St Theodore's

Wattle Park

Sermon of the Week
Look up the passage

15/12/02

The Credible Christian Household Eph 5:21-6:4
Matt 19:1-9

I want us to spend some time today thinking about what a Christian household might look like. Mind you I don't mean just any Christian household. Of course I mean a credible Christian household.

Well, what is it that might characterise a credible Christian household? Is there something about a Christian household that people might notice as different?

Well, as usual I want to start by thinking about a particular passage, the one we just read, from Ephesians 5 & 6, and as we go along we'll think about some other passages as well.

Here in Ephesians 5 Paul begins to think about how the unity of the Church should be reflected in the way households operate. So he starts with this simple instruction in v21: "Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ." His desire is that Christian households would demonstrate a level of harmony and partnership that will be seen by others as commendable, that is, as commending the gospel.

Now I guess most of us are familiar with the concept of a submissive wife. It's an idea that's been taught fairly widely over the years, based largely on this passage. Wives are told to be subject to their husbands, just as they're subject to the Lord. The idea is that if the unity of a couple is to be maintained then the wife needs to overcome her natural inclination to want to rule her husband. Now before you start throwing things, let me assure you that there's more to this than just that and I'll be talking about husbands in a moment. But this bit is important. If you're a wife you have a primary role in maintaining the harmony of the household. Not the primary role, but a primary role.

When God announced the curses that had come on humanity as a result of Adam and Eve's rebellion, one of the curses was that the woman's desire would be for her husband, but that he would rule over her. Now we tend to think of that in terms of sexual desire, but in fact the word desire is also used in the next chapter to describe the way sin is desiring to master Cain, but instead Cain must master it (4:7). So it seems probable that the curse has to do with the desire for control, whether by the wife or by the husband. Now, as I said, we'll say more about husbands in a moment. But first, wives need to work this one through. If your marriage is to be characterised by mutual submission, by you being subject to one another, then that means being prepared to go against the way we've all been trained over the past 30 to 40 years. In other words you might need to forego the desire for self fulfillment, self-actualisation, in favour of working for the benefit of the partnership, perhaps even giving up your own desire for fulfillment because you want to see your partner grow. I don't have time to go into the legacy of Abraham Maslow, but for those who don't know about him he was a psychologist who observed human behaviour in organisations and came up with what he called a hierarchy of needs. The trouble was that this hierarchy of needs, with the need for food and shelter at the bottom and self-actualisation at the top, I think, has become a self fulfilling prophecy. So, now it isn't just that people come to the point of desiring self-fulfilment after all their other needs are met. We now see it as the most important thing we can have.

And that sometimes works directly against any desire to work with a partner in mutual submission. Now the reason I'm saying this to wives in the first instance is that I think one of the negative results of the women's liberation movement of the past 30 years has been to close off the possibility of concern for the welfare of the husband where there was any possibility that it might conflict with the self-actualisation of the wife. To the point where I think if a Christian wife were following these principles from Ephesians 5 she'd be seen as betraying the ideals of feminism.

Before we go on, I should mention something that Peter writes to wives in 1 Peter 3. There he encourages wives to accept the authority of their non-Christian husbands, not out of mutual submission, but out of as desire to win them over to faith in Christ. There it's the husband who will notice the behaviour of his wife rather than her friends and neighbours.

But that's enough on submissive wives. What about submissive husbands? We don't hear so much about them do we? Some people suggest that's because it's usually husbands who do all the preaching. But look again at v21: "Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ." The sort of submission that will characterise a Christian marriage involves both parties being subject to each other. It will involve submissive wives and submissive husbands. Now I want you to think about that for a moment. When we talk about submissive wives we might feel a bit uncomfortable mightn't we? Some of us, I imagine, might feel very uncomfortable. But what about when we talk about submissive husbands? Well some of you are probably thinking I've got it wrong. I haven't read the rest of the passage. Husbands are meant to be the head of the household. Well, let me assure you I have read the rest of the passage. But I'm also aware that the rest of the passage hangs on this foundation. It's our mutual submission that will separate our marriages from so many others, not wives who obey their husbands; not even husbands who sacrifice their own interests for the sake of their wives. No it's the sense of mutuality, of a desire for the good of the other that will set us apart and commend the gospel to our friends and neighbours.

