Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. Now, as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle, or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. . . . For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. This is a profound mystery.(Ephesians 5: 21-32)

It is significant that Paul addresses wives first. This is not a placatory gesture towards husbands! It is, instead, an acknowledgement of the crucial importance of the role of the wife, and by extension also of the mother, in the health and wholeness of family as an institution. For all the self-importance men presume for themselves, wives and mothers are, comparatively, far more important in shaping and sustaining the culture and health of their homes. Apparently this fact was obvious to Satan. So he targeted Eve first. There is no suggestion at all in the Bible that Eve was weaker than Adam in a mental, moral or even physical sense. Nor was Satan looking necessarily for the line of least resistance. He was making a strategic move and was keen, hence, to penetrate the pivotal point. This pattern is further reinforced by the salvation story. God chose a woman as the vehicle for the advent of His son to this world. Mary was a far more sustained and substantial presence in the life and ministry of Jesus as compared to Joseph. So Paul addresses wives first, simply because of the key role they play in healing families both in terms of ministering to their husbands and in terms of nurturing healthy generations.

Why are, let us ask, wives asked to submit to, or obey, their husbands? Doesn't it seem more appropriate to instruct them to 'love' their husbands, which is what probably would have occurred to most of us to insist on? Elsewhere in this book we shall consider the spiritual paradox that it is the strong that are required to submit. Their submission is voluntary and, hence, has an empowering value. To the world, submission smells only of defeat and humiliation. There is no spiritual merit in submitting under pressure when one has no other alternative. Two things are difficult for the weak. The first is to resist the mighty. The second is to be meek towards those who are weaker than themselves. It is not because they are weak that wives are to submit to their husbands, but precisely because they are strong, even if their strength is different from 'strength' in a manly sense. And it is not only to purchase domestic peace that they need to so submit. Submission that is spiritually valid is not a strategy but a sacrament. Its purpose is sanctification, redemption and healing. It is the maximization of the good. Submission is the medium through which a wife ministers to her husband.

This spiritual model of submission has nothing to do with humouring one's husband, or aiding and abetting his wrongdoings. As we have seen at the outset itself, the shaping principle for the discipline of family life is the messianic goal of "fullness of life" for all, which includes all members of the family. The wife is, therefore, required to submit to her husband 'as to the Lord'. This does not mean, "as unconditionally as you would submit to the Lord". It means "submit to your husband as gladly and wholehearted as you would to the Lord, provided that the substance of your submission is Christ-oriented. Through this redemptive and self-emptying submission, the wife ministers to her husband in his need to be more and more like Jesus.

Emotional insecurity, as we have seen, tortures the most confident-looking male in the world, simply because of the power-orientation that has come to dominate the nature and culture of man. The rebelliousness of the wife aggravates this dormant disease and mortally infects the relationship between them. Power cannot be detoxified by power. The breath-taking revelation in the Garden of Gethsemane is that submission is the only antidote to the madness of power. It is this saving truth that reverberates through the prayer of Jesus, "Not my will, but thine be done". The characteristic symptom of the male sickness of power-induced insecurity is the inability to love. The wife has a duty to enable her husband to shift from the foundation of power to that of love not only because in that way alone lies the prospect of her being loved by her husband, but also because it is the will of God for her in her vocation as a wife. Submission is the godly investment she makes into enabling her man to be Christ-like in his vocation as a husband.

As against this, the usual temptation is to fight and frustrate the male will-to-dominate through a prolonged war of emotional attrition. Power confronts power. Sparks fly. Wounds and pains persist and multiply. Power-driven relationships are their own nemesis. They undermine the health of the family. Families, not less than individuals, need salvation. But it is not easy to submit. And the growing cultural allergy to meekness, and the exaltation of the cult of power, makes this option seem increasingly unattractive. In such a context, the people of God have to make a special and deliberate effort to rise above the 'patterns of the world' and to be transformed after the culture of the Kingdom.

