Re-reading Household Relationships Christologically (Ephesians, Empire and Egalitarianism)

Why has the biblical passage, Eph. 5:21-33 traditionally been used to reiterate the subordinate position of wives and women in general? This book attempts to analyze the Jewish, Greco-Roman and Christian elements of household relationships in the letter to the Ephesians as a site for postcolonial feminist theological formulations. While there are negotiations with the colonial and patriarchal environment, one may also find how the author struggles to retain the egalitarianism of early Christian church. The imagery of Christ-church union and mutuality in "one flesh" marital relationship provide pointers to re-read the text towards de-colonizing and de- patriarchalizing the Ephesian household codes.

Rev. Dr. Jayachitra Lalitha is Professor of New Testament at the Tamilnadu Theological Seminary, Madurai. She is also the Dean of Women's Studies. She has co- edited two books, Teaching All Nations: Interrogating the Matthean Great Commission and Evangelical Postcolonial Conversations: Global Awakenings in Theology and Praxis.

This book, originally submitted as a doctoral dissertation to the Senate of Serampore College (University), is an attempt to analyze the household marital relation in the letter to the Ephesians as a site for postcolonial theological formulations. Since, Ephesus itself is a colonized city and a prominent centre of Christianity in the first century Roman imperial era, there might have been direct impact of Greco-Roman religion, ideology and ethics on the Christian living in its early stages of development. The Church at Ephesus would probably have struggled to negotiate its existence amidst other dominant ideologies. The letter to the Ephesians exhibits hybridized nuances from its multicultural setting of Judaism, Greco- Roman religions and Christianity and therefore, portrays a narrative ambivalence as a literature. Thus, a reader might encounter anti- imperial strategies not in an explicit manner, but in a subtle way in the form of hybridity and colonial mimicry.

The epistle to the Ephesians reflects overtones of imperial ideology as it struggles to keep the pressures from the colonial environment at a check. As far as the author is concerned, God's empire is in the heavenly realms with all the spiritual blessings (1:3), which in fact becomes the starting point for narrating the whole theology against the colonial backdrop. The empire of God's spiritual/heavenly realm is now incarnated into the household of God (2:19), where no one remains foreigner or alien but everyone is a fellow citizen with God's people. A study on the ethnic, religious and linguistic groups in the multicultural Rome in first century CE supports that the Jewish and Christian communities were treated as 'foreign' to Roman culture and social life. But, in the epistle to the Ephesians, the empire is replaced by the household, while retaining the other political terms. A household in a Roman society plays a significant role in that the social order is being established beginning from the smallest unit of the society. The concept of the household of God comprising all the members of Ephesian church links to the author's intention of making God's empire very much relevant for the church in a colonial environment.

Unless the Ephesian church is a colonized community in itself, the thrust of the letter will not make sense to the readers. It also should be noted that in the process of creating a counter-empire, the Ephesian church tends to become imperial by mimicking the strategies of the imperial power. The author's inclination to use Greco-Roman terminologies and concepts like Household, ecclesia, powers, authorities and the imagery of army/ soldier in the letter to the Ephesians attests to this.

Christian household codes in general and Ephesian household codes in particular exhibit possibilities of a hybrid formulation of the prevalent household duties practiced from the time of Aristotle till Roman captivation. The author of Ephesians, by asking the husbands to love their wives, is actually setting a resistant tone to the then prevailing Greco-Roman household codes. It was by no means conventional in the imperial Roman society to expect of husbands to love their wives. The marriage relationship is generally viewed as a contractual bond, which can be broken legally at any time by divorce. Since, wives continued to live under the patriarchal control of their fathers even after their marriage, the husbands were actually not enjoying much legal control over their wives in Roman society. In such a conventional Roman society, it would be radical and revolutionary to demand from husbands love toward their wives. It raises the question whether such an exhortation challenges the patriarchal domination safeguarded by the imperial powers.

There has been a rising interest in the nature of the household in recent times, motivated and provoked by feminist perspectives which envisage the household as a major and significant institution, in which and through which gender relations are arranged, prescribed and perhaps disputed. Examining the nature of the household has enhanced our understanding of its particularities, leading to the awareness that there is variation in the manner in which relationships are forged between members within the household and between the household and the society, all influenced by context, space and time. Households were in all likelihood internally differentiated. How we analyse and understand these variations and diversities are in turn dependent upon our understandings of patriarchies. The possibility and the need for wide-ranging analyses of the household are therefore essential.

The Indian grha or household has always been recognized as a basic unit of society and its health and success was crucial to the life and the well-being of the society and the State. The Indian tradition therefore contains within it several such codes found, for example, within the lastric traditions the Manusmrti, the Arthalästra and the Kamasutra. These codes continue to sway influence on the Indian household, irrespective of caste, class or religion and govern relationships amongst its members, particularly between men and women. One cannot therefore ignore their influence and relevance in today's Indian context, in spite of the eras that separate us from the time when they were composed or compiled. What a juxtaposed reading of these fastric traditions and the household codes (haustafel) within the New Testament might produce remains to be seen.

The haustafel found within the New Testament and their interpretations over the many centuries have impacted and influenced the Indian Christian household. In many ways, the uncritical interpretations of these codes and a prescriptive use of these along with the Indian cultural traditions which relegate women to a subservient position within family and society have reinforced women's subordination and subjugation with the Christian household and the Church. The extent to which these prescriptions are followed remains enigmatic. Changing social circumstances have led to the questioning, to modifications, sometimes abandonment and other times reversals as well.

The importance of the questioning of Ephesians 5 and its interpretations for Indian women cannot be undermined. The text, a favorite in marriage rituals, has often been used prescriptively to encourage married women to be submissive and to buttress male superiority and domination; female inferiority and submission. But, that there is a huge gap between such sexist interpretations and what the text might actually be suggesting has been highlighted by several scholars both men and women. Ephesians 5:21-33 reflects a revolutionary idea - a re-conceptualized relationship between a man and a woman in the context of marriage. But does it really? Let Jayachitra tell us.

**Contents and Sample Pages**