From: kmm@cs.purdue.edu (Kevin Megill)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Men's/Women's Roles in Marriage
Date: 2 Oct 92 05:04:33 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University

To clh: I realize this subject generates more heat than light.
If it has been discussed too much too recently feel free to reject this
post.

The moderator replies to another post by saying:
 
>There was an interesting discussion at some point in the past
>(possibly in Christia rather than here), where someone asked "OK,
							       ^^^
>suppose we agree that the husband is the head of the marriage.  Just
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>what in practical terms does that *mean* to your marriage?"  I thought
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>the responses where interesting.  No one, even among the conservative
>Christians, seems to see it in terms of men controlling.  Rather, it
>seems like almost a symbolic role -- the husband represents the family
>in some circumstances, and may serve a tie-breaker role.  But if you
>believe in the tie-breaker role, you have to do it in the light of
>Paul's general principle: "submit yourselves to one another".  Thus it
>does not mean that the husband's desires matter more than the wife's:
>there's every reason to think that a husband may make the final
>decision by deferring to his wife.

I want to answer!

My wife Kate and I both believe the standard conservative
ideas about the husband being the head of the family, 
including the "tie-breaker rule".

How does the idea that I am the head of our marriage make a practical
difference?  

First of all,  I need to concentrate on what God commands ME, not
what He commands my wife.  I am not commanded to make sure that my
wife submits to my leadership or respects me or anthing like that.
That is between her and God.  My reponsibilty is to lovingly lead.
But I cannot make her follow that lead, and I shouldn't try.

From my point of view then, the key word is RESPONSIBILITY.
Practically speaking, being the head of our marriage means that
I take responsibility for how the marriage is going.  "The buck
stops here."  If we argue, and haven't reconciled, it doesn't matter
whose fault it was -- either way it is MY responsibility to keep the
marriage strong, and so I need to take the initiative to set things right.
If our kids keep Kate too busy to spend adequate time in prayer and
Bible reading, then that is not just her problem, it is MY problem --
because I am responsible for my wife's spiritual health, and I
have to do whatever it takes to make things work.

If there is any danger in this, it is not that I will dominate her,
but that I will patronise her.   So far, though, Kate doesn't
feel patronised.  She feels loved and protected.

If Kate were here typing this in with me, I know what she would
say about her role.  She would emphasize that her responsibility 
before God is to respectfully support my leadership, whether or 
not I am being a good husband.  She would almost certainly give 
the following example, which is a favorite of hers for 
illustrating the point:

    Suppose Kevin came home one day, and said "I've decided to quit
    my job, and we're all going to move to Africa".  Would I just
    pack up and go?  Well, first of all I wouldn't JUST pack up and
    go.  Marriages don't work that way -- we would first talk it over
    for a while.  If I thought it was a terrible idea, I would say
    "Honey, I have some real concerns about this idea..." and we
    would discuss it.  Kevin needs my input, and I am responsible to
    give it to him.  

    But if, after all the discussion, Kevin was adamant that Africa
    was the place to go, we'd go.  If Kevin was making a poor decision
    because he was in sin somehow, God would deal with him about it --
    but in the meantime, He would bless and protect me in submitting
    to my husband.

    The next day, though, when a neighbor asked me why in the world
    we were making such a crazy decision, I shouldn't say "Well, I
    know it's crazy, but for some reason Kevin wants to, and so I
    am going to go along with it."  That wouldn't be submitting to 
    Kevin or showing respect for his leadership.  Instead, I would
    need to get things resolved in my own heart so that I could 
    truthfully say, "We looked at it together, and the decision we 
    made as a couple was to go, for the following reasons..."

Knowing Kate takes me this seriously doesn't make me domineering.
Instead, it makes me take my responibilities to her seriously.
It also gives me the confidence to lead without worrying about 
impressing her with my spirituality or maintaining my macho image :-)

Kevin Megill
kmm@ector.cs.purdue.edu
KEVIN_MEGILL@dsu1.dsu.NoDak.edu

P.S.  Do we really live by these standards?  Not as much as we
should, of course.  But our marriage has sure seemed easy --
it's been a real delight -- through our 7 1/2 years so far.
Some of that may be that we haven't faced real trials, but at
least a little I trace to the functioning of headship in our
marriage.