Ephesians 5, 21-32

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tim_Landry
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Paul: oh I would add – whenever I came to something later that I did not quite get yet – I would remember the words of Peter to Christ when some left him due to his talking of eating his flesh and Jesus asked if they would leave too and Peter replied-- where else would we go? you have the words of eternal life.

Artemeus: I understand that once you came to believe in Christ as the Logos and Son of God–you embraced his teachings and those of his Apostles and those they gave authority to. That makes sense for you believe he is the Son of God. But what is this about eating his flesh?

Paul: oh sorry I forgot. That is not something to really talk about now. But I very much encourage you to meet again with Cornelius our Presbyter.

Artemeus: yes I will. Pray for me

Paul: I do every day.
 
Tis also to be noted – the husband is the head…

but the wife is the heart

(following an analogy and language differing here from Paul but still important)

(PS I recall old This Rock articles on this subject on the main site-- before the renewal of the site --but one can prob find them)
 
So you believe because you are told to believe not because you read and understand the what they tell you is true.
Absolutely. As much as I love to read Scripture, I have come to understand that I can’t scratch the surface of the depth of beauty and meaning.

Once I realize that I don’t have all the answers, Scripture can take on a whole new understanding. Even if I read a book about cars, I would still trust my mechanic to fix my car…
 
Absolutely. As much as I love to read Scripture, I have come to understand that I can’t scratch the surface of the depth of beauty and meaning.

Once I realize that I don’t have all the answers, Scripture can take on a whole new understanding. Even if I read a book about cars, I would still trust my mechanic to fix my car…
So I have to ask, Why read at all?
 
Because it is the word of God. Best to read it, however with an approved Catholic commentary. There are many and it helps to enrich the words on the page. Also, Scripture should be read in context of the whole Bible, not just the verse or passage being read…Commentaries help to identify those passages that would relate or apply.
 
Because it is the word of God. Best to read it, however with an approved Catholic commentary. There are many and it helps to enrich the words on the page. Also, Scripture should be read in context of the whole Bible, not just the verse or passage being read…Commentaries help to identify those passages that would relate or apply.
I agree one should read the Bible and accept it in entirety and not just verse or passage without cross referencing to understand the full meaning.

The reason I asked if why you read at all is if you believe you cannot begin to understand so you simply believe what you are told to believe anyway, why take the time?
 
People who object to this passage need to chill out. First of all, it is inspired scripture. While Paul may have intended the message to be carried to the people of Ephesus, the Holy Spirit intended it for all generations and all people. Yes, even you and me.
This is an important point, especially for those saying that Paul’s writings were a product of his time. We are not free to disregard this or any other part of Scripture willy-nilly. Nor is this an isolated sentiment. It reappears in 1 Corinthians, in 1 Timothy, and of course in Genesis.

As Paul makes clear, the relation of husband to wife mirrors the relation of God to Church. God and husband both are active lovers, the ones who do the loving. Church and wife both are passive lovers, who receive the act of loving. For the husband/wife relationship, it is built into our very physiology (think about that for a moment). And the analogue for the Church/God relationship is in the Eucharist. We receive Christ physically, take him inside ourselves (rather like the marital act), and are transformed thereby – by his power, not our own. For the Church/God schema, that means being transformed into a being fit for Heaven, a new life of the soul being created as a result. For the husband/wife schema, that means being transformed into a mother, a new life being created literally as a result. That might be a disturbing analogy for men who receive the Eucharist faithfully and regularly, like myself, to liken it to the marital act, but get used to it. Again, it’s built into the very structure of reality.

As some have rightly pointed out, this entails duties on the part of both spouses – mutual, permanent, continuing, and essential duties, not contingent ones. Woman is instructed to obey her husband, and man to care for and if necessary die for his wife, in the same way the Church is to obey God and God cares for and died for us. The pattern of relationships between Church and God is somewhat more perfect than that between husband and wife, but the pattern of duties is the same. Man is to care for and if necessary die for his wife even if she hates him and reviles him, denies him intimacy, etc. (did Christ not die for us, despite our ingratitude?). And woman is to obey her husband even if he is a liar, deceiver, manipulator, abuser, etc. Because in both cases, the faithful witness of the one spouse may contribute to the redemption of the other.

This is what we mean when we say that husband and wife are to be subordinate to one another. “Subordinate” in this case must be qualified with respect to the nature of both man and woman. Man is not to be subordinate to woman in the way that woman is to be subordinate to man, because they are different beings with different natures. Their natural goods and thus the goodness of their relations to one another are conditioned by these differences. A wife subordinating herself to her husband means her obeying him, even if he is an unworthy man. A husband subordinating himself to his wife means his caring for, providing her, and if necessary dying for her, even if she is an unworthy woman. It emphatically does not mean that husbands and wives are to behave exactly the same in every possible way all the time.

