In my last post I summarized Darcy Lockman’s book All the Rage: Mothers, Fathers, and the Myth of Equal Partnership, in which she argues that both parents should be equally involved in parenting and equally free to pursue their careers unhindered by the care of children. Lockman sees very little essential difference between women and men, and therefore no biological mandate for mothers to be primary caregivers in family life. She surveyed many women and found a common frustration among women that fathers fail to share equally in the work of parenting. She finds that fathers, in general, do not equitably make adjustments in their professional lives to accommodate the demands of family, nor do they sufficiently enter into family life during their discretionary time. Lockman notes that men in the families she interviews enjoy the privilege of unhindered career and leisure time. They fail to become competent to care for kids, knowledgeable of family routines and schedules, or to do what they agreed to do without reminders from their wives. When they do pitch in they are congratulated as if their contribution is above and beyond the call of duty. As a result, their wives, who also want to further their careers, are carrying a disproportionate workload. In short, many mothers are unhappy with the heavier burden they carry for the wellbeing of their families. The solution, according to Darcy Lockman, is equitable sharing of family responsibility alongside equitable treatment of their respective careers.
I wrote in another post some time ago about another writer who was also concerned for mothers’ unhappiness and the wellbeing of families. Stephen Rhoads, author of Taking Sex Differences Seriously, believes that there are significant differences in the psychological makeup of men and women and that women are in general better nurturers of children. Children need time and attention from their parents, so he proposes that the better nurturers be freed from the siren call to full time careers in order to nurture children and …be happier mothers. Rhoads spent approximately 10 years researching for his book and asserts that the happiest moms are part-time workers, while the LEAST happy moms are full-time workers. Rhoads agrees with Lockman that full time work and the demands of family together are too heavy a load, but his solution is to divide both family responsibility and the primary responsibility for financial provision (aka work/career) inequitably. The best recipe for happy moms, dads and children, says Rhoads, is for mothers to work part-time only and take the primary role in caregiving, while fathers work full-time and take a secondary role at home.
What does the Bible say about all this? At the end of my last post, I mentioned that I would focus on a biblical response to these books. The Bible has a lot to say on this topic, and in fact offers an explanation both for why the women in Lockman’s study are unhappy with checked out husbands and for why Rhoads finds that the happiest mothers are the ones who work part time.
Before we begin a discussion of the roles of husbands and wives, we must remember that God created men and women equally in His image (Genesis 1:26-28, 5:1-2). This means that we have equal value in His eyes, regardless of how society views us or the roles we fill. For more discussion on our equality, see this post and this post. In God’s eyes, our particular work does not make us more or less valuable. When care of children hinders a career path, it is not because that person, or that person’s work, is less valuable. The signals from our culture tell us that taking “the mommy track” is to miss out on advancement opportunities in our career paths to fill the lower status caregiver role. As a Christian mother, I find a deep affirmation of the value of caregiving work in the Bible, as well as a reason not to miss out on nurturing children.
The Bible does not, however, forbid mothers from working outside the home, for the good of the community and to earn money for their family’s needs. However, there are multiple passages which teach them to embrace different roles in the family and church. Genesis 3 describes the outworking of sin increasing the pain of childbirth and bringing strife to the marriage relationship for wives/women and on work (providing food) for husbands/men, suggesting these will be their primary vocations. We believe that Scripture consistently gives wives the primary responsibility of caring for their homes. Titus 2:3-5 instructs younger women to be workers at home and to love their husbands and children. First Timothy 2:9 – 3:7 steers women away from certain leadership roles in the church and toward their unique role in bearing children. (See my former post.) First Timothy 5:14 instructs young widows to pursue remarriage, having children, and managing their homes, rather than aspiring to church ministry at that stage of their lives. By implication, the burden of providing financially for the family falls on the husband.
However, the Bible does not say that after begetting children, fathers may walk away from the nurturing role altogether and simply provide for them financially. While God gave women alone the ability to physically carry and nourish children before birth, his intention was that the bearing of children happen in the context of marriage (a partnership), and that parents would together nurture their children to adulthood. Proverbs makes reference to both parents teaching wisdom to their children (Proverbs 1:8, 6:20). Ephesians 6:1-4 instructs children to honor their parents, and verse four specifically commands fathers to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Deuteronomy 6:7 commands all of Israel to diligently teach their children about the Lord, specifically enumerating all the opportunities for parenting – “when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down and when you rise.”
In giving both husbands and wives the shared responsibility of stewarding their children well, God is not allowing men to check out and be uninvolved. In fact, a well ordered home is one of the qualifications for male elders (1 Timothy 3:4-5). If men were not expected to be actively involved in the raising of their children, why would God make this a qualification for eldership? This doesn’t just mean leading family devotions. Bringing children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4) requires first hand involvement in their children’s lives, competence in their care and knowledge of their school lives and friends, their interactions with siblings and enjoying recreational activities together. This is all part of nurturing their spiritual lives.
If God designed both husbands and wives to be involved in the nurturing, care and training of children, it makes sense that Lockman finds many wives enraged at their husbands’ lack of involvement in the home. This is not God’s intent or design for marriage. Their sense of anger is justified! Our churches should train parents, and particularly fathers to be involved, servant leaders at home. However, it also makes sense biblically that Lockman finds full time working moms extremely burdened in their role (pp 174-181) and also that Rhoads finds the happiest moms are the ones who have the privilege of working part time. Perhaps because God designed wives to have the primary responsibility of caring for their home, they will feel this burden regardless of whether they work full time or not. But carrying that load while also working full time is extremely taxing. We want to affirm moms who decide to take a step back in their careers to focus on the home. This is a good thing! However, we recognize that it is a privilege to not have to work full time, and many mothers cannot afford this. As the body of Christ, we should come alongside single moms and full time working moms to support them.
In the end, Lockman and Rhoads both observe general differences between men and women. Lockman is enraged by the ease with which men lapse into non-communal behavior (sitting on the couch with their cell phones while their wives handle the meltdowns, etc.) and advocates society-wide resistance to accepting this trend. Rhoads is more positive about the differences, and would structure life to capitalize on the differences. But he too would urge men to be communal. His version is to get married, have children and provide for them, allowing their wives the freedom from fulltime work to manage their homes and nurture the children. Both writers have (unknowingly) found some biblical truths in their research. May Christian men aspire to be competent, unselfish, hands-on dads who affirm the value of caregiving by doing some of it willingly, by enabling their wives to step back from full time careers (and chronic overwork) if they so choose, and by praising the faithful caregiving work that women do!