Submitting One to Another - Glenn Conjurske

Abstract of a Sermon Preached on July 26, 2000

by Glenn Conjurske

Is it ever right for a husband to submit to his wife?

Is it ever right for parents to submit to their children?

Is it ever right for a king to submit to his subjects?

I believe without question that all these things are good and proper, and I aim to prove it to you from the Bible. In Ephesians 5:21 Paul says, “Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.” This requires all of us, regardless of our position or authority, to submit to others, regardless of their inferior station. “Submitting one to another”—-each to all, husbands to wives and wives to husbands, children to parents and parents to children, servants to masters and masters to servants.

Long ago I read a beautiful statement of this from Cathy Rice, the wife of Bill Rice. She was endeavoring to teach the women to submit to their husbands, but some of them did not like the doctrine, and asked her, “Do you mean to tell us that you always do whatever your husband asks of you?” She assured them that she did. When she went home she asked Bill, “Haven’t I always done everything that you have asked me to?” He assured her that she had, and added, “And I have always done everything that you have asked me to.” This is “submitting one to another.”

But you will say, this was easy for them. They had a good marriage. They were in love. No doubt, and no doubt this did make it easy. They were agreed in their principles also, and this no doubt made it very easy. But I tell you, where the submission is more difficult it is also more necessary. The more strained the marriage, the less agreement there is in principle, the worse the relationship between parents and children, the more necessary this submission becomes, especially on the part of those who hold the authority. A gentle submission on their part will tend greatly to make the relationship better, where a stubborn insistence upon their own way will make it immeasurably worse. Submission one to another will ease the tensions and smooth the path of all concerned.

But here I must caution you against a false and evil use of this text. Much of the modern church, under the influence of modern feminism, perverts this text entirely, and uses it to teach that the husband owes the same kind of submission to the wife that the wife owes to the husband. Marriage is a “partnership,” with nobody in charge. Years ago I knocked on the door of a Baptist pastor. His wife came to the door, and I asked her facetiously, “Is your master at home?” She looked offended, and said, “My partner is.” She would not call him her lord, as Sarah called Abraham. They were equal partners, and nobody was in charge.

But I tell you, if the husband has the same obligation to submit to the wife as the wife has to the husband, you create an impossible situation. Nobody has the determining power. They must either always agree, or have a tie vote, with nobody to break the tie. Each holds one of the reins, and the poor horse is likely to be mighty confused at times.

But speaking of horses, I recall a story I heard years ago from John R. Rice. He spoke of a man who was taken to court for adulterating his rabbit sausage with horse meat. The judge asked him if he didn’t put a little horse meat in his rabbit sausage. He admitted that he did. “How much,” asked the judge. “Fifty-fifty,” he replied. “Fifty-fifty!” exclaimed the astonished judge, to which the man replied, “Yes, Sir: one horse and one rabbit.” And John R. Rice added, “And when a woman tells me her marriage is a ‘fifty-fifty proposition,’ I can tell you who the horse is, and who’s the rabbit.”

But I do not believe any of this modern doctrine which makes husband and wife equal, with neither of them holding the authority, and both of them equally obliged to submit to each other. This is as unscriptural as it is impossible. The plain fact is, the wife owes a submission to her husband that he does not owe to her, and children owe a submission to their parents that their parents do not owe to them.

We are dealing here with two different kinds of submission. All those who are under authority have an obligation to submit to the commands imposed upon them by that authority, but all of us, authority or no authority, have an obligation to submit to the wishes of all the rest. Submission to the commands imposed by authority is mandatory. Submission to the wishes of those who are under us is voluntary. You will tell me that if this submission is voluntary, then it cannot be an obligation, but I tell you, “Nonsense.” Love is voluntary also, and yet we are obliged to love. Christians have an obligation to support their preachers, and yet their gifts are voluntary. There are many things which are voluntary, and yet obligatory. This submission is voluntary in that it is at our own discretion when or how much of it we do, but we are certainly obliged to do it. The scripture does not merely advise us to do this, but orders us to.

