Manhood vs. Grama?
It's my day to post on Tapestry today. Here's what I said:
In the thirty-three years since I said “I do,” I’ve heardmany messages and read lots of books on marriage. And if I’ve heard and readone thing about the job of the husband, it’s that “provider” is one of his keyroles.
The proof-text for this has been, without exception, 1Timothy 5:8—“If a man does not provide for his own, especially his own family,he has denied the faith, and he is worse than an infidel.” Five male pronounsmake it clear: providing is his job. I’ve even heard some say that a wife whoseincome exceeds that of her husband’s threatens his sense of manhood. (Suchfragile manhood these people think men have!)
Here’s the problem. When I took Greek, I discovered that 1Timothy 5:8 contains allgender-neutral pronouns. It goes more like this: If someone does not providefor one’s own, especially one's own family, that person has denied the faithand is worse than an unbeliever.”
Once I made that revealing observation, I took a closer lookat the passage. And to my astonishment, I discovered it was weighted towardchildren and grandchildren, and even more so toward women. The context is not marriage or manhood or leadership, butcaring for widows. And at the end of the passage, the author says this: “If a believing woman has widows….” In aworld with no nurses or nursing homes, the most natural person to bathe andfeed an infirm matron would have been her daughter, granddaughter, and/ordaughter-in-law. With this in mind, read the passage again:
1 Tim. 5:3 Honor widows who are truly in need. 5:4 But if awidow has children or grandchildren, they should first learn to fulfill theirduty toward their own household and so repay their parents what is owed them.For this is what pleases God. 5:5 But the widow who is truly in need, andcompletely on her own, has set her hope on God and continues in her pleas andprayers night and day… 5:8 But if someone does not provide for one’s own,especially one’s own family, that person has denied the faith and is worse thanan unbeliever…. 5:16 If a believing woman has widows in her family, let herhelp them. The church should not be burdened, so that it may help the widowswho are truly in need.
After traveling outside of the US, I made a furtherdiscovery. Only in a context of relative wealth would anyone interpret 1Timothy 5:8 as telling a woman to guard her husband’s manhood in the provisiondepartment. In a poor, agrarian society, if her chicken sales exceed his beefsales, the Christian family rejoices over God’s provision. The husband evenpraises her as a P-31 kind of woman!
As I learned more about the Industrial Revolution and therise of the middle class, I saw the roots of our misguided interpretation. Whena man went off to the factory, it became the mark of success to leave behind astay-at-home wife. Her presence at home became cause for respect. And for mostfamilies that set-up worked best as the ideal (though most did not obtain it).But it crept into our thinking as the “biblical” ideal.
We need to rethink this one. The goal of marriage isoneness, not conformity to the standard of a materialistic culture.
At the school where I teach, couples often decide that shewill work and provide health insurance benefits for her family while he studiesfull-time, gets the kids to school, and makes dinner. Two people mutuallydecide how they can best use their resources to glorify the Lord. What men andwomen of God!
We can discuss whether God calls husbands to be the primaryproviders for their families over a lifetime. But let’s quit using 1 Timothy5:8 as our proof-text. In viewing these words of Paul as gender-specific advicefor husbands, we miss an essential application for men, women, children andgrandchildren alike: do the holy work of honoring our aged family members. Incaring for them we prove that we believe, and in the process, we take a loadoff the church and free up resources to aid those who are alone in the world.