Not only that, but think about the model husbands are given for this submission. We're to love our wives the way Christ loved the church. We're to be submitted to our wives, the way Christ submitted himself to the Church. What does Phil 2 say? He "did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, ⁷but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, ⁸he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death-- even death on a cross." That's the sort of submission men are supposed to exercise! Humbling themselves to the point of death. Where's self-actualisation in that?

Well, actually here it is: v28: "husbands should love their wives as they do their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. ²⁹For no one ever hates his own body, but he nourishes and tenderly cares for it, just as Christ does for the church." Here's the paradox of mutual submission. In the very act of giving up our own desires for the sake of our spouse, we're actually serving our own ends, because the 2 of us have become one. So serving her needs, also serves my own.

But there's more to be said about the way husbands behave in a marriage situation. The passage we read from Matthew 19 is addressed in the first instance, I believe, to husbands. This is one place where inclusive language wouldn't have been in order. In Jesus' day a man could do what he liked as far as his wife was concerned. As often as not she was treated as a mere chattel, someone to be discarded when her husband was sick of her. So Jesus' teaching was quite radical in saying that this practice of divorcing a wife on whatever grounds they liked went against the whole institution of marriage. Now these days we don't think of wives as chattels I hope, but there is, in some people's minds, the idea that a marriage relationship only matters while the needs of both partners are being met. If one person's needs aren't being met then you might as well dissolve the partnership and start again. Well, it might come to that in a fallen world, but if we're seeking to live as credible Christians then we need to be working at our relationships so they don't break down. And part of being mutually submissive is that we seek to ensure that the needs of the other party are met as well as our own, so there's no reason for a relationship to break down if that's what we're working at.

We could talk about the way children are to obey, or honour their parents in a credible Christian household, but the children aren't here, so let's instead think about how parents might treat their children. Eph 6:4: "fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord." There's a responsibility on the part of parents to discipline their children in such a way that they grow up in the fear and love of Jesus Christ. One of the criteria for selection of elders in the Church is that their children be submissive and respectful in every way. In other words before you give someone responsibility for running a church, you need to make sure that they've managed to run their household well. And the test of that will be the behaviour of their children. Are they rebellious or are they respectful?

Again, this is news to some people, though I hope not to those here, but parents are the ones who have the responsibility of teaching their children to obey them and to love and honour God. You see some parents relating to their children and you wonder which is the parent. Who's running their household? There was an article in the Weekend Age a few weeks ago about an organisation that's teaching parents how to discipline their children. Why? Because they've never learnt how to do it. In fact that didn't think they were allowed to. With the result of course that their children were out of control. But now with a little help they're changing their lives by introducing some long needed discipline to their households. And this is particularly a role for fathers it seems. I'm not sure whether it was in the same article but I also read that week a female journalist commenting on how her husband didn't have any trouble disciplining her kids, while she was always at war with them. She commented that her husband seemed to be able to deal with his kids in a more matter of fact way than she could. They seemed to know how to work on her emotions in a way that didn't work with their father. Now I'm not going to comment on whether that's a general experience of parents, but it does seem to me that where fathers are involved as well as mothers in the raising of their children and in disciplining them from an early age they tend to be better adjusted.

But notice that we're not to discipline in a way that will provoke our children. Admittedly it seems to be the role of fathers to embarrass their teenage children, but that makes it all the more important for us to work hard at not doing things that we know will make them angry. It's OK if they're upset because we've placed limits on them, but it's not OK if we've provoked them unreasonably to anger.

Well, we've talked a lot about households of families but I'm conscious that a good proportion of our congregation in fact don't live in family settings. Like much of Australian society today there are a lot of single person households represented here today. So how does a single person Christian household look different to any other?

Well, let me suggest that one area where single households and for that matter multi-person households can show the difference in being built on Christian foundations is this: in the area of hospitality.

