Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
Wives ,submit yourselves to your own husbands -Ephesians 5:21-23
Hello,
I shall be thankful for any clarfication on the following verses: I checked the homily of St John Chrysostom on this verse, but I did not understand it completely:
" Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior".
If husband and wife are one flesh,what exactly does "submit" mean in this instance? How does it work practically? what should the wife do (examples) so that she said to have submitted to her husband? Thanks
I shall be thankful for any clarfication on the following verses: I checked the homily of St John Chrysostom on this verse, but I did not understand it completely:
" Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior".
If husband and wife are one flesh,what exactly does "submit" mean in this instance? How does it work practically? what should the wife do (examples) so that she said to have submitted to her husband? Thanks
Comments
This is a very important passage and especially as it's "wedding season" we'll be hearing these words many times in our church. Take a look at this: http://enduringword.com/commentaries/4905.htm I think he does a very good job of summarizing what St. Paul was referring to.
Thanks,
Michael
I just read it. It sounds nice,but I have few reservations as unworthy 1, since it is not orthodox commentary.But I admit, it sounds logical.I am actually more interested in few examples as to what a wife needs to do so that there is harmony in the marriage.I know a couple who are not getting along .The husband makes use of this verse and so far a I can tell, he may taking things out of context. That is why I need an orthodox teaching to help him understand things better.
Perhaps there is something in Mark J. Edwards' Ancient Christian Commentary, New Testament VIII: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians
Here is the relevant section in Fr. Tadros Malaty's book The Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians.
Hello,
I shall be thankful for any clarfication on the following verses: I checked the homily of St John Chrysostom on this verse, but I did not understand it completely:
" Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior".
If husband and wife are one flesh,what exactly does "submit" mean in this instance? How does it work practically? what should the wife do (examples) so that she said to have submitted to her husband? Thanks
Christ gave His life for His Church. He served His Church, He died for His Church. What a lucky wife if men were to follow Christ's example at being this head.
I don't think the term "submit" means to be submissive in the English sense of the word. The term submissive has connotations of someone who is subdued or weak. I think in the context of how Christ is our head and what He has done for His Church, should be the context in which we interpret the term "submit" within the above passage.
It means if a women is blessed to have a husband that puts Christ first, she should in turn respect his (her husbands) views, even if she might not agree with him at the moment. Like if they have a disagreement she would accept his 'last say' on the matter and do as he say's. When a man puts Christ first they cannot go wrong.
I don't see any conditional statements in the verse. It doesn't say if your husband is awesome submit to him. It just says to submit to him as you do to the Lord.
[quote author=Ηεζεκιελ link=topic=11915.msg141903#msg141903 date=1311617793]
Hello,
I shall be thankful for any clarfication on the following verses: I checked the homily of St John Chrysostom on this verse, but I did not understand it completely:
" Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior".
If husband and wife are one flesh,what exactly does "submit" mean in this instance? How does it work practically? what should the wife do (examples) so that she said to have submitted to her husband? Thanks
Christ gave His life for His Church. He served His Church, He died for His Church. What a lucky wife if men were to follow Christ's example at being this head.
I don't think the term "submit" means to be submissive in the English sense of the word. The term submissive has connotations of someone who is subdued or weak. I think in the context of how Christ is our head and what He has done for His Church, should be the context in which we interpret the term "submit" within the above passage.
The woman (wife) is the weaker vessel and should be treated as such.
The wife is the weaker vessel but the onus or responsiblity is on the husband.
The wife is the weaker vessel but the onus or responsiblity is on the husband.
Oh yes, thats right we have to read the whole scripture to get the whole truth. The husband is responsible for his wife as Christ is responsible for the Church.
It is not a 'one-sided' thing. The husband has to prove himself worthy of the wife's submission. The husband must have Christ as his leader.
[quote author=Joshuaa link=topic=11915.msg143509#msg143509 date=1313962541]
The wife is the weaker vessel but the onus or responsiblity is on the husband.
Oh yes, thats right we have to read the whole scripture to get the whole truth. The husband is responsible for his wife as Christ is responsible for the Church.
It is not a 'one-sided' thing. The husband has to prove himself worthy of the wife's submission. The husband must have Christ as his leader.
