About the Author
Aaron P. Debusschere is the husband of one and father of three. He holds degrees in philosophy, theology, and education, and is currently completing a dissertation on the Augustinian roots of Vatican II’s ecclesiology. He blogs with his wife at The Romantic Catholic.
The Cross of Marriage: The Centrality of the Cross in Paul’s Household Code
The most profound reflection on marriage found in Scripture is, at the same time, the most detested in our modern age. Perhaps this is because our world sees marriage as outdated, or it sees the ideal as unattainable, or perhaps it is simply that the world is comfortable in its pursuit of pleasure and doesn’t like suffering. Almost certainly it is because the world’s infernal puppet master recognises the great dignity of marriage as a sign of the Cross and seeks to suppress it. If for no other reason, this should be enough for us to seek a restoration of, and reappreciation for, the great sacrament of marriage. This begins with a proper understanding of Paul’s own reflection on marriage in chapter five of his letter to the Ephesians.
The passage in English lectionaries typically begins with either the command, “be subject to one another in fear of Christ” in verse 21, or the alternative command, “wives be subject to your husbands” in verse 22 (Unless otherwise noted, all passages from the New Testament are the author’s own translations of Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th ed). Because no one these days is fond of the suggestion that a woman be subject to any man, let alone her husband, the new lectionary permits the reader to leave out verses 21 to 24 so that the text begins with “husbands, love your wives.” This shorter version likewise cuts out the last verse, which says that “you likewise also, each in this way is to love his wife as himself, but a woman should fear her husband.”
The concern is that women will get in a huff over the command that they be subordinate to men, something the feminist movement has long fought against. The problem, however, is that Paul is misunderstood, and the passage becomes addressed only to men with the command to die for their wives, while the women are left with no responsibilities. But what Paul sees in Christian marriage is neither a one-sided domination of man over woman, nor a one-sided sacrifice of man for woman; rather, he sees the economy of salvation played out in miniature, at the heart of which is the Cross.
In order to see this connection, we need to take a step back and see how Paul’s “household code” fits into the context of the letter as a whole. In typical Pauline fashion, Ephesians is arranged into two parts: the first is a narrative section that presents the good news of salvation with a special emphasis on unity; the second section is an exhortation to live a life worthy of that gospel.
The gospel Paul proclaims to the Ephesians focuses on the unity of the community, the whole Church, and even all creation in Christ. He begins by presenting a description of the wise plan of God, literally the “economy” of God, from before creation “to recapitulate all things in Christ” (1:10). Two things here are important to remember. First, the Greek word “economy” (oikonomia) is derived from the word for “household” (oikos); in Paul’s context, “economy” meant simply “household management,” so God’s plan is nothing other than the management of His household. Second, “to recapitulate” is not simply to summarise or bring everything together, but to restore the head. So, God manages His household by placing Christ as head over all things. This is what the Catechism refers to as the “economy of salvation.”
Paul goes on. God’s economy was previously hidden, it was a mystery, but it is now revealed by the Holy Spirit to the apostles and the prophets (3:5, 9). This economy of recapitulation was accomplished when the Father raised Christ from the dead, “subjected all things under His feet and gave Him as head over all things to the Church, which is His body” (1:22–23a). Thus, it is God who has made all things subject to Christ. The Gentiles who were once far off have been brought near “in the blood of Christ” (2:13) and “in His flesh” (2:14) made one with the Jews “into one new man, making peace, and reconciled again both, in one body, with God through the Cross” (2:15b–16a). This is Paul’s insight into “the mystery of Christ” (3:4), which he seeks to share with the Ephesians, that “the Gentiles [are] to be coheirs and comembers and coparticipants of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (3:6). But the instrument by which this union in Christ is accomplished is the Cross.
Therefore, Paul exhorts the Ephesians to bear “one another in love, striving to maintain the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace” (4:2b–3). We are united by the one Spirit through one faith and one baptism into one body, but there are many members, each with his or her own gifts, roles, and duties. All of these different parts of the body must fulfill their proper functions so that, by “speaking truth in love, we will grow all things into Him, who is the head, Christ, from whom all the body being fitted and brought together, through the provision of all joints according to the activity in measure of each part, growth of the body is made unto the edification of itself in love” (4:15–16). So, “walk in love,” says Paul, “even as Christ loved us and gave Himself over for us” (5:2a), and “be filled in spirit . . . being subject to one another in fear of Christ” (5:18b, 21).
