Evangelical Reformation

One of the great needs of our society is husbands and fathers who are effective leaders in their homes. Quality male leadership in the home would stabilize and purify our families, and as a result do the same for our society as a whole.

Accomplishing this task effectively is especially difficult in our contemporary society because maleness has fallen into disrepute, and both the right and capacity to be leaders in their homes is constantly challenged. Nonetheless, if we are not willing to take on challenges, we are not worthy to be leaders.

Effectiveness in leadership requires adherence to a collage of foundational principles. It is a collage because to a great extent these principles overlap, ultimately morphing into a unified whole. Only one of them can be presented in the space of this post. Lord willing, the rest will follow.

The foundational principle is sacrifice. By this I refer to a willingness to pay whatever price is necessary for the safety and care of our families. Ephesians 5 indicates that the relationship between Christ and the church provides the model for marriage. In that passage we are reminded that Christ gave his life for the church.

Application of this principle takes many forms in domestic leadership. If there is danger, the husband and father must place himself in harm’s way when necessary. If the family has needs, he must make whatever sacrifice is necessary to meet those needs, be it working harder, giving up personal desires, etc. If there is a problem, he must deal with it even if doing so is threatening. When there is a difficult task and everyone is tired, he should do it.

The principle of sacrifice is foundational because it validates the husband/father’s leadership role. In making sacrifices, he earns the right to leadership. Though it is true that that right is bestowed upon him by God, the husband/father’s willingness to sacrifice earns the right for him to assume that role in the eyes of his wife and children.

They are much more willing to follow someone that they see sacrificing for them. They can have the confidence that he is leading, not to pursue his own interests, but for their benefit.

Leadership often requires asking people to make changes, move in new directions, contrary to their preferences. A leader who sacrifices himself gives assurance to them that in making such decisions he has they are good in mind.

The leader of the home should not sacrifice in order to validate his leadership. He should do it because that is his responsibility, and because he loves his family. Nonetheless, sacrifice does provide validation for his role, and without it he is a tyrant, not a leader.

Leading sacrificially requires love and discipline. Love provides the motivation for sacrifice. We make sacrifices because we want to protect and care for our families.

Often love for our families calls us to tasks that we do not feel like doing—tough jobs that are uncomfortable, tiring, dangerous, and even painful. Sacrificial leadership requires the discipline to do it anyway.

Sacrifice is only the first step in leadership. If a husband and father sacrifices but does not otherwise lead, he will fail as a leader of his family. In one sense, sacrifice is the easy part of leadership because it is the part that our society is happy to see the husband/father fulfill. Other aspects of leadership, ones not favored by society, are forthcoming. They must be included in the leadership package. However, sacrifice is the foundation, the place we must start.

Scripture says: Do not oppress an alien; you yourselves know how it feels to be aliens, because you were aliens in Egypt. (Ex 23:9 NIVUS); When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. (Le 19:33 NIVUS); And you are to love those who are aliens, for you yourselves were aliens in Egypt. (De 10:19 NIVUS)

Some Christians contend that opposition to illegal immigration, and especially advocating the removal of the illegal immigrants, is contrary to such verses. Is this true?

One of the most significant approaches we must utilize in understanding and applying Scripture is that there is a hierarchy within scriptural mandates. That is, there are times when one principle will take precedence over another.

Going a step further, it appears that for every principle in Scripture there is a counterbalancing principle that delimits the first principle. For example, Scripture requires that we obey the government, but when the government makes laws that violate scriptural principles, we have a responsibility to disobey.

We even see this mechanism at work in the more practical areas of life. God calls us to a life of work and sacrifice, and yet Scripture conveys that there is a point when rest and recreation takes precedence.

The teaching above regarding the stranger assumes that the person’s alien status is the only variable. To mistreat him because he comes from a different country or has a different color skin is wrong.

However, the insertion of additional variables changes the equation. For example, if the stranger is breaking a law, that would have to be factored into our treatment of him.

Or what if instead of dealing with a stranger, we are dealing with 12 million of them? That is an added consideration.

Or what if those strangers formed extensive organizations that promoted the idea that large portions of our country really belongs to them, and that they had every intention of taking them over? That would certainly have to be considered in the application of the mandate to love the stranger.

Or what of those strangers had massive rallies aimed at demonstrating their political strength and therefore at influencing legislation? And what if because their birthrate was somewhat higher than the native population, they expressed the intentions of ultimately displacing the current citizens as the dominant force?

Or to put the argument somewhat differently, what if loving the stranger would mean that we were not loving our children, but rather creating a political and cultural disaster that could make our children’s future very difficult? Does the scriptural mandate to love the stranger take precedent over loving our children, especially if the strangers are intentionally planning to take actions that will harm our children?

Candidly, the theology of liberal-leaning evangelicals tends to be quite shallow. We have exposed this tendency in many of our posts. This is just another example of their inclination to use Scripture to advance an agenda without any sincere attempt to genuinely determine a scriptural perspective.

The evangelical community desperately needs an evangelical reformation that would provide intellectual leadership that takes Scripture seriously.