(emphasis mine)
Where are you getting this from? I don't see anything in the passage to indicate that. Furthermore, we learn from the great saint (I forget her name) who is called "the mother of the poor" that no matter how awful the husband is the wife should be submissive, unless it leads her away from the faith.
Still, even though we strive to reach this level of understanding.....honestly how many of us do? And does that mean it is O.K. for the husband to treat his wife badly?? I'm sure her husband (The Mother of the Needy's) went straight to Hell! Hopefully in this instance a husband can learn the correct way to treat his wife and the wife can be saved from unnecessary abuse. And then they both can walk hand in hand through the 'Pearly Gates'.
I thought that submit meant obey. So wifes should obey their husbands. When someone obeys then they are loyal and this is a bond. A bond keeps things together. What husbands should give their wifes is respect in a way that shows caring. After all women care. I think when the husband and wife agree on resposibilities, The husband for the direction and the wife to support him, that this would be a bonding in Christ.
i saw the saint movie but it was ages ago, i don't quite remember.
it also doesn't mean that it's ok to behave like that, just that God has mercy on sinners, of whom i am chief.
actually, i think he repented towards the end.
i saw the saint movie but it was ages ago, i don't quite remember.
it also doesn't mean that it's ok to behave like that, just that God has mercy on sinners, of whom i am chief.
I remember the movie quite vividly:
His wife took him to Church after he had no where else to go and came back to her; and when he went to the Priest the Priest asked him to please leave because he (the Priest) saw something so disgusting in his (the husbands) eyes......all the evil. Of course he was sorry for all the wrong he had done when he couldn't 'get away' with it anymore. To me his repentance didn't seem full. He seemed only sorry he had finally been 'caught out'.
And really I am the worst sinner
Hello,
I shall be thankful for any clarfication on the following verses: I checked the homily of St John Chrysostom on this verse, but I did not understand it completely:
" Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior".
If husband and wife are one flesh,what exactly does "submit" mean in this instance? How does it work practically? what should the wife do (examples) so that she said to have submitted to her husband? Thanks
Hi Hezekiah,
This is Part 1 of another too long response concerning my most compelling issue. This part 1 mostly concerns background issues that require that you and most of the current Orthodox Christians are in so much darkness and confusion concerning traditional Orthodox patriarchal gender, family and marriage theology. The next post, Part 2, more directly responds to your issue.
I meant to join your discussion back when you opened it, but wasn’t able. I just reviewed the entire discussion and the seeming level of general Coptic Church ignorance of this most important issue of God Creator, Apostolic and Orthodox Patristic instructed traditional Orthodox family order and peace is embarrassingly heretical and/or deficient. Sadly, this seemingly intentionally created destructive ignorance of such a vital principle of Orthodox family order and peace seems to be only about one to two adult generations old (entirely the product of HH Pope Shenouda’s and the current Synod’s reign). A telling sign of this intentional and/or negligent general heretical mind set and philosophy throughout the Coptic hierarchy, clergy and entire education establishments is the equally sad fact that seemingly no current western Copt, nor you, has received enough basic traditional Orthodox gender, family and/or marriage theology instruction and guidance to be able to determine a reasonable understanding of St. Chrysostom’s valuable commentaries on the relevant verses of the Holy Bible. I suspect that you are able to understand the basic Orthodox message of Chrysostom’s commentary, but could not believe your understanding because of the intense demonic hegelian dialectical propagandistic promotion of anti-patriarchal feminist theology and philosophy throughout the entire Coptic Church for the past 40 years, that confused your true understanding that had not yet died completely.
This may not be precisely your situation. However, parts of these 19th century formal English translations of our Holy Father St. John Chrysostom are difficult to understand, for all of us, without great effort, a good dictionary, and several repeated readings.
Sincere, righteousness seeking women are the most pitiable victims of this heretical propaganda because demon inspired, anti-patriarchal/ feminist attractive dishonest “talking points” are designed to present false impressions and promises to that traditionally spiritually “weaker” gender. I have seen seemingly sophisticated, but obviously crude, Coptic women, in church, acting like starving, raging vicious attack animals; in order to disrupt Bible study and to prevent these self-benefiting eternal truths, from God (at creation), from being taught to and discussed by fellow parishioners and youth who had made a special trip, at night, on a weekday, to study these very important gender, family and marriage issues.