Ironically, the need to submit, not less than the will to power, is basic to human nature. As a matter of fact, lusting after power is itself a form of submission, the submission to the lust of power, and the neurosis that results from it. Submission, this giving in to the lust of power, is written into the logic of fallen human nature. That being the case, the choice is between submitting to true authority or submitting to its false counterparts. Teenagers who habitually defy their parents, for example, allow themselves to be enslaved by their peer-group. Women who belittle the authority of their husbands tend to meekly submit to alternative forms of authority or influence, often irrespective of their merits. The cultural allergy to submission amounts in practice to the willingness to be enslaved by a counter force or attraction. Rebelliousness is much more than mere disobedience. The problem with Eve was not only that she disobeyed God. The real problem was that her disobedience was the product of another 'obedience': submission to the insinuation of the Tempter.

Obedience or submission is, thus, not a simple issue. And it does not come spontaneously to human nature, located as we are in a tradition of radical rebelliousness inaugurated in the Fall. One of the major factors involved in such rebelliousness is ignorance, or rejection, of the basic purpose of a relationship. The wife's duty to submit herself to her husband must be seen as integral to her calling to be a "proper help," which is what God envisages her to be. What is "proper" in this context needs to be understood in relation to the culture of man as husband. Given the dynamics of family life as well as male nature, the quality of being 'proper' has to include wifely submission in order to help the husband to become a 'proper' help, which nobody is at the beginning. It is most important to remember that the wife's submission is to be offered and received as "help", and not as a matter of right on the part of the husband or as strategy, or marriage tax, on the part of the wife. Both wife and husband have a shared and sacred duty to ensure that this remains "proper" help. Especially the husband needs to realize that if improperly received and treated, the submission that his wife offers will cease to be 'proper' help. It could be a source of corruption and ill health for the family.

What is proper about this submission needs to be understood also in relation to the shared mission that underlies husband-wife relationship. God constitutes relationships not just as the means for private profit or pleasure, but as resources for His Mission. It is in this sense that marriages are made in heaven and lived upon this earth. Outside of this purpose, or in indifference to it, the discipline of man-woman relationship stands on flimsy grounds. The proper submission of the wife to the husband 'as to the Lord' calls for, besides, great spiritual strength and wisdom. The might that creates misery is a cheap one. The strength to hurt and humiliate is only another form of weakness. True or godly strength is that which empowers the weak to be strong. As Paul emphasizes, God takes the weak of the world to make them strong; the foolish, to make them wise. A 'prudent' wife, says the writer of the Proverbs, is a gift from God. Wifely prudence involves not only able resource-management; it also includes constructive, even redemptive, human resource management, especially in respect of "the one talent" that God entrusts to every wife: namely, her husband.

It is through holy submission that Mary became the mother of the Lord and the most blessed among all women. She submitted herself to the will of God saying, "I am the Lord's servant. May it be to me as you have said." (Lk.1: 38). It is this spirit of purposive submission that we see in her again in the context of the miracle at Cana of Galilee. Despite the seemingly curt response from Jesus, she went and instructed the servants: "Do whatever he tells you." (Jn. 2: 5). She displays the same strength all through the arrest and crucifixion of Jesus. We do not see her protest or rebel against the plan of God, according to which a sword had to piece her heart also (Lk. 2:35). HUSBANDS, LOVE YOUR WIVES! Having exhorted wives to shift from resistance to submission, Paul goes on to urge husbands to move from control to companionship. They are to love their wives. The very fact that it seemed necessary to the Apostle to give this instruction at all proves that it is neither easy nor natural for husbands to do so. Men tend to take love within marriage for granted! They are too busy, too manly, or too strong to love. A husband, who would fight another man for making advances towards his wife, may not love her with half the intensity with which he fights the adversary. From courtship to marriage, the radical change a man undergoes is the shift from love to ownership.

