We are taking only one question today because as we get into the meat of the fifth commandment we need to define terms primarily because things sound different to us than they may have to the writers of the Larger Catechism. That’s an us problem rather than a they problem. As I noted last week we live in a day-and-age where egalitarianism is the water in which we swim. Even for so-called complementarian churches we often speak of roles and responsibilities in a way that is almost always with a tone of apologizing for the way the Bible makes distinctions in regards to who is in charge and who is not. This often comes up when we talk about whether or not men alone are to be ordained and installed in the offices of minister, elder, and deacon or if we are to allow Galatians 3:28 be the controlling verse for all of Scripture when it comes to this subject.
Without getting into the problems for how that idea damages how we read the word in general it is important that we not allow the spirit of the moment tell us that how our fathers and brothers in the faith were either misogynists or totalitarian in how they spoke about these matters. The first of the second table laws is incredibly central to the order not only of the church, but of the family and the state as well. Trouble always comes when people do not stay in their lane. We usually notice this in regards to Uzzah, Nadab and Abihu, Caiaphas, and Jezebel and others who were judged by God when they seized jobs and took on roles that were divinely given to others.
There is a great need of humility if the bodies of the church, the state, and the family are to run in mutually blessed ways. Paul’s wisdom in using a living being to describe why that is in 1 Corinthians 12 shows us that much thought and care is to be taken into account as we discuss these truths, that a machine could never react to or sympathize with.
It is to this last point that will take up most of our time today. Let’s get into the Q/A...