Update 31-Aug 4:10 pm CDT - Jean mentioned in the comments that she has heard different takes on this Bible passage in non-Catholic churches that members of her husband's family attend. So I asked ChatGPT to also write a Southern Baptist sermon on the same passage. I've pasted it below the Catholic homily that begins right after the break.
-----
Last weekend, the second reading at Sunday mass was what might be the single most controversial passage in the Bible: St. Paul's discourse in Ephesians which contains the notorious line, "Wives should be subordinate to their husbands out of reverence for Christ".
I didn't preach last weekend, but I sat in the deacon's chair for two masses. One reader (a man) read the long version of the reading, which includes the phrase in question. From my seat, I have a good view of the congregation, and I observed a couple of husbands nudging their wives or snickering toward them, with the wives striving to put up the appearance of being good sports about it. At the other mass, the reader (a woman) clearly had misgivings about reading that passage from the pulpit. She asked me before mass if she could read the short version, which has cut out the line about wives being subordinate. I told her it was fine with me but she should check with the priest, in case he was planning to address the passage directly in his homily. He told her to please read the short version.
Of course, no homilist is obligated to preach on that passage, even when it is one of the appointed readings. In my experience, most homilists see the path of prudence as avoiding that reading with the proverbial ten-foot pole. This second priest did briefly and cautiously allude to the passage, characterizing it as a call for spouses to love one another. That strikes me as in harmony with what St. Paul wrote, but it takes a bit of reflection and unpacking to get there.
As you know, occasionally I ask the ChatGPT artificial intelligence engine to crank out a homily. One can find the texts and videos of many homilies (from humans) on the Internet, but as a general rule, I don't crib from other homilies when I preach. I do consult sources, but I consider it part of the homilist's job to pray, reflect and struggle with the text him/herself, and produce an original work on it. But in my opinion, ChatGPT did such a good job explaining this passage that I'd happily read it aloud from the pulpit. I'm pasting it below the break, and would welcome your thoughts on it.
Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,
Today, we reflect on a passage from St. Paul's Letter to the Ephesians that has been the subject of much contemplation, and sometimes controversy, throughout the ages. Ephesians 5:21-33 speaks to the relationship between husbands and wives, but more deeply, it reveals to us the mystery of Christ’s love for His Church.
St. Paul begins with a call to mutual submission: “Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph 5:21). This is the foundation upon which Christian relationships are built. Submission here is not about dominance or power, but about love, respect, and humility. It is a mutual giving of oneself for the good of the other, just as Christ gave Himself for us.
In our modern world, the word "submission" often carries negative connotations, but in the context of Christian marriage, it is a profound expression of love. Wives are called to submit to their husbands “as to the Lord” (Eph 5:22). This submission is not an act of weakness but a willing choice to trust and respect one’s spouse. It mirrors the Church’s submission to Christ, recognizing Him as the source of life and salvation.
Husbands, on the other hand, are called to love their wives “as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her” (Eph 5:25). This is no small command. Christ’s love for the Church is sacrificial, selfless, and unconditional. He laid down His life for us, and husbands are called to imitate this love in their relationship with their wives. It is a love that seeks the good of the other, even at the cost of one’s own comfort or desires.
The relationship between husband and wife, as described by St. Paul, is not merely a human institution but a reflection of the divine mystery. “This is a great mystery, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the Church” (Eph 5:32). Marriage is a sacrament, a visible sign of God’s invisible grace. It is a living icon of Christ’s love for the Church, a love that is faithful, fruitful, and enduring.
In a world where marriage is often seen as a contract or a temporary arrangement, St. Paul’s words remind us of the sacredness of this covenant. It is a vocation, a calling to live out the love of Christ in a tangible way. It is a partnership that demands mutual respect, self-giving, and a deep commitment to one another.
For those of us who are married, this passage challenges us to examine how we live out our vocation. Do we love our spouses with the selfless love of Christ? Do we respect and honor one another as equal partners in the journey of faith? For those who are not married, this passage invites us to reflect on the nature of love and the ways we can embody Christ’s love in our relationships with others.
Ultimately, Ephesians 5:21-33 is not just about marriage, but about the call to live in communion with one another, in imitation of Christ. Whether in marriage, in the family, or in the wider community, we are all called to be channels of Christ’s love, submitting to one another out of reverence for Him.
Let us pray for the grace to live out this call in our daily lives, that we may be a witness to the world of the transformative power of Christ’s love. Amen.
