The Submissive Wife


During the Iowa debate, Fox News interrogator Byron York asked Michelle Bachmann to clarify her comments about Paul’s command in Ephesians 5:22, “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord.”

York asked, bluntly, “As president, would you be submissive to your husband?”

Conservative reaction was fairly universal, against both Fox and York for “gotcha” journalism turned into bad taste. Carrying a bias against the media, including Fox, into this debate, I can fully understand this outrage, but Glenn Beck raises a good point, namely, that by York bringing this question up now, he had “inoculated” Bachmann from it ever being brought up again.

Chew on this, for there’s probably some truth to it, whether intentional or not.

But in a way, it’s a shame, because I’d like to see Bachmann have another go at that question, so then she could then turn it into a conservative teaching moment.

The Teachable Moment

My greatest disappointment with the candidates so far, except Rick Santorum and Herman Cain, is they have turned every question asked them into a way to recite, ad naseum, their resumes. “Me, me, me, I did this, I did that” can get very stale, very quickly. Tim Pawlenty has been, by far, the worst offender in this regard, but Bachmann and Romney also offend.

Perhaps worse, especially for the non-conservatives looking in, is to lose the teachable moment, and perhaps set a few of those minds into a higher state of inquiry about constitutional conservatism. Santorum especially seems to look for opportunities to insert a constitutional or moral precept into any discussion he’s a part of. It’s always good, as I’ve written often, to have a Ben Franklin around the council table, constantly reminding everyone else at the table of the bigger picture, and where this issue or that fits into it.

Then, this can be edifying to more than just conservatives or Republicans. By rehearsing or being coached to answer every question with a me-me-me resume, the candidates pass on a great opportunities to do a little teaching.

The Submissive Wife

So, I would love for Michelle Bachmann to get a second bite at the “submissive wife” apple to explain that this phrase is one of the most abused sections of Paul’s teachings (Eph 5:21-32)…especially by non- or anti-Christians of the Left.

Every Christian husband and every Christian wife knows what it means, and does not mean. Every anti-Christian, feminist Leftist has tried to portray this wifely submission as a slave to a man; a barefoot, pregnant, stupid, repressed woman, always with that damned apron on, a mammy scarf on the head, a Mixmaster in one hand, a scrub brush in the other, a tub of Spin N’ Span on the floor…yadda, yadda, yadda.

From the beginning of time, the sky (circumstances) has always determined this relationship. Without trying to pick any fights I will only say that most of  the decisions made in any relationship (not just marriage) is made by one person, but almost never the same person every time. By a process impossible to detail in less than 1000 pages, each party cedes to the other power to decide, from kraut and wieners or pot roast, to Disney World or the Atlanta Braves, to your parents or my parents at Thanksgiving. Oh, there may be hell to pay sometimes, and that hell is so varied as to defy any single book.

Christians just seem to deal with all this drama better than others. (Go figure.) Christians seems to be more content in their decisions. There is more happiness, more light and less dark. And somehow, Christians seem more able to bear these conflicts, for more of them stay married. And they put out into the world children who seem more able to enjoy its fruits and the fruits of their labor, rather than sitting in a dark corner, seething about this or that, as the children raised by only one parent are more apt to do.

There are no trophy wives, and while even Christians may stumble, there are rarely mistresses, stained blue dresses, or a No 9 stamped to a Client list. These are all attributes of an angry agnostic Left.

Clearly Christian “submission” means something entirely different from the “submissiveness” the anti-Christian Left implies.

Left Wing Submission

Still we are led to believe the word “submissive” is the nuclear red button to the Left. Well, it is not, though they do try to disguise it. The word they most hate here is “wife”, especially in the context of Paul’s exhortation to the “Christian wife.”

For in truth, there is nothing in this world more submissive than the empty, hateful Leftist.

I could not detail for you in a thousand pages all the ways in which a wife does not “submit” to her husband, while still keeping within Paul’s strictures to be submissive. Again, all drama (and comedy) in fiction is built on this one one essential conflict, from Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf  to Lucy and Desi. But what can be proved statistically, in every category of every human emotion, e.g, happiness, love, joy, even dealing with loss, and every human virtue; e.g., honesty, fidelity, charity, kindness (look them up) the submissive Christian comes out much higher than the “open-minded” humanist. Morality is high in survival enhancement, while immorality is in cultural self-destruction.

This is because the anti-Christian humanist is a complete and total slave; submissive to his/her passions (dark and angry as they are), his/her appetites (avaricious as they are), and his/her vanities (preening and narcissistic as they are).

The most submissive being on earth is the one that worships himself.


0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 14, 2011 10:42 am

This is a fantastic write up Vassar and well I thought perhaps Mr York and the leftists who consistently get this portion wrong to make women in the conservative movement look small needed to see it so I tweeted it to him!/JadedByPolitics/status/102751582269095938

August 14, 2011 11:21 am

This clearly touches on something that is constantly being overlooked by the interviewers or interrogators (your choice of which you word you want to use) who ask these gotcha questions and how the candidate responds. The Mike Wallace types are always looking for YouTube moments (these having since replaced Kodak moments) almost for their own notoriety, rather than helping to force the candidate to expose what they actually think and believe. At least with the latter you have a better chance of understanding who the candidate is. That is always better than what they choose to project. Converting the interviews/responses… Read more »

redneck hippie
August 14, 2011 11:30 am

You really aced this one, Vassar.

Lady Penguin
August 14, 2011 12:44 pm

Ah, Vassar. You hit a homerun, and these words fit closely to something I am working on:

This is because the anti-Christian humanist is a complete and total slave; submissive to his/her passions (dark and angry as they are), his/her appetites (avaricious as they are), and his/her vanities (preening and narcissistic as they are).
The most submissive being on earth is the one that worships himself.

They live in a dark world.

August 14, 2011 1:30 pm

(In best hillbilly dialect) “Where do Y’all git one a them thar ‘submissive wives’?”

August 14, 2011 2:16 pm

Vassar you are a harsher critic than I am with respect to the candidates who like to brag about their achievements. If you only have candidates talking about how hard they fight against the status quo, their own party even, then you have a cage match between Michelle Bachmann and Ron Paul. The lame stream media are going to love it for ratings and entertainment value, but this is not what our country needs right now.

August 14, 2011 2:43 pm

Love how the left likes to ramp up that old “Christian motto”- “Men are in charge, women should be barefoot and pregnant.” Hey! It’s in the Bible, right? So…”If you’re elected President, won’t your husband [he asked eyes narrowed] be the REAL President?” One guy I like to look to is Jack Hayford, though others say [strawman alert!] essentially the same thing; Ephesians 5:22 Women are never made second to men in general, but the wife is specifically called to accept her husband’s leadership and not endeavor to dominate (see note on Gen. 3:16). The husband must lead with mutual… Read more »