Masculine Authority
Scripture is full of many challenging passages. Each time and place struggles with some passages more than others. Today, there is a great deal of struggle in the western world with what it means to be a man or a woman and how to navigate the relationships between them. This struggle is not helped by the many false ideas that circulate the various streams of our culture. My hope here is to reflect upon a biblical understanding of one aspect of this dynamic: that of masculine authority.
I’m sure some balk at even putting those words together, perhaps taking offense at the idea that men have a particular kind of authority which women don’t, or even at the idea that “masculinity” is a thing that can be defined. Well, if we’re going to take scripture seriously (and I am going to do that here), then we have to realize that such a thing as masculine authority does exist and then we have to deal with what it means.
From the beginning, humanity has been clearly delineated as being binary “male and female he created them” (Gen 1:27) and that this fact is tied up with the more important fact that “God created mankind in his image.” It’s also clear that he gave both of them “dominion over” everything else on earth (Gen 1:28). In the very next chapter, we see a difference in the dynamic of man and woman. Man (“ish” in Hebrew) is the one who names woman (“isha” in Hebrew) and the one who “leaves” his parents to “cling” to the woman (Gen 2:24). Yet, the woman is not a passive mute. Although she misuses it to lead them both into sin, we nonetheless see in woman’s exchange with the serpent that she has a voice and real influence over her husband.
Let’s jump ahead a few millennia to the writings of the New Testament. In three places, Christian scripture points out a particular aspect of masculine authority in relation to his wife. St. Peter, the first pope, writes “you wives should be subordinate to your husbands” (1 Peter 3:1). St. Paul writes twice that “the husband is head of his wife” (1 Cor 11:3 & Eph 5:23). Look, I get the gut reaction to this. I still feel the instinct to cringe a little when I read it out loud. But here’s the thing. This is not a fluke or a random aside. Two Apostles and authors of scripture assert it clearly and use other passages of scripture in pointing it out. If we decide to simply ignore two Apostles using the bible to write more of the bible, then we are no longer in a position to say we believe in the bible.
“But!” you might interject “don’t we have to interpret it correctly?” Yes, yes we do. It seems most of my headaches as a priest come from people misinterpreting scripture. The question is, how? There’s a lot to be said about interpretation, but probably the best single piece of advice I can give is to use what is called "the Analogy of Faith.” Put simply, it means to use the whole context of Christian teaching to interpret individual pieces of it. Think of a puzzle. If you just look at one or two pieces, it’s hard to make sense. But put it in it’s proper place in the whole, and you’ve got it.
So, we use more scripture to interpret these passages. And not just scripture, but also the lived Christian faith handed on to us as “traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours” (2 Thess 2:15). In this case, I’ll two aspects of our faith that we’ve recently celebrated: St. Joseph, Husband of Mary, and the example of Jesus during Holy Week.
The Authority of Joseph
“St Joseph with the Infant Jesus” by Guido Reni, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
There are many things to be said for St. Joseph, but one of them is not that he had much to say. Joseph is Mary’s husband, meaning any biblical teaching on a Man’s authority in marriage would apply. Yet, we do not hear Joseph bossing Mary around. In fact, we don’t hear from him at all. The one thing Joseph attempts to do unilaterally is divorce Mary, but that is immediately shut down by God himself, who sends an angel to order him to change course. Before we dismiss his authority entirely, however, we do have to recognize that Joseph is the one who names Jesus (Matt 1:25), which reflects the initial authority of Adam who names the animals and Eve. Even still, his authority derives from God: he gives the name he is told to give. Joseph is also the one who is left in charge of protecting the Holy Family from Herod and his son (Matt 2:13-23). After the Annunciation, Mary does not receive any other direct communication from the angel of God and her mission in life is subsumed under the direction of Joseph, her Husband who is himself directed by the angel.
Speaking of the Annunciation, it is this episode that poses an interesting counter-point to those who argue for the unilateral authority of men in a marriage. Please realize that Joseph and Mary were already married at the time of the Annunciation. In Jewish practice at the time, “betrothal” meant they were legally married but that they hadn’t yet moved in together. Think about it, if they weren’t married, Joseph wouldn’t have even needed to consider divorce because there would be no marriage to end.
So, Joseph is Mary’s husband. That is a key part of his vocation, one we can assume he chose for himself on some level. The other central part of his vocation, to be the foster father of Jesus, was not his choice. When the angel appears to Mary and announces that she would be with child, he is announcing something that affects not just Mary, but also her husband. It is something that radically changes their married life forever. When Mary consents to this, she does not consult Joseph. This crucial aspect of Joseph’s vocation is mediated to him through his wife. Rather than being the unilateral decision maker, he is forced to respond to something God has done in his wife. He ultimately consents (with divine help), but the point stands that his husbandly authority is partially subject to a relationship he does not control: the relationship between God and his wife. In other words, his authority exists in order for him to recognize what God is doing in her and then put himself in service to that. I repeat, his authority exists to serve his wife, not dominate her.
