Introduction

INTRODUCTION

There is an active debate about the role of women within the evangelical church that borders on polarization. In recent years this polarization has resulted in the formation of two groups that, described broadly, represent two different approaches to the interpretation and application of the relevant biblical material. This debate takes place over the role of women in ministry that manifests itself in a variety of ways; from women being ordained as priests in the Anglican church to women being allowed to teach men or young boys in conservative churches. This debate also takes place in regard to the role that women play in the home. With the advent of the women’s liberation movement of the last century and increased participation of women in places of leadership in religious organizations the question is begged: what about the role of women in the home? Are women to be considered equals with their husbands? Does Scripture allow such an arrangement? What does equality mean exactly and can there be significant restrictions in roles and activities of wives while maintaining equality between the husband and wife? It is the status of Christian women in the home, that is the subject of this study.

Thesis Statement
It is my contention and the focus of this study that the Apostle Paul’s instructions to wives and husbands in the Ephesians 5:21-33 is not at all contrary to the idea of complete and unmitigated equality between the sexes. In fact, when this same passage is viewed through what is called a redemptive-movement hermeneutic it is clear that the passage provides an example of redemptive movement toward equality and oneness, or in the words of some writers equal regard. The application of Paul’s words in our current cultural setting would necessarily require an arrangement between husband and wife that is at least egalitarian but even more a relationship of deep intimacy and oneness. This reveals in Scripture a theology of marriage that is both Pauline, derived from Paul’s writings and theology, and non-hierarchical or egalitarian.
My argument includes a description of the redemptive-movement hermeneutic at work in this area as well as others along with other research which supports a non-hierachical reading of Ephesians 5:21-33. It will first be necessary to demonstrate that the redemptive-movement hermeneutic is a valid method of application and interpretation and that it can be employed with consistency in a variety of Scriptural contexts. The redemptive-movement hermeneutic has precursors that are often called a developmental, trajectory or progressive hermeneutics. This method of interpretation and application takes seriously the original context of Scripture along with the current context into which that Scripture must be applied. The “movement” that is spoken of is a description of how the specific application of certain Scriptures change from context to context while focusing upon the redemptive intent of the author. The redemptive intent is considered to be transcultural, that is, transcending one culture and applicable across the bounds of culture and context. It will then be necessary to examine how Ephesians 5:21-33 could be read through such a hermeneutic and what results such a reasoned and cautious reading would provide. Secondly, there are several other arguments which are not specifically related to the redemptive-movement hermeneutic which support my contention that Ephesians 5 represents an example of Paul further advancing the cause of Christ through the tearing down of barriers between men and women. These will include: 1) the argument that the submission of wives is set in the overall context of mutual submission between all Christians; 2)a discussion of the image of headship and its meaning for this passage; 3)the linguistic evidence which promotes the idea of a voluntary submission on part of wives. The end result will be a recognition that the patriarchy of the 1st Century world is not held up to be the universal pattern for male/female role relationships for all time. In fact, it will be displayed that an egalitarian type of interaction which is focused upon oneness, mutual submission, servanthood and respect is to be preferred when exploring one’s options for the application of such a passage as this.

