Kristen

As for this sort of question:

“The Church submits to Christ in everything in a way that has no authority connotations?”

No– I don’t think that’s what’s in view in Eph. 5. There are certainly authority connotations in the household codes given by Paul. But the point I would make is that the authority of the husband/father/master is a shared assumption of Paul and his readers in that time and culture– not a divine mandate. When this is understood, it is not the instructions to the wife, slave or child that are so radical (except that we tend nowadays to miss the fact that Paul was doing something revolutionary in speaking directly to those to be ruled, as if they had some will of their own in the matter). What is really radical is the instruction given to the one in power. Mark wonders where it is that Christ is spoken of in terms of submission to the church. Surely it is in the moment when He yielded voluntarily to those who cried “Crucify!” as spoken of in Eph 5 (“he gave himself for her”), many of whom, no doubt, became the church when Peter preached to them in Acts 2 (“God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom YOU CRUCIFIED.”)
Paul says, “submit to one another . . . husbands, lay down your lives as Christ did for the Church.” If that’s not an illustration of submission, I don’t know what is. And I honestly don’t see how Mark doesn’t see it in Christ “emptying himself” and “becoming obedient to death” in Philippians 2 as well.
Yes, Paul tells those under authority in that culture to submit to those in authority over them. But then he tells those in authority to lay down their power. But what Paul never does say is, “Men, your authority over your wives, children and slaves is by divine right.”