If we have trouble with this teaching, if we find it offensive, if it makes us angry… well, this is the revealed word of God and it is how the Church has understood it pretty much since the beginning. If we dislike it, it is because our consciences are malformed, probably by decades of meritless feminist agitprop. The Bible doesn’t exist to legitimate our opinions.
 
This is an important point, especially for those saying that Paul’s writings were a product of his time. We are not free to disregard this or any other part of Scripture willy-nilly. Nor is this an isolated sentiment. It reappears in 1 Corinthians, in 1 Timothy, and of course in Genesis.

As Paul makes clear, the relation of husband to wife mirrors the relation of God to Church. God and husband both are active lovers, the ones who do the loving. Church and wife both are passive lovers, who receive the act of loving. For the husband/wife relationship, it is built into our very physiology (think about that for a moment). And the analogue for the Church/God relationship is in the Eucharist. We receive Christ physically, take him inside ourselves (rather like the marital act), and are transformed thereby – by his power, not our own. For the Church/God schema, that means being transformed into a being fit for Heaven, a new life of the soul being created as a result. For the husband/wife schema, that means being transformed into a mother, a new life being created literally as a result. That might be a disturbing analogy for men who receive the Eucharist faithfully and regularly, like myself, to liken it to the marital act, but get used to it. Again, it’s built into the very structure of reality.

As some have rightly pointed out, this entails duties on the part of both spouses – mutual, permanent, continuing, and essential duties, not contingent ones. Woman is instructed to obey her husband, and man to care for and if necessary die for his wife, in the same way the Church is to obey God and God cares for and died for us. The pattern of relationships between Church and God is somewhat more perfect than that between husband and wife, but the pattern of duties is the same. Man is to care for and if necessary die for his wife even if she hates him and reviles him, denies him intimacy, etc. (did Christ not die for us, despite our ingratitude?). And woman is to obey her husband even if he is a liar, deceiver, manipulator, abuser, etc. Because in both cases, the faithful witness of the one spouse may contribute to the redemption of the other.

This is what we mean when we say that husband and wife are to be subordinate to one another. “Subordinate” in this case must be qualified with respect to the nature of both man and woman. Man is not to be subordinate to woman in the way that woman is to be subordinate to man, because they are different beings with different natures. Their natural goods and thus the goodness of their relations to one another are conditioned by these differences. A wife subordinating herself to her husband means her obeying him, even if he is an unworthy man. A husband subordinating himself to his wife means his caring for, providing her, and if necessary dying for her, even if she is an unworthy woman. It emphatically does not mean that husbands and wives are to behave exactly the same in every possible way all the time.

If we have trouble with this teaching, if we find it offensive, if it makes us angry… well, this is the revealed word of God and it is how the Church has understood it pretty much since the beginning. If we dislike it, it is because our consciences are malformed, probably by decades of meritless feminist agitprop. The Bible doesn’t exist to legitimate our opinions.
Amen.
 
This is an important point, especially for those saying that Paul’s writings were a product of his time. We are not free to disregard this or any other part of Scripture willy-nilly. Nor is this an isolated sentiment. It reappears in 1 Corinthians, in 1 Timothy, and of course in Genesis.

As Paul makes clear, the relation of husband to wife mirrors the relation of God to Church. God and husband both are active lovers, the ones who do the loving. Church and wife both are passive lovers, who receive the act of loving. For the husband/wife relationship, it is built into our very physiology (think about that for a moment). And the analogue for the Church/God relationship is in the Eucharist. We receive Christ physically, take him inside ourselves (rather like the marital act), and are transformed thereby – by his power, not our own. For the Church/God schema, that means being transformed into a being fit for Heaven, a new life of the soul being created as a result. For the husband/wife schema, that means being transformed into a mother, a new life being created literally as a result. That might be a disturbing analogy for men who receive the Eucharist faithfully and regularly, like myself, to liken it to the marital act, but get used to it. Again, it’s built into the very structure of reality.

As some have rightly pointed out, this entails duties on the part of both spouses – mutual, permanent, continuing, and essential duties, not contingent ones. Woman is instructed to obey her husband, and man to care for and if necessary die for his wife, in the same way the Church is to obey God and God cares for and died for us. The pattern of relationships between Church and God is somewhat more perfect than that between husband and wife, but the pattern of duties is the same. Man is to care for and if necessary die for his wife even if she hates him and reviles him, denies him intimacy, etc. (did Christ not die for us, despite our ingratitude?). And woman is to obey her husband even if he is a liar, deceiver, manipulator, abuser, etc. Because in both cases, the faithful witness of the one spouse may contribute to the redemption of the other.

