Kids, youth, Christmas, mission, skiing, ...

We have a packed next few weeks ... and almost everything involves Betty Ann! She has been working very hard for what's coming up these next few weeks, and I encourage you to show her as much support as you can (helping out, words of encouragement, notes, participating in one of the fundraisers, and so on).

The children and youth will be teaching us the Christmas story on Sunday the 21st. I've read the script, and think that they have a very interesting story to bring to us. Also, please join us Christmas Eve at 6:00 PM for our annual Christmas Eve service. This year will be time of traditional carols and celebrating the valuable gift of God sending His Son to us.

The youth have a Christmas party / progressive dinner planned for Sunday night - thanks to all the families who have opened their homes for part of the meal.

On the 31st, many of our youth are leaving on their mission trip / ski trip. They are taking one day of their trip to pack nutritious meals for the hungry around the world, and then spending some time on the slopes for a good winter break.

As you can see, Betty Ann has her plate full! Please help lighten her load with prayer, encouragement, and helping out.

One important event outside of Betty Ann's direct leadership is the Angel Tree project. We are raising money again this Christmas to provide financial support for the teachers of the Friends of Christ orphanage in Ahero, Kenya. Please take one of the envelopes, prayerfully consider an amount to give, and then put it into the brown offering box. As money is raised, we add ornaments to the Christmas tree in the sanctuary - a bit of a reversal of our normal method of taking ornaments off of the tree as we support more.

Headship Questions, Part 4

Last week, I said that I should take a "cream puff" question about headship to give myself a break on these tough questions our men have put together. Well, so much for "cream puff" - this week's question is another doozy.

Question: If the wife takes action that is against the will of the covenant head, what should the response of the covenant head be to his wife?

This is one of the "real life" questions. The theory is understood, but in real life, things don't always go the way we studied about. In fact, things almost never go the way we study about.

Let's begin with the enormous assumption in this question - that the husband is doing a decent job of maintaining the covenant head responsibilities. If the husband is doing a miserable job upholding his role of leadership, then he has little to no right to focus on the wife failing in her role. Yes, faulty people can accurately assess what other faulty people should be doing, but in this particular case, we're talking about the covenant head, and unless he's providing some decent leadership, he forfeits his rights to insist on good follower-ship.

The wife's submission is submission to the husband's headship. (Recall our definition of submission: "A wife's submission is her commitment to the success of her husband as the covenant head.") She is responsible for this submission even when he's failing - she can be committed to his success whether or not he's committed to it. However, if the husband is failing in his role, I would say that he has no clout at all to insist on his wife fulfilling her role to submit to his non-existent leadership! She answers to the Lord for how she submits, but he of all people has no credibility to be the one to press her on the matter.

But if our assumption is correct, that the husband is doing a decent job, then we can explore what he should do when she still insists on rejecting her role to submit.

The man is instructed in Ephesians 5:25 "Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her." This does not say, "Husbands, rule over your wives," or, "Husbands, make sure your wives submit like I told them to in verse 22." The man's headship does not mean that he tries to force the wive to fulfill her role. He is told to love her, and to love her in the same way that Jesus sacrificially loves the church. He is to love her even when she's not submitting, just like the wife is to be submitted to the husband's success as the covenant head, even when he's falling down on the job.

A man must answer this tough question by asking, "How does Jesus love the church when she doesn't follow His leadership?" We know this happens, so how does Jesus, the perfect Covenant Head, handle it? He never stops loving her, He never stops advocating on her behalf before the Father, He never stops providing leadership, He never leaves her nor forsakes her (Hebrews 13:5), and He never fails to offer God's Word. In other words, when the church refuses to follow His leadership, He provides more leadership! But He never forces her to submit against her will.

There were three things we said the covenant head does, and he needs to continue doing those things when the wife rebels.

