The love of a husband—a reflection of Christ’s love (Ephesians 5:22–33)
Introduction
Last Wednesday, November 3, is one of the happiest days of my life. On that night, the woman I have loved and pursued, Rita, accepted the love I so ardently offered, and gave me her own heart to hold and cherish and guard. It was a glorious night, full of joy and love. And yet if I am to truly walk in the way of the Lord, this love that was given to me has certain responsibilities attached to it. But if my love be true and pleasing before the Lord, then these “responsibilites” are not so much hinderances or duties, but true manifestations and expressions of love, as first expressed by the Author of love Himself, our Lord God.
The charge to lead
Turn with me to Ephesians 5:22–24, one of the most controversial passages in the Bible today. Here, wives are called to submit to their husbands just as the church submits to Christ. Why? Because as Paul pointed out, husbands are to be the head of the wife just as Christ is head of the church, which is His body. There cannot be two heads in a family. Otherwise, the family will be torn apart.
But the head cannot make a decision without input from the body. And the head cannot decide only for itself, apart from the body. Whatever happens to the body happens to the head, and if the head were to be the sole center of decision-making, then the head is responsible for whatever happens to the body. The head enjoys all the good that happens to the body, and suffers with the body all calamities that come to it. Thus, as this passage calls wives to submit to their husbands as an act of obedience to Christ, so also does this passage calls husbands to step up and be the leaders that God called them to be. If wives are to follow their husbands, is it not only expected that husbands should be followable? Is it not only right that husbands should be respectable, decisive, and able to look after the well-being, fulfillment and overall holiness of his wife and children? If the wife is called on to trust the husband to make decisions for her and her family, then the husband is called to be worthy of that trust.
But is this whole submission issue just a matter of duty and responsibility? I remember one lady speaker at a forum who presented a Christian feminist view of the story of Mary and Martha. When she was asked, “Don’t you, as a woman with feminist beliefs, find it hard to submit to your husband?” She answered, “I have seen my husband stand by me when I was at my worst. He took on all my arguings, my whining, and my unreasonableness, and still he stood by me. On top of this, he said that he loved me so much he would take a cannonball for me, and I know he would. Because of such great love, I cannot help but submit to him. I think any sane woman would gladly submit to a man like that.” And a man like that is a man who striving to be like Christ.
The call to be like Christ
If the wife is called to submit to the husband as an act of obedience to Christ, the husband is called to love his wife as Christ loved the Church. And how did Christ love the Church? He gave Himself up for her, the greatest expression of which is the Cross. Christ died for the Church so that she may be cleansed of her sin, cleansed of her shame, and made holy to enable her to be with her Bridegroom. He gave her His Word that she may be able to follow Him. He came to earth and spent His life that she may become the people He inteded her to be.
In the same way, husbands should love their wives so much that he would lay down his life for her. To the extreme, he is to die in her place should it come to that. If not, then he is to live his life devoted to his wife’s good. He should be the spiritual leader, making sure that she is growing in knowledge and relationship with the Lord. He should be able to teach her the Truth that would make her more and more into the image of Christ. He should strive to make her more pure, more righteous, more holy. And, possibly more painfully, he should nurture her to the point that she loves Christ more than she loves him. The husband should seek to lovingly correct his wife of her faults, so that none may find fault with her, and praise her for her good traits. But to do all this, the husband may be called upon to give up his ambitions, his dreams, his aspirations, even his lifestyle, so as to better care for his wife and make her happy.
The call to provide and nurture
Christ, as Head, cares for His Body, the Church. He feeds her with His Word and His riches. He provides for her every need, as we have seen in our church here. He gives her guidance as to what He wants her to do, that she may reach her full potential and be a glorious reflection of Christ here on earth, to be a channel of His love to the lost.
In the same way, the husband should care for the needs and desires of his wife, as if he were caring for himself. He should see to her every need—physical, emotional, spiritual, intellectual. He should support her in her pursuit of her dreams, that she may feel fulfilled as a person and as a child of God. When he does all these, she will be a gloriously beautiful reflection of himself, and moreso of God. In a profound way, this fulfills Genesis 2:24, for the condition of the wife and the family is a reflection of the character of the husband, just as the condition of the Church is a reflection of the Christ who saved her and brought her to Himself.
A living parable
You may be wondering why I speak of husbands and wives when I am just a boyfriend. It is because to me, a boyfriend is a husband in training, just as a girlfriend is a wife in training. For what is the point of being a boyfriend and having a girlfriend if I do not have marriage in mind for her? To think anything less is to make a mockery, a plaything, out of one of the most beautiful gifts given by God to us humans: romantic love. The courtship stage is a period where Rita and I explore the possibility of being married to one another, and thus we strive to know each other ever so deeply whenever we are together. We seek to build a deep friendship that would be the foundation of our love, so that when the fires of passion have cooled, we would still want to be with each other because we are the closest of friends. And above all, we seek to know God more deeply, for He is the author and perfecter not only of our faith, but also of our relationship that would glorify His name before all the world.
I speak of this in the Spirit of God because I follow Christ. And if I were to love this wonderful daughter of the Father, then I must seek to become more like His Son Jesus. He has set for me the standard of Ephesians 5:22-33, and by His grace I will be up to that standard. And thus far, God has given me a love for her of such passion and intensity that I would be eternally grateful for the privilege of laying down my life to see that she be happy, fulfilled and well cared for. This relationship that God has given to us would be a reflection of God’s love to us and of our love for Him, and of how He loves each and every one of us.
