I need context here. The Revised Common Lectionary — which is used by almost every confessional church in the West — sets readings each Sunday which are designed to move through the Bible over three years.

Well, last Sunday it was a bit about wifely submission for the Catholic and Anglican Communions — the RCL skipped this. Let’s look at the text.

Ephesians 5:21-32

21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

22 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. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[b] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church..

Bonald started the conversation up with this set of questions…

Okay, how many of our Catholic readers had to endure one of those “of course Saint Paul didn’t mean that” homilies this past weekend? Or the even worse “Paul did mean it, but that was just his evil cultural conditioning speaking” homily? Maybe a better question would be whether any of you didn’t hear one or the other? Was their one priest in all of Christendom who was willing to agree with and defend the revealed word of God?

Well, over at Complementarian Loners they got exactly that.

Fr Lukewarm (sorry, not sure of his real name) presided at the Mass.

He said, “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord.” Then I guess it was time for a little bit of irreverence, so Fr. Lukewarm said: “Well, I’ve avoided commenting on this for 20 years, and I’m going to continue to avoid commenting on it – ho ho ho!” This brought chuckles from the congregation and self-satisfied smiles from the women. Phew! He dodged that bullet!

But rather than let him think that he dodged the issue in order to avoid controversy, I will expose him as a shamelessly wussy man. Women do not listen to or pay attention to wussy men!

This, my friends, is why many Catholics can’t be bothered to go to Mass on Sunday (or Saturday evening). Weekday Masses are better, since the Mass is about half as long with no old lady warbling choir and awful music, but honestly, this is worse than a joke, it’s disrespectful to Our Lord.

Now, that is not uniform. Some priests know the nature of the old faith and have the old fire. This one warms the cockles of this presbyterian heart.

His homily was awesome. He bridged the readings exactly as Craig said above, pointing out that St Paul’s is a hard teaching for us today. He also taught just as Radam and Proph discuss above. He went even futher though, giving a shout out to feudal social relations, explaining that hierarchy embodies both mutual obligations and obligations to God. He mentioned, in this context, the Holy Father’s title “Servant of the Servants of God.” He read from Pius XI (can’t remember the encyclical, unfortunately).

One part of his homily was particularly amazing for its unflinching courage. After describing the mutual obligations of husband and wife, he went on to consider whether a wife was still obliged to obey her husband when he was not trying to be a proper Christian head of the household. The answer is yes, of course, and he said so. He then went on to observe, first, that this is one of the reasons you only choose to marry a proper Christian husband and, second, that your best bet for converting your un-Christian husband is by the witness of your perfect obedience to him.

The most fun part was the beginning. He started as if he was going to spew the usual drivel, mentioning that this Sunday is informally known as “Nudge Sunday,” because husbands can be seen nudging their wives. He went on for a while (in a neutral and factual way) on the subject of how different St Paul’s are from contemporary ideas. Then he said something like “Some people would call this reading primitive. I would call it the Word of God.”

Well, the great thing about the internet is that the reformed have put almost all the old divines online. So let’s go look.

I quote Calvlin a lot. He is, to my mind, one of the best biblical theolgians. His commentaries are well-judge, scholarly, and often sum up the work of not only the first generation of Reformed and Evangelical Scholars but also the work of the fifteen hundred years that proceed them. And he also does not pull punches.

21. Submit yourselves. God has bound us so strongly to each other, that no man ought to endeavor to avoid subjection; and where love reigns, mutual services will be rendered. I do not except even kings and governors, whose very authority is held for the service of the community. It is highly proper that all should be exhorted to be subject to each other in their turn.

But as nothing is more irksome to the mind of man than this mutual subjection, he directs us to the fear of Christ, who alone can subdue our fierceness, that we may not refuse the yoke, and can humble our pride, that we may not be ashamed of serving our neighbors. It does not much affect the sense, whether we interpret the fear of Christ, passively, thus, — let us submit to our neighbors, because we fear Christ; or actively, — let us submit to them, because the minds of all godly persons ought to be influenced by such fear under the reign of Christ. Some Greek manuscripts read, “the fear of God.” The change may have been introduced by some person, who thought that the other phrase, the fear of Christ, though by far the most appropriate, sounded a little harsh.

22. Wives, submit yourselves. He comes now to the various conditions of life; for, besides the universal bond of subjection, some are more closely bound to each other, according to their respective callings. The community at large is divided, as it were, into so many yokes, out of which arises mutual obligation. There is, first, the yoke of marriage between husband and wife; — secondly, the yoke which binds parents and children; — and, thirdly, the yoke which connects masters and servants. By this arrangement there are six different classes, for each of whom Paul lays down peculiar duties. He begins with wives, whom he enjoins to be subject to their husbands, in the same manner as to Christ, — as to the Lord. Not that the authority is equal, but wives cannot obey Christ without yielding obedience to their husbands.

23. For the husband is the head of the wife. This is the reason assigned why wives should be obedient. Christ has appointed the same relation to exist between a husband and a wife, as between himself and his church. This comparison ought to produce a stronger impression on their minds, than the mere declaration that such is the appointment of God. Two things are here stated. God has given to the husband authority over the wife; and a resemblance of this authority is found in Christ, who is the head of the church, as the husband is of the wife.

And he is the savior of the body. The pronoun HE (autos) is supposed by some to refer to Christ; and, by others, to the husband. It applies more naturally, in my opinion, to Christ, but still with a view to the present subject. In this point, as well as in others, the resemblance ought to hold. As Christ rules over his church for her salvation, so nothing yields more advantage or comfort to the wife than to be subject to her husband. To refuse that subjection, by means of which they might be saved, is to choose destruction.

24. But, as the church is subject to Christ. The particle but, may lead some to believe that the words, he is the savior of the body, are intended to anticipate an objection. Christ has, no doubt, this peculiar claim, that he is the Savior of the Church: nevertheless, let wives know, that their husbands, though they cannot produce equal claims, have authority over them, after the example of Christ. I prefer the former interpretation; for the argument derived from the word but, (alla,) does not appear to me to have much weight.

25. Husbands, love your wives. From husbands, on the other hand, the apostle requires that they cherish toward their wives no ordinary love; for to them, also, he holds out the example of Christ, — even as Christ also loved the church. If they are honored to bear his image, and to be, in some measure, his representatives, they ought to resemble him also in the discharge of duty.

And gave himself for it. This is intended to express the strong affection which husbands ought to have for their wives, though he takes occasion, immediately afterwards, to commend the grace of Christ. Let husbands imitate Christ in this respect, that he scrupled not to die for his church. One peculiar consequence, indeed, which resulted from his death, — that by it he redeemed his church, — is altogether beyond the power of men to imitate.

OK. John Calvin sets the standard. Now, the modern reformed people, following the current revised common lectionary, wimped out and changed the text to Ephesians six. Ironically, Calvin would have come across similarly to the Catholic prelate. His commentaries start with a parallel text in the vernacular and Latin. He assumes you have some greek. And he tends to not stray too far from the text.

He does not contextualize. He does not look at how this can mould into our current mores. As one priest said today, he took it as the word of God, and for today. I wish that more people did so.