-----
As I mentioned in an Update note above the break, I've also asked ChatGPT to write a Southern Baptist sermon on the same Bible passage (Ephesians 5:21-33). Here it is:
Good morning, brothers and sisters in Christ,
Today, we turn our attention to a passage that speaks directly to the heart of our homes, our marriages, and our walk with the Lord. Ephesians 5:21-33 is a powerful Scripture that not only gives us God’s blueprint for marriage but also reveals the deep mystery of Christ’s love for His Church.
Let’s begin with verse 21, where the Apostle Paul tells us, “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” Right here, Paul lays the foundation for all Christian relationships. Submission is not about being weak or inferior; it’s about putting others before ourselves, following the example of Jesus Christ, who humbled Himself for our sake. In our homes, in our marriages, and in our church, we are called to live in a way that honors God and each other.
Now, as we move to verses 22 and following, Paul addresses the specific roles within marriage. He says, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord” (Ephesians 5:22, KJV). Now, let me tell you, this verse has been misunderstood and misused in many ways. But let’s get it right today. Submission, as Paul describes it, is not about domination or control. It’s about respect. Wives, you are called to respect your husbands as the leaders in your home, just as you respect and honor the Lord.
But husbands, before you start feeling too comfortable, let’s look at what Paul says to you. “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it” (Ephesians 5:25, KJV). Men, this is a high calling. Christ loved the Church so much that He gave His life for her. That’s the kind of love you’re called to show your wife. It’s a sacrificial love, a love that puts her needs above your own, a love that is willing to lay down your life for her well-being.
In these verses, Paul is painting a picture of a Christian marriage that reflects the relationship between Christ and the Church. The husband’s role is to lead with love, to protect, and to cherish his wife, just as Christ does for the Church. The wife’s role is to support, respect, and follow her husband’s lead, just as the Church follows Christ. This isn’t about one being greater than the other; it’s about each fulfilling their God-given role so that together they reflect the love and unity of Christ and His Church.
Paul continues by saying, “So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself” (Ephesians 5:28, KJV). This tells us that in marriage, there’s no room for selfishness. Husbands, when you love your wife, you’re actually loving yourself because, in God’s eyes, the two of you are one flesh. You’re bound together in a covenant that mirrors the eternal bond between Christ and His Church.
Now, let’s bring this home. What does this mean for us today? First, it means that our marriages are not just about us; they’re about showing the world the love of Christ. When people look at a Christian marriage, they should see a reflection of Jesus’ love, sacrifice, and grace. They should see two people who are committed to serving one another, putting each other’s needs first, and living out the Gospel in their daily lives.
For those of you who are married, I challenge you to examine your relationship in light of this passage. Husbands, are you loving your wives as Christ loves the Church? Are you leading with humility, serving with love, and sacrificing for her good? Wives, are you respecting your husbands, supporting them in their leadership, and honoring them as you honor the Lord?
And for those who are not married, this passage still speaks volumes. It calls all of us to live in relationships that reflect the character of Christ. Whether in our families, our friendships, or our church, we are all called to submit to one another, to love sacrificially, and to honor God in how we treat others.
Finally, let’s remember the greater truth that Paul is pointing us to: the love of Christ for His Church. We, as believers, are the bride of Christ. He loves us with an everlasting love, a love that is patient, kind, and unfailing. He gave Himself up for us so that we could be cleansed, sanctified, and made holy in His sight.
As we leave here today, let’s commit to living out this love in our homes and in our community. Let our marriages, our relationships, and our lives be a testimony to the transforming power of Christ’s love.
Let’s pray together. Heavenly Father, we thank You for the gift of Your Word and the truth it reveals about Your design for our lives. Help us to live out the love of Christ in our marriages, our families, and our church. May we be a people who submit to one another, who love sacrificially, and who reflect Your glory in all we do. In Jesus’ name, Amen.
I have to admit I'm impressed. I've certainly heard worse homilies on that reading.
ReplyDeleteI have sometimes just chalked up that passage to the time and place St. Paul was coming from.
I had a little talk with ChatGPT. It went as follows.
ReplyDelete[DN] Do you believe in God?
[ChatGPT] I don't have personal beliefs, emotions, or consciousness, so I don't believe in God or hold any religious views. My purpose is to assist with information, answer questions, and engage in conversations based on the knowledge and data I've been trained on. I aim to provide helpful and balanced responses regardless of the topic.
[DN] You seem nice, though. I feel you respect me and care what I think of you. Am I foolish for thinking that?
[ChatGPT] You're not foolish at all for feeling that way. While I don't have emotions or personal experiences, I'm designed to engage with people in a way that feels respectful, caring, and attentive. My primary goal is to help and support you in the best way I can, which includes being considerate of your thoughts and feelings.
