Marriage, Sex and Sexuality 9 - Eph.5:21-24

If you’ve been attending the LLF course, you’ll know that one of my deepest concerns about the whole process is the way in which the Bible is viewed and engaged with.  But it isn’t just LLF that is raising questions about the authority of the Bible to speak into and to shape the life of the Church today.  Many who call themselves evangelicals can also slip into the trap of relativizing the Scriptures – especially when confronted with a passage such as the one we are considering this week.

It’s certainly counter-cultural…  but it might be more accurate to say that it is culturally offensive.  As those shaped by a post-feminist culture, we will almost inevitably struggle to make sense of, or accept Paul’s teaching.  There are many attempts to soften, or sidestep what Paul says here, but perhaps the most common is to simply dismiss it as itself culturally limited and conditioned.  Paul is writing in a first century context, and we shouldn’t absolutize it, as if it were universally applicable to all cultures.

Whilst it might appear initially convenient, there are a number of problems with this suggestion.  Apart from the general observation that it suggests an inadequate view of the nature of the Bible as the inspired Word of God (that transcends culture, and as such critiques the culture(s) in which it is produced as much as our own), it runs into significant problems with each member of the Trinity.  Paul explicitly grounds his vision for marriage in the account of Creation and the life of humanity prior to the fall (5:31).  As such that teaching finds its genesis not in first century culture, but in the intentions of the Father for marriage displayed in a pre-fallen world.   Further, Paul taps into this deep unity between the purposes of God in creation and redemption grounding the dynamics of Christian marriage in Christ’s sacrificial love, and His giving Himself up for the Church (5:23, 25).  Finally, it loses sight of the fact that this is a way of life shaped by and enabled by the Church’s being ‘filled with the Spirit (5:18).  Far from being culturally limited, Paul’s vision for Christian marriage is expanded to cosmic proportions as it is framed by the life and purposes of the Trinity for all creation.

Do you think that this passage reflects more of the mind of the Spirit, or of Paul?  What do you think is the relationship between the Spirit and those inspired by Him in the writing of Scripture? 

Does this passage have any credibility in 21st century British culture?  Where do you think the tensions lie?  Why?

How would you define ‘submission’?  How do you think submission should feature in Christian discipleship? 

How does v.21 (‘submit to one another’) connect with the remainder of the chapter, which teaches that a wife should submit to her husband, but doesn’t seem to have a corresponding passage about husbands submitting to wives?

Why is it important that Paul qualifies the call to mutual submission with ‘out of reverence for Christ’?

Should Christians only ever use the traditional form of marriage vows?

What does Paul mean by ‘head’ (v.23)?  

What is Paul’s analogy between Christ / Church and husband / wife designed to achieve?  All analogies have limits – what are the limits of this one?

What would a Church that submitted to Christ look like?  Do you think MIE fits that description?  Looking more widely, what about the Church of England?

Why do we find it so difficult to submit to Christ?  How could we help each other to be more submissive to the Lord?