The CBE Scroll

A book review by Anna and Ryan Snyder

This past fall, when we first learned John and Stasi Eldredge had written Love and War, a book on marriage, our initial reaction was negative, to say the least. Don’t get us wrong, we find the Eldredges’ desire to help people improve their marriages admirable. But having just finished re-reading large portions of Wild at Heart and Captivating, their books on men and women, respectively, we instinctively worried about the advice they would give. The Eldredges often claim God created men and women as almost complete opposites, and as a couple firmly committed to the idea that women and men have more similarities in their humanity than they do differences in their gender, we weren’t clamoring to see this type of approach applied to marriage.

The book, however, exceeded our expectations. At times, we actually found ourselves wanting to like it. Unfortunately, at its conclusion, the negatives still outweighed the positives.

Focusing largely on their own experiences, the Eldredges begin by asserting marriage is “fabulously hard” (p. 13). In fact, given that (1) men and women are complete opposites, (2) we are all broken people, and (3) Satan hates marriage, they say it is a “miracle of the first order” that any marriage makes it all (p. 14). However, despite these difficulties, marriage plays a crucial role in God’s story. We live in a world at war, they write, and God gives us marriage to provide us with companionship, and as a picture of his love. Thus, although marriage is excruciatingly hard, God is on our side.

With all this in mind the Eldredges proceed to discuss a number of important, marriage-related issues. From communication, to sex, to having a shared mission in one’s marriage, they offer input and advice, much of it helpful. For example, they explain how people’s brokenness contributes to problems with their spouse, and they encourage people to embrace the resulting conflict as a way of seeking transformation. Additionally, their discussion of the need for both spouses to seek fulfillment in Christ, rather than each other, was commendable. Much of their advice even borders on being pro-egalitarian; they advise a process of mutual decision-making and encourage couples to exercise authority together in matters of spiritual warfare.

However, despite its good points, we reluctantly found ourselves increasingly frustrated with the authors. Their extreme negativity about marriage was exhausting; a few of the more choice examples include comparing the exchanging of wedding vows to the special forces “vowing their lives to one another as they embark on a perilous mission in dark lands, the outcome of which remains quite uncertain,” (p. 4), and claiming “if you cannot admit the disappointment of your marriage, you have made an idol out of it,” (p. 67). They also resort to stereotypes, often attributing marital difficulties to irreconcilable differences between the genders. Sadly, by persuading men and women they are complete opposites and that marriage is almost impossible, they may well convince them their marriage is irreparable, the exact problem the authors are trying to correct.

The authors also treat Scripture carelessly, taking it out of context and providing incomplete quotations, without indicating they have done so. They use pop culture even more heavily than they use the Bible, reporting that human-made movies and stories prove how God intended the world to be. Also, throughout the book the Eldredges often muffle their own meaning with indirect, unstructured, and hard to follow writing. They are overly repetitive both with unclear and weakly constructed analogies and by restating nearly all of Wild at Heart and Captivating.

When we finished with the book, we were left wondering why our marriage is not as hard as the authors say it should be. We have never contemplated divorce, wondered whether we made a mistake in getting married, or threw our hands up in resignation to the fact that marriage is just so hard. While it is true we have only been married for roughly two years, according to the authors, we should have found ourselves wildly disappointed with our marriage by now, or even contemplating divorce, as they were at this point. Yet, while marriage is sometimes difficult, the overwhelming majority of the time we have found it to be better than we ever imagined.

So why do the authors insist marriage is so difficult? Has this been true of your marriage…or are we abnormal in experiencing a joyful and fulfilling marriage? (We doubt the latter is the case.) Why is everyone – Christians included – so down on marriage? Is this a self-fulfilling prophecy (the old ball and chain, etc.)? What causes divorce rates to hover at 50% both within the church and outside it? What are we missing?

by Mary Ann and Sam

Mary Ann:
Did you know there was a man in biblical times who took his wife’s family name?  In Nehemiah 7:63, a man is mentioned named Barzillai, who had married a woman who was a descendant of Barzillai of Gilead and had taken her family name.  He changed his name to hers!  When a friend first mentioned this, I thought she was kidding.  Isn’t it practically biblical for a woman to take her husband’s name when she gets married? The answer, surprisingly, is no!!  It’s western tradition, but it’s not biblical.

