"What is manhood? If you ask conservative Christians, some will say that mature manhood is a 'sense of benevolent responsibility to lead, provide for and protect women.' This definition, drafted by John Piper, is just that--a definition. In other words, it's not a quote from Scripture. Nowhere does the Bible say that God designed men to be leaders, providers and protectors of women. Nor does the Bible say, as Piper furthermore does, that women are designed by God 'to affirm, receive, and nurture the strength and leadership of worthy men.'
I respect John Piper as a brother in Christ. I also recommend his other books. But I do not affirm his definitions of masculinity and femininity . It's good for men to be leaders and for fathers to provide for and protect their families. It's godly for wives, as he puts it, to nurture the strength and leadership of their husbands. I benefited from having a stay-at-home mother and a father who provided for me. For a mother to be at home caring for the kids and a father to be present leading, protecting and providing for the family is a marvelous approach, if it fosters genuine love and gratitude. But it's just one model and it's not the only way to function biblically.
I don't question Piper's intentions. To me, it's evident that he's a fervent man of God who, like Wayne Grudem, truly wants nothing more than for Christians to be biblical in their relationships at home. But it concerns me, even so, that Piper's definitions guide people to think in terms of making it their goal to strive for 'biblical manhood and womanhood.' The Bible never commands us to strive for mature masculinity or mature femininity. Instead, the Word of God calls people to become like Christ. The right question is not 'Am I fulfilling my call to become a biblical man or a biblical woman?' The right question is 'Am I imitating Christ?' 11
I am also concerned that Piper's definition (at least of femininity) leaves it to the woman to decide whether or not the man's strength and leadership is worthy enough to be affirmed. As Piper explains it, 'Mature femininity... is discerning in what it approves.' Thus every man, according to Piper's plan, is subject to the test of earning a woman's approval. To me, that doesn't make sense. How can he say that men are leaders of women, if women are endowed with the prerogative to decide if men's leadership is worthy?
The Bible includes no such prerogative for women. On the contrary, the Bible says something quite different. To begin with, it never tells the woman that it's her responsibility to 'affirm the leadership' of her husband if he is 'worthy.' In fact, the Bible doesn't even say that the husband is her leader. There is no commandment that says, "Husbands, lead your wives.' The commandment, instead, is for husbands to love their wives as themselves (Ephesians 5:33). The Bible says that the wife is responsible to submit to her husband (Ephesians 5:24). But it also says that it is her responsibility--regardless of her husband's behavior--to see to it that she respects her husband (Ephesians 5:32). In other words, respect for a husband is not a feminine option. Just as Abigail in the Old Testament respected her husband Nabal, so every wife is commanded by God to respect her husband too, even if his conduct is foolish (1 Samuel 25). According to Scriptures, a wife's respect for the husband depends not on the husband but rather on the wife...
...The most ironic thing is that although Piper sees men as women's leaders, he charges women--not men--with the final responsibility of making sure that men 'feel' manly. Anytime a husband starts to doubt himself as a man or feels that his manhood has been violated by a woman's expression of strength, Piper says it's her responsibility to figure out a way to adjust...
...From the time they are boys, men are challenged to attain manhood. Their consciences are trained by society and church and also by women such as myself. Every time I long for my husband to sweep me off my feet so that I don't have to walk the difficult path of Christlike suffering, in essence I am asking him to prove that he is a man so that I don't have to prove that I am a Christian.
When Jim and I were first married, I wanted him to be my Superman. I didn't like it when he felt afraid. I wanted him to rescue me from my fears and not have any fears of his own. My picture of marriage called for me to be human and for him to be superhuman. For me to be vulnerable, and for him to be invulnerable. I expected our marriage to be a comforting refuge where I would be held safe in the arms of my hero and where he would be admired by me. Jim would be Zorro, and I'd be Cinderella. And we would serve Christ in our home.
I am on a journey of repenting from my worldly view of marriage. I am letting go of my selfish expectations. I am surrendering my selfish desire to feel sorry for myself when my husband doesn't save me from my fears. I am in the process of learning to accept the full responsibility for my stuff. And through it all, I am discovering a new vision of marriage, one that's based on love instead of fantasy.
That's my story. As for Piper, he does not equate manhood with being macho. His objective, I believe is to prompt Christian men to be responsible. 'At the heart of mature masculinity,' he says, 'is a sense of benevolent responsibility to lead, provide for and protect women.'
If all men everywhere adhered to this definition the world would be a far better place. If men were esteemed as the caretakers of women, the world would then embrace the tacit claim that women are worth being taken care of. As a result, there would no longer be any wife battering, or sex trafficking, or sexual molestation from males to females. Mothers would be assisted financially by the fathers of their children, and husbands would spend a lot more time at home. If all men would commit to follow Piper's way, the cultures of the world would be renewed.
But it wouldn't solve the issues. Instead, another problem would arise. The rest of the world would face the same problem that many Christians in the United States now face. Though Piper's definition of manhood is congenial toward women, it fails women. It also inevitably fails men. Christian men are continually being taught to measure themselves against women. Instead of being trained to be macho, men at church are trained to establish their identity in terms of how they rank against women.
11 As my friend Lydia puts it, 'The right question for people is to ask What does Christ look like in a mother of two children? What does Christ look like in a teenage boy? What does Christ look like in all the particulars that make me me ?" -pgs 85-90
- Sarah Sumner, P.H. D.
Sumner, Sarah. Men And Women In The Church. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2003.
No comments:
Post a Comment