The Pleroma (18) - Charles H. Welch

No.18. The title Head, and 

its relation to the Fullness. 

The largest section of the Epistle to the Ephesians is in the practical portion, and occupies the whole of chapter v., and nine verses of chapter vi. This great section falls into two parts. (1) A threefold walk; (2) A threefold relationship. 

       The threefold walk 

a | v. 2. Walk in love. 

   b | v. 8. Walk as children of light. 

      c | v. 15. Walk circumspectly. 

       The threefold relationship 

a | v. 22, 23. Wives and husbands. 

   b | vi. 1-4. Children and parents. 

      c | vi. 5-9. Servants and masters. 

The first thing to observe is that if Eph. v. 22-33 teaches that the church is “The Bride” or “The Wife”, then by parity of reasoning, w must continue the analogy and say that the church is also a ‘child’ and a ‘servant’, but that would be untrue in this connection, for while individuals believers are ‘children of God’ and many of the Lord’s children are also His ‘servants’ that is very different from teaching that the church in its dispensational aspect is itself either child or servant. This is not true. The church of the Mystery is categorically called in the doctrinal section “The Church which is His Body, the fullness of Him that filleth all in all”, and to forget that Eph. v. and vi. deals with the practical outworking of the truth in the daily life of the individual believer is to make an initial mistake, the consequences of which are far reaching. While we are dealing with this aspect of the subject, let us deal with another, which is allied. It is sometimes taught that seeing that the word ‘Church’ is feminine that Eph. v. 25 should be translated ‘As Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for HER’, but this is to confuse gender with sex. In many languages both ancient and modern, things are often expressed in either the masculine or the feminine gender, but this is in reference to the language employed, not the thing itself. The very word we have before us “The Head” is the Greek kephale which is feminine, consequently the same argument that demands ‘her’ in Eph. v. 25 would demand that we use ‘she’ when speaking of Christ the Head! Peace and forgiveness are feminine, but blessings and will are masculine. This has reference only to their grammatical form. The reference to “The Head” which is the reason for turning to Eph. v. is found in verse 23: 

“For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church; and He is the saviour of the body.” 

It is evident that this passage is part of an argument, an argument that develops from the closing statement of verse 21: 

“Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God (or of Christ).” 

Observe that it does not say, wives submit to husbands, or husbands submit to wives, but ‘submitting yourself one to another’. This ‘submission’ flows out of the position of the Lord and the Church’s relationship with Him. The Greek word hupotasso ‘to submit’ or ‘to be subject’ is used in Eph. i. 22 where we read ‘And hath put all things under His feet’. It is evident, however, from the same passage that the Church which is His Body, is not put in subjection under His feet, for the near context speaks of this same company as ‘seated together’ in the heavenlies. The first occurrence of the Greek word hupotasso is Luke ii. 51, where it speaks of Christ as a lad of twelve years of age, who returned with His parents to Nazareth ‘and was SUBJECT unto them’. Can we not enter into the next sentence “But His mother kept all these sayings in her heart”? The last reference to hupotasso so far as fulfillment is concerned is I Cor. xv. 28: 

“And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” 

Between the first occurrence and the last, we have the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ, with all things being placed under His feet, first as Head of the Church of the one Body (Eph. i. 22, 23), then over ‘the world to come’ whereof Paul speaks in Hebrews (Heb. ii. 5-8), of which the heavenly section is dealt with in this epistle, and the earthly in such prophecies as Psa. ii. and Psa. cx., and Rev. xi. 15. These successive subjections were set forth in type when Adam was created, given dominion, and commanded not only to replenish the earth but to ‘subdue’ it (Gen. i. 28). In the light of the age-purpose, in the light of the submission of the Son of God Himself, all resentment, all sense of humiliation, all argument concerning equality or rights or any other objection that arises in the human breast, falters and dies in the presence of such utter devotion to the glorious purpose of redeeming love. What husband or what wife, having seen such a grace and condescension manifested for their salvation and peace, would not gladly and willingly co-operate with such love that passes knowledge, and count it a joy and a privilege to have the smallest place in the outworking of such a purpose? Both the husband and the wife are in the first place types and shadows. The husband is a type of the Headship of Christ, the wife a type of the Church which is His Body. Neither the one nor the other is superior or inferior, both are essential to the completion of the figure. Wives are called upon to submit themselves unto their own husbands ‘as unto the Lord’. Husbands are called upon to love their wives ‘even as Christ loved the church’. This is an entirely different plane than that of human affection. In the ordinary way of life one expects a husband to love his wife, and where there is such love, there is usually no argument as to who is head of the family. This is taken for granted in Eph. v. The Apostle is not instructing husbands and wives in things they already know and feel, he is concerned with the type ‘as unto the Lord’, ‘As Christ also loved’. In verse 23, there is an addition or clause. After the parallel is complete “for the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church” the Apostle adds “And He is the Saviour of the body”. There is but one reference to the Saviour in Ephesians, and but one in Philippians, and both deal with the Body. In Ephesians, the Body, the Church is in view; in Philippians (iii. 21) the transfiguration of the body of the believer in resurrection is in view. The words appear to be added in Eph. v. 23 for several reasons: 

(1) No human husband can be called ‘The saviour of the body’ whether ‘the body’ refers to himself, his wife, the church, or the resurrection. 

(2) The reference to ‘the body’ seems to be included here, and in verses 28 and 30, to prevent the idea forming in the mind that the church here can be looked upon as the ‘wife’. The husband is to love his wife as his own body. 

(3) The quotation from Gen. ii. 24 follows, but lest we should think that Gen. ii. is speaking of that which was a mystery at that time ‘hid in God’ and so be self contradictory, the Apostle adds: 

(4) “This is a great mystery”, i.e. the fact that in true marriage a man and wife become ‘one flesh’. 

(5) This he differentiates from the relationship of Christ in the Church by saying immediately ‘But I speak concerning Christ and the church’. Then leaving once again the type, the Apostle returns to the obligations which devolve upon both husband and wife saying ‘Nevertheless, let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself, and the wife see that she reverence her husband’. 

The fact that the exhortation to husband and wives are an integral part of a threefold exhortation that includes children and parents, servants and masters, must be kept before the mind throughout the reading of this chapter. Even if there had been no revelation which indicated the relationship of the church with Christ, it would still have been necessary to remind husband and wives of their relationship one to another, and to the need to express in their mutual love and relationship the doctrine already given. That relationship having been given as that of a ‘Body’ with the ‘Head’ cannot be altered simply because some believers in that company happened to be married, any more than the constitution of the one Body could be modified, simply because other believers in that company were masters or slaves. The blessed truth which can easily be lost sight of in this argument is that the highest revelation of doctrine, the highest of all callings, the most wonderful of all spheres of blessing, are not too high but that they may be exemplified in the daily life in home and business of the humblest member. The exhortations of Eph. v. and vi. are but a part of the demand made by the Apostle that all believers should walk worthy of the vocation wherewith they had been called, the ‘walk in love’ with which Eph. v. opened, being most clearly exemplified by the love of the husband to the wife. If every Christian home could but be run on these lines what a witness it would be both to men and to angels. In the light of the Saviour’s own selfless love, and subjection for our sakes, such relationships should be nothing more than our ‘reasonable service’. 

-------------

(From The Berean Expositor vol. 43, page 157).

------------