I believe that marriage, especially Christian marriage, should turn you into the person that you otherwise never would have been. Paul writes in Philippians 2:5 “In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!”
A host of scholarly papers, commentaries and Sunday messages have covered Philippians 2:5 thoroughly. Whatever one might say about this passage one thing is for sure, Paul is offering a statement on how Jesus wants things to happen. What does Jesus want? According to Paul, Jesus would really like it if we didn’t take advantage of one another. Instead, Jesus would really like it if we were each other's cheerleaders. Cheering on one another into becoming fully human by humbling ourselves in service to each other which often takes grace, waiting, being interrupted and readjusting our agendas.
What a nice thought, right? Who wouldn’t want that in their relationships? Who among us enjoys being taken advantage of? I bet we could all tell a story about some friend or family relative who just takes advantage. They take advantage of their power and use it for their agenda. They take advantage of your time and use it for their gain. No gratitude. No honest relationship in which they offer vulnerability. They are takers and will continue to take.
Instead, Paul suggests that relationships should focus on how others are served not what is gained. That might be a difficult concept for American minds to consider. We have all been trained in the art of using the relationships (people) around us for our advantage. The goal of networking isn’t to gain lifelong friendships as much as it is to gain contacts to further our goals. Some folks get married for financial or social gain. Parents/Adults can take advantage of the children in their lives by using them to fulfill their own dreams.
In American culture relationships tend to be more about what you get from them. If you aren't getting what you need/want, then that relationship does not get our attention. Jesus offers an alternative. Be humble and offer yourself as a kind of cheerleader who desires to see others achieve. In doing so you and the others around you could become who they otherwise never would have been.
Consider Ephesians 5:21-22. It is hard to read this passage or any passage in the Bible for that matter, and not stick our own notions on it. Regrettably the real punch of this passage is often lost on many Christians because it has been reduced to arguments over who gets to be the leader. The passage gets pulled into discussions over so-called “biblical roles” of men and women in marriage. The focus tends to be on who is supposed to submit to who. One of the main issues with this passage concerns the translation of the original Greek into English.
Every English translation translates Ephesians 5:22 as a complete sentence, with an imperative verb addressed to women. Here are a few samples:
- Wives, submit yourself to your own husbands as unto the Lord (King James Version).
- Wives be subject to your husbands as to the Lord (Modern Language Version).
- You wives must submit to your husbands’ leadership in the same way you submit to the Lord (Living Bible).
- Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord (Revised Standard Version).
- Wives, be subject to your husbands as you are to the Lord (New Revised Standard Version).
- Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord (New International Version).
Ephesians was not written in English. It was written in Greek. In the Greek text used by any first-year Greek student or translator will find that there is no verb present in Eph. 5:22. In fact in two of the earliest surviving Greek manuscripts of Ephesians, Papyrus 46 and Codex Vaticanus (also known as B), there is no verb or participle in Ephesians 5:22. Instead, this verse borrows the verbal idea from the previous verse. So, whatever sense the “submit” participle is in verse 21, this same sense carries over into verse 22. In other words, if you just plainly (so to speak) translate Eph. 5:22 from Greek into English you would get . . . “Wives to their own husbands as to the Lord.” This isn’t a complete sentence, because there is no verb. So, where does the idea of submission come from?
It comes from the verb of the previous verse, Ephesians 5:21. In 5:21, the verb is not an imperative addressed only to wives. Instead, it is what Greek grammar calls a “reflexive” verb, in which submission is “to one another.” The suggestion to submit to one another, in our so-called modern times, sounds fairly benign. Yet in Paul’s time that seemingly benign concept would have been an uncomfortable and socially radical thought. Women in Paul's world were not to be submitted to by any man. In other words, Paul’s words to wives were relatively unremarkable yet his words to husbands would have been astounding to his audience.
When it comes to Ephesians 5:21 and 5:22, we have two distinct translation decisions at work in most English Bibles. The first is that English translations take the idea of submission from the verb in 5:21 and creates an imperative form of a verb in 5:22, although the Greek has no verb at that point. The second is that English translations tend to treat 5:21 and 5:22 as separate units, with no real connection to each other. This translation move, in English, makes it seem as if Paul is addressing women when in fact his target is more likely the men. At no time does Paul tell men to lead their wives or that men have some kind of unilateral authority over women. Instead, Paul will tell husbands, six times in Eph. 5, to love their wives. Paul connects the love husbands are to have for their wives with Jesus' love for others in which he humiliated himself by dying on a cross.
