A Note on Resources: Desiring God Ministries

What’s the difference?

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 1

2/23/09 8:26:51 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 2

2/23/09 8:26:51 AM

C R O S S W A Y B O O K S

W H E A T O N , I L L I N O I S

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 3

2/23/09 8:26:51 AM

What’s the Difference?

council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.

Published by crossway Books

a publishing ministry of Good news Publishers

1300 crescent street

Wheaton, illinois 60187

adapted from a chapter in Recovering Biblical Manhood

and Womanhood, edited by Wayne Grudem and John Piper

(crossway Books, 1990)

the council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood was estab-

lished in 1987 for the purpose of studying and setting forth

Biblical teachings on the relationship between men and women,

especially in the home and the church.

duced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by

any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or

otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, except

cover design: Jessica dennis

cover photo: Photos.com

first printing, trade paper edition, 2001

Printed in the United states of america

Library of congress catalog card number 90-80358

isBn 13: 978-1-4335-0278-1

isBn 10: 1-4335-0278-X

1 3

1 2

1 1

1 0

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 4

2/23/09 8:26:51 AM

To Noël

my partner

in the great mystery

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 5

2/23/09 8:26:51 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 6

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

contents

Foreword by Elisabeth Elliot

1 what’s the diFFerence?

2 the Meaning oF Masculinity

3 the Meaning oF FeMininity

4 the biblical Vision oF coMpleMentarity

5 a closing challenge to Men and woMen

notes

a note on resources

Desiring God Ministries

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 7

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 8

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

foreword

for years i have noted with growing disquiet the pollution of

many christians’ minds by the doctrine of feminism. i believe

it is a far more dangerous pollution than most have realized,

and i (with what seemed to me pitifully few others) have tried

to sound the alarm in every way i could. it is a relief to me

that John Piper has done what was badly needed—clarified

the fundamental distinctions, defining them not fashionably

but Biblically and with good common sense. he has done

more—he has cut through much of the confusion that arises

through a careless reading of the “difficult” Bible passages,

and shown us the true liberation that comes with humble

submission to God’s original design. i think his thesis rings

true to the manliness or the womanliness in each of us.

—Elisabeth Elliot

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 9

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 10

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

What’s the difference?

When i was a boy growing up in Greenville, south carolina,

my father was away from home about two-thirds of every

year. and while he preached across the country, we prayed—

my mother and my older sister and i. What i learned in those

days was that my mother was omni-competent.

she handled the finances, paying all the bills and dealing

with the bank and creditors. she once ran a little laundry

business on the side. she was active on the park board, served

as the superintendent of the intermediate department of

our southern Baptist church, and managed some real estate

holdings.

she taught me how to cut the grass and splice electric

cord and pull Bermuda grass by the roots and paint the eaves

and shine the dining-room table with a shammy and drive a

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 11

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

car and keep french fries from getting soggy in the cooking

oil. she helped me with the maps in geography and showed

me how to do a bibliography and work up a science project on

static electricity and believe that algebra ii was possible. she

dealt with the contractors when we added a basement and,

more than once, put her hand to the shovel. it never occurred

to me that there was anything she couldn’t do.

i heard one time that women don’t sweat, they glow.

not true. My mother sweated. it would drip off the end of

her long, sharp nose. sometimes she would blow it off when

her hands were pushing the wheelbarrow full of peat moss.

Or she would wipe it with her sleeve between the strokes of

a swingblade. Mother was strong. i can remember her arms

even today thirty years later. they were big, and in the sum-

mertime they were bronze.

But it never occurred to me to think of my mother and

my father in the same category. Both were strong. Both were

bright. Both were kind. Both would kiss me and both would

spank me. Both were good with words. Both prayed with

fervor and loved the Bible. But unmistakably my father was a

man and my mother was a woman. they knew it and i knew

it. and it was not mainly a biological fact. it was mainly a

matter of personhood and relational dynamics.

When my father came home he was clearly the head of

the house. he led in prayer at the table. he called the fam-

ily together for devotions. he got us to sunday school and

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 12

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e D i f f e r e n c e ?

worship. he drove the car. he guided the family to where we

would sit. he made the decision to go to howard Johnson’s

for lunch. he led us to the table. he called for the waitress.

he paid the check. he was the one we knew we would reckon

with if we broke a family rule or were disrespectful to Mother.

these were the happiest times for Mother. Oh, how she

rejoiced to have daddy home! she loved his leadership. Later

i learned that the Bible calls this “submission.”

But since my father was gone most of the time, Mother

used to do most of those leadership things too. so it never

occurred to me that leadership and submission had anything

to do with superiority and inferiority. and it didn’t have to do

with muscles and skills either. it was not a matter of capabili-

ties and competencies. it had to do with something i could

never have explained as a child. and i have been a long time

in coming to understand it as part of God’s great goodness in

creating us male and female. it had to do with something very

deep. i know that the specific rhythm of life that was in our

home is not the only good one. But there were dimensions

of reality and goodness in it that ought to be there in every

home. indeed they ought to be there in varying ways in all

mature relationships between men and women.

i say “ought to be there” because i now see that they

were rooted in God. Over the years i have come to see from

scripture and from life that manhood and womanhood are the

beautiful handiwork of a good and loving God. he designed

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 13

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

our differences and they are profound. they are not mere

physiological prerequisites for sexual union. they go to the

root of our personhood. this essay is an attempt to define

some of those differences as God wills them to be according

to the Bible.

* * * * *

Let me say a word about that phrase, “according to

the Bible.” the subtitle of this little book is “Manhood and

Womanhood defined According to the Bible.” What that

means is that i have made every effort to bring the thinking of

this book into accord with what the Bible teaches. at the same

time, however, i have not tried to include a detailed exegetical

argument for every assertion.

there are two main reasons that seem to justify this

approach:

first, for the purposes of this little book, it seemed

best to present the Biblical vision of manhood and woman-

hood as clearly and concisely as possible, and to leave the

comprehensive technical discussion for other publications.

thus this little book was originally written as a chapter in a

larger collection of essays, Recovering Biblical Manhood and

Womanhood (published in 1990 by crossway Books; edited by

Wayne Grudem and John Piper), and this longer work pro-

vides detailed exegetical support for the vision of this smaller

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 14

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e D i f f e r e n c e ?

work. i have also tried in articles,1 sermons,2 and unpublished

papers to give a credible account of the Biblical foundations

of what i say here.

second, i have tried to include enough Biblical argu-

mentation in this essay, especially in the footnotes, to show

why i believe this vision of manhood and womanhood is in

fact “according to the Bible.” i hope it will be obvious that my

reflections are not the creation of an independent mind, but

the fruit of a tree planted firmly in the soil of constant medita-

tion on the Word of God.

third, experience has taught me that there are two ways

to commend a vision of manhood and womanhood. One way

has to do with rational argumentation concerning factual

evidences. for example, an evangelical christian wants to

know, does the Bible really teach this vision of manhood and

womanhood? so one way of commending the vision is by

patient, detailed, careful exegetical argumentation.

But there is another way to commend the vision. a per-

son also wants to know, is the vision beautiful and satisfying

and fulfilling? can i live with it? this is not a bad question.

commending Biblical truth involves more than saying, “do

it because the Bible says so.” that sort of commendation may

result in a kind of obedience that is so begrudging and so

empty of delight and hearty affirmation that the Lord is not

pleased with it at all.

so there is a second task needed in winning people over

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 15

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

to a vision of manhood and womanhood. not only must there

be thorough exegesis, there must also be a portrayal of the

vision that satisfies the heart as well as the head. Or to put

it another way: we must commend the beauty as well as the

truth of the vision. We must show that something is not only

right but also good. it is not only valid but also valuable, not

only accurate but also admirable.

this little book is meant to fit mainly into the second cat-

egory. not merely, but mainly. it is designed to show that our

vision of manhood and womanhood is a deeply satisfying gift

of grace from a loving God who has the best interests of his

creatures at heart. the vision is not onerous or oppressive. it

does not promote pride or self-exaltation. it conforms to who

we are by God’s good design. therefore it is fulfilling in the

deepest sense of that word.

* * * * *

the tendency today is to stress the equality of men and

women by minimizing the unique significance of our male-

ness or femaleness. But this depreciation of male and female

personhood is a great loss. it is taking a tremendous toll on

generations of young men and women who do not know

what it means to be a man or a woman. confusion over the

meaning of sexual personhood today is epidemic. the con-

sequence of this confusion is not a free and happy harmony

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 16

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e D i f f e r e n c e ?

among gender-free persons relating on the basis of abstract

competencies. the consequence rather is more divorce, more

homosexuality, more sexual abuse, more promiscuity, more

social awkwardness, and more emotional distress and suicide

that come with the loss of God-given identity.

it is a remarkable and telling observation that contempo-

rary christian feminists devote little attention to the definition

of femininity and masculinity. Little help is being given to a

son’s question, “dad, what does it mean to be a man and not

a woman?” Or a daughter’s question, “Mom, what does it

mean to be woman and not a man?” a lot of energy is being

expended today minimizing the distinctions of manhood and

womanhood. But we do not hear very often what manhood

and womanhood should incline us to do. We are adrift in a

sea of confusion over sexual roles. and life is not the better

for it.

ironically the most perceptive thinkers recognize how

essential manhood and womanhood are to our personhood.

Yet the meaning of manhood and womanhood is seen as

unattainable. for example, Paul Jewett, in his very insight-

ful book, Man as Male and Female, argues persuasively that

maleness and femaleness are essential, not peripheral, to our

personhood:

sexuality permeates one’s individual being to its very

depth; it conditions every facet of one’s life as a person.

as the self is always aware of itself as an ‘i,’ so this ‘i’

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 17

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

is always aware of itself as himself or herself. Our self-

knowledge is indissolubly bound up not simply with

our human being but with our sexual being. at the

human level there is no ‘i and thou’ per se, but only

the ‘i’ who is male or female confronting the ‘thou,’ the

‘other,’ who is also male or female.3

he cites emil Brunner to the same effect: “Our sexuality

penetrates to the deepest metaphysical ground of our person-

ality. as a result, the physical differences between the man

and the woman are a parable of psychical and spiritual differ-

ences of a more ultimate nature.”4

after reading these amazing statements concerning how

essential manhood and womanhood are to our personhood

and how sexuality “conditions every facet of one’s life,” it is

stunning to read that Jewett does not know what manhood

and womanhood are. he says,

some, at least, among contemporary theologians are

not so sure that they know what it means to be a man in

distinction to a woman or a woman in distinction to a

man. it is because the writer shares this uncertainty that

he has skirted the question of ontology in this study.5

all human activity reflects a qualitative distinction

which is sexual in nature. But in my opinion, such an

observation offers no clue to the ultimate meaning of

that distinction. it may be that we shall never know what

that distinction ultimately means. But this much, at least,

seems clear: we will understand the difference— what it

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 18

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e D i f f e r e n c e ?

means to be created as man or woman— only as we learn

to live as man and woman in a true partnership of life.6

surely this is a great sadness. We know that “sexual-

ity permeates one’s individual being to its very depth.” We

know that “it conditions every facet of one’s life as a person.”

We know that every i-thou encounter is an encounter not

of abstract persons but of male or female persons. We know

that physical differences are but a parable of male and female

personhood. But, alas, we do not know who we are as male

and female. We are ignorant of this all-pervasive dimension

of our identity.

