Christian pop-controversies are the sorts of ideas that fit neatly into Twitter’s pre-X days of a 280-character limit. Provocations are effective marketing techniques. There’s no such thing as bad publicity, right? If you want to grow your follower count, throw out a post or two declaring something crazy like, “Christian men should lift weights,” and watch the fire rise. Sure, let there be a time and place for such fun. And, keep it at the level of fun.
There are other controversies, however, that are more substantive in nature and consequential in application. Actually, there are many such controversies – starting with the fundamental proclamation that Jesus Christ is Lord. And since rivers flow downstream, the Christian faith is uncontroversially not without controversy. These sorts of things we are to keep at the level of substantive fun.
Hot topics in a room of fumes ignite quickly. In such a context, one may be tempted toward nuance and qualification. And yet, nuance isn’t always helpful. Clarity is what we’re after. When qualification serves to the end of clarity, may we smother our chicken with sauce and seasoning. But the sauce is not to overwhelm. An award winning chef will tell you that a good sauce is meant to enhance the meal, not detract from it. In the same way, we ought not to nuance our point into oblivion. The call for clarity demands that sometimes we forgo qualifiers and speak plainly, like simple folk. Somebody please do tell the South that steak isn’t chicken, and is not to be served smothered in sauce. A little salt, a little pepper. A Tavola!
In a culture like ours, with too many examples of bludgeoning nuance and smothered steak, straight-talk is like mountain-spring water to a parched tongue (if you’re a pseudo-hipster, for you it’s like a cold IPA on a crispy fall evening). Yes, as in anything, one can overcompensate. But we can deal with that later. “The wind blows to the south and goes around to the north; around and around goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns.” (Ecc. 1:6). History is a see-saw on the children’s playground. We were born for this time, not a different one.
An area in Christian circles oversaturated with qualification is the fundamental role set apart for the husband. The indicative reality of the headship of the man is varnished with a glossy sheen to mask the rough appeal of Au Naturel. Sure, you can dilute your cast strength 2 ounces of single-malt whiskey with a little water to enhance the flavor compounds, adding to your enjoyment. But if it’s whiskey you’re drinking, don’t forget that you’re drinking whiskey.
Too many complimentarians stifle the husband’s headship with qualifiers. Yes, we can analyze and discuss the effeminate motives behind this practice. But what’s clear is that the role is too often not defined as clearly as it should be. In my work as a business owner, I can tell you all about the frustrations that arise when the role is not clearly defined. There are, of course, good teachers who bring clarify to the question of the husband’s headship – the sort that quote Apostle Paul, say amen, and go on with their merry day.
You see, we cook in God’s kitchen and use His recipe book. The household was God’s idea. The family is an institution that God enacted, and which reports to Him directly. God designed the structure of the household, defined the roles within it, and directed its mandate. The design, definition, and direction comes from the Lord. That’s not something we get to mess with. It’s something we get to learn about and submit under. Working through God’s definitions, even as a reminder, is only good. And, you know how it is, whether it’s AmPm or Green Leaves in Mirkwood, you can never have too much good stuff.
The Husband Is Responsible
The Husband’s role encompasses many facets. But to deliver on my own call for clarity, I’d like to narrow the husband’s role, for now, as it pertains to his relationship with his wife. Not all assumptions are helpful, but some are necessary. For the sake of this argument, I’m going to assume that you, my dear guest, agree with me that the husband is, in fact, the head of his wife. My goal is not to persuade of that reality, but, rather, like the Bible does, assume its existence and explain its ramifications. The marriage covenant is made between the man and the woman, and before their Maker. And in that covenant, the man is the head. Since we like good teachers, here’s the Apostle himself:
For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. – Eph. 5:23
The Bible does not give male-headship as an imperative – meaning, the Bible doesn’t command husbands to be the head. It says, “the husband is the head of the wife.” The Lord has decided. It is the way it is. We can pretend that an egalitarian world works. Husbands can pretend that they’re not the head and try to abdicate. Wives can pretend that their husbands are not the head and refuse to submit. But they’ll have to deal with the generational consequences of trying to uproot reality. In God’s design the husband is the head of his wife.
But what does that mean? We all agree that the husband is the head. But it’s in the definitions that disagreements arise. The battle, as we’ve been told, is fought in the dictionary. And the dictionary belongs not to Merriam or Webster, but to the Incarnate Word. Whether we like it or not, the Word is in charge of all the words. What does the Word say the husband’s headship means?
Now, before I get accused of any purple prose, allow me to ensure clarity. Start with the meat and sear it well on all sides to let the natural juices form the base. Hold back any additional ingredients just for a bit. We can add some butter, minced garlic, and thyme in 2 minutes. The headship of the husband means the husband is responsible for everything within his household. Specifically in his relationship with his wife, the husband is completely responsible for her.
Is that enough clarity? Perhaps we need some more. Let’s let it sear. 30 seconds.
The man is responsible for the spiritual and physical condition of his wife, and for her spiritual and physical actions. The husband is responsible for where his wife is and what she does. Even though Eve sinned first, God called to the man. God demands an account from the husband as to the condition of his wife. Blame-shifting and finger-pointing – like Adam – won’t get the man out of that responsibility.
