Enjoying this episode? Check out Doug's audiobook, "Reforming Marriage: Gospel Living for Couples" canonpress.com/products/reforming-marriage-gospel-living-for-couples/

I can't get the image of the first Adam standing between God and Eve asking that judgment fall on him and the second Adam standing between God and his bride doing the same out of my mind. That one's going to stay with me. Thank you.

Yes! My young marriage was nearly derailed by acts of unfaithfulness. She was guilty of what she did... but I was absolutely responsible for allowing it to happen. I created and fostered situations that led to problems... and this was a total dereliction of my duty as her husband. It was really hard for a while, but I'm happy to say that we are celebrating 20 years of marriage this year and our relationship could not be better! There is REAL forgiveness and restoration in Christ! I could not be happier with the bride of my youth!!! We are as close as close can be. I adore her far more than I did even before things went bad. God is good! Restoration is real... and it is beautiful! Forgive much as you are forgiven much!!! We now have 7 kids and a blissful marriage. I will love and adore this woman forever!!

I always knew headship had to be a much deeper and more active role than just "tie-breaker", and this seems like a very scripturally well-reasoned and practical alternative to that idea. Thank you.

I’m still in high school but I need to take more time to learn about this stuff now so that I won’t be rushing to when I need it lol

This made so much sense; I’d love to hear more!

Well stated. This is something I have been saying for years. The man bears the responsibility for covenant leadership.

Thank you Uncle Doug.

Yes. Hard in this culture, but 100% right on truth.

To give an example from a healthy marriage: This week I was recovering from Omicron, battling PMS, dealing with tooth pain and trying to help one obstinate teen do a Science Fair Project and another obstinate teen prepare for a mission trip. I was extremely cranky and nit-picky with my husband, which caused him to be irritable and rude to me. Both of us were choosing to walk in sin because of our stress, but the next day, he took responsibility and apologized for being harsh, which inspired me to apologize for sinning with nagging, and he then gave me a nice back and neck massage and lots of hugs to encourage me to push through my stress, and remembered to pray for me instead of just ignoring me. He wasn't guilty for my sins, but had his own sins to work on and realized that he was responsible for where our ship was heading and was going to do everything within his power to change the course of the ship. This example takes place in a marriage where the man and woman both love Jesus wholeheartedly and want to obey him. However, I have seen marriages where one spouse is serving the Lord and the other is choosing to walk in unrepentant sin and the ship then hits an iceberg even if the Captain is trying valiantly not to. A cousin had a wife who committed adultery, left him, left the church, and tried to take his children from him. He was in full submission to his church leaders through the whole situation and lived through a few years of hellish heartbrokenness until God restored his joy and brought a lovely and devout Christian woman into his life. So, there isn't always a happy ending for the marriage even if the man is fully seeking Christ as the covenant head.

Much needed guidance here.

As always, excellently said.

This was probably the most clear, detailed, and concise explanation of federal headship I've ever heard. Well done, sir, and thank you.

I'm loving you videos. Keep it up. It's nice to get an intellectually sound biblical view on the everyday struggles of people in a fallen world. I've been trying to walk in the spirit for only a few years and I want you to know that these videos, while entertaining, are really a light in shining through the muck of secularism and spineless and or opportunistic false teachers . I haven't made up my mind if your opinion is scripturaly 100 but I am studying the Word as much as possible and I haven't found reason to disagree yet. AGAIN KEEP IT UP ! and thank you.

Wow. I truly appreciate your content. God bless. 🙏

Probably one of my top favourites of your work due to the centrepiece of the gospel. Very wholesome, very underrated!

The problem is it becomes very hard to distinguish guilt from responsibility, without ending up with what looks a lot like the general evangelical counseling session where the husband is the one who needs to deal with the faults because the buck stops with him, even if it is the wife who is doing xyz. So I think the concern that "isn't this just what the feminists are saying?" has some legitimacy if for no other reason than what appears to be the practical outcome. A captain on a ship for example is not merely responsible, he is also guilty for negligence in the overseeing of his ship.

This is glorious! Thank you, Pastor. 💕

working in middle managment for the first time (been at it a few years now) taught me all about blame and responsibility. if some one in the factory screws up they are to blame for the mistake, but im responsible for it. life actually gets alot better once you accept this and people will respect you more. its the same dynamic as being the head of a family. it reminds me of something i read in the bible recently, some thing about "those who humble themselves will be exhalted and those who exhalt themselves will be humbled".

