Should ministers talk about their “smokin’ hot” spouse in public?
Hi Dojo readers,
Today on a Facebook group to which I belong, someone shared a blog post called “Smokin’ Hot Wives & Water to the Soul” by author Zach Hoag. In it, Hoag talked about the phenomenon that he and others such as Mary DeMuth have noticed among many evangelicals involving Pastors who publicly comment on their spouse’s attractiveness.
Hoag associates this with certain forms of Complementarianism in which he believes women are reduced to objectified sex objects who are to submit to their husbands in all things, including their desire for sexual gratification. He states:
I was once a part of the segment of evangelicalism that fosters this kind of attitude – the kind that makes leaders go on and on about their wives’ hotness as if it’s some kind of requisite modern virtue. And, full disclosure, I bought into the smokin’ hot talk for a while, if only to be one of the guys, part of the team. Of course, underlying all that rhetoric is a strong complementarian view of gender roles in the church and home, where men are the heads and women submit, where men are the shepherds and women…submit, where men need lots of sex because that’s how God created them and women………submit. You get the idea.
…
Recently, I saw one megachurch pastor post a photo of his wife on Instagram with a caption from Proverbs 31 (I know, surprise surprise). Part of it took some, ahem, liberties with the text: “her leather pants are like water to her husband’s soul.” This particular fellow is known for free and frequent hot wife posts, including one photo of the couple with a room full of new church members where he commented that despite his joy at meeting such great new people, he was really just staring at his wife’s (no doubt leather-clad) butt. And my friend Stephanie Drury from Stuff Christian Culture Likes can unearth literally hundreds of posts like these at any given moment from evangelicals and pastors tweeting about their hot wives this and body parts that as a matter of pious online course.
It’s all a bit disturbing, really.
After stating that the purpose behind such comments is to show the world that Christians have a high view of sexuality and aren’t the “Puritanical” prudes many people believe them to be (which is a misnomer of a term, since the Puritans had a very robust view of sex–which is another topic for another time!), Hoag offers the following critique of the actions of these “frat-pastors”:
But here’s what’s really going on, most of the time. Mostly, guys blabbing about this stuff are just posturing. They are publicly asserting that they are in fact one of the (Christian) guys, the ones with the power, the ones with the penii (is that the correct plural form?). They are showing that they have a dominant gender role in the home and church, given to them by God, and by golly they are going to tweet compliments about their wives, using the words of drunk 19 year old fraternity brothers. And mostly, they are overcompensating because this Christian culture obsession with sex has got them thinking lustfully and, probably, not always about their wives of x years but other women more appealing to them in the teenage kneejerk visual stimulation sense.
In other words, mostly, they are projecting.
And worse, even as they go on and on about the hotness of their spouse, they are demeaning her.
I wanted to share this post with Dojo readers and ask for responses because I can see some valid points that Hoag makes and I believe his criticism applies in many cases…
…but something doesn’t sit right with me overall.
First of all, it’s worth pointing out that the phrase owes much of its popularity to Will Ferrel’s character Ricky Bobby in Talladega Nights as much as anything else. During the dinner scene, which is pretty hilarious for a number of reasons and could be the topic of a number of different blog posts, Ricky prays the following before dinner:
“Dear Lord Baby Jesus, I want to thank you for this wonderful meal, my two beautiful sons, Walker, Texas Ranger, and my Red-Hot Smokin’ Wife, Carley”
(click HERE to see the clip if you haven’t already)
And as Sarah Pulliam Bailey noted back in 2011, it even led to a crazy prayer by Pastor Joe Helms before a NASCAR event that enjoyed a brief moment of viral fame.
But back to Hoag’s post…
I read with sympathy the article he linked to over at Her.meneutics by DeMuth, who is a survivor of sexual abuse, and for whom such horrific experiences growing up have often resurfaced through various “triggers” that occur even today between her and her husband (to whom she is happily married and loves very much) which they are still working through. This is the reality of a world in which so many women are violated in so many ways and thus experience sex as a thing of ugly memories rather than beautiful intimacy.
