Michele Bachmann, (Submissive) Theologian?

Aug19 by D Gregory Smith

Michele Bachmann has championed the “Christian” cause, sprinkling her speeches with scripture and holy buzzphrases. But one in particular caught my ear.

During the Iowa Republican Debate, Bachmann was asked about whether she would be submissive to her husband. She slipped right out of her earlier statements (and any fundamentalist credibility) when she basically said, “in our house, submission means respect”.

But what did Paul mean when he wrote, “Wives, submit to your husbands as is fitting in the Lord” in his letter to the Colossians? Or Peter, when he wrote “Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands…” in the First Letter of Peter?

It comes from the tradition which Paul amplified in his letter to the Ephesians:

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. (NIV) Ephesians 5.22-24

Pretty clearly not simple, mutual respect. Maybe another translation will help. Let’s try the King James:

²²Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. ²³For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.²⁴Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

Nope, still clearly hierarchical. Paul is speaking from a clearly patriarchal tradition here- one where the husband is the head of the family, the boss, the Pope, the King- those are the images he uses here.

And they are meant very specifically and clearly: wives are the subjects of their husbands, as the church is subject to Christ. As a serf is subject to a king. Not partner, not even helpmate. Subject.

Not that I think this is right, proper or correct. My understanding of Christian scripture is quite different- and I take an anthropological/interpretive approach- not a fundamentalist one. But if you’re going to proclaim to have fundamentalist Christian leanings- you have to be consistent. The first century church was a product of its time- patriarchy was all the rage- and I think we’ve evolved beyond it. Well, mostly. But if Michele Bachmann is going to quote scripture, she can’t just pick and choose what it means. She can’t back off of it and maintain any integrity with/for her Christian base.

But she did. And she has. And the media is letting her. CBS News:

AMES, Iowa – Appearing on “Face the Nation” Sunday, Rep. Michele Bachmann stood by her comment in Thursday’s Republican debate, insisting that when she said wives should be submissive to their husbands, she meant that married couples should have mutual respect.
In 2006, Bachmann said her husband had told her to get a post-doctorate degree in tax law. “Tax law? I hate taxes,” she continued. “Why should I go into something like that? But the lord says, be submissive. Wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands.'”
Asked about the comment by CBS News’ Norah O’Donnell Sunday, Bachmann reaffirmed that to her, “submission means respect, mutual respect.”
“I respect my husband, he respects me,” she said. “We have been married 33 years, we have a great marriage…and respecting each other, listening to each other is what that means.”
O’Donnell asked Bachmann if she would use a different word in retrospect.
“You know, I guess it depends on what word people are used to, but respect is really what it means,” Bachmann replied.
“Do you think submissive means subservient?” O’Donnell asked.
“Not to us,” Bachmann said. “To us it means respect. We respect each other, we listen to each other, we love each other and that is what it means.”

Look at the story she uses to illustrate her point: Marcus Bachmann told her to get a degree in something she hated– and she did it because- according to a fundamentalist interpretation of scripture- she is his subject. She must submit to him. She later rejected this, saying it equals respect.

Well, maybe in the way a serf respects the King who holds power over him/her. But let’s keep looking. Hey! Maybe the dictionary will mention respect.

submissive
sub·mis·sive
–adjective
1.inclined or ready to submit; unresistingly or humbly obedient: submissive servants.
2.marked by or indicating submission: a submissive reply.

Okay, that didn’t do much for her case, either. Hey, maybe the Greek will help! What was the word in the Bible the writers actually used? Maybe that means respect…

“In the first instance, then, hupatassomai does not mean so much ‘to obey’—though this may result from self-subordination—or to do the will of someone but rather ‘to lose or surrender one’s own rights or will.¹³⁶ In the NT the verb does not immediately carry with it the thought of obedience … ¹³⁷

The idea implicit in the term is “to place under” (in the active voice).¹³⁸ As it is found in our text, the idea would be, “to subordinate oneself” or “to place oneself under.” In general terms, submission is the placing of oneself under the one to whom we submit. Since we are commanded to submit ourselves one to another, we are to place all others above ourselves. (source)

Whoops. Even worse.

Sorry, Michele. Looks like if you want to maintain scriptural consistency- and your fundamentalist/evangelical/christianist street cred, you’re going to have to say submit, subject to, submissive, surrender.

Presidential words, indeed.

Montana Family Foundation: Using Scripture To Slander Others

Mar8 by D Gregory Smith

First, listen to this podcast.

Second, listen to this:
This fundamentalist, smug and patronizing interpretation of Paul’s letter to the Romans by Mr Laszloffy is used to villify and degrade other human beings- and in particular, a human being I consider to be a friend.
Jamee Greer is not part of the radical homosexual agenda or a latter-day Gomorran. He is a man who simply wants identical freedom for all Montanans. This irresponsible podcast advocates harsh judgment, not God’s love and forgiveness.
I’m terrified that some fundamentalist is going to start picking off liberal lobbyists.