The submission to authority proceeds always in one direction, from the subject to his superior. The submission to each other’s wishes proceeds equally in both directions. This it is that Paul speaks of in First Corinthians 7, 33 and 34. “He that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife,” and “she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.” This works equally in both directions, while the authority of the husband remains intact. He holds the determining power, and the veto power.

But the man who holds authority over others, and does not make it his constant study to please them and submit to their wishes, is utterly unfit to exercise his authority. All authority comes from God, and it is designed to be a benefit to its subjects, but if a man holds authority, and cares nothing to please his subjects, or to submit to their wishes, that authority will be nothing more than a heavy burden on their backs. He is unworthy the name of father or husband, for he is really a tyrant.

And I will tell you another thing. No man’s position of authority is secure unless he makes it his study to submit to those who are under him. If he cares nothing for their wishes, they will care nothing for him. We see a plain example of this in the foolish son of the wise Solomon. In

I Kings chapter 12 we read of Rehoboam’s accession to the throne of Israel. The people come immediately to him, saying, “Thy father made our yoke grievous. Now therefore make thou the grievous service of thy father, and his heavy yoke which he laid upon us, lighter, and we will serve thee.” The king requires three days in which to give an answer. He first asked the old men, who stood before his father, and they told him wisely, “If thou wilt be a servant unto this people this day, and wilt serve them, and answer them, and speak good words to them, then they will be thy servants for ever.”

“But he forsook the counsel of the old men, which they had given him, and consulted with the young men that were grown up with him.” This was utterly foolish. Why consult with anybody at all? The young men that were grown up with him had no more sense than he had himself, and he ought to have known that the old counsellors of Solomon must have been wise. But he played the fool, and took the counsel of the young men, and how utterly foolish it was soon appeared.

He spoke to the people “after the counsel of the young men, saying, My father made your yoke heavy, and I will add to your yoke; my father also chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.”

“So when all Israel saw that the king hearkened not unto them, the people answered the king, saying, What portion have we in David? neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse. To your tents, O Israel. Now see to thine own house, David.”

What else could he have expected? By showing the people that he cared nothing for their grievances, and that he would not serve them nor submit to them, he showed them that he was utterly unfit to rule them. His answer reeks of pride. He would show them who was king, but all he showed them was that he was utterly unfit to be a king. From that moment both his person and his authority were despised, and this could hardly have been otherwise.

You will tell me this was very naughty, it was rebellion, it was resisting the authority which was established by God, it was rejecting the Lord’s anointed. Perhaps so, but still it was inevitable. Abuse of authority always spawns the rejection of that authority—-and it is certainly an abuse of authority to refuse to submit to the reasonable suits of our subjects. Those who stand in positions of authority represent God, and yet they are utterly unlike him if they care nothing for the feelings and grievances of their people.

And as it was with Rehoboam, so it is with every man who holds authority. If he does not make it his business to submit to the wishes of his subjects, his whole course will wear away at his own authority. All his deportment will weaken his own position, till his person and position and power are all despised. This is inevitable. You may preach the “divine right of kings” till your tongue is tired, and bring all your powers of reason, and all your strong scriptures, to prove the God-given powers of husbands and parents and elders, and it will all avail you nothing, unless you make it your business to submit to the wishes of your subjects. Apart from this, they may submit to you of necessity, but it will never be a willing submission, and they will long for the day when they may escape from the burden of your authority. I know children today who are longing for their escape from their parents’ authority, and it is the parents’ fault, not the children’s. If you submit to their wishes, you secure their hearts. “If thou wilt be a servant unto this people this day,” the old counsellors say, “and wilt serve them, and answer them, and speak good words to them, then they will be thy servants for ever.” You will secure their hearts, and when that is done all is done. But if the heart is not secured, nothing is secured.

But when, how much, how often, ought superiors to submit to the wishes of their underlings? They ought to submit as much and as often as they can—-as much as wisdom and reason and conscience will allow it. On any other plan they deny the wishes of others merely at their own whim.

