Wives have you let yourself Go ?


The following are two great articles by 2 people I admire greatly.
Mary Kassian was one of my professors at seminary and I don't know of any
other person who has a better grasp of the subject of feminist theology. I
completely agree with her thoughts below. We were created in God's image...
female with a very special and distinct purpose.
Ladies as wives or future wives, let us continue to grow in His Word and be a
good steward of the physical temple God provided.


Female Beauty Matters
Originally posted by Mary Kassian | May 28, 2011 |Girls Gone Wise

Recently, several bloggers tackled a highly sensitive and debated topic— the
need for women to attend to their beauty and appearance. I published a
post, extracted from my Girls Gone Wise book, which examined some
Scriptural directives for women on what and what not to wear. I came under
fire for focusing on such mundane matters rather than really important stuff—
like comforting the sick and war-torn.
I admit it. The topic of woman’s appearance is trivial compared to the war on
the other side of the world – but given the reality of our culture, it’s a battle
that hits much closer to home.
The Debate about Female Beauty
Tim Challies, a popular Christian blogger, published his thoughts on women
“letting themselves go.” While he was careful to stress that “the beauty the
Bible commends is the beauty of character more than a beauty of
appearance,” he suggested that inner and outer beauty are actually
inexorably connected, and concluded that women need to make the effort to
remain beautiful to their husbands.
Another blogger, Rachel Held Evans, was disappointed by Challies’
refrain that “outer beauty reflects inner beauty” and that “a good wife will
keep up appearances for her husband choosing an attractive sweater
instead of the stained Mickey Mouse t-shirt.” She argued that
The Bible never demands that women be beautiful nor does it justify a man’
s infidelity because his wife “let herself go.” If anything, it presents a fairly
consistent picture of beauty as a passing pleasure. Challies and company
are free to teach that women should stay beautiful for their husbands, but I
wish they would stop referring to this teaching as “biblical” when it is not.
The discussion surrounding this issue was intense. Challies’ and Evans’
posts attracted several hundred comments. When Mark Driscoll mentioned
my “What Not to Wear” post on twitter, Girls Gone Wise got flooded with
so many visits that it temporarily downed the site. Incidentally, Driscoll took a
whole lot of flak, a few years ago, when he offered to take one for the guys,
by decrying pastor’s wives for “letting themselves go.”
A Sensitive Issue for both Sexes
Woman’s appearance is a sensitive issue, because from a man’s perspective,
a wife’s effort to be beautiful for her husband speaks of her care and
respect for him, and communicates her desire to be sexually attractive and
available for him. Making a reasonable effort to care for and beautify herself
is a demonstration of her devotion. In his view, a lack of effort in this regard
demonstrates a lack of concern for him. Bottom line – whether we like it our
not, it’s important to our guys. Challies points out:
In all of these things, a woman ought to understand (and believe) that what a
man finds (or ought to find) beautiful in his wife is more about care and
respect and effort and availability than it is about figure and proportion. In
too many cases a woman who lets herself go is simply symbolizing that she has
let her marriage go. Conversely, care for herself shows her care for her
husband, respect for him, love for him.
It’s even a touchier subject for women, because as Evans points out, “many
are so burdened by the impossible standards imposed by our culture that
they feel as though their efforts will never be enough.” Like Evans, I have
never in my life met a woman who did not want to be beautiful for her
husband.
When it comes to beauty, women react against the burden of expectation,
the fear that they will fall short of the desired standard, the inevitability of
decay, and the resentment that the script is different for men than women. A
woman wants to be loved and accepted as she is. From a wife’s perspective, a
husband’s attraction to/desire for beauty can magnify her feelings of
personal inadequacy and insecurity, and she may fear that his
love/acceptance depends on her ability to measure up.
Approaching the Discussion from a Different Angle
So who is right—Challies or Evans? Was Driscoll entirely off base in
suggesting that it might negatively affect a pastor if his wife lets herself go?
Or were his critics misguided in insisting that a woman’s lack of attention to
her appearance should in no way impact her husband’s propensity to stray?
The stalemate in the discussion often boils down to the fact that women
resent the fact that men are so attracted to beauty, while men resent the fact
that women don’t make the effort to properly attend to it. So how do we