This is what we mean when we say that husband and wife are to be subordinate to one another. “Subordinate” in this case must be qualified with respect to the nature of both man and woman. Man is not to be subordinate to woman in the way that woman is to be subordinate to man, because they are different beings with different natures. Their natural goods and thus the goodness of their relations to one another are conditioned by these differences. A wife subordinating herself to her husband means her obeying him, even if he is an unworthy man. A husband subordinating himself to his wife means his caring for, providing her, and if necessary dying for her, even if she is an unworthy woman. It emphatically does not mean that husbands and wives are to behave exactly the same in every possible way all the time.

If we have trouble with this teaching, if we find it offensive, if it makes us angry… well, this is the revealed word of God and it is how the Church has understood it pretty much since the beginning. If we dislike it, it is because our consciences are malformed, probably by decades of meritless feminist agitprop. The Bible doesn’t exist to legitimate our opinions.
Dear sw85,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Hear, hear. Jolly splendid post. Thankyou for that (name removed by moderator)ut, my dear chap.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax
 
I agree one should read the Bible and accept it in entirety and not just verse or passage without cross referencing to understand the full meaning.

The reason I asked if why you read at all is if you believe you cannot begin to understand so you simply believe what you are told to believe anyway, why take the time?
Again, it is the word (logos) of God. I read that I may grow in understanding salvation history and come to appreciate God’s love for his fallen creatures.

Scripture, truly is a love story and reading this love story gives me strength and hope. I take the time because of the rich spiritual benefits I derive. It is not enough, however, just to read the words on the page, I must also understand their meaning.

Humbly, I acknowledge that I don’t have sufficient background in linguistics, near eastern history and literature, archeology, cultures and literary styles to fully understand just by reading. I need to dig deeper because there is such richness that is not always apparent at the surface.

That is why I take the time. With all due respect, you might try that, as well.
 
Are Christians to be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ? Yes.

Are wives to be subject to their husbands as to the Lord? Yes.

Is the husband (not “the man”) the head of the wife (not “the woman” as Christ is the head of the Church? Yes.

Is the husband to love his wife as Christ loved the Church giving himself up for her? Yes.

Is the husband to love his wife as his own body? Yes

Is the husband to love his wife as himself? Yes

Is the wife respect her husband? Yes

Is the husband to dominate his wife? no.

Is the wife to disrespect the husband? no.

Is the husband to become some dictator? no.

Is the wife to say – you must love me as yourself – so buy yourself that expensive diamond necklace…no…

Can people mistake or abuse the meaning of this passage? yes – it has happened and can happen.

Is there in all of this a mutual love and service as Christians and as spouses? Yes.

Are husband and wife different? yes

Are husbands and wives of equal Christian dignity? and indeed brother and sister? yes

Can there be exceptions in various ways --like for example a husband who is unfit to function as such…? yes of course. Just as there can be an exception to say being subject to your Bishop – like if he starts saying ok folks we are going to start a new Catholic way – we are going to burn the Bible and only follow XYand Z.

Can there be various incarnations of how this is played out? Yes.

Is this demeaning to a wife? No. Is this demeaning to the husband to have to become become in a sense as a slave to his wife or to have to suffer for her? (remember Jesus …to love the wife as Christ love the Church) --no.
 
Hello. I was born and raised a Catholic but fell away about 50 years ago. I still remember sitting in a park in Montreal on the first Sunday I chose not to attend Mass - and wondered if God would strike me dead. About 5 years ago, I came back to the Church and have now become a BIT active (Warden, Chair of the Liturgy Committee, on the Parish Pastoral Council, Lector and Eucharistic Minister)

I am so happy to have once again found God - but I DO have one question/concern on Ephesians 5:21-32. I am so happy I was not reading last week because I would have had a HUGE problem reading that one. How can the Church accept such a chauvinistic translation “The husband is head of his wife - so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything” As a 66 year old GUY, I find that actually borderline offensive.
…how about: “husbands Love your wifes as Christ Loved the Church that He Gave His Life for her?”

…are females obliged to give their lives for their husbands or are they to push the husbands in harms’ way, thusly assisting them in remaining true to Scriptures?

…here’s the problem with your though (as that of most feminists and their supporters); Scriptures are not meant to be taken as a political/social event: abortion is legal hence God should not have a problem with abortion!