St. Chrysostom clearly explains the very important family strengthening duty that St. Paul and nearly 2000 years of Orthodox Faith has actually placed on these seemingly childishly spoiled pathetic older Coptic women. Who, except an heretical, Orthodoxy destroying hierarchy would grant more respect and authority to dedicated family and church destroying foolish older women such as these?
Based upon St. Paul’s instructions in Titus 2:3-5, St. Chrysostom defines the duties of the older women in the Orthodox Church as follows:
Ver. 3. “The aged women likewise, that they be in behavior as becometh holiness.”
That is, that in their very dress and carriage they exhibit modesty.
“Not false accusers, not given to much wine.”
For this was particularly the vice of women and of old age. For from their natural coldness at that period of life arises the desire of wine, therefore he directs his exhortation to that point, to cut off all occasion of drunkenness, wishing them to be far removed from that vice, and to escape the ridicule that attends it. For the fumes mount more easily from beneath, and the membranes (of the brain) receive the mischief from their being impaired by age, and this especially causes intoxication. Yet wine is necessary at this age, because of its weakness, but much is not required. Nor do young women require much, though for a different reason, because it kindles the flame of lust.
“Teachers of good things.”
And yet thou forbiddest a woman to teach; how dost thou command it here, when elsewhere thou sayest, “I suffer not a woman to teach”? (1 Tim. ii. 12.) But mark what he has added, “Nor to usurp authority over the man.” For at the beginning it was permitted to men to teach both men and women. But to women it is allowed to instruct by discourse at home. But they are nowhere permitted to preside, nor to extend their speech to great length, wherefore he adds, “Nor to usurp authority over the man.”
Ver. 4. “That they may teach the young women to be sober.”
Observe how he binds the people together, how he subjects the younger women to the elder. For he is not speaking there of daughters, but merely in respect of age. Let each of the elder women, he means, teach any one that is younger to be sober.
“To love their husbands.”
This is the chief point of all that is good in a household, “A man and his wife that agree together.” (Ecclus. xxv. 1.) For where this exists, there will be nothing that is unpleasant. For where the head is in harmony with the body, and there is no disagreement between them, how shall not all the other members be at peace? For when the rulers are at peace, who is there to divide and break up concord? as on the other hand, where these are ill disposed to each other, there will be no good order in the house. This then is a point of the highest importance, and of more consequence than wealth, or rank, or power, or aught else. Nor has he said merely to be at peace, but “to love their husbands.” For where love is, no discord will find admittance, far from it, other advantages too spring up.
“To love their children.” This is well added, since she who loves the root, will much more love the fruit.
“To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good.” All these spring from love. They become “good, and keepers at home,” from affection to their husbands.
“Obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”
She who despises her husband, neglects also her house; but from love springs great soberness, and all contention is done away. And if he be a Heathen, he will soon be persuaded; and if he be a Christian, he will become a better man. Seest thou the condescension of Paul? He who in everything would withdraw us from worldly concerns, here bestows his consideration upon domestic affairs. For when these are well conducted, there will be room for spiritual things, but otherwise, they too will be marred. For she who keeps at home will be also sober, she that keeps at home will be also a prudent manager, she will have no inclination for luxury, unseasonable expenses, and other such things.
“That the word of God,” he says, “be not blasphemed.”
See how his first concern is for the preaching of the word, not for worldly things; for when he writes to Timothy, he says, “that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty” (1 Tim. ii. 2.); and here, “that the word of God,” and the doctrine, “be not blasphemed.” For if it should happen that a believing woman, married to an unbeliever, should not be virtuous, the blasphemy is usually carried on to God; but if she be of good character, the Gospel obtains glory from her, and from her virtuous actions. Let those women hearken who are united to wicked men or unbelievers; let them hear, and learn to lead them to godliness by their own example. For if thou gain nothing else, and do not attract thy husband to embrace right doctrines, yet thou hast stopped his mouth, and dost not allow him to blaspheme Christianity; and this is no mean thing, but great indeed, that the doctrine should be admired through our conversation.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf113.v.v.iv.html
Notice that St.Chrysostom devoted a full page of very compact type to explain the meaning of these four short important verses from St. Paul.