But what about Jewett’s prescription for hope in the face

of this stunning ignorance of who we are? he suggests that

we discover who we are “as man or woman” by experiencing

a “true partnership” as man and woman. the problem with

this is that we cannot know what a “true partnership” is until

we know the nature of the partners. a true partnership must

be true to who the partners are. a true partnership must take

into account the sexual reality “that conditions every facet of

their life.” We simply cannot know what a “true” partnership

is until we know what truly “permeates [our] personhood to

the very depths.” if we are really ignorant of what true man-

hood and womanhood are, we have no warrant to prescribe

the nature of what true partnership will look like.

the sexual turmoil of our culture is not surprising when

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 19

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

we discover that our best christian thinkers claim not to

know what masculinity and femininity are, and yet acknowl-

edge that these are among the most profound aspects of per-

sonhood that “condition every facet of one’s life”! how shall

parents rear daughters to be women and sons to be men when

even the leading teachers of the church do not know what

manhood and womanhood are?

the conviction behind this essay is that the Bible does

not leave us in ignorance about the meaning of masculine and

feminine personhood. God has not placed in us an all-perva-

sive and all-conditioning dimension of personhood and then

hidden the meaning of our identity from us. he has shown

us in scripture the beauty of manhood and womanhood in

complementary harmony. he has shown us the distortions

and even horrors that sin has made of fallen manhood and

womanhood. and he has shown us the way of redemption

and healing through christ.

to be sure, we see “through a glass dimly.” Our knowl-

edge is not perfect. We must be ever open to new light. But

we are not so adrift as to have nothing to say to our genera-

tion about the meaning of manhood and womanhood and its

implications for our relationships. Our understanding is that

the Bible reveals the nature of masculinity and femininity

by describing diverse responsibilities for man and woman

while rooting these differing responsibilities in creation, not

convention.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 20

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e D i f f e r e n c e ?

When the Bible teaches that men and women fulfil dif-

ferent roles in relation to each other, charging man with a

unique leadership role, it bases this differentiation not on

temporary cultural norms but on permanent facts of creation.

this is seen in 1 corinthians 11:3-16 (especially vv. 8-9, 14);

ephesians 5:21-33 (especially vv. 31-32); and 1 timothy

2:11-14 (especially vv. 13-14).7 in the Bible, differentiated

roles for men and women are never traced back to the fall

of man and woman into sin. rather, the foundation of this

differentiation is traced back to the way things were in eden

before sin warped our relationships. differentiated roles were

corrupted, not created, by the fall.8 they were created by

God.

* * * * *

this leads me then to attempt at least a partial definition

of manhood and womanhood. this is risky business. every

word we choose could be misunderstood. Unsympathetic

readers could jump to conclusions about practical impli-

cations that are not implied. i would simply plead for the

application of that great principle of good criticism: Before

assessing an author’s position, express an understanding of it

in a way the author would approve.

i would commend the following descriptions of masculin-

ity and femininity for consideration. it will be very important

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 21

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

to read them in the light of the subsequent comments. these

are not exhaustive descriptions of all that masculinity or femi-

ninity mean. they are an attempt to get at the heart, or at least

an indispensable aspect, of manhood and womanhood.9

at the heart Of MatUre MascULinitY is

a sense Of BenevOLent resPOnsiBiLitY tO

Lead, PrOvide fOr and PrOtect WOMen

in WaYs aPPrOPriate tO a Man’s differinG

reLatiOnshiPs.

at the heart Of MatUre feMininitY is a

freeinG disPOsitiOn tO affirM, receive and

nUrtUre strenGth and LeadershiP frOM

WOrthY Men in WaYs aPPrOPriate tO a

WOMan’s differinG reLatiOnshiPs.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 22

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

the Meaning of

Masculinity

here we take the definition of masculinity a phrase at a time

and unfold its meaning and implications.

at the heart Of MatUre MascULinitY is

a sense Of BenevOLent resPOnsiBiLitY tO

Lead, PrOvide fOr and PrOtect WOMen

in WaYs aPPrOPriate tO a Man’s differinG

reLatiOnshiPs.

“ A T T H E H E A R T O F . . . ”

this phrase signals that the definitions are not exhaustive.

there is more to masculinity and femininity, but there is not

less. We believe this is at the heart of what true manhood

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 23

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

means, even if there is a mystery to our complementary exis-

tence that we will never exhaust.

“ . . . M A T U R E M A S C U L I N I T Y . . . ”

a man might say, “i am a man and i do not feel this sense of

responsibility that you say makes me masculine.” he may

feel strong and sexually competent and forceful and rational.

But we would say to him that if he does not feel this sense

of benevolent responsibility toward women to lead, provide

and protect, his masculinity is immature. it is incomplete and

perhaps distorted.

“Mature” means that a man’s sense of responsibility is in

the process of growing out of its sinful distortions and limita-

tions, and finding its true nature as a form of love, not a form

of self-assertion.

“ . . . A S E N S E O F . . . ”

i use the word “sense” because to be masculine a man must

not only be responsible, but sense or feel that he is. if he does

not “sense” or “feel” and “affirm” his responsibility, he is not

mature in his masculinity.

the word “sense” also implies the fact that a man can be

mature in his masculinity when his circumstances do not put

him in any relationship where he actually has the possibility to

relate to any woman. he may be in combat or out to sea away

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 24

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

from women. he may be in prison. he may have a job on an oil

rig in the north atlantic. he may be a monk. Or his style of life

may simply make interaction with women very limited.

a man can be properly masculine in those circumstances

if he has the sense of benevolent responsibility to lead, pro-

vide for and protect women. this sense need not be actual-

ized directly in order to qualify for mature masculinity. for

example, his “sense” of responsibility will affect how he talks

about women and the way he relates to pornography and

the kind of concern he shows for the marriages of the men

around him.

the word “sense” also implies that a man may not be

physically able to provide for or protect his family and yet be

mature in his masculinity. he may be paralyzed. he may have

a disabling disease. his wife may be the main breadwinner in

such a circumstance. and she may be the one who must get

up at night to investigate a frightening noise in the house.

this is not easy for the man. But if he still has a sense of his

own benevolent responsibility under God he will not lose his

masculinity.

his sense of responsibility will find expression in the

ways he conquers self-pity, and gives moral and spiritual

leadership for his family, and takes the initiative to provide

them with the bread of life, and protect them from the greatest

enemies of all, satan and sin.

someone might ask: so is a woman masculine if she is a

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 25

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

single parent and provides these same things for her children?

are these only for men to do? i would answer: a woman is

not unduly masculine in performing these things for her chil-

dren if she has the sense that this would be properly done by

her husband if she had one, and if she performs them with a

uniquely feminine demeanor.

however, if a woman undertakes to give this kind of

leadership toward her husband she would not be acting in a

properly feminine way, but would be taking up the mascu-

line calling in that relationship. if the husband is there but

neglects his responsibility and does not provide leadership

for the children, then the mature, feminine mother will make

every effort to do so, yet in a way that says to the husband, “i

do not defy you, i love you and long with all my heart that you

were with me in this spiritual and moral commitment, leading

me and the family to God.”

“ . . . b E N E v O L E N T . . . ”

this word is intended to show that the responsibility of man-

hood is for the good of woman. Benevolent responsibility is

meant to rule out all self-aggrandizing authoritarianism (cf.

Luke 22:26). it is meant to rule out all disdaining condescen-

sion and any act that makes a mature woman feel patronized

rather than honored and prized (cf. 1 Peter 3:7). the word

“benevolent” is meant to signal that mature masculinity gives

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 26

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

appropriate expression to the Golden rule in male-female

relationships (Matthew 7:12).

“ . . . R E S P O N S I b I L I T Y . . . ”

the burden of this word is to stress that masculinity is a God-

given trust for the good of all his creatures, not a right for men

to exercise for their own self-exaltation or ego-satisfaction. it

is less a prerogative than a calling. it is a duty and obligation

and charge. Like all God’s requirements it is not meant to be

onerous or burdensome (1 John 5:3). But it is nevertheless a

burden to be borne, and which in christ can be borne lightly

(Matthew 11:30).

the word “responsibility” is chosen to imply that man

will be uniquely called to account for his leadership, provi-

sion and protection in relation to women. this is illustrated in

Genesis 3:9 when God says to adam first, “Where are you?”

eve had sinned first, but God does not seek her out first.

adam must give the first account to God for the moral life

of the family in the garden of eden. this does not mean the

woman has no responsibility, as we will see. it simply means

that man bears a unique and primary one.

“ . . . T O L E A d . . . ”

One problem with language is that words tend to carry very

different connotations for different people. hence the word

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 27

2/23/09 8:26:52 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

“lead” will sound strong and domineering to some, but mod-

erate and servant-like to others.

another problem is that one word carries many dif-

ferent nuances and implications for different contexts and

situations. for example, the word “lead” could refer to what

people do when they direct an orchestra, or persuade a friend

to go to the zoo, or inspire a group for a cause, or command a

military platoon, or make the first suggestion about where to

eat, or take the driver’s seat when a group gets in the car, or

take the initiative in a group to push the button in an eleva-

tor, or choose a door and open it for another to go through,

or chair a committee, or sing loud enough to help others, or

point a lost motorist to the freeway entrance, or call the plays

on a football team, or call people together for prayer.

therefore, i need to explain in some detail what i have

in mind by the mature masculine responsibility to lead.

Otherwise false ideas could easily come into people’s minds

that i do not intend. following are nine clarifying statements

about the meaning of mature masculine leadership.

1. Mature masculinity expresses itself not in the demand to

be served, but in the strength to serve and to sacrifice for

the good of woman.

Jesus said, “Let the greatest among you become as the

youngest and the leader as one who serves” (Luke 22:26).

Leadership is not a demanding demeanor. it is moving things

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 28

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

forward to a goal. if the goal is holiness and heaven, the

leading will have the holy aroma of heaven about it—the

demeanor of christ.

thus after saying that “the husband is the head of the wife

as christ is the head of the church,” Paul said, “husbands,

love your wives as christ loved the church and gave himself up

for her, that he might sanctify her” (ephesians 5:23, 25). Jesus

led his bride to holiness and heaven on the calvary road. he

looked weak, but he was infinitely strong in saying nO to the

way of the world. so it will be again and again for mature men

as they take up the responsibility to lead.

2. Mature masculinity does not assume the authority of

Christ over woman, but advocates it.

the leadership implied in the statement, “the husband

is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church”

(ephesians 5:23), is not a leadership that gives to the man all

the rights and authority that christ has. the analogy between

christ and the husband breaks down if pressed too far, first

because, unlike christ, all men sin. christ never has to apolo-

gize to his church. But husbands must do this often.

Moreover, unlike christ, a husband is not preparing a

bride merely for himself but for another, namely christ. he

does not merely act as christ, but also for christ. at this

point he must not be christ to his wife lest he be a traitor

to christ. standing in the place of christ must include a

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 29

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

renunciation of the temptation to be christ. and that means

leading his wife forward to depend not on him but on christ.

and practically, that rules out belittling supervision and

fastidious oversight. she also stands or falls before her own

master, Jesus christ.

3. Mature masculinity does not presume superiority, but

mobilizes the strengths of others.

no human leader is infallible. nor is any man superior to

those he leads in every respect. therefore a good leader will

always take into account the ideas of those he leads, and may

often adopt those ideas as better than his own. this applies to

husbands at home and elders in the church and all the other

places where leadership is critical.10 a man’s leadership is not

measured by his obliviousness to the ideas and desires of oth-

ers. a leader of peers may be surrounded by much brighter

people than himself. he will listen and respond. and if he is

a good leader, they will appreciate his initiative and guidance

through the ups and downs of decision-making. the aim of

leadership is not to demonstrate the superiority of the leader,

but to bring out all the strengths of people that will move

them forward to the desired goal.

in ephesians 5:28-29 the wife is pictured as part of the

man’s body as the church is part of christ’s body. so in loving

his wife a man is loving himself. this is clearly an application

to marriage of Jesus’ command, “Love your neighbor as your-

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 30

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

self.” this rules out a leadership that treats a wife like a child.

a husband does not want to be treated that way himself.

