Yesterday we celebrated Independence Day. It is the day, in 1776, when our forefathers drafted the Declaration of Independence. In declaring their independence from England, they declared that rulers such as King George III received their mandate to rule, not from God but from the people whom he governed. They declared that governments were established by the people to insure the rights that were given them by the creator.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;

Prior to 1776, governments were changed by capture from the outside or revolution from the inside, but in each case, one monarch was replaced by another. There was no challenging the premise that God's way of governing was through a monarch (one ruler).

When the Declaration of Independence with its brash assertions burst onto the scene, it challenge the idea that had practically universal acceptance - the way to govern a people so as to create a state of peace and prosperity is through a ruler who was ordained of God to rule. This ordination was generally passed down through generations by inheritance.

Now, some two centuries later, most of the world's major governments have some kind of structure that is responsive to the people from whom their power to govern is derived. If this change in the way people are governed had not come in 1776, I am sure some such revolution would have happened elsewhere. This is an idea whose time had come.

In addition to changes in the way we are governed, there have been changes in the way we organize our households. Homes across history have tended to mirror the governments under which they existed. There was a monarch ordained by God to rule the country and there was a monarch ordained by God to rule the home - the Father-ruler. This kind of home government is known as a hierarchical marriage.

If the Declaration of Independence had not been stated and monarchies had continued down to the year 2003 A.D., what would our families look like? I think they would look a lot like families in parts of the world where there are monarchies - places like Saudi Arabia. Fathers would have the absolute power of life and death over their wives and children. Women would certainly not have the right to vote. They would not even be able to drive a car. But hey, there would not be anything on which to vote. Civic governments would be by rule of a monarch whose rulership would be handed down by family succession. And there would be only one vote in the home - Dad's vote.

I found myself being thankful yesterday for the opportunity to live in a democracy - a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And I was grateful that I am a part of a family where there is more than just one vote, where power is shared, and where every member of the family is encouraged to develop the gifts with which they were endowed by God.

With the hierarchical marriage, I think the theory must have been, "with the rule of one, and all submissive to that rule, conflict would be eliminated. Families in the Bible reflected their civic government - one ruler, but there was a lot of conflict in homes anyway. An example might be Abraham and Sarah (Genesis 21:9-11).

By developing good communication skills and conflict management skills, couples can experience their marriage as a "Partnership of Equals" while resolving conflicts as they arise. Call me at my office (903-938-0262) to enroll in a refresher course in communication and conflict resolution skills.