I'm told by friends who are single that one of their great dangers is that they can become self-focussed. They get used to only having to worry about themselves and some of them even begin to enjoy their seclusion. But let me suggest that if you're to show your Christian faith in action, then you'll be opening your homes to others. Sharing with them the good things you have to share. And of course such hospitality brings with it a double reward. First we have the reward of knowing that God is pleased with us because we're showing his love to others and secondly, we have the pleasure of enjoying others company. Our loneliness is lessened, our sense of community is deepened, our joys are shared, our value to others is affirmed. And when they go home you can sit back and relax, thankful that God has given us you a pleasant home to enjoy all by yourself.

We mustn't underestimate the value or the importance of hospitality in the Christian community. In several places in the New Testament we're encouraged to be hospitable, with one passage even suggesting that some people have entertained angels unawares through their hospitality. It can be a valuable means of evangelism as well as a way of building up community.

Finally, I want to talk about the way we use our tongues. Now I guess this applies to all of us whether we're in single or shared households. It applies to the way we talk to our neighbours, to other family members, to friends, whoever. Eph 4:29 says to "Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only what is useful for building up, as there is need, so that your words may give grace to those who hear." Col 4:6 says "Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer everyone." There's a great power for good or evil that resides in our tongues. Our words can be used to build up or to cut down. And in households the power of those words is magnified. And sadly, in some households that power is often lacking in control. There are some who use their words, their tongues, to manipulate and to control; even to subdue. Not necessarily even in a violent way, but nevertheless in a harmful way. Sometimes it's by manipulative means. Sometimes it's by whining. Other times it's by yelling or threatening. But wouldn't it be good if, before we spoke, we were to apply this simple test to our words: "Are they gracious, seasoned with salt? Are they useful for building the other person up and are they necessary at this moment?" There might be far fewer words spoken in anger mightn't there?

Well, we need to stop. Let me encourage you to think some more about how your particular household functions and particularly how it reveals the truth and grace of the gospel to those around you.

Contact us

Check our Mission Statement

Our Mission Strategy

Our 5-Year Plan

Preaching Program

Home

Last Week's Sermon

Index of Sermons

	Sermon of the Week	Look up the passage
	15/12/02
	The Credible Christian Household	Eph 5:21-6:4 Matt 19:1-9

