ growth. Secondly, husbands generally DO need to step up their spiritual leadership of the home and/or relationship with their wife.
All that said, I agree with the GENERAL PRINCIPLE that husbands are responsible for their wife’s spirituality. Here’s some things that DOESN’T mean:
- This doesn’t mean that a wife does not have a totally unique, independent relationship with God.
- This doesn’t mean that a husband usurps or supplants Christ’s relationship with his wife.
- This doesn’t mean that the husband (or men in general) are superior to the wife (or women in general).
- This doesn’t mean that the wife has less of the Holy Spirit than her husband.
- This doesn’t mean that a wife is responsible FIRST to her husband, and THEN to Christ.
I’ve found that most people who hedge at the above assertion often conflate it to include one of these misconceptions. By saying that the husband is responsible for his wife’s spirituality, I’m simply appealing to the more traditional interpretation of gender roles in marriage and that God has called the man into a role of “headship.” I am NOT inferring that a wife requires her husband to have a healthy spiritual life, that she can’t hear the Holy Spirit without her husband’s cooperation, or that she is somehow stymied by a spiritually delinquent spouse.
While this position grates against much contemporary thought, it has significant biblical precedent. In the context of discussing head coverings during worship, the apostle Paul wrote,
“But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.” (1 Cor. 11:3).
Paul appeals to a clear order or hierarchy. Which he does a second time:
“For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man” (I Cor. 11:8-9).
In Paul’s day, veils were used to signify the woman’s subordinate relationship to men, particularly of wives to husbands. Apparently, some of the women in the Corinthian church were praying without veils, and Paul’s corrective is a reminder about the created order. It was the principle of women’s subordination to men, not necessarily the symbol of that particular subordination, that Paul appears to be addressing. Anyway, there’s lots of interpretative juggling used in attempt to get around what it seems obvious these verses are saying. Taken at face value, they build on a concept that goes all the way back to the Book of Genesis, that of “Federal Headship.” So when the apostle Paul addresses husbands thus —
“Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her; that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the Word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless.” (Eph. 5:25-27).
— he is in fact appealing to something that is not just a cultural construct (hierarchy appeared pre-Fall in the created order), but a spiritual reality. Ultimately, the Bible tells us that sin came through “one man,” Adam (Rom. 5:12) — “man” as in “male/husband.” Even though Eve also sinned and was cursed, Adam appears the fountainhead (or leaky faucet) through which sin came. This is an example of Federal Headship.
Not only did the buck stop with Adam, Eve was the first victim of Adam’s failed headship.
Which is why Christ is portrayed as “the Last Adam” (I Cor. 15:45) whose sacrificial living and dying resulted in the sanctification of His Bride. This is the same imagery the apostle Paul is invoking in his marriage analogy.
- The First Adam defiled his bride through his sin.
- The Last Adam sanctified His Bride through obedience.
In this sense, I’d say that the husband is responsible for his wife’s spirituality in the same way Adam was responsible for his wife’s. In the end, she suffered because he did not lead and/or obey.
Please note, I’m simply extrapolating what I believe flows naturally from a Federal Headship idea. Many good Christians see it otherwise. What I find fascinating is that people’s opinions on this subject tend to divide along complementarian / egalitarian lines.
- Complementarian: The husband is ultimately responsible for his wife’s spirituality.
- Egalitarian: Spouses are entirely responsible for their OWN spirituality.
Perhaps there’s a third level in there, something along the lines of
- Spouses are responsible for their partner’s spirituality AS NEEDED.
I tend to think of this as “Joint Sanctification.” Let me give you an example. Scripture teaches that the wife can “sanctify” her husband. In addressing the subject of “unequally yoked” marriages (where a believer is married to an unbeliever), the apostle Paul writes,
“And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy” (I Cor. 7:13-14 NIV bold mine).
Here, the Bible says the wife can sometimes act as the Federal Head, incurring blessing upon others in the family who don’t deserve it (in this case, the unbelieving husband). I’m not sure all this means, if it just applies to unequally yoked marriages or has broader application. The idea is that in various situations, the husband OR the wife can be a sanctifying agent upon their spouse and household. In other words, gender is not the issue as much as spirituality.
Throughout our 30+ years of marriage, my wife Lisa has often been the primary spiritual leader of our family. Whether it was because of my stubbornness, blindness, laziness, or spiritual density, she has acted as the Federal Head, praying down blessing where none was deserved. I have been sanctified by her many, many times. My guess is that many husbands would admit the same thing.
