Hypotasso
Nothing like learing a little Greek. The subject of last weekends message was “control” and we looked at what Paul has to say about resolving control issues in our marriage. He writes in Ephesians 5 that the way to resolve the power struggles we experience in our marriage is through mutual submission. The word for “submit” in the originial Greek is “hypotasso.” (Hoop-o-tas-o) It means “to voluntarily give in,” “to cooperate,” or “bear a burden.” Think about how different marriage would be if we really lived with a mindset of mutual submission. If we voluntarily gave in and put the needs of our spouse ahead of our needs. If we cooperated the way God created us to, as coequals with complimentary roles. If we beared the burden to assure our family lived according to God’s principles. If we lived that way do you think our marriages would be more stable, more lasting, more enjoyable, and more loving? I call that a “no brainer.” Paul was definitely right when he said the path to oneness and unity in marriage is throught mutual submission.
Hi Jason,
I enjoyed your message, mostly. In our couples’ small group last night we discussed this concept of the wife stepping back and “allowing the husband to lead.” In general we thought this to be off the mark. Not only did the men not necessarily want to lead all the time, the wives in our group were put off by the suggestion; especially on the heels of the mutual submission discussion. Doesn’t it seem to be in direct conflict? And what makes the man more suitable to lead than the woman? Why should it even be one or the other…
By the way, why doesn’t Bob blog?
Barb,
I’m glad you said something, since I had a lot of the same feelings and wondered if anyone else did. I think it’s true that a lot of times people need some space in order to grow into a leadership role, but the description of mutual submission didn’t sound very mutual to me. I think that mutual submission imples mutual leadership as well. Both spouses need to help each other grow into mutually shared leadership roles. I also feel that wives deserve a far richer vision of what their role can and should be, and often is, in fact.
I think the underlying problem is that we often equate leadership with exercising authority and lording over others. It’s not enough just to allow others to have input while we insist on being the one to make a decision. Christ explicitly forbade this approach to leadership. Instead He stated and demonstrated that leadership is based on servanthood. Christ-like leadership based on servanthood seeks to enhance the leadership potential and opportunities of others. Non-Christ-like leadership tends to reserve certain perogatives for oneself rather than share them in a mutual arrangement. Those with true leadership capabilities will have more than enough perogatives granted to them freely by those they serve.
Ironically, when I think of the big spiritual influences in my life, they seem to have come far more often from women than from men even though it has usually been men who have held the “official” leadership titles and positions. These external trappings seem to have clouded the picture of what Christlike leadership is all about.
Barb and Eric,
Sorry for the delayed repsonse but with the Relevance conference last week like got a little crazy for a bit.
My recommendation for wives to step back and allow the husband room to lead is does not mean that the wife is not supposed to exercise her leadership gift if she has the gift. My wife is a leader through and through, yet she’s also a good follower. She “hypotassos” very well. We cooperate very well together, mutually submitting to one another. I think we all know a couple where the wife does the lording of her leadership over the husband (John and Kate + 8 comes to mind). I wasn’t suggesting that the husband gets to call all the shots. That’s not godly leadership, that’s dictatorship. Regardless if the husband or wife has been gifted with leadership both still need to practice mutual submission.
One more thing, Barb, the reason Bob doesn’t blog is because he simply doesn’t have the time to devote to it. The demands on his time are such that he’s made the decision that if he’s going to keep the main thing the main thing, then there’s no time for blogging. If he did then something else would have give and Eagle Brook may suffer becasue of it.
Jason,
Thanks for the clarification. I agree with what you’re saying here.
While I’m here I’d like to thank you and your non-blogging partners for yet another great message series. I heard a lot of positive and enthusiastic comments from others as well. Out of all the great points that were made, the one that helped me the most this time around was the one about bids. That was very usable and helpful information.
Jason,
I agree that it is not “politically correct” for some people to accept the fact that the man is supposed to be the leader in the family. But, people cannot re-write the Bible or start making it more to their personal liking. God wanted the man to be the leader for a reason and we should accept that and try to live the way God wants us to live. I admit that at times I think that I am a better leader than my husband, but for the most part, my husband is the head of the household. He often jokes that although he is the head of the household, I am the neck and I can turn the head in any direction I choose.
God Bless,
Wendy