…man is supposed to be the spiritual leader (head) of the family; a true Believer must recognize that man’s leadership is delegated to him by God… sadly Believers render Scriptures according to hollowood: “do it till you’re satisfied…”

…once something does not agree with a Believer (liberal Faith) a person is free to subscribe to his/her “conscience;” (also taken from Scriptures) so females should not be obliged to obey their husband because that is such an antiquated chauvinistic mentality!

…it seems that the Bible was not Inspired by the Holy Spirit–only those parts that are politically correct, easily manageable and malleable… hurray for hollowood! :hypno:

Maran atha!

Angel
 
It’s the way God intended. The reason some take offense IMO is because they feel equality is being taken away. Equality of the sexes was never a given. I do not want to be or act like a man and I dont want my husband to be or act like a woman. Eoungh said.
…loved your closing statement! :bowdown2::bowdown2::bowdown2:

Maran atha!

Angel
 
I may sound chauvinistic, but really I´m not. Before I married Miriam, 42 years ago, I used this verse when I proposed. I really got the meaning of it, as well as the importance of it. I believe she did too. She was a very independent Social Worker. I told her that I wanted to marry her, but would not if she didn´t agree with that verse. She agreed. We´re still married. In any covenant between two people or groups of people, someone has to be the one to make the final decisions. Personally I don´t like making decisions. But it seems God, in a marrage, puts the man in charge. How many women out there wish, that their man would step up? How many marriages out there on the brink, because the husband checked out? Should a marriage be fifty fifty? No. If you do it Christs´way it´s one hundred one hundred. The husband gives all to the wife and the wife gives all to the husband. But the final decision making … is for the husband. A big responsibility, but that´s the way God wants it. God bless:thumbsup:👍👍
…while it is great to have Mom involved, the fact is that when Dad is laxed, for the most part, children are also laxed–the Church depends upon the domestic church and the domestic church is not as strong and productive when the Dad, as you say, has checked out!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
As a side note: it is safe to look up the word subordinate in google, but if you just look up the word submissive it does NOT take you straight to the definition, but rather yields some… less than savory results.

As to your question: you’ve got a contextual problem, because what you quoted was NOT the message of what Paul is saying at the end of Ephesians 5.

Let’s look at the whole thing in context, and I’m going to highlight some key parts:

***Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ. ***Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is head of his wife just as Christ is head of the church, he himself the savior of the body. As the church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything.
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her to sanctify her, cleansing her by the bath of water with the word, that he might present to himself the church in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. So (also) husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one hates his own flesh but rather nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. “For this reason a man shall leave (his) father and (his) mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church.
**In any case, each one of you should love his wife as himself, and the wife should respect her husband. **

Okay, let’s start off with the portion I highlighted in RED:

Husbands and wives are called to be SUBORDINATE to each other. But submission here is not meant in the modern sense of the word. Submission here means to be under the mission of… we are called to SUPPORT (be under) the MISSION (salvation) of one another. In other words, in marriage we are to subvert our selfishness for satisfaction to support one another in our spiritual walk with Christ.

Now, let’s move to the part I highlighted in ORANGE:

Wives are called to subordinate themselves to their husbands and all are called to subordinate themselves to the Christ. Is that such a heavy burden? No. We are called to follow the teachings of Christ (spiritual leadership) and to reverence the Lord. This is about a fundamental need of men: the need to be respected… men have a need to know that their wives respect them both privately and publicly. A woman here is being informed: a happy relationship with a healthy male involves giving praise for when he does right. Women are being told to: 1) build up their husbands to a healthy ego rather than trying to subvert them and 2) to follow the lead of the husband where it is appropriate.

Okay, now let’s talk about that GREEN bit:

Men are being told that we need to love our wives… because affirming love and loyalty is IMPORTANT to a wife. Men are psychologically better at giving respect, but poorer at expressing emotions (a side effect of the fact that what we desire is respect rather than emotion). Paul is telling us here that we are to express love to our wives. He furthermore clarifies how this love is to take shape: in the form of the love of Christ (aka, expressing love does not mean sex). In other words, in expressing this love, the husband is to care for his wife, to provide strong and correct spiritual leadership (side note: I really can’t stand when I go to mass and see a whole family kneeling EXCEPT the father… :mad:).

Paul sums this whole passage up in ONE sentence, that bit in PURPLE:

Basically, thousands of years before the field of psychology was introduced and gender studies commenced in formal manner, St Paul is offering keen insight on the relationship needs and desires of men and women: men seek respect, women seek emotive love. What he’s doing here is not saying that women are inferior to men, but rather he is dispensing a condensed form of what hundreds of years of gender study has finally revealed to us to be true: that men and women have different needs in a relationship, and that we have to learn what the other needs in order to fulfill it and be successful in a marriage. Paul is giving the first recorded instance of Catholic marriage counseling, not disparaging women
…out on a limb… sociologist/psych?