All that to say, I sort of find myself in the middle of this issue, seeing something along the lines of Joint Sanctification. Generally speaking, I believe that men are called into spiritual headship over their families and households, and that God will hold them to greater account than their spouse. However, there appears to be lots of room in Scripture. There’s many biblical accounts of God using women to lead men and, in the case of marriage, there’s even evidence that the wife may be the primary spiritual leader, or at least co-leaders (see: Priscilla and Aquila). I know this position is a bit squishy. But I’d like to know your thoughts, where you think I might be getting it wrong or right.
Wow.
You do realise that he made these comments on a private account intended for friends and that my post was also a friends-only discussion, right?
Beyond the questionable ethics of misappropriating a private conversation, it’s also offensive that you’ll give him the courtesy of thorough quoting of his position while attempting a glib and dismissive summation of the opposing position.
Katherine, Patrick and I are Facebook friends, too. My link is to his post. I thought I represented both sides fairly. Not sure where you think I was “glib and dismissive” but please feel free to clarify what you feel I’ve misinterpreted.
A conversation meant to be strictly private should be held in private, as in a private message. Sharing something sent in a private message is clearly unethical. But sharing something tweeted, even if to friends, cannot have a strict expectation of privacy. It’s like having a conversation with friends in a public place like a restaurant. Someone may overhear. So I do not find your criticism of that aspect of what Mike had to say reasonable.
Travis, on my FB link, Patrick said he was OK with me using his quote because it was “globally scoped” with no “expectation of privacy.”
Validated. 😀
I think you’ve provided a good break down and balanced approach to the issue. I’m honestly uncomfortable with the idea of “headship”. I have trust issues. I don’t trust a man (fallible human) to lead me, thus, I’m difficult to lead. (Ask my husband.) I simultaneously want to be lead while loathing it. Dang. I have issues. Truth is…Eve and I probably have some things in common.
I want to be “lead”. Hmm. I want to be an element. That’s a new one. (“led”)
Jessica I would be honored if you would consider my COMMENTS to this unbeliever named Sarah from last year. The first two long ones. Your honesty is commendable and I promise you I am NOT picking a fight. I don’t have time even if I was.
I didn’t even read this article yet and only saw the title as I’m on my way out the door. Maybe I should have waited to comment if at all, but the title does seem to say enough to warrant some thoughts.
I don’t mean to be pushy and certainly I’m not telling you to do anything, but I would also be humbly interested in your reading my conversation with Jen over at Aimee Byrd’s PLACE as well if you found yourself so inclined.
Saves me a lot of typing here.
Mike, I think you’re getting it right.
there are so many seemingly contradictory things in scripture, and we need to back up a bit and get perspective. idk where all the responsibilities are going to lay when we get to heaven someday, but i do believe we’ll probably be a bit shocked at how God sees things.
i’ve become weary, over the years, of all the ways wives have demeaned men in this area. women have created ideals of what they would like their husbands to *do* and *be* and *look like* as Spiritual Head of the Home, and they’ve translated those into biblical absolutes. they’ve beaten down many a good man in the process. a friend told me years ago her husband would rather be home with the family on a weeknight than at a men’s bible study. thankfully, this friend was wise enough to see that THIS choice WAS being the spiritual leader of the home.
my first husband became very jealous when i knew more about some bible things than he. this created its own friction (and was one of many issues).
the man i’m married to now would not ‘measure up’ to many church-women’s ideas of a spiritual leader … but he knows that he’s to love me as he loves himself, the way Christ loves the church, and that’s powerful. powerful. also, he’s not jealous of me and celebrates my strengths, even if they are spiritual in nature, rather than demeaning me b/c i’m ‘beating’ him at something.
it’s a heart-issue, really.
I agree, over the years, I think I’ve seen how the church’s definition of “headship” has caused women to look down on their husbands and become disillusioned in their marriages. I backed off the teachings and began rethinking things when I noticed the damage being done.
Mike if you and I never agree on another thing as long as we both shall live, you do ask some GREAT questions for discussion. The short answer is yes. He will be brought to account for how and with what attitude he performed his honorable duties as covenant head of one of God’s precious daughters. Though it is not my intent, I can see the smoke comin outta the ears of some of these gals already. (I promise I have heard all the arguments)
She will however stand by herself at the judgement and will have him neither as defender nor excuse.
It will be the same in reverse as well. A covenant wife can be the most spiritually supercharging earthly ally a man could possibly have or a ball and chain and source of constant misery. He however will also stand by himself at the judgement having her neither as defender nor excuse.
