Wifely Submission

[Mling]

There is a huge misconception about submission here. It is not about fetching slippers and being a doormat. It is about mutual respect and the natural order of things. Men have gifts and women have gifts. Men have roles and women have roles. It is not about superiority or inferiority. It is not about equal rights or that poor little wife. It is about fulfilling the natural roles that have been assigned to us by God. It is in no way demeaning to the wife to submit to her husband. It is in no way raising the husband up to some kind of mini-king within the home. It is simply about the gifts that God has given to us.

Lisa

I think this answered Momwhothinks's question pretty well. Many people get upset about female submission/male dominance because it is presented as The Correct Way to Be. The unavoidable implication being that if a person or couple is any other way, they are rejecting God, or just simply wrong.

I agree that people should live according to "the gifts that God has given to us," and I absolutely understand that a submissive/dominant relationship is not about doormats and kings, and can be very healthy and satisfying for both. I actually believe that a submissive/dominant relationship is actually an equal relationship in terms of respect and personal growth, but that's a different conversation.

Even a cursory look at humanity, though, reveals that God has given different people different gifts, and yes, like you said, people should live according to their gifts. So, it cannot be said that women should submit to their husbands, or that that is the good and proper way to respect God, when it is very clear that some couples are more functional, healthier, and more respectful of God's design if they arrange their relationship some other way.

 

[quatona]

There is a huge misconception about submission here. It is not about fetching slippers and being a doormat. It is about mutual respect and the natural order of things. Men have gifts and women have gifts. Men have roles and women have roles. It is not about superiority or inferiority.

The claimed hierarchy Christ-man-woman told me it was.

It is not about equal rights or that poor little wife. It is about fulfilling the natural roles that have been assigned to us by God. It is in no way demeaning to the wife to submit to her husband. It is in no way raising the husband up to some kind of mini-king within the home. It is simply about the gifts that God has given to us.

Postulating that one person has received the gift of making life decisions for someone else qualifies as making him a mini-king, in my book.
My point is not so much that it is demeaning to the wife in particular, but that an ex cathedra gender role distribution is demeaning for both parts. I see no indication that women are less gifted to make life decisions than men, and I see no indication that men are unable to play the submissive part that you prescribe the women. Thus, whilst I do acknowledge there are natural differences between men and women, I fail to see how being submissive vs. being the decision maker are such natural differences. Simply claiming so doesn´t make an argument.
And, yes, it is exactly about equal rights. If a wife doesn´t want to be submissive I want her to have the same right to not be submissive (no matter how much you personally like that role) that the husband has. If a man wants to be submissive, I want this request to have the same weight as when a woman wants it. If both want to have a partnership free of submission and dominance, I want them to have this right.

 

[Mskedi]

I don't know why people who don't believe in submission complain so much about it. It's like people who believe in birth control griping about the Catholic Church teaching against it. Just because YOU don't want to be obedient, why does it so bother you that others are?

I've never been upset that someone else wanted to be in a submissive relationship. I've only become upset when I'm told that my taking charge of the finances (because my husband will drive us into debt if we don't) or choosing to discuss where we're going to move to in a few years instead of just saying wherever my husband wants to move is fine is wrong.

I believe in mutual decisions. My husband does, too. That works for us.

If submission works for another couple and both are truly happy, then more power to them. I know I couldn't be happy in such an arrangement and would choose not to get married rather than enter one.

 

[Lisa0315]

I think the issue is that a man's gift is to be a leader, a woman's gift is to be a follower. A man's job is to be a decision maker, it's a womans job to be a decision follower.

At least to me, with how some have phrased it, it sounds like people are saying the equal of saying:

"It's the white person's job to sit at the front of the bus, and it's the job of the black people to sit at the back of the bus. Those were the seats assigned us by God, and it's not that white people are better than black people, it's that's the role that God ordained and sitting at the front of part of what it's like to be a white person. Everybody is equal, nobody controls the other, it's just that the white people are in the front and the black people are in the back. It's the natural order. It's not bad to sit in the back of the bus and it's not demeaning to sit at the back of the bus, in fact, it's wonderful because you're doing what you're ordained to by God!"

I mean, it's the same sort of mentality you read about men having before women could vote. "Men can vote because it's his job to make decisions, and women don't vote because they have different roles to fufill. That's not bad, it's the natural order of things."

For those of us who subscribe to a less restrictive view on what the role of a husband and wife are, it's just a little disturbing. If people like that lifestyle, that's super duper, and I wish them well acheving the goals that they're setting out for by setting down rules like they are. That doesn't mean, though, because that's what they choose, others can't observe it, form opinions on it, and express them, especially when being told by people in that lifestyle that your particular marital arrangement is "wrong."

