Questions for a Godly Wife

Ignoring the lurid pink background, which is actually impossible to do given the nature of that colour, this (below) is a helpful resource for wives wishing to be godly ones. It is a document that Jane has found useful (I am not sure how she found it ... but suspect it was femina) and then has humbly passed it onto me. So I am slowly working through it in prayer: 

Questions for a Godly Wife

Don't put it off

for better or worse

When he speaks to you that way ...

Old insights

from Tertullian's  Ad Uxorem


Chapter IV.—Of the Hindrances Which an Unbelieving Husband Puts in His Wife’s Way.


But let her see to (the question) how she discharges her duties to her husband. To the Lord, at all events, she is unable to give satisfaction according to the requirements of discipline; having at her side a servant of the devil, his lord’s agent for hindering the pursuits and duties of believers: so that if a station is to be kept, the husband at daybreak makes an appointment with his wife to meet him at the baths; if there are fasts to be observed, the husband that same day holds a convivial banquet; if a charitable expedition has to be made, never is family business more urgent. For who would suffer his wife, for the sake of visiting the brethren, to go round from street to street to other men’s, and indeed to all the poorer, cottages? Who will willingly bear her being taken from his side by nocturnal convocations, if need so be? Who, finally, will without anxiety endure her absence all the night long at the paschal solemnities? Who will, without some suspicion of his own, dismiss her to attend that Lord’s Supper which they defame? Who will suffer her to creep into prison to kiss a martyr’s bonds? nay, truly, to meet any one of the brethren to exchange the kiss? to offer water for the saints’ feet? to snatch (somewhat for them) from her food, from her cup? to yearn (after them)? to have (them) in her mind? If a pilgrim brother arrive, what hospitality for him in an alien home? If bounty is to be distributed to any, the granaries, the storehouses, are foreclosed.


Chapter V.—Of Sin and Danger Incurred Even with a “Tolerant” Husband.


“But some husband does endure our (practices), and not annoy us.” Here, therefore, there is a sin; in that Gentiles know our (practices); in that we are subject to the privity of the unjust; in that it is thanks to them that we do any (good) work. He who “endures” (a thing) cannot be ignorant of it; or else, if he is kept in ignorance because he does not endure (it), he is feared. But since Scripture commands each of two things—namely, that we work for the Lord without the privity of any second person, and without pressure upon ourselves, it matters not in which quarter you sin; whether in regard to your husband’s privity, if he be tolerant, or else in regard of your own affliction in avoiding his intolerance. “Cast not,” saith He, “your pearls to swine, lest they trample them to pieces, and turn round and overturn you also.” “Your pearls” are the distinctive marks of even your daily conversation. The more care you take to conceal them, the more liable to suspicion you will make them, and the more exposed to the grasp of Gentile curiosity. Shall you escape notice when you sign your bed, (or) your body; when you blow away some impurity; when even by night you rise to pray? Will you not be thought to be engaged in some work of magic? Will not your husband know what it is which you secretly taste before (taking) any food? and if he knows it to be bread, does he not believe it to be that (bread) which it is said to be? And will every (husband), ignorant of the reason of these things, simply endure them, without murmuring, without suspicion whether it be bread or poison? Some, (it is true,) do endure (them); but it is that they may trample on, that they may make sport of such women; whose secrets they keep in reserve against the danger which they believe in, in case they ever chance to be hurt: they do endure (wives), whose dowries, by casting in their teeth their (Christian) name, they make the wages of silence; while they threaten them, forsooth, with a suit before some spy which most women, not foreseeing, have been wont to discover either by the extortion of their property, or else by the loss of their faith.


Chapter VI.—Danger of Having to Take Part in Heathenish Rites, and Revels.