I know that it is deeply heartbreaking to watch a sincere young married couple engaged in a spiritual ignorance and misinformation based, heretical marriage and trust destroying conflict. You seemingly knew that this conflict should be resolved with the help of the church and asked for help. Unfortunately, our current Coptic Church leadership has spent all of its efforts and time submitting its 2000 year old successful gender, family and marriage strengthening wisdom and graces to the demonic destruction demanded by foolish rebellious Coptic feminist activists such as those that I described above.
Lets see if we can find some help from some excerpts from the commentary of our Holy Orthodox Father, St. Chrysostom, to define the meaning of St. Paul’s verse that you asked about.
I think that the first fact to consider is that for the first about 1950 years after Jesus taught God’s gender, family and marriage commandments to His Apostles, who passed them on to all subsequent christian communities, there was practically NO DIVORCE in any and all of these communities. This general world wide christian family peace and unity condition included the well known to be drunken and violent, brutally persecuted and impoverished (by our powerful neighboring English "christian" rulers) Irish people, my ancestors, whom I know of too well. I’ve been told, and I believe, that Coptic family morality has always been higher, and had consequently always had superior and more tenacious unity and integrity. The most important stock-in-trade of the Irish family was the Irish wife’s universal, uncompromisable respect for and obedience to her husband, in obedience to God’s commandments that we are discussing. Older Coptic friends have told me that their mothers and grandmothers lived in strict obedience to the same commandments.
However, beginning in about 1960, more and more western women began adopting anti-patriarchal, feminist beliefs and rebelling against all of these traditional christian family and cultural principles. Encouraged by the greedy, corruptly biased divorce and freudian counselling industries (whose greatest financial threats are peaceful families), western Roman Catholic and Protestant wives became seemingly addicted to divorcing their families (and thereby destroying their own spiritual and material best interests) at an epidemic rate. By about 1980 western orthodox wives of most jurisdictions had begun joining into this seemingly addictive divorce epidemic. Most orthodox and non-orthodox “christian” leaders abandoned their traditional patriarchal gender, family and marriage theology and began compromising with and adopting the feminist theologies and philosophies that the divorce epidemic was based upon. Feminist activists cleaned out the patriarchal literature in most christian church libraries and bookstores; and began re-translating the patriarchal Holy Bible and writings of our Holy Orthodox Fathers. Church leaders and teachers cowered from raging feminist protesters and stopped teaching God’s gender, family and marriage commandments, that had been the base for 1950 years of near perfect christian family peace and unity, to their congregations, youth and newly weds.
In the next post, Part 2, I am going to discuss St. Chrysostom’s commentary that you seemingly tried to study. It is found at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf113.iii.iv.xxi.html
[quote author=???????? link=topic=11915.msg141903#msg141903 date=1311617793]
Hello,
I shall be thankful for any clarfication on the following verses: I checked the homily of St John Chrysostom on this verse, but I did not understand it completely:
" Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior".
If husband and wife are one flesh,what exactly does "submit" mean in this instance? How does it work practically? what should the wife do (examples) so that she said to have submitted to her husband? Thanks
St. Chrysostom starts his commentary by stating OT verses that show that family peace depends upon the wife’s agreement (submission/ obedience) with her husband. Examples of these blessing are: “A wife agreeing with her husband.” and “that a woman should dwell in harmony with her husband.” He states the general principle that we are trying to understand: “For there is no relationship between man and man so close as that between man and wife, if they be joined together as they should be.” (emphasis added). He stresses, by several imaginative examples, that God’s creation of all mankind from a single person, Adam, shows that it was God’s original intent that all mankind (starting with each husband and wife) be united in peace. Family and societal strife and/ or peace depend upon the presence of unbreakable love of man and wife. Consistent with God’s order of original creation, to achieve this peace, St. Paul commanded, “Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.” And why so? Because when they are in harmony, the children are well brought up, and the domestics are in good order, and neighbors, and friends, and relations enjoy the fragrance. But if it be otherwise (If God’s design and commandments are perverted, expect disaster), all is turned upside down, and thrown into confusion. And just as when the generals of an army (Husband and wife are to be (allied) generals of the home, who must also obey rank and authority.) are at peace one with another, all things are in due subordination, whereas on the other hand, if they are at variance, everything is turned upside down; so, I say, is it also here. Wherefore, saith he, “Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.”
[St. Chrysostom explains that it was God’s will from creation that a wife has a higher duty to obey her husband than we have to obey government authorities (which, St. Paul told us, if we resist/ disobey, we will incur God’s judgment for sin). Rom. 13:2.