Excellent observations, Uncle Doug, of what Adam should have done to take responsibility, like Christ had. Thank you. More illustrations of godly responsibility need to seep into men's training, as I fear C.S. Lewis is correct that we have raised too many boys without chests that know and act on not only taking responsibility for themselves, but also taking responsibility for others as their roles in leadership, family, and society require, being imitators of Christ. A hint for the third person plural in the depths of KZfaq comments here, if you as aman ever catch yourself saying "not my fault, not my problem " regarding any moral ill in society, then you are the problem, first Adam, please look to the second quickly.

Powerful presentation and a glorious take on what Jesus did in "stepping between" God and his bride. Practically, what does this mean for a pastor's sermon or an apostle's letter? Do these authorities step around the husband and address a wife directly? I've sat in too many Mother's Day sermons extolling feminine virtue (while admonishing men for not appreciating the gift that the ladies are) only to have the Father's Day sermon sound like a faint echo of that same sermon 4 weeks earlier (encouraging them stop slacking off especially when it comes to honoring the gentler sex). I hear Paul addressing hubands AND wives when he writes to the churches. Wouldn't it be appropriate to have subsequent church leaders provide that same direct teaching?

Thank you, Doug, for this and many other "talks" you have graciously shared with the body of Christ. I truly believe you have been raised for a time such as this. God bless you.

Thank you, Doug. This was superbly convicting and encouraging. Please do write more on this topic.

I must confess and bit of envy for your wisdom, and a great deal of thankfulness for your sharing of it...

From what I understand the bible teaches, I, as a Christian man, am to accept all the responsibility and cost of being head of the house with no authority or any kind of elevation or benefit. In other words, a doormat. Please understand, I am not being flippant. I truly struggle with this. What am I missing?

Adding this one to a list of favorites. Thank you for this.

Beautiful message. Thanks for sharing this Pastor Doug

Thanks Doug!

Would love to hear you talk about imprecatory prayers. Thank you for your ministry.

Outstanding and certainly correct. My experience is that few people in or out of Christianity understand "Responsibility".

Stuff I wish I knew years ago.

Brilliant, yet again.

So great. American Evangelicals need to hear more of this!!

Yes, more on this please~

Great, brother Doug.

Legitimate question; what do you mean by "responsible?" In the example given, the husband is "responsible" for the wife's sin, because he is her covenant head. But what does that actually entail? If he has no power to control her behavior, if he cannot stop her adultery, use physical force to get off her backside and complete her domestic duties, he cannot force her to perform her sexual duties without being accused of rape, etc., then what does him being responsible actually require him to do? In your ship example, the captain is still responsible, even if it is the helmsman who messes up the order. However, the Captain, ought to have known that this person's performance was off; he had power to correct that person, through his subordinates, even sanctions he could have brought to bear, to correct unacceptable behavior or to remove him from a position where he might endanger the ship. The captain is responsible because he did not use the lawful power available to him, to ensure that the ship did not go ground. But what power does the husband have to do anything except plead to his wife, or bring her before the elders of the church (which if she is acting the way described, she is unlikely to listen to). What can he do, other than divorce her? I mean, honestly, isn't that what Jesus does to unrepentant people inside His church; He separates them from Himself for all eternity? These are all honest questions and do not presume any agenda on my part; I really want to understand what you mean by "responsible."

Great article. My Christianity refined in massive ways when I realized the importance of the husband at the door when the judge comes. Something that is blowing my mind recently is in Ephesians 5. “And he is the saviour of the body”. Who is the subject of he? This is the only place in the NT where the word saviour is not capitalized.

Grace and Peace of the Lord our God. I completely agree with your episode today. Thank you. Donna~forgiven child of God

Doug, you have an awesome way of clearing explaining the proper biblical world view of this. For the last year or 2 I’ve been thinking exactly what you described and what Adam should have done: stepped between Eve and the serpent then between God and Eve if sin still manifested. Now I know that’s true and how to explain it apologetically in the sense of responsibility. 👏🏽

this is empowering - and it also links up perfectly with my grieving over ministers who refuse to step down when their house is in disarray. Their family suffers - their church suffers! What are they doing? Not taking responsibility. Is their son's or wife's sin his? Not at all, and that seems to be their reasoning. But is their family more important than the church they serve? YES!!! And what a God-glorifying display to the world and their church to step down to take responsibility for loving and shepherding their family first, then the church.

