Those who reject the Biblical teaching of leadership of the husband in a marriage, preferring instead to teach that there is no Biblical indication of leadership within a marriage (some teach a sort of "that was then, this is now" Biblical reading, meaning that yes, the husbands did have leadership now, but that was a "cultural thing" and not for today).One of the passages that instruct wives to submit to their husbands is
Eph 5: 22-24 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 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. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. (ESV)
First, this is obviously a metaphor. A wife is not walking around with her husband sitting on top of her neck. We need to discern what it is a metaphor for. There are a couple of schools of thought - head means "source", like the head of a river, or head means "leader", like the head of a corporation.
Second, even if "head" means "source", you still have to deal with "submit".
Third - we can try to make sense of the grammar
Can we use "source"?
- Christ is the source of the church
- the husband is the source of the wife.
You can either reject this usage of the word, or you can submit to the idea that there IS a creation order, man was created first and woman second; man is the glory of God and woman is the glory of man. In this case, it would be clear why there would be an instruction to submit - because of the creation order.
Yes - we can actually use source and have it work, but that gives egalitarians a problem with submission within the creation order.
Can we use "leader"?
- Christ is the leader of the church
- the husband is the leader of the wife
Egalitarians don't like this one. But yes, the grammar works.
In either case, you still have to deal with the word "hupotasso" - submit.
Wives - submit. Why? Because the Bible said so.Whether the metaphor is used to indicate "source" or "leader" - the instruction is still to "submit" - hupotasso.
A husband's leadership over his household has been the teaching of the church for centuries. The legal term is "he who asserts must prove". Egalitarians must prove from Scripture that centuries
Suzanne
Eph. 5:21 calls for Christians to submit to one another. Why should marriage be held to a lower standard than relations between brothers and sisters in Christ?
Ellen
Suzanne, if it can be proven from the text that wives are to submit to their husbands, and husbands are to lead, would you accept that?
Ellen
If "mutual submission" means that no Christian has authority over another, then there can be no church leadership, no elder, no pastor. A Christian should not have a Christian employer, since that would mean the employer would have authority over the employee.
It can be demonstrated that submitting to the needs of another Christian does not mean there are no authority structures. Marriage is one and you have yet to prove that it is not from the text.
Suzanne
Ellen,
If it can be proven from the text that slaves are to submit and masters are to be fair would you accept that?
Ellen
Suzanne - answer the question.
Suzanne
When a bishop consecrates he simply acts on behalf of the entire congregation, all of whom have the same authority. They may select one of their number and command him to exercise this authority on behalf of the others.
Only by consent and command of the community should any individual person claim for himself what belongs equally to all. If it should happen that anyone abuses an office for which he has been chosen, and is dismissed for that reason, he would resume his former status.
This is from Luther's appeal to the Ruling Class and is one of the founding texts of the reformation. It is clear that all have equal authority and one acts on the consent and command of the others. That is how we have church leadership, pastors and elders.
There is no reason to believe that Christ teaches one ethic for men that they should act with each other as equals, and an entirely different ethic for women.
Ellen
From Scripture please?
Suzanne
I have already answered it. I have said that there are times when Christians must submit to persecution.
You have answered my question - you said "no" if I quote you correctly.
Suzanne
You are a royal priesthood and a realm of priests. 1 Peter 2
Thou hast made us priests and kings by Thy blood. Rev. 5:9
Ellen
Luther also said, "Women...have but small and narrow chests, and broad hips, to the end that they should remain at home, sit still, keep house, and bear and bring up children." and "Even though they grow weary and wear themselves out with child-bearing, it does not matter; let them go on bearing children till they die, that is what they are there for." Works 20.84
Ellen
Suzanne, if it can be proven from the text that wives are to submit to their husbands, and husbands are to lead, would you accept that
I have already answered it. I have said that there are times when Christians must submit to persecution.
Wives submitting to husbands is persecution. That is what you are saying.
Suzanne
Yup, but I daresay he said that because he couldn't change diapers and hold his nose at the same time. Luther also wrote,
Now you tell me, when a father goes ahead and washes diapers or performs some other mean task for his child, and someone ridicules him as an effeminate fool, though that father is acting in the spirit just described and in Christian faith, my dear fellow you tell me, which of the two is most keenly ridiculing the other? God, with all his angels and creatures, is smiling, not because that father is washing diapers, but because he is doing so in Christian faith. Those who sneer at him and see only the task but not the faith are ridiculing God with all his creatures, as the biggest fool on earth. Indeed, they are only ridiculing themselves; with all their cleverness they are nothing but devil's fools.
The main thing is that ultimately Luther did submit to "his Lord Kathe" as he called his wife.
But I quote Luther to rebut this statement of yours.
If “mutual submission” means that no Christian has authority over another, then there can be no church leadership, no elder, no pastor.
That statement is false. All are equal and yet by consent and command of the community one exercises authority on behalf of the others. The pastor does not exercise authority over the others, but on behalf of the others.
Ellen
Suzanne, if it can be proven from the text that wives are to submit to their husbands, and husbands are to lead, would you accept that.
Without resorting to equating complementarianism to abuse or persecuation, if it can be proven (this is a yes or no question) from the text that wives are to submit to their husbands, and husbands are to lead, would you accept that?
Suzanne
In response to #11, most marriages now are effectively egalitarian. However, my assessment of the biblical counseling given to women who are told that they should be in unilateral submission to their husbands, and my assessment of husbands who actually hold their wives to unilateral submission is that unilateral submission is a form of suffering or injustice which sometimes a Christian must submit to.
Suzanne
If you can prove to me that the unilateral submission of one human being to another sinful human being does not entail suffering injustice then we can discuss this further.
Ellen
That statement is false. All are equal and yet by consent and command of the community one exercises authority on behalf of the others.
Exactly. You are the one imposing inequality to complementarianism, not me
Ellen
Without resorting to equating complementarianism to abuse or persecuation, if it can be proven (this is a yes or no question) from the text that wives are to submit to their husbands, and husbands are to lead, would you accept that?
Suzanne
In response to #16, one person may exercise authority on behalf of others who are his or her equals. However, they do not exercise authority over those who are their equals. That is why pastors and leaders are in mutual submission to their congregations. They are responsible to their congregation and can be removed from office by their congregation.
Suzanne
In response to #17, I cannot agree to the condition, so I cannot answer your question.
Ellen
You need to take a note from your own blog, where David Lang said,
"Egalitarians need to stop looking for abuse in every traditional marriage..."
Ellen
You have just ended the discussion if you are not willing to change according to the text.
Suzanne
Ellen,
#20 I have been clear that not every traditional marriage entails unilateral submission.
#21 I do not agree to your understanding of the text. I just have to ask myself if I am confident in my understanding of the text. I am.
I do not accept your authority over me in matters of exegesis and hermeneutics.
Suzanne
I forgot to link back to my own blog. Here it is. I wish you well, Ellen, healthwise and all that.