I don’t think Christians should be teaching gender roles of the home to be God-ordained.
Now let make me this clear- I am not saying Christians shouldn’t teach the nuclear family. The nuclear family is good and important.
I am speaking to the idea of the man provides, and the woman homemakes.
I know I’ve spoken about it before, but in this case, Christians teaching that this is God-ordained may find themselves preventing Christians from actually following what God wants them to do. By teaching this, we say that we already know what God’s plan is for everyone’s life, so we go about searching for a spouse so we can follow God’s plan of providing for a family (for men) or making the home (for women).
And while God certainly calls people to those positions, I’ve often seen and heard Him do more than that. He’s called people to uncomfortable positions, or positions that challenge them. Gender roles of the family are no exception.
If the church teaches men that their purpose in a family is to be the provider, what then is a man to do when he feels God calling him to a position where he’s not the breadwinner? What if God calls him to a position where he and his family have to rely on God providing for them, and not the man?
Does the man ignore this calling, because he has to be conscious of the mouths to feed? Do we set him up for struggle of self worth, because he’s not doing as he was taught, which was to provide his family instead of putting God first? Or do we teach him that God might not call him to be the provider, the breadwinner? That his first and foremost duty is to God and follow what God calls him to do, even if it means going against the norm?
For the women, if the church teaches them that their purpose is to be the homemaker, what then is a woman to do when she feels God calling her to a position that would earn her more than her husband? Takes her out of the home, and possibly put her and her husband in a situation where he’s spending more time at home? Can she trust that God has intended her for a purpose that’s more than being a mother to her kids?
Does the woman ignore this calling, knowing that her first and foremost goal is to take care of her children, and put aside working outside of the home? Do we set her up for struggle, splitting her between wanting to follow the call and wanting to be the dutiful, good, God-fearing wife? Or do we teach her that God might call her to places that are not just her home, and instead put her in the workforce? That her first and foremost duty is to God and follow what God calls her to do, even if it means going against the norm?
It’s not that being parents is unimportant -it is, and God -GOD- knows being a parent is important. He wouldn’t have you abandon your kids. But He may not have you work your family in the traditional sense. By claiming traditional gender roles as the “God-ordained” model of family dynamics, we as the church can end up putting an obstacle to couples where there didn’t need to be an obstacle.
Now we can certainly use anything to prevent us from following God’s calling for our lives, but I question the wisdom of the church to preaching this message, when the message first is to go to the ends of the earth to be His witnesses. He created us as individuals with our own strengths, which He can use to further His purpose if we are obedient. God can and does use housewives to further His will. But He didn’t create every woman -nor even every mother- to be a housewife. God can and does use providing men to further His will. But He didn’t create every man to be provider/breadwinner of his family.
Are we encouraging families -husbands and wives- to first be obedient to God? Or are we teaching husbands and wives that following gender roles is obedience to God?
If we teach the first, we should trust that God has the best interests of the family at heart, even when the calling gets tough, difficult, and challenging.
If we teach the second, we can end up setting up Christians to dismiss the calling of God.