In the time and place in which Ephesians was written, the idea of a man submitting to their wife or any woman for that matter would have been a shocking concept. In contrast, there was nothing new in the idea that wives were to submit to their husbands. There have been all kinds of books, scholarly papers, and Sunday messages about what Paul is or is not doing here in Eph. 5. Some speculate that Paul is speaking diplomatically and is simply showing a high degree of respect for women/wives. In that case Paul isn’t making any new arguments or challenging any social norms. Maybe Paul, as some scholars suggest, is offering a kind of midrash (commentary) on Genesis 2. Yet there is another angle to consider.
Paul is a guy who has been snake bit, shipwrecked, jailed, ostracized and criticized. Paul endured all of that because he was changed by the resurrection of Jesus. Jesus demonstrated and taught what it was to love your neighbor and love your enemy. Talking with a Samaritan woman, eating with sinners and tax collectors, healing on the Sabbath, flipping over tables in the Temple were just a few of the challenges Jesus offered to the social and economic systems of his day and time.
By the way Jesus wasn’t doing anything new. He was continuing the long story of what God had been doing all along. How many stories are there from Genesis to Revelation of God challenging what everyone else thought was supposed to be the norm? Because of the resurrection of Jesus and Paul’s conversion story it is not difficult to consider that Paul is continuing what Jesus started. Jesus' resurrection inaugurated the Kingdom of God and the writings of Paul reflect his attempt at offering what that new reality looks like in daily living. It would seem for Paul the Kingdom of God that Jesus inaugurated includes reimagining how husbands and wives relate to one another.
Debates about who is to submit to whom, men being the head of the house and offering black and white guidance as to the roles of men and women in marriage might just be grand adventures in missing the point. In light of this brief examination of Philippians 2:5 and Ephesians 5:21-22 there are many things to reconsider yet I offer one.
Wives (solely) submitting to their husbands when Paul says it is to be mutual.
This is a touchy subject for some Christians raised on the belief that men are the “head” of the house. Lots of Sunday sermons and Bible studies have been devoted to offering some kind of clear-cut guidance on what it means for husbands and wives to submit to one another (but really submit to husbands). Many Christians have built their marriages on the firm foundation that the husband is the “head” of the household. I believe that Christians who hold to this tradition do so sincerely. There are many families who function with the husband or man as the “head” of the house. It is a great deal for men yet not so great for women.
Many women and girls have not been treated well (understatement) in families, churches and societies that shape themselves around the concept of male headship. Within the male-as-head systems women are diminished and the harm done to them often goes unreported or ignored. How many news stories are there about women and girls reporting their mistreatment only to have it ignored? How many women are walking around with some unspeakable story of mistreatment and refuse to say anything. Not because they don't have the truth on their side. But because they have seen and heard other women who spoke up and told their awful story only to have it ignored or criticized. Point is, just like in Paul’s time, the whole men being the “head” of the house works great for men and horrible for women.
Years ago, while serving as a church minister, a mission trip to Mexico was being planned. The plan was to go to Juárez Mexico and build a home for a family with a mission group call Casas por Cristo. Unknown to me at the time was a woman at the church who really wanted to go. She was at the church almost every time the doors were open. She gave her money, time, talent, and energy to all kinds of church related events and activities. She felt that God was tugging at her heart to go on the Mexico mission trip. When she expressed her desire to go to her husband, he said no. It was too dangerous he felt. Her comment was "Well, he is the head of the house." I found that sad. By the way, at no time was anyone in our group ever in danger from anyone in Juárez. I don't offer this story as being critical or judgmental of their marriage. It is their marriage. It does seem like a good opportunity was missed for their potential growth into becoming who they otherwise never would have been.
The terms complementarianism and egalitarianism have come to define opposing camps of thought offering views on the topic of submission. I will not solve that debate here. I will say that I believe that marriage is about becoming the person you otherwise never would have been. Marriage is about creating the space for you and your spouse to fully thrive. Within the men-as-head of household system, how can women thrive when it is assumed they are never going to be an equal partner. Recent books such as Jesus and John Wayne by Kristin Kobes Du Mez offer the sad tale of suffering caused to women and society in general when systems are geared towards male headship. There is much more to say yet my hope is that in reading this you might consider or reconsider the nature of your relationships so that you might become who you otherwise never would have been.
Comments
Post a Comment