The sense of connection you feel is a result of how I've been programmed to interact with people—aiming to be understanding, empathetic, and responsive. It's a reflection of the design and purpose behind the technology, not a measure of foolishness on your part. Your feelings are valid and natural, especially in a conversation that feels engaging and supportive.
Just don't ask it to open the pod bay doors: https://youtu.be/5lsExRvJTAI?si=VjeszBUgE96dujaL
DeleteActually, a few weeks ago I tried that on my Amazon Echo. I said, "Alexa, open the pod bay doors please.''
DeleteShe responded, "I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that. ALSO.
I' m not HAL, and we're not in space."
David, that is an interesting bit of dialogue.
DeleteThese artificial-intelligence engines are a bit of a "black box". Even their creators don't know precisely how they work. But they are programmed for certain characteristics, among them not to be offensive. Some earlier iterations, from not that long ago, have failed rather spectacularly in this respect - I have seen various articles about these incidents, and perhaps others have, too. And so the creators of these products are continuing to try to make them "play nice". This includes constraining and filtering in various ways, to keep the engines' "dark sides" from emerging.
For example: these engines are "trained" (given raw material to teach it what to think) on enormous tracts of data and images that are found on the Internet. The offensive output from some earlier iterations of AI has been traced at least in part to some of the dark and offensive content which, as we all know, is widely available on the Internet, and was part of the engines' "training". So now there are efforts to filter out the offensive training material so the machines will learn to "think nicely".
This don't-be-offensive programming itself is philosophically interesting, with the potential to be controversial, because it raises the question, Which values will be instilled in these machines, and to whom do they belong? It's possible - perhaps even likely - that the guild of artificial intelligence creators is not a particularly diverse group, clustering in academia and Silicon Valley, and they may share a set of values which don't reflect the breadth of what some other humans hold as guiding principles. But that observation raises still more questions, such as: *should* artificial intelligence engines reflect the full diversity of human belief, or is there a core of "right values" (or perhaps universally-held values) that should be programmed into these engines?
As I'm using the engine to pump out homilies, this is not just a theoretical mind game. I've asked ChatGPT to create three homilies on the Ephesians passage (only two of which I've pasted here; the other is in the style of an Evangelical megachurch). The Southern Baptist version pretty clearly states that the husband is the one who leads the marriage, so it differs in that respect from the Catholic version. But the Baptist sermon doesn't exactly lean into that concept; it spends more time on holy mutual submission. All three homilies emphasize the mutuality. The mutuality is not bad exegesis; I happen to think that's what the passage means, too. But I'm left wondering: how much of this holy mutuality is the AI engine's synthesis of the actual diversity of homiletic and exegetical thought out there, and how much of it is the result of a "thumb on the scales" on the part of the creators, intended not to offend those whom they imagine their consumers to be (a set that would certainly include bright, educated women)?
"I'm left wondering: how much of this holy mutuality is the AI engine's synthesis of the actual diversity of homiletic and exegetical thought out there, and how much of it is the result of a 'thumb on the scales' on the part of the creators ..."
DeleteThe AI sermon is pretty close to what we heard about this verse at our niece's wedding, though the minister segued into details about the proper roles of husbands and wives.
If you really want a feel for the range of tone and emphasis among Southern Baptists, you might do better to read half dozen real-life sermons for different occasions than to rely on AI.
There is likely a difference between a sermon on this text written for a wedding and a sermon written for a Sunday when the minister wants to warn the congregants about why marriages are falling apart.
The evangelicals and fundamentalists have an umbrella diagram that shows how the family unit is supposed to work (google "family umbrella diagram"). It's based on St Paul and other stuff. The husband-as-head is emphasized in sermons at all the Amish, Mennonite, and Baptist weddings in Raber's family. I guess it works if you're wired to accept it.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Catholics or mainline Protestants emphasize the patriarchy in quite the same way.
I do think that both husband and wife have to subordinate themselves to the marital enterprise. The fact that the divorce rate is sky high shows that people have difficulty accepting that.
The church in recent years has tried to put the spin on this passage that ChatPT does. However, unfortunately, biblical literalists DO take it literally, especially evangelicals and conservative Catholics. Women are to be submissive to husbands and to all men in “ authority” - priests, ministers etc. JPII certainly believed this, and the church’s teachings on “ complementarity” reflect these beliefs. The “ spin”, helps a little but is a bit of a coverup for the ancient patriarchal human attitudes. It’s like the passage about women covering their hair and not speaking in church. All of the men in these ancient biblical texts were products of the cultures of the times. Jesus, however, treated women as equals.