1. Stand before God on behalf of the family, and stand before the family on behalf of God. Even when she rebels, the husband must be persistent in prayer, facing God and praying on behalf of his wife. He must also lovingly, gently make sure that God's Word is clearly provided. He does not beat her over the head with the Bible, but if she is unaware of the biblical teachings, he must make it available in an appropriate way. In effect, he is facing her on behalf of God.
2. Stand in the breech between danger and his wife. A wife who rejects godly leadership is facing dangers, physical, emotional, and spiritual. It may be by her own choosing, but the husband as the covenant head must provide as much protection as he can. He doesn't need to shield her from every consequence, but he must protect her from forces that would truly harm her. He cannot shrug his shoulders and pretend like he has no responsibility for her well-being.
3. Love his wife as Christ loves the church. This is the primary, unconditional, non-negotiable absolute of being a Christian husband. Our marriages are modeled after the relationship of Christ and the church, and there is no excuse we can offer to let men off the hook from loving their wives. This love is sacrificial, which means it will cost the man to love his wife. He will pay some of the price to restore her, and he should do so willingly. It is how Christ loves the church.

I recommend that you read the book of Hosea, which is a dramatic and prophetic picture from the Old Testament of how Jesus will continue to pursue the church even when she's wayward.

Perhaps the questioner (and the reader!) wants more of a "how to" than this. What are the steps? What can I do to bring my wife around? Men should remember that they do not have the capacity to make their wives "come around." So, rather than dwell on things we cannot accomplish, focus on these principles, and let God do God's work:

• Never stop providing covenant head leadership.
• Never stop loving your wife as Christ loves the church.

Headship Questions, Part 3

NOTE: This blog allows readers to make comments. You are more than welcome to make comments on any post, so long as you are respectful. You can even post a different conclusion, if you like. I only ask that whatever anyone posts (including me), that it is an honest effort to represent Scripture and is written in a spirit of kindness.

Let me continue with the series of questions about headship that were generated at the Men's Retreat. If you've missed parts 1 and 2, then scroll down or look in the archives to find those questions and answers.

The next questions is a toughie! If as covenant head I do everything to guard against danger and instruct the Word of God and my family still chooses to not follow the way they should, will God hold their disobedience against me?

This question arises from two theological thoughts that seem to be at odds with one another. One the one hand, we said in our series that the man stands before God doubly accountable - he is accountable for himself, as are all people, but as the Covenant Head, he is also accountable for the family. On the other hand, from what we know of God, it doesn't seem right to hold someone accountable for someone else's sin, especially if that person does everything he can to be a godly influence in the other person's life. These two ideas seem to conflict, and so we have an excellent, perceptive question.

My first reaction is to say, "Oh, no, God won't hold you accountable if you've done everything you can." That only seems fair and right.

But I have two problems with this response. First, it seems to unravel the entire idea of being doubly accountable, which is the foundation of our headship model. It certainly doesn't pack any punch to say that the man is doubly accountable for himself and the family ... as long as the family does well. That lacks any kind of significance.

Second, this answer doesn't fit with the example we've chosen to understand the principles of headship, namely Moses up on the mountain while the people of Israel committed the sin of the golden calf. Moses was not only completely innocent of the sin of the golden calf, but he was also occupied doing the exact thing God needed him to do in order to be the Covenant Head - he was up on the mountain to receive the Ten Commandments. You can't find a better model for our question: If as covenant head I do everything to guard against danger and instruct the Word of God and my family still chooses to not follow the way they should, will God hold their disobedience against me?

Moses was certainly doing everything he was supposed to do to guard and instruct, and they still chose to follow a different path (with Aaron, the "substitute Covenant Head", allowed them to do). And yet, Moses was still held accountable for the covenant group. God called on Moses to answer for them.

But, notice something very important in this story (Exodus 32). God laid the situation before Moses, starting in verse 7. In verse 10, God gives Moses an option: "Leave me alone, so that my anger may burn against them and I can destroy them." As we discussed in the series, God was putting before Moses two options: leave him alone (in other words, fail to stand up as the Covenant Head), or the second option, which was implied, don't leave him alone (in other words, stand up as the Covenant Head and intercede on behalf of the covenant group).

Moses was accountable for their sin, but God's offer was to mete out the punishment where the punishment was due - on the people, not Moses. As the Covenant Head, Moses would not pay the price of their sin, but he still was the one who was accountable to God - he answered to God even though they were the ones who sinned. Moses' did not say, "I've got nuthin' to do with this." Instead, he chose to be the Covenant Head and stand before God to represent the sinful people, advocating on their behalf (which he does starting in verse 31).

