In Search of Male Leadership: The Logical Inconsistency of Defining a Man’s Initiative in One Way and a Woman’s in Another

Recently I attended a conference on the theology of marriage hosted by Denver Seminary. Over lunch I had a brief conversation with one of the presenters, a megachurch pastor and chair of the theology department at a school in another state. 

We were talking about whether the differences between men and women have to do with leading and following or with something else. My discussion partner explained that he does lead his wife and that this is a very important aspect of manhood in general and his manhood in particular, since he views himself as the priest of his home. As an example of his leadership, he mentioned that he often says to his wife, “Let’s pray.” She usually does the praying, he noted, since she is better at it than he. But his point was that he is doing the leading by suggesting they pray.

This man’s wife is a college professor who also presented a paper at the conference. Obviously intelligent, capable, and accomplished, she was every bit as thoughtful and engaging as her husband. By all appearances the couple is happy and has worked out their relationship in a mutually satisfying way.

Frankly, though, I finished lunch scratching my head trying to figure out how a husband’s suggesting prayer is an example of male leadership. I wondered if it would be leadership if his wife was the one who proposed they pray or if he would call it a suggestion. Or would he describe his wife’s initiative as influence or even support for his leadership? Is making the suggestion to pray a role that only men may fill, though women are free to do most of the praying?

Mostly I’m perplexed by the many explanations of male leadership in marriage that I hear from those who promote a hierarchical view of things. The concept of “male authority” is easier to grasp, since it means a man is supposed to do what he thinks is right when there’s a disagreement. The husband should decide because that’s the way God set things up.

I find the notion of male leadership harder to pin down. Though I understand that most hierarchicalists connect leadership with initiative, my question is why this is viewed as a male trait.

Another example I ran across recently was propounded by a woman. She explained that a few weeks into her marriage her husband asked her to get up early and make breakfast for them. She didn’t see the point and resisted for years. 

After she finally gave in she realized how much starting their day together enhanced their marriage and family life. Now, she writes, she sees that her husband was “leading” her all along but she was refusing to follow that leadership. She goes on to explain how honoring others is a basic Christian principle since God’s word tells us to love our neighbor and look out for the interests of others, so deferring to her husband in this matter should not be considered strange. [1]

I have no argument with applying ideas of honoring others and loving our neighbors to marriage; I have been arguing for as much for some time. Of course we should defer to our spouse just as we are called to defer to other members of the body of Christ. A Christian couple is first of all brother and sister in Christ, after all, so all the principles of Christian community attend first and foremost within marriage. The point of those teachings, however, is that they go both ways. 

Yet here I have pretty much the same question I had with my first example: If the wife had been the one who knew the value of eating breakfast together and had asked her husband to join her for the morning meal, would that be leadership? Or would her initiative be defined as support, influence, or even helping her husband fulfill his leadership role? Or, let’s say he wasn’t interested, perhaps because he simply wasn’t used to eating in the morning or was anxious to get on the road. Would her request be considered nagging, especially if she asked him repeatedly as her husband had of her?

Let’s go a step farther: Would it be leadership if the wife asked her husband to make the meal because her employment required a lengthy commute but his did not? Or would it be considered inappropriate for her to ask him to cook or even just sit down to breakfast, especially if she knew it was something he did not want to do?

In other words, is a particular behavior “leadership” when it arises from a man and something else when it comes from a woman?

However male leadership may be defined by hierarchicalists, apparently Christian men aren’t doing it. Another presenter at the marriage conference said that over his forty years of pastoral ministry women complaining of passive husbands outnumbered those who were dealing with abusive ones “a hundred to one.” 

His point was that the real problem with men is not abuse, but that they are not stepping up. We should never discourage men from being the leaders in their homes just because an extremely small number of husbands take things too far, he seemed to be saying. Vastly more Christian men are passive than domineering and abusive.

What is going on with this scenario? For forty years this pastor taught men that it is their “role” to take the lead yet, at least as far as their wives can discern, they are not doing so. Why is that? Are Christian men passive and irresponsible? Is something out of kilter with guys or have we simply set ourselves up for failure by feeding husbands and wives a tale of “male leadership” that eludes definition? 

I agree that men should step up and take initiative. No one is saying they shouldn’t. Neither is anyone saying that wives shouldn’t get behind their husbands. Good wives love it when their husbands step up and love supporting that initiative. Those aren’t the issues.

