Expertinent: Huckabee Agrees That Wives Should 'Submit Graciously' to Their Husbands. What Does He Mean?
Andrew Romano

Poor Mike Huckabee. He can't catch a break these days--at least with press. (The polls: different story.)

First it's ethics complaints. Then AIDS. Then the parole of a once (and future) rapist/murderer. Then alleged payoffs from Big Tobacco. All while sustaining attacks from his Republican rivals on immigration, taxes and crime. It's almost enough to get a guy eating corndogs again.


The latest fuel on the fire: his views on marriage. In June 1998, the Southern Baptist convention amended its official statement of beliefs for the first time in 35 years to declare that "a wife is to submit graciously to the servant leadership of her husband." And Huckabee, a former Baptist minister then serving as governor of Arkansas, signed a full-page ad in USA Today in support of the statement (along with 129 other evangelical leaders). Now, as the New York Post so poetically puts it, "HOLY HUCKABEE FACES SNIT OVER 'GALS, SUBMIT.'" DailyKos and Andrew Sullivan agree.


It's clear, then, that non-Baptist ears are hearing "do whatever your husband says"--a "Father Knows Best" (if not "Flintstones") philosophy. But to a Baptist like Huckabee, what does "submit graciously to the servant leadership of her husband" actually mean? Seeking context, I called up Roger S. Oldham, the Southern Baptists' vice president for convention relations. Here's what he had to say on the subject:

Mike Huckabee and his wife in signing this ad in 1998 were reflecting their commitment to their core religious values as revealed in the Bible.


With the exception of the word graciously, this is language coming right out of the Biblical text Ephesians V. It is an imperative addressed to the wife. It's not an imperative addressed to the husband. In other words, the man doesn't walk around and say, "Well, you're supposed to be submissive to me." It's not a club. Subordination is not subjugation, nor is it a statement of inferiority. And "servant," by the way, is not directed toward the woman. It's directed toward the man. She is submitting to the "servant leadership" of him. He is the one who is in the role of servant.


Now, there's no doubt that there has been abuse in interpreting the Ephesians V text. There have been those over the years who have read it that the husband is to keep his wife in constant remembrance that she's to be submissive.

But ideally the Ephesians V family is a family in which there is mutual submission to one another in the fear of the Lord. Therefore, when there are matters of discussion, both husband and wife converse with each other, seeking to find consensus. In those rare instances where consensus is not reached, the wife says, "Okay, you have the responsibility and accountability to stand before God one day and give an account of the decision you're going to make. But I--voluntarily--submit to your leadership is this instance." Now, when that happens, what that does is frees the husband up. He's no longer arguing with his wife. He now has to stand before God.

Sure, that's softer than "submit." But, in the end, the man still gets the upper hand--meaning there's still considerable room for controversy.


How will Huckabee's views on marriage play politically? We know it won't disturb the evangelicals boosting his primary bid. In fact, as an affirmation of faith-based family values, it's probably a plus (especially if Huckabee again calls criticism on this issue an attack on his faith, as he did in 1998).

But much of America might see such strict adherence to Biblical doctrine as sort of extreme, which (along with Huckabee's other "issues") could cause him trouble in the general election. It's one thing to be a man of faith. Most people appreciate that. It's another to say that a wife should agree to give her husband the last word.

I know a lot of "gals" who would disagree.

Actually if a woman is religious, she will submit because her religion tells her it is right and her duty. The non religious women will not look so kindly on it.

Huckabee's dilemma is surely to be found more with a lack of understanding of Biblical doctrine as made emphatic by Paul's words, than with any subjugation of subserviance implied and conferred upon the married Christian woman.


The heart of the doctrine is that the man must be himself submitted to the Lord and be last in his own judgements.

The married Christian man is called upon to put his own needs ,wants ,and desires behind the needs, wants, and desires of his Christian family.

The point is to insure that the man is always cognizant of his wife's dependence on him to act faithfully to the Lord in all of his ways, and therefore recognize her submission to him as the head of the household while equally displaying to the wife that her husband is equally submitted to the Lord in defence of her well being.


That will be lost on the American people and used by the media to taint Huckabee.


But we all know the truth, don't we?


Do we?





huh?

I am not religious by any means but I just loved the way that was put and maybe it was your belief coming through but it made me feel all warm inside. WOW wouldee, that was great!!!