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.