I once asked my pastor why a woman had to have her hair covered in church. He gave me so many words that it was clear he didn’t know. During a lull, his wife chimed in something about how a married woman’s hair should be covered, because her husband is over her, and he is uncovered before God.
That pastor ended up cheating on his wife. It seems some coverings have holes.
A husband as a covering
Submission, leadership and washing with the Word… Women want their husband to create an environment where it is safe to submit, for him to lead correctly and to keep truth raining down.
Sometimes, though, a husband’s “covering” can be an excuse for a lazy pursuit of God. Early in my marriage, I thought my husband should initiate Bible study, prayer, and worship. All three, not just one. It’s easier to be thin with a personal trainer & chef, so maybe it’d be easier to follow God if your husband took care of it for both of you.
Without a covering
But then I met unmarried women and women with unsaved husbands who were devout in their walk, and diligent in their personal prayer and fasting. They had to be. They didn’t have a husband-excuse to blame it on.
“It’s not about what you want…it’s about what I want,” he said.
I think it was popular a generation ago to say that the husband is the head, so he’s in charge of everything. Finances being a favorite example in Christian marriage books—regardless of who has the skill or time, or who needs to notice how the spending affects the family. I’ve met a few women from that era who were blindsided when his promise of “I’ve got it taken care of,” left her bereft and penniless at his death.
We are told in the New Testament to submit to him but not given details about what that looks like. And being the boss of everything wasn’t how Christ interacted with his disciples. Using the same example of finances: one of the twelve was treasurer. Christ, as the head, did not control the money bag. Even though Judas was stealing.
How was Christ the “head”? He degraded himself with serving to the point of Peter’s embarrassment.
Even if you are both individually fervent in your pursuit, linking your life to another changes your walk. When only one of you is elevated, man or woman, it’s easy to forget you’re on the same team.
Wives submit to your own husbands…but not like the women in the Bible
In Joshua 7, Achan sinned and stole from the Lord. I often wonder about his wife. Did she submit to him when he brought the plunder into their tent? It helps me sleep to tell myself that she must have helped him hide it. But did she really have a choice when men could divorce their wives and leave them, without education or provision, on a whim? It matters because—when he was caught, his entire family was killed, including her, their sons and daughters. Was it good to submit to him?
I know the most thorough way to punish a man is to kill off everything he loves, his progeny and, therefore, his name along with him. In movies, they even kill his dog. We see it in other places in the Bible as well, like the men who tried to feed Daniel to the lions but ended up being thrown in with their wives and children. So maybe Joshua was showing the severity of disobedience to God. We don’t know if the whole family sinned with Achan. I’m just observing the fact that, as a wife, your husband’s actions affect your life and future. Apparently, even for the chosen, as in this story, but also when Sarah obeyed Abraham. She was rewarded by being sent into a harem, twice.
The Bible makes a point to say that the second man “didn’t go near her,” but not the first. In fact, Pharoah said, “Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her to be my wife?” We talk about how Sarah is in the Hall of Faith in Hebrews 11. But she is mentioned there because she believed God, not because she let her husband prostitute her. Although, I could be wrong, and it is a credit to Sarah that she submitted in this way. Free agency is a relatively new concept for women.
Submission to a mere man outside the will of God will destroy you. This could be anything from letting him remain abusive to bringing someone else into your marriage bed. Submitting does not mean following him into sin.
There will be consequences for you if you sin.
Submit to God first
Moses was supposed to circumcise his son in Exodus 4, but didn’t. The Lord was on his way to kill him. His wife, Zipporah, could have followed him obediently, but instead, she did the circumcising. She saved Moses’ life by taking charge of the situation.
David wanted help from Nabal but the man was surly and mean. David would have destroyed him and his family. Nabal’s wife, Abigail, could have just submitted. But instead, she took action outside of the will of her husband. It saved her husband’s life and her own. Later, David married her, un-submissiveness and all.
So women risk consequences if they follow their husband into sin and, likewise, they will suffer consequences if their husband is just surly, rebellious, or broken like the rest of us.
However, I believe men will have an individual reckoning because they have been entrusted with more power. And, it isn’t like my soul-health doesn’t affect my husband’s life and future.
A good way to look at it is how Daniel lived in Babylon. He honored the king, but didn’t defile himself with the king’s food. He sought the best thing for the kingdom, but still did what was right even when it was illegal.
Don’t lead him into sin
It can go both ways. Because, if he loves you as he loves his own body, he will bend to your wind. So don’t make the excuse that he is the leader and responsible for both of your sin.
Hamam took advice from his wife Zeresh (and his friends), to build a pole to kill his enemy. In Esther 7:10, Haman himself is impaled.
Jezebel advised her husband in 1 Kings 21 and “There was never anyone like Ahab, who sold himself to do evil in the eyes of the Lord, urged on by Jezebel, his wife.” She was eaten by dogs, for her reckoning.
Taking your own initiative
I remember whispers about a woman who went a little wonky in her doctrine. The probable cause? She was attending church without her husband, so it was easier for her to be led astray. As though males are impervious to false doctrine.
I think it’s a misinterpretation/misassumption that females are more likely to be deceived simply because Eve was deceived. If this were true, then by the same measure, since Adam was not tricked, you could say men are more likely to be rebellious and stand by watching their wives sin, flaccidly wondering what’ll happen. Then blame her for it.
How long should a woman wait for a husband’s covering, initiative, leading? Should she wait with her kids as though a covering of a husband can fill in for the blood of Christ? Or should an uncovered woman cut away the extra flesh like Zipporah?
Only Christ can cover you
At the judgement seat, we will stand before God. And sister, you will not be able to say, “It was the man that you gave me, Lord.” That excuse has holes.