We know there are two sides to every question. We know that we have in this day a great horde of self-willed persons who dislike authority as such—-except when they hold it themselves. A man fifteen hundred miles away once took me to task for determining everything in the congregation without consulting the people. I told him the charge was false. When I mentioned the charge to some of you, you told me it was ridiculous.

I never determine anything without consulting the people. I may not consult every babe and every child, or every person on every matter, but I consult the people in general. I may hold the determining power in my own hands—-this is right, this is of God—-but I always consult the feelings of the people. If I had determined the matter of my own will, we would use fermented wine in the Lord’s supper, as Christ and the apostles certainly did, but I found some of the people strongly against it, and I was glad to submit to them. I don’t always submit. I will not admit certain hymns in our meetings merely because somebody likes them. I won’t admit all the hymns which I like myself. Truth must prevail over pleasing music, and even over spiritual emotion, and reason and wisdom must prevail over the tastes and wishes of us all. I cannot, therefore, always submit to the wishes of everybody, but I make it my business to consider them. To submit to the wishes of those who are determined to have their own way will do no good to them or anybody else, and to submit to the belligerent wishes of anybody is only to invite more of the same. The determining power must lie somewhere, or we will have anarchy and confusion.

I asked you at the beginning whether it is ever right and proper for husbands to submit to wives, or parents to children, and some of you indicated you believe it is. You believe, in other words, that it is right for those who hold the positions of authority to submit to those who are under them. But let me ask you a further question. Is it ever right and proper for God to submit to man? Is it ever right for the supreme ruler of the universe to submit to the wishes of his creatures? It certainly is, and he certainly does so. But observe, it is never proper for him to submit to their commands or demands or dictates. Neither will he ever do so, unless to take the wise in their own craftiness, or to destroy the wicked by their own devices. But God submits to the wishes of his people, and in all this we see those two kinds of submission of which we have spoken before. We are obliged to submit to the commands of God, while he is pleased to submit to our wishes. The latter fact is the foundation of our praying.

Take one plain example. God sent his prophet to Hezekiah, saying, “Set thine house in order, for thou shalt die, and not live.” Hezekiah turned his face to the wall and wept sore. He labored to change the mind of God. He said, “Remember now, O Lord, I beseech thee, how I have walked before thee in truth and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy sight.” And God heard his prayer, saw his tears, and submitted to his wishes.

And I want you to observe well the significance of this. If God, the supreme ruler of the universe, will submit to the wishes of his sinful creatures, what right have the petty powers which he has created to disregard the wishes of their subjects? It must be the height of hypocrisy for a husband or a parent to treat with cold indifference, or contempt or anger, the wishes of their wives or children, and then go to God with their own wishes, and expect God to hear them. Even if we believe ourselves in the right, and the wishes of others altogether mistaken, yet mild and gentle measures become us, who are sinners ourselves. If we are in the right, and others in the wrong, yet we cease to be right as soon as we adopt high-handed measures. You think you are right, but no man has any more right to force the conscience of another to make him do right, than he has to force his conscience to make him do wrong. It may sometimes be necessary to force the heart, but this we ought to do with reluctance. Where it concerns a matter which means a great deal to the other party, we ought to do so only with the greatest hesitation, where there is some compelling necessity for it. There are doubtless cases where we ought not to do it at all. High-handed measures may secure us a temporary advantage or victory, but they will always work against us in the end, where mild and gentle ways will secure the hearts of the others, if they do not convince their minds.

But I do not preach any such foolish doctrine as that we ought always to submit to the wishes of our subjects. This would make authority a non-entity, and it would make wisdom useless. Parents who always submit to the wishes of their children make spoiled brats of them. This is foolish. But yet I tell you, it ought to hurt us to deny the wishes of our subjects. My little boy came to me some time ago with a rather large request, which I was obliged to deny. I was simply unable to grant it. And yet I dare say I felt the disappointment much more than he did. I feel it still—-feel it often—-though I dare say he has long since forgotten about it. And I still often meditate upon how I might grant it yet.