Moreover christ does not lead the church as his daugh-

ter but as his wife. he is preparing her to be a “fellow-heir”

(romans 8:17), not a servant girl. any kind of leadership

that in the name of christlike headship tends to produce in a

wife personal immaturity or spiritual weakness or insecurity

through excessive control or picky supervision or oppressive

domination has missed the point of the analogy in ephesians

5. christ does not create that kind of wife.

4. Mature masculinity does not have to initiate every action,

but feels the responsibility to provide a general pattern of

initiative.

in a family the husband does not do all the thinking and

planning. his leadership is to take responsibility in general to

initiate and carry through the spiritual and moral planning for

family life. i say “in general” because “in specifics” there will

be many times and many areas of daily life where the wife will

do all kinds of planning and initiating. But there is a general

tone and pattern of initiative that should develop which is

sustained by the husband.

for example, the leadership pattern would be less than

Biblical if the wife in general was having to take the initiative

in prayer at meal time, and get the family out of bed for wor-

ship on sunday morning, and gather the family for devotions,

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 31

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

and discuss what moral standards will be required of the chil-

dren, and confer about financial priorities, and talk over some

neighborhood ministry possibilities, etc. a wife may initiate the

discussion and planning of any one of these, but if she becomes

the one who senses the general responsibility for this pattern of

initiative while her husband is passive, something contrary to

Biblical masculinity and femininity is in the offing.11

Psychologist James dobson is so concerned about the

recovery of the leadership of husbands at home that he calls

it “america’s greatest need.”

a christian man is obligated to lead his family to the

best of his ability. . . . if his family has purchased too

many items on credit, then the financial crunch is ulti-

mately his fault. if the family never reads the Bible or

seldom goes to church on sunday, God holds the man

to blame. if the children are disrespectful and disobedi-

ent, the primary responsibility lies with the father . . .

not his wife. . . . in my view, america’s greatest need is

for husbands to begin guiding their families, rather than

pouring every physical and emotional resource into the

mere acquisition of money.12

5. Mature masculinity accepts the burden of the final say

in disagreements between husband and wife, but does not

presume to use it in every instance.

in a good marriage decision-making is focussed on the

husband, but is not unilateral. he seeks input from his wife

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 32

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

and often adopts her ideas. this is implied in the love that

governs the relationship (ephesians 5:25), in the equality

of personhood implied in being created in the image of God

(Genesis 1:27), and in the status of being fellow-heirs of the

grace of life (1 Peter 3:7). Unilateral decision-making is not

usually a mark of good leadership. it generally comes from

laziness or insecurity or inconsiderate disregard.

On the other hand dependence on team input should

not go to the point where the family perceives a weakness

of indecision in the husband. and both husband and wife

should agree on the principle that the husband’s decision

should rightly hold sway if it does not involve sin. however,

this conviction does not mean that a husband will often use

the prerogative of “veto” over the wishes of his wife or family.

he may, in fact, very often surrender his own preference for

his wife’s where no moral issue is at stake. his awareness of

his sin and imperfection will guard him from thinking that

following christ gives him the ability of christ to know what’s

best in every detail. nevertheless, in a well-ordered Biblical

marriage both husband and wife acknowledge in principle

that, if necessary in some disagreement, the husband will

accept the burden of making the final choice.

6. Mature masculinity expresses its leadership in romantic

sexual relations by communicating an aura of strong and

tender pursuit.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 33

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

this is very difficult to put into words. But sexual rela-

tions are so basic to human life we would be delinquent not to

at least try to say how masculinity expresses itself here.

it is the mingling of tenderness with strength that makes

the unique masculine quality of leadership in sexual rela-

tions. there is an aura of masculine leadership which rises

from the mingling of power and tenderness, forcefulness and

affection, potency and sensitivity, virility and delicateness. it

finds expression in the firmness of his grasp, the strength of

taking her in his arms, the sustaining of verbal adoration, etc.

and there are a hundred nuances of masculine pursuit that

distinguish it from feminine pursuit.

it is important to say that there is, of course, a feminine

pursuit in sexual relations. this is why the word “initiate” is

not an exact way of describing masculine leadership in sexual

relations. the wife may initiate an interest in romance and

may keep on initiating different steps along the way. But there

is a difference. a feminine initiation is in effect an invitation

for the man to do his kind of initiating. in one sense then you

could say that in those times the man is responding. But in fact

the wife is inviting him to lead in a way as only a man can, so

that she can respond to him.

it will not do to say that, since the woman can rightly

initiate, therefore there is no special leadership that the man

should fulfil. When a wife wants sexual relations with her

husband she wants him to seek her and take her and bring

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 34

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

her into his arms and up to the pleasures that his initiatives

give her.

consider what is lost when women attempt to assume

a more masculine role by appearing physically muscular

and aggressive. it is true that there is something sexually

stimulating about a muscular, scantily clad young woman

pumping iron in a health club. But no woman should be

encouraged by this fact. for it probably means the sexual

encounter that such an image would lead to is something

very hasty and volatile, and in the long run unsatisfying. the

image of a masculine musculature begets arousal in a man,

but it does not beget several hours of moonlight walking

with significant, caring conversation. the more women can

arouse men by doing typically masculine things, the less they

can count on receiving from men a sensitivity to typically

feminine needs. Mature masculinity will not be reduced to

raw desire in sexual relations. it remains alert to the deeper

personal needs of woman and mingles strength and tender-

ness to make her joy complete.

7. Mature masculinity expresses itself in a family by taking

the initiative in disciplining the children when both parents

are present and a family standard has been broken.

Mothers and fathers are both to be obeyed by their chil-

dren (ephesians 6:1). Mothers as well as fathers are esteemed

teachers in the home (Proverbs 1:8; 6:20; 31:1). they carry

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 35

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

rights of authority and leadership toward their children, as do

their husbands. they do not need to wait till dad gets home

from work to spank a disobedient child.

But children need to see a dynamic between Mom and

dad that says, dad takes charge to discipline me when Mom

and dad are both present.13 no woman should have to take

the initiative to set a disobedient child right while her hus-

band sits obliviously by, as though nothing were at stake.

few things will help children understand the meaning of

responsible, loving masculinity better than watching who

takes the responsibility to set them right when Mom and dad

are both present.

8. Mature masculinity is sensitive to cultural expressions of

masculinity and adapts to them (where no sin is involved)

in order to communicate to a woman that a man would like

to relate not in any aggressive or perverted way, but with

maturity and dignity as a man.

this would mean dressing in ways that are neither

effeminate nor harsh and aggressive. it would mean learn-

ing manners and customs. Who speaks for the couple at the

restaurant? Who seats the other? Who drives the car? Who

opens the door? Who walks in front down the concert hall

aisle? Who stands and who sits, and when? Who extends the

hand at a greeting? Who walks on the street side? how do

you handle a woman’s purse? etc. etc. these things change

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 36

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

from culture to culture and from era to era. the point is that

masculine leadership will not scorn them or ignore them,

but seek to use them to cultivate and communicate a healthy

pattern of complementarity in the relationships between

men and women.14 Mature masculinity will not try to com-

municate that such things don’t matter. Mature masculinity

recognizes the pervasive implications of manhood and wom-

anhood, and seeks to preserve the patterns of interaction that

give free and natural expression to that reality. a dance is all

the more beautiful when the assigned steps are natural and

unself-conscious.

9. Mature masculinity recognizes that the call to leadership

is a call to repentance and humility and risk-taking.

We are all sinners. Masculinity and femininity have been

distorted by our sin. taking up the responsibility to lead must

therefore be a careful and humble task. We must admit as

men that historically there have been grave abuses. in each

of our lives we have ample cause for contrition at our passiv-

ity or our domination. some have neglected their wives and

squandered their time in front of the television or putzing

around in the garage or going away too often with the guys to

hunt or fish or bowl. Others have been too possessive, harsh,

domineering, and belittling, giving the impression through

act and innuendo that wives are irresponsible or foolish.

We should humble ourselves before God for our failures

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 37

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

and for the remaining tendency to shirk or overstep our

responsibilities. the call to leadership is not a call to exalt

ourselves over any woman. it is not a call to domineer, or

belittle or put woman in her place. she is, after all, a fellow-

heir of God and destined for a glory that will one day blind

the natural eyes of every man (Matthew 13:43). the call to

leadership is a call to humble oneself and take the responsibil-

ity to be a servant-leader in ways that are appropriate to every

different relationship to women.

it is a call to risk getting egg on our faces; to pray as we

have never prayed before; to be constantly in the Word; to

be more given to planning, more intentional, more thought-

ful, less carried along by the mood of the moment; to be

disciplined and ordered in our lives; to be tenderhearted and

sensitive; to take the initiative to make sure there is a time and

a place to talk to her about what needs to be talked about; and

to be ready to lay down our lives the way christ did if that is

necessary.

“ . . . P R O v I d E F O R . . . ”

“at the heart of mature masculinity is a sense of benevolent

responsibility to lead, provide for . . .”

the point of saying that man should feel a responsibility

to provide for woman is not that the woman should not assist

in maintaining support for the family or for society in general.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 38

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

she always has done this historically because so much of the

domestic life required extraordinary labors on her part just to

maintain the life of the family. today in many cultures women

carry a tremendous breadwinning role in the field, often while

the men do far less strenuous tasks. it is possible to be exces-

sively demanding or excessively restrictive on a woman’s role

in sustaining the life of the family. Proverbs 31 pictures a wife

with great ability in the business affairs of the family.

What i mean when i say that a man should feel a benevo-

lent responsibility to provide is this: when there is no bread on

the table it is the man who should feel the main pressure to do

something to get it there. it does not mean his wife can’t help

— side by side in a family enterprise or working in a different

job. in fact, it is possible to imagine cases where she may have

to do it all — say, if he is sick or injured. But a man will feel

his personhood compromised if he, through sloth or folly or

lack of discipline, becomes dependent over the long haul (not

just during graduate school!) on his wife’s income.

this is implied in Genesis 3 where the curse touches man

and woman in their natural places of life. it is not a curse that

man must work in the field to get bread for the family or that

woman bears children. the curse is that these spheres of life

are made difficult and frustrating. in appointing the curse

for his rebellious creatures God aims at the natural sphere

of life peculiar to each. evidently God had in mind from the

beginning that the man would take special responsibility for

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 39

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

sustaining the family through breadwinning labor, while the

wife would take special responsibility for sustaining the fam-

ily through childbearing and nurturing labor. Both are life-

sustaining and essential.

the point of this Genesis text is not to define limits for

what else the man and the woman might do. But it does sug-

gest that any role reversal at these basic levels of childcare

and breadwinning labor will be contrary to the original

intention of God, and contrary to the way he made us as male

and female for our ordained roles.15 supporting the family is

primarily the responsibility of the husband. caring for the

children is primarily the responsibility of the wife.

again i stress that the point here is not to dictate the

details of any particular pattern of labor in the home. the

point is that mature manhood senses a benevolent responsi-

bility before God to be the primary provider for his family. he

senses that if God were to come and call someone to account

for not meeting the family’s needs God would come to the

husband first (Genesis 3:9).

the same is true for a social grouping of men and

women who are not married. Mature men sense that it is

primarily (not solely) their responsibility to see to it that

there is provision and protection. the covenant of marriage

does not create a man’s sense of benevolent responsibil-

ity to provide the basic necessities of food and shelter. in

marriage the sense of responsibility is more intense and

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 40

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

personal. But this dimension of mature manhood is there

in a man apart from marriage.

“ . . . P R O T E C T I O N . . . ”

“at the heart of mature masculinity is a sense of benevolent

responsibility to lead, provide for and protect . . .”

suppose a man and a woman (it may be his wife or sis-

ter or friend or a total stranger) are walking along the street

when an assailant threatens the two of them with a lead pipe.

