Husbands and Wives, Marriage and Household Codes in Christianity - Religion Essay Example

In the early times, before the adoption of Christianity, rules were governing the people. Particularly, they were under the Roman rule running back as far as the Fourth Century BC. During these times, the household was considered to depict the hierarchical societal structure, the gods, and the universe, thus seemingly a microcosm. According to Aristotle, the most fundamental and principal elements of the household were the master and slave, father and children and husband and wife. Other philosophers such as Josephus and Philo even wrote about these household codes, arguing that for a man to be successful, he needed to flex authority over his family. In fact, the household codes were perceived to be so important that the Pax Romana passed laws to guarantee their protection. However, a new narrative of the Household codes was introduced by Peter and Paul, which seemed to contradict the common Greco-Roman system. They advocated for kindness and fair treatment of slaves, children, and wives which were unlike Romans code which had no element of advocacy towards fair treatment of subordinates. Peter further justified slaves suffering to that of Christ also likening womens obedience to that of Sarah in 1 Peter 2:18-25. Paul also urged women and slaves to submit to their household heads as they submit towards God, reminding them that both the slaves and their masters have a heavenly master who is unbiased in giving eternal inheritance. Therefore, the Christian narrative of Household codes sought to create a balance between both the Greco-Romans narrative and itself to prevent an advancement of the Romans preconceived notion that Christians were against their rules and authority.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

According to 1 Peter, the role of women shows a lifestyle for all Christians. In fact, Balchs argument is accurate that Asian Christian communities were part of the minority religious groups that had to defend their legitimacy and agree with Roman household ethics. For instance, the presence of the Isis cult could have brought up social and official suspicion regarding Christian communities. In Peter verse 21, slander and threats of suffering are seen, and they affirm that Christians were under the keen scrutiny of the general society. It is, therefore, possible that the church may have been encouraged to coincide with the beliefs of the outsiders that slaves and women were subservient classes. Additionally, according to Balch, the argument towards the apologetic function of the household codes in 1 Peter appears to be reasonable.

The New Testament household codes do bear witness to the gospel in subdued ways. Instead of a strict conformity towards the dominant cultural values of the Romans, Joel Green currently agrees that the household codes in 1 Peter accentuate that New Testament authors adopted these regulations about the faith commitment demands. The status of women was seen to be changing during these times. In fact, women were urged to live out their belief and faith in Christ in their daily lives bearing witness to honor and love in Christ. Peter urged church members not to retreat in the face of societal scrutiny but only to engage with the society having a new identity or rather a newly acquired perspective of honor with a positive attitude towards subordination. The first redemption of the Roman Culture is identity renewal in Christ. This identity is as a result of previous knowledge of God the Father in the spirits sanctification which was made possible through Christs sprinkling of his blood and obedience. Therefore, from the commencement of this letter with a unique honor of being elected, that can be attributed to Asian Minor Christians which resonates with Roman Honor.

Shame with exile, refugees, and trauma, on the other hand, is referred to as diaspora. The first element showing their election is seen from 1:3 where new birth is associated with the resurrection of Christ Jesus from death showing that Christ is part of the community of the holy nation, a royal priesthood and a chosen race. His resurrection is visibly seen to be the divine inauguration of a new order of the world where the people were assured by Peter of an eschatological inheritance. They were thus encouraged to honor, glorify and praise the revelation of Jesus Christ. This new closeness to eschatological honor towards Christ offered a firm foundation especially to Christians enabling them to endure scrutiny in the society bearing witness to their faith when they were living as aliens in the world. This unknown status did not occur as a result of physical location but due to the Gentiles different lifestyles.