Yet nothing matters as much to a woman as being loved does. Why is that so? Why does the Bible define the psychology of women in terms of "desire"? Desire is driven by the need to complete the self. The male need to dominate is also a form of 'desire'; but it is a different kind of desire. It is the desire not so much to complete, as to reassure, the self. It is the desire to own the partner as an exclusive personal trophy, a monopoly item. The 'desire' of the woman aims not at having, but at being. Her desire towards her man involves her identity and personal validation. It engages her personal worth. To see this clearly, all we have to do is to consider the social and emotional overtones of the word 'widow'. It is not unlikely that it is for this very reason that orthodox societies see the unfaithfulness of a wife as a greater offence than the unfaithfulness of a husband, even if this double standard is morally indefensible. This is not only a matter of the 'male conspiracy' to keep women under bit and bridle. It also involves the psychology of women; and is felt as such by women, not less than by men.

While psychic insecurity torments men as husbands, most women as wives are plagued by a sense of low self-esteem. Though its degree varies from culture to culture, it is nonetheless a universal reality. The most classic symptom of this psychological malady is the deep-seated conviction harboured by its victims that "it is a curse to be a woman". Love is the only antidote for this malady; and, fortunately, it is a sufficient antidote. Love is the ultimate alchemy of personal worth. Love effects a quantum leap in the worth of the object of love. Paul, in exhorting husbands to love their wives, is instructing them to minister to their partners in terms of their basic need.

But the issue of the low self-worth of the wife has consequences that involve the well-being of the husband also in a substantial way. A sense of low self-worth disables the wife from believing in her equality with her husband. Love presupposes equality. So the deep-seated anxiety of the woman in this relationship, rarely conceptualized or articulated by a wife, inhibits love in the relationship. Love is necessarily an egalitarian force. The vague sense of inequality that hangs over the wife cripples her capacity for companionship. She then tries to offer substitute gratifications and compensations for this disability by 'slaving and slogging' in the house, even denying herself the basic comforts that are readily available and affordable. This breeds a tendency to exaggerate the burden and weariness one has to live with. Or, to adapt the words of St. Paul to this occasion, she gives her body to be burned only to make up for her inability to enter into a relationship of love and companionship. She tries to prove her 'worth', her usefulness to the entire household as a self-sacrificing servant, though often a disgruntled one. Predictably, this brings poor dividends. Those husbands who look for companions in their wives feel disappointed at getting a glorified servant, instead. Husbands who try to own their wives as adjuncts to their male egos also get disappointed because the self-deprecation, and the personal elusiveness that invariably goes with it, makes the catch not worth having it! This disappointment inhibits love further and perpetuates the cycle of bitterness and grievance.

It is necessary and helpful to recognize some of the practical implications and complications of this epidemic of low self-esteem.

1. It kills companionship. No human being can be a companion and a servant at the same time. This does not mean that service is incompatible with companionship. Rather, the contrary. True companionship expresses itself through mutual and joyful service in love. For one thing, low self-esteem corrupts the idea of service into 'a necessary evil'. For another, it becomes a disappointing substitute for true companionship. As we have seen, the capacity for companionship is corrupted in the male, by one's control-orientation. In the female, it is crippled by low self-esteem.

2. Low self-esteem robs its victim of the value of the value of what one is and has. This expresses itself not much in terms of direct expression of disapproval or disappointment. Hardly any wife says explicitly that her husband is useless or what she owns is cheap. She may indicate as much by being indifferent to these on the one hand, and through disproportionate appreciation for what is outside of her home, on the other. Wifely weapons are mostly indirect. Given the hypersensitivity of insecure male ego, it is not necessary to tell a man to his face that he is worthless. All a wife has to do is to praise someone else on his trivial achievements or hypothetical virtues, like someone else's husband in the neighbourhood being very successful, enterprising, caring, creative, and so on. Misplaced appreciation and admiration could be calculated barbs. Women, who do not take themselves seriously, which happens in low self-esteem, find it difficult to believe that others, especially their husbands, can cherish them either. It is important to understand the pernicious logic at work in this situation. The wife projects her sense of worthlessness on all that she has. Because she is worthless; her husband also must be. So also, her children, her home, her belongings. Hence it must be deemed a matter of 'inspired self-interest' for the husband to minister to his wife vis-à-vis her self-worth, making a clear distinction between self-worth and self-importance. Exhibitionistic self-importance is a symptom of low self-worth.