Mature masculinity senses a natural, God-given responsibility

to step forward and put himself between the assailant and the

woman. in doing this he becomes her servant. he is willing

to suffer for her safety. he bestows honor on her. his inner

sense is one of responsibility to protect her because he is a

man and she is a woman.

there is a distorted and sinful masculinity that might

claim an authority and leadership that has the right to tell the

woman to step in front of him and shield him from the blows

and let him escape. But every man knows this is a perversion

of what it means to be a man and a leader. and every wife

knows that something is amiss in a man’s manhood if he sug-

gests that she get out of bed 50% of the time to see what the

strange noise is downstairs.

she is not condemned as a coward because she feels a

natural fitness in receiving this manly service. and she may

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 41

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

well be more courageous than he at the moment. she may

be ready to do some fearless deed of her own. a man’s first

thought is not that the woman at his side is weak, but simply

that he is a man and she is a woman. Women and children

are put into the lifeboats first, not because the men are

necessarily better swimmers, but because of a deep sense of

honorable fitness. it belongs to masculinity to accept danger

to protect women.

it may be that in any given instance of danger the woman

will have the strength to strike the saving blow. it may be too

that she will have the presence of mind to think of the best

way of escape. it may be that she will fight with tooth and

claw to save a crippled man and lay down her life for him if

necessary. But this does not at all diminish the unique call of

manhood when he and his female companion are confronted

by a danger together. the dynamics of mature masculinity

and femininity begin the drama with him in front and her at

his back protected—however they may together overcome

the foe or suffer courageously together in persecution. a

mature man senses instinctively that as a man he is called to

take the lead in guarding the woman he is with.16

“ . . . W O M E N . . . ”

“at the heart of mature masculinity is a sense of benevolent

responsibility to lead, provide for and protect women . . .”

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 42

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

i do not say “wives” because there is a sense in which

masculinity inclines a man to feel a responsibility for leader-

ship and provision and protection toward women in general,

not just toward wives or relatives. Masculinity and feminin-

ity are rooted in who we are by nature. they are not simply

reflexes of a marriage relationship. Man does not become

man by getting married. But it is clear that the form which

leadership, provision and protection take will vary with the

kind of relationship a man has with a woman—from the

most intimate relationship of marriage to the most casual

relationship with a stranger on the street. this is why the

description of masculinity must conclude with the follow-

ing phrase.

“ . . . I N W A Y S A P P R O P R I A T E T O

A M A N ’ S d I F F E R I N G R E L A T I O N S H I P S . ”

ephesians 5:22, titus 2:5 and 1 Peter 3:1, 5 exhort wives to

be subject to “your own” ( idiois) husbands. this term, “your

own” shows that the relationship of leadership and submis-

sion between a woman and her husband should be different

from the relationship of leadership and submission which

she may have with men in general. husbands and wives have

responsibilities to each other in marriage that they do not

have to other men and women.

But this does not mean that there is no way that male-

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 43

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

ness and femaleness affect the relationship of men and

women in general. that a man has a unique responsibil-

ity for leadership in his own home does not mean that his

manhood is negligible in other settings. it is not negligible.

But it is very diverse. the responsibility of men toward

women will vary according to the kind of relationship they

have. husband and wife will have different responsibilities

than a pastor and female parishioner will have. and those

responsibilities will in turn be different from the differing

responsibilities of men and women in business, recreation,

government, neighborhood, courtship, engagement, etc.

the possibilities of women and men meeting each other and

having dealings with each other are extremely diverse and

beyond counting. and my persuasion is that mature mascu-

linity will seek appropriate expressions of manhood in each

of these relationships.

these expressions of manhood will include acts of defense

and protection, a readiness to serve with strength, and a pat-

tern of initiative. i have touched on all three of these. But it

may be helpful to focus once more on this idea of a pattern of

initiative that is appropriate for differing relationships. the

point here is that even though a man will not take initiating

steps of leadership with a stranger or with a colleague the

same way he will with his wife, his mature manhood will seek

a pattern of initiative appropriate for the relationship.

for example, if a man works as a lawyer in a law firm with

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 44

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

other lawyers, some of whom are women, he will of course

not initiate many of the kinds of discussion that he might

with his wife. in fact one of the special initiatives mature

masculinity will take is to build protections against the devel-

opment of any kind of inappropriate intimacy with his female

colleagues. it is not primarily the responsibility of women to

build procedural and relational guidelines to protect them-

selves from the advances of ill-behaved men. Primarily it is

the responsibility of mature manhood to establish a pattern

of behaviors and attitudes — a kind of collegial choreography

— that enable men and women to move with freedom and

ease and moral security among each other.

if, in the course of the day, a woman in the law firm calls

a meeting of the attorneys, and thus takes that kind of initia-

tive, there are still ways that a man, coming to that meeting,

can express his manhood through culturally appropriate

courtesies shown to the women in the firm. he may open the

door; he may offer his chair; he may speak in a voice that is

gentler.17

it is true that this becomes increasingly difficult where

a unisex mentality converts such gentlemanly courtesies

into offenses and thus attempts to shut out every means of

expressing the realities of manhood and womanhood. it will

be a strain for mature christian men and women to work

in that atmosphere. But it may be that through intelligent

discussion and courteous, caring behaviors they may have a

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 45

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

redeeming effect even on what their colleagues think and feel

about manhood and womanhood.

We must reckon with the possibility that in the various

spheres of life it is possible that role relationships emerge for

men and women that so deeply compromise what a man or

woman senses is appropriate for their masculine or feminine

personhood that they have to seek a different position. this is

what J. i. Packer implies when he makes the following percep-

tive observation:

While i am not keen on hierarchy and patriarchy as terms

describing the man-woman relationship in scripture,

Genesis 2:18-23 . . . and ephesians 5:21-33 . . . continue

to convince me that the man-woman relationship is

intrinsically nonreversible. By this i mean that, other

things being equal, a situation in which a female boss

has a male secretary, or a marriage in which the woman

(as we say) wears the trousers, will put more strain on

the humanity of both parties than if it were the other

way around. this is part of the reality of the creation, a

given fact that nothing will change.18

this brings us back to the basic insight of Paul Jewett,

namely, that

Our self-knowledge is indissolubly bound up not sim-

ply with our human being but with our sexual being. at

the human level there is no ‘i and thou’ per se, but only

the ‘i’ who is male or female confronting the ‘thou,’ the

‘other,’ who is also male or female.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 46

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f M a s c u l i n i t y

i believe this is true and that God has not left us without

a witness to the meaning of our masculine and feminine

personhood. i have tried to unfold at least some of what that

masculine personhood involves. now we turn to the meaning

of mature femininity.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 47

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 48

2/23/09 8:26:53 AM

the Meaning of femininity

a significant aspect of femininity is a way of responding to

the pattern of initiatives established by mature masculinity.

this is why i have discussed masculinity first. Much of the

meaning of womanhood is clearly implied in what i have said

already about manhood—in the same way that the moves

of one ballet dancer would be implied if you described the

moves of the other. nevertheless it is important now to focus

on the description of womanhood given earlier and unfold its

meaning for the sake of a balanced and attractive portrait of

manhood and womanhood.

at the heart Of MatUre feMininitY is a

freeinG disPOsitiOn tO affirM, receive and

nUrtUre strenGth and LeadershiP frOM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 49

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

WOrthY Men in WaYs aPPrOPriate tO a

WOMan’s differinG reLatiOnshiPs.19

“ A T T H E H E A R T O F . . . ”

again, this phrase signals that the definition of femininity is

not exhaustive. there is more to femininity, but not less. i

believe this is at the heart of what true womanhood means,

even if there is a mystery to our complementary existence that

we will never exhaust.

“ . . . M A T U R E F E M I N I N I T Y . . . ”

the word “mature” implies that there are distortions of

femininity. false or immature stereotypes are sometimes

identified as the essence of femininity. ronda chervin, in her

book Feminine, Free and Faithful, gives a list of what people

commonly consider “positive feminine traits” and “negative

feminine traits.” the participants in her workshops say posi-

tively that women are

responsive, compassionate, empathetic, enduring, gen-

tle, warm, tender, hospitable, receptive, diplomatic,

considerate, polite, supportive, intuitive, wise, percep-

tive, sensitive, spiritual, sincere, vulnerable (in the

sense of emotionally open), obedient, trusting, graceful,

sweet, expressive, charming, delicate, quiet, sensually

receptive (vs. prudish), faithful, pure.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 50

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f F e m i n i n i t y

chervin lists the following women who exhibit many

of these traits: ruth, naomi, sarah, Mary (Jesus’ mother),

cordelia of King Lear, Melanie in Gone with the Wind, Grace

Kelly, and Mother teresa of calcutta. On the other hand

people often stereotype women with negative traits:

weak, passive, slavish, weepy, wishy-washy, seductive,

flirtatious, vain, chatter-box, silly, sentimental, naive,

moody, petty, catty, prudish, manipulative, complain-

ing, nagging, pouty, smothering, spiteful.20

it is plain then that when we talk of femininity we must

make careful distinctions between distortions and God’s

original design. “Mature femininity” refers not to what sin

has made of womanhood or what popular opinion makes of

it, but what God willed for it to be at its best.

“ . . . I S A F R E E I N G d I S P O S I T I O N . . . ”

i focus on mature femininity as a disposition rather than a set

of behaviors or roles because mature femininity will express

itself in so many different ways depending on the situation.

hundreds of behaviors may be feminine in one situation and

not in another. and the specific acts that grow out of the dis-

position of womanhood vary considerably from relationship

to relationship, not to mention from culture to culture.

for example, the Biblical reality of a wife’s submission

would take different forms depending on the quality of a

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 51

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

husband’s leadership. this can be seen best if we define sub-

mission not in terms of specific behaviors, but as a disposition

to yield to the husband’s authority and an inclination to follow

his leadership.21 this is important to do because no submis-

sion of one human being to another is absolute. the husband

does not replace christ as the woman’s supreme authority.

she must never follow her husband’s leadership into sin. she

will not steal with him or get drunk with him or savor pornog-

raphy with him or develop deceptive schemes with him.

But even where a christian wife may have to stand with

christ against the sinful will of her husband, she can still have

a spirit of submission—a disposition to yield. she can show

by her attitude and behavior that she does not like resisting

his will and that she longs for him to forsake sin and lead in

righteousness so that her disposition to honor him as head

can again produce harmony.22

the disposition of mature femininity is experienced as

freeing. this is because it accords with the truth of God’s

purpose in creation. it is the truth that frees (John 8:32).

there are sensations of unbounded independence that are

not true freedom because they deny truth and are destined

for calamity. for example, two women may jump from an

airplane and experience the thrilling freedom of free-falling.

But there is a difference: one is encumbered by a parachute on

her back and the other is free from this burden. Which person

is most free? the one without the parachute feels free—even

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 52

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f F e m i n i n i t y

freer, since she does not feel the constraints of the parachute

straps. But she is not truly free. she is in bondage to the force

of gravity and to the deception that all is well because she feels

unencumbered. this false sense of freedom is in fact bondage

to calamity which is sure to happen after a fleeting moment

of pleasure.

that is the way many women (and men) today think of

freedom. they judge it on the basis of immediate sensations of

unrestrained license or independence. But true freedom takes

God’s reality and God’s purpose for creation into account and

seeks to fit smoothly into God’s good design. freedom does

include doing what we want to do. But the mature and wise

woman does not seek this freedom by bending reality to fit

her desires. she seeks it by being transformed in the renewal

of her desires to fit in with God’s perfect will (romans 12:2).

the greatest freedom is found in being so changed by God’s

spirit that you can do what you love to do and know that it

conforms to the design of God and leads to life and glory.