When we first got married, Sam and I really wrestled with the name change (some of you may remember that I blogged about it).  We wanted to be able to represent the uniqueness and individuality which God gave to us both while also representing the oneness.  But how could we represent both of our identities, both of our ethnicities and both of our backgrounds?  He didn’t want me to give up my name.  I didn’t want him to give up his name.  But practically speaking, it seemed much better to have the same last name.

Sam:
In our marriage, there is mutual submission because we believe in Biblical equality (Eph 5:21).  Each spouse has equal footing in all aspects of marriage. We have equal value and equal input in everything. When one of us sees a need, that one fills it. If dishes need to be washed and Mary Ann is tied up, I’ll do them, and vice versa. (Most of the time, we do it together because we love spending that time together.) The same goes for laundry, cooking, cleaning, shopping — everything. We make all decisions together, big or small. If we’re stuck at an impasse, we’ll talk it through until we’re at mutual agreement. I have no desire or need for veto power (which by the way, I think that “veto power” is a terrible idea if you want harmony in your relationship).  I am no better, smarter, privileged, or more valuable than she is, nor she than I. God made us equally in His image, and we are both intrinsically valued.

So because we are equals, when it came to deciding what to do about our last name, I had to humbly ask myself who was I to say that Mary Ann had to drop her last name and take mine? It’s the same effect as asking of myself, would I be willing to drop my last name and take hers? That thought didn’t sit well with me when I thought about it initially, because it made me realize how drastic of a change it is to lose your last name. The dilemma we faced was, whose name would be dropped? We eventually realized that there was a way to not have to drop either last name but, rather, to include them both.

Mary Ann:
Most people (Christians, mainly) don’t really think twice about having the woman change her name.  And if Sam was a lesser man, he might have set his manhood on a need to brand me with his name.  However, his determination in our having an “inclusive name” (he coined that phrase) despite the challenges and difficulties of changing his name (with the California legal system) and whatever flak he may incur from traditionalists has augmented my admiration of him as a man.  Through this journey, I have learned that he is unflappable in his purpose when he is certain about a course of action, he is confident in who he is as one who answers only to God and not anyone else, and he is secure in his manhood.  He has made me adore him even more so than ever, and I am so proud to share a name with him.

A few weeks ago, he and I both officially changed our name.  We both added the other’s surname to our own to make an inclusive name (someone else would call it ‘hyphenated’).

Sam:
We decided on her surname first and then mine because it has a nice ring to it. I like it. Not only does it represent both of our identities, but it also represents our new family — a product of diversity and a blending of two cultures.

When I got married a year ago, I kept my maiden name – just the way it had always been. It wasn’t that I ever came upon a final decision; rather, it was more the result of a lot of indecision.

It was assumed, of course, by all of our family and friends that I would take my husband’s name. For not long after we had walked down the aisle we started receiving letters and invitations addressed to ‘Mr. and Mrs.,’ and it was frequently in the traditional form of, ‘Mr. and Mrs. John Smith.’ When I received those letters, I wondered where I went in the midst of the addressing process. Suddenly, my identity was completely lost in my husband, and it made me very ‘angsty.’

The angst, however, was no slight on my husband. I am ineffably in love with him and still breathless thinking about the incredible romance God has unraveled before us. However, I had spent almost thirty years with a certain name. How could I suddenly change it to something else? Losing my name felt like losing my identity. It felt like losing a certain part of me – my culture, my heritage, and the woman I had grown into – complete and whole, called and gifted by God without a husband/man’s ‘leadership’ or ‘covering.’ And, putting my first name with my husband’s last name resulted in a person I did not know. She was a stranger to me, and I wasn’t sure I was ready to be her.