Well, I do believe what Scripture says. I do believe that the natural order of things for a Christian couple is for the man to be the head of the home and the woman to submit to his authority. Now, again, there needs to be some discipline and some discipleship for our men to show them exactly what this means, and how to be that authority. I think the unhappiness in a Christian marriage may stem from both the man and woman not understanding what their roles really mean.

Lisa

 

[Savage78]

Marriage is an equal partnership. No one should submit to anyone.

An interesting theory.

However what about if the woman/man wants to go and spend a druken weekend with members of the porn industry, and the husband/wife forbids it...do you think that then one should submit?

 

[serephim02]

I saw a bugmenot poster lol...I thought those were banned here....always trolls. Anyway its archaic

 

[kevin36]

I'm an Agnostic Wiccan and he's an Anti-Christian Agnostic, so it reasons to stand that we're not going to bend over backwards to apply the Bible in our lives. Especially if the Scripture demands something completely unreasonable.

You're right. I'm still finding my way around here, and I wasn't paying too close attention to which
section of the site I was on.

I assumed you were a Christian (which baffled me regarding some of the responses), but I was wrong.

I disagree with you on many things, and I also think that you and several others are still fuzzy about what the Bible means about submitting, but there is no reason that I should expect you to live by Christian standards if you are not a Christian. My appologies for that.

Kevin

 

[Lisa0315]

Actually, I think the problem is that I'm understanding all too well what "submitting" means. It means a man loves his wife "even when she doesn't deserve it" and, "letting your husband have final say in decisions" and following orders that you may not agree with because it's your role to be submissive. I believe the exact quote was:

"Now, if my husband asked me to do something that was not sinful, but that I really didn't want to do, then yes, I should do it anyway. Yes he is human and may make wrong decisions at times. But that does not negate my responsibility to be submissive."

I'm thinking I get exactly what being submissive is, which is the problem.



Judging by the comments of some of the other Christian posters, this sounds like a limited standard applied to Christians, not something all Christians apply or follow.

Yeah, that is a good example of Christian submission. However, in that same situation, the husband is supposed to be taking his wife's desires and needs as his chief concern. It is not about what HE wants or what SHE wants. It is supposed to be about what is best for both and what is best for the marriage.

Lisa

 

[Savage78]

The man makes all the decisions...

I dont know where you got that idea from..I did say man/woman, husband/wife...some one needs to be the "man" in the relationship....it doesnt neccesarily have to be the male.

 

[Mling]

An interesting theory.

However what about if the woman/man wants to go and spend a druken weekend with members of the porn industry, and the husband/wife forbids it...do you think that then one should submit?

Well, it is a simple, physical truth that one person cannot decide how another person will behave, unless the first person is willing and able to physically assault and restrain the other, which is almost never appropriate. The spouse can make any orders he or she wants, and the one who wants to do the partying can decide to respect their spouse's values or not. In return, the spouse can decide whether he or she really wants to be in a marriage with somebody whose values are so drastically different from their own, and who refuses to compromise on the things that really matter to him/her.

As for "sometimes he [/she] wants me to do things I don't like, but I do them anyway," without any other context, I don't find that a horribly shocking idea. I consider that to be one foundation of any healthy relationship: sometimes things that don't matter to you, or that you actively dislike, are important to somebody you care about. In that case, it is sometimes reasonable to do something solely out of respect for them. For example, I really dislike my best friend's husband, and I think the feelings are mutual, but we are civil, and sometimes even friendly, with each other for no other reason than because we both care about her.

Yes, it is submission. We are both submitting our desires to not interact with each other to her desire to have peaceful relationships with both of us. We are doing this thing that we don't like for no other reason than because we both care about her.

 

[kevin36]

Actually, I think the problem is that I'm understanding all too well what "submitting" means.

Well, by what you said in the rest of your post, I don't think that you do understand what it is, but I'm not going to argue the point with you further.

Kevin

 

[Rebekka]

I submit to my husband as he submits to me. I can't forbid him to submit to me, as he's the head of the house, being the husband and all.

There's no biblical command against husbandly submission, and as christians we are to submit to one another anyway.

But I'm sure that has been said before - I haven't read the entire thread.

If couples want to practice wifely submission and it works for them, that's fine with me. Whether my husband and I submit to each other or only me to him is something between my husband and me, not for others to decide if it's right or wrong.

We're a team, we're equals, we take decisions together and it works perfectly for us. I have no problem submitting to him and he has no problem submitting to me.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

An interesting theory.

However what about if the woman/man wants to go and spend a druken weekend with members of the porn industry, and the husband/wife forbids it...do you think that then one should submit?

No.

Neither should "submit"... they should DISCUSS and come to a suitable compromise and understanding.

