I would be curious to hear your take on more examples of what a shorter tether looks like or means. We have the example of combat but what else? Otherwise I can see the reasoning of “sure my paycheck provides for the needs of the home” being too broad.
Thanks. I think it's important for the man of the house to recognize that if his wife or daughter works for a single business, his headship is diminished. That may not be a sin, given the situation, but it's compromised because some other individual is telling his wife what to do. This weakens family life dramatically in a way that freelance work or a home business doesn't. Again, I can see situations where that can be handled well, but I know of multiple instances where a male boss emotionally manipulated the woman through his position. We need to beware of the pitfalls. If that's not you, great. But this is increasingly normal.
So maybe the simple answer should just be No, she can not work outside the house. And then let that be the standard. Then with the exceptions make some wiggle room for few individuals. This is me speaking as a wife and mom who had a feminist and higher earning income at one point. Then God graciously took me out of that to be a stay at home mom with one single income.
Thank you for this article! Amen! Praise the Lord! Proverbs 31, a scripture that is often slighted. I am a believer, a wife, a mother, and a working RN. My husband was the first person to explain this scripture to me correctly! Godly women who work outside the home are always concerned about their household (we are our husbands’ helper, we raise arrows for the kingdom). What a privilege it is to serve the Lord in this way!
To those saying that it weakens a man’s headship if his wife works for a single company: Does it really? The head of a man is God; does it weaken God’s headship over the man if he has another boss? It certainly *could* provide a situation where he is tempted to serve mammon instead of God—but at the end of the day a man has to work, and it would be absurd to say that every man has to freelance or start his own business in order to avoid having any other authority over him. And what about a woman who is the main breadwinner because her husband becomes disabled, etc? Does she have to become an entrepreneur in order to provide for her family?
Not to say that there won’t be pitfalls and temptations, but to say that a woman shouldn’t work for a company seems to be a simplistic answer to a question framed in the same way that Pastor Foster said it should *not* be framed. It’s nice and tight, but it’s a false dichotomy that doesn’t allow for the range of legitimate circumstances that families face in any given church.
Excellent and helpful article. Brings to mind a book I read in college, 'Behind Mud Walls', about the dreadful lives many Muslim women lived in Pakistan, basically prisoners in their own courtyards, unable to leave home or, if they did, only covered so completely you couldn't even see their faces. That is a tether far too short.
Always appreciate the keen insights. Well worded things like this are a huge help as I pastor and navigate the landscape out here.
The real issue is should be be a servant/slave to someone else:
1) The man is required to provide with the wife as the helpmate that may help him do that. Any exceptions would be an exigent situation, not the norm.
2) The biggest issue is that by making her a wage-slave you've given her another authority; she now has two heads. This is confusion.
I would be curious to hear your take on more examples of what a shorter tether looks like or means. We have the example of combat but what else? Otherwise I can see the reasoning of “sure my paycheck provides for the needs of the home” being too broad.
Thanks. I think it's important for the man of the house to recognize that if his wife or daughter works for a single business, his headship is diminished. That may not be a sin, given the situation, but it's compromised because some other individual is telling his wife what to do. This weakens family life dramatically in a way that freelance work or a home business doesn't. Again, I can see situations where that can be handled well, but I know of multiple instances where a male boss emotionally manipulated the woman through his position. We need to beware of the pitfalls. If that's not you, great. But this is increasingly normal.
So maybe the simple answer should just be No, she can not work outside the house. And then let that be the standard. Then with the exceptions make some wiggle room for few individuals. This is me speaking as a wife and mom who had a feminist and higher earning income at one point. Then God graciously took me out of that to be a stay at home mom with one single income.
God bless you for doing that.
Very well said. A clear explanation to a difficult question.
Thank you for this article! Amen! Praise the Lord! Proverbs 31, a scripture that is often slighted. I am a believer, a wife, a mother, and a working RN. My husband was the first person to explain this scripture to me correctly! Godly women who work outside the home are always concerned about their household (we are our husbands’ helper, we raise arrows for the kingdom). What a privilege it is to serve the Lord in this way!
To those saying that it weakens a man’s headship if his wife works for a single company: Does it really? The head of a man is God; does it weaken God’s headship over the man if he has another boss? It certainly *could* provide a situation where he is tempted to serve mammon instead of God—but at the end of the day a man has to work, and it would be absurd to say that every man has to freelance or start his own business in order to avoid having any other authority over him. And what about a woman who is the main breadwinner because her husband becomes disabled, etc? Does she have to become an entrepreneur in order to provide for her family?
Not to say that there won’t be pitfalls and temptations, but to say that a woman shouldn’t work for a company seems to be a simplistic answer to a question framed in the same way that Pastor Foster said it should *not* be framed. It’s nice and tight, but it’s a false dichotomy that doesn’t allow for the range of legitimate circumstances that families face in any given church.
Well said.
Excellent and helpful article. Brings to mind a book I read in college, 'Behind Mud Walls', about the dreadful lives many Muslim women lived in Pakistan, basically prisoners in their own courtyards, unable to leave home or, if they did, only covered so completely you couldn't even see their faces. That is a tether far too short.