To the steadfast defenders of rebellion

Several people have taken issue with me pointing out that a woman with a 16-point list of situations in which she will not submit to her husband–including such open-ended examples such as if she believed he was leading her into a false teaching–is not in any way, shape, or form submissive.

From Rick Stilson:

I think you have mischaracterized the article you linked. She links only extreme examples for cases when a wife should refuse to submit to her husband in the sight of God.

From ST:

I read the original article. You’re wrong and she understands the concept much better.
“Wives, submit to your own husbands as you do the Lord” is not “Wives, let your brains fall out and give up all your agency”

From Deep Strength:

Like I said on my post, I don’t think there is anything wrong with her list *for her* as her husband has agreed to it.

Let me explain why you are wrong, and why submission with caveats is not submission.

Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. –Ephesians 5:24

Point #1–Everything means everything.

A woman that has a 16-point list of when she will not submit to her husband is not submitting to him in everything. Thus, she is not following the Scriptural imperative to “submit in everything” to her husband. Do not give cover to a rebellious woman. Everything means everything. The Scripture commands wives to submit to their husbands in everything. That’s about as direct and plain as it gets–those who see in that command room for a 16-point list of situations in which a woman may choose to not submit to her husband are more than wrong. They are speaking lies in hypocrisy; having had their conscience seared with a hot iron.

Point #2–Wives are to submit to husbands as the church submits to Christ.

So if there is a 16-point list on when a wife can choose to not submit to her husband, where is the analogous 16-point list of when the church can choose not to submit to Christ? Does the church get to rebel if asked to do something dangerous? Does the church get to rebel if Christ claims to have absolute authority over it and to be its primary Lord?


Then wives don’t either.

7 thoughts on “To the steadfast defenders of rebellion

  1. Yeah, I already know that.

    What I’ve been saying is that this list was posted with full knowledge and approval of her husband (this was stated on her blog). It’s his right if he wants to give and/or affirm a list of things she doesn’t have to submit to.

    You and/or I may think that is foolish, but it is his right via authority.

    Now, other wives applying this to their husbands? That’s wrong. That’s why I wrote the post in the first place.

  2. If I were speaking, it would be:

    “If I say anything that might violate God’s commands in Scripture, let me know.”

    I would expect my wife to say this:

    “If there’s potentially a sinful situation, I’ll let you know respectfully and humbly before I obey. If it turns out not to be a sinful situation, I’ll obey.”

    I believe that you and I differ on the sinful situation, but the thrust of the point is clear. I don’t need to make some random list that can be interpreted any which way of someone’s potential choosing. Making a list is foolish for that reason.

  3. Dear Moose,

    I believed you were correct; after perusing the list in question from “Peaceful Wife” I believe so even more strongly. My favorite was that she would not obey her husband were it to become clear he was possessed by a demon… I can just see that coming up in divorce court… “No, really your honor, his head spins around and he spits split pea soup all over the place! How can I possibly be expected to live with that?”

    More telling, however, is her assertion that she would not submit to her husband were it to become clear that he is mentally insane. My ex attempted to play this card with the church we attended when she filed for divorce. At the insistence of the church elders, and over the strong objection of my attorney, I attended several sessions where I was examined by some fellow who is licensed to do such things. At the end of eight or nine sessions, he told me I was perfectly sane, and wrote a letter to the court recommending me for custody of my son. My now ex, on the other hand, had to disclose that she was taking no fewer than three powerful psychotropic medications and was under the care of a psychiatrist for multiple conditions; nonetheless she continued to maintain she had no obligations to me because I was the crazy one. To top matters off, the fellow she moved in with when she ran off had had his military career derailed when he was found psychologically incompetent for duty… and that was at a time when the Bush administration was trying to keep everyone possible IN the service.

    Now, as to her husband giving her permission to print the list…. Other than her say so, how do we know that is even true? And if it is true, she is still encouraging other women to disobey their husbands, which is false teaching on her part, and ironically enough one of the reasons she lists not to obey him.

    At any rate, good work on the expose.


  4. Yes, I have been able to keep custody for the most part. I did far better in court than most fathers, for which I remain thankful.

  5. @ DS

    What I’ve been saying is that this list was posted with full knowledge and approval of her husband (this was stated on her blog).

    This man is seeking to lead astray other men’s wives. There is no other reason to approve the publication of a list encouraging rebellion. The problem with the list is that it encourages rebellion in our wives and the wives of our neighbors. Therefore, it must be anathematized.

Leave a Comment