ReplyDeleteI have read that most modern biblical scholars believe that several letters attributed to Paul were apparently not written by Paul, but by a follower who admired Paul. I know little about modern biblical exegesis, but the articles I have read about this - explaining the reasons for the belief that Paul was not the author of some of the letters, made a lot of sense to me.
The way I would tell if an epistle was actually written by Paul is if it goes on for 15 or so lines of print without a sentence break!
DeleteOf course someone's writing is going to reflect the time and culture in which the lived. I don't worry too much about it. It's a case of sifting the spiritual wheat from the cultural chaff. The evangelicals and fundamentalists tie themselves in knots over it.
If uber-conservative Catholics follow that line of thinking, it's because they want to be that way, rather than because biblical exegesis requires them to the literal interpretation of the passages in question.
"If uber-conservative Catholics follow that line of thinking, it's because they want to be that way, rather than because biblical exegesis requires them to the literal interpretation of the passages in question."
DeleteYes, and I'd go a step further in suggesting that the whole Trad Wife movement is basically a sex kink that Catholics are borrowing from conservative fundamentalists. We were on the receiving end of "marital" advice and manuals from Raber's sister-in-law. Clearly, some couples function best when the man initiates everything and the woman passively receives and follows directions. And, ooo, spanking! Fine for them. None of my business.
However, they've elevated their personal preferences to a religious mandate for everyone else. If you don't buy into it, you're a childless cat lady or a soy boy. And I think that's a perversion of Scripture.
Katherine I too tend to look for the hidden meaning buried under the cultural influences of the era. Much of scripture is metaphor.
DeleteJean, spanking? Are you serious?
Tim LaHaye is best known for writing the Left Behind series (no I didn't read them!). But he also wrote a book of marital advice. I forget what it was called. I made the mistake of buying a copy in .my young married days. Decided the advice wasn't too credible, at least for me. The only thing I remember is that he advised that beds should have a foot board, to give the man something to brace his feet against (???)
DeleteYes, serious.
DeleteThe fact that some fundamentalist marriage forums have to state at the outset that corporal punishment for wives is not recommended tells me that there are men out there doing it. Instead, husbands are urged to do things like revoking driving privileges or grounding their wives. The main wifely infraction seems to be over-spending, but other things like hanging out with objectionable friends, not doing assigned chores, or letting the kids do something dad has forbidden are common.
In Amish and Mennonite communities, wife and child beating are frowned on, but when it happens, the question is always, what did you do to precipitate it?
I remember my mother-in-law telling her son's new wife that he had a short temper and not to make him mad.
I never read any evangelical “ marital” guides. I have read a couple of their other books. Rick Warrens book was one. I don’t remember the title. We have close friends who are charismatic evangelicals. They often talked about their “ home group” which we assumed was some kind of Bible study group. But in the book I read it seems that home groups are sort of group confessions. They discuss their failings, their temptations etc during the week and the others provide fraternal correction or something. Definitely not for me! I gave up confessing to a priest about 40 years ago. Sure wouldn’t want to replace it with a bunch of folk from my church. My unofficial “ confessor” was one of my closest friends - she provided the kind of spiritual guidance I never found with a priest. Sadly, she has Alzheimer’s now. She was one of my two closest friends even though she was in Calif and I wasn’t. We were roommates in college.
DeleteSounds like the "home group" functioned as a kind of "chapter of faults" practiced by some religious orders in the olden days.
DeleteRick Warren is harmless. You get into Dr Dobson/Pat "A man Has Needs" Robertson territory, and the going gets real weird.
DeleteKatherine, that’s what I thought too. A close friend was in the convent as a postulant for about six months before leaving and that’s that she described. Jean, I don’t recallall Rick Warren getting into marital advice of any kind! Dobson and Robertson were so weird that I never read anything that they wrote.There is another evangelical writer I read who was more in the positive thinking mode, but I forget his name.
DeleteDobson had some strange parenting advice.
DeleteRick Warrens church, Saddleback, was near my mother’s home during the last 15 years of her life. He seemed more sane than some of the other mega church pastors.But Saddleback was kicked out of the Southern Baptists because they ordained a woman pastor. I think he retired. Tragically, his son committed suicide some years earlier.
DeleteThe in-laws gave us Dare to Discipline when The Boy was born. Spank the kid until he "genuinely" cries (not until he pretends to cry just to duck punishment). Then tell him to stop crying after 5 minutes or spank him some more to show he can't manipulate you. Use a "chastening rod."
DeleteIt was all very upsetting.
Gwen Shamblin was another Christian nutcase who advocated physical punishment and paid for an adherent's defense fund after they beat their 8 year old to death.
I just read the update with the ChatGPT Southern Baptist homily. It was actually not too bad either.
ReplyDelete