The Bride of Christ : a problematic wedding - Ephesians 5:22-33

Abstract

The passage in Ephesians that compares the union of husband and wife to that of Christ and the church is a favorite ecclesial image, yet it has always been problematic. It is not clear what is the intended function of the household codes, and this passage in particular is open to a variety of misinterpretations. The effects of the way in which simile and metaphor function in the passage extend beyond ecclesiology in ways that suit certain interests. A feminist analysis indicates some interpretive mistakes and suggests some criteria for approaching this beautiful but dangerous text.

**********

This is not the first time I have spoken or written on this text. In one talk a few years ago, I brought in my critique of the negative effect that the passage has had on church life, which led one reporter to entitle an article: "Biblical scholar raps Bride of Christ"!

We are confronted with a formidable text, formidable not only because of the layers of associations and feelings it evokes, but also because of its complexity and the importance it has had in the church's understanding of itself (not: herself, which is one of the less felicitous effects). If we employ a hermeneutic of suspicion, there is plenty to be suspicious about, as witnessed by the blank stares of women when I tell them I am working on this text.

I want to consider this very influential passage in Ephesians first from the perspective of its historical and social context, then in light of its literary genre, and finally from the perspective of ecclesiology, in every case withm a feminist framework of interpretation. There is by now no such thing as a uniform or even standard feminist hermeneutic. In every area of biblical interpretation--whether historical-critical or literary--feminist scholars, by no means all female, are creating a network of feminist scholarship marked by a variety of approaches. What I think most of them have in common, and what is the basis of my own investigation here, is analysis and critique of how engendered power works, with a view ultimately toward the restructuring of society--including church--into a more just and equal distribution of power. Needless to say, I do not consider power itself something evil or to be avoided, but rather a necessary component of any human interaction, one that will enter into the dynamic of human exchange, whether with conscious intention or not.

In the current Roman lectionary our reading occurs on one Sunday (twenty-first of the year) and one weekday (Tuesday of the thirtieth week), and it is an optional Second Testament reading for marriages. In the readings for marriages, we are given a long form and a short form. The short form omits Ephesians 5:22-23, 33, those verses that contain submission of wife to husband. Both long and short readings introduce the passage with Ephesians 5:2a: "Follow the way of love, even as Christ loved you. He gave himself up for us" (omitting the sacrificial aspect of Ephesians 5:2b: "as an offering to God, a gift of pleasing fragrance"). From there the lectionary reading jumps to 5:21: "Defer to one another out of reverence for Christ." My parish priest friends tell me that almost no couples choose either the long or the short version of that reading, though a prospective groom will occasionally joke about it (e.g., "I'd like to choose it, but I value my life"). But the reading has already had its effect, and of course, in some conservative Christian traditions today, the structure of relationships within it is taken quite seriously.

A Place for Everything and Everything in Its Place: The Household Code

I begin with what I know best, and what has continued to fascinate me for some time. I will not enter into arguments pro and con Pauline authorship of the letter. In my opinion, that conversation was finished some time ago. Most scholars today would say that the Letter to the Ephesians was written by a disciple or imitator of Paul using Pauline ideas and images, but taking them beyond Paul's own thinking. Nor will I enter into a discussion of whether or not the historical Paul, or the author of Ephesians, was a chauvinist. In such discussions we inevitably judge ancient persons by modern standards, which is not fair. What I do want to argue, though, is that the author of Ephesians has read Paul well, and has combined several Pauline themes into a new configuration under the guiding theme of the hieros gamos, or sacred marriage. But more on that later.

The household code (translation of the original German name Haustafel or "household table") is a description of mutual relationships within a household. The usual dyads, as here, are wife-husband, children-fathers, and slaves-masters. Thus six roles in three relationships are discussed, though of course, only four actual groups of people are involved, since husband, father, and slave owner are presumed to be the same, notwithstanding the social realities of the day: mothers, though not legally owed obedience, were just as influential in the upbringing of their children as they are today, and many women owned slaves. Because of the Greek use of masculine for generic language, modern translations are justified to translate "parents" instead of "fathers," but in the original self-consciously patriarchal context, it is very doubtful that the authority of mothers was envisioned here.