So, again, I don’t want to diminish DeMuth’s (or Hoag’s) valid points.
And yet…
I can’t help but feel that there is something perhaps a bit reactionary underlying the response that finds such comments about one’s spouse’s physical beauty demeaning; that perhaps the “projecting” is flowing both ways.
I say this because I have heard many non-Complementarians (both men and women) publicly declare how “smokin’ hot” (or other similar adjectives denoting physical attraction) they find their spouse.
I also say this because there is an entire book of the Bible that is brimming with public, explicit, uninhibited, unapologetic praise of the physical beauty and erotic attraction that was an intended aspect of human sexuality–the Song of Songs (which I believe presents a post-Fall longing for pre-Fall intimacy and may or may not have been written by Solomon, though he is cast in a less-than-flattering role throughout the Song!)
In Song of Songs, both the woman and the man overtly and openly speak of how “smokin’ hot” the other is, using the ancient Near East format of a wasf (a form of poetry devoted to the physical features of the beloved). If Hoag’s post is correct, how then does such praise of the other’s physical attractiveness not also demean and objectify when it’s found in Scripture?
To be sure, the Song of Songs has been woefully misinterpreted by many popular preachers and teachers as a “marriage manual” or “Christian Kama Sutra”, and there are many Bible studies out there that read all sorts of things into the text which aren’t there or have little to do with it (some of you have probably done such studies in your own small group or Sunday School class!). But the Song DOES contain blatant, open, public bragging by the man AND the woman of the others’ physical features that are sexually arousing. There is no credible way to deny this fact…though it has often been downplayed by pious readers who are uncomfortable with the imagery it contains.
And it was written into Israel’s Scripture. It was more public than any Tweet or sermon comment. The entire nation would’ve heard it read out loud. Jesus would have heard it read out loud (and perhaps read it out loud Himself!).
When I mentioned this, a friend responded by saying:
Well, there seems to be a lovely, safe and intimate equality between the two lovers in Song of Songs. Not so much between frat-pastors and their hot-butted wives.
I can see her point…but, as I asked her in a follow up comment, where is that line? What determines the difference?
In thinking about it this morning, I’ve tried to put into words what troubles me about Hoag’s post (in which, again, there is much I agree with and find valid). I think it’s that the post seems to project an awful lot of assumptions regarding the mindset and relationship dynamic of a the pastors who make such comments (based on casting them all in the mold of the controversial Mark Driscoll). It struck me as saying more about the author’s (and other Christians who agree with him) comfort with physical appraisal than about the motives or mindsets of the pastors in question.
I can’t help but sense a reactionary tone when I read it (which of course I may be reading into it as well, I realize!). I find myself troubled by the fact that blatant praise of one’s spouse’s physical attractiveness is pitted against praise of their other attributes as well.
It seems to foster a semi-gnostic understanding of the physicality of sex and attraction, which I believe the Song was put in Scripture specifically to counter among God’s people.
I know different things strike people as more or less acceptable, and much of it is based on cultural conditioning, personal experiences (like DeMuth’s tragic past sexual abuse) and subjective taste. I recognize that “not all things are beneficial”…particularly when said publicly by those in leadership positions of teacher (James 3:1).
But I see a dynamic of reaction in responses like these that I can’t help but be uncomfortable with at times.
This is where charity, liberty, thinking the best of one another, and above all, balance is needed among believers, I would suggest.
For instance, I know some Christian women who are genuinely flattered and/or appreciative when their beauty is publicly praised by their husbands (I was raised by one, in fact!). They find it affirming and it makes them feel cherished on the level where insecurities can most often manifest and where the surrounding culture is constantly telling them they are not good enough. In fact, just this morning I saw on a newlywed friend’s Facebook feed a picture from her wedding and her comment was simply “He’s hot!” (both are active in ministry and missions). I didn’t even remotely read this as offensive or belittling; I thought it was sweet.