Challenge
Brothers and sisters, especially brothers, God calls us to become more like His Son, Jesus Christ, especially in our relationships with our wives and girlfreinds, as the case may be. Sisters, God calls you not to blind and mindless obedience, but to supportive and loving submission to your husbands and boyfriends—as the case may be—as your act of obedience to the Lord. To those of you who are waiting and looking for that significant other to be given to you, look to Jesus and how He loves you. May His love for the church be the standard by which we love one another, not just as romantic partners, but as brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ.
there is no getting around the fact that the love for submission proposition is sexist, no matter how "loving" is made to seem like it entails more effort and sacrifice than "submitting." after all, why shouldn't women be called to love and men to submit? or ideally, why can't both be called to love each other and to submit to the interests of the partnership or the family. this, of course, would be impossible if our whole theory of relationships is based on a biological analogy in which men are the head and women are just bodies. once you start with that proposition, there really is no way of making the framework sympathetic to gender egalitarian frameworks, much less feminist ones. after all, the body-head connection is a relationship of unequal power. cut off half your body or replace one or two key organs, and you'd still be the person you are. cut off your head and you're dead.
ReplyDeletenow i'm not arguing that the head shouldn't rule. that is its function. i'm arguing that the analogy to male-female relationships is questionable, even if it's in the Bible. If it's a direct quote from Jesus, I might think twice--or quit Christianity altogether. But it's a Paulinian ideal, and as such needs to be evaluated through the lens of its own socio-cultural context. the head-body analogy only makes sense in societies where the interests of the man coincide perfectly with the interests of the partnership and/or the family. in societies where it is possible for women to have just as much or even more education and earning potential than their husbands, then allowing husbands to play head would be detrimental to the welfare of the entire organism that is the marriage or the family. we need to modify the analogy from St. Paul or ditch it altogether. i'm not taking any relationship advice from an unmarried apostle who says it's best to be single and that men should only get married if they can't live without sex.
@Nathan: This is assuming that the feminist/egalitarian world-view is more correct than the Biblical world-view... that parts of the Bible should be accepted or rejected insofar as they coincide with another paradigm.
ReplyDeleteFor some of us, we'd rather do the opposite.
Also, if one believes that Paul speaks for Christ as Christ's apostle through revelation (and especially the apostle who does make a distinction over what "he" says and what "the Lord" says), there really should be no question as to who is more credible. Jesus had a 3-year ministry, Paul had at least 2 decades... if Paul wrote more it's because he had the time (and people did not have word processors back then to make them more prolific).
Paul used an analogy... as all analogies go, it will always break down at some point. When Christ says he was a door, you don't look for a doorknob... and you don't assume he just opens up to something else. He says he is the way... one doesn't go ahead making proverbs about how Christ is like asphalt... or worse, that he only leads to something else.
To ditch Paul's advice on relationships just because he was a "single man" is just as, um, short-sighted as assuming Val knew nothing about relationships when he was single... and magically had something to say only when he now has Rita.
Besides, you have oversimplified and taken out of context Paul's "relationship advice". One can, similarly, oversimplify and take out of context his admonitions to "submit to authorities" (there goes your civil disobedience) and "children submit to your parents" (and, consequently, enumerate all Dickensian evils).
@Val: still happy for you, mate.
If upholding the differences between men and women all the while maintaining equality--given that equality does not mean sameness--is sexist, then yes, I am sexist. And proudly so.
ReplyDeleteAnd it is in the recognition that men derive their self-worth in being able while women derive their self-worth from belongingness, that such admonitions to respect husbands and to love wives exist.Actually, in verse 22, there is the command to submit to one another. So mutual submission is commanded. However, submission is different for men and women just as men are different from women. For a man, their version of submission is to give up his own interests and to live his life devoted to the welfare of his wife and children. Though he is called to lead, his life is no longer his own. For a woman, her call is to give up her independence, trusting and supporting her husband as he leads the family.
Why shouldn't the man be called to submit? Because if he does so, he loses respect for himself in his own eyes as well as those of his spouse and children. He becomes less of a man, and a shell of what he once was of could have been. Also, I've yet to find a woman who would respect a submissive man. Why shouldn't a woman be called to love? Why reinvent the wheel? Selfless love is a natural capability of women, as evidenced by mothers caring for their children.
If the basis of authority (which, in the eyes of Paul is a matter of function, not superiority in value) is to be education and the capability to create wealth, then on a larger scale we should not begrudge those who are rich and educated if they so decide to run society, and the masses who have little or no education and/or wealth have no say. The proposition that women SHOULD be given authority over the home simply because she is the breadwinner and the intellectual superior is not egalitarianism, but survival of the fittest. What is proposed as a more enlightened way of thinking is actually a re-presentation of the law of the jungle.
Re: Paul the single, there are those who say that you cannot be a Pharisee without being married. Thus, Paul would have been either a widower, or was divorced by his wife because of his faith in Christ. Given this, from a practical point of view, he knows what he's talking about.
Being politically incorrect is a liberating thing, sometimes. :)
ReplyDeleteI agree, Ian... in fact, the entire "submission=oppression" argument has become really tiresome of late. I know of so many women who have submitted willingly to their husbands coming out as more powerful and more influential in the home than their more "feminist" counterparts (who spend so much time fighting for their rights that they don't have the time or the energy to actually be powerful and influential).
ReplyDeleteBut what really galls me that even Christians would go and spout the secular world view as "fact" which the spiritual world view either has to agree with or be rejected. What makes the "secular world view" more credible (this is assuming that there is just one "secular world view").
In the end, we must choose to whom we are fully obedient to; if the Bible says deny yourself and if submitting to another solely because of gender or authority entails that, we should do it gladly. It should be my ideology that should submit to the will of God, and not the other way around.