Defining submission and headship within marriage

2007 March 8
by Tim Chester

We had an interesting discussion at Northern Training today on defining submission within marriage. I confessed that I found it hard to find a definition of the submission required of wives that did not look very similar to the love required of husbands. Yet clearly there must be a difference since they are to be mo delled on the relationship of Christ and the church. At our last Northern Training Institute seminar day we came up with what I think is a helpful formula, but somewhat frustratingly I couldn’t recall this morning during the lecture. Here it is …

  • The wife puts her husband’s will before her own.
  • The husband puts his wife’s interests before his own.

This captures, I think, the similarities in their respective attitudes (since mutual love and mutual submission are commended within the wider body of Christ of which they are members – see 5:2, 21). But it also captures the difference in their roles. It gives the husband a lead role, but a lead role defined by the cross – one which seeks the good of the other rather than self-interest. It also captures how their respective roles correspond to the roles of the church towards Christ and Christ towards the church.

One more point. The ‘formula’ does not say, ‘The wife puts her husband’s will first. The husband puts his wife’s interests first.’ Both of them have a higher allegiance and a higher purpose: to submit to Christ and seek his glory. This means, for example, there will be times when the wife challenges her husband. So a further refinement would be: ‘The wife puts her husband’s will before her own (but not before Christ’s will). The husband puts his wife’s interests before his own (but not before Christ’s interests).’

8 Responses
  1. 2007 March 8

    Tim,

    I wanted to say thank you for this insightful definition. It led to me posting some of my own thoughts on the Ephesians’ verses about husbands and wives on my own blog.

    If you have time to read my post and comment on it, I’d love to hear what you think.

    Yours in His service,

    Andy

  2. 2007 March 9
    Antony Billington permalink

    That’s an enormously helpful observation, and very concisely put. Many thanks.

  3. 2007 March 16
    Mandy permalink

    The thing with formulas is that they reduce a wider concept into an easy repeatable solution. Can you reduce the love to this? How does equality fit within this definition? Men and women are created equal and all are one in Christ. It has been said that ’submission and love are two sides of the same coin.’ Submit to one another is a key verse in this debate surely?

  4. 2007 March 16

    Hi Mandy: As I said in the article, submission and love are very close. But they cannot be synonymous since the throughout is Christ and the church. My relationship to Christ is not a mirror of his relationship with me. Christ does not submit to me! ‘Submit to one another’ is important. But it is not the ‘heading’ of the section on marriage, but the climax to the previous section. Although most English translations hide this, ’submitting to one another’ is one of four participle sub-clauses qualifying the command to be filled with the Spirit (the NIV hides this badly by making it a separate paragraph). Paul says, in effect: ‘Be filled with the Spirit, by speaking to one another … by singing in your hearts … by giving thinks to God … by submitting to one another.’ The husband does not submit to the wife in the same way that the wife submits to the husband. Of course men and women are equal. But equality does not rule out complimentary roles or headship. Otherwise we cannot have a proper doctrine of the Trinity. The persons of the Trinity are equal in terms of their being (their ‘godness’). But the Son subordinates himself to the Father: he puts the will of the Father before his own (John 5:19; 8:28 etc.) This is the point Paul makes in 1 Corinthians 11:3. Biblical teaching on this issue clearly runs contrary to the spirit of our age. But the answer is not to make the Bible conform to our worldview, but to make our worldview conform to that of the Bible – to be counter-cultural. This does not mean, to anticipate the ‘What about …’ scenarios, we must defend all the abuses of male headship over women – quite the opposite! The big issue is what does it mean to to exercise authority. As my earlier blog on marriage and Ephesians 5 tries to show, our problem is we understand authority in the image of Satan’s lie rather than in the image of God’s rule. So we think of authority of repressive and restrictive. But God’s rule is liberating, life-giving and loving. Men believe the lie when they abuse authority and women believe the lie when they reject headship.

  5. 2007 October 27
    James Wilmoth permalink

    Your post is very good, Tim. I would only suggest that you change the order of your formula to conform to the order given in 1 Cor. 7:3,4. In that text, it is clear that the husband is to lead in rendering kindness (or putting his wife’s needs before his own, as you put it) while the wife is to lead in submitting her body to her husband’s control (or putting his will before her own, as you put it). You might disagree, but I have to believe that the order of “events” in 1 Cor. 7:3,4 is very important.

    Just a thought!

  6. 2007 December 15
    Idetrorce permalink

    very interesting, but I don’t agree with you
    Idetrorce

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. More on submission and headship « Tim Chester
  2. Workman's Toolbox « Unashamed Workman

Comments are closed for this entry.