[St. Chrysostom then discusses and clarifies some seeming scriptural contradictions to this commanded relationship and states its result.]
Let us take as our fundamental position then that the husband occupies the place of the “head,” and the wife the place of the “body.”
Ver. 23, 24. Then, he proceeds with arguments and says that “the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the Church, being Himself the Saviour of the body. But as the Church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their husbands in everything.”
Then after saying, “The husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is of the Church,” he further adds, “and He is the Saviour of the body.” For indeed the head is the saving health of the body. He had already laid down beforehand for man and wife, the ground and provision of their love, assigning to each their proper place, to the one that of authority and forethought, to the other that of submission. As then “the Church,” that is, both husbands and wives, “is subject unto Christ, so also ye wives submit yourselves to your husbands, as unto God.” (St. Chrysostom makes this relationship very clear. The husband’s place is that of family authority and forethought (objectives and planning) whereas the wife’s place is that of submission. Wives are to obey their husbands as if they are obeying God, Who commanded the wife’s unconditional obedience, in everything.)
[Then this commentary continues on to explain the wisdom and the symbiotic like consequences of a husband’s independent duty to love his wife, even as Christ also loved the imperfect, disobedient, rebellious Church.
[Demonic feminist persuasion leads us to try to find exceptions and conditions to a wife’s duty to obey her husband. St. Peter’s first epistle to the dispersed, persecuted first Christian families (that we read as the catholic epistle in many daily and Sunday Coptic liturgies every year) contains a very strong actual example of a wife’s obedience that you ask for.]
1 Pet.3:1 In the same way (as slaves were earlier instructed to be obedient to their masters), wives, be subject to your own husbands. ... 3:5 For in the same way the holy women who hoped in God long ago adorned themselves by being subject to their husbands, 3:6 like Sarah who obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. You become her children when you do what is good and have no fear in doing so.
[Do you recall the two most fearful examples of Sarah’s reliance on God while peacefully obeying God’s commandment to obey her husband, Abraham? ]
Gen.12:10 ... 13 “Please say that you are my sister so that it may go well with me because of you, and that I may live on account of you.” 12:14 ... 15 ... and the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. 12:16 ... 17 But the Lord struck Pharaoh and his house with great plagues, because of Sarai, Abram’s wife, 12:18 ... 19 ... Now then, here is your wife, take her and go. 20 ...and they escorted him away, with his wife and all that belonged to him.
[And again, Sarah relied on God and fearlessly obeyed Abraham.]
Gen. 20:1 ... 2 And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, “She is my sister.” So Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. 20:3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream of the night, and said to him, “Behold, you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is married.” 20:4 ...7 “Now therefore restore the man’s wife, for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you, and you will live. But if you do not restore her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours.” 20:8 ... 14 Abimelech then took sheep and oxen and male and female servants, and gave them to Abraham, and restored his wife Sarah to him. 20:15 ... 21:2 So Sarah conceived and bore a son to Abraham in his old age, at the appointed time of which God had spoken to him.
[This instruction from St. Peter, Jesus Christ’s chosen leader of the Apostles, had a nearly perfect record of success for general Christian (and Coptic) family unity, until the current leaders of the now, “so called” successor apostolic orthodox churches capitulated to heretical demonic feminist enticements. What are the enticements? What apostle do they now follow while in disobedience to St. Peter’s proven patriarchal family paradigm? Judas? What woman model are they striving to duplicate? Jezebel?
[In Verse 5:34, St. Paul again instructs each husband to love his own wife as himself and instructs the wife to also fear (respect) her husband. St. Chrysostom explains that fear (respect), reverence and love are all complementary, mutually beneficial and supportive.]
And yet how can there ever be love, one may say, where there is fear? It will exist
pg.147- there, I say, preeminently. For she that fears and reverences, loves also; and she that loves, fears and reverences him as being the head, and loves him as being a member, since the head itself is a member of the body at large. Hence he places the one in subjection, and the other in authority, that there may be peace; for where there is equal authority there can never be peace; neither where a house is a democracy, nor where all are rulers; but the ruling power must of necessity be one.