At this point Paul sets out to show how each part of the household supports the edification of the whole in love, beginning with wives and husbands, then children and parents, and finally slaves and masters. In each of these three relationships there is a person in authority and another who is subject. Interestingly, however, Paul speaks differently of wives in this regard than he does children or slaves. He commands children to obey their parents and slaves to obey their masters, but there is no command for wives to obey their husbands. Rather, a wife should fear her husband, being subject to him, “for man is head of the wife as also Christ is head of the Church” (23a).
Now recall what we said previously about God recapitulating all things in Christ, that is, making Him head over God’s household. Recall also that this was accomplished by God making all things subject to Christ and giving Him as head of the household to the Church. Paul is setting up a parallel between the household of God and the Christian family. In marriage, God sets a man as head over a household and gives him to his wife, while the wife is made subject to her husband as his body. A husband, therefore, stands in persona Christi toward his wife and the whole household and is to be, like Christ, “himself saviour of the body” (23b).
At this point it is important to mention that some try to argue that because verse 21 says “being subject to one another in fear of Christ,” it must be the case that a husband and wife must be mutually subject one to the other, an idea often referred to as “mutual submission.” The popular view is that traditional hierarchies are not applicable to Christian households, since Galatians tells us that “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (3:28 , from the Revised Standard Version translation). In such a view, a man must be subject to his wife in all things just as she is subject to him in all things. This interpretation serves to ameliorate the discomfort that any form of hierarchy causes to modern man, who prizes liberal egalitarianism as the ultimate ideal; it is, then, no surprise that “mutual submission” only came into vogue in the nineteenth century, when Europe was shaking off the shackles of both the monarchy and the authority of the Church.
But such a definition conflates submission with being subject. Submission is a free act, a choice to follow the will of another, to hand oneself over to the other. To be subject, however, is simply the state of one being under another’s authority by virtue of their respective social roles. There is certainly a place in marriage for mutual submission in this sense, but to be mutually subject is incoherent.
Every other use of the verb “to be subject” in the New Testament refers to obedience to those in authority with no possibility for a mutual subjection. Rather, it denotes a ranked order. A citizen is subject to the king, which necessarily precludes the possibility of the king being subject to the citizen; yet both the king and the citizen are free to submit or not submit to the other. The Church is subject to Christ, never having authority over him; yet Christ freely submits himself to her and washes the feet of his disciples. In Paul’s presentation of Christian marriage, a wife is subject to her husband, which would necessarily preclude the husband being subject to her, while still allowing his free submission to his wife when fitting.
But Paul does say “being subject to one another” (5:21) What are we to make of this? It should be noted that this phrase is immediately followed by “the women to their husbands as to the Lord” (5:22), with no such command for husbands to be subject in turn; rather, the only command for the husband is to love his wife. The following command for children and then slaves to obey those in authority over them are further instances of “being subject to one another,” which would leave us with an interpretation of verse 21 as “being subject to others,” or more specifically, “being subject to those in authority over us.”
This interpretation is supported by the command to be subject found elsewhere in Paul’s writings, applied in some places to wives or slaves, and in other places to all Christians. If it were the case that Paul required husbands to be at all subject to their wives in Ephesians 5, he would be saying the direct opposite in I Timothy 2:12 where he permits no woman “to have authority over men,” which would necessarily be the case if a husband were subject to his wife. Paul is even more explicit in I Corinthians 11:2, where he presents a hierarchy of headship from God down to the wife, for “the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God” (from the Revised Standard Version translation).
By appealing back to the creation of Adam and Eve, Paul provides the reason for this hierarchy. In I Corinthians 11:7–9 he states, “a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.)” (from the Revised Standard Version translation). Thus, the hierarchy of a husband over his wife has its foundation in the natural order of creation, not in mere cultural norms. Adam was created first and tasked with the care of creation, while Eve was created from his flesh and bone to be his helpmate. We might say that God made Adam the steward of God’s household, which necessarily included Eve, even though, as his own flesh, she acted as his helpmate.
Finally, in his letter to the Romans, Paul states most explicitly to whom and why we are to be subject: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment” (13:1–2 from the Revised Standard Version translation).
Thus, the authority of a man over his wife is instituted by God and revealed in the creation of man and woman. For a woman to resist her husband’s authority—that is, to refuse to submit to him—would be to resist the will of God. There is a divinely instituted order within the household; yet, as Paul pointed out above, each member needs the others, no one independent of the whole. The various members, each according to his or her proper role, work together in the household as members of a body, “unto the edification of itself in love” (Ephesians 4:16). The household code in Ephesians thus sets up the model of the divine economy to be replicated in the home, the authority of the husband being from God himself, “from whom all paternity in the heavens and on earth are named” (Ephesians 3:15).