I have a question Pastor Doug, could you expand on the concept of the covenant head taking responsibility for the sins of the children as well. How exactly would that work especially when after a certain age, most kids kinda become quasi-independent? Thanks for this great video

So if I understand the analogy, the gentleman working two jobs and cleaning the house is bearing responsibility. This does not sound very different from the first option where the man is to blame.

Excellent analogy. As a Naval officer, I agree entirely. If you'd like to take the metaphor further, perhaps we might say that wives are enlisted while husbands are commissioned. I've told every Chief I've ever had, "You're in charge. I'm in command." Furthermore, the care and feeding role of Chiefs is precisely analogous to the wife's while the planning, oversight, and ultimate responsibility for the ship fall squarely on the officer husband.

It's all Covenant all the way down!

The glasses look good, Doug.

Sir this was a very illuminating video for me! I mean I've known this principle for quite some time, but you spoke it very accurately! Easy to understand and straightforward. The only downside is the fact that many aren't going to get TO that kind of covenant in postmodern life. There's an ever growing disparity between the sexes and it seems like far too many men have lost very much. I mean all things work for the glory of the Lord, and this I believe wholeheartedly, but we may be looking at a near future with a great handful of celibate monks and polyamorous marriages. And I kid you not sir, I've seen articles from evangelical organizations making a case for it. It's mind blowing.

It sounds brutal hearing this while being in a modern world, but I do agree. However, who is responsible for when politicians allow these sinful rulings, and the people abide by them?

Insightful

THIS!!!

Wow, Doug. Hard teaching. However, I do have an issue with the Captain analogy. It doesn't matter whether responsibility or authority comes first. What matters is that they be paired as with a ship's captain. The way to Hell is to have one without the other - as marriage does today.

Amen

Doug, there's a lot of good comments here. I hope you look through them. Thank you for broaching this subject. I would like a practical explanation of what "taking responsibility" actually means. There are numerous discussions here in the comments about the fact that men no longer have authority in the modern legal court when it comes to marriage. Egalitarianism has ruined that authority. At best, you might be able to get elders in the church or pressure from a wife's family to appeal to in order to keep her in line, but husbands in the modern world have no legal authority to do anything other than divorce. They should not rush to that. They should pursue counseling and every other means they can to save the marriage, but ultimately, they cannot force the woman to do anything. To me, the only fair option seems to be fast and immediate divorce at the first sight of trouble. This is NOT Biblical, and not at all conducive to fostering families in the long run. So this isn't the right answer. You are basically asking men to adhere to the Biblical depiction of marriage when a man has no actual authority or ability to enforce it. If one finds a good woman who choses to live a Christian life, the marriage can work. But if the woman changes her mind at any point, nothing can actually be done about it. I am not advocating that women should be forced to stay married, or forced to do anything. I am just pointing to the legal reality on the ground in the first world today. The old societal systems and expectations that prevented women from just divorcing on a whim no longer exist. I value your counsel and I think it's true that probably in 80+% of cases, if the woman is doing sinful shit, the man is in some what responsible. He chose to marry this person, or was an ineffective leader or teacher or example. I believe it's correct for the man to accept the responsibility for his part in this. But what can actual practically be DONE about this to correct the woman's behavior? Beyond divorce, I see no option. You cannot force one to believe. At best, you can convince people to take certain actions, often by enticement or reward. Any attempt at using force or fear will backfire and fail. This is an abuse of power in most instances, and destroys love. I guess what I'm struggling with is that, if a man marries a woman and then shit goes sideways.... if the woman does not desire to change (or the man for that matter), the entire marriage is scuttled. It is fucked and completely lost. You are left with staying together for the sake of the kids, whether you arrive at this for religious reasons, or practical reason or lack of options, or divorce. The Institution of marriage seems helpless fraught with unbelievable pain and peril. 15-20% of marriages will work out and be happy. 50% divorce. The rest suffer through profound alienation and all manner of sin for the sake of the kids or lack of better options. It seems like in the past it was 80% of marriages were unhappy and never ended, and that that was the point. The suffering and learning to bear our cross, but it was better for the kids and the future generation. If it's wildly wrong, on this call, me out on it. The state of things in the world today are it relates to marriage and the family are completely fucked up. We've got to figure out how to fix the problem but all I see are insurmountable problems. There is no way to re-establish the authority of the husband in society. And even if you could, there will be legitimate abuses preformed by some husbands. I would like to hope that those scenarios would be less overall evil than what we have currently, but I have no way of knowing. The majority of the world is not Christian and I simply do not see Christianity reversing it's waning influence in society. It would potentially be done via war, bloodshed and domination; but this would both be wrong, and the men who inhabit Christianity are not up to the task. No group of modern first world men are in my estimation. It would literally take the hand of God to save the institution of marriage at this point as far as I can see. EDIT: The other possibility is we lose all of our technology somehow, and the vast majority of those currently alive don't reproduce and die and we have some kind of "reboot". Yah know, like the Millennium

To be quite honest, I find nothing to call wrong in what I hear, but I'm a bit lost on how to "take responsibility"- what does that actually, practically mean?