Third: If something happens to Jamee Greer because of this, Mr Laszloffy, the cries to heaven will be deafening. So will my words. And they will be these: You are personally responsible for spreading hate and destruction. And I will speak them until you repent.

I asked My friend Kathy to do a bit more work with this. As a straight woman, a Christian, a non-Montanan and a friend, she’s got more objectivity than I do right now.

RESPONSE TO MONTANA FAMILY FOUNDATION’S JEFF LASZLOFFY
by Kathy Baldock, Canyonwalkerconnections.com

The Word of God is a Holy Text. Abuse of the Word of God, unfortunately is rampant in the church. Theology is a compilation of the interpretation that we read (re-written from the original Greek and Hebrew), with our personal translation of what those words mean as understood in our context, our language and our own personal filters. Added to all this, is the personal revelation and relationship we individually have with Jesus.

So, is there room for one person to view Scripture differently than another person? Of course.

One of the most flagrant mis-uses and abuses of verses of the Bible is the section quoted by Jeff Lazloffy on the Legislative Update on the Montana Family Foundation Radio podcast.

Mr. Lazloffy bases his assessment of a group of people at the legislative session in Montana on some verses from the Book of Romans. Verses originally spoken to a group of people left behind in Rome in about 60 AD after all the converted Jewish Christians, the Jews and Gentile “acting like Christians” were forced to leave Rome. Theses groups were infighting over who was right, who got to use the temple space (kind of like today), so the Caesar kicked all the trouble makers out of Rome in the Edict of 54 AD. They were excommunicated for five years. So, after five years, the baby Christians left behind, the ones that were once polytheists and idol worshippers (from generations and culture of both) had fallen back into their old ways of worship in the temples. Duh! They were doing what they knew to do and, they had no mentors around to help stop the falling back.

Priscilla carried a letter from Paul to these Romans (hence the Book) and the letter told the once-gentiles-then-believers-now gentiles-again to please recall commitment once made. Having once known Jesus as Lord, they had turned from Him. THAT was the grave sin. Turning back to idol worship. Not same sex behaviors! Not homosexuality. Idol worship. Putting others things before the commitment to God.

But, misreading and abusing this text from Romans give more fuel to the anti gay crowd, so, we keep on repeating the scenario. “If you are gay and will not stop being gay, God will cut you loose and you will be a reprobate.” Noooooo. If you once had the knowledge of God and turn from Him, He will let you go your own way. Back to your old stuff.

For a full treatment of these verses go to “Romans 1:18-32. . .To Whom Was This Directed?”

It is dreadful when Christians misuse Holy Words to subjugate, threaten and demonize any other group of people . I read the Gospel as Good News. How did a Book of love get to become a weapon of fear and destruction? This is how: you put it in the hands of a people who indeed have an agenda of fear and exclusion, two messages completely contrary to the message of the Gospel.

I speak the same language as you Mr. Lazloffy, so this is for you. I do not believe for one minute that God showed you a vision of Mr. Greer in the way you depicted it. If those were God’s eyes, you would have seen someone you are called to love and serve, not judge and oppress. You were looking at one of God’s children, equal to you in His eyes. If you need a verse, stop camping on the misuse of Romans 1: 28 and drop on back to Isaiah 58:6-12. Cut the cords of oppression, fight for justice. Stop laying more oppression onto the backs of others.

I am assuming many of the objects of your version or “God love” have left churches. Yet, you want them to follow the club rules and, not only have they never bought into the rules, you won’t even let them in the club. (My assumption here, but I do assume you are not welcoming of gay/trans people in your home church, unless they change that is.)

The church has gotten to looking very much unlike Jesus. Rather than look at this group of others as “steeped in sin”, do what God really did ask of you: look at your own sin and, back to this again, love and serve.

Christians like you are keeping the youth away from churches, denying 5% of the population access to a God that somehow was able to handle my sorry self and yours. If He wants to make someone not gay, or not liberal, or not whatever the thing they are that makes you uncomfortable, then let Him do it. This stinky stuff called self-righteousness that we wear out in public is a stench to a Holy God. And it is stinky to others too.

Go love and serve, fight for justice and against oppression and then, you might actually smell sweet enough, like Jesus, to draw people to Him instead of repulsing them away.

I am a straight Evangelical Christian who is finally understanding the message of Jesus that is not embodied in Romans 1:28. The overarching message of the Bible is not power packed into six anti gay verses, it is this : love your neighbor (told once) and love your enemy/the stranger (told twenty six times). I do not need a vision to confirm that you are failing at that calling. I only needed to listen to your three minute legislative summary.

Go apologize and serve the others, then, you will begin to look like the Lord I love and serve