The passage
      v21. This verse properly belongs to the preceding passage, but none-the-less establishes a principle that applies to Paul's teaching on relationships within the church. Paul encourages his readers to mutual submission. We cannot be self-assertive, demanding our own way, insisting on our own rights, without reference to the way of Christ. Christ "emptied himself", placing the needs of others before his own and this is the way we must travel, Phil.2:3-8.
      v22-24. First, Paul looks at the role of wives and encourages loving respect. The Biblical view is that wives should place themselves under the authority of their husbands in the same way as "the church submits to Christ" Our relationship with Jesus is one of great individual freedom and expression and is certainly not oppressive and destructive of personality. We must therefore be careful not to argue in favour of a pagan form of male dominance as though it were from the Lord. This is a submission to loving care and not a submission to male dominance. Paul encourages a submission to a Christ-like self-giving. Christ gave himself in love for the welfare of his body the church and it is this form of headship that a husband should exercise over his wife. The wife therefore, submits to the loving care of her husband rather than to male dominance. This structure is especially important for children who learn of the fatherhood of God imaged in their own family unit.
      v25-27. Paul now turns to the role of husbands and encourages loving service. It's always interesting how we males continually talk about our responsibility to rule our homes. At times we feel very put down when we fail to do this well, particularly if our wives tend to do it better than we do. We need to be reminded that the scriptures direct us to "love" our wives. That's the job we need to be concerned about. Love, in the terms of self-sacrificial care for the well-being of our marriage partner. Many of us would do well to view our role in these terms rather than promoting a headship role.
      v28-32. After defining love in the example of the person and work of Jesus, Paul explains that loving one's wife is of itself a very natural act. Marriage produces a psychological bond whereby the well-being of a partner is emphatically experienced by the other partner, and vice versa. To love one's wife is to love oneself.
      v33. Paul now sums up his teaching on the proper relationship of a husband and a wife; "I say no more, except that each one of you husbands must love his wife as he loves himself, and that every wife must respect her husband", Barclay.

Authority in marriage
      With the influence of Marxist Leninist ideology on Western societies, egalitarianism is now firmly part of our psyche. The prevailing Christian world view has lost substantial ground. In particular, the institution of the Biblical family has been targeted and has faced ideological ridicule. It is often claimed that the Biblical shape of family is an evil institution, a degrading and oppressive experience, especially for women and children. To this end, the egalitarian ethos of our age now shapes legislation and government bureaucracy.
      Christians have had to fight hard to maintain a truly Biblical position. On the one hand we have adopted many conventions of the past. Often, they have little to do with Biblical principles, but rather reflect the injustice of a former male dominated society. On the other hand, the secularizing influences of our age have pushed many to adopt a more egalitarian stance. On the radical fringe, Liberation Theology, sometimes called Revolutionary Theology, has tended to fully adopted a Marxist stance and so be critical of the Biblical family of husband and wife. Socialist philosophy opposes a family where a man and a woman have "left" mother and father and established a new fundamental unit of association where there are sex roles.
      It is very difficult in our age to define a Biblical view of marriage and family. We certainly can't allow a "liberal" view of theology to prevail. Such a view advances on the notion that Biblical Theology itself is enculturated and therefore must be deculturated in the face of "enlightened" thinking. In simple terms, it is argued that Paul's theology of marriage and family, as it stands, reflects the ethos of his age and must be reinterpreted. Yet, we also cannot defend a pattern of family life which is a product of another age. The typical nuclear family unit in Western societies is a product of the industrial revolution. As we move into the post industrial age, the family unit may need to take on a different shape to suit the changing environment. There is no point being reactive to change, nor should we fail to be critical of the nuclear family's less than healthy aspects.
      In our passage for study the apostle develops a number of principles on marriage and it is worth noting one in particular: a husband is to love his wife. Notice, Paul doesn't say rule his wife. A husband is to exercise authority over his wife in much the same way as Christ exercises authority over the church. Christ rules us by serving us, by giving himself for us, washing our feet, dying on the cross. A husband's authority is exercised in love, in self-giving compassion, and a wife is to respond by accepting that loving service. Even for the 21st century, this is a radical idea.

v21
      Most modern translations begin this new section with v21, rather than v22, yet it is very likely that the participle, "submitting", in v21, serves as a third participle of result, its antecedent being "filled by the Holy Spirit", v18, cf. AV, RV, Barclay.... Where v21 is treated as an introduction to instructions concerning the relationship between a husband and wife, the participle is translated as imperatival, "be subject." This is possible, although unlikely.