resolve the impasse? In my opinion, we can’t hope to make sense of the
question until we view woman’s beauty and beautification through the lens of
the biblical typology of gender, and the eternal, cosmic meaning of sexuality.
Beauty has a Cosmic Meaning
Psalm 45 is a song celebrating the marriage of a Hebrew king to a foreign
princess. But it’s also a messianic prophecy pointing to the relationship
between Christ the King and His Church-Bride. The Psalmist notes that
the king “desires her beauty”, and that the princess, in turn, makes herself
beautiful—“all-glorious”— for him.
Scripture uses this imagery to illustrate how we are to make ourselves
beautiful for our King. The Lord wants us to clothe ourselves in fine,
spotless garments of righteousness—in holy character and holy deeds. (Rev.
19:7—8) He wants us to be beautiful, and through Jesus, we are! The great
story of the gospel is that God gives us the opportunity to clothe ourselves
in the beauty of Christ. He provides the beauty- and we don’t need to work
or strive to measure up, nor do we need fear that we will fail to meet the
standard.
So what does all this have to do with our discussion about female
appearance? It has a great deal to do with it. We live—as C.S. Lewis coined
it—in the “shadow lands.” The earthly, physical realities of our lives are but
shadows—copies—of true and heavenly realities (e.g. Heb. 8:5; 9:24-25).
The physical and temporal exist to point us to the spiritual and eternal. And
nowhere is this more the case than in the relationship between male and
female.
Human sexuality is a parable —a testimony to the character of God and to
His spectacular plan of redemption through Jesus. This spiritual truth is so
magnificent that God chose to put it on display permanently. Everywhere.
Men were created to reflect the strength, love and self-sacrifice of Christ.
Women were created to reflect the grace and beauty of the Bride He
redeemed.
I believe that men are “wired” to be attracted to beauty in women because
our Heavenly Bridegroom desires the beauty of His Bride. And I believe
that deep down, every woman wants to feel beautiful and desired. This is
the way that God has created us as male and female—and the illustration
points to something far bigger than ourselves.
Beauty is More Than a Passing Pleasure
Many scorn beauty as “a passing pleasure.” They think that the illusive,
fragile, fading, temporary, and wrinkle-and-stretch-mark-prone nature of
female beauty indicates that men (and women) should just “get over it” and
focus on more important things.
Beauty is indeed a passing pleasure. But I think there’s a deeper meaning
here that we dare not trivialize. The symbolic importance of
beauty/beautification is not unlike the symbolic importance of marriage.
Woman’s beauty, and all the broken, distorted ideas about it, will not so
much pass, as give way—in the end—to that to which beauty points. There
will be no marriage in heaven because the shadow will give way to the reality.
Likewise, the illusive, fading, temporary beauty of women will one day give
way to the breathtaking, spectacular, eternal beauty of the Bride of Christ.
The gospel doesn’t negate man’s desire to enjoy beauty and woman’s desire
to be beautiful, but it does shift the focus of our attention beyond the
symbol to that to which it points. When we consider the jaw-dropping picture
painted by Scripture, it would seem that our Lord finds our desire for
beauty not too strong, but too weak. We get all wrapped up with the earthly
and the superficial and temporal, while the supernatural and eternal is
offered us. Like an ignorant tourist who spreads out his towel under the
picture of the umbrella on the sign, because he does not know that the sign
points to the beach. We are far too easily pleased. (Again, a favorite C. S.
Lewis thought)
Embracing Beauty
Followers of Christ know that the symbol is not even fractionally as
important as the reality. But they understand that it is not totally
unimportant either.
So girls, let’s give the guys a break. Let’s stop condemning them for feeling
attracted to beauty and wanting us to make a reasonable and sustained
effort in that department. And guys… give us a break. Please understand
how very personal and painful this issue can be for women. It’s very difficult
to stay engaged in fighting a battle we know we are destined to lose. The
beauty of our youth will inevitably fade. And most of us don’t have a hope
of even remotely resembling the airbrushed model on the cover of the
magazine.
And let’s always remember that the whole issue of female beauty is merely a
signpost. It’s reminder to all of us—male and female—that the King desires
our beauty, and that we ought to carefully attend to our character, and to
making ourselves spiritually beautiful for that great destination wedding on
the other shore.
In my opinion, the answer to the conundrum surrounding the discussion
about female beauty is not to diminish or deny its importance, but to exalt
and embrace the all-surpassing beauty to which it points.

