How would you describe the perfect wife? I suspect that nine out of ten Christians immediately think of the woman in Proverbs 31. How often have we heard about this woman? Whenever many Christian men, both single and married, attempt to describe desirable characteristics of wives, they quickly offer Proverbs 31 as the standard toward which women should aim to reach. Even many Christian women verbalize their goal to become this woman.

I’m not so sure I completely agree.

Verses 10-31 of this proverb detail the qualities displayed by this woman. Granted, the fruit she exhibits reflect God’s commands and illustrations of godly living. However, scriptural accounts of other women, such as Mary praising God with her Magnificat (Luke 1) and Hannah “pouring out her soul before the Lord” so intently that Eli mistook her as drunk (1 Samuel 1)—scriptures that provide examples of women who possess a passion for time spent still and quiet in His presence—harmonize with the Proverbs 31 woman and enhance our understanding of God’s ideal for women.

As we analyze this passage of Scripture in Proverbs, we should apply the same rules of Biblical interpretation that we would if we were discussing any of a number of theological topics. The interpretative error of asserting the Proverbs 31 woman as the ideal, in isolation from other complementary passages, creates an incomplete portrait of a godly woman.

Mary and Martha come to mind:

Now as they went on their way, Jesus entered a village. And a woman named Martha welcomed him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet and listened to his teaching. But Martha was distracted with much serving. And she went up to him and said, “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Tell her then to help me.” But the Lord answered her, “Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things, but one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the good portion, which will not be taken away from her.”  –John 10:38-42

Jesus corrected Martha and praised Mary.

What I see in Proverbs 31 is a woman that’s very busy. She’s less Mary and more Martha, minus the complaining, resentful, and worried heart.

If we focus too much on what the text explicitly states and less on the influence of God that created this God fearing woman, then we potentially uphold an unbalanced ideal for womanhood. We elevate the Martha who concerned herself more with serving and being productive over the Mary who desired to rest at the feet of Jesus with a teachable spirit, when in fact we know that God desires both for women.

I hope that I’m a woman one day that would wake up while it’s still dark to prepare food for my family (Stop it, Quixote). But more than that, I hope that my primary focus each day rests on God and that I carve out quiet time devoted solely to Him. Otherwise, I invite the pitfalls of self.

31 Give her of the fruit of her hands, and let her works praise her in the gates.

Give me what God wants of my hands, and let my love of Jesus praise God in the gates.

Valentine’s Day is upon us yet again as a reminder of the unsurpassed ingenuity and ascendancy of American capitalism, despite the stormy petrels circling the current economic landscape. Not to worry: the Government in which we trust has promised us Valentine’s stimulation, so get out there and buy something.

None of this interests Quixote that much, and I am certain he will wile away the Valentinian hours pining for Dulcinea del Toboso, except that he’s been pestering me with thoughts about love and such. In particular, he’s wondering if our atheist friends feel the same way about love as we Christians do. I gave it some thought, and compiled some Valentine pointers below for your edification. This is a list of how it’s not done on Valentine’s day, by category*:

If your date says, “How do I look?” Don’t respond:

• When you’re dead, you’re dead atheist: “Heeeeeey Bebe.”
• Christian: “Your hair is like a flock of goats descending from Gilead.”
• Elite atheist: “You and a cow have homologous structures.”

If your date says, “Kiss me.” Don’t respond:

• WYDYD atheist: “Come to Butthead.”
• Christian: “Your teeth are like a flock of sheep just shorn. Each has its twin; not one of them is alone.”
• Elite atheist: “Did you know there are millions of bacteria in the human mouth?”

If your date says, “Do you love me?” Don’t respond:

• WYDYD: “Whatever you say, Bebe.”
• Christian: “I liken you, my darling, to a mare harnessed to one of the chariots of Pharaoh.”
• Elite atheist: “Well, your pheromones must be strong tonight. Love’s just a human conception, not an objective or absolute value in any real sense of the word, but my neurons do seem to be firing strangely tonight.”

If your date says, “Will you love me forever?” Don’t respond:

• “Let me sleep on it, baby, baby, let me sleep on it. Let me sleep on it. I’ll give you an answer in the mornin’.”
• “Did you know the Bible says that a wife should be subject to her husband?”
• “Well, we are hard-wired through evolution to care for our mates so that our children grow up to reproduce; therefore, making us successful biological organisms.”

*In Quixote’s mind there are two classes of atheist that may be found within both weak (negative) and strong (positive) atheism. The WYDYD atheist, often referred to as the low-church atheist, does not know or care about Euthyphro, logical syllogisms, Reason, Nihilism, Existentialism, and may or may not believe in Darwinian evolution, etc. He just knows that when you’re dead, you’re dead. By contrast, the elite, or high-church atheist, is generally well-educated, philosophical, and intensely concerned with Science and evidence, among other associated characteristics. Strong or Positive atheism may be represented by the phrase “There is no god or gods.” Weak or Negative atheism may be represented by the phrase “There’s no, or not enough, evidence to persuade me to believe in a god or gods.”

There’s often a seamless transition from “The civil and ceremonial laws were fulfilled in Christ” to “You should vote for X because he’s promised to propose a bill in Congress to stop Y” within American Christian circles. And by often, I intend to communicate a staggering preponderance of Christians from all brands of American Christianity, along all points of the political spectrum. It’s an inconsistent, and perhaps contradictory, theological passage from the Kingdom of God to a terminus of entanglement with the world. It’s as if a man who removed the internal combustion engine from his car out of environmental concerns, elected to install it to power his windmill instead.

The Areopagus is steadfastly committed to the universal Church, both visible and invisible, and is prepared to apologize in her defense. It is my contention, however, that the Church’s primary difficulties rarely arise from without. After all, the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church, and let no Christian forget that gates are defensive armaments. If the Christian God attends to the affairs of humankind, can Christianity really be conceived to fail? I pray we recall our creed the next time we are tempted to treat someone outside the faith poorly, say, a scientist, an atheist, a Hindu, or any other ill-perceived threat.

The Church’s foremost troubles decidedly arise from within, from both God’s own people, and false prophets. At present, The Areopagus recognizes two primary evils corrupting the heart of the church: the first is the Church political, the other will be disclosed in a subsequent post. Christianity’s involvement in politics will be subjected to routine criticism as long as this blog endures. It’s time for Christians to rid the Church of this toxin.

I invite readers and commenters, then, to consider the following questions. Do we as Christians genuinely seek to establish another Holy Roman Empire? Do we as Christians really believe the Church needs political influence to survive? Is there any basis in Scripture to support the Church’s political activity, or does the Bible speak against it? Is it possible for the Church to provide a moral voice when it’s lobbying for votes? For those outside the faith, do you approve of the church’s involvement as long as it happens to coincide with your political leanings, or are you prepared to lose a percentage of your voting bloc for your party on account of your support for the separation of church and state?

In preparation for an extended discussion on the Church political, there’s another related consideration to ponder. God comes in judgment on His own people first–with respect to hierarchy, not time: You have lifted up the shrine of your king, the pedestal of your idols, the star of your god–which you made for yourselves. Therefore I will send you into exile beyond Damascus, says the Lord, whose name is God Almighty (Amos 5:26-27). You may wish to reconsider the next time you think that calamities of any classification are exclusively purposed for non-believers. In days such as these, where it seems many think the Church’s mission is electing those who can ensure us acceptable Supreme Court justices, it’s reasonable to conclude He has the Church in mind.