	I want us to spend some time today thinking about what a Christian household might look like. Mind you I don't mean just any Christian household. Of course I mean a credible Christian household.
	Well, what is it that might characterise a credible Christian household? Is there something about a Christian household that people might notice as different?
	Well, as usual I want to start by thinking about a particular passage, the one we just read, from Ephesians 5 & 6, and as we go along we'll think about some other passages as well.
	Here in Ephesians 5 Paul begins to think about how the unity of the Church should be reflected in the way households operate. So he starts with this simple instruction in v21: "Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ." His desire is that Christian households would demonstrate a level of harmony and partnership that will be seen by others as commendable, that is, as commending the gospel.
	Now I guess most of us are familiar with the concept of a submissive wife. It's an idea that's been taught fairly widely over the years, based largely on this passage. Wives are told to be subject to their husbands, just as they're subject to the Lord. The idea is that if the unity of a couple is to be maintained then the wife needs to overcome her natural inclination to want to rule her husband. Now before you start throwing things, let me assure you that there's more to this than just that and I'll be talking about husbands in a moment. But this bit is important. If you're a wife you have a primary role in maintaining the harmony of the household. Not the primary role, but a primary role.
	When God announced the curses that had come on humanity as a result of Adam and Eve's rebellion, one of the curses was that the woman's desire would be for her husband, but that he would rule over her. Now we tend to think of that in terms of sexual desire, but in fact the word desire is also used in the next chapter to describe the way sin is desiring to master Cain, but instead Cain must master it (4:7). So it seems probable that the curse has to do with the desire for control, whether by the wife or by the husband. Now, as I said, we'll say more about husbands in a moment. But first, wives need to work this one through. If your marriage is to be characterised by mutual submission, by you being subject to one another, then that means being prepared to go against the way we've all been trained over the past 30 to 40 years. In other words you might need to forego the desire for self fulfillment, self-actualisation, in favour of working for the benefit of the partnership, perhaps even giving up your own desire for fulfillment because you want to see your partner grow. I don't have time to go into the legacy of Abraham Maslow, but for those who don't know about him he was a psychologist who observed human behaviour in organisations and came up with what he called a hierarchy of needs. The trouble was that this hierarchy of needs, with the need for food and shelter at the bottom and self-actualisation at the top, I think, has become a self fulfilling prophecy. So, now it isn't just that people come to the point of desiring self-fulfilment after all their other needs are met. We now see it as the most important thing we can have.
	And that sometimes works directly against any desire to work with a partner in mutual submission. Now the reason I'm saying this to wives in the first instance is that I think one of the negative results of the women's liberation movement of the past 30 years has been to close off the possibility of concern for the welfare of the husband where there was any possibility that it might conflict with the self-actualisation of the wife. To the point where I think if a Christian wife were following these principles from Ephesians 5 she'd be seen as betraying the ideals of feminism.
	Before we go on, I should mention something that Peter writes to wives in 1 Peter 3. There he encourages wives to accept the authority of their non-Christian husbands, not out of mutual submission, but out of as desire to win them over to faith in Christ. There it's the husband who will notice the behaviour of his wife rather than her friends and neighbours.
	But that's enough on submissive wives. What about submissive husbands? We don't hear so much about them do we? Some people suggest that's because it's usually husbands who do all the preaching. But look again at v21: "Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ." The sort of submission that will characterise a Christian marriage involves both parties being subject to each other. It will involve submissive wives and submissive husbands. Now I want you to think about that for a moment. When we talk about submissive wives we might feel a bit uncomfortable mightn't we? Some of us, I imagine, might feel very uncomfortable. But what about when we talk about submissive husbands? Well some of you are probably thinking I've got it wrong. I haven't read the rest of the passage. Husbands are meant to be the head of the household. Well, let me assure you I have read the rest of the passage. But I'm also aware that the rest of the passage hangs on this foundation. It's our mutual submission that will separate our marriages from so many others, not wives who obey their husbands; not even husbands who sacrifice their own interests for the sake of their wives. No it's the sense of mutuality, of a desire for the good of the other that will set us apart and commend the gospel to our friends and neighbours.
	Not only that, but think about the model husbands are given for this submission. We're to love our wives the way Christ loved the church. We're to be submitted to our wives, the way Christ submitted himself to the Church. What does Phil 2 say? He "did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, ⁷but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, ⁸he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death-- even death on a cross." That's the sort of submission men are supposed to exercise! Humbling themselves to the point of death. Where's self-actualisation in that?
	Well, actually here it is: v28: "husbands should love their wives as they do their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. ²⁹For no one ever hates his own body, but he nourishes and tenderly cares for it, just as Christ does for the church." Here's the paradox of mutual submission. In the very act of giving up our own desires for the sake of our spouse, we're actually serving our own ends, because the 2 of us have become one. So serving her needs, also serves my own.