However, this differing view of physical praise actually presented a problem in a previous relationship of mine. I was raised believing that praise of physical beauty is akin to praise of intelligence, creativity or any other valued gift from God. But my girlfriend at the time was bothered whenever I would comment on her attractiveness (not even in public; just to her), and I couldn’t understand why. It caused seeds of resentment that I only found out about after they had grown into weeds of contempt that ultimately (along with other factors, of course) choked out our relationship. But it always made me feel terrible that something meant as praise and admiration was taken as “unspiritual” denigration and led to resentment.
There is such a diversity of opinion on this subject among Christians, I realize. And there is definitely a difference between crass boasting, distasteful language, or unhealthy obsession with outward appearances.
I believe we must find a balance when it comes to extolling physical attributes along with spiritual and intellectual attributes of spouses; and I’m sure many of the pastors who comment in this way do not maintain that balance. But the only way to determine it objectively would be to note every public praise they’ve ever given of their wives and see what the percentages are. I would have no problem if a pastor who often praised the intelligence, resourcefulness, faithfulness, humility, love or patience of their spouse also from time to time commented on how wildly attracted he or she was to them as well. That would communicate (to me) that physical sexual desire is a healthy and godly part of marriage and should be nurtured and encouraged.
But if that’s all they ever said about their spouse or if they used overly-crass phraseology, or if they held to disturbing views of sex in general (as Driscoll has been criticized for, and which I don’t necessarily dispute, having read many of his public teachings and comments on the subjecct), then I could see it being irresponsible at best and demeaning at worst.
I guess I just think it’s best to be cautious when addressing it and trying to discern the underlying relationship dynamic or intention of the people involved (regardless of how we personally react toward or emotionally resonate with the comment itself).
My question to you, Dojo readers, would be:
Is it possible for a Christian to blatantly praise and admire (and even, like the Song of Songs, practically brag about) the physical beauty of one’s spouse without it being perceived as objectifying?
Is that possible in our culture where many Christians feel that since society is so focused on the outer, the only proper and Godly Christian response is to focus on the inner over and against it?
I don’t have an answer that fits every situation, culture, or personal preference, and I know how easy it is for someone’s words (particularly in written form) to be misunderstood. So I want to give others (on both sides of the “smokin’ hot spouse” issue!) the benefit of the doubt in terms of their motives and sincerity.
What do you think, readers?
Categories: Blog, Hebrew Bible, Ministry, Relationships
Great article, James-Michael! I’d love to lend my view on this subject…
I think marriage relationships in the church are always under a lot of scruitiny, and that’s why people in these roles need to remember they are supposed to model God’s intention for marriage.
Ephesisans 5:25-27 basically explains that a husband should focus on keeping his wife holy. Does directing other men’s eyes and thoughts to her physical desirabilty help with this? No… it does the opposite. So I think that open lust-centered praise isn’t helpful to the wife or to the church body. I could be wrong, but I think The Song of Solomon was done in private. What a man and wife say to eachother in private is just that- private. Not public.
The Bible also directs women and wives in a lot of ways. There is soooo much more direction to women than plain submission, and I think pastors miss this because they’re not looking for it. Perhaps they’re just naturally more interested in how the Bible directs women to deal with men in authority.
I submit this verse:
1 Peter 3:3-4 Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.
So, if a pastor wants to make his wife feel good publicly, while at the same time modeling the church and what is important to God, he should focus on his wife’s heart.
It is a shame that so many of these pastors, and men in general seem to completely miss this. Women deserve better than just being praised for their appearance…. it’s one of the only things that they can’t really control.
Someone gave me this book: The 5 Love Languages: The Secret to Love That Lasts
for my wedding and it’s helped my husband a lot.
Thanks again for this post!
by Laura on Apr 22, 2013 at 7:25 pm
Thanks Laura. The Five Love Languages is a great book and it shows the importance of, among other things, Words of Affirmation. The question, of course, is whether or not specific comments on physical beauty is affirming or not.