I cannot dispute or argue with the theology Pastor Doug explained, he is correct. The root of the problem comes from the third party in today's marriages. The government. Being the covenant head of the marriage means the husband is indeed the responsible party when it comes to God. In the secular world however the husband has a proverbial gun held to his head by the government, at the slightest behest of the wife, regardless of who did the sinning. The simple truth of the matter is that there is such a massive divide between men and wmn today ( without even adding marriage to the mix) because we have ALL strayed so far from God's design for relationships/marriages that we can scarcely even interact with each other, let alone generally plan out a life together.

This is an interesting and novel idea to me. I am open to more discussion, because I struggle to understand what would be some practical examples of application. I'm not saying there aren't, I'm just saying I'm struggling to formulate them.

Not gonna lie… I wasn’t so sure about this response… until I heard it all the way through… then.. 🤩!!!

I like the specs.

Hey Doug! Big fan of your teaching and the manner in which you break things down. Can you offer more information about how young men, such as myself, can assume responsibility whenever his wife is to blame? What does that look like? How can he get better at taking on this role as the head?

I need to ruminate on this one, it makes sense. Can you please give some practical examples of this please? I've recently been thinking along these lines in regards to me being responsible to teach my wife and children about Christ.

All ye heavenly paralegals hear this, these commandments are written in your hearts, and of the abundance of your heart your mouth will wait till scripture gives you the green light, paraphrasing of course. This is the same yesterday today and during the apocalypse. Doug isn't the attorney general In these matters, he's a highway patrolman, so give him a break, and get your tail lights fixed, before you cause an accident. Amen.

❤️

How do we take responsibility for something we didn’t do and not be lying?

It’s pretty hard for Adam to keep Eve from the serpent when the serpent is running the divorce courts. Looking for to hearing more about it.

Fantastic 👏 thank you for this! Also, my husband and I were recently pondering why Adam did not stop Eve from sinning. My husband said he thought Adams love for Eve made him take part. So she wouldn't go down alone. Personally I don't think it was love but cowardice. Idk, could you do a video on this? Thanks in advance, if you do.

How the heck do I learn and apply such simple wisdom!

I love the part about Adam stepping in when he should have = I am like Adam = Jesus fixed it, all of it.

Often a woman decides to get an abortion because the father has refused to take responsibility. He has either abandoned her or has urged/pressured her to get the abortion. Physicians have also been known to pressure a woman to get an abortion. Parents of the pregnant woman also apply pressure. I have also had clients ( I am a psychologist) who were in abusive marriages and the only way to escape was to avoid having another child at all costs while secretly saving money so she could sneak away while the husband was out. When there is an unwanted pregnancy there are usually many guilty parties. Who is in the position to take responsibility and sort out the mess depends on the specific circumstances.

I understand this distinction between blame & responsibility. Now, what is the husband to do as covenantal head of his adulterous, disobedient wife? If he just goes along, the children could be ruined. What if an unmarried girl gets pregnant & has an abortion & the man is not in the picture? She comes to deeply regret this & begs forgiveness of God. But how does it work when there is no covenant to obey? Is she just on her own & responsible for herself?

Well said. When you get a chance check your Gab chat please. Thanks

but would not douglas agree that authority has been removed from husbands and fathers by the state, therefore this principle is... i dunno, not fair somehow?

What is your hypothetical blameless but very much responsible man supposed to *do* about his wife's malfeasance?

100%

While perhaps not totally accurate, the terms certainty and uncertainty are useful to me for understanding the relationship between male and female. Essentially, whatever it's inaccuracies, a body of uncertainties does not make coherent sense without it first adopting or adhering to an assumption. Like running an experiment. A body of uncertainty adopting an overarching assumption, and visa versa, is an image of a marriage. Incorrect conclusions that the body of uncertainty produces as part of this shared body may be due to the inaccuracies in either one of the bodies of uncertainty or certainty. However, the body of certainty by definition includes an overarching truth claim and so by default is responsible for both any good or bad outcomes that result from within the shared body.

