Recently, Congresswoman Bachmann was questioned about the issue of wives submitting to husbands. Probably in many people's minds, the word "submission" brings about the image of a person agreeing to every whim of another person. I think it is legitimate to ask how this concept of submission will work out if Congresswaoman Bachmann becomes president. Will her husband really have more influence than warranted? President Kennedy, when he was a candidate, was also questioned about the future role of the Pope, since he was Catholic, in his administration.

    I want to comment in this word submission. The passage in Ephesians 5 about husbands loving their wives as Christ loves the church was preceded by the statement for the church, "Submit yourselves to each other." I read this passage as saying men show their submission by loving their wives as Christ loves the church. The temptation of the stronger is to impose his will on the weaker. As the more powerful person (physically at least), the husband's temptation is to impose his will on his wife, making her agree to whatever he wants. On the other hand, the temptation of the weaker is to usurp the stronger, making ways to underhandedly defy or undermine his power. As the weaker person (at least physically), the woman's temptation is to undermine her husband- telling their children to disobey their father, manipulation. Therefore, her submission comes in the form of cooperation- honoring the husband's power. Both husband and wife have to give up their agendas for the other to create a marriage that reflects the way of the cross, the way of sacrifice which is the way of salvation.

     As an aside, some Christians see the husband as the head in a spiritual sense, like a priest who brings his family to God. However, all believers male and female, have equal access to God and his spirit, through the blood of Christ which removed the separation between God and man. They both stand before God equally responsible for their lives. Both of them have to be engaged in their world, which includes their family and their work. Sitting back waiting for "prince charming" or being passive and uninvolved, needs to be avoided.  

      All indiviuals have the will to power, to be in control. In this individualistic culture, the will to power is not something discouraged. In a more community centered culture, this will to power is more suppressed.  Submission is frowned upon in a society that promotes individual rights to the point of giving women the right of ending a hepless child's life. Opposition politicians oppose the ones in power to make them look incompetent in the face of the nation's problems, not out of a desire to help the whole nation, but a desire to look like the competent ones deserving power. The ones in power give themselves credit for success and find ways to blame the failures on the "opposition". This pattern is what is addressed in the submission passage. Instead of lovingly upholding each other, the husband and the wife undermine each other, just like politicians do. The solution is mutual submission, which is the goal in relationships. Hierarchy is temporary and equality is the end point.

     Despite statements that children love boundaries, I don't believe that children value boundaries at the moment. Maybe they will appreciate their parent's "no" later in life when they better understand their parents' perspective, but in the moment, rebellion is usually a way to express power. However, I do agree that lovingly communicating the purpose of boundaries is good for the child and for the relationship. Boundaries unexplained is not helpful and is resented.  This will to power that humans are born with makes "submission" an odious concept.

      The spiritual (a person's worldview, where he fits in, others fit in, where 'God" fits in, etc) has something to say in every sphere of life. Spirituality may not be overtly religious (identified with evangelical thought) and maybe hidden (atheists have a "spirituality"), but each person has a spirituality that influences every sphere in life- government, family, education, etc. These spheres are independent of each other (the protestant view), which should assure us the "President" Bachmann won't "submit" to her husband in the political sphere. Congresswoman Bachmann, President Obama, and every other person has a spirituality that influences their decisions. Therefore, talking about a person's "true spirituality" is legitimate, and should not be assumed to be the same as the religion identified with. Let us hope that our leaders' spirituality does not put themselves in the center, "valuing" their pride, their comfort.