I do want to challenge one point, however. The Song of Songs was anything but private. It was composed and included within Israel’s holy Scripture. It literally claims to be “the greatest song ever written” and even within the Song, the woman and man praise the physical attributes of the other to the friends and to the audience. This doesn’t mean that any comment a person makes on their spouse’s beauty is automatically holy, of course! But it does give precedent for the public praise of physical beauty–even erotic beauty–at certain times in certain settings.
by jm on Apr 22, 2013 at 7:36 pm
I have a follow up question on the Song of Songs… do you mean it was done publicly because it was published later, or that they literally had a live audience? I’m only asking because I personally think this is a big difference. On one hand, it can be included in holy scripture as a representation of how a man and wife can interact in private. On the other hand, it would be a representation of how a man and wife can interact in public.
I’m glad you like the love languages book too! The Words of Affirmation love language doesn’t work for well for me… sounds like it didn’t work in your relationship etiher… but that’s ok because I operate under a different love language.
I love the book because it showed my husband the love language that I would actually understand and respond to.
by Laura on Apr 22, 2013 at 7:46 pm
Yes, words of affirmation are one of my main love languages. I would love to hear a woman I love praise any of my physical attributes if it was sincere; as such praise does not come often to those of us who grow up pale, skinny, freckly redheads in this society! 🙂 But I learned through my experience with her that for others, acceptance of such intended compliments are a source of embarrassment or insecurity. So now I know that this is something to be on the lookout for in terms of any future relationship, at least.
As for the Song, it was read (perhaps sung in character) publicly and it portrays events both private and public. The sexual intimacy (within the world of the Song) takes place in private. But the praise of the lover and beloved over the physical beauty and attractiveness of the other is done (within the world of the Song) to the friends at times. Since it’s a song (rather than a story, as some erroneously read it) there is not a clear-cut distinction of what is public and what is private. But the fact that it is a celebration of physical beauty (among other gifts the lovers recognize in one another) and is included within the sacred Scriptures shows that such topics are not taboo for God’s people to discuss, consider or seek to emulate at times, I would argue.
by jm on Apr 22, 2013 at 7:59 pm
Very cool- thanks for the clarification!
I guess for me the bottom line is that it doesn’t focus on the wife’s bottom… I think it’s distracting for men who work every day to view women with respect and clean thoughts.
by Laura on Apr 22, 2013 at 8:15 pm
I think it can be distracting, particularly to those whose main battle is against sinful sexual lusts. That’s where the “not all things are beneficial” comment comes into play, I believe.
But to be fair, the Song really does go into more explicit detail of the anatomy of both the man and the woman…including lips, breasts, thighs, genital euphemisms, etc. This is why there’s been such a level of discomfort with it among Jews and Christians for over 2,000 years now.
by jm on Apr 22, 2013 at 8:19 pm
If you don’t think the mainstream view of Puritans is that of anti-fun bastards, how do you reconcile that with the term puritanical views being so commonly used to describe the forces of censorship?
by Fortuna Veritas on Apr 22, 2013 at 7:40 pm
The same way I reconcile the fact that in modern English “Fundamentalist” means close-minded, whereas the early authors of “The Fundamentals” included some who accepted Darwinian evolution and various other concepts that modern Fundamentalism completely rejects.
Urban legends are hard to stop once they’ve circulated for long enough.
by jm on Apr 22, 2013 at 7:44 pm
My problem with looking to Song of Solomon as an example is that he had 700 wives and 300 concubines. Surely a man like that isn’t a prime example of sexual purity? Especially since his lust led him to stray from God. I like the other Laura’s comment about what this might cause other men to think. As a Christian woman, I want a husband who will think I’m “smokin’ hot” and praise me for that, but I don’t want a husband who is being bombarded with images of other women and being told they are “smokin’ hot.” Perhaps the sexually-charged comments would be better kept private, especially considering the culture we live in today, where men already have a hard enough time guarding their eyes and thoughts.
by Laura C. on Apr 22, 2013 at 8:26 pm
Good comments, Laura C. I don’t disagree. I could see making comments that involve sexual concepts in a setting where it was the focus or subject (i.e. a marriage retreat or sermon on sex, etc.).