God will not make the Covenant Head pay for the sin of the family - each person is accountable to God for his own sin. But the Covenant Head is accountable in the sense that his responsibility is to advocate to God on behalf of the family and to advocate to the family on behalf of God. If they sin and he's perfectly innocent, he's not off the hook. He still has a seriously important responsibility to intercede, teach, lead, pray for, guide, coach, and correct. He has that unique set of responsibilities as the Covenant Head.

Also consider Christ as the Covenant Head. In this case, the Covenant Head did in fact pay the price of the sins of the covenant group. He was completely innocent. He had given us more than enough instruction and guidance. And yet we, the human race, still "did not follow the way that we should." And Jesus was the one accountable to God for our sin. In this case, the Covenant Head paid the price himself! But, of course, he chose to do so voluntarily. That's what's so amazing about this covenant!

So, men, you are not off the hook for the family's sin, even when you've done absolutely everything to be the Covenant Head (although, I seriously doubt a husband ever did absolutely everything he could to lead his family). That doesn't mean you pay for their sin, but it does mean you have a holy obligation before God when the family sins, even though you are virtually innocent.

This means that when the family sins, a real Covenant Head doesn't say, "I've got nuthin' to do with this." A real Covenant Head says, "I will stand."

Maybe in the next blog I'll pick a cream puff question to give myself a break!

Happy Thanksgiving!

May the Lord grant you all the joy of being thankful!

When you think about it, being thankful is a joy. Having a heart of gratitude is enjoyable! There is a great personal benefit from being thankful for someone else or for what someone has done. When we're thankful, we get a second gift. The first gift is whatever it is we're thankful for, and the second gift is the joy of being thankful.

If we see our response to God as an obligation, then we don't enjoy it so much ... and it's not really thanksgiving. Scripture does exhort us to be thankful, but it never has in mind a begrudging obligation. Scripture merely commands us to do what's truly enjoyable! We have been blessed in many ways - the most important, of course, is the free offer of salvation in Christ. Then, Scripture instructs us to enjoy being thankful for the blessings.

What a great 1-2 punch!

May the Lord grant you all the joy of being thankful!

Headship Questions, Part 2

Continuing on in our series of answering questions about "headship" that came out of our recent men's retreat...

Question 2: Does the definition of submission defined in the sermon create a license for the wife to do what she wants under the auspices of making her husband successful?

This question is based on the definition of submission that we used in the sermon series: A woman's submission is her commitment to the success of her husband in his role as the Covenant Head.

It took a few Sundays to develop this definition, and requires some understanding of the concept of headship in the first place. There's not enough space in this column to develop all that material again, so I refer you to the sermon series itself at http://dublinbiblechurch.org/sermons.html .  The example of Abigail was an extreme example in order to demonstrate the difference between submission and subjection. In that extreme example, Abigail made decisions that gave her husband the best chance to succeed, even if it meant doing something different than what he has already decided.

This question tests the limits of of the model. If women are to be committed to their husbands' success even to point of doing something other than what their husbands say, what's to stop her from just doing as she pleases, willfully disobeying her husband, and all the while claiming the excuse that she's just doing what she thinks is best for his success? Clearly, that is a concern.

Let's distinguish between the model and interpretation of the model. The model is that she is to be committed to her husband's success, not just what she interprets to be in his best interest. If she is truly committed to his real success as the Covenant Head, she is by definition not going take this model as license to do as she pleases. "Doing as she pleases" is neither a commitment to her husband's success nor submission. So, just by definition, she can't truly submit according to the model and use the model to do whatever she wants.

But the practical question is: How can we avoid her abusing the definition and turning it into license? Of course, wanting to "make her" live according to the model comes from an attitude of lording over her, rather than leading her. So, husbands can't "make her" live by the model at all. There must be a different way to help her avoid abusing her role.

The way to avoid the abuse comes down to the wife humbly adopting the biblical model in truth, and not just as a cover to doing as she pleases. This model puts a hefty responsibility on both husband and wife, and we experience problems when either one of them either abuses the responsibilities or just ignores them.

