I just started reading an article for my Trinitarianism class that discusses what the Trinity teaches us about marriage. It had complementarianism in the title, so my hackles rose, and I prepared myself to dislike everything. But the premise is this: the triune God is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. They are unified, equal in authority, while at the same time being distinct Persons with specific roles and functions.
And...I have no problem with that? Ah, the pride of saying I have no problem with who God is. But what I mean is, I have no problem with that in marriage. That's the beauty of the relationship: two people united together, working together, each supplying their own gifts and talents and quirks.
My problem, I guess, is when society decides what those unique roles are. The husband must make more money, the wife must cook and clean and raise kids. Bull crap. Why can't each one bring their jobs to the financial table? Why can't each one participate in the monotony of daily living? And definitely, shouldn't each one equally participate in raising their offspring? Takes two to make a kid, ought to take two to raise them.
What about women as an ezer kenegdo? Hell yeah, I'll be the strong helper (assuming that's the translation, since it has also been translated "helpmeet" or simply "strength", which assumes equality, but I'm going for a middle ground translation, so...) The term is often used of God protecting Israel, which is kind of a big deal, I think. If God is described some way, I also want to be described in that way. I am down with being an ezer kenegdo. I will happily support my spouse, my kids, my friends, my church family. I want to build people up and encourage and defend. Why would you marry someone if you didn't love their outlook on life, their dreams and their goals? Whenever I get married, I will support my husband, whether that be financially, emotionally, spiritually, physically, whateverly. I hope he'll do the same for me. Because we are equal in unity and authority, but unique in roles.
I love when God shows me Himself and makes me want to be more like Him.
I definitely agree that there should be sharing in roles in the marriage. That being said, there are just some things that I do better than Dusty, and some things that Dusty does better than I do that would put us in a marriage that is more society decided. You know me. You know us. We're a typical looking marriage. Do you feel like our marriage is limited by those societal expectations?
ReplyDeleteI guess I didn't express myself very well. My realization was that marriages, like the Trinity, have equal authority but DISTINCT roles. I think that a husband should bring whatever he's best at to the table, and the wife should bring whatever she's best at to the table. I just don't think that those distinct roles automatically HAVE to line up with societal expectations (and if they do, that's fine too).
DeleteI see how my thought about both working, both doing daily monotony, both raising kids would be confusing. That was largely personal. :) I want to work. I want my husband to work. I think we can both serve each other in those roles, and if a time comes when one or both of us need to step back for the sake of something else, then we should work out how and why. I personally am not hugely into cooking. I would love to marry someone who cooks with me, so that it's kind of fun and an activity. Is there a definite "role" for cook? I don't know. I assume that's not necessary. Maybe I'm wrong. :)
Obviously, I'm still working out my thoughts on this issue! This was part one of "holy crap, I think there's a theological basis for mutuality!" and I just let my random thoughts fly. But it's definitely a thought-in-transition.