But to clarify, in the Song itself, Solomon is not held up as an example–if anything, he is denigrated and put forth as an example of what NOT to be at the end of the Song. If Solomon was the author (which I’m inclined to believe he could have been), then the Song would be a profound recognition near the end of his life (during the time of Ecclesiastes, perhaps) of how far he had strayed from what sexual intimacy was intended by God to be and thus it reflects what I refer to above as a “post-Fall longing for pre-Fall intimacy”. I go into this more in the message I gave on the book which you can listen to or download over on the audio archive page.
by jm on Apr 22, 2013 at 8:34 pm
I think mostly that we as humans over compensate when it comes to anything. We are of course supposed to be complimentary to our spouses. We forget that words come with baggage in our effort to be seen as “X” (insert your descriptor). And therein lies the rub…people saying these things for external or peer recognition. If anyone were to say that their spouse was “beautiful” or that they are “the most wonderful spouse” nobody would argue that those expressions are different than “my spouse is hot” or “my spouse has a hot butt.” The former is based in love, the latter is based in lust.
by Drew on Apr 22, 2013 at 9:35 pm
Let me start my response with this:
After 11 years of marriage, I am extremely and intensely physically and sexually attracted to my wife Lucy. I say this to honor God, her, and marriage, all of which are dishonored in our society.
In relation to a marriage question, Jesus said that man should not separate what God brings together. But God as the establish-er of the ONE FLESH relationship is continually dishonored as the tempter, as the one who gives sexual desires but no true outlet of fulfillment. But the scriptures say,
“Let your fountain be blessed and rejoice in the wife of your youth. May her breast satisfy you at all times. May you be intoxicated by her love always. WHY BE INTOXICATED BY THE EMBRACE OF AN ADULTERESS!?”
Solomon said this to his sons.
Satisfying breasts. Intoxicating sexual love.
God not only established the one flesh relationship of marriage, but wants it be be satisfying and intoxicating. And I bear witness that God is good. My wife’s body is a gift to me.
I complimenting Lucy’s physical desirability, I honor my wife because wives are dishonored in this world, made out to be physically unsatisfying, unless they are “desperate house wives” type. The world makes it seem like the adulteress is the intoxicating one, but Solomon exposes that lie, and reveals the adulteress as poisonous, though intoxicating AT FIRST. The adulteress is ULTIMATELY UNSATISFYING, leading foolish mean to death and hell. Note, Solomon is neither chauvinist nor feminist. He exposes the sexual sin of the man and woman in adulterous situations. But the wife’s sexual beauty is exalted in scripture. Thus I exalt my wife’s physical beauty after 11 years.
In complimenting my wife’s body I honor marriage according to this scripture,
“Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed undefiled, but adulterers and fornicators will be judged.”
The marriage bed is UNDEFILED. This seems to me to show the ultimate liberty in marital sexuality. As long as the husband and wife consent, they are free to fulfill each other however they choose, in the secrecy of their marriage beds.
Therefore, I propose three standards for a minister’s public comments about his wife’s physical beauty:
1. Does SHE find it honorable and desirable to be so praised by her husband?
2. Does the minister defraud or tempt people to lust after his wife (or after him) by being too graphic in his descriptions of his wife’s body?
3. Does his wife tempt others by being to graphic in her dress or how she carries herself? Do they tempt members of the congregation to sexually covet them?
I’ve experienced being tempted to lust after the preacher’s wife, a “smokin’ hot” praise and worship leader showing ample cleavage and wearing skin tight short dresses! I remember going to a retreat, and a “praise leader” coming out with short shorts and a very tight tank top. A brother simply turned and looked at me. His look said it all. I knew he too would be distracted from God’s glory that morning because of the glory of this woman’s sexuality displayed for all to see.