The handmaid of God dwells amid alien labours; and among these (labours), on all the memorial days at the beginning of the year, at the beginning of the month, she will be agitated by the odour of incense. And she will have to go forth (from her house) by a gate wreathed with laurel, and hung with lanterns, as from some new consistory of public lusts; she will have to sit with her husband ofttimes in club meetings, oft-times in taverns; and, wont as she was formerly to minister to the “saints,” will sometimes have to minister to the “unjust.” And will she not hence recognise a prejudgment of her own damnation, in that she tends them whom (formerly) she was expecting to judge? whose hand will she yearn after? of whose cup will she partake? What will her husband sing to her, or she to her husband? From the tavern, I suppose, she who sups upon God will hear somewhat! From hell what mention of God (arises)? what invocation of Christ? Where are the fosterings of faith by the interspersion of the Scriptures (in conversation)? Where the Spirit? where refreshment? where the divine benediction? All things are strange, all inimical, all condemned; aimed by the Evil One for the attrition of salvation!

Some Respectives on Marriage Troubles

Depths to love

..romance has the same function as the curtains of a house - it cannot serve as the concrete poured for the foundation. What establishes the foundation for any godly marriage is covenantal faithfulness to the God who gives us marriage. He gave us the principles, the rules, the laws that govern marriage, and we serve God with a whole heart as we take these things to heart, and then treat our spouse obediently and lawfully with a good will, dependent entirely upon the grace of God in Christ. With the whole heart a man should ask what the Bible requires of him in his treatment of his wife. A wife must ask the same concerning the treatment of her husband. When Christians enter into the covenant of marriage this way, they are blessed with wonderful marriages. Not suprisingly, an obedient man and wife have strong emotional and romantic attachments to one another. But when romance is the foundation, the house does not take very long at all before it starts to crumble.    

p23 Her Hand in Marriage

Are your sexpectations right?

Adam: male & female

This is the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them mankind in the day they were created. (Genesis 5:2)

'In Hebrew, the italicized word translated mankind is Adam. In other words, God created Adam and his wife male and female, He blessed them, and called them Adam. She was, from the beginning, a covenantal partaker in the name of her husband. God does not call her Adam on her own, He calls her Adam with him.' (p15)

'God is the one who called our first parents by the collective name Adam. Now Adam is also a generic term for man or mankind. This shows clearly the biblical practice of including women under such a description. Our English use of the generic man and mankind follows this biblical example exactly. Far from being insulting to women, as feminists want to maintain, it reflects a biblical pattern of thought. The feminist reaction to this, and their rejection of taking a new last name (in order to keep their father's name!), is not just a small bit of modern silliness. It is a fundamental rebellion against God. So when our Susan Miller becomes Mrs. Robert Carter it is not just 'something' we do. It is covenant security.' (p18)

from Reforming Marriage, D Wilson

Independent?

In both passages where she [Eve/Woman] is named [Gen 2:23 & Gen 3:20], it is clearly stated that her two names reveal truth about her. The first reveals her dependence upon man - she was taken out of man. [Gen 2:23] The second reveals man's dependence upon her - every man since is her son. Millenia later, the apostle Paul teaches us that we are continually to remember these two truths in our marriages. Each wife is an Ishshah, and each wife is a Chavvah. Each is Woman, and each is Eve. [1 Cor 11:11-12] (p17, Reforming Marriage, Wilson, D)

Zoe Lewis - an extreme case ... or not?

Zoe Lewis is a playwright who embraced the feminism espoused by her mother and flaunted by Madonna. She now feels betrayed. Below are some extracts of her honest assessment of her experiences of feminism:

Madonna syndrome:
I should have ditched feminism for love, children and baking

I never thought I would be saying this, but being a free woman isn't all it's cracked up to be. Is that the rustle of taffeta I hear as the suffragettes turn in their graves? Possibly. My mother was a hippy who kept a pile of (dusty) books by Germaine Greer and Erica Jong by her bed (like every good feminist, she didn't see why she should do all the cleaning). She imbued me with the great values of choice, equality and sexual liberation. I fought with my older brother and won; at university I beat the rugby lads at drinking games. I was not to be messed with.
Now, nearly 37, those same values leave me feeling cold. I want love and children but they are nowhere to be seen. I feel like a UN inspector sent in to Iraq only to find that there never were any weapons of mass destruction. I was led to believe that women could “have it all” and, more to the point, that we wanted it all. To that end I have spent 20 years ruthlessly pursuing my dreams - to be a successful playwright. I have sacrificed all my womanly duties and laid it all at the altar of a career. And was it worth it? The answer has to be a resounding no.