So.... I am somehow responsible for a poorly made sandwich?

Dear Bro. Doug, We're going to need some operational principles on how to proceed. The Almighty might say, "Bro. Steve, what was that?" I need a better answer than, "Here am I, whack me." First, I note that the 'whacking' was already done once for all at Calvary. Furthermore, the hypothetical guy with the horrible wife wants the problem actually *solved*. I always appreciate your insights and don't disagree with any of them, but in this case, I'm not seeing how this is going to apply effectual fix-it pressure to an adulterous, spendy wife.

God has command that we shall not murder. No nuance, or conditions. Mererly, you shall not murder.

In other words men are screwed either way

Im curious what your thoughts are in situations where the husband has become unable to lead in the case of things like dementia and other brain altering diseases. Where does this leave the wife? I remember reading about OT times being the brothers keeper in such situations but we dont have that anymore, how does God view such things then? Also, what of husbands stepping in to protect his wife from the attacks of his family? Such scenarios are not uncommon but are often swept under the catch all of "her" needing to "get over it and forgive", just to have the same abuse happen over and over. At what point does the husband step in, leave his father and mother, and cling to his wife to protect her from his family whom he knows wishes her harm? Many predatory people use Christianity to keep the abuse of the outsider going.

Thanks. Couldn't be clearer. Must be too much high fructose corn syrup intake if people can't understand....the reality is....what if the covenantal head refuses to take responsibility....so, like, what goes on all the time.....thanks again, for clarity with winsome tartness.

What is responsibility without authority. I note that Jesus had/has authority over his body/bride. When the church doesn't backstop the man's authority in the home upholding the right order of things against the world/ government/ feminist. What is a man to do? This is what frustrated me. Very curious for your thoughts.

How can a Christian husband influence an openly rebellious wife? Let’s say she knows he has zero power. The courts will always take her side, so she literally does whatever she wants whenever she wants. She scoffs & screams accusations of abuse if he attempts to apply Bible verses. What leverage does the husband have?

I really like what your daughter had to say. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eb6GaZRn1rrbkZ8.html In the captain/helmsman analogy, it’s not that the helmsman didn’t simply carry out orders, he actively sought mutiny!

Commanders are not responsible without authority. Strip a commander of his authority, and you cannot hold him accountable or responsible. Our culture and our churches have no place for husband’s authority, except in name only (and this only in more conservative churches). This, along with the wide acceptance of “No fault divorce” and the corresponding economic punishments associated with divorce for the innocent party, put our culture and churches out of step with the very authority of Scripture in unfathomable magnitude. Yet, we still expect couples to engage in this civil farse called "Marriage". Why the Christian church is not in a state of emergency over "No fault divorce" is beyond me. When there are no teeth (enforcement) to the covenant, expect domestic partnerships, gay marriage, polygamy, incest and pedophilia to follow. In the meantime, family lawyers get rich, marriage gets devalued, and the church becomes increasingly irrelevant to speak on this matter. Meanwhile, the churches are in a controversy over whether there should even be something called discipline or membership and whether it is really necessary to hold to six day creation over deep time and billions of years of evolution. The church is in a sorry state to be sure.

What are the duties of the head?

I think I'm having some semantical and/or homographic difficulties with this concept and the dictionary isn't solving them.

This is a point our team constantly brings up when we do sidewalk ministry at the abortion mills. Men need to take serious the responsibility God has given them.

Everyone sins, we are born in sin because of the original sin from Adam. Again your analogies are great and are helping me better understand why it’s so important to properly understand submission. The submission you preach is not “ultra-conservative” it’s biblical. So are you saying it’s wrong for a husband to do the cooking, I grew up in a house where my dad did the cooking?

Biggest regret in my entire life

So just wondering, . . . Is there a difference between testosterone and sin nature? ;)

Question: I'm following the responsibility portion, but it's it true that you don't think the woman that walks her baby to the alter of death doesn't deserve the death penalty after trial?

Eh, I’m not convinced Pastor Wilson.

Second question: I honestly don't know how the (murdered) baby's daddy, who isn't in a covenant relationship by marriage, should be "held" responsible. Should he be civily punished in some way as well depending on his involvement?

You guys should stop this little snippet of later on the video up front. Just start the video

So who should be punished for abortion? He never really answers it.