In summary:
1. God, the wife, and marriage should be honored by compliments to the wife.
2. Measure the appropriateness of the ministers physical compliments of his wife by the wife’s attitude toward the compliments, and by whether the minister or his wife tempt people to covet them sexually.
by Olatunde on Apr 22, 2013 at 11:07 pm
beautifully put, Olatunde!
by jm on Apr 23, 2013 at 1:46 am
Olatunde,
great, wise, loving response. Thanks.
by Dawn on Apr 23, 2013 at 5:24 pm
I am glad you wrote this because it identifies things about this article that didn’t sit well with me either–specifically, the amount of projection into another’s motives. It was useful to know, and it’s important to be aware of reactions, but there was a lack of grace in that struck me as unkind. Granted, I haven’t known pastors like the ones she describes, but I couldn’t tell whether they really are that deeply misogynistic or if was a bit of a straw man argument. Maybe both.
When my husband compliments me on my physical attributes, even in public, I don’t hear degradation. We have three children together. We love, respect and uphold each other. I do not feel he reduces me to the sum of my physical parts if he notes my beauty, nor do I feel he is internally comparing me to someone more ideal. Rather, what I hear is that he redefines his ideal, each day, as we age, to me.
How we talk about our marriage may be something we’ll continue to be aware of as time marches on, but I hope people can see that respect, friendship and sexual attraction are neither mutually exclusive nor degrading in a marriage.
by Christine on Apr 23, 2013 at 4:03 am
Thanks for weighing in with a Pastor’s wife perspective, Christine! 🙂 Well said.
by jm on Apr 23, 2013 at 3:57 pm
The problem I find with this response that that it is less about recognizing what is wrong with the “smokin’ hot” comments. It is more asking, in a seemingly half-hearted way, why do certain women find the comments offensive, because *I* know women who think it’s flattering.
Yes, sometimes it’s reassuring or flattering to hear that your partner finds you attractive, even in public. But having a partner genuinely appreciate you for your great qualities and having them boast and idolize you are two completely different things. The partner becomes a trophy, something won, an object to be viewed and admired. Would I rather my partner find me “smokin’ hot”, or intelligent, generous, patient?
Part of the problem with objectification is that it’s difficult to spot, for everyone involved, if you’re not looking. Some women think that catcalling and cheesy pick-up lines are flattering, but that doesn’t make them universally so. In a culture like ours, which objectifies humans to the point of being pieces and prizes, it takes people like Zach to step back and say, “Hey, maybe this isn’t a good thing. We need to reexamine this.”
Comparing tweets about “date night with the hot wife” to the Song of Solomon is also unfair, for a number of reasons. Song of Solomon was written in a vastly different cultural context. Women in our culture are given opportunity to express themselves intellectually, emotionally, artistically. They are not (or should not be) the property of their fathers or husbands. They have (or should have) more value than their sexual attractiveness, ability to raise children, and support from the sidelines. Even when a husband makes seemingly self-demeaning comments like, “What a catch! I am the luckiest man to land such a sexy wife! I can’t believe she married me!”, I can’t help but feel like he’s subverting her input into the marriage, her point of view, all to raise her up as a “great catch”.
by Jingles on Apr 23, 2013 at 4:05 am
But why the dichotomy? Why must it be an either/or? Why can a spouse not celebrate and lift up ALL the things he or she finds amazing in his or her spouse (physically, spiritually and intellectually)? That is the implication I find troubling and semi-gnostic.
by jm on Apr 23, 2013 at 4:03 pm
I’m a Youth Pastor and my wife is hot… So sue me! :)
Seriously, most people who know me, or read what I write, know exactly how I feel about my wife, so I don’t really need to Tweet it.
Most pastors don’t post this stuff for the benefit of their wives anyway, (otherwise they would simply tell them how they feel). This is usually more about perception/image management.
