On the way home from an appointment, Nancy and I decided to stop at Panera and get a bread bowl of onion soup. We both think it's the best thing on the menu. We went up to the cash register; Nancy ordered onion soup, while I ordered onion soup and a coffee. She found us a table, while I got her water and my coffee. I went back up to pick up our soup…and saw two styrofoam bowls with onion soup. A look at the menu revealed that, in fact, you can get onion soup not in a bread bowl. A look at the reciept showed that we had been charged only for onion soup. Crap.
I took the soup over to our table, told Nancy that I would take the two onion soups and get her a bread bowl with onion soup. She protested, but I pointed out that a) this was the only reasonable way for anyone to get a bread bowl, b) I am a diabetic — this was better for me, though there would have been no harm in me getting the bread bowl and c) I'd need more food if I didn't get the bread bowl, so two soups worked out for me.
Honestly, I was bummed. I really, really wanted a bread bowl of onion soup. But this was the most practical solution. On the way up to the counter, it hit me. Sure, there were a lot of reasons I'd done what I'd done, but in the end, I did this simply because I loved Nancy and I would put her needs ahead of mine.
I got to wondering. In the Christian church, there's a lot of debate about a passage in the New Testament concerning submission and marriage:
Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— for we are members of his body. "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
– Ephesians 5:21-33 (NIV)
Now, some people take the "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ" to be a summary, and what follows an explication of what it meant to submit. Husbands and wives should submit to one another. While described differently for a different culture, the goal was mutual submission. Others take the first sentence as a general command, but that wives should submit to their husbands, and not the other way around, creating a domestic dictatorship.
Nancy and I, since before we were married, took the first interpretation. You probably guessed that when I used the phrase "domestic dictatorship," didn't you? But as I brought the bowl of onion soup back to the table, I realized that, for me, the interpretation didn't matter. No matter how I interpreted it, my actions would always be the same: I would seek to do what was best for Nancy, to put her interests ahead of my own, to be willing to take the lesser things myself and give her the better things and eat breadless bowls of onion soup so that she could have the bread bowl onion soup. Maybe it's what God requires of us, but that's not why I do it. I do it because she is the love of my life. I want to do these things, even giving up my bread bowls of soup and computerized microscope, because I love her more than I love myself, more than I love any other human.
Submission, at least to us, however it would be interpreted, does not mean being stupid. Nancy's the better engineer. If she says something's not structurally sound, either I pull out the modulus tables and prove mathematically that she's wrong, or I'd better listen to her. If there's a medical question, we go with my judgement. But even in those cases, if I have a funny feeling about something structural, she'll do some extra reinforcing; many are the birds that wound up at the vet because Nancy had a hunch that something was "odd," though I couldn't see it. We acknowledge each other's strengths and concerns.
We're also reasonable. I once saw an article in a 700 Club magazine where someone asked Pat Robertson about submission: her husband wanted her to go out and earn money as a prostitute, and she was questioning as to whether she had to submit. Pat said that, in this case, she didn't have to submit. My own opinion on the matter involved terms like "morons" and "too stupid to live." Perhaps our having IQs greater than a retarded parakeet (the "crested" gene achieves it's appearance by causing brain damage that deforms the skull, causing feathers to stick up in a crest — we no longer breed that mutation) means that we can't understand the situation some people are faced with.
And the thing is, Nancy does the same for me. If it hadn't been for the diabetes thing, who knows? We might have stayed at Panera until we both ate one bread bowl of soup and one that wasn't. One of the few things we fight about is who gets to give up their desires for what the other person wants. Trying to figure out what to do for a date used to be miserable: "What do you want?" "No, what do you want?" Eventually, we figured out that we just had to be honest about our desires and figure out a compromise. You spend a couple date-nights at home trying to insist on doing what the other person wants, you catch on that some things just don't work!
I guess I'm wondering. Is the debate on submission really about the Bible or because the people debating are pathological and have pathological marriages no matter the interpretation? Is the debate about forcing the other person to submit?
And exactly what is it about Nancy and me as a couple? Why is it that we still behave like love-sick teenagers in public and horny teens in private? How is it that, after 30 years of knowing each other, we can't stop talking to each other and playing with ideas together and joking and learning new things? Why is it that, in the middle of the night, one or the other of us will wake up and just marvel that we get to spend our lives with the person sleeping next to us? Why won't another hundred years together be too little?
Is this something we can share with others, or are we a 6 sigma anomaly where the two best people for each other wound up married?
Mind you, I'm not complaining…