Ok Doug. Here's where I think your arguments will die the death of cowardice and diversion. If the covenantal head is responsible, what tools does he have - on his own - to enforce obedience? If his wife won't obey his lawful commands, what be he do? Don't punt to someone else's authority (the pastor, elders, her father, etc). Don't punt to passive aggressive "influence". And no, obedience isn't a "matter of the heart" that can't be extracted. If you think otherwise, then the man taking responsibility is also a matter of the heart and can't be forced. In your example, the Captain can exact a whole host of penalties on his own without tattling to his superior. So I'll ask a second time. If the man is to take responsibility for and assume the penalties of his wife's disobedience, what powers does he have under his own prerogative to correct his wife's disobedience? Don't troll me, either. Please answer the question directly. What penalties may a husband exact on his wife? If none, then please retract your assertion that he is externally responsible for her behavior.

So God is the failure when I sin? Hmmm. Isn't that the same thing you're saying right now?

Let me save the niceties till the end. You say, "he (a safe assumption that it's Adam) should have stepped in between his wife and the serpent." This statement contains an assumption. The statement assumes Adam was present during the conversation between Eve and the Serpent. If this is true, then would not Adam have been partnering with the serpent (even if indirectly) to bring about is own wife's suicide? Adam, which is recorded in the New Testament, was NOT deceived (1 Timothy 2:14). I state that for those who do not know the New Testament, and not for you. Now let me try to see if you were thinking in a different way, the "stepped in between" part and also which I'm now sensing a reaching for more assumptions on my part, that Adam was not present but knew the conversation would be taking place. Would he still not be guilty forming a "unholy partnership" by knowing a conversation was going to happen but did nothing to prevent it. Hopeful we all see where this leads, assumption layered on by more and more assumptions--"nor shall you touch it..." An assumption can lead to acceptance of an idea that did not come from above. Let's quickly look at another "assumption" which is that Adam was not present and did not know that a conversation between Eve and the Serpent was going to occur. This may mean Adam realized when he saw the fruit on Eve's person that the wages of sin was death and chose death because he knew Eve would not be in his world. Christ before the foundation of the world chose death of the cross, knowing we would not be in His world unless He died for us. Therefore, the last enemy to be destroy is death--gulp (little Biblical humor intended). Now to the niceties. I've watched several of your videos now and find myself saying Amen, Amen to various topics you bring up. Thank you for doing your best to present truth as you perceive and understand it. :) Lastly, some may be wondering why I focused only one point in the whole vid, that's because others have already focused on other various points. Again thank you for your courage to produce insights into Biblical topics.

Your analogy is wrong. A rebellious wife is not an irresponsible helmsman. She's a mutineering Executive Officer. When the XO mutinees, they punish the XO, not the Captain.

First Doug says authority “flows” to people who take responsibility, as if it is an inert gas that spontaneously manifests in the presence of a man “declaring headship.” Then he says authority cannot be taken, it can only be given. The question is, who bestows the authority? Christ had authority because it was given Him by God the Father, not because He “took responsibility as the covenant head and it flowed to Him.” Doug Wilson is merely beating the same drum Jordan Peterson beats: “Back to the reservation man-child! Man up, marry and take responsibility for these women who have literally spent their whole existence constructing a life as independent of men as possible.” And the trad-cons love invoking Christ as justification for this. But it is non-analogous, because Christ is God-incarnate and has the power to cover the sins of past AND present. To take the abortion example: If these women had the abortion outside of marriage, then who is to take “responsibility?” There is no “covenant head.” Does her eventual husband retroactively take responsibility? How? Does he also have the power to reach back in time? Is he responsible for all of his wife’s past sins, all the way to her childhood?? Authority needs to be explicitly given to men. Doug and the rest of the trad-con coterie seem to have no problem explicitly assigning responsibility to men, so I don’t see why they should have a problem explicitly assigning authority to men also. Furthermore, authority implies the power or right to enforce obedience. Once authority “flows” to the husband, how does Doug anticipate him achieving this? In the setting of no-fault divorce, the Duluth model of assessing domestic disputes and a church that is more than happy to assuage women’s “blame” after they “repent,” responsibility without true authority is slavery. Furthermore, Christ explicitly makes provisions for divorce in cases of marital unfaithfulness. It’s pretty much the only thing he makes provisions for. Does that mean that the husband’s responsibility and the wife’s blame is dissolved by unfaithfulness? This is important because the top commenter on this video is literally a man who says his wife was unfaithful.

I am a man who is also guilty of abortion. I aborted the first 36yrs of my life to unbelief. Can't say I've done great with the other years that followed. A Savior? Yes please.