As a consequence of the early Christians way of life, they did not follow the underlying values and would only practice the teachings of Christ leading to their denial, rejection, and persecution. Their suffering, they believed would not outweigh the potential benefits of honor and joy towards joining Gods household and a hope of an eschatological inheritance. This identity of Christ challenged the Greco-Roman hierarchical belief of home management based on any persons rationality possession. They also believed that lifes purpose is not pursuing personal happiness but rather Gods glorification with a residual effect of joy. New angles of the relationship between woman and man or rather wife and husband are created in these new beliefs. The paterfamilias was the priest of household gods having a sign of harmony in the family which is the religious uniformity of slaves and wife. For example, according to Balch, Christian and Jewish slaves were the pioneers towards rejection of worshipping their masters gods to worship their God exclusively. Additionally, if a married woman decided to follow Jesus, the religious harmony in her household would be disturbed. Women being the first of Christs followers, their relationship with Christ were uniquely different from the religious practices of their husbands causing negative reactions in the society. Initially, Peter addresses this issue of women being alienated in the society for their belief in Christ. On verse 13, it is stated that to be subordinate shows finding and responsibly occupying ones place in the society rather than resignation. In fact, it is blessed of the Lord and should have freedom as Gods slaves who are different from total obedience towards the gospel and God. Therefore, for a married woman whose husband was still not a Christian, she would first be required to show loyalty to God before the spouse. However, that does not exempt her from being obedient and loyal to her husband as long as it does not compromise her faith. Her responsibilities would thus be no different from that of her Roman neighbors. Therefore, these guidelines should not be used by wives as a theological principle but as their persuasion especially for the wives in non-Christian families with the goal of minimizing religious conflicts in religious practices. Thus, an overall instruction of honoring all but her behavior would only meet the Roman Cultural mandate requirement, at the same time acting as a testimony of her faith.

Unlike the Aristotelian and Platonic advice of a husbands dominance in his relationship with his wife, Peter has different instructions to the Christian men as shown in verse 3:7. It commences with the statement, in a similar way referring to the same way that is described towards wives to honor all households. Husbands in the Roman society did not accept their wives while Peter offered guidance that man should live knowledgeably with their wives and other women in the society by making an informed decision based on Christs character that redeemed humans restoring faith from God to them. Consequently, Peter expresses that women being the weaker in the society, they receive honor rather than marginalization. Harmony should be lived out in mutual honor between the members of different households. In spite of the uniqueness between the Aristotelian and Peters household codes, there are also similarities especially regarding instructions offered to their wives. Household relations thus still form a basis of ties in a larger society. In Peters instructions, wives and slaves were encouraged to follow Christs footsteps exemplifying a lifestyle for each and every Christian. The relationship of women and slaves represented that of Christians in the Roman society who were powerless and without privilege being under societal scrutiny. Thus, Peters household code is not concerned with acquiring a position in the secular society but rather to show Christians the proper way of life compared to the world societal beliefs. Therefore, the role of women in this code is to express the mercy and love of Gods gospel. This code did not only define an internal relationship among Gods household members but also encouraged those members of the society to live according to the gospel message within their marginalized duties.

More often than not, humans will always visit a pastor for marital counseling due to the occurrence of a particular crisis in their relationship especially whenever it has reached a breaking point. Due to the current increase in marriage fragility, many Christians acquire the chance of fixing this challenge in the church through the acquisition of an education. Such an education assists them to salvage their almost broken relationship in the context of Gods love for every couple. Thus a majority of strife, crisis, and tensions can be prevented by assisting people in forming a solid biblical understanding of their covenant in marriage. One significant element of a healthy marriage would be a question of how wives and husbands are encouraged to positively relate with each other by love and in pursuit of Christs leadership. According to Ephesians 5:22; Paul explains the hierarchical marriage model as expressed in the Second account of creation in Genesis 2 showing that males should not display imperialism over their wives but rather there should be a compromised relationship where mutual benefits are accorded both ways. Aristotles policy was that men were naturally born to be the leaders of the household similar to the human nature of mating where the female was the subject. According to Greco-Roman authors, who were careful in their quantification of the husbands power over his wife. It was, therefore, imperative that the household rules be rewritten in the Early Church which before this change was seemingly a monarchical rule over the woman which was apparently a constitutional requirement or rule where wives could only obey and thus fall subject to. In fact, Plutarch argues that in every decision made in their household, they came to an agreement with the wife, although he played the leadership role as a husband. On the other hand, Jewish authors were clearer on the role of the wife, for instance, Josephus stating that according to the law, the woman is inferior to man, which is unlike Latin and Greek authors. Adding that she should be submissive but not for her to be humiliated, but rather so that she can receive authority passed down from God to man. Thus, the ideal wifes depiction is that of an entirely submissive woman who either stands with her man or behind him. Submissiveness can be depicted in numerous ways such as a wife being silent in public which is insisted upon by Plutarch that a woman should only speak through or to her husband and should rather not be offended whenever her opinions make a significant impact as they are articulated by the husband rather than herself. Plutarch additionally states that a womans words, similar to her body, should never become public property. Instead, she should be reserved with both body and speech, guarding both with priority against a...