v22
      "submit" - The verb must be supplied from the participle "submitting" found in the previous verse. Given the context of verse 21, the participle describes mutual submission as a consequence of being "filled by the Spirit", v18. The word clearly carries the sense of submitting to the proper authority of those over us, eg. in the military. The same word is used of submitting to governmental authority in Paul's letter to the Romans. It is possible that Paul is simply raising an issue of form, rather than substance, such that "submitting" evidences good citizenship, and thus is ultimately relative. On the other hand, Paul may just be promoting mutual submission; "mutual consideration", Allen. If Paul does mean that a believer is to subordinate their will to others, then we need to note the qualification that the exercise of this authority must be compatible with "reverence to Christ", v21. Softening the sense may help, but is at best, condescending; "you wives must learn to adapt yourselves to your husbands", Phillips.
      toiV idioV "your" - to their own, one's own. The adjective usually takes a reflective or possessive sense, here possessive "their husbands."
      wJV tw/ kuriw/ "As to the Lord". "Lord" here may refer to "lord", in the sense of her husband, but this is very unlikely. Probably carrying much the same idea as v21, "in order to honour Christ." Possibly "as required by Jesus."

v23
      kefalh (h) "Head". This is a much debated term. In the end, our choice of meaning seems to depend on our own view of the male/female roles in marriage. Some argue that it refers to authority, therefore "master", or "lord", while others argue that it refers to origin, "source". The word "head", when used figuratively, usually means preeminence or superiority, but is this Paul's intention here?
      wJV kai "as" - as also. Although the idea is disputed, the grammar clearly establishes a comparison between the headship of a husband over his wife and the headship of Christ over the church. Commentators argue as to whether Christ's headship over the church serves to illustrate the headship of a husband over his wife, or visa versa. It seems likely that the comparison is that of authority, ie. how Christ exercises his authority over us (in self-giving) compares with a husband's authority over his wife. Some commentators argue that the comparison is that of submission, ie. how we submit to Christ compares with how a wife should submit to her husband. This is surely very unlikely. "As also."
      thV ekklhsiaV (a) "the church" - assembly. "The assembly of believers."
      autoV "his" - Emphatic and clearly referring to Christ, not the husband. "He himself (that is Christ) is the savior of the body."
      tou swmatoV (a atoV) "body" - of the body. Clearly referring to the church, which is Christ's "body". "Saviour of the Body", Moffatt.
      autoV swthr "Of which he is the Saviour". It is best to translate "Saviour" here with a small "s". It is not so much a title as a function. Self-giving headship cares for and protects the "body". This is the type of headship exercised by Christ and is therefore the type of headship that should be exercised by a husband. A wife should encourage her husband to fulfill this function. "Christ is the head of the church and saviour of his body", Phillips.

v24
      alla "now" - but. Given that most commentators don't like the idea of a husband being the "Saviour" of his wife, the tendency has been to translate this conjunction as an adversative, "but", so most modern translations. It is possibly resumptive, "and", eg. NJB. The NIV forms a new resumptive sentence with "now". As noted above, "saviour" is being used as a descriptive function, not a title; a description of self-giving. So, there is much to be said for it being consecutive, "therefore", AV.
      uJpatassetai (uJpatassw) pres. pas. "submits" - is submissive. The present tense indicating ongoing action. Although the verb expresses the idea of being subject to another's authority, a wife's subjection to her husband is compared with the church's subjection to Christ, and it is this comparison that reshapes the human idea of subjection. Our subjection to Christ involves subjection, not to law and slavish obedience, but to grace and freedom. "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free." For the sake of meaning we could paraphrase; "as believers accept Christ, in the same way wives should accept their husbands."
      wJV ...... oJtwV "as .... so" - as, like .... thus, so, in this way. Establishing a comparison. "Given that the authority of a husband over his wife is exercised in self-giving sacrificial love, therefore, in just the same way as believers accept Christ's self-giving, so in like manner should a wife accept her husband's self-giving."
      en panti "in everything" - in all, every. "in every area of life", O'Brien.

v25
      agapate (agapaw) pres. imp. "love" - Present tense indicating ongoing action. That which the wife is to "submit" to is now laid on the husband. "Husbands, practice self-giving sacrificial compassion toward your wives."
      kaqwV "just as" - as, just as. Establishing a comparison.
      hgaphsen aor. "loved" - The aorist indicating punctiliar action, namely Christ's act of self-giving compassion on the cross.

v26
      iJna + subj. "to" - that. Introducing a purpose clause, "in order to make her holy."
      aJgiash/ (aJgiazw) aor. subj. "holy" - Possibly in the sense of "sanctify", referring to the process of making Christ-like / holy, but more likely in the sense of "set apart for God."
      kaqarisaV (kaqarizw) aor. part. "cleansing [her by the washing of water]" - having cleansed. The participle is coincidental with the verb "may make holy", probably expressing the means by which the action of the verb is achieved. "In order to make her holy by cleansing her with the washing of water", NRSV.
      tw/ loutrw/ (on) dat. "by the washing" - in, by, with the washing. The water imagery may come from the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, cf. Titus 3:5, but more likely the custom of bathing prior to marriage - the removal of something unseemly. Here, the washing away of sin. Baptismal imagery is most unlikely.
      en rhmati (a atoV) "through the word" - in word. This prepositional phrase probably qualifies "cleansing", further identifying the agent of the action, namely, "through the word of the gospel", O'Brien.

