DeoOmnisGloria.com

Jay,
The mainstream press didn't report much on the Pope's visit to Turkey, but it was a huge success for Christianity and the RCC. Most press reports I saw downplayed the significance of the Pope's visit, saying that "this pope is a transitional figure" and his work isn't "as relevant as other popes in the past..." Benedict presented the absolute reason of our faith and walked the walk of an educated, experienced, and wise Christian. His meeting with the Orthodox leader was particularly important. The press travelling with the Pope didn't get airtime because the Pope's team did a great job at settling Muslim histeria following his comments on the importance of reason in faith -- to the dispair of CNN and the BBC.

Nice to see you again Michael O.

Were you able to find any explanations for why Protestants use the phrase "head of the house" instead of "head of the wife"? It seems like in both of our experiences people quote Ephesians 5 extensively even though it uses the phrase "head of the wife". I've checked several Protestant translations and it all says "head of the wife".

My pastor (from the time when I had left the Roman Catholic Church to join a Baptist Church) pointed out this anomaly to me many years ago. It still baffles me that people would quote Ephesians 5 and then use a completely non-biblical phrase in place of a biblical one.

Burnt,

I think you have a valid point in regards to the "head of household" phrase. Are you pointing this out to make an argument regarding the roles of husbands and wives in Christian families? If that is the case, I Peter, Chapter 3 is quite clear, I think.

It's good to be back. Thanks.

Michael O.

Michael O,

You do me too much justice when you say I might have a valid point. I have no idea what my point is. My pastor pointed this out to me years ago and I've been trying to figure out the difference in the two phrases.

The best I've been able to come up with is: yes, there is a difference between head of wife and head of household and that the biblical phrase better defines the husband's role.

We know the headship of husband-wife and parallels the relationship between christ and his bride the church. The headship over the household parallels the relationship between God the Father and we his children.

It would seem then that the differences between head of house vs head of wife should be found analogously in the differences between our relationship with the Father and our relationship with the Son.

The Son says that he reveals everything to us. The Father does not. The Son warns us of danger if we do not repent but he does not actually punish us - that is the domain of the Father. The Son came not to be served but to serve.

So if husbands parallel the relationship with Christ and his Church, some things become forbidden for a husband to do to his wife: to treat her as a servant (and when a woman 'submits' to her husband it means she must allow her husband to serve her as Christ washed the disciple's feet), to keep secrets from her, or to punish her, or to assign her chores.

Note that the father can do these things to the children as "head of house". Also note that the mother can do likewise to the children. Presumably this stems from the two becoming one and so she shares in headship over the house in solidarity with the husband. According to the book of Proverbs, a wise woman can buy and sell property without consulting the husband.

So when it comes to "head of the house" this authority to buy and sell, keep secrets, punish, or assign chores does not rest with the man alone.

But when it comes to "head of the wife" the prohibition aginst keeping secrets, punishing, or assigning chores applies only to the man in relation to his wife.

It is my conclusion, therefore, that the non-biblical phrase "head of the house" must NEVER be understood to describe or define the relationship of husband to wife.

Post a comment