We can now return to where we left off in verse 23 with the husband being “himself saviour of the body.” If Paul’s analogy is to stand, then it must be the case that a husband saves his wife in a manner analogous to that of Christ. It is certainly not the case that a husband can obtain her salvation in the same way, but he may do so in an analogous way. Verses 25 through 27 clarify how this can be. Men are commanded to love their wives “even as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself over for her, that He might sanctify her, . . . that He may present to Himself the Church glorified, . . . that she may be holy and blameless.” If we replace Christ and the Church with the husband and wife, we get the following: “as the husband loved his wife and gave himself over for her, that he might sanctify her, that he may present to Christ his bride glorified, that she may be holy and blameless.”
When Paul says that Christ “gave Himself over for her, that He might sanctify her,” he is recalling verse 2, which states, “also walk in love, even as Christ loved us and gave Himself over for us, an offering and sacrifice to God unto a fragrant aroma.” If Christ gave Himself over as a sacrifice, so must a man give himself over for his bride. Like Christ, he must “empty himself, taking the form of a servant” (Philippians 2:7), his entire life being offered as a sacrifice, even unto death on a cross, so that her purity, her sanctity may be assured. Just as Adam failed in his duty to preserve Eve from the snares of the serpent, so also if a man’s wife does not attain salvation, he has failed in his duty as her husband.
Thus, a man may be the head of the household, he may have authority over his wife, but authority is for the sake of service, and the service required is one of a priest-victim. A man’s headship cannot be separated from suffering. Authority without the Cross is tyranny.
It may be useful at this point to mention Jewish marriage rituals, which took place in two phases. First was the betrothal wherein the spouses legally contracted the marriage, at which point they already fully belonged to each other. After the betrothal, the bridegroom would go to prepare his house for the bride, leaving her under the watchful care of a friend. This “friend of the bridegroom” was tasked with preparing the bride, preserving her virginal fidelity, and presenting her to the bridegroom upon his return. When all was prepared, the bridegroom would return for the marriage celebration and then take the bride to the place prepared for her. While in verse 27 Christ presents His bride to Himself, by analogy, a man is to present his own bride to Christ. Just as Christ was placed as head over God’s household, so was the Christian man placed over a portion of God’s household; he is but the steward of God’s goods. He stands, then, as a friend of the true Bridegroom, Christ, for whom he is to preserve his wife’s purity and fidelity, and to whom he will have to present his bride on the last day.
The husband’s stewardship of God’s goods ties into the next verse, where Paul indicates that in the same way that Christ loves the Church, “so also husbands are bound” (5:28a). The verb used for “bound” implies a moral obligation to repay a debt. The love Paul commands, then, is not simply a lofty ideal that one can aim for but is okay to miss, neither is it simply a way for Paul to “baptise” the pagan household hierarchy; rather, this love is a matter of justice. The husband has a debt to pay.
If the debt were owed to his wife, it would presumably be on account of her being subject to him, which would entail a debt dependent on the wife’s prior act of subjection. But we already made clear that it is God and not the wife who makes her subject to her husband. Therefore, the debt is independent of the wife’s actions and appears instead dependent on Christ’s love for the Church, which is prior to any act of the Church. Further, if a husband is tasked with preserving the purity of his wife, and if his wife is the bride of Christ by virtue of being a member of the Church, then the husband stands as the “friend of the Bridegroom.” In this case, the husband most certainly has a moral obligation toward Christ, who entrusted his bride to him, and toward God, who has made her subject to him in marriage.
Paul returns to the image of head and body, noting that the debt of love is akin to the love one has for his own body. “No one ever hated his flesh, but he nourishes and warms it” (29). The verb “to warm” refers to the tenderness of a mother, specifically that of a mother bird who faithfully cares for her eggs, warming them until they hatch. A husband’s love for his wife, then, is naturally tender. If a man does not tenderly cherish his wife, he does not fulfill the law of nature, let alone the law of love.