The issue here is why so many wives complain their husbands aren’t taking initiative and whether it’s more a matter of misdirected expectations. My thought is that the Evangelical emphasis on male leadership over the past generation may have had the opposite effect, paralyzing men and keeping them from working out life’s problems in partnership with their wives. 

If experience is any indicator, men are more likely to step up in marriages characterized by mutuality than in those that follow rigid gender roles. I don’t know if it’s because their comfort level is increased when they don’t feel the pressure to make so many “final” decisions, or if they simply have a greater sense of accountability to their wife in a marriage of equals. 

Either way, my experience is that men take more initiative – sometimes a lot more – when they let go of being the one and only leader. Wives do better too, stepping up, solving problems, and working together with their husbands rather than burdening them with unreasonable demands or even fighting against them. And, before long, the couple has settled into a comfortable pattern of initiative-taking that leaves neither spouse overburdened or overlooked.

Tim and Anne Evans, after counseling hundreds of struggling couples for decades, agree that this over-emphasis on male leadership may actually be the cause of a lot of male passivity.

Many church leaders default to telling husbands they do not lead right, pray enough, parent the kids well, lead in devotions enough, manage the finances effectively, or provide the spiritual cover they are responsible to provide over their wives. 

Our experience is many husbands get frustrated and desert – they may check out emotionally, physically, spiritually – and others just give up. Regrettably, some husbands get so discouraged, they reach the conclusion that I’ll never be the spiritual leader my wife wants and church leaders say I’m supposed to be, so why bother? And they invest their time and energy in other interests.[2]

Part of the reason may be that societal changes have made a man’s risk-free exercise of leadership obsolete. In previous generations a man could walk in the door, announce he had resigned from the Navy or was running for political office, as former President Jimmy Carter did, without it once crossing his mind that he ought to consult his wife before taking such steps. A man could simply do what he thought best, no questions asked.

That world has long since vanished, at least in the West. Nowadays wives are more likely to speak their minds, push back, and resist decisions that do not consider their needs or have not been properly thought through. In his book A Full Life Jimmy Carter says that he now finds it inconceivable that it did not occur to him to consult Rosalynn before giving up a good income to try to make a living out of farming or forever sacrificing his family’s privacy by going into public service. 

The challenge for men with the way things are now is that taking initiative is accompanied by deep risks: the risk of his wife’s resistance, the risk of his wife having a better idea, the risk of her unhappiness about what he wants to do, the risk of being viewed as incompetent. Yet the Bible never teaches that the husband has to have all the answers or is the only one who ought to be hearing from God and suggesting solutions. We have put way too much pressure on men and restricted women far too much. 

Through their highly successful marriage counseling service Tim and Anne Evans have discovered that couples do best when they understand their union as one of co-leadership. They base this view of marriage on two facts: the dominion mandate was given equally to the man and woman in Gen. 1:28, and male dominance only comes into play after the fall.

Let’s go back to my final example and turn the tables one last time: What if it happens to be the wife who is being passive and irresponsible? Would her passivity, her refusal to pull her weight, take initiative, or solve problems be considered a lack of leadership? Or would it be identified as a lack of submission to her husband’s leadership? 

I suspect that for those who promote a hierarchical view of marriage her behavior would never be considered a lack of leadership. Rather, it would somehow or other be tied to submission. 

So there you go. Looking at typical illustrations, my search for a definition of male leadership seems futile. Exactly the same behavior is defined in opposite terms, depending on whether it arises from a woman or a man. Though I try, I cannot make sense of the concept from the examples I am given.

And I find that fully illogical.

[1] Emily Jensen, “Wives, Honor Your Husband’s Preferences,” The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, November 13, 2015, https://cbmw.org/topics/marriage-public-square/wives-honor-your-husbands-preferences/

[2] Tim and Anne Evans, Together: Reclaiming Co-Leadership in Marriage (Colorado Springs: Real Life MInistries, 2014) 155-56.

What I Learned from the "Perfect" Wife: Sarah, Abraham and 1 Peter 3:1-6

I’ve mentioned this here before, but my marriage went through a radical transformation a number of years ago. For a long time my husband and I tried to work out our relationship according to traditional “biblical marriage” teachings, with him “leading” and me “submitting.”

We were committed to this path since we thought it was the only “biblical” way, even though we ended up far more frustrated than happy. Then about ten years ago we went through a crisis that brought all of our unhealthy relational patterns to the surface. At that point we either had to figure out how to change or face the possibility of losing everything we had worked toward for so long.

