For Rebekah these gifts signified Isaac’s pledge to give himself to her, and to assume an entirely new role in life; and in courtship we must ask: Is there enough love and respect for true mutual submission? Will this relationship be a matter of two people struggling to get their own way, one dominating and taking advantage of the other, or will the wife acknowledge the headship of her husband, and will he gladly take full account of the perceptions and feelings of his wife?
The giving of gifts is sometimes misunderstood. It signified giving of self. In the giving of a ring, some are saying ‘I give you this ring, but I take you as a personal slave.’ The words ‘I take thee’ in the marriage service are understood too literally by some male believers who think they mean, ‘I take you as my possession; my chattel, the provider of affection and support for me and my plans, and as my cook and house-cleaner.’ The servant’s gifts assigned dignity to Rebekah, promised every consideration, and conveyed total loyalty. If these attitudes are firmly in both hearts during courtship, then there is a strong indication that the right kind of relationship is being established by the Lord.
Are we ready for marriage? In Ephesians 5 Paul lays down the vital duties of marriage in these terms, ‘Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord . . . in every thing.’ To husbands, he says, ‘Love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.’ Is there commitment to the divinely commanded distinctive roles for marriage? Is the man willing to give himself (even to sacrifice himself) to caring for and sharing with his future wife, and will she enter wholeheartedly into her new calling?
Does God approve of gold ornaments? We believe not, for they promote vanity and luxury. But used in great moderation, and to mark special events, and to signify pledges and promises, they are surely permissible. Calvin’s remarks are pertinent. ‘Women who desire to shine in gold, seek in Rebekah a pretext for their corruptions. Why, therefore, do they not, in like manner, conform to the same austere kind of life and rustic labour to which she applied herself?’