You see, when nobody really cares what you think, you can say all sorts of things. It’s not like the Christian man-o-sphere or the feminists even know I exist, let alone will read what I say. I’m marked safe from criticism due to my irrelevance. Life is simpler that way. But just in case some nitpick gets a handle of this, let me offer a minor qualification (for the sake of clarity, that is). Let the steak simmer for a second. Are you ready? Here it is:
Yes, the wife is responsible for her sin.
Okay, that’s enough qualification. Back to basting. Headship within a covenant means the covenant head is the stand-in. He stands in front of his wife. Even though the wife is responsible for her own sin, the husband is her covenant stand-in. Who she is, where she is, and what she does is the husband’s responsibility.
But semantics is a thing. I’m no English major, but I am fluent in 2 languages, so I know what connotations are. We don’t want to get carried away with our words. Are we on a mission for clarity or aren’t we?
Our base is set and it’s time to add the rest of the ingredients. The husband being the head of his wife means 2 things. First, he represents her. And second, he rules over her. As the head, he is her Representative Ruler. The husband is responsible to report to God as to his representative rule over his wife. And yes, alliteration is alluring. There aren’t many things in life more thrilling.
Now, I’m running low on my word-count capacity. An overdone steak is the worst. In this kitchen, we like medium-rare. We turn off the heat and gently move the steak to a cutting board to let it rest. While the juices soak in, I’m going to make a few final assertions before plating it. I figure since this is a safe-space, I can do so freely. As long as the assertions are clear.
The Husband As Representative
The husband represents his wife as her stand-in. All of her needs, issues, and sins are his burden to carry before his Maker. If the husband tries to have the wife carry the burden, he’s in sin. Her entire life is his responsibility.
But representing her also means that the husband’s actions – whether public or private – affect her, whether she knows it or not. When the representative acts, he does so on behalf of his wife, and she is benefited or harmed by his actions. There are covenantal consequences to the husband’s decisions.
This next part is vital to grasp in order to understand the essence of representative rule. In order for a covenant head to be qualified for that role, he must be equal to the party he’s representing. This is why Jesus is qualified to be our stand-in. He is able to sympathize with us, because, being God, he became man. Vere homo, vere Deus. Truly God, truly man.
In order for a husband to be his wife’s representative, he must be her equal. And he is. Both the man and the woman, together, are God’s image. They are called mankind, because the man is the head. But them together is how God’s image is demonstrated. Man and wife have equal dignity as image-bearers of their Maker.
Being her equal means he identifies with her. He is connected to her. He draws her to himself. Instead of pushing her away, he brings her along. He doesn’t run out in front as a way to distance himself from his wife, leaving her to carry her own baggage. “When you get your stuff together, you can join me.” No. Identifying with her, he is her representative.
The Husband As Ruler
Within that context as her stand-in representative, as her equal companion, the husband as head also means that he is to rule over her. Headship is representative rule. His role is an authoritative one. The husband has the authority to make decisions and execute on those decisions on behalf of his wife.
Now, if the idea of the husband as “ruler” bothers you, if it makes you uncomfortable because it seems too authoritative, you should just keep using that word until it gets easier. Let me make it easier. The husband is in charge. The Bible associates the husband’s role with rule. The husband rules over his household. “Domestic” and “Domicile” both come from the Latin domus, which means “home.” Dominion comes from the Latin dominus, which means “lord.” The root is the same. Lord of the Manor? I think so. That’s why Sarah called Abraham “lord.” Because they spoke Latin.
The husband’s rule means two things. First, as the ruler, the husband is to take initiative. He is to go first. A practice of reacting to the wife’s initiative is not ruling. He is the one to initiate. There is a sort of leadership passivity that neglects a proper response to the situation. A husband who responds to the problems in his home is closer to faithfulness than the one who doesn’t. However, always being in a position to respond is still not a ruling position. The ruler is the one who initiates. A husband who is simply his wife’s friend and supporter, who only provides an encouraging ear, is an unfaithful head because, although he may be representing her, he is not leading her. The leader has clarity of vision for the future, and brings his wife along as he goes first. As the ruler, he initiates.
And second, as the ruler, he also vetoes. The wife not only can, but should be making decisions in her domain, and making commitments on behalf of her role. But, the husband has the responsibility to either confirm or cancel her commitments, and if he has to, pay the price for them. Numbers 30:10-15 demonstrates what the husband’s veto responsibility looks like. Someone please show it to the Christian Feminists of both genders. The husband’s silence is still authoritative. The wife’s decisions are always the husband’s concern.
The ruling husband sets the course and the pace for his household as he leads his family. His wife is to follow him because he’s going somewhere, not just responding to her outcries. The ruling husband judges, decides, decrees, and acts. This is his role to play before God and for the sake of his wife.
So, the husband’s role is the Head of the Household. Another way to say that, is he is his wife’s Representative Ruler. He is responsible for her, and therefore, has authority over her.
The steak has been moved onto the plate and is ready to be served. Now, here is the moment of truth that makes all the difference. If, after all the effort I undertook to prepare such a beauty, I was to pour a ladle-worth of some sort of sauce all over this master piece of meat, besmearing it with qualifications, the entire meal would be ruined. No, and a hundred times, no. Steak is not to be served smothered in sauce. The husband is the head of his wife. A little salt, a little pepper. A Tavola!
Leave a Reply