Lastly, it’s one thing to post “My wife is hot”, (which draws attention to her physicality, and risks objectifying her, and encouraging others to do so), and another to post “I’m hot for my wife.”, which speaks to devotion, intimacy, contentment, etc.
by John on Apr 23, 2013 at 6:02 pm
“Most pastors don’t post this stuff for the benefit of their wives anyway, (otherwise they would simply tell them how they feel). This is usually more about perception/image management.”
This is where I think we have to be careful of assigning motives to others. There could be a legitimate desire on the part of someone tweeting/speaking about it to lift up publicly the value of marital intimacy and Christian sexuality. This is, of course, tricky and requires a great deal of care (as when talking about any potentially controversial issue publicly). But I know how easy it is to project what we read based on our own anecdotal experience…and I’m certainly not immune to doing so myself. That’s why I think it’s a hidden danger to be aware of, as Christine pointed out above.
by jm on Apr 23, 2013 at 11:13 pm
I agree with the comment by “Jingles”
____
“Comparing tweets about “date night with the hot wife” to the Song of Solomon is also unfair, for a number of reasons. Song of Solomon was written in a vastly different cultural context. Women in our culture are given opportunity to express themselves intellectually, emotionally, artistically. They are not (or should not be) the property of their fathers or husbands. They have (or should have) more value than their sexual attractiveness, ability to raise children, and support from the sidelines. ”
____
I think the dichotomy exists because being “sexy” is based on sex. Sex appeal… why make other men drool over your wife’s butt?
If you’re going to compliment your wife’s physical features in the church on the pulpit, there should be very little emphasis on it… because the bible tells women not to be known for it.
by Laura on Apr 23, 2013 at 6:06 pm
I agree that any compliment of physical features should be proportionate to compliments geared toward other features (though the authors in the original post seem to bristle ANYTIME such intended compliments are made). If someone talks most about how physically attracted to their spouse they are, but rarely about how emotionally fulfilling they find them to be, for instance, that’s a very reasonable red flag (which is why I can see some validity in both Hoag’s and DeMuth’s points). I think Olatunde did a good job summarizing ways by which we can discern the difference, btw.
But I’m not sure I’d say “the Bible tells women not to be known for it”, Laura. I think the Bible tells women not to be known ONLY for their outward beauty, or PRIMARILY for their outward beauty. But it does celebrate beauty as a legitimate gift from God that should be received with thanksgiving and used in a way that edifies others, as with any other gift. Paul’s admonitions to Timothy about women not ultimately relying on their outward appearance serves as a balance to the temptation (both then and now) for women (and men!) to make up for inward shortcomings through outward impressive display. This is why the often “literal” translation, the NASB, uses the word “merely” in that passage, I believe.
by jm on Apr 23, 2013 at 11:08 pm
Both Jingles and Laura have some good insight in this. If a man wants to compliment his wife it should be about who she is as a person, not her bodily features or his sexual attraction to her. We all love sex but that is not the point of life. It is also not the point of a woman’s purposes in being alive.
If a man cannot see past what a woman does to see who she is, then he is in trouble and their marriage is missing an important spiritual element.
by TL on Apr 23, 2013 at 8:27 pm
“If a man wants to compliment his wife it should be about who she is as a person, not her bodily features or his sexual attraction to her.”
But as Olatunde and Christine have pointed out in their comments, a person’s bodily features, including the sexual attraction they generate in their spouse is part of who they are as a pserson, and even celebrated openly and publicly in the Song of Songs. This in and of itself doesn’t necessitate seeing physical/sexual attraction as a person’s “purpose in being alive.” That’s seems to be overly reactionary, which is what didn’t sit well with me as I read the posts initially.
by jm on Apr 23, 2013 at 10:58 pm
Thanks for the interesting article. While I am very happily married, and don’t have a problem with spouses appreciating each others’ physical traits (although I’d appreciate it if they don’t do it in front of me), I would add one caveat. Scripture contains one book that celebrates physical love, not sixty-six. I think this gives us a position from which to affirm God’s good gifts, without becoming obsessed with them, as our culture tends to be. Thanks again.
by Noel on Apr 23, 2013 at 11:10 pm
Good point, Noel. Thanks for commenting!
