_PNG.png)
trust me. my goal is not to be controversial today. my goal is stronger, healthier marriages. that’s it.
according to scripture, i am the head of wanda. scripture says it. i believe it.
for the husband is the head of the wife as christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the savior. ephesians 5:23
even though that’s the only place in the whole bible that says that the husband is the head of the wife, i still believe it. the goal throughout my lifetime, as the head of wanda, has been to understand that title properly and biblically, and live accordingly.
the “traditional” explanation of headship (the one i was taught by my church and the one that is held by most conservative, evangelical churches) is that the husband is the spiritual leader of his wife and family. hey, i don’t have a problem owning up to spiritual leadership. i’m a pastor. i have sold out and dedicated my life to leading people in their spiritual journies and being responsible for the care and equipping of the body of christ for life and ministry. i don’t shy away from the responsibility of spritual leadership.
but i have two observations, though, regarding applying the concept of spiritual leadership to the word head. bear with me.
the first is a general one. bible interpretors have always had to work hard not to apply modern word definitions to first century concepts. the discipline of sound interpretation always focuses on what the original writers and hearers would have understood the word to mean…in their context…before we place more modern or culturally relevant definitions to those concepts.
practically, what that means to me is this: our culturally modern definition of the word head immediately conjures up the idea of leadership, ownership, boss, president, executive, responsibility, chief decision-maker, and the like. i’m not sure that definition is exactly what the apostle paul had in mind when he used head to define my relationship with wanda.
second, the definition of head actually appears right in the text, and traditionalists pretty much ignore it…favoring the more “culturally relevant” definition. paul is clear what it means for the husband to be the head of the wife:
husbands, love your wives, just as christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. in this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. he who loves his wife loves himself. after all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as christ does the church– for we are members of his body. ephesians 5:26-30
my role, as wanda’s head, is to love her…which means to always place her needs above my own. to serve her and give my life to her. to deliberately and willingly lay aside what i want in favor of what she needs. according to this passage, she does not exist to cater to my dreams, my career, my interests…but rather, mine to hers. her well being is to be my only focus…to help her become everything that god has called her to be. it is my calling to affirm her and graciously submit my best interests to hers. period.
if you want to define leader as servant, i’m all over the concept of being the spiritual leader. but leader does not have to be defined as decision-maker, boss, “i’m-out-in-front…you-follow-me”, the responsible party. that’s cultural. and not necessarily spiritual.
what do you think our marriages would look like if husbands actually took the words of the apostle paul seriously? what do you think our marriages would look like if husbands actually followed the example of jesus… instead of the examples of corporate ceo’s, politicians, bosses and modern leaders…when it comes to defining the meaning of head?
men, we have a long way to go…
Comments