[Here St. Chrysostom states another universal principle of wise organization and order that is the reason that every effective organization, especially a peace seeking nuclear christian family must have one clear final authority, its father head. This is the same principle that dooms many 50-50, equal partnerships. No dispute or crisis can be resolved when the equal partners disagree, or act in opposition. No ship has two captains. No car has two drivers/ steering wheels/ gas pedals/ brake pedals.
[St. Chrysostom also ties together the practical necessity of one family authority with the universal patriarchal order of all creation under One God.] “So difficult and impracticable is unanimity, where persons are not bound together by that love which is founded in supreme authority.”
[At the beginning of page 148 of the commentary, St. Chrysostom defines the “fear” (respect) for her husband that is required of the Christian wife.]
148-However, when thou hearest of “fear,” demand that fear which becomes a free woman, not as though thou wert exacting it of a slave. For she is thine own body; and if thou do this, thou reproachest thyself in dishonoring thine own body. And of what nature is this “fear”? It is the not contradicting, the not rebelling, the not being fond of the preëminence. It is enough that fear be kept within these bounds. But if thou love, as thou art commanded, thou wilt make it yet greater. Or rather it will not be any longer by fear that thou wilt be doing this, but love itself will have its effect. The sex is somehow weaker, and needs much support, much condescension.
[From about page 149, to the end of the commentary, on page 152, St. Chrysostom discusses many practical marriage planning and improvement issues; such as how to choose a holy wife, how to plan a holy wedding, how to plan, establish and lead a holy married life, how to train and persuade your new wife to live together in accord with God’s relevant Orthodox marriage commandments, how to avoid marriage problems in these various areas, and etc.
[In one of St. Chrysostom’s related commentaries, that I have not been able to locate and include in this response, he explains that the minimum spiritual duties of obedience, not contradicting, not rebelling and not being fond of the preëminence are independent obligations of the wife that are not dependent or conditional on the husband’s compliance with his spiritual duty to love his wife. And likewise, the husband is obligated to love his wife as Christ loved the church, independent of and not conditional on his wife’s compliance with her minimum duties of obedience and the above stated acts of respect. These independent spiritual duties enable the compliant spouse to influence the sinning other spouse to return to compliance with his/ her duties, without repeated counter sinful retaliations and scorched earth family war, ie, God hated divorce, etc.]
I was able to locate this explanation by St. Chrysostom at page 147 of this commentary on Ephesians 5, as follows: "For the man who loves his wife, even though she be not a very obedient one, still will bear with everything. So difficult and impracticable is unanimity, where persons are not bound together by that love which is founded in supreme authority; at all events, fear will not necessarily effect this. Accordingly, he dwells the more upon this, which is the strong tie. And the wife though seeming to be the loser in that she was charged to fear, is the gainer, because the principal duty, love, is charged upon the husband. “But what,” one may say, “if a wife reverence me not?” Never mind, thou art to love, fulfill thine own duty. For though that which is due from others may not follow, we ought of course to do our duty. This is an example of what I mean. He says, “submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of Christ.” And what then if another submit not himself? Still obey thou the law of God. Just so, I say, is it also here. Let the wife at least, though she be not loved, still reverence notwithstanding, that nothing may lie at her door (Sin, See Gen. 4:7); and let the husband, though his wife reverence him not, still show her love notwithstanding, that he himself be not wanting in any point. For each has received his own."
The OP stated he already read the commentary of St. John. As for the link I posted, the author may not be Coptic Orthodox, but his insight into the chapter still holds.
Hi Michael,
Thank you for your compassionate attempt to help resolve a serious issue. I disagree with your conclusion and representation that this protestant bible commentary "holds" as Orthodox theology. Of course, you can rely on any references that you choose. But, especially in these days when Coptic theology of marriage is so weak and confused, probably heretical, it seems to be wrong to add to the confusion by vouching for generally un-orthodox authorities. It is an obvious public disgrace that there are no Coptic sources that we can rely on. If you are able, it would be valuable if you would study St. Chrysostom's commentary and let us know how you think its spiritual value and persuasion compares with the protestant source that you recommended. Which is the strongest support for your present or future marriage and family? Encourage your bishop to put Coptic gender and family theology back on the true traditional orthodox track.
