SPIRITUALITY - SORTING OUT CRUCIAL GENDER ISSUES

Desiring to be obedient to God’s Word regarding how I function in the Church and what I teach others, over the last several years I have spent hours researching and writing about the role of women in the Church.

Aware of my interest in this subject, I was recently asked to edit a review Jon Zens was writing of a book written by John Piper, What’s the Difference? Manhood & Womanhood Defined According to the Bible. While there have been ongoing debates about this topic amongst scholars for centuries, Jon writes very indisputably about a section of scripture which is frequently overlooked, yet worth considering:

It is interesting that in Piper’s major publication, Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood (1991), there are separate articles devoted to Eph.5:21-33, 1 Cor.11:3-16. Col.3:18-19, 1 Pet.3:1-7, etc., but 1 Cor.7:1-5 is suspiciously absent. Likewise, in What’s the Difference? There are two lists of verses dealing with marriage provided, but once again 1 Cor.7:1-5 is not included (PP.21,66).

This omission is unfortunate for the following reasons. First, 1 Cor.7:1-5 is the only place in the NT where the word “authority” (Greek, exousia) is used with reference to marriage. But it is not the authority of the husband over the wife, or vice versa, that is in view, but rather a mutual authority over each other’s body. 1 Cor.7:4 states that the wife has authority over her husband’s body. One would think that this would be a hard pill to swallow for those who see “authority” as resting only in the husband’s headship.

Secondly, Paul states that a couple cannot separate from one another physically unless there is mutual consent (Greek, symphonou). Both parties must agree to the separation or it shouldn’t happen. There is in this text, then, nothing supporting the contention that the husband’s “authority” should override his wife’s differing viewpoint.

John Piper suggests that “mature masculinity accepts the burden of the final say in disagreements between husband and wife, but does not presume to use it in every instance” (p.32). But 1 Cor.7:5 challenges Piper’s assumed maxim. If the wife disagrees with a physical separation, the husband should not overrule his wife with the “final choice” (p.33). Biblically, such separation can occur only if both husband and wife are in “symphony” (unity) about such an action.

Now if mutual consent applies in an important issue like physical separation from one another for a period of time, wouldn’t it seem proper that coming to one-mindedness would be the broad decision-making model in a healthy marriage? Piper feels that “in a good marriage decision-making is focused on the husband, but is not unilateral” (p.32). In light of 1 Cor.7:1-5 I suggest that decision-making should focus on finding the Lord’s mind together. Over the years the good ideas, solutions to problems and answers to dilemmas will flow from both husband and wife as they seek the Lord as a couple for “symphony.”

1 Cor.7:5 throws a wrench into the works for those who would conclude that the husband has the “final say” under presumed authority commonly known as “male headship.” Paul teaches that unless the couple can agree on a course of action, it should not be executed. I suggest that this revelation invites us to re-examine what the husband’s headship really entails.

(Jon has been the editor of Searching Together magazine since 1978, and lives in Osceola, Wisconsin. www.searchingtogether.org www.jonzens.com )


Whole-Heartedly,
Bonnie