The Authority of Jesus
A great deal could be said of Jesus’ own example of masculine authority, but this blog post has room for only one story: that of the washing of the feet. First, we have to recognize that Jesus is a husband, a bridegroom in a unique way. His bride is the Church. This is the very point St. Paul is making in that infamous passage from his letter to the Ephesians (5:32). In fact, all marriage is really a sign, a reflection of this greater reality of the union between God and humanity in the mystical marriage of Christ and his Church. With that in mind, it is helpful to look at how Christ treats his Church to gain insight into how husbands ought to treat their wives. The most obvious point is that Jesus died on the cross for his Church. Husbands are to use their authority, their headship to lead the way in sacrificing themselves for the Church. Paul himself says this right there, just a few lines after he talks about wives being “submissive.”
“Jesus Washing Peter’s Feet” by Ford Madox Brown, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Still, there’s something interesting about the scene at the last supper when Christ washes the feet of his apostles. Remember that Holy Thursday marks both the institution of the Eucharist and the institution of Holy Orders. What Jesus does for his Apostles, he is doing for his bride, the Church. The washing of the feet is a powerful act rich with multiple layers of meaning. It symbolizes the call to charity: “as I have done for you, you should also do” (John 13:15). It symbolizes the sacrament of Confession as a renewal of baptism: “Whoever has bathed [i.e. “is baptized”] has no need except to have his feet washed” (John 13:10). But, this also symbolizes the act of the bridegroom for his bride. As St. Paul puts it in that same passage from Ephesians, “as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her to sanctify her, cleansing her by the bath of water with the word, that he might present to himself the church in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish” (5:25-27). In this moment, the Apostles represent the Church, the bride of Christ, and Jesus is using his authority to serve, to act as a slave and wash their feet.
What’s even more interesting for his authority is the unique exchange he has with St. Peter. As the first among the Apostles, Peter represents the Church in a particular way. When he tries to refuse the washing of his feet, we can see in this an image of the Bride of Christ trying to refuse the self-emptying love of Jesus. In this moment, Jesus flexes his authority over Peter, over the Church, over his bride to insist that they accept this action. He’s not seeking their submission to his power, he is seeking their submission to his offer of love.
That is the core of what Paul means by “submission.” He wants wives to be under (“sub”) the mission of their husband to give himself in love. In plain terms, he wants wives to accept their loving service. He is not interested in supporting a power structure where “woman, go make me a sandwich” is seen as an acceptable and healthy part of the marital relationship. Part of the reason for this command is that, like Peter - like all human beings - wives sometimes have trouble accepting the love of God as well as the love of others.
The Point
I should make it clear that the passages about authority and the relationship between man and wife are complicated, particularly when the husband in question is not Christian. The meaning of these verses is richer and includes more than what I’ve laid out above. But, this aspect of service, of authority that is also submissive is central to the correct interpretation of these passages. It is wise to remember that Paul is addressing the Christian wife and invoking her free will, encouraging her to choose to submit. At no point does St. Paul or St. Peter tell the husband to flex his authority. 99% of the time, when a man says to his wife “the bible says you’re supposed to submit to me,” he is missing the point and should instead focus on the lines addressed to him. Joseph and Jesus both do use their authority, but in every case it is to carry out God’s command to them, not to gain the satisfaction of being in charge of others.
As Peter and Paul address women in those verses, I address men in this post. Masculine authority is a real thing and it is different than the authority of women. In an age increasingly confused about the differences between man and woman, we must hold on to this truth. At the same time, we must hold on to the truth, not an exaggeration or perversion of that truth. If we are going to defend masculine authority, we men must live in an authentic way. If we are going to live it in an authentic way, we must learn from those models given to us in Scripture.
Learn from St. Joseph the power of silent example.
Learn from Jesus to humble yourself in service to your wife.
Learn from St. Joseph not to expose your wife to shame.
Learn from Jesus to wash away the faults of your wife by love, patience, and forgiveness.
Learn from St. Joseph that sometimes God’s plan for you comes to you directly and sometimes it comes through your wife’s decisions.
Learn from Jesus when to press your authority not for personal gain, but because it is the only way to give your wife what she needs.
Learn from St. Joseph to put your authority at the service of God’s work in your wife rather than coming between them.
Above all, learn from Jesus that no love and no authority in this life can be separated from the Cross.