Ah, my apologies. I missed that. :-[
Perhaps there is something in Mark J. Edwards' Ancient Christian Commentary, New Testament VIII: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians
Hi Jeremiah,
Thanks for your attempt to help find a spiritual oasis in this barren desert of Coptic gender and family theology and practice. As I mentioned to Michael in the above post, I don't believe we should encourage the use of protestant authorities for resolving any of our Orthodox spiritual challenges. I believe that this Ancient Christian Commentary is especially dangerous because it seems to conceal its seeming simplistic 'non-denomninational" protestant chain verse cafeteria line of concise patristic gems behind ancient (greatly pre-protestant) artistic facades. How would you compare the spiritual value of its "excerpts" to St. Chrysostom's commentary that you also recommended? Are you disappointed that you couldn't find any substantive Coptic resources concerning this vital family issue? The Coptic Marriage Liturgy is irrelevant because its literal patriarchal principles are no longer taught and supported.
It means if a women is blessed to have a husband that puts Christ first, she should in turn respect his (her husbands) views, even if she might not agree with him at the moment. Like if they have a disagreement she would accept his 'last say' on the matter and do as he say's. When a man puts Christ first they cannot go wrong.
Hi elsi70x7,
Thank you for sincerely sharing what you have been taught concerning this vital marriage relationship principle in this post and in your later posts.
Who is your bishop?
Have you ever attended any of your bishop's sermons on marriage and family?
Where did you attend these sermons?
What parish did you attend when you learned the principles of marriage that you have shared with us?
For about how many years have you known these marriage principles?
[quote author=Ηεζεκιελ link=topic=11915.msg141903#msg141903 date=1311617793]
Hello,
I shall be thankful for any clarfication on the following verses: I checked the homily of St John Chrysostom on this verse, but I did not understand it completely:
" Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior".
If husband and wife are one flesh,what exactly does "submit" mean in this instance? How does it work practically? what should the wife do (examples) so that she said to have submitted to her husband? Thanks
Christ gave His life for His Church. He served His Church, He died for His Church. What a lucky wife if men were to follow Christ's example at being this head.
I don't think the term "submit" means to be submissive in the English sense of the word. The term submissive has connotations of someone who is subdued or weak. I think in the context of how Christ is our head and what He has done for His Church, should be the context in which we interpret the term "submit" within the above passage.
Hi Zoxsasi,
Yes, of course, the husband's duty is to love his wife as Christ loved the church. You don't seem to think that the wife has any specific duties under this verse.
Who is your bishop?
Have you ever attended any of your bishop's sermons on marriage and family?
Where did you attend these sermons?
What parish did you attend when you learned the principles of marriage that you have shared with us?
For about how many years have you known these marriage principles?
[quote author=elsi70x7 link=topic=11915.msg143530#msg143530 date=1314041187]
[quote author=Joshuaa link=topic=11915.msg143509#msg143509 date=1313962541]
The wife is the weaker vessel but the onus or responsiblity is on the husband.
Oh yes, thats right we have to read the whole scripture to get the whole truth. The husband is responsible for his wife as Christ is responsible for the Church.
It is not a 'one-sided' thing. The husband has to prove himself worthy of the wife's submission. The husband must have Christ as his leader.
(emphasis mine)
Where are you getting this from? I don't see anything in the passage to indicate that. Furthermore, we learn from the great saint (I forget her name) who is called "the mother of the poor" that no matter how awful the husband is the wife should be submissive, unless it leads her away from the faith.
Hi Andrew,
Long time no see. Are you tired yet, of stumbling through this minefield with no map, and blindfolded? I hope you'll have time, energy and patience to struggle your way through all of St. Chrysostom's commentaries. It is a valuable exercise for every servant, and for your classes. You can then brief them to your bishop, maybe some rare priest, and even to HH Pope Shenouda. I download St. C's commentaries to my ancient (Orthodox?) Palm and work my way through them when I can. I need to add a few notes in the text for my understanding. Clean house, sweep out all of those feminist demons that try to puzzle you. Please read the last few pages of the Ephesians commentary referred to in this discussion. St. John gives some 21st century suggestions for marriage preparation.
I agree with unworthy1, the verse does not place a condition on the wive's sumbission. I think it's important to remember it is not the husband that the wife is submitting to, but Christ - because He is the one that commabded it. So worthy or not, it would not matter
Hi Hizz_chiilld,
Thank you for you compassionate concern explain this vital verse. I think that Christ, through St. Paul, told the wife to submit to (obey) her husband in everything. Eph.5:24. This is based upon God's eternal commandment to Eve: "You desire to rule your husband, but he is to rule over you." Gen.3:16b.