Finally, we approach the climax of the text. Christ cares for the Church as His own body, nourishing it and warming it, “for we are members of his body” (5:30), and the Byzantine text continues, “from his flesh and from his bone” (5:30b). Brought together into one “in his flesh” (2:14), like the woman created from Adam’s rib, the Church is Christ’s body, “from his flesh and from his bone.” Thus, the spousal relationship of Christ and the Church is seen to be prefigured in Adam and Eve. For which reason Paul continues in verse 31, “Therefore, a man leaves behind father and mother and will cleave to his wife, and they will be two in one flesh.”
In Genesis 2, this verse presents being “two in one flesh” as the purpose of marriage. But Paul reverses the order of causality. The unity of Christian marriage is not rooted in Eve being drawn out of Adam, but in the Church being drawn out of Christ, “from his flesh and from his bone” (30b). The two become one flesh in marriage, because they are already members of one body in Christ. For Paul, being two in one flesh in Christ is the source of Christian marriage. And where was the Church drawn out of Christ’s sleeping side but on the Cross!
Paul does not stop there. He continues with verse 32, “this is the great mystery, but I speak in Christ and in the Church.” While Genesis reveals the unity in one flesh as the purpose of marriage, Paul elevates the spousal union by applying it to the Christ-Church relationship, thereby giving a new meaning to Christian marriage. In Christ, unity in one flesh remains the natural end of marriage, but also becomes its supernatural cause. The physical union of Christian spouses is sealed, so to speak, by their membership in Christ’s own body. The original meaning of Genesis 2:24 therefore remains applicable to every human marriage, but the example of Christ’s love for the Church is now to be imitated, being itself a richer source for spousal unity, a unity most intimate, being a physical union “in one flesh,” rooted in the unity of Christ, and no mere social contract. This intimate spousal union is true of both human marriage and the Christ-Church relationship, the former being an image of the latter, and the latter now a model for the former; therefore, “you likewise also, each in this way, is to love his wife as himself” (33a).
Paul’s final phrase that “a woman should fear her husband” (33b) returns to verse 21, “being subject to one another in fear of Christ.” As the Church, being subject to Christ, is to fear Christ, so the wife, being subject to her husband, is to fear her husband. Given the tender and maternal affection by which Paul has described the love of Christ and the Christian husband, it is clear that a wife—and the Church—is not to fear her husband as a tyrant who will strike at the least offence, but as a tender lover whom she would hate to offend. This is the same fear that is the beginning of wisdom (Proverbs 9:10), to which Paul exhorts the Ephesians in 5:15. It is a fear that seeks to please and fulfill the other’s desires not for the sake of one’s own preservation, but for the sake of the other’s delight. Such a fear is itself rooted in love for the other and is the fitting manifestation of Christian love on the part of the subject toward those in authority. Thus, as the husband is to imitate the example of Christ in loving his wife, so is the wife to imitate the Church in fearing her husband.
Now, even if all this is what Paul meant, why should this hierarchically ordered view of marriage remain relevant in a modern egalitarian society? For three reasons. First, Paul presented the love of Christ and his Church as the source, model, and archetype of Christian marriage. Unlike ancient household codes, the relationship of Christ and the Church is not dependent on any time or place, but endures into eternity; for this reason, it remains always and everywhere the source, model, and archetype of Christian marriage. Second, just as Christ justified his perennial rule for the indissolubility of marriage by appealing to the beginning, so did Paul justify the hierarchical order of marriage by appealing to the beginning. Humanity in Genesis 2 had not yet fallen, so the hierarchical order of man and woman in marriage cannot be attributed to a fallen world, but to God-created human nature. It is in this natural ordering of man and woman that spousal love continues to signify and realize the love of Christ and the Church. Third, Paul indicates that the authority of a man over his wife is a divine institution and the subjection of a woman to her husband is a divine command. This is no mere social construct or cultural norm, but the divine law—which is never dependent on time or place but remains ever relevant to human society. For these three reasons, it is necessary even in an egalitarian society for wives to be subject to their husbands and husbands to love their wives.
This is all well and good, but what use is an abstract theory if it is not accompanied by a practical application? It remains necessary, then, to provide some indications of what an ordered spousal love would look like in the real world.
First, wives are to be subject “to their husbands in all things.” This implies obedience to the husband in all things. This means carrying out all his commands and fulfilling his will in all things. Yet, a wife cannot obey her husband if her husband does not exercise his authority, so “being subject” is necessarily dependent on the actions of her husband. Further, “in all things” makes many a wife nervous; what if he commands her to sin? Is she still bound to obey him? Certainly not. Verse 21 reads “being subject to one another in fear of Christ.” The husband must also, then, exercise his authority in fear of Christ. It is to God that he owes the debt, and it is God’s authority that he wields. For these reasons and because the husband’s authority is ordered toward the common good of the household and the sanctification of his spouse, his authority does not extend to requiring sin.
