Some Thoughts on Driscoll and SAHDs

First, see Mark Driscoll’s talk: Should I Be a Stay-at-Home Dad?

In my opinion, most of the force of Driscoll’s argument comes from Titus 2. Wives are to prioritize motherhood and homemaking, and I agree with Grace that women are designed for it. So, we ought to be asking ourselves whether or not our priorities are biblical if our wives are accepting something less than full devotion to motherhood and homemaking. There are a lot of ways to go wrong here. For example, it’s wrong to compel your wife to work because you are lazy, selfish, or desire the vicious luxuries her job provides you. Further, trading in motherhood and homemaking for career satisfaction just reveals the backwards thinking feminism has given us.

We should also recognize that, in most cases, it is difficult for wives to devote themselves to motherhood and homemaking unless they are being supported in it. And, since people should care for their family members (1 Timothy 5:8), husbands should support their wives’ role. Normally, this means husbands ought to financially provide for them. This all makes sense to me.

However, to claim that the bible commands wives to be full-time mothers and homemakers and to claim that husbands ought to provide for them financially through a job, as in a 1950s model family, is to specify too precisely what Titus 2 and 1 Timothy 5:8 command us to do. It’s legalistic.

Now, I’m a mathematics major at WMU. My parents sponsor my education, and they and my mother-in-law baby-sit my three children (a 9 month old, a 2 year old, and a 3 year old) while I’m in class and my wife is at work. My wife takes over child care at around 5:20 pm when I go out to study. The rest of the time I’m a stay at home dad.

So, am I wrong? If so, the tragic irony here is that I’m striving to finish my education because I want my wife to be a full-time mom and homemaker. That’s my driving reason. I don’t know anyone who would characterize me as a lazy man. Really, there aren’t many candy ass classes for math majors. And I don’t think selfishness motivates my decision. I want what’s best for my family. I’m a complementarian. So, I reject career satisfaction as a good reason for my wife to give up motherhood and homemaking. Indeed, I kind of like the 1950s model as an ideal to aspire to. It has merit.

Currently, there don’t seem to be any deal killers for my plan to finish college. If my parents withdrew their sponsorship, or my wife wanted to quit work, or I couldn’t find a good baby sitter, or fatigue got the best of me, or if I were too incompetent as a “mom”, then I would quit. I’m not saying there aren’t issues that result from my choice to finish my education, and husbands in my situation ought to seriously consider the stresses they may be placing on their families and themselves, but, in my case, those issues are manageable.

Furthermore, getting a job now and giving up on my college education is a second rate plan because, in our culture, a bachelor’s degree is a ticket to a much better paying job. My family lives on approximately $1800 per month (about $17 per hour) and we make ends meet. Very likely, if I reentered the work force without a degree, I would make much less than this and my wife would have to work part time to make up the difference. Is this really what Driscoll wants me to do? I have a much better chance of supporting my wife as a full-time mom and homemaker if I’m permitted to finish my education. The alternative for me seems to be to become a failure as a man because I don’t have the economic maturity to fully support my wife and family through a job.

In conclusion, even though I think Driscoll is wrong on this, I’m glad he brought it up because it has helped me think through what I need to do to finish my education and wisely lead my family.

Although I don’t completely agree with Stackhouse, I think he makes some good points:

http://stackblog.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/time-to-give-mark-driscoll-a-sabbatical/