© Mary Kassian
www.girlsgonewise.com

________________________________________


Letting Herself Go
by  Tim Challies  Posted at his blog     05/26/11

A short time ago blogger and author Rachel Held Evans wrote an article
she titled “Thou Shalt Not Let Thyself Go?” She began it this way: “In
my quest for biblical womanhood, I’ve found that sometimes there’s as much
to learn from what the Bible doesn’t say as there is to learn from what it does
say.” Her article, she suggested, reflected something the Bible doesn’t say.
She looked to Mark Driscoll, Dorothy Patterson and Martha Peace and
pointed out how each one of them has at one time suggested that a woman
has to be careful that she does not “let herself go” after having children or
after being married for some time.
“The message is as clear as it is ominous,” she concludes. “Stay beautiful or
your husband might leave you. And if he does, it’s partially your fault.” She
spent a month “studying everything the Bible says about women and
beauty.” She “turned the Bible inside out, combed through dozens of
commentaries, conducted word searches and topic studies and extensive
research” and at the end of it all “found nothing in the Bible to suggest that
God requires women to be beautiful.”
It is an interesting question: Does God want a woman to seek to remain
attractive to her husband even while she grows older? Is there any significance
to her doing this, or not doing this? Evans believes that emphasizing physical
beauty, even as a woman ages (or perhaps especially as a woman ages)
points to a new kind of misogyny. But after long reflection, I am not
convinced. Hear me out here.
The Inner and the Outer
I agree that when the Bible speaks of beauty it largely downplays physical
beauty in favor of inner beauty. According to the Bible, a beautiful woman is
not one who is perfectly proportioned (by whatever society determines to be
perfect) or one whose face is stunning. Rather, a beautiful woman is one who
is genuinely godly, who reflects “the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet
spirit.” The beauty the Bible commends is a beauty of character more than
a beauty of appearance.
But. You knew there had to be a but. I think Evans may draw something of
a false distinction between the inner and the outer as if these things are
entirely disconnected. I would suggest that these two things are actually
inexorably connected: the outer is a reflection of the inner. And this means
that the outer person matters too. What a person wears has spiritual
significance because what a person wears or how a person treats her body
reflects her heart. This is contra the Gnostics who believe that what is spirit
is inherently superior to what is physical. The Bible allows no such tension.
Though only one is immortal, both were created by God and deemed very
good. Our responsibility extends to both.
When Martha Peace and Dorothy Patterson and others speak of the
importance of outer beauty, I do not think they are pointing to a Barbie doll
figure at 50 or a perfectly flat stomach at 60. Instead, they are
acknowledging that there is a connection between what is outside and what is
inside. When I read Peace and Patterson, I read less about the inevitable
changes that come with years and pregnancies and illnesses and more about
those things that can be controlled: dress, appearance, hygiene, care.
This is not about a woman whose body bears the battle scars that come with
3 or 4 pregnancies or about a woman who has lost a breast to cancer. This is
about a woman who expresses her love and respect for her husband in her
dress and in her appearance. This is not about choosing plastic surgery over
surrendering to gravity’s influence on breasts, but choosing outer
expressions of an inner reality. It is about brushing the hair, about choosing
an attractive sweater instead of the stained Mickey Mouse t-shirt. It is about
those things that display beauty, availability, respect. These things may vary
a lot from time to time and culture to culture; even more so, they will vary from
couple to couple. It is about drawing that connection between inner beauty
and outer beauty. One controls the other.
1 Corinthians 6:19 seems applicable here. This is where Paul writes about
the body being the temple of the Holy Spirit. That temple must not be
abused through sexual immorality, but neither should that temple be
neglected to fall into disrepair. We are to be faithful stewards of these
outward bodies, even though they are wasting away.
How the Outward Speaks
What is outward is significant. Clothes make a statement. There is a spiritual
dimension to what a person wears. Clothes can be used to attract attention
and they can be used to deflect attention; they can be used to serve other
people and they can be used to hinder other people. The same is true of
hair (Peter speaks of both clothes and hair in 1 Peter 3) and jewelry and
anything else outward.
At the very least, then, this means that a woman who “lets herself go” (a
phrase that begs further definition) may do so for a variety of reasons.
Perhaps she just doesn’t get it—she may not understand how to take care of
herself. Perhaps she just doesn’t care—she does not care about her
appearance and doesn’t care if anyone else cares about it. Perhaps she
wants her clothes to repel—by dressing as she does she makes a statement
to her husband about her regard for him and her unavailability to him. In
every case, there is a connection between the heart and the body, between
the adorning of the heart and the adorning of the body.
The way a woman relates to her spouse is a spiritual matter. And the way
she dresses, the way she cares for herself, is a part of the way she relates to
him. It makes a statement about her, about him, about them. Her words
speak, her actions speak, but so too do her clothing, her appearance, her
hygiene, her adornment.
It should be noted that in this way a man can let himself go just as much and it
would be just as much of a sin. I know of women who have become utterly
disgusted by their husbands—husbands who have given up, who do not
show their wives the dignity of seeking to remain attractive to them. It is not
just women whose clothes and whose appearance make a statement. It is not
just women who ought to make a continued effort to be attractive and
appealing and dignified.
In all of these things, a woman ought to understand (and believe) that what a
man finds (or ought to find) beautiful in his wife is more about care and
respect and effort and availability than it is about figure and proportion. In
too many cases a woman who lets herself go is simply symbolizing that she has
let her marriage go. Conversely, care for herself shows her care for her
husband, respect for him, love for him.
Does a woman need to remain beautiful to her husband? Yes, she does!
But this does not mean that she needs to remain beautiful in the way society
understands beauty. She does not need to mimic the Hollywood starlets of
years gone by who seek to look young and sexy even in their seventies. We
cannot confuse beauty with sexiness. But she ought to seek to remain
attractive to her husband, to allow the outer to reflect the inner. Her outer
beauty, though it is diminishing by worldly standards, will be a reflection of
her increasing inner beauty as she becomes increasingly conformed to the
image of the Savior. Many a man will tell you that his wife is more beautiful on
their 50th anniversary than on their 1st. And he is speaking the truth.
________________________________________
I know this is a very difficult and sensitive topic. I wrote this article about 2
weeks ago. Since then I’ve read it, changed it and passed it to women I know
and trust to get their impressions or corrections. Now I’d love to get your
feedback. Am I on the right track here? Why don’t you leave a comment and
tell me what you think. Let’s work this one out together.

www.challies.com




Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.  For the husband is
the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and
is himself its Savior.  Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives
should submit in everything to their husbands. Ephesians 5:22-24
Put Off
Put On
IMAGE GOES HERE
Word4Wives...