God’s commands to husbands and wives, save only for those qualifying guidelines also clearly declared in scripture, have nothing to do with the performance of the other. I am to love my wife as myself no matter how unlovable she may be (that’s how Christ loves His church bride btw) and except for sin or actual danger she is to submit to my headship no matter how bad I am at it.
Great topic Mike as I say.
MAN I wish I had more time.
As for the topic at hand, the Bible does seem to indicate that men have a responsibility for greater (but not domineering) spiritual leadership, which I find ironic because my experience has been like yours in that I have personally observed that women are more frequently spiritually engaged in Christian churches and families and are often more likely to pray, serve, and study Scripture.
Perhaps God gave men a role of leadership because we are so spiritually lazy that without being asked to be the leader we’d be so spiritually lazy we’d never do anything at all?
Just a thought…
Travis, interesting question, about why God gave men the role of leadership if they tend to abdicate it or do it poorly. I lean towards the idea that Mike mentioned, that our original assigned roles were corrupted by Adam & Eve’s original sin and the consequences of that have resonated down to every man and woman, every husband and wife, since then.
So now we each find the greatest challenge in doing what we were originally assigned to do. Which is why in the New Testament, men are admonished to love their wives and wives are admonished to respect their husbands — which directly addresses the greatest (most common) lacks in each.
Just speculation, but it makes sense to me.
would not being a man who loves Jesus, a man of character and integrity, be a man who is spiritually leading his family?
i think we’ve created some elusive checklist of how men should be, what they should be doing, what it should look like … when many a man who loves Jesus is leading, and leading well. we’re just looking at the wrong things.
i know too many who *do* religious things who i want nothing to do with.
give me a man of character, integrity, an ability to love unconditionally, a heart after God’s own heart … over a man who leads/forces his wife and kids to church and church/religion things just because it’s technically the right thing to do.
a man who truly loves his wife will not have to force ‘headship’ down her.
I think a man is responsible for his leadership but I don’t think he is technically responsible for his wife’s attitude about what to do with that headship (if that makes sense).
You have managed to do what most of these articles do: tell us what this “male spiritual leadership” isn’t, without telling us what it is. It seems to be a somewhat meaningless concept. But I do think it comes down to your third option in most healthy marriages. This is what husbands and wives do for each other. They pray and stand strong when the other can’t. You indicate that you’ve experienced this back and forth. Most of the long-term marriages I’ve witnessed around me are like this. In a few long-term marriages, you simply have one spouse who is carrying all the spiritual weight for the other. But those are not what I would call healthy relationships. They can lead to healthy results eventually. I’ve seen that happen, and it’s a moment to praise God when a previously spiritually unhealthy or unbelieving spouse turns his/her head to God and repents. When one person is carrying all the weight all the time, it’s just as likely the marriage will collapse, though.
After 23 years of marriage (yes to the same guy), here are my conclusions: I think it’s a matter of perspective, and its different for a man than it is for a woman. Men tend to see the overall picture, making sure his “team” is winning the battles, and swooping in at the last second to keep the cart from falling off the cliff. They extol their wisdom, then move on to the next thing to fix, mow, or grill. Women meanwhile live on the front line managing all the details, especially when kids arrive. We make sure things run smoothly, and everyone is fed, clean, and happy. We watch over the kids’ existence constantly monitoring for improvements, and prefer to stop the cart before it ever gets near the cliff. But when necessary, we call in the Big Gun, and he swoops in to save the day (and then watches the game). Men are like generals leadership-wise, but we women are his right-hand leading the daily charge.
Let’s also remember that the Scripture says husbands should give themselves up for their wives as Christ did for the church – that means to sacrifice himself for his wife and his family, as any good general or captain would do. What all this actually looks like and how it is implemented is up to the couple. If either party thinks the other party is not holding up their end, then it’s time for negotiation to reach change and/or compromise. Communication is the key.
I do think Christians promote the fallacy of a perfect marriage and what its supposed to look like. There is a superficiality to it that makes me cringe. As if you never get angry at your spouse, or irritated at their quirky habits, or wonder once in awhile “what if?”. I agree with Jill that we all need more practical advice not “Would you pick up his dirty underwear if you were married to Jesus?” My reply is “Jesus wouldn’t leave it under the coffee table!”
I think you summarized things pretty much the way I see them, Mike, including the uncertainty about the “squishy” areas. I also think that God has left us with squishy areas in life because He wants to see what we’re made of, what we value, what we’ll do when given a choice.