Who is your bishop?
Have you ever attended any of your bishop's sermons on marriage and family?
Where did you attend these sermons?
What parish did you attend when you learned the principles of marriage that you have shared with us?
For about how many years have you known these marriage principles?
I thought that submit meant obey. So wifes should obey their husbands. When someone obeys then they are loyal and this is a bond. A bond keeps things together. What husbands should give their wifes is respect in a way that shows caring. After all women care. I think when the husband and wife agree on resposibilities, The husband for the direction and the wife to support him, that this would be a bonding in Christ.
Hi Joshuaa,
Thank you for bringing the light of hope to my disappointments and to Hezekiah's question. The only thing that I would add is that the husband and wife should be taught, agree, and promise that God and the church assigns them these individual, unconditional responsibilities at their marriage liturgy. St. Chrysostom's commentary strengthens and broadens your basic summary of a spiritual marriage relationship.
Who is your bishop?
Have you ever attended any of your bishop's sermons on marriage and family?
Where did you attend these sermons?
Did your bishop's sermons explain these principles to you?
What parish did you attend when you learned the principles of marriage that you have shared with us?
For about how many years have you known these marriage principles?
How would you describe the process of your learning these marriage principles?
[quote author=Andrew link=topic=11915.msg143532#msg143532 date=1314044082]
[quote author=elsi70x7 link=topic=11915.msg143530#msg143530 date=1314041187]
[quote author=Joshuaa link=topic=11915.msg143509#msg143509 date=1313962541]
The wife is the weaker vessel but the onus or responsiblity is on the husband.
Oh yes, thats right we have to read the whole scripture to get the whole truth. The husband is responsible for his wife as Christ is responsible for the Church.
It is not a 'one-sided' thing. The husband has to prove himself worthy of the wife's submission. The husband must have Christ as his leader.
(emphasis mine)
Where are you getting this from? I don't see anything in the passage to indicate that. Furthermore, we learn from the great saint (I forget her name) who is called "the mother of the poor" that no matter how awful the husband is the wife should be submissive, unless it leads her away from the faith.
Hi Andrew,
Long time no see. Are you tired yet, of stumbling through this minefield with no map, and blindfolded? I hope you'll have time, energy and patience to struggle your way through all of St. Chrysostom's commentaries. It is a valuable exercise for every servant, and for your classes. You can then brief them to your bishop, maybe some rare priest, and even to HH Pope Shenouda. I download St. C's commentaries to my ancient (Orthodox?) Palm and work my way through them when I can. I need to add a few notes in the text for my understanding. Clean house, sweep out all of those feminist demons that try to puzzle you. Please read the last few pages of the Ephesians commentary referred to in this discussion. St. John gives some 21st century suggestions for marriage preparation.
You don't understand how tired I am, Irishpilgrim. But, alas, there is no hope for me. Those bloody feminists have taken hold of me and corrupted my mind beyond repair. Pray for me daily!
[quote author=Michael Boutros link=topic=11915.msg141921#msg141921 date=1311629429]
The OP stated he already read the commentary of St. John. As for the link I posted, the author may not be Coptic Orthodox, but his insight into the chapter still holds.
Hi Michael,
Thank you for your compassionate attempt to help resolve a serious issue. I disagree with your conclusion and representation that this protestant bible commentary "holds" as Orthodox theology. Of course, you can rely on any references that you choose. But, especially in these days when Coptic theology of marriage is so weak and confused, probably heretical, it seems to be wrong to add to the confusion by vouching for generally un-orthodox authorities. It is an obvious public disgrace that there are no Coptic sources that we can rely on. If you are able, it would be valuable if you would study St. Chrysostom's commentary and let us know how you think its spiritual value and persuasion compares with the protestant source that you recommended. Which is the strongest support for your present or future marriage and family? Encourage your bishop to put Coptic gender and family theology back on the true traditional orthodox track.
Coptic Theology on marriage weak and confused? Do you hear urself. I don't know what denomination you are, but before you go out and make the most general statements like that, you need to bring proof to the table. Why is it that you think the Coptic Theology on marriage is weak and confused?(i'm not mocking, i am sincerely wondering why you think so.) Also, can you try to organize your thoughts in one or two posts, not 9?