v27
      iJna + subj. "and to [present]" - that. Introducing a purpose clause, "in order to present."
      endoxon adj. "radiant" - glorious, splendid, wonderful, in splendor*. Possibly the parousia is in Paul's mind, although there is a sense where the eternal universal gathering of believers has already been presented to Christ and we are even now seated with him in his heavenly kingdom, Eph.2:6. Time is an earthly constraint of which eternity is in no way dependent. The image possible reflects Ezekiel 16:10-14. "So that he might present the church to himself all glorious", REB.
      mh ecousan (ecw) pres. part. "without" - not having [blemish or wrinkle]. Describing pure, youthful, skin. "In all its beauty", TEV.
      alla "but"- but. Adversative; "without stain or wrinkle, but rather ..."
      iJna + subj. "-" - [not having spot or wrinkle ..... but] that [she may be holy and without blemish]. Introducing a purpose clause; "but in order that the church be consecrated and blameless." That believers might be spiritually and morally perfect; "pure and faultless", TEV.
      hJ/ "-" - [that] she may be. The subjunctive of the verb to-be.

v28
      ouJtwV "in this same way" - thus, so, in this way. The NIV, as with most translations, takes this adverb as forming a comparison with the proceeding verses, namely, a husband's love toward his wife is being compared with Christ's love toward the church. Yet, Paul has already made this comparison. Here the adverb refers forward establishing a comparison between a husbands love for his wife and his love for his own body. "Men ought to give their wives the love they naturally have for their own bodies", Phillips.
      ofeilousin (ofeilw) pres. "ought" - The sense is to be under an obligation to act in a particular way. "A husband should love his wife", CEV.
      wJV ta eJautwn swmata "as their own bodies" - The NIV's literal translation fails to convey the comparison in English. "As much as he loves himself", CEV.
      eJauton agapa/ "loves himself" - [the one loving his own wife] to himself loves. This images the creation picture; she is "bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh." Humanity is complete in marriage, in the sense of fulfilled, although this does not mean that a single person is less than human. God created man in his image, both "male and female he created them", Gen.1:27. The picture is of the male not resting until he finds his missing rib, Gen.2:23. "A man who loves his wife loves himself", TEV.

v29
      gar "after all" - for. The conjunction here is probably emphatic, as NIV; "indeed / to be sure."
      emishsen (misew) aor. "hated" - hated. The aorist here is usually regarded as gnomic, expressing a timeless truth; "none of us hates our own bodies", CEV.
      sarka (sarx sarkoV) "body" - flesh. Here used interchangeably with "himself", v28, and "body".
      ektreqei (ektreqw) pres. "feeds" - nourishes, raises. An uncommon verb, as is also "cares for." "Nourishes and cherishes it", Barclay.
      kaqwV "just as" - as. Again establishing a comparison, "just as also."
      "does" - The verb is added for meaning, Gk. "as also Christ (var. "the Lord") the church."
      Note the variant in Textus Receptus which adds "from his flesh and from his bones", cf. Gen.2:23. v30
      oJti "for" - that, because, since. The causal sense here is a little misleading. Christ doesn't love the church because we are member of his body, rather "we" (Paul includes himself) are nourished and cherished because of our union with Christ, our solidarity with him. Rather than "because", we are best to translate the conjunction "after all", Arnold.

v31
      cf. Gen. 2:24, 1Cor.6:16.
      "As the scriptures say", CEV.
      anti toutou "for this reason" - because of this, instead of this, in place of this. Literally "because of this", although the LXX has "for this reason." Barth suggests that the phrase is aetiological (providing a reason or cause) and so probably it serves to introduce a reason from scripture for Paul's argument as to why a man who loves his wife loves himself. As such, we may do better if we begin the quotation after this phrase. "To be sure, none of us hates his own body, but nourishes and cherishes it ....... and the scriptures explain why in the words `a man will leave his father and mother .......'"
      proskollhqhsetai (proskollaw) fut. pas. "be united to" - will be joined. Physical union is intended, but this may be gently expressed in "a man leaves his father and mother to get married", CEV.
      sarka mian "one flesh" - flesh one. Emotional and psychological union is the product of the "leaving and cleaving." "And he becomes like one person with his wife", CEV.

v32
      to musthrion touto "this .... mystery" - this mystery. What mystery? Given that Paul is speaking about marriage it is more than likely that marriage is the mystery - the reuniting of the missing rib to form a one flesh union. Naturally, many commentators argue that Paul is speaking about the union of Christ with the church. "The marriage relationship is doubtless a great mystery", Phillips.
      mega (megaV) adj. "profound" - [is] great. This adjective is in the predicate position so "this mystery is great", RV; "this mystery is a profound one", RSV rev.
      egw de legw eiV "but I am talking about" - and I speak to. If we are right to argue that the "mystery" primarily concerns marriage, not the union of Christ and his church, v32b is probably an aside serving to make the point that the mystery of marriage can be compared with the mystery of our union with Christ. Paul has made this comparison a number of times already in our passage for study. "And as I have already shown, the mystery of marriage is similarly reflected in the union between Christ and his people."