The implications of low self-worth take a toll on the spontaneity and depth of husband-wife relationship. The erosion of spontaneity aggravates mistrust, especially on the part of the husband. Lack of spontaneity breeds the vague and nagging feeling in a husband that his spouse is playing hide-and-seek with him, that there is something more to it than meets the eye. This breeds mistrust and activates a sense of grievance, even when there is no factual basis for it. Such a relationship fails to meet the emotional needs of the spouses.

3. Such a situation tortures the husband inwardly. It aggravates the in-born disease of emotional insecurity. Where he expects security, he finds insecurity. Where he asked for an egg, he thinks he has been given a scorpion. Instead of companionship, he experiences loneliness. Instead of peace and a sense of belonging, he begins to be tortured by the demons of irrational suspicion. Viciousness and vindictiveness result. The husband resorts to a variety of tactics to break down the spirit of his wife and to secure control over her, through which he hopes to gain his peace. If he cannot have her relationally, he must own her like chattel. But the more he tries to impose his will on her, the farther she gets from him emotionally. (Strangely, the psychological dependence of the spouses on each other could deepen even as they fight more and more viciously!) This creates a vicious circle that spirals its way to the dead-end.

4. When a husband-wife relationship comes to this sorry pass, the wife begins to see herself as a hapless victim. This is unhelpful, even dangerous, for two reasons. First, her version of the situation does not correspond to the whole truth. In an overwhelming majority of cases, wives play roles complementary to those of their husbands. This is true in varying degrees, even if this is the last thing a 'suffering wife' expects to be told. Second, a wife who thinks of herself as a victim disables herself from taking any initiative to improve the situation. Marriage counselors know that women in this state when urged to recognize the compulsive patterns in their own role and their responsibility for perpetuating their domestic misery, show a distressing reluctance to do what they can to help themselves. Recognizing responsibility is a pre-condition for helping oneself; for the only area where we can improve, to begin with, is that of our own choices and actions. It does not help to explain away the evidence against oneself. The notion of responsibility is, however, alien to the idea of "victim". This proves attractive because it exempts the person concerned from the duty to do what one can to improve the situation. A victim is, by definition, helpless. Helplessness excuses inaction and dilutes guilt.

The situation is not unlike what Jesus diagnosed in the cripple who remained un-healed for thirty-eight long years beside the pool of Bethesda (Jn. 5: 1-). His basic malady was this "victim-complex". He assumed that everything was up to everybody else. There was nothing he could do for himself. He saw himself as abjectly dependent on others. This very disposition blinded him from seeing what he could do for himself. That was his basic problem. So Jesus confronted the man with a searching question, "Do you want to be healed?" (v.6). This is the central question in every human situation, including the domestic scene. It is sadly true that far too many people do not want to be healed, as far as the sickness of their homes is concerned.

Consider this young housewife who broke out into tears as she recounted the misery of her family life to me. In the early phase of her married life, she and her handsome husband lived in the joint family that inhibited their freedom and intimacy. She was too busy looking after a large family to pay adequate attention to her husband, who began to feel emotionally neglected. This paved the way for an extra-marital involvement on his part, which came to light eventually. Remedial steps were taken thereupon; and the man mended his ways completely, as per the confessions of the wife herself. Yet the past continued to stonewall their relationship. In about 13 years of their life thereafter, she has never had the courage to sort out her inner hurt and to redeem her relationship. She was not able to talk it out with her husband. She could not forget or forgive. The result was that their relationship continued to suffer. As a result, she continued to live with the feeling that her husband did not love her. She was well liked by everyone else except her husband. When steps towards improving this painful situation were suggested to her, she became altogether silent. It looked as though the prospect of coming out of this situation bewildered her, having got so used to being a victim for so long! Put this way, it might seem harsh and unfeeling, but there is an element of truth in this, which needs to be grasped for what it is worth in practical terms.

Unlike the instance above, often the causes for major domestic tragedies are simple! It takes only a spark to burn a forest. As a rule, couples in misery do not have the objectivity to understand their problems aright. In the urban context of nuclear families, young couples have no worthwhile guidance and help in times of trouble. The result is that situations gradually deteriorate and reach a point of 'no return'. Those who are caught in an unhealthy situation get obsessed with the symptoms, but not reach the roots of their problems. This is further complicated by the "victim" mentality that, as we have seen, rules out any reformative response from either side.