God does not intend for women to be squelched or

cramped or frustrated. But neither does he intend for women

to do whatever seems to remove these feelings without regard

to the appropriateness of the action. sometimes freedom

comes from outward changes in circumstances. sometimes

it comes from inward changes of the heart and mind. Many

today say, for example, that true freedom for a lesbian would

be the liberty to act according to her sexual preference.23 But

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 53

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

i would say that true freedom cannot ignore God’s judgment

on homosexual activity and God’s will for men and women to

be heterosexual in their sexual relations. therefore true free-

dom is not giving in to our every impulse. it is the sometimes

painful and exhilarating discovery of God’s power to fight free

from the bondage of our sinful selves.24

i believe that the femininity to which God calls women

is the path of freedom for every woman. it will not look the

same in every woman. But it will lay responsibilities on all

women in the same way that mature masculinity lays respon-

sibilities on all men. some of these we express very naturally.

Others of them we must grow into by prayer and faith and

practice. But this process of growth is no more confining

than the growth of a young woman toward patterns of mature

behavior that enable her to act with natural freedom in the

company of adults.

“. . . TO AFIRM, RECEIvE ANd NURTURE

STRENGTH ANd LEAdERSHIP

FROM WORTHY MEN . . .”

“at the heart of mature femininity is a freeing disposition to

affirm, receive and nurture strength and leadership from worthy

men in ways appropriate to a woman’s differing relation-

ships.”

the “strength and leadership” referred to here is what

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 54

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f F e m i n i n i t y

was described above concerning the responsibility of mature

masculinity to lead, provide and protect. the quality of that

strength and leadership is captured in the phrase, “from wor-

thy men.” i recognize that there is strength and leadership

that is unworthy of a woman’s affirmation. i do not mean

to define femininity merely as a response to whatever sinful

men may happen to offer up. Mature femininity is rooted in

a commitment to christ as Lord and is discerning in what

it approves. Mature femininity has a clear, Biblical vision of

mature masculinity. Woman delights in it as man delights in

mature femininity. each gives the other the greatest scope for

natural, pure, mature expression. But when a man does not

possess mature masculinity the response of a mature woman

is not to abandon her femininity. rather, her femininity

remains intact as a desire for things to be as God intended

them to be. But she also recognizes that the natural expres-

sion of her womanhood will be hindered by the immaturity

of the man in her presence.

My definition of the heart of femininity includes three

words to describe the response of a woman to the strength

and leadership of worthy men: affirm, receive and nurture.

“affirm” means that mature women advocate the kind of

masculine-feminine complementarity that we are describing

here. this is important to stress because there may be occa-

sions when women have no interaction with men and yet are

still mature in their femininity. this is because femininity is

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 55

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

a disposition to affirm the strength and leadership of worthy

men, not just to experience it firsthand. it is also true, as we

will see below, because there are unique feminine strengths

and insights that women embody even before they can be

given to any man.

“receive” means that mature femininity feels natural and

glad to accept the strength and leadership of worthy men.25 a

mature woman is glad when a respectful, caring, upright man

offers sensitive strength and provides a pattern of appropriate

initiatives in their relationship. she does not want to reverse

these roles. she is glad when he is not passive. she feels herself

enhanced and honored and freed by his caring strength and

servant-leadership.

“nurture” means that a mature woman senses a respon-

sibility not merely to receive, but to nurture and strengthen

the resources of masculinity. she is to be his partner and

assistant. she joins in the act of strength and shares in the

process of leadership. she is, as Genesis 2:18 says, “a helper

suitable for him.”

this may sound paradoxical—that she strengthens the

strength she receives, and that she refines and extends the

leadership she looks for. But it is not contradictory or unintel-

ligible. there are strengths and insights that women bring to

a relationship that are not brought by men. i do not mean to

imply by my definition of femininity that women are merely

recipients in relation to men. Mature women bring nurturing

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 56

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f F e m i n i n i t y

strengths and insights that make men stronger and wiser and

that make the relationship richer.26

note: We need to heed a caution here about the differ-

ing strengths of men and women. Whenever anyone

asks if we think women are, say, weaker than men, or

smarter than men, or more easily frightened than men

or something like that, a good answer would go like this:

women are weaker in some ways and men are weaker in

some ways; women are smarter in some ways and men

are smarter in some ways; women are more easily fright-

ened in some kinds of circumstances and men are more

easily frightened in other kinds of circumstances.

it is very misleading to put negative values on the

so-called weaknesses that each of us has by virtue of our

sexuality. God intends for all the “weaknesses” that are

characteristically masculine to call forth and highlight

woman’s strengths. and God intends for all the “weak-

nesses” that are characteristically feminine to call forth

and highlight man’s strengths.

a person who naively assumes that men are superior

because of their kind of strength might consider these

statistics from 1983: six times more men than women

are arrested for drug abuse. ten times more men than

women are arrested for drunkenness. 83% of serious

crimes in america are committed by men. twenty-five

times more men than women are in jail. virtually all

rape is committed by men.27

i point that out to show that boasting in either sex as

superior to the other is a folly. Men and women as God

created them are different in hundreds of ways. One

helpful way to describe our equality and differences is

this: Picture the so-called weaknesses and strengths of

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 57

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

man and woman listed in two columns. if you could give

a numerical value to each one the sum at the bottom of

both columns is going to be the same. Whatever differ-

ent minuses and pluses are on each side of masculinity

and femininity are going to balance out. and when you

take those two columns from each side and lay them, as

it were, on top of each other, God intends them to be

the perfect complement to each other, so that when life

together is considered (and i don’t just mean married

life) the weaknesses of manhood are not weaknesses

and the weaknesses of woman are not weaknesses. they

are the complements that call forth different strengths

in each other.28

if it is true that manhood and womanhood are to

complement rather than duplicate each other, and if it is

true that the way God made us is good, then we should

be very slow to gather a list of typical male weaknesses

or a list of typical female weaknesses and draw a con-

clusion that either is of less value than the other. Men

and women are of equal value and dignity in the eyes

of God—both created in the image of God and utterly

unique in the universe.29

“. . . IN WAYS APPROPRIATE TO A

WOMAN’S dIFFERING RELATIONSHIPS . . .”

“at the heart of mature femininity is a freeing disposition to

affirm, receive and nurture strength and leadership from worthy

men in ways appropriate to a woman’s differing relationships. ”

Mature femininity does not express itself in the same

way toward every man. a mature woman who is married, for

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 58

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f F e m i n i n i t y

example, does not welcome the same kind of strength and

leadership from other men that she welcomes from her hus-

band. But she will affirm and receive and nurture the strength

and leadership of men in some form in all her relationships

with men. this is true even though she may find herself in

roles that put some men in a subordinate role to her. Without

passing any judgment on the appropriateness of any of these

roles one thinks of the following possible instances:

• Prime Minister and her counsellors and advisors.

• Principal and the teachers in her school.

• College teacher and her students.

• Bus driver and her passengers.

• Bookstore manager and her clerks and stock help.

• Staff doctor and her interns.

• Lawyer and her aides.

• Judge and the court personnel.

• Police officer and citizens in her precinct.

• Legislator and her assistants.

• T.V. newscaster and her editors.

• Counsellor and her clients.

One or more of these roles might stretch appropriate

expressions of femininity beyond the breaking point. But in

any case, regardless of the relationships in which a woman

finds herself, mature femininity will seek to express itself in

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 59

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

appropriate ways. there are ways for a woman to interact

even with a male subordinate that signal to him and others her

endorsement of his mature manhood in relationship to her as

a woman. i do not have in mind anything like sexual sugges-

tiveness or innuendo. rather, i have in mind culturally appro-

priate expressions of respect for his kind of strength, and glad

acceptance of his gentlemanly courtesies. her demeanor—the

tone and style and disposition and discourse of her ranking

position—can signal clearly her affirmation of the unique role

that men should play in relationship to women owing to their

sense of responsibility to protect and lead.

it is obvious at this point that we are on the brink of

contradiction—suggesting that a woman may hold a position

of leadership and fulfill it in a way that signals to men her

endorsement of their sense of responsibility to lead. But the

complexities of life require of us this risk. to illustrate: it is

simply impossible that from time to time a woman not be put

in a position of influencing or guiding men. for example, a

housewife in her backyard may be asked by a man how to get

to the freeway. at that point she is giving a kind of leadership.

she has superior knowledge that the man needs and he sub-

mits himself to her guidance. But we all know that there is a

way for that housewife to direct the man that neither of them

feels their mature femininity or masculinity compromised. it

is not a contradiction to speak of certain kinds of influence

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 60

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f F e m i n i n i t y

coming from women to men in ways that affirm the responsi-

bility of men to provide a pattern of strength and initiative.

But as i said earlier, there are roles that strain the person-

hood of man and woman too far to be appropriate, productive

and healthy for the overall structure of home and society.

some roles would involve kinds of leadership and expecta-

tions of authority and forms of strength as to make it unfitting

for a woman to fill the role. however, instead of trying to list

what jobs might be fitting expressions for mature femininity

or mature masculinity, it will probably be wiser to provide

several guidelines.

it is obvious that we cannot and should not prohibit

women from influencing men. for example, prayer is cer-

tainly a God-appointed means women should use to get

men to where God wants them to be. Praying women exert

far more power in this world than all political leaders put

together. this kind of powerful influence is compounded

immensely when one considers the degree to which the world

is shaped and guided by the effects of how men and women

are formed by their mothers. this influence is perhaps more

effective than all the leadership of men put together.

so the question should be put: what kind of influence

would be inappropriate for mature women to exercise toward

men? it would be hopeless to try to define this on a case-by-

case basis. there are thousands of different jobs in the church

and in the world with an innumerable variety of relationships

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 61

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

between men and women. More appropriate than a black-

and-white list of “man’s work” and “woman’s work” is a set of

criteria to help a woman think through whether the respon-

sibilities of any given job allow her to uphold God’s created

order of mature masculinity and femininity.

here is one possible set of criteria. all acts of influence

and guidance can be described along these two continuums:

Personal

non-personal

directive

non-directive

to the degree that a woman’s influence over man is

personal and directive it will generally offend a man’s good,

God-given sense of responsibility and leadership, and thus

controvert God’s created order.

a woman may design the traffic pattern of a city’s streets

and thus exert a kind of influence over all male drivers. But

this influence will be non-personal and therefore not necessar-

ily an offense against God’s order. similarly, the drawings and

specifications of a woman architect may guide the behavior

of contractors and laborers, but it may be so non-personal

that the feminine-masculine dynamic of the relationship is

negligible.

On the other hand, the relationship between husband

and wife is very personal. all acts of influence lie on the con-

tinuum between personal and impersonal. the closer they get

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 62

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

T h e M e a n i n g o f F e m i n i n i t y

to the personal side, the more inappropriate it becomes for

women to exert directive influence.

But the second continuum may qualify the first. some

influence is very directive, some is non-directive. for exam-

ple, a drill sergeant would epitomize directive influence. it

would be hard to see how a woman could be a drill sergeant

over men without violating their sense of masculinity and her

sense of femininity.

non-directive influence proceeds with petition and per-

suasion instead of directives. a beautiful example of non-

directive leadership is when abigail talked david out of

killing nabal (l samuel 25:23-35). she exerted great influence

over david and changed the course of his life; but she did it

with amazing restraint and submissiveness and discretion.

When you combine these two continuums, what emerges

is this: if a woman’s job involves a good deal of directives

toward men, they will, in general, need it to be non-personal.

the God-given sense of responsibility for leadership in

a mature man will not generally allow him to flourish long

under personal, directive leadership of a female superior.