After a couple of years of struggle we did end up successfully changing not only our marital dynamics but also our fundamental conception of what a Christian marriage ought to look like. A big part of this process entailed my realizing how I had listened to the wrong voices and embraced the wrong ideas. I found it difficult to change, but in the end it was more than worth it. My life, my marriage, and my heart have been transformed in a beautiful way.

Just not in the way you might assume. Continue reading “What I Learned from the "Perfect" Wife: Sarah, Abraham and 1 Peter 3:1-6”

It’s Good to Be a Woman Day Retreats

A few years ago I was asked to join a team of young women who hoped to reach the women of their generation with a conference designed specifically for them. Feeling that the women’s ministry of our church catered to an older generation, these young leaders were hoping to capture the hearts of their peers.

What struck me that day was what these women hoped to communicate through their conference. A lot of ideas were knocked about but in the end it came down to this: our generation needs to believe it’s good to be a woman. Some of those present expressed the idea that it can be easier to think it’s good to be a woman out in the world than it is in the church. Once a woman becomes a Christian, a whole new set of expectations and limitations is placed upon her that can cause her to doubt the goodness of being female.

We’re at a point in time when women need to know that God created a good thing when he created woman. Rightly understood, what the Bible teaches about womanhood is empowering and freeing. Women are both fully human and fully woman. Women fully represent God in his eternal essence, just as men do. Women also reflect humanity as the object of God’s affection.

There is a lot of confusion in current Christian teaching on gender and “gender roles,” however. In some cases fundamental human qualities are ascribed to men alone, leaving the impression that women are somehow a bit less than fully human. In others, differences between women and men are minimized or ignored. And, very often, the fact that a husband and wife point to the greater “marriage,” that of Christ and the church, is taken to mean all sorts of things that it does not.

For this reason I have launched my It’s Good to Be a Woman day retreats.

Continue reading “It’s Good to Be a Woman Day Retreats”

A Husband is Not His Wife’s Shepherd

The Bible compares the relationship of a husband and wife to that of Christ and the church, implying that a human marriage is somehow a head-body connection like that of Jesus and his bride. We read that a man is the “head” of his wife like Christ is the “head” of the church, and we assume we comprehend what is intended. Not only do we know how Christ functions in relation to the church, by leading and directing and providing, but we also understand what it means to be the head of a corporation, head of state, or the head of a household.

It’s as plain as day.

Or is it? Continue reading “A Husband is Not His Wife’s Shepherd”

Are Husbands Supposed to Get Their Wives Ready for Jesus?

A recent article on a very prominent Christian website argued that husbands have a unique responsibility to get their wives ready to meet Jesus. The author explained that he had recently been confronted with the fact that he didn’t challenge his wife enough. He went on to say, through Ephesians 5:25-26, that husbands are called to be “instruments of [God’s] sanctifying work in the lives of their wives.”[1]

I try to stay away from commenting on things I read that I disagree with, recognizing that there is a range of ideas on more than one topic that sincere believers adhere to.

But there are times when the potential harm overcomes my reservations.

This is one of those times.

Continue reading “Are Husbands Supposed to Get Their Wives Ready for Jesus?”

How Manhood Teachings Harm Good Men

I used to be a big proponent of manhood studies, once even convincing my husband to undertake one with our son. Now, however, I wonder if there isn’t a dark side to our well-intentioned efforts to aid men in becoming who God intends them to be.

Christian manhood teachings increasingly stress the leadership role of men, telling guys they are the spiritual leader in their home charged with the task of leading family devotions, hearing from God, and making the final decisions. Continue reading “How Manhood Teachings Harm Good Men”

Paul’s Theology of Gender Part 2: The First Reality

For the next few posts I’m going to focus on the overwhelming majority (96%) of what the Apostle Paul wrote that indicates he believed women and men are the same with respect to their full possession of the image of God. (If you haven’t read the first installment of this series, you may want to check it out before you read on.)

At this point in my life, I’m convinced that Paul believed women are fully and equally human, possessing the same essential human nature as men. I will explain why I believe this by walking you through the books of the New Testament that shed light on Paul’s thoughts, and when I’m finished you can decide if, as Ryan Lochte would say, I’m over-exaggerating. Continue reading “Paul’s Theology of Gender Part 2: The First Reality”

%d bloggers like this: