Part 4 - Egalitarian Relationship Not Ruling Authority
Church background will greatly influence the interpretation we place on Ephesians 5:21-33. It’s with some irony that non-Christians have no disagreement with the idea of marriage equality, but the church is divided on theological grounds. Some interesting statistics have shown that couples who live egalitarian relationships have happier, healthier, more intimate, more meaningful, and generally longer-lasting relationships than many Christian counterparts who wrestle with who’s in charge. The Genesis account is compelling in its support for egalitarian marriages, as opposed to the patriarchal example which has continued in all streams of the church, due to a counterfeit religious spirit that set about politicizing the church. The idea of Patriarchal authority has nothing to do with the teaching about headship, which I’ll in my next commentary. That it’s often interpreted this way is arguably responsible for many marriage breakdowns, and also the autocratic style of leadership, that we find in many churches today.
The New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology defines marriage as a co-partnership of equality where "neither may lord it over the other." This represents an egalitarian view of marriage. The egalitarian approach is described as a mutual partnership without forced roles, and characterized by a high degree of intimacy. In contrast, a traditional hierarchical view of marriage has distinct roles with the husband on top, in authority over the wife. Traditionalists claim their view "should find an echo in every human heart." The root problem in marriage, they say, "is the unwillingness of each to accept the role for which he or she was designed." If this statement were true, marriages based on hierarchical relationships should be the happiest and most intimate of all marriages and have the lowest divorce rate. Yet in many countries, born-again evangelical Christian divorce rates are little better, and most appear to ignore both secular and biblical evidence to the contrary. Penn State sociologists, Drs. Alan Booth and Paul Amato have stated, that if a wife changes from a patriarchal marriage to an egalitarian one, she'll be much happier, and much less likely to look for a way out. In the long run, the husbands are happier too.
Why do I believe that God created an egalitarian blueprint for relationships? Because, God created Adam and Eve to be free, in perfect accord, and relationship with himself. Both were without sin, not acquainted with, or motivated by a desire for power and control. They had freedom of choice and were perfectly balanced examples of the character of God. In the creation, no separation of responsibility is defined by power and authority. The narrative suggests that both were equally responsible for looking after God’s creation. In the New Testament, we find Jesus drawing us back to the same egalitarian principles, where the body of believers would be released from the laws that bound and controlled them. They would become a counter-culture to the prevailing religious order of the day (1Cor12:14-31), where there is a separation of authority but this authority would be exemplified in sacrifice. We also find this separation of authority with the gifts, not for our benefit, but for the blessing of others.
For Adam and Eve, the consequences of sin included shame, pride, pain, and separation from God. We’ve suffered the results of sin ever since. For women, this is seen in the pain of childbearing and unfrequented love. A Woman’s desire would be for a relationship, but the husband would “rule” over and crush her, to a greater or lesser degree depending on the culture in question. Gen 3:16: To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain, you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." The word for rule is the “verb”, mashal /maw·shal. A primitive root, occurrences; AV translates as “rule” 38 times, “ruler” 19 times, “reign” eight times, “dominion” seven times, “governor” four times, “ruled over” twice, “power” twice, and “indeed” once. To reign, rule, have dominion, cause to rule, to exercise dominion. This predisposition, introduced by sin, is not what God intended in the beginning, but it’s been the prevailing reality for all relationships between men and women. Men have often wielded power in tribes, families, businesses, corporations, nations and empires. Without wanting to distinguish the good from the bad, gender differences or personal preferences, the fact remains that sin has ruled and controlled the corridors of life, exactly as the Genesis narrative predicted it would. No matter how much we might like to reject the verb “rule” it cannot be interpreted in any way, other than controlling authority. Only through the Holy Spirit can we find a better path that respects the biblical account.
The underlying appetite for sin will never be extinguished. All Christians make conscious choices between doing what is right, and doing what is wrong. Why, because God said, “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Being filled with the Holy Spirit does not remove us from the temptation of sin. Being born again allows God to see past the results of transgression so we might be empowered to make better choices. By changing the way we think and act toward each other, Christ becomes the cornerstone, and the plumbline, by which we test right from wrong.