J. i. Packer suggested that “a situation in which a female boss

has a male secretary” puts strain on the humanity of both

(see note 16). i think this would be true in other situations

as well. some of the more obvious ones would be in military

combat settings if women were positioned so as to deploy and

command men; or in professional baseball if a woman is made

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 63

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

the umpire to call balls and strikes and frequently to settle

heated disputes among men. and i would stress that this is

not necessarily owing to male egotism, but to a natural and

good penchant given by God.

conversely, if a woman’s relation to man is very personal,

then the way she offers guidance will need to be non-direc-

tive. the clearest example here is the marriage relationship.

the apostle Peter speaks of a good wife’s meek and tranquil

spirit that can be very winsome to her husband (1 Peter 3:4).

a wife who “comes on strong” with her advice will probably

drive a husband into passive silence, or into active anger.

it is not nonsense to say that a woman who believes she

should guide a man into new behavior should do that in a way

that signals her support of his leadership. this is precisely

what the apostle Peter commends in l Peter 3:lff. similarly in

the workplace it may not be nonsense in any given circum-

stance for a woman to provide a certain kind of direction for

a man, but to do it in such a way that she signals her endorse-

ment of his unique duty as a man to feel a responsibility

of strength and protection and leadership toward her as a

woman and toward women in general.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 64

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

the Biblical vision of

complementarity

in the book Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood

(crossway, 1990) we show, with more detailed exegetical

argumentation, that the vision of masculine and feminine

complementarity sketched in this essay is a Biblical vision—

not a perfect portrayal of it, no doubt, but a faithful one. this

is the way God meant it to be before there was any sin in the

world: sinless man, full of love, in his tender, strong leader-

ship in relation to woman; and sinless woman, full of love, in

her joyful, responsive support for man’s leadership. no belit-

tling from the man, no groveling from the woman. two intel-

ligent, humble, God-entranced beings living out, in beautiful

harmony, their unique and different responsibilities. sin has

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 65

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

distorted this purpose at every level. We are not sinless any-

more. But we believe that recovery of mature manhood and

womanhood is possible by the power of God’s spirit through

faith in his promises and in obedience to his Word.

in the home when a husband leads like christ and a

wife responds like the bride of christ, there is a harmony

and mutuality that is more beautiful and more satisfying

than any pattern of marriage created by man. Biblical head-

ship for the husband is the divine calling to take primary

responsibility for christlike, servant-leadership, protection

and provision in the home. Biblical submission for the wife is

the divine calling to honor and affirm her husband’s leader-

ship and help carry it through according to her gifts.30 this

is the way of joy. for God loves his people and he loves his

glory. and therefore when we follow his idea of marriage

(sketched in texts like Genesis 2:18-24; Proverbs 5:15-19;

31:10-31; Mark 10:2-12; ephesians 5:21-33; colossians

3:18-19; and 1 Peter 3:1-7) we are most satisfied and he is

most glorified.

the same is true of God’s design for the leadership of

the church.31 the realities of headship and submission in

marriage have their counterparts in the church. thus Paul

speaks of authority and submission in 1 timothy 2:11-12.

We will try to show that “authority” refers to the divine call-

ing of spiritual, gifted men to take primary responsibility

as elders for christlike servant-leadership and teaching in

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 66

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

T h e B i b l i c a l V i s i o n o f C o m p l e m e n t a r i t y

the church. and “submission” refers to the divine calling of

the rest of the church, both men and women, to honor and

affirm the leadership and teaching of the elders and to be

equipped by them for the hundreds and hundreds of vari-

ous ministries available to men and women in the service

of christ.

that last point is very important. for men and women

who have a heart to minister—to save souls and heal bro-

ken lives and resist evil and meet needs—there are fields

of opportunity that are simply endless. God intends for the

entire church to be mobilized in ministry, male and female.

nobody is to be at home watching soaps and ballgames while

the world burns. and God intends to equip and mobilize the

saints through a company of spiritual men who take primary

responsibility for leadership and teaching in the church.

the word “primary” is very important. it signals that

there are different kinds and levels of teaching and leading

that will not be the sole responsibility of men (titus 2:3;

Proverbs 1:8; 31:26; acts 18:26). Mature masculinity will

seek by prayer and study and humble obedience to discover

the pattern of ministry involvement for men and women that

taps the gifts of every christian and honors the God-given

order of leadership by spiritual men.

there are many voices today who claim to know a better

way to equip and mobilize men and women for the mission

of the church. But we believe that manhood and womanhood

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 67

2/23/09 8:26:54 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

mesh better in ministry when men take primary responsibil-

ity for leadership and teaching in the church; and that mature

manhood and womanhood are better preserved, better nur-

tured, more fulfilled and more fruitful in this church order

than in any other.

if i were to put my finger on one devastating sin today, it

would not be the so-called women’s movement, but the lack

of spiritual leadership by men at home and in the church.

satan has achieved an amazing tactical victory by dissemi-

nating the notion that the summons for male leadership is

born of pride and fallenness, when in fact pride is precisely

what prevents spiritual leadership. the spiritual aimlessness

and weakness and lethargy and loss of nerve among men

is the major issue, not the upsurge of interest in women’s

ministries.

Pride and self-pity and fear and laziness and confusion are

luring many men into self-protecting, self-exalting cocoons of

silence. and to the degree that this makes room for women

to take more leadership it is sometimes even endorsed as

a virtue. But i believe that deep down the men—and the

women—know better.

Where are the men with a moral vision for their families,

a zeal for the house of the Lord, a magnificent commitment

to the advancement of the kingdom, an articulate dream for

the mission of the church and a tenderhearted tenacity to

make it real?

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 68

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

T h e B i b l i c a l V i s i o n o f C o m p l e m e n t a r i t y

When the Lord visits us from on high and creates a

mighty army of deeply spiritual men committed to the Word

of God and global mission, the vast majority of women will

rejoice over the leadership of these men and enter into a joy-

ful partnership that upholds and honors the beautiful Biblical

pattern of mature manhood and mature womanhood.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 69

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 70

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

a closing challenge to

Men and Women

several years ago the women of our church asked for a morn-

ing seminar in which i would lay out my vision of manhood

and womanhood and discus it with them. i was eager for this

opportunity. We spent all of saturday morning together. it

was very encouraging for me. they had many hard questions,

but as a whole were wonderfully supportive of the vision i

shared. not all the women of our church see things exactly

the same way; but those who came out that saturday morning

were enthusiastic about the kind of manhood and woman-

hood portrayed in this book.

i closed the seminar with a personal (fifteen-point) chal-

lenge to the women of our church. it has some parts that show

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 71

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

the special emphases of our fellowship, but i thought it would

be a helpful and practical way to conclude this essay. to bal-

ance the ledger i have written a corresponding challenge to

men. ten of the points are virtually identical for men and

women (1-8, 12-13).

My earnest challenge and prayer for you is . . .

W O M E N

M E N

1. that all of your life—in 1. that all of your life—in

whatever calling—be devoted whatever calling—be devoted

to the glory of God.

2. that the promises of christ 2. that the promises of christ

be trusted so fully that peace be trusted so fully that peace

and joy and strength fill your and joy and strength fill your

soul to overflowing.

3. that this fullness of God 3. that this fullness of God

overflow in daily acts of love overflow in daily acts of love

so that people might see your so that people might see your

good deeds and give glory to good deeds and give glory to

your father in heaven.

4. that you be women of the 4. that you be men of the

Book, who love and study and Book, who love and study and

obey the Bible in every area obey the Bible in every area

of its teaching. that medi- of its teaching. that medi-

tation on Biblical truth be tation on Biblical truth be

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 72

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

A C l o s i n g C h a l l e n g e t o M e n a n d W o m e n

the source of hope and faith. the source of hope and faith.

that you continue to grow that you continue to grow

in understanding through in understanding through

all the chapters of your life, all the chapters of your life,

never thinking that study and never thinking that study and

growth are only for others.

5. that you be women of 5. that you be men of prayer,

prayer, so that the Word of so that the Word of God

God will be opened to you, will be opened to you, so

and so the power of faith the power of faith and holi-

and holiness will descend ness will descend upon you,

upon you, that your spiri- that your spiritual influence

tual influence may increase may increase at home and at

at home and at church and in church and in the world.

the world.

6. that you be women who 6. that you be men who have

have a deep grasp of the sov- a deep grasp of the sovereign

ereign grace of God which grace of God which under-

undergirds all these spiri- girds all these spiritual pro-

tual processes; and that you cesses; and that you be deep

be deep thinkers about the thinkers about the doctrines

doctrines of grace, and even of grace, and even deeper lov-

deeper lovers of these things.

ers of these things.

7. that you be totally com- 7. that you be totally com-

mitted to ministry, whatever mitted to ministry, whatever

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 73

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

your specific calling; that you your specific calling; that you

not fritter your time away on not fritter your time away on

soaps or women’s magazines excessive sports and recre-

or unimportant hobbies or ation or unimportant hobbies

shopping; that you redeem or aimless diddling in the

the time for christ and his garage; but that you redeem

Kingdom.

the time for christ and his

Kingdom.

8. that, if you are single, you 8. that, if you are single, you

exploit your singleness to the exploit your singleness to the

full in devotion to God (the full in devotion to God (the

way Jesus and Paul and Mary way Jesus and Paul and Mary

slessor and amy carmichael slessor and amy carmichael

did) and not be paralyzed by did) and not be paralyzed by

the desire to be married.

9. that, if you are married, 9. that, if you are married,

you creatively and intelli- you love your wife the way

gently and sincerely support christ loved the church and

the leadership of your hus- gave himself for her; that you

band as deeply as obedience be a humble, self-denying,

to christ will allow; that you upbuilding, happy spiritual

encourage him in his God- leader; that you consistently

appointed role as head; that grow in grace and knowl-

you influence him spiritually edge so as never to quench

primarily through your fear- the aspirations of your wife

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 74

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

A C l o s i n g C h a l l e n g e t o M e n a n d W o m e n

less tranquillity and holiness for spiritual advancement;

and prayer.

that you cultivate tender-

ness and strength, a pattern

of initiative and a listening

ear; and that you accept the

responsibility of provision

and protection in the family,

however you and your wife

share the labor.

10. that, if you have chil- 10. that, if you have children,

dren, you accept responsibil- you accept primary respon-

ity with your husband (or sibility, in partnership with

alone if necessary) to raise your wife (or as a single par-

up children in the disci- ent), to raise up children in

pline and instruction of the the discipline and instruction

Lord—children who hope in of the Lord—children who

the triumph of God—sharing hope in the triumph of God;

that you establish a pattern

with your husband the teach- of teaching and discipline

ing and discipline they need, that is not solely dependent

and giving them the special on the church or school to

attachment they crave from impart Bible knowledge and

you, as well as that special spiritual values to the chil-

nurturing touch and care that dren; and that you give your

you alone are fitted to give.

children the time and atten-

tion and affection that com-

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 75

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

municates the true nature of

our father in heaven.

11. that you not assume 11. that you not assume

that secular employment is advancement and peer

a greater challenge or a bet- approval in your gainful

ter use of your life than the employment are the highest

countless opportunities of values in life; but that you

service and witness in the ponder the eternal signifi-

home, the neighborhood, the cance of faithful fatherhood

community, the church, and and time spent with your

the world; that you not only wife; that you repeatedly

pose the question: career or consider the new possibili-

full-time homemaker?, but ties at each stage of your life

that you ask just as seriously: for maximizing your ener-

full-time career or freedom gies for the glory of God in

for ministry? that you ask: ministry; that you pose the

Which would be greater

for the Kingdom—to work question often: is our family

for someone who tells you molded by the culture, or do

what to do to make his or we embody the values of the

her business prosper, or to Kingdom of God? that you

be God’s free agent dreaming lead the family in making

your own dream about how choices not on the basis of

your time and your home secular trends or upward life-

and your creativity could style expectations, but on the

make God’s business pros- basis of what will strengthen

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 76

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

A C l o s i n g C h a l l e n g e t o M e n a n d W o m e n

per? and that in all this you the faith of the family and

make your choices not on advance the cause of christ.

the basis of secular trends

or upward lifestyle expecta-

tions, but on the basis of what

will strengthen the faith of

the family and advance the

cause of christ.