My heart is revealed when I have the choice to submit to the authority chain a certain way and I refuse to do it. What I value is revealed. Do I value some concept about my independence as a human being and my own ultimate authority over my own spirituality more than I value the Word of God? While the details of what spiritual headship may look like day to day are squishy, I think if one does a thorough study of the concept of authority throughout the Bible, there is only one conclusion to be drawn. God subscribes to (well, He originated) the concept of the chain of authority. It is a top-down hierarchy, and ***overall in the ideal situation***, He chose to give the husband a place in the chain above the wife.
(*** That is, there are exceptions and sticky situations. But all else being equal, the intention is for the man to be responsible and in authority over the wife and his children. )
It is also clear from the overall body of Scripture as well as many individual examples that God does not consider men superior to women. I really liked your list of things that headship does NOT include, Mike. Those are the misconceptions that usually trip us up. They are fine lines, but very important to get.
In studying the biblical concept of authority, the need for *someone* to be in charge becomes clear. The choice of man over woman may not have been totally arbitrary (perhaps it was because God knew that He would be born as a male when He took on flesh), but it is not a reflection of some innate superiority or qualifications that only men possess. I still remember the day that I studied this out and the realization hit. It was very freeing to finally be able to look my husband in the eye and not feel like I was somehow weaker, less qualified, or inferior.
He’s in charge simply because this is how God operates. This is how the King works. You can’t have two captains on a battleship. You can’t. It doesn’t work. We need a default for the chain of command, and God said it would be the husband. In other words, the answer that no child likes to hear from their parent: “Because I said so.”
And yet… when I realized that it wasn’t a reflection of my ability or value, it was life-changing. Now my husband and I can work together as equals, he can delegate or defer to me in the areas that I’m strong or gifted (as any wise commander does), and my strengths don’t have to become a threat or an opportunity for strife. We submit to each other in love (also biblical).
I loved what you have written about whether a man is responsible for his wife’s spiritual growth and when I came to this line: “Not only did the buck stop with Adam, Eve was the first victim of Adam’s failed headship.” I stood up and said amen brother.
This is also a problem for Catholic husbands and wives. As a Catholic woman, I am baptized as Priest, Prophet and (king) Queen, in full and equal measure to the mission of Christ as I am an equal partner in my marriage to my husband.
God created marriage to be a sharing of two imperfect people who through a harmonious balance of talents and prayer, they can support and uplift each other
Thank-you so much Mike. Well said – simply said. I’m 63- never married- female “Bible studier” wondering just how disgusted the Lord must be with the American “christian” male. Is not the church & family in a huge bloody war every minute with the demonic forces of evil? What do you call ebola in the USA? I call it a curse for sin on our nation – from the Lord.
What is so difficult in understanding “the chain of command” – what it is for – how it works and WHY the Lord set this order??? Somebody has to be THE top, THE leader, THE commander for when thing get really rough and for the daily battles too. Every prosperous business, bank, national government, industry, and social group, even a friendship has the alfa person – God has set up everything this way….? Wake-up!
Is not America STILL the hope of the whole world? Is not America the ONLY nation that can continue to help other nations in a HUGE way, including spiritually. The US church is full of “pastors”/husband/fathers who yak up a storm about stupid football while the Lord’s church/family members under his command are all sinning day & night – many of whom are going to hell under his cowardly and sinful leadership – from Catholic to Charismatics/to wife & children. Only humbling ourselves, wrestling with God in prayer with tears over our own personal sins, repenting and then getting the males actively taking back the reigns of command to protect, care/love, teach that living without sin is easy, and nurture their family members first, and churches second – can save our nation and get the wheels whirling again. What if family’s started getting blessings instead of curses? WOW!
How many sermons/fathers teaching the Bible to wives & children – do we hear about the horrible curses that “GOD” hands out to every male/female who is into porn. Or the curses God gives out every day for all the different types of sins…..gossip, anger, lying, pretenders, deception, cheaters……. no matter if your saved or a serial rapist or a murderer. Do pastors/husbands/fathers teach how to overcome a sin? NO! Why? Because pastors/husband/fathers sin day and night and like it – just like the ungodly “priests” and “prophets” of the OT. Men like churches were they aren’t PREACHED at about SIN! You might investigate that every disease is a curse from the Lord for sin…..Deut 28, etc etc etc….
Again thanks Mike – for even getting on this vital subject. The Lord will bless you for it!!!!