	But there's more to be said about the way husbands behave in a marriage situation. The passage we read from Matthew 19 is addressed in the first instance, I believe, to husbands. This is one place where inclusive language wouldn't have been in order. In Jesus' day a man could do what he liked as far as his wife was concerned. As often as not she was treated as a mere chattel, someone to be discarded when her husband was sick of her. So Jesus' teaching was quite radical in saying that this practice of divorcing a wife on whatever grounds they liked went against the whole institution of marriage. Now these days we don't think of wives as chattels I hope, but there is, in some people's minds, the idea that a marriage relationship only matters while the needs of both partners are being met. If one person's needs aren't being met then you might as well dissolve the partnership and start again. Well, it might come to that in a fallen world, but if we're seeking to live as credible Christians then we need to be working at our relationships so they don't break down. And part of being mutually submissive is that we seek to ensure that the needs of the other party are met as well as our own, so there's no reason for a relationship to break down if that's what we're working at.
	We could talk about the way children are to obey, or honour their parents in a credible Christian household, but the children aren't here, so let's instead think about how parents might treat their children. Eph 6:4: "fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord." There's a responsibility on the part of parents to discipline their children in such a way that they grow up in the fear and love of Jesus Christ. One of the criteria for selection of elders in the Church is that their children be submissive and respectful in every way. In other words before you give someone responsibility for running a church, you need to make sure that they've managed to run their household well. And the test of that will be the behaviour of their children. Are they rebellious or are they respectful?
	Again, this is news to some people, though I hope not to those here, but parents are the ones who have the responsibility of teaching their children to obey them and to love and honour God. You see some parents relating to their children and you wonder which is the parent. Who's running their household? There was an article in the Weekend Age a few weeks ago about an organisation that's teaching parents how to discipline their children. Why? Because they've never learnt how to do it. In fact that didn't think they were allowed to. With the result of course that their children were out of control. But now with a little help they're changing their lives by introducing some long needed discipline to their households. And this is particularly a role for fathers it seems. I'm not sure whether it was in the same article but I also read that week a female journalist commenting on how her husband didn't have any trouble disciplining her kids, while she was always at war with them. She commented that her husband seemed to be able to deal with his kids in a more matter of fact way than she could. They seemed to know how to work on her emotions in a way that didn't work with their father. Now I'm not going to comment on whether that's a general experience of parents, but it does seem to me that where fathers are involved as well as mothers in the raising of their children and in disciplining them from an early age they tend to be better adjusted.
	But notice that we're not to discipline in a way that will provoke our children. Admittedly it seems to be the role of fathers to embarrass their teenage children, but that makes it all the more important for us to work hard at not doing things that we know will make them angry. It's OK if they're upset because we've placed limits on them, but it's not OK if we've provoked them unreasonably to anger.
	Well, we've talked a lot about households of families but I'm conscious that a good proportion of our congregation in fact don't live in family settings. Like much of Australian society today there are a lot of single person households represented here today. So how does a single person Christian household look different to any other?
	Well, let me suggest that one area where single households and for that matter multi-person households can show the difference in being built on Christian foundations is this: in the area of hospitality.
	I'm told by friends who are single that one of their great dangers is that they can become self-focussed. They get used to only having to worry about themselves and some of them even begin to enjoy their seclusion. But let me suggest that if you're to show your Christian faith in action, then you'll be opening your homes to others. Sharing with them the good things you have to share. And of course such hospitality brings with it a double reward. First we have the reward of knowing that God is pleased with us because we're showing his love to others and secondly, we have the pleasure of enjoying others company. Our loneliness is lessened, our sense of community is deepened, our joys are shared, our value to others is affirmed. And when they go home you can sit back and relax, thankful that God has given us you a pleasant home to enjoy all by yourself.
	We mustn't underestimate the value or the importance of hospitality in the Christian community. In several places in the New Testament we're encouraged to be hospitable, with one passage even suggesting that some people have entertained angels unawares through their hospitality. It can be a valuable means of evangelism as well as a way of building up community.
	Finally, I want to talk about the way we use our tongues. Now I guess this applies to all of us whether we're in single or shared households. It applies to the way we talk to our neighbours, to other family members, to friends, whoever. Eph 4:29 says to "Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only what is useful for building up, as there is need, so that your words may give grace to those who hear." Col 4:6 says "Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer everyone." There's a great power for good or evil that resides in our tongues. Our words can be used to build up or to cut down. And in households the power of those words is magnified. And sadly, in some households that power is often lacking in control. There are some who use their words, their tongues, to manipulate and to control; even to subdue. Not necessarily even in a violent way, but nevertheless in a harmful way. Sometimes it's by manipulative means. Sometimes it's by whining. Other times it's by yelling or threatening. But wouldn't it be good if, before we spoke, we were to apply this simple test to our words: "Are they gracious, seasoned with salt? Are they useful for building the other person up and are they necessary at this moment?" There might be far fewer words spoken in anger mightn't there?
	Well, we need to stop. Let me encourage you to think some more about how your particular household functions and particularly how it reveals the truth and grace of the gospel to those around you.


	Contact us	Check our Mission Statement	Our Mission Strategy	Our 5-Year Plan	Preaching Program	Home		Last Week's Sermon	Index of Sermons