Developments In This Field Of Study
It is important to acknowledge some of the developments made in the study of men and women in the Bible up to this time. As mentioned previously there appears to be a polarization in this area illustrated by the development of two different organizations supporting two different agendas for women in the church. One group is called the Council For Biblical Manhood and Womanhood supports the equality of men and women when it comes to their reception of salvation and their intrinsic value in God’s eyes but maintains a functional inequality by restricting the participation of women in ministry and home. The Council For Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) was created in response to what was considered an unhealthy advance in Biblical feminism among evangelicals. Through the formation of the group and the drafting of the Danvers Statement, a text outlining the central concerns and affirmations of the CBMW, formally stated their position “equal in personhood and value, but difference in roles”. In the context of the home women are to submit to their husbands in a benevolent yet hierarchical arrangement. It could be viewed as a form of modified, benevolent patriarchy. This form of modified, benevolent patriarchy is sometimes referred to as the traditional perspective. However, it will be illustrated shortly that this description is not accurate. People who adhere to this perspective often refer to themselves as complementarians, reflecting their belief that men and women have complementary roles which are established by God, and grounded in the order of creation, within the church and the home. This complementarity includes a hierarchical arrangment between men and women, husbands and wives, based upon certain passages from the New Testament such as I Timothy 2:11-15, I Corinthians 11:3-12, and the passage which is the focus of this study Ephesians 5:22.
The second organization is called Christians For Biblical Equality and those who adhere to the principles advanced by this group are often referred to as egalitarians and sometimes as evangelical feminists. These terms represent a point of view that advocates equality and opportunity within the Christian community based upon a more complete understanding of the Bible. The egalitarian perspective advances the full equality of women and men in all areas of Christian life including leadership within the church and shared responsibilities within the home. This group also supports their position through an appeal to Scripture and contends that God’s ultimate redemptive desire is not mere equality between men and women, husbands and wives but for oneness within the Body of Christ. This oneness, they contend, is greatly hindered by restrictions on the roles of women based on anything other than their giftedness. In relationship to roles within the church the egalitarian camp holds that positions of leadership and teaching, roles typically restricted to men, are to be distributed along lines of spiritual giftedness “without reference to racial, social or gender distinctives.” Within marriage husband and wife are to mutually submit to each other as brothers and sisters in Christ, live as co-heirs of the grace of Christ, and practice a form of headship which focuses upon oneness between the head and the body, not domination or rule. It is crucial to note that both complementarians and egalitarians hold these commitments as a result of earnest and sincere study of Scripture (as can be observed by looking at the statement’s of faith adhered to by each along with a cursory examination of some of the primary texts used in defense of each position). Neither makes their view of the role of women in church and family a confessional norm nor do they assert that this is a determinative issue for one’s Christianity. However, there are many examples of this issue creating a deep polarization between the groups as the creation of separate organizations, publishing houses and respective journals illustrate.
As mentioned earlier the complementarian view is sometimes held up as the traditional perspective on gender roles while the egalitarian perspective is viewed as a recent, novel addition. However, it needs to be noted that neither perspective is more or less traditional or novel than the other. The authors of the seminal text on hierarchical complementarianism, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, point out in their introduction that they want to distance themselves from what the true and unfortunate reality is regarding the traditional status of women in the church. It is equally important to make a distinction between what is traditional and what is biblical. What is biblical has often been eclipsed by the traditional and people on both sides of this debate recognize the necessity of recovering biblical truth from dogma reinforced by centuries of negative tradition. Sarah Sumner, in her book Men and Women in the Church, traces out the negative impact that many early church fathers had upon the church’s understanding of women. Tertullian identified the woman as the one solely and originally responsible for the fall of all mankind and characterized them as the “devil’s gateway.” A complementarian, Daniel Doriani highlights the blatant misogyny in Tertullian’s writings and with the editors of Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood recognize the problem with identifying too closely with the traditional view of the role of women in the church. In addition, Augustine endorsed the idea that woman was not an image bearer of God and that the company of woman was desirable only for the sake of procreation. From his perspective a woman’s company was much less desirable than a man’s because of the woman’s reduced ability to participate in conversation or intellectual pursuit. While Augustine remains one of the most important theologians of the western Church we must recognize his fallibility and the possibility that his own moral failings as a young person made it difficult to perceive women apart from a negative sexual connotation. This point of view was also endorsed by Ambrose and other church fathers. Sumner summarizes this point by stating, “What I am trying to say is that women’s equal worth is a novel idea in church history.” Tradition is not to be disregarded because it is fallible but neither is it to be followed when it departs from biblical teaching.
With few notable exceptions the history of the church paints a picture of gross inequality and maltreatment of women through the ages. Fueled by a misreading of the Bible and a misunderstanding of God’s work in redemption misogyny has been a common experience for Christian women within the church. These examples from the writings of leaders in the early church illustrate the necessity to return to a biblically formed understanding of how men and women should interact in both the church and the home.

The Structure of this Study
The overall structure of this study is as follows. In chapter one, there will be an analysis and description of the redemptive-movement hermeneutic with a brief example of how it works in relationship to Galatians 3:28, passage many believe to be the cornerstone Scripture regarding relationships between men and women, husbands and wives. Chapter two will briefly examine the Pauline authorship of Ephesians and provide some historical background which sheds light on the life of the church in Ephesus of the first century. In chapter three I will apply this hermeneutical principle to the Ephesians passage by utilizing Webb’s persuasive criteria, designed to help the reader determine the applicability of such passages across contexts and cultures. In this process I will pay special attention to the interpretive impact of the household codes, Paul’s instructions regarding the treatment of slaves, and comparison to other Scriptures within the Pauline corpus. In chapter four there will be a review of some of the other arguments which support a non-hierarchical reading of Ephesians 5 including the meaning of the word kephale, a discussion of mutual submission in v.21, and a focus on the image of oneness portrayed by the Apostle Paul in the passage. Chapter five will look at the positive outcomes for Christians who approach married life recognizing an equality and oneness between the sexes.