Reinterpreting 1 Peter

I feel some reluctance to come back to the topic of female submission. However, there are few enough women blogging on the interpretation of the Bible, so I think I should respond. Rachel Held Evans asked Mary Kassian to blog about submission. I can’t possibly take on her many points, but her first point really got me thinking.

Before discussing the content of her post, let me say that I appreciate that Mary Kassian provides a model of a strong Christian woman with both a husband and family, and a career. I see her as athletic, sporty and career-oriented, whereas I am a single mother, and more oriented to being a provider, regardless of how exciting or unexciting my occupation is. I like my job, but I don’t think of it as a “career.” I think of myself as more homey, and enjoy puttering around the house wishing I was knitting or embroidering. I used to do all those things when I was younger, but now I feel quite busy keeping my house and yard in shape. I just wanted to record how I see Mary and myself as women, so this won’t be a contest between a “feminist” (me) and Mary, a “biblical woman”.

It will be enough to examine Mary’s first of seven points. Here it is,

The biblical directive to submit applies to Christians—not to those outside the faith community. People without the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit have neither the discernment nor the power to live out submission and authority in a godly manner.

It seems to me that this is in some way a reinterpretation of 1 Peter. If we look at this epistle, we can see that the author was writing about a behaviour which was expected by all members of society at that time. There were already established instructions to members of society to submit to the government, and to slaves and wives to submit to masters and husbands. The difference is that Christians would endure injustice, they would in some sense “bear up.”

Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. ¹⁹ For it is commendable if someone bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because they are conscious of God. ²⁰ But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. ²¹ To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.

There is no sense, in my view, that the Bible suggests that there are different expectations and standards of behaviour regarding submission for Christians and non-Christians, except in attitude. I believe that the Bible is talking about the basic patterns of submission and authority that were already established by society, and that all members of society were bound to, at that time. However, Christians would be able to endure the suffering that this arrangement necessarily entailed because they could keep the example of the Lord’s suffering before them and look up to that as a model.

So, Christians, as those in submission, bear suffering by thinking of Christ on the cross. On the other hand, Christians as leaders, in government, as masters and slave owners, (this included men and women) and as husbands, were to lead by example, as Christ did.

Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; ³ not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. 1 Peter 5:2-3.

However, it may be that Mary Kassian is saying that the behaviour of a wife would be the same, whether Christian or not, – a wife sometimes has to say “no” and draw boundaries – but that a Christian wife would have a particular attitude of heart in doing so. This seems consistent with the text.

When Mary says “People without the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit have neither the discernment nor the power to live out submission and authority in a godly manner,” I think she rightly sees the problem. Human beings cause those under their authority to suffer, unless there is some restraint. She suggests that the power of the Holy Spirit will provide the necessary restraint, and that we should promote relationships of submission and authority.

I, on the other hand, doubt that Christians behave according to the power of the Holy Spirit in their everyday dealings with those in subordination under them. Sometimes they do, and sometimes they don’t. Even among Christians, relationships of submission and authority entail suffering.

Instead, since godly behaviour cannot be controlled and enforced, the Christian ethic of treating others as we would be treated, has promoted the institution of accountable government, and likewise, ought to promote the institution of accountable marriage, a relationship of mutual accountability. Within this institution of mutual accountability, I agree with Mary, that a wife should be agreeable, and not be ‘critical, impatient, defiant, and “snarky”.’

For myself, I would look at the role of a woman and wife in our society today, under our present law, and I would emphasize that women have equal responsibility under the law and as Christians, to protect, provide and make wise decisions for our children, ourselves, and often aging parents. No matter how much the law protects us, or how wealthy we are, life will always entail suffering and disappointment, from unhappy relationships with spouse, children or other members of our family, or from illness and loss.

The Christian woman fulfills the spirit of 1 Peter by having a gentle attitude towards others in her life, even when these things go wrong. We may not have the same  patterns of submission and authority in our lives today as there was in the New Testament era, but we can still fulfill the instruction of the scripture to endure the circumstances of our life with a gentle attitude.

Both Mary and I are reinterpreting 1 Peter. In spite of this, can we derive the same values from this passage? I think we can.