The perverse psychology of "victim mentality" needs to be reckoned. While it allows the aggrieved party to luxuriate in self-pity, it works invariably to her disadvantage. Violence is basic to this scenario. Victims are the products of violence and violence is necessary to sustain one's image as a 'victim'. That being the case, the so-called victim cooperates with the aggressor one way or another to perpetuate the violence against oneself. It is a basic moral duty for all who suffer to assess prayerfully as to how much of one's personal suffering is genuinely unavoidable. A commitment to 'fullness of life' -which is the umbrella concept under which personal and family culture needs to be defined in the Christian context- demands the elimination of avoidable and meaningless suffering. The crude, sentimental approach that mendaciously associates pointless suffering with spiritual value amounts to a mockery of the biblical way of life. God is not honoured if we continue to suffer on account of our own folly, no matter how intense that suffering is, and how stoically we put up with it. God does not want us to be each other's victims!

It is a profound biblical insight that only the sinless and perfect One can be a genuine, pure Victim. Every other victim is a deception and a distortion of truth, though the degree of aberration may vary from case to case. The astounding truth of the Gospel is that Jesus is the Victim! This must urge us to be vigilant against casting ourselves in the victim-mode. It was to set us free from our captive state as inward prisoners and victims that Jesus became the Ultimate Victim (Lk.4:18). Reluctance to leave this personal prison amounts to belittling the work of liberation accomplished on the Cross of Calvary. In contrast, the logic of sin compels an abdication of personal responsibility and the perpetuation of the miserable status quo. Jesus' call to 'repent' was addressed to this human predicament.

Of course, the so-called victims also fight, even if the weapons and tactics employed are different from those of victimizers. The wife employs, mostly, various tactics of insubordination, the refusal to submit or obey. They include, first, ignoring the will and discounting the opinions of the spouse. This hurts, especially in situations of conflict, as this amounts to a challenge of the husband's authority as 'the head'. Second, the wife comes to depend increasingly on the guidance and opinions of others, belittling there by the privileged position of the husband. Third, the wife creates an ambience of willful neglect, mainly as a rebuff to the male need to own her, and partly also as a protest against not being cherished. The wife develops an uncanny knack to discover what picks the nerves of her husband. In all these, the woman uses the tactic of tenacity and endurance knowing that to be her native strength.

In the heat of this war of attrition, both parties lose sight of the universal truth that this war of wills can produce only loses and not victors. In the strange logic of life and relationships, to win in a war of interpersonal relationship is to lose. This too proves the truth of the biblical insight that marriage, the man and woman become one flesh. This rules out the possibility of one triumphing over, or thriving at the expense of, the other.

In respect of her relationship to her husband, the wife has the following options:

Submit herself in love to her husband, and so transform submission into companionship.
Submit herself to her husband under coercion.
Resist her husband and keep him at an arm's length so that to avoid the eventuality of loving submission.

All these options result in creating their own distinctive domestic cultures the fruits of which will be harvested over generations. Choices in this respect need to be made, therefore, with a sense of responsibility and in the 'fear of the Lord' that makes people wise in these matters. Most people realize only too late that the choices they made were suicidal. That is because human beings learn, under normal circumstances, only from their own experience. The advantage in participating in a spiritual tradition is that one has the wisdom of the accumulated experience of generations. There is the additional guarantee, besides, that this experiential wisdom is shaped, directed and refined by the guidance of the Spirit.

The preceding analysis is meant to reckon the rationale for the Apostle's instruction to husbands: "love your wives". The only antidote to the pathology of low self-esteem is the alchemy of love. Love transforms the object of love. It enhances the worth of the loved one. In the context of marriage, it makes the wife feel truly cherished. That makes it not only easier for the wife to submit to her husband, but transforms submission itself into a sacrament of love. Love inspires love. And love does not disdain to obey or to submit. In fact, obedience becomes a metaphor of love in action. Jesus expressed his love for his heavenly Father through self-emptying obedience (Phil. 2:5-11).