Though, to be fair, it is an ENTIRE book…haha… 😉
by jm on Apr 23, 2013 at 11:15 pm
I guess I am continuing to be a voice for moderation. I may not run in the right circles, but I honestly don’t know anyone who views his wife as a vessel for his lustful thoughts, and pits her in direct competition with pornography for his lustful gaze. If a husband calls his wife beautiful, I don’t assume he thinks her brain is as useless as a pink giraffe. If those assumptions ARE true, it’s a real problem, but I have yet to encounter a marriage for which it is true, which makes me think the percentages of truly misogynistic, shallow-sex focused marriages is a minority of marriages. There’s probably a grain of it in many marriages, but not to the extent it’s being portrayed.
Perhaps the language being used is extreme in order to make a point, but such language can also be unfair to the people being criticized. There’s a lot of assuming going on.
This is a separate point from whether it’s beneficial for others to hear men complimenting each wives’ bodies. I would add that, while it’s a lesser charge, women who publicly praise their husband’s fathering may be a hindrance to women unhappy in their marriages. The drive to be married to a good dad is strong in many mothers, and this has led and will continue to lead to affairs. It seems to me that we’re pretty specifically discussing ways men lead other men to desire their wives, but there are plenty of ways women lead other women to desire their husbands (usually unwittingly). Not saying it’s an apples-to-apples comparison, just throwing it out.
by Christine on Apr 24, 2013 at 4:02 pm
Your 2nd point is one that I was thinking about yesterday as well, Christine. If one objects to pastors publicly praising their spouse’s physical attributes because it will make those who don’t measure up to that feel insecure or rejected, what about praising emotional/intellectual attributes? If a husband praises how brilliant his wife is, will that not make women who don’t feel as smart feel less secure or like they don’t measure up to such expectations? Or the pastor publicly praises the charm, wit, or sense of humor of his wife, will that not run the risk of making women who don’t feel that funny or interesting even less desirable?
In other words, why is physical praise singled out as inherently more damaging than praise of other equally dispersed-in-varying-measures-among-people attributes?
by jm on Apr 24, 2013 at 4:56 pm
I guess I’m just really having trouble seeing a context in which praising my wife’s physical features *for other people to hear* is affirming and validating for her. When I was a teenager, I wanted a hot girlfriend so that I could walk past the other guys holding her hand. I appreciate your wanting to critique the critique, but it’s apples and oranges what I whisper to my wife when I know that she needs to hear affirmation and blasting out pictures of her physical features to all my twitter followers. I’m sorry. It seems pretty cut and dry to me.
by Morgan Guyton on Apr 28, 2013 at 8:56 pm
Morgan, I see your point. But I’m hesitant to go there because the lovers in the Song of Song DID see fit to publicly praise each others’ physical features. I’m not saying that’s what any pastor’s tweet is coming close to doing…I’m just saying that to definitively declare it to be crass or unacceptable *in and of itself* based on our own inward motives if *we* were to do so is something I’m not comfortable doing.
by jm on Apr 28, 2013 at 9:02 pm
Just a thought, here …
If a woman were to walk into church wearing a short skirt, accentuating her behind and/or other … uhhh … physical attributes, shall we say? … she would be called immodest. She would often be accused of leading men astray in their thoughts with her display of herself.
Why, then, is it okay for her husband to say, “Check out my wife” and encourage other men to look at her as such?
A whole lot of people wouldn’t bat an eye at assuming the motives of a woman who shows herself off. I agree that we shouldn’t project too much into the motives of men showing off their wives, but are you sure that you’re showing the same grace, or is there a disparity? And if there is, why?
I’m inclined to think that we’re swinging a bit too far by putting our wives up for show. It’s great to appreciate and affirm each other. But this does seem to cross a line into immodesty by proxy.
by Ken Leonard on Jun 8, 2013 at 11:59 pm