I wrestled with the name change for months before and after my wedding and was told, more than once, of all the spiritual reasons for why I needed to change my name. Some reasons given to me included:

1. You need to embrace your husband’s identity as your own identity. (My response: Of course! But my question is: why doesn’t he need to embrace my identity as his own identity, too?)

2. It is a standing truth that God made Adam and Eve in his image, but at the same time he refers to both as ‘man.’ (I think that the person who said this meant that since God referred to both Adam and Eve by the man’s name ‘man,’ so too, I should take on my husband’s name.)

3. You need to change your name because ‘the beauty of God’s image is in a man and woman becoming one. Each needs to be lost in the identity of the other, being fully represented and affirmed. The Father was willing to identify with the Son and the Son totally submitted to the will of the Father.’ (My response: But why is it, despite this ‘equality’ sounding reasoning, do I feel like I’m the only one losing her identity here? I don’t feel like I am being fully represented and affirmed.)

4. Changing your name to your husband’s demonstrates your submission to him as your spiritual head. (My response: What about the idea of mutual submission from Ephesians 5:21?)

5. You need to show your oneness and unity in order to do battle against Satan. Satan attacks marital unity, after all. (My response: Is a name capable of scaring off Satan?)

I was perturbed by these reasons given to me by older, spiritual men whom I respected. Their arguments made it sound like changing my name was God’s will and akin to being spiritual and godly. Not changing it was not being a submissive wife and therefore being a bad Christian. However, I don’t personally believe a woman changing her name is a biblical mandate. It’s a part of Western culture and tradition, one that has been deeply influenced by patriarchy, but it is not the equivalent to godliness.

In a way, my desire to keep my maiden name is a resistance against some of the inconsistent lines of thoughts that were presented to me. I don’t want to simply fall in line with patriarchal traditions that pose as biblical mandate. To change my name would feel to me like I was making a public proclamation that I subscribe to mainstream interpretations of spirituality – i.e. headship and submission roles in marriage – when on the contrary, my husband and I have spent the last year establishing a biblical marriage based on mutual submission.

So, I haven’t changed my name. But, I still wrestle with all this because while I want to be able to represent the uniqueness and individuality which God gave to us both, I also want to represent the oneness. I don’t want to be so focused on the ‘twoness’ in the midst of the oneness that there is no oneness to be seen. And, ‘oneness’ is important to me too.

I still haven’t come to a final conclusion yet. Maybe you could help me.

What do you think about the name-changing tradition? Biblical, unbiblical? What are pros and cons to a woman changing her name? What is your personal experience?

I came across this concept in a book some time back and then more recently someone sent me an email with the same content which had been taught at a school. It demonstrates what is happening in some sections of the Christian community and gives us cause for concern when young people endorse these practices. What am I talking about – some questionable new age techniques or dabbling with the occult? No, it’s some guidelines for young women and men as to their behavior when spending time with each other in groups and as dating couples.

The rationale for these suggestions comes from an interpretation of Creation which teaches that because Adam was made first he was to be the leader and initiator and that God made Eve to be Adam’s helper in the tasks which God had given him. This then defines what is feminine and what is masculine and the fixed roles these descriptions portray.

Young men are encouraged to practice their servant leadership and always take the initiative in deciding where to go and what to do. Even in conversations the men are told to direct the ideas and speak first, albeit considerately. They are also urged to be the spiritual leader in the relationship in preparation for being the spiritual leader of the home. To be fair, it is also stressed that the men are to be considerate, protective and respectful. So, you can see where this is going in respect to how the young women are expected to behave! They are told they should make room for the guys to practice their servant leadership as ‘a woman’s biggest temptation is to take control.’ This means stepping back and letting the man lead because that is how she can ‘practice for the time when she will follow a husband.’ In conversations it is deemed to be better to have awkward silences than for a woman to speak first.

Teaching like this, which describes masculinity and femininity by such detailed actions and attitudes, is having a marked impact on the current Christian scene. Have others come across this sort of thing, and why do you think some young people are finding it attractive? Obviously I have my own opinion but I’m sure we would all like to read some discussion on this disturbing trend.