12. that you step back and 12. that you step back and

(with your husband, if you (with your wife, if you are

are married) plan the various married) plan the various

forms of your life’s ministry forms of your life’s ministry

in chapters. chapters are in chapters. chapters are

divided by various things— divided by various things—

age, strength, singleness, age, strength, singleness,

marriage, employment, chil- marriage, employment, chil-

dren at home, children in dren at home, children in

college, grandchildren, retire- college, grandchildren, retire-

ment, etc. no chapter has all ment, etc. no chapter has all

the joys. finite life is a series the joys. finite life is a series

of trade-offs. finding God’s of trade-offs. finding God’s

will, and living for the glory will and living for the glory

of christ to the full in every of christ to the full in every

chapter is what makes it a chapter is what makes it a

success, not whether it reads success, not whether it reads

like somebody else’s chapter like somebody else’s chapter

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 77

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

or whether it has in it what or whether it has in it what

only another chapter will only another chapter will

bring.

13. that you develop a war- 13. that you develop a war-

time mentality and life-style; time mentality and life-style;

that you never forget that that you never forget that

life is short, that billions of life is short, that billions of

people hang in the balance people hang in the balance

of heaven and hell every of heaven and hell every

day, that the love of money day, that the love of money

is spiritual suicide, that the is spiritual suicide, that the

goals of upward mobility goals of upward mobility

(nicer clothes, cars, houses, (nicer clothes, cars, houses,

vacations, food, hobbies) are vacations, food, hobbies) are

a poor and dangerous substi- a poor and dangerous substi-

tute for the goals of living for tute for the goals of living for

christ with all your might christ with all your might

and maximizing your joy in and maximizing your joy in

ministry to people’s needs.

14. that in all your relation- 14. that in all your relation-

ships with men (not just in ships with women (not just

marriage) you seek the guid- in marriage) you seek the

ance of the holy spirit in guidance of the holy spirit in

applying the Biblical vision of applying the Biblical vision of

manhood and womanhood; manhood and womanhood;

that you develop a style and that you develop a style and

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 78

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

A C l o s i n g C h a l l e n g e t o M e n a n d W o m e n

demeanor that does justice to demeanor that expresses your

the unique role God has given God-given responsibility for

to man to feel responsible for humble strength and leader-

gracious leadership in rela- ship, and for self-sacrificing

tion to women—a leadership provision and protection;

which involves elements of that you think creatively and

protection and provision and with cultural sensitivity (just

a pattern of initiative. that as she must do) in shaping

you think creatively and with the style and setting the tone

cultural sensitivity (just as he of your interaction with

must do) in shaping the style women.

and setting the tone of your

interaction with men.

15. that you see the Biblical 15. that you see the Biblical

guidelines for what is appro- guidelines for what is appro-

priate and inappropriate priate and inappropriate

for men and women not as for men and women not as

arbitrary constraints on free- license for domination or

dom, but as wise and gra- bossy passivity, but as a call to

cious prescriptions for how servant-leadership that thinks

to discover the true freedom in terms of responsibilities

of God’s ideal of complemen- not rights; that you see these

tarity. that you not mea- principles as wise and gra-

sure your potential by the cious prescriptions for how

few roles withheld, but by to discover the true freedom

the countless roles offered. of God’s ideal of complemen-

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 79

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

that you look to the loving tarity; that you encourage

God of scripture and dream the fruitful engagement

about the possibilities of your of women in the countless

service to him, with the fol- ministry roles that are

lowing list as possibilities for Biblically appropriate and

starters:

deeply needed. for example:

O P P O R T U N I T I E S F O R M I N I S T R Y

Ministries to the handicapped

audiovisual ministries

hearing impaired

composition

Blind

design

Lame

Production

retarded

distribution

Ministries to the sick

Writing ministries

nursing

free-lance

Physician

curriculum development

hospice care—cancer, aids, etc. fiction

community health

non-fiction

editing

Ministries to the socially estranged institutional communications

emotionally impaired

Journalistic skills for publications

recovering alcoholics

recovering drug-users

teaching ministries

escaping prostitutes

sunday school: children, youth,

abused children, women

students, women

runaways, problem children

Grade school

Orphans

high school

college

Prison ministries

Women’s prisons

Music ministries

families of prisoners

composition

rehabilitation to society

training

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 80

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

A C l o s i n g C h a l l e n g e t o M e n a n d W o m e n

Ministries to youth

Performance

teaching

voice

sponsoring

choir

Open houses and recreation

instrumentalist

Outings and trips

counseling

evangelistic ministries

academic assistance

Personal witnessing

Parachurch groups

sports ministries

home Bible studies

neighborhood teams

Outreach to children

church teams

visitation teams

counseling at meetings

therapeutic counseling

telephone counseling

independent

church-based

Pastoral care assistance

institutional

visitation

newcomer welcoming and assistance

radio and television ministries hospitality

technical assistance

food and clothing and transportation

Writing

announcing

Prayer ministries

Producing

Praying

Mobilizing for prayer events

theater and drama ministries

helping with small groups of prayer

acting

coordinating prayer chains

directing

Promoting prayer days and weeks

Writing

and vigils

scheduling

Missions

social ministries

all of the above across cultures

Literacy

Pro-life

support ministries

Pro-decency

countless “secular” jobs that

housing

undergird other ministries

safety

Beautification

the awesome significance of

drug rehabilitation

motherhood

Making a home as a full-time wife

i realize this list is incomplete and reflects my own cul-

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 81

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

ture and limitations. But it is worth the risk, i think, to make

clear that the vision of manhood and womanhood presented

in this book is not meant to hinder ministry but to purify and

empower it in a pattern of Biblical obedience.

the ninth affirmation of the danvers statement32 is per-

haps the crucial final thing to say so that the aim of this book

is not misunderstood.

With half the world’s population outside the reach

of indigenous evangelism; with countless other lost

people in those societies that have heard the gospel;

with the stresses and miseries of sickness, malnutrition,

homelessness, illiteracy, ignorance, aging, addiction,

crime, incarceration, neuroses, and loneliness, no man

or woman who feels a passion from God to make his

grace known in word and deed need ever live without

a fulfilling ministry for the glory of christ and the good

of this fallen world.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 82

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

notes

Between november, 1983 and May, 1984 i carried on a debate con-

cerning this issue with my friends and former colleagues alvera and

Berkeley Mickelsen in our denominational periodical, The Standard (of

the Baptist General conference). in these monthly articles i tried to lay

the exegetical foundations for how men and women are called by God

to relate to each other. the names of the articles are: “Male, female and

Morality” (november, 1983), pp. 26-28; “satan’s design in reversing Male

Leadership role” (december, 1983), pp. 33-35; “Jesus’ teaching on Men

and Women: dismantling the fall, not the creation” (January, 1984),

pp. 32-34; “a Metaphor of christ and the church” (february, 1984), pp.

27-29; “creation, culture and corinthian Prophetesses” (March, 1984),

pp. 30-32; “the Order of creation” (april, 1984), pp. 35-38; “how should

a Woman Lead?” (May, 1984), pp. 34-36.

2. the cassette tapes of seven sermons on manhood and womanhood

can be ordered by writing to council of Biblical Manhood and

Womanhood, P.O. Box 1173, Wheaton, iL 60189.

3. Paul K. Jewett, Man as Male and Female (Grand rapids: William B.

eerdmans Pub. co., 1975), p. 172.

4. Man as Male and Female, p. 173. the reference is to emil Brunner, Das

Gebot und die Ordnungen (tuebingen: J.c.B. Mohr, 1933), p. 358.

5. Man as Male and Female, p. 178.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 83

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

6. Man as Male and Female, p. 187f.

7. the teaching in 1 Peter 3:1-7 concerning the differentiation of roles is

not based explicitly on the order of creation, but neither is it based on

convention. rather it is rooted in the example of “holy women who

hoped in God” (v. 5). sarah is cited as an example of submission, not

because she complied with abraham’s wish that she pose as his sister

(Genesis 20), which is the amazing example of submission we might

have expected Peter to use, but rather because she said “my lord”

when speaking offhandedly to herself about her husband. this seems

to suggest that the root of sarah’s submission was a deep allegiance to

abraham’s leadership that expressed itself without coercion or public

pressure.

8. this is developed and defended exegetically in two extensive essays

by John sailhammer and ray Ortlund Jr. in Recovering Biblical

Manhood and Womanhood (crossway Books, 1990).

9. the limitation of this essay is seen, for example, in that i will say

very little about the capacity of a woman to bear children, and the

special role that she has in nursing and nurturing them. nor do i say

anything about the man’s crucial role in nurturing healthy, secure

children. My focus is on the significance that manhood and wom-

anhood have for the relational dynamics between men and women

and the implications of these dynamics for the roles appropriate for

each.

10. the fact that a christian wife and church member, according to acts

2:17, may “prophesy” implies, at least, that she may often have ideas

and insights that a wise and humble husband and pastor will listen

to and adopt. On women and prophecy see Wayne Grudem, The Gift

of Prophecy: In the New Testament and Today (Wheston: crossway

Books, 1988), pp. 215-225.

11. this understanding of masculine responsibility will be developed,

for example, from the way God comes to adam first after the fall,

implying his special responsibility in the failure even though eve had

sinned first. this accords with other pointers in the early chapters

of Genesis before the fall that God meant for adam to have a special

responsibility for leadership (establishing a pattern of initiative) in

relation to eve. the sharing of initiatives within that general pattern

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 84

2/23/09 8:26:55 AM

N o t e s

is implied in the image of christ and the church as the model for

marriage (ephesians 5:21-33). christ means for his bride to look to

him for leadership, but not to the exclusion of her own thoughtful

choices and initiatives in communication and in shared mission.

12. James dobson, Straight Talk to Men and Their Wives (Waco: Word

Books, 1980), pp. 64f.

13. notice the move from “children, obey your parents” in ephesians

6:1 to “Fathers . . . bring them up in the nurture and discipline of

the Lord” (v. 4). Both have responsibility to discipline, and children

should hold both in high regard. But there is a special responsibility

on fathers for the moral life and discipline of the home.

14. the Biblical teaching on nature’s voice urging men and women not

to exchange or confuse the cultural symbols of masculinity and femi-

ninity is very relevant here. When Paul says in 1 corinthians 11:14,

“does not nature teach you that for a man to wear long hair is degrad-

ing to him?” he means that there is in man a native sense of repug-

nance against taking on cultural symbols of femininity. We would

say, “does not nature teach you that it is degrading to a man to wear

a dress to church?” this voice of “nature” has great social benefits

even in cultures untouched by special revelation from scripture.

But romans 1:18-32 shows that a culture can become so corrupted

that the native sense is ignored (vv. 26-27) and suppressed so that

unnatural practices are even approved (v. 32). at such a point the

call for Biblical repentance is not only a call to believe what the Bible

teaches, but also to be transformed so deeply that the natural inclina-

tions of mature manhood and womanhood are recovered, and society

conforms once again not merely to what the scriptures teach, but to

“what nature teaches” among those who are now under the sway of

Biblical truth and, more widely, under the rectifying social power of

common grace. alongside this teaching on the voice of nature should

be put the teaching of 1 corinthians 13:5 that love does not act in an

“unseemly” way; it does not offend against good manners.