 

[NeTrips]

When taken out of context and when only one part of God's plan is put in place there is tremendous opportunity for domination and abuse.

The wife is directed to submit to her husband.
The husband is directed to love his wife as Christ loved the church.

If the husband truly upholds his duty to love his wife as Christ loves His church, then the man will do everything and anything to support, provide for, nurture, love, care for, provide safety, promote her best interests, etc. Christ does not force Himself or His will on the church, neither should a husband. Christ does not sit back and wait to be served, He came to serve others.

Focusing only on one side of the equation only gives a lopsided view.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

When taken out of context and when only one part of God's plan is put in place there is tremendous opportunity for domination and abuse.

The wife is directed to submit to her husband.
The husband is directed to love his wife as Christ loved the church.

If the husband truly upholds his duty to love his wife as Christ loves His church, then the man will do everything and anything to support, provide for, nurture, love, care for, provide safety, promote her best interests, etc. Christ does not force Himself or His will on the church, neither should a husband. Christ does not sit back and wait to be served, He came to serve others.

Focusing only on one side of the equation only gives a lopsided view.

why must the wife submit though? Why is either part submitting preferable to "both spouses must love each other as Christ loved the church"?

 

[christalee4]

Fair enough call, particularly since Christians themselves are notorious for being very reluctant when it comes to commenting on the nature of partnerships and the sexuality of others.

Just to make that entirely clear: If people find pleasure and fulfillment in submission and dominance, this doesn´t bother me at all. Just like it doesn´t bother me that some people find pleasure and fulfillment in meeting in a boxing arena and beating the crap out of each other.
What bothers me are
1. doctrines that make blanket statements that this is what people are to do (and, more generally, the assumption that the statement "god agrees with me" gives the claimer of such notions more authority, and more weight to the claim),
2. the claim made by one poster here that a submissive wife is what I want.

And furthermore, the great potential for spiritual abuse in the cases of 1) husbands making their wives unhappy by being overly controlling and domineering, and 2) when couples join a heavy-handed church that preaches that a husband should have a submissive wife, whether he wants one or not, is also a factor in questioning as to whether it applies as a standard to "true" Christians.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_n19_v115/ai_21003278

Major rightwing religious groups have taken a more patriarchal view of submission since the 1990's.

The reality of submission in practice, however, due to societal changes with feminism, women in the workplace, economic realities, is far from that misty Father Knows Best picture. For many, the submission lifestyle is highly symbolic and discussed as an ideal. In the real world, many couples are far more egalitarian in their decision-making and relationship, without needing to dictate roles based on their gender. The culture has changed too much to go back.

 

[NeTrips]

why must the wife submit though? Why is either part submitting preferable to "both spouses must love each other as Christ loved the church"?

Because that is what God has directed through His Holy Word.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Because that is what God has directed through His Holy Word.

So, the total of your argument is, effectively "Cos the bible SEZ!"?

 

[Rebekka]

Actually, looking at both sides still produces a lopsided view. The Biblical role of women is to submit to their husbands, allowing husbands to have a final say in decisions, direct the activities of the family, and oversee the woman's spritual health. In the role of partner in a marriage, she allows her husband to be the voice.

The Biblical role of men... "Love ya babe!"

Taking into account that pretty much everything that's asked for of the dominating male has to be delivered by the submissive wife (since it's rare that a man would want a wife that didn't "support, provide for, nurture, love, care for, provide safety, promote his best interests, etc), it seems a pretty cheap trade to sacrafice your voice and part of the authority in your life and most of it in your family, simply for love, no matter how big the love may be in words or deeds.

I'm sorry, that sounds like a king ruling over his subjects, not a marriage that's made up of the lives of two people.

I love my husband to death, and I know he loves me to death, but even as great as our love is, if it came with the condition that I had to submit him, allowing him to make decisions that involve the family and sacraficed the authority over my spiritual health, it'd seem like a cheap trade.

I agree. I love my husband with all my heart, too (although the Bible doesn't say that I have to - only to respect and obey him - but what sort of wife doesn't love her husband, even though the Bible is silent on that???) - and if that's not wrong, then I don't see why it would be wrong for a husband to do something that the Bible isn't explicit about either (but doesn't say they aren't allowed to do), i.e. submitting to their wives?

Besides, as christians we are to submit to one another, so in that light, husbands are definitely allowed to submit to their wives (assuming they are people, or even christians, too).

What's wrong with mutual submission to each other and to God?

My husband doesn't want me to submit - what am I to do? If I do submit, I disobey him. If I don't, I obey him, but he doesn't want me to.

 

[NeTrips]

So, the total of your argument is, effectively "Cos the bible SEZ!"?

Close. The totality of my reasoning is actually because God says so. What more does a Christian need for argument but the one unerring source?