You have done an excellent rendering of this passage! :hug3:

…all I could do was: 🍿🍿🍿

Maran atha!

Angel
 
You must remember that St Paul wrote in the culture of his time**. He also speaks of slaves and master…another thing common in the culture of his time, and the Church has spoken out against slavery in the past few centuries. John Paul ll spoke of mutual submission in his encyclical “Mulieris Dignitatem” ( in the culture of **our time) **with these words:

“The author of the Letter to the Ephesians sees no contradiction between an exhortation formulated in this way and the words: “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife” (5:22-23). The author knows that this way of speaking, so profoundly rooted in the customs and religious tradition of the time, is to be understood and carried out in a new way: as a “mutual subjection out of reverence for Christ” (cf. Eph 5:21). This is especially true because the husband is called the “head” of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church; he is so in order to give “himself up for her” (Eph 5:25), and giving himself up for her means giving up even his own life. However, whereas in the relationship between Christ and the Church the subjection is only on the part of the Church, in the relationship between husband and wife the “subjection” is not one-sided but mutual.”

Some women (as they have shown on this thread) may prefer to total submission to their husband, but John Paul ll has told us that it’s actually mutual submission in a marriage.

Some Bible verses and teachings must be understood that they were written in the culture of their time and cannot be taken out of that context. How does one know what is part of that time and what is relevant to us today? Look to the Church- the Popes write their Encyclicals to instruct us in the things that do change because of where we are in the history of humanity and they do this with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
…though it is true that changes comes with the times (just check social values in the US); the Church exists both in and outside the culture; while it is wonderful to feel equality among the sexes… we are wired differently and when man does not lead women must lead–however it was true then as it is now: man must lead the domestic church or children’s Faith, as it so often happens in the US, becomes fragile and at times even corrosive… people tend to frown on absentee workers but none bat an eye when Dad’s are MIA!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Wives are to be in total submission to their husbands. Submission is not slavery. And yes the Church may speak against Slavery today, but slavery is still very alive today.

Submission is to respect, including respecting your husband’s authority. He is the head of the house and even if you disagree with a decision he makes, it’s his to make and you should respect the decision in private and in public, whether you agree or not.

One might want to read 1st and 2nd Timothy as well. here you will find more instruction on Christian living, including more in depth on what the role of a man and woman are, namely what is expected from a man as Head of Household.

While I agree with that husband and wife should give one another mutual respect, that does not mean that we are equals. If the bible could be read in a unisex fashion, the writers would not have to use the words, he, she, husband, wife, man, wife, child.

We both have roles to fulfill and they are pointed out in a very matter of fact way in the bible. Too many folks dont want to step on toes or rock the boat. If you are getting your toes stepped on, then maybe you need to step up and if you are afraid of rocking the boat, buy a lifejacket.

Wonder why there are so many different denominations? Because somebody somewhere, read a verse that didn’t set well with them, decided it must mean something else, something that tastes better or is easier to swallow, find some like minded fellows, Shazam! New Church.

i.e. I have met some Catholics that believe there is no way God would send people to Hell, I replied to them He doesnt, you send yourself…it’s called Freewill.

i.e. I met one guy who said Once saved Always saved, so he doesnt understand the need to pray or ask for forgiveness.
…don’t forget those “…don’t need to belong to an “institutionalized” church…” and the “invisible church of God…” :ouch:

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Well said. Yes, marriage is about mutual submission. If some women/men want their marriages to be about the submission of the wife only, it may be their choice but let’s be clear that it is not God’s/Christ’s rule.

We have some (even a few on CAF) who even take the position that women are subordinate to men. Paul did say to the effect that under Christ all are equal.
…this is exactly why “women…obey…husbands” makes no sense as a chauvinistic or cultural imperative… you cannot have both equal and yet more equal than (except for ‘Animal Farm’); so there has to be more than a cultural biased speak… more as the order of things: man must be the head of the domestic church and as such he must lead, provide, and protect… how does that debase a woman?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Thanks for reading my profile and noticing I am in the RCIA. Doesn’t make me Bible illiterate. You think I haven’t been investigating, inquiring, discerning the teaching and the beliefs of the Catholic Church. This is not a hobby or a pasttime, or a birthright.
:clapping::clapping::clapping:

…glad you caught it!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top