Ten years ago The Times ran a piece about my play Paradise Syndrome. It was based on my girlfriends in the music business. All we did was party, work and drink. The play sold out and I thought: “This is it! I'm going to have it all: success, power and men are going to adore me for it.” In reality it was the beginning of years of hard slog, rejection letters and living on the breadline. A decade on, I have written the follow-up play Touched for the Very First Time in which Lesley, played by Sadie Frost, is an ordinary 14-year-old from Manchester who falls in love with Madonna in 1984 after hearing the song Like a Virgin. She religiously follows her icon through the years, as Madonna sells her the ultimate dream: “You can do anything - be anything - go girl.” Lesley discovers, along with Madonna, that trying to “have it all” is a huge gamble. I wrote the play because so many of my girlfriends were inspired by this bullish woman who allowed us to be strong and sexy. I still love her and always will, but she has encouraged us to chase a fantasy and it's a huge disappointment.

I may be an extreme case. My views may not represent those of other women of my generation. Perhaps I am just a spoilt middle-class girl who had a career and who has now changed her mind? I don't think so.

This month the General Household Survey found that the number of unmarried women under 50 has more than doubled over the past 30 years. And by the age of 30, one in five of these “freemales”, who have chosen independence over husband and family, has gone through a broken cohabitation.

I argue that women's libbers of the Sixties and Seventies put careerism at the forefront, trampling the traditional role of women underneath their Doc Martens. I wish a more balanced view of womanhood had been available to me. I wish that being a housewife or a mother wasn't such a toxic idea to middle-class liberals of yesteryear.

I wish I'd had kids ten years ago, when time was on my side, but the problem is not so much time as mentality. I made a conscious decision not to have serious relationships because I thought I had all the time in the world. Many of my friends did the same. It's about understanding what is important in life, and from what I see and feel, loving relationships and children bring more happiness than work ever can.....

......Not all women want children but I challenge any woman to say she doesn't want loving relationships. I wish I'd had the advice that I am giving to my 21-year-old sister: if you find a great guy, don't be afraid to settle down and have kids because there isn't anything to miss out on that you can't do later (apart from having kids)....

....I have always felt a huge pressure to be successful to show men that I am their equal. What a waste of time. Wife and mother should be given parity with the careerist role in the minds of feminists.

from http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/article5662099.ece

What shall we do today darling?

The Father and the Son are one... They are not one because they have merged, but rather because the distinct Father indwells the Son, and the Son indwells the Father, while remaining fully and completely Themselves. The Spirit indwells the Father and the Son as well; each Person of the Trinity fully indwells the others (without confusion of the Persons). Theologians call this mutual indwelling perichoresis. We have the same kind of thing in marriage. Husbands must say, ‘I am the head of my body, my wife. I am head of the one who fills me.’ The wife must say, ‘ I am the fullness of the one who is my head.’ Anyone who comes away from a careful reading of the apostle Paul’s teaching on marriage with the idea that the husband is ‘the boss’ and the wife is ‘the slave’ is someone not to be trusted with any text.

(Wilson, For a Glory and a Covering, p8)

Strange Glory

[There is a ] slander that says because Christianity teaches that man is head of his home, it permits men to abuse their wives. What the Bible really teaches is very different. According to the Bible, to be the leader means to sacrifice oneself for the other, as Christ sacrificed Himself for the Church. If Christ is the pattern for the husband – and He is – then what the Bible calls for is self-sacrificial love that glorifies the wife. This is not a view that promotes abuse of any kind. [Ralph Smith, Trinity and Reality, p66]

The first chapter of Ephesians therefore helps us to make sense of the fifth chapter.

If you come to the fifth chapter with the wrong assumptions about what is going on, you will be hopelessly overwhelmed by a rigid Marriage Law.

If all that Christ’s coming did was raise the ethical standard to a higher level, then our condidtion is hopeless. But if we have received the grace revealed in the Incarnation – the grace St. Paul prayed that we might have in Ephesians 1:17-18 – what then? If you have the spirit of wisdom and revelation, how will you think of your husband or wife? If the eyes of your understanding are enlightened and you know how the saints are a glorious inheritance for Christ, then you know what a husband and a wife are. And you will not know it until then.

(Wilson, For a Glory and a Covering p9)