Coercion is the alternative to love. Husbands, who are incapable of loving, resort to violence in the hope that they will break down the spirit of their wives. Whether they win or lose, this ensures the defeat of their family life. For, if they win, their wives will degenerate into slaves and servants, turning victors into widowers! If they lose, their families become "headless", with unhappy consequences especially for the disciplined nurture of children.

In the light of what we have seen so far, we can appreciate the complementarity of the roles that St Paul ascribes to wives and husbands. Wives must submit in order to enable their husbands to love them all the more. Rebelliousness is unlikely to increase their attractiveness or improve their well-being in this context. Husbands must love their wives in order to enable them to submit themselves in love. Submission in love enriches; whereas submission under coercion impoverishes. These complementary responses cement their relationships and make them endure over a lifetime.

It could well be debated as to who has the more difficult mandate: the wife who has to submit herself to her husband, or the husband who is instructed to love his life, as Jesus loves the Church? The answer to this depends on a further question:

What does it mean for the husband to love in this fashion?

First of all we need to dispel the romantic notion that loving comes naturally and easy to everyone. It simply does not. Especially, love as it is understood in the Bible. Spiritual love is quite unlike romantic love! Romantic love is an indulgence. Spiritual love is a mission. Romantic love, loves because of the object of love. Spiritual love loves in spite of the object of love, as is evident from the instruction to love our enemies. In this instance the reason for loving does not rest in the object of love, but in our relationship with God and in the spiritual discipline that it implies.

What does it mean, let us then ask, for the husband to love his wife as Jesus loves the Church?

Love, says Paul, builds up (1 Cor. 8:1). The duty to love obliges every husband to prioritize the maximum possible development and fulfillment of his wife. The end-goal of this process is the total transformation of the person concerned. Jesus endeavours to present the Church without blemish before the throne of Grace. So also the husband must cherish and protect his wife as the richest treasure in his life for which he should be willing, if need be, to lay down his life. What distinguishes Jesus' love for the Church is its absoluteness. But a husband's love for his wife is not required to be absolute, but total; for God alone deserves our absolute love. In practical terms total love implies 'leaving all else and cleaving' to one's wife. This does wonders for the wife and imbues her with an unshakable sense of self-worth, provided she is able to respond to it and appropriate it.

Secondly, love expresses itself through service. This purifies the authority of the husband of the desire to dominate the wife. Jesus experienced the zenith of his authority in the context of the fellowship meal. Significantly, it is then that he rises up and begins to wash the feet of his disciples. What makes all the difference in the world is not authority per se, but whether or not love is present in the exercise of it. Authority devoid of love degenerates into power. Authority driven by love blossoms as service. The husband is mandated thus to serve his wife in love. His role model in this, as in all else, is Jesus who came "not to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for the sins of many" (Mk. 10: 45).

Thirdly, love is eager to care and to share. Love is the ultimate cementing force. It is this that effects the mystery of the two becoming "one flesh". This also carries the logic of the caring culture that must nourish husband-wife relationship. It is a pity that, due to cultural conditioning, caring has been traditionally associated with women rather than men. The life and ministry of Jesus is a decisive rejection of this cultural bias. As the incarnation of God's love, Jesus remains the ultimate example of caring and sharing. The ministry of healing that he exercised is a good example of it. He shared all he had with others. The final sacrament he instituted is a sacrament of absolute sharing. There is nothing beyond sharing one's body and blood with others. Caring is also a statement of worth; and a caring approach on the part of the husband cannot but transform the wife.

Finally, the duty to love obliges the husband to be steadfast; for love never fails. Biblically, the husband has no excuse for withholding his love from his wife. His love is not rooted primarily in his wife or in himself; it is rooted in God who is not volatile or capricious. It is because God is love and because we are created in His Image that we are capable of love at all. If it were otherwise, the Commandment to love would not have made any spiritual sense.

Given all these, and much else besides, it is obvious that Paul was not being partial to or soft on husbands!