Some will say that we shouldn't teach this model if we can't stop women from abusing the definitions. It's too dangerous, and women might just start doing whatever they want, they say. But just because people might abuse the biblical model doesn't mean we shouldn't teach the biblical model. We don't want to teach a less-than-biblical model just because someone might abuse the truly biblical model.

Furthermore, where are the controls to prevent men from abusing their end of the model? Should we not teach headship if some men will abuse that definition to do as they please? Even if men can abuse their responsibilities, we teach the biblical ideal. The same should hold true for women. What will keep men inside the model is the same thing that will keep women inside the model - humble submission to the Lord and to His definitions of husband and wife.

I must reiterate a point made in the sermon - the cases where the woman actually has to "go Abigail" on her husband and defy his words in order to submit to his success are rare. This is not an option that women need to resort to often. There are many, many options of finding resolutions to problems before the wife is cornered into following Abigail's extreme example. 

They may even be times when the wife needs to avoid "going Abigail" on an issue even if she is clearly right and he is clearly wrong, simply because the "Abigail option" always comes with a price in the relationship. That price may be too high to pay for situations that are not crucial. In Abigail's case, it was a matter of life and death. The level of danger warranted the price of going against the husband's will. However, if the matter is about how much to spend on Christmas presents, the outcome is likely not so crucial that the price of taking the "Abigail option" is worth it.

This model is not a license for women. But it does show that the position of submission is a very important, responsible position that requires a lot of wisdom and humility. Rather than shield women away from their responsibility because they might abuse it, we should empower them to the fullest extent of Scripture - just like we should do for men.

Men, there's only one sure way to avoid having your wife need to "go Abigail" on you. Lead with integrity in a way that serves your family's best interests, according to the biblical model. The only time wives need the "Abigail option" is when we're making decisions that contribute to our failure as the covenant head. Simply make decisions that work for your success as the covenant head, and you will have created the best, most effective safeguard you can against your wife exercising license inappropriately.

Headship Questions, Part 1

At the Men's Retreat last weekend, we generated nearly 50 questions related to the concept of the covenant head and ezer, based on our recent sermon series on being "Men and Women of God." There were a lot of excellent, important questions. There was not nearly enough time to answer all of them. Clearly, the series generated more questions than it answered! The challenge, now, is for us to find the best format to discuss these questions in a way that is most accessible to all the men of DBC. One of those ways will be to discuss a few questions at a time as a Colonnade article / blog.

One of the questions was: When a couple reaches a point of disagreement and there is no way to reach an agreement - at that point, does the wife yield her will to the covenant head?

This is a natural question to flow out of our topic. It is a question we discussed in the Youth Sunday School several weeks ago, and something that our small group also pondered one night.

Let's set up the scenario for purposes of discussion:

• There's a family decision to be made that's important and affects the whole family.
• There are only two choices: "A" and "B". There is no compromise "C" in this scenario. (Clearly, reaching a compromise when possible is very desirable, but I'm taking that possibility out of this picture in order to answer the root question.)
• The husband thinks that "A" is the best option. The wife thinks that "B" is the best option.
• The couple has sought a solution in prayer, through wise counselors, in Scripture, and so on. In other words, they have already done all the things that you're supposed to do in order to make a big decision, and yet they still have different opinions.
• Both have the same level of conviction. It's not like he's 51% sure and she's 99% sure.
  

OK, now that the scenario is set, how do we reach a decision between "A" and "B"?

One possibility is to go with what the husband thinks. After all, he's the covenant head, he's the "tie breaker", and he's the one who answers to God on behalf of the entire family.

Another possibility is to abdicate the husband's responsibility and just go with whatever the wife wants - in this case, "B." Wouldn't that just be easier in the long run? Besides, guys are pretty adaptable to different situations, aren't they?

A third possibility is to do something random, such as flip a coin. The apostles cast lots in order to replace Judas Iscariot, for example.

You might be surprised that I think that the third possibility is the best of the three. But there's a better answer.

The key to understanding this, as one of our own youth so astutely observed, is the fact that the husband will stand before God responsible for the decision. But, this does not automatically mean that we go with option "A" !!! Just because he's accountable doesn't mean that he should choose his own favorite idea. His position before God does not automatically translate to going with his opinion.

What this means is that the buck stops with him, and the decision is his responsibility. He must see to it that "A" or "B" is chosen, and he answers for it. But he is free to choose either "A" or "B", and to bear the consequences of that choice.