We ought sometimes to deny the wishes of our subjects. Reason and wisdom and conscience may often require this of us. We hold our authority for the benefit of our subjects, not merely for the immediate happiness of every individual as such. Sometimes the will of one must be sacrificed to the good of the whole church or family, and sometimes for the good of the individual himself. But we have no right whatever to treat their wishes with cold indifference, or to purposely cross them, merely to “show them who’s boss.” This is contemptible, and in the end it will bring their contempt upon us. But it is not the contempt of our subjects which concerns me here, but the disapproval of God. Our text says, “Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.”

But what has the fear of God to do with your submitting to the wishes of those who are beneath you? Much every way. Turn with me to Colossians 4:1. Here we are told, “Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.” And what does this have to do with the matter. Just this, that your Master in heaven will deal with you as you have dealt with others, “Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.” God will see to it that you receive the same treatment which you have dealt out to others. If you have treated the wishes of your wife or your children—-or your husband or your parents, for that matter—-with cold indifference, God will treat your own wishes the same way. When you are crying to him, and wondering why he will neither hear nor heed your prayers, you need only look at the way in which you have treated the petitions of others. This is what the fear of God has to do with the matter.

Again in Ephesians 6:9, “And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.” He has been exhorting servants to obey their masters, and render them good service, and now he turns to the masters, and says, “do the same things unto them.” Do the same things to them that you expect them to do to you. Not, of course, that masters are to obey their servants, but they are to submit to their wishes—-to honestly and carefully seek their welfare and their happiness, the same way that you expect them to seek yours. Any why this? Because your own Master is in heaven, and he will do to you as you have done to others. As you have measured to others, he will measure back to you, and good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over. If you therefore value your own happiness, you ought to be very careful about the happiness of others, and submit to their wishes in the fear of God, in whose hands lies your own welfare.

If you ask when, and how often, and how much we ought to submit to the wishes of others, I say, Do unto others as you would have God do unto you. Measure to others as you would have God measure to you. Most of us probably have more sense than to expect God to submit to our every whim. We can easily forgo this, if he will but grant us the things which mean the most to us. Then study to do the same to your wives and your children—-not to say to your husbands and parents. All of you submit to one another, and certainly in those things which matter most to the others. Make this your business, and God will make it his business to do the same to you.

Well, but you will ask me if I practice what I preach. I think I do, though I know I am a poor failing creature. I like to feed the birds, and have a couple of bird feeders outside my study window, but the chipmunks like to come and eat everything. And they don’t eat their fill as the birds do, and then go their way, but fill their cheeks with load after load, and carry it off, leaving nothing for the birds. So I got myself a B-B gun, and began to make war on them. But one of my daughters told me the gun “has an awful sound,” and “makes her blood run cold.” So I told her I would put it up and not use it. This was something that obviously meant a great deal to her, and I would be a fool—-and something worse too—-not to submit to her wishes in such a matter, though from my viewpoint her wishes were not very reasonable. They may not even be very reasonable from her viewpoint, but her viewpoint is not reason, but emotion. She may know better—-she grants many things must be killed for many reasons—-but still she cannot help feeling what she feels, and I will not go on wounding her feelings if I can help it. Just this morning a squirrel came to clean out my bird feeder. I walked outside and approached him, but he sat there and looked at me. I clapped my hands, but still he sat there. I walked almost up to him, and by slow stages he sauntered off. I could have shot him ten times, but no: “That gun has an awful sound,” and “It makes my blood run cold.” So I left it on the shelf, and the squirrel went free, to come again as he pleases. He has chewed holes in the wall and ceiling of my shed, and I would love to get rid of him, and before he has a wife and a brood of little ones too. I may do so yet, somehow, but as to the gun, I submit to the feelings and wishes of my precious daughter, and you may call me weak and foolish if you please.

Thus we ought to submit one to another. If the matter evidently means a great deal to the other party, and we have no sufficient reason to deny it—-and our own pride or selfishness is hardly a sufficient reason—-we ought to submit to their wishes. And if those who stand in the positions of authority will aim always thus to submit to their subjects, their yoke will be an easy one, and their inferiors will be glad to bear it.

Glenn Conjurske