Certainly, one liberating quality of Paul’s household code is that he acknowledges the moral agency of those subject to authority, something not recognized by the pagan codes. Thus, a husband cannot force a wife to act contrary to her conscience, but she must remain free to obey him out of love for him and fear of Christ. A wife should always use caution, however, when considering disobedience toward her husband. No exceptional case can overturn the law and no misuse of authority can revoke that authority.
Paul also requires that “a woman should fear her husband” (Ephesians 5:33), which we explained above indicates a requisite desire to please her husband “in all things” out of love for him. This is again dependent on the interests and desires of the husband and is open to the discretion of the wife, while limited by morality. It may be so simple as making his favorite meals or hiding a love note in his lunch bag, or it may be something much more elaborate. Particular actions can only be determined by the circumstances of the spouses and not by any universal rule. What is important is acting out of love for her husband rather than in her own self-interest.
Finally, since Paul appeals to the creation of man and woman, we may reflect on what it means for the wife to be her husband’s helpmate. Just as Eve was tasked with helping Adam care for God’s household, so is a wife tasked with helping her husband care for the household entrusted to him. As helpmate, she serves the common good of the home under the direction of her husband, supporting him and assisting him in his mission. This mission has two ends: the natural end denoted by the natural household economy and the supernatural end of accomplishing God’s economy within the household. The wife, then, supports and assists her husband both in the ordinary duty of managing the household and in the extraordinary duty of pursuing holiness and raising their children in faith. Because grace builds on nature and does not overthrow it, the extraordinary duties cannot interfere with the household economy. Thus, ensuring the children are fed takes precedence over extra times of prayer; yet extra times of prayer may be added when the ordinary duties are met.
Complementarily to the wife, a husband is to have authority over his wife in all things. Tasked with the care of the household on Christ’s behalf, the husband’s authority is directed to the common good of the household. The husband must, then, exercise his authority in governing the household, providing order and direction to his wife and children, but he must exercise it reasonably. He cannot expect unreasonable demands to be met, wherefore they must be in accordance with the common good and, therefore, right morality, as well as the wife’s own natural duties and capabilities. Neither ought he delegate to his wife those tasks which are his proper duty or for which he is most capable, particularly those tasks of governing, teaching, and sanctifying the family, though she may assist him in their fulfilment.
Paul’s precept for husbands is specifically that they love their wives, but he provides several examples from Christ explaining what form that love takes. The love of a husband is sacrificial and directed toward his wife’s preservation, sanctification, and glorification. Her preservation pertains to the husband’s duty to nourish and care for his spouse with tender affection, ensuring all her needs are met in the natural order. This requires providing her with food, clothing, shelter, and protection as part of the ordinary household economy.
As head of the household, the husband also has a role in sanctifying his wife. This does not mean he is the source of her sanctification, but simply that he serves as its instrumental cause. He does this by ensuring her spiritual needs are met through the sacraments, regular prayer, and education in right doctrine, while also preserving her from near occasions of sin and the snares of the enemy.
Finally, just as Christ desires to “present to himself the Church glorified” (Ephesians 5:27), so is it natural for a husband to desire his own wife to be glorified; by this we refer to her beauty and joy. As such, a husband who loves his wife as Christ would seek to please and delight her and adorn her with beautiful gifts. As was the case for wives seeking to please their husbands in all things, the fulfillment of a husband’s desire to please his wife is dependent on the spouses themselves and cannot be defined as a rule beyond what is already dictated by the moral law. What is most important is the loving service of one spouse for the sake of the other.
In this way there remains some room for a kind of “mutual submission” of spouses. Not the mutual subjection so often advocated today, but the kind of mutual submission taught by Christ and the Church Fathers, a mutual submission that takes the form of the Cross. Such a mutual submission in marriage would entail reciprocal loving service within the natural and divinely ordained familial structure. By fulfilling his or her proper duties, each member of the Christian household seeks to selflessly serve the others and the common good, whereby the whole household works “unto the edification of itself in love” (Ephesians 4:16).
Unless otherwise noted, all passages from the New Testament are the author’s own translations of Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th ed. (Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012), available online at https://www.academic -bible.com/en/online-bibles/novum-testamentum-graece-na-28/read-the-bible-text/.
Leave a Reply