15. another pointer from scripture that this is the way God intends the

relationship of husband and wife to be is the image of christ as head

of the church with man playing that role toward his wife according to

ephesians 5:23. the image of head implies that christ is the provider as

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 85

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

well as a leader. “hold fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nour-

ished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a

growth that is from God” (colossians 2:19; cf. ephesians 4:16).

this does not at all contradict the idea of leadership implied in “head-

ship.” On the contrary it strengthens it. the thought in colossians 2:19

begins in verse 18 with a reference to people who are puffed up, “not

holding fast to the head, from whom the whole body, nourished and

knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth

that is from God.” What is especially significant here for us is the

implication that since christ as head is supplier, the church must “hold

fast” to him. the opposite of holding fast is being puffed up in mind

and independent of christ. so the implication is that headship is a role

to be depended on and followed. there is to be an allegiance to the

head as provider. this in essence implies a kind of leadership role for

the head, as one to whom the body should ever look for what it needs.

this is all the more evident when we note how christ in fact does pro-

vide for his wife, the church. as the head he provides the body with

truth (ephesians 4:15, 21) and strength (colossians 1:11) and wisdom

(colossians 2:3) and love (ephesians 3:17-18; 4:16; colossians 2:2).

this means that the idea of provider implies loving leader because

christ leads with his truth and wisdom and he does this with love that

lives out his teaching before us and for us.

there are numerous other Biblical evidences of the father’s spe-

cial responsibility to provide for his family. consider, for example,

1 timothy 3:5, “for if someone (an elder) does not know how to

manage (proistenai) his own household, how shall he take care of

(epimelesetai) the church of God?” this idea of managing his own

home well may have more than provision in mind (leadership for

sure; see the use of proistemi in 1 thessalonians 5:12), but i doubt

that it has less. elders/overseers are responsible to feed (1 Peter 5:2;

acts 20:28; Jeremiah 3:15) and protect (acts 20:28-31) the flock.

Other evidences of the father’s special responsibility to provide

for his family portray the husband and father as the protector too.

for example, deuteronomy 10:18, “[God] executes justice for the

fatherless and the widow, and loves the stranger giving him food and

raiment.” in other words, when the natural protector and provider

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 86

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

N o t e s

is not there God steps in to take his place for the orphan and widow.

Jeremiah 31:32 points in this same direction. God says concerning

israel, “My covenant which they broke, though i was their husband,

says the Lord.” how was he their husband? the context suggests that

he was their husband in giving them protection at the sea and the

provision in the wilderness.

16. the Biblical support for this is seen first in the texts like the ones

cited above in note 10 (deuteronomy 10:18 and Jeremiah 31:32).

it is also implied in ephesians 5:25, “husbands, love your wives as

christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” christ is here

sacrificing himself to protect his wife, the church, from the ravages

of sin and hell. christ gives himself as the model for the husband in

this regard because the husband is the man. this is not an arbitrary

assignment. it is fitting because men were created for this. the “mys-

tery” of marriage (ephesians 5:32) is the truth that God designed

male and female from the beginning to carry different responsibilities

on the analogy of christ and his church. the sense of responsibility

to protect is there in man by virtue of this design of creation, not by

virtue of the marriage covenant. Marriage makes the burden more

personal and more intense, but it does not create it.

additional support for man’s primary responsibility to protect

women is found in the Old testament pattern of men, rather than

women, being given the duty to go to war. and nature itself seems

to teach this duty of protection by endowing men, by and large, with

greater brute strength.

17. such customs, like all manners, are easily caricatured and satirized.

But that is a mark of immaturity. Just as men and women know that

some rough contact sports are not natural for women to play, so we

know that there is a verbal rough-and-tumble among men, a kind of

tough and rugged argumentation that is less appropriate when speak-

ing to a woman than to a man.

18. J. i. Packer, “Understanding the differences,” in Women, Authority

and the Bible, ed. by alvera Mickelsen (downers Grove: intervarsity

Press, 1986), p. 298-299.

19. One way of relating this definition to scripture is to see it as an

attempt to unfold some of what is implied in the old-fashioned phrase

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 87

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

“help meet” in Genesis 2:18—“and the Lord God said, it is not good

that the man should be alone; i will make him a help meet for him”

(KJv). it may well be that the feminine inclination to help a man

in his life and work signifies far more than i have been able to spell

out in the phrases “affirm, receive, and nurture.” But i have chosen

to focus on what seems to me to be the heart of woman’s feminine

suitableness to man as a helper. the animals were helpful in some

ways (Genesis 2:19). But the helpfulness of the woman is radically

different. that unique human element is what i am interested in.

20. ronda chervin, Feminine, Free and Faithful (san francisco: ignatius

Press, 1986), p. 15.

21. the Biblical warrant for this definition is 1 Peter 3:1-6, where a

believing wife is married to an unbelieving husband. the text clearly

teaches that she is to be submissive, but not in such a way that fol-

lows him in his unbelief. in fact, she is instructed how to get him to

change, and be converted. the implication here is that her submis-

sion is not a de facto yielding to all that he says (since she has a higher

allegiance to Jesus), but a disposition to yield and an inclination to follow. her submission is a readiness to support his leadership wherever

it does not lead to sin.

22. this paragraph is taken largely from my wider discussion of this issue

in Desiring God (Portland: Multnomah Press, 1986), pp. 177-184.

23. for example, Gerald sheppard, a professor of Old testament at the

University of toronto, said in 1986, “i believe that the Gospel—as

evangelicals concerned recognizes—should lead us at least to an

affirmation of gay and lesbian partnerships ruled by a biblical ethic

analogous to that offered for heterosexual relationships.” “a response

to anderson (ii),” TSF Bulletin, vol. 9, no. 4, (March-april, 1986),

p. 21. similarly in July of 1986 the evangelical Women’s caucus

international under the influence of virginia Mollenkott and nancy

hardesty took a stand affirming the legitimacy of lesbianism to such

an extent that members like Katherine Kroeger and Gretchen hull

withdrew their membership. see “Gay rights resolution divides

Membership of evangelical Women’s caucus,” in: Christianity Today

(October 3, 1986), pp. 40-44. ralph Blair, the founder of evangelicals

concerned, continues to debunk the claim that homosexuals can or

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 88

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

N o t e s

should change their sexual orientation. he promotes monogamous

homosexual relationships and claims Biblical support for it, arguing

that the Bible is opposed to promiscuous homosexuality, not homo-

sexuality itself. his views are cited by tim stafford, “coming Out,”

Christianity Today (august 18, 1989), p. 19.

24. for a discussion of contemporary ministries that believe in the real

possibilities of homosexuals to experience significant changes in the

focus and power of their sexual preference see Christianity Today,

august 18, 1989. see also George rekers, Shaping Your Child’s Sexual

Identity (Grand rapids: Baker Book house, 1982).

25. this is implied in the goodness and gladness of creation before the

fall (Genesis 2) when man, created first, was called to the primary

responsibility of leadership, and woman, created to be “a helper

suitable for him,” was called to use her gifts in helping carry that

leadership through. this was all “very good” (Genesis 1:31) and

therefore must have given man and woman great gladness. the same

glad responsiveness to this order of things is implied in ephesians

5:21-33 where man and wife are to model their relationship after

that of christ and the church. the church delights to accept strength

and leadership from christ. the delight that a woman takes in the

strength and leadership of her husband is not merely owing to the

marriage covenant. Just as man was created with a native sense of

responsibility to lead and provide and protect in ways appropriate to

his varying relationships (see note 12), so woman was created as a

suitable complement to honor this responsibility with gladness and

satisfaction.

26. see page 50 for some examples of feminine strengths that enrich

men.

27. Weldon M. hardenbrook, Missing from Action: Vanishing Manhood in

America (nashville: thomas nelson Publishers, 1987), pp. 9-10.

28. experience and psychology teach us that there are significant dif-

ferences of many kinds between men and women. in each case one

could establish a standard that would make one sex stronger and the

other weaker. But Paul’s teaching on the body of christ warns us

against demeaning those that have traits of weakness—male or female

(1 corinthians 12:21-26). the creation of male and female in the

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 89

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

W h a t ’ s t h e d i f f e r e n c e ?

image of God (Genesis 1:27) forbids that we make our diversity a

ground for variable worth as persons in God’s eyes. and the Biblical

declaration that all was “very good” when God created us with our

differences means that a “weakness” by one narrow standard is a

“strength” in its contribution to the total fabric of man as male and

female in God’s image.

29. When 1 Peter 3:7 refers to the wife as a “weaker feminine vessel,” it is

probably focussing on the most obvious fact, especially in that more

rugged culture, that a woman has lesser brute strength. that is, she

is more in need of protection and provision from the man than he is

from her. he is to “recognize” this and honor her by supplying all she

needs as a fellow-heir of grace. the verse does not contemplate the

question i have raised, namely whether there are some other things

about man that can also be described as weaker than woman.

30. i am assuming implicitly here what i said about submission on

pp. 51-52.

31. the elders are charged with the primary responsibility of leadership

(acts 20:28; 1 timothy 5:17; 1 Peter 5:3) and Biblical instruction

(titus 1:9; 1 timothy 3:2; 5:17) in the church. that’s a summary of

their job. so when Paul puts those two things together and says, “i do

not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority,” one very natural

implication is, “i do not permit a woman to assume the office of elder

in the church.”

so the authority Paul has in mind in 1 timothy 2:12 at least

includes the authority of elders. We saw already from Jesus in Luke

22:26 what that is supposed to look like: “Let the greatest among you

become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves.” Paul said

in 2 corinthians 10:8 and 13:10 that God gave him authority in the

church not for tearing down or destroying, but for building up. and

Peter said to the elders of the churches (1 Peter 5:3), “do not domi-

neer over the those in your charge, but be examples to the flock.”

in other words elder-authority is servant-authority. elder-leader-

ship is servant-leadership. that’s why teaching is at the heart of this

calling. Biblical authority leads by persuasion—by teaching—not by

coercion or political maneuvering. elder-authority is always subor-

dinate to Biblical truth. therefore teaching is the primary instrument

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 90

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

N o t e s

of leadership in the church. and authority refers to the divine calling

of spiritual, gifted men to take primary responsibility as elders for

christlike, servant-leadership and teaching in the church. their goal

is not their own status or honor. their goal is the equipping of the

saints—women and men—to do the work of the ministry.

32. the danvers statement is the charter statement (rationale,

Purposes and affirmations) of the council on Biblical Manhood and

Womanhood and may be ordered from the council at P.O. Box 1173,

Wheaton, iL 60189.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 91

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 92

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

If you would like to further explore the vision of God and life pre-

sented in this book, we at Desiring God would love to serve you.

We have hundreds of resources to help you grow in your passion

for Jesus Christ and help you spread that passion to others. At our

website, desiringGod.org, you’ll find almost everything John Piper

has written and preached, including more than thirty books. We’ve

made over twenty-five years of his sermons available free online for

you to read, listen to, download, and in some cases watch.

In addition, you can access hundreds of articles, listen to our daily

internet radio program, find out where John Piper is speaking, learn

about our conferences, discover our God-centered children’s cur-

ricula, and browse our online store. John Piper receives no royalties

from the books he writes and no compensation from Desiring God.

The funds are all reinvested into our gospel-spreading efforts. DG

also has a whatever-you-can-afford policy, designed for individu-

als with limited discretionary funds. If you’d like more information

about this policy, please contact us at the address or phone num-

ber below. We exist to help you treasure Jesus Christ and his gospel

above all things because he is most glorified in you when you are

most satisfied in him. Let us know how we can serve you!

Desiring God

Post Office Box 2901

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402

888.346.4700

[email protected]

www.desiringGod.org

DG_MinPage_5-25x7-75.indd 1

3/26/08 10:56:50 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 93

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 94

2/23/09 8:26:56 AM

feminist ideology is everywhere. it’s in schools, television

shows, music, politics—even the church. in fact, it’s so per-

vasive within the evangelical community that it’s become its

own movement—“evangelical feminism.” But what many of its

adherents fail to recognize is that incorporating feminism into

theology has devastating implications on our relationships, soci-

ety, the church, and our homes.

in the most comprehensive response yet, a group of scholars

explore every key passage of scripture to determine the biblical

view of male and female roles and relationships. What they have

found is imperative for anyone searching for the truth.

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 95

2/23/09 8:26:57 AM

WhatsTheDifference.02781.int.indd 96

2/23/09 8:26:57 AM

↑ Back to top