 |

Dear Rev.
Know it all;
My 26 year old niece,
Diodora Steinherz, and her fiancé, both Catholic, hope to marry in June.
However, Diodora's parents, who are "Bible Christians" do not think her fiancé
is the right person for their daughter and based on their interpretation of the
biblical "headship covenant", have advised her they will not agree to the
marriage. If she chooses to go against their wishes, particularly her father's
wishes, they will not attend the wedding nor will they allow any of Diodora’s
brothers and sisters that still live at home to attend the wedding. At this
point, it would appear their intent is to "ban" her if she goes through with the
wedding without their approval. This, of course, is causing many problems in the
immediate as well as extended family. Is there any validity to this man’s claim
that the bible states that the father must approve a grown daughter’s choice of
a spouse? Does he have "authority" over his daughters until marriage? What
does the bible say in regard to these matters?
Sincerely,
Hedda Oferheels
Dear Hedda,
Dad is nuts on many, many
levels. Headship covenant? Covenant implies mutuality. Unless Diodora signed on
to have her father run her life and pick her spouse, I don’t think there is a
covenant. I can’t find the phrase “headship covenant” in any Bible I’ve read.
So, let us look at what the texts say.
1 Corinthians 11 has this
to say: “I would have you know, that the head of every man is the Messiah
(Christ); and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of the Messiah is
God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his
head. But every woman that prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors
her head. A man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image
and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of
the woman: but the woman of the man...... Neither was the man created for the
woman; but the woman for the man..... Nevertheless neither is the man without
the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is
of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God."
Then we have the text of
Ephesians, chapter 5. “Be filled with the Spirit,... submitting yourselves one
to another in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, as
to the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head
of the Church: and He is the savior of the body. Therefore as the Church is
subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave
himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water
by the word, that He might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having
spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without
blemish. Thus ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loves
his wife loves himself. No man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourishes and
cherishes it, even as the Lord of the Church.... Nevertheless, let every one of
you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife should
reverence her husband.”
From these texts, it is
apparent that the headship and submission that St. Paul talks about have to do
with the relationship between husbands and wives, not fathers and daughters. I
am sure that “Dad” can counter with texts from the letters of St. John and
sundry other bible bullets about children obeying and honoring their parents. It
sounds from your letter that Diodora is anything but a child. Dad is probably a
lost cause but I am very worried about his children, for whom I write this
note. The text from Corinthians is very obscure and seems to contradict Jewish
custom. Both Jewish women and men cover their heads in prayer. I have discussed
this at great length with my dear friend, the Rabbi Yehuda ben Yiddishkeit, and
neither he nor I can quite make heads or tails of it. The most revealing part of
the text I have left out for brevity’s sake ( YOU can find it if you reference
the whole text in your Bible.) St. Paul says, a woman should cover her head out
of respect for the angels! That is, women are such a gift and a wonder, that
even the angels are distracted by their true spiritual inner beauty. It is a
biblical principle that what is sacred is covered. (Contrast that with our
current barbarism.) When we read that woman is for man, not man for woman, one
needs to remember the Creation story. Adam was created on the sixth day, as were
the beasts. He was alone and so God caused him to fall into a deep sleep, When
he woke, there was Eve, taken from his rib, that part of the body that protects
the heart. Now
the Hebrew sages point out that the Sabbath, the seventh day, doesn’t begin at
sundown. It begins when there is not enough light to distinguish between a black
and a white thread. There is that twilight, which is neither the sixth nor the
seventh day. When do we sleep? When the sun goes down. It was when he awoke on
Sabbath that Adam found Eve. She was God’s Sabbath gift to him. She makes him
fully human, even though he had been created on the same day as the beasts. She
divinizes him, for “In His own image He made them; male and female he made
them.” This is why the woman is “for man,” lest the man return to the beasts.
Ain’t it the truth? Most men can’t even find their socks without a woman to tell
him where he put them!
The idea becomes clearer
in the second reading from St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians. Headship is not
about control, it is about service. I never understood headship until I heard
Chicago’s Cardinal George talk about it. A brainless, hair-hatted reporter once
asked his Eminence, “As leader of the Archdiocese of Chicago what are going to
do about yadda yadda?” The Cardinal looked shocked and said “I’m not the leader
of the archdiocese. I’m its head!” Amazing! Headship and leadership are not the
same thing. Leadership emerges from different places in different situations.
When I am hungry, it is my stomach that leads me. It is the head’s job to get
what the stomach needs, and to do it in a reasonable and healthy way, but it is
nonetheless a matter of the service of the head to the body, not the other way
around. In this case, the head submits to the body, for it’s well being, just as
Christ submitted to death for the sake of His bride, the Church.
I always used to tell my
students that the little words in a text were the most important. Here we have a
fine example. The most important word in the text is “as.” No one in the Greco
Roman world doubted that a woman should submit to her husband. St. Paul modifies
that submission by the word “as.” A woman was not to submit as to the emperor,
not as to a slave owner, but as to the Messiah (Christ in Greek). A husband was
to love his wife. A Greek would have asked, “Why?” A woman had no soul. She was
a domestic appliance that could have children and was also useful, as were
daughters, for cementing business deals. Love and amusement, well, there were
lots of other people for that sort of thing. Not only does St. Paul tell the
Greeks of Ephesus to love their wives, but to love them “as” Christ loves the
Church. A man is supposed to give himself for his wife, not the other way
around!!! He also mentions that Christ drew a bath for His wife, the Church.
Sounds pretty romantic, no? I wonder when was the last time that Diodora’s dad,
Mr Steinherz, drew a bubble bath for his wife. It sounds like his favorite song
is “Put Another Log on the Fire.” (Look it up if you don’t know it. A country
music classic.)
St. Paul also says, (1
Corinthians 7:4) “The wife doesn’t have authority over her own body; her husband
does, and likewise the husband doesn’t have authority over his own body, but his
wife does.” St. Paul is, I suspect, the first person in history to say that a
man is answerable to a woman, and not just a woman to a man. So you see,
headship is all about service and not about domination. The whole point is moot,
however, because Diodora is not a child and besides, “...for this a man leaves
his parents and clings to his wife and the two become one flesh.”
I can imagine the pain
that this must cause the family, but my suspicion is that Dad is not interested
in Biblical principles. He seems to be a control freak who has found a theology
to fit his illness. Were I your niece, I would tell this bully, “Fine if you
don’t want to be part of our lives because of a nonsensical private
interpretation of Scripture, that’s up to you. It will be just as well that our
children will be brought up in orthodox, traditional Christianity and that you
won’t be able to bully them as you’ve tried to bully me.” Such a statement is
not disrespect. It is truth spoken in love (Ephesians 4:15). For the sake of
the siblings and whatever grandchildren there may yet be, I would put my foot
down now and say no more of the bible based bullying.
Yours,
Rev.
Know-it-all
PS I would encourage your
niece to go as slowly as possible on the marriage and to get good marriage
counseling with her fiancé before the marriage. My instinct is that Dad will do
everything possible to break up the marriage just for the pleasure of saying, "I
told you so." |