No matter what he chooses, however, that decision now becomes his favorite. If he chooses "A", then that's now his favorite (not hard to do - it was his idea!). If he chooses "B", then that becomes his favorite. It becomes his decision and the family's decision, not just "hers." This means that if he chooses "B" and ends up going poorly, as the covenant head, he has forfeited the right to say, "I told you so!" He is responsible for the decision, and being the covenant head means that it is now "his" decision as much as anyone's. So, later casting blame onto the wife is violating the responsibility of the covenant head. He also forfeits the right to say "I told you so" if he chooses "A" and it works out well. "I told you so" creates distance, whereas the covenant head should build oneness.

Likewise, the wife as the ezer (suitable helper) has the responsbility to make the husband's decision her favorite. Again, that's easy if he chooses "B". But if he chooses "A" and it goes poorly, she also forfeits the right to say "I told you so." That's not the role of the ezer. And if he chooses "B" and it goes well, rather than "I told you so," she should be thankful that her covenant head is succeeding in his role.

Why would the husband choose "B" if "A" is what he thought was best? Several reasons. First, he could choose to do so in order to show honor and respect for his wife. Second, he could choose that in order to demonstrate to her that he trusts her, that he doesn't always have to have his way, or that he values her opinions. Third, he could do so because he knows that she is more spiritually sensitive than he is (for example) - choosing to rely on her strengths to make the best possible decision. Whatever the reason, he is still acting as covenant head. He takes the responsibility. It is not abdication because he claims responsibility for it and is the one who bears the brunt of the consequences if things turn out poorly. He answers to God for the decision, which is the opposite of abdication.

So, in those rare instances where the couple has done all the wise things and still can't make a decision, the covenant head must act with the full knowledge that he's responsible for the decision. Sometimes, that means humbly choosing "A", and sometimes that means gracefully choosing "B".

In my experience, this is the rare case. More often, we can't reach decisions because have not fully exercised all the provisions of wisdom God has made available to us: Scripture, prayer, wise counsel, etc. Men, as the covenant head, I strongly urge you to delay using your "final authority" until all paths of wisdom have been exhausted. Often, you can find unity in a decision by seeking the Lord's face together.

Now ... about the coin toss possibility. There's a rather large book that delves into the issue of decision-making, and it deals with the coin toss question. There's too little space here. So ... this is a question I'm going to leave to you to ask me in person when there's time to talk about it. Call it a little bit of blog cruelty.

The Blessing of Prayer

Lynne and I had a fantastic trip to California this past weekend, primarily for the privilege of baptizing and praying for one of our godchildren. But while we were there, we naturally spent time reconnecting with old friends and finding out what God has been doing in their lives. We were overwhelmed by the love and concern that people still have for us, even though we haven't seen many of them for over 5 years.

The greatest blessing, though, was an all-too-brief time of prayer with our hosts and dear friends, Aaron and Amanda. It is our tradition to pray together for one another whenever we get together (and even sometimes over Skype). I must confess that Aaron and Amanda do a better job of making sure we have that time of prayer than I do. That kind of prayer is something that we had as couples almost every week.

As we prayed Sunday night, the sense of God's love, His protection, His sovereignty, His mercy and grace, and His presence was very, very strong. My love and gratitude for Him was rich and almost primal. It was another very special moment with our close friends.

I encourage you to get over that little awkwardness of asking the question and make sure when you spend quality time with your closest of friends that you say, "Let's not leave until we've prayed for each other." Find out the most pressing prayer needs, share your own most pressing needs, and have a relaxed time of prayer that lasts as long as there are prayers to be uttered.

Don't just pray for God to do things to benefit us. Praise, thanksgiving, affirmation of trust, and even confession should be a part of this intimate, shared prayer time.

Meaningful prayers that we share in Small Group or in church settings are necessary and greatly beneficial. But there's another level of shared prayer with your closest Christian friends that goes beyond the norm. If you don't have that, go get it!

It may even be a little awkward at first. But know this - it's not awkward for God.

I believe you'll be amazed at what happens within your spirit when you allow yourself to be abandoned in prayer with other believers you are very close to.