Are women still considered in a "state of subjection?"

[AngryAtheist8]

Do you think that a person who has a boss is childlike compared to the boss?

Consider this: a wife owns a small business. There, she is the boss–she makes the decisions, she hires and fires, etc. Her husband is an employee of a big company. He has a boss over him, he is told what to do.

And yet at home, within the family, things are different. There her husband has been put in charge *by God, *Whom it seems you do not believe in, but in Whom *we *believe. I believe that my husband is in charge. I may not be happy about some of his decisions, just as there are things I am in charge of within the family and he may not be happy with some of my decisions.

Consider what would happen within a company if everyone decided that they were in charge!

I was under the impression that Catholic marriages were supposed to be partnerships:shrug:

 

[AngryAtheist8]

You bring up a good point here, one which I neglected in my previous two answers.

The husband is subject to *God, *and God sets down the rules of morality. The husband can no more “decide what’s moral for the family” than he can say that cowardice is a virtue and courage a sin.

So, God is like the CEO, the husband is like the VP in charge of training, and the wife is like his assistant, and the children are those being trained.

So the wife is at the bottom of the hierarchy (except for small children, who can get promoted if their boys).

If I believed that I would thank God (literally) that I’m not a woman.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

You bring up a good point here, one which I neglected in my previous two answers.

The husband is subject to *God, *and God sets down the rules of morality. The husband can no more “decide what’s moral for the family” than he can say that cowardice is a virtue and courage a sin.

So, God is like the CEO, the husband is like the VP in charge of training, and the wife is like his assistant, and the children are those being trained.

Except in practice, God is like an absentee landlord and the husband is the one left in charge of the property.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

If there were no negative consequences, what would the problem be?

You are absolutely right. And if it came to a situation of immorality or disobedience to God’s laws, then the wife would have a different approach.

I myself said nothing about blind obedience–I suggested that the wife discuss things with her husband; I equated the wife with an employee who discussed things with the boss.

All of life is like that. I was not talking about situations in which the consequences of a husband’s decision would be so terrible that a wife ought to step in. I was talking about relatively normal people both of whom are Christians, since the original context was Catholic.

Why would the husband (or the boss for that matter) ever have to discuss anything?
He’s the one in charge.
If the wife disobeys isn’t she rebelling against his Godly authority?

 

[bmullins]

Actually you appear to think that it is the intent of the verse.
Because in the very same post you say:
Someone has to have the deciding vote. Many people will tell you it’s just the man, but it’s not. It’s God! The man should be approaching God with the problem and saying Father, help me to solve this in your will! Then he should be going to his wife, and saying “You mean more than my own life, what is your opinion in this matter?” Then out of love and trust in the Lord, he should decide. Even if the two members do not agree, they should abide by that decision.

-Now you can say that God has the deciding vote, in practically speaking its the man’s (since God seldom just comes out and says what he wants).

I would contend that God seldom ever doesn’t come out and say what he wants. It’s very simple to find God’s will. Get out the Bible. Go to church. Listen to a priest. Find a good counsel. Talk to your wife. Spend time in Adoration. God can use all of those to speak to you. My point is this… the husband is only the head of the house… when he puts the house before his own wants and needs. In a true relationship both of them run the house, because the wife is more important to the husband than his own life.

 

[bmullins]

Why would the husband (or the boss for that matter) ever have to discuss anything?
He’s the one in charge.
If the wife disobeys isn’t she rebelling against his Godly authority?

Apparently you’ve never had a good boss. A good boss doesn’t just make decisions without knowing his employees and their skills, and even asking their (name removed by moderator)ut. Especially when the decision involves those employees. There are all kinds of bad bosses, bad husbands, and yes bad wives. We are talking about how it should be, not necessarily how it actually pans out. The good boss, and the good husband, both take the wife and the employee into consideration and ask for their opinion, and often when it is the employees domain, step aside and let the employee make the decisions.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I would contend that God seldom ever doesn’t come out and say what he wants. It’s very simple to find God’s will. Get out the Bible. Go to church. Listen to a priest. Find a good counsel. Talk to your wife. Spend time in Adoration. God can use all of those to speak to you. My point is this… the husband is only the head of the house… when he puts the house before his own wants and needs. In a true relationship both of them run the house, because the wife is more important to the husband than his own life.

So God is other people then (but not you’re wife)?

What’s to prevent a man from simply relying on sources that tell him what he wants to hear?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Apparently you’ve never had a good boss. A good boss doesn’t just make decisions without knowing his employees and their skills, and even asking their (name removed by moderator)ut. Especially when the decision involves those employees. There are all kinds of bad bosses, bad husbands, and yes bad wives. We are talking about how it should be, not necessarily how it actually pans out. The good boss, and the good husband, both take the wife and the employee into consideration and ask for their opinion, and often when it is the employees domain, step aside and let the employee make the decisions.

I have had a few good bosses, but I have had more bad ones.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Apparently you’ve never had a good boss. A good boss doesn’t just make decisions without knowing his employees and their skills, and even asking their (name removed by moderator)ut. Especially when the decision involves those employees. There are all kinds of bad bosses, bad husbands, and yes bad wives. We are talking about how it should be, not necessarily how it actually pans out. The good boss, and the good husband, both take the wife and the employee into consideration and ask for their opinion, and often when it is the employees domain, step aside and let the employee make the decisions.

Any system that depends on everyone always being on their best behavior is doomed to fail, and therefore a bad system.

 

[St_Francis]

But employees can quit if their bosses make consistently bad decisions.
Can a wife quit a marriage if her ‘boss’ makes consistently bad (or for that matter evil or insane) decisions?

If her husband is making very bad decisions, yes, she can leave him. If they are sacramentally married, then she will remain married in the eyes of God, but she will be away from her husband.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

If her husband is making very bad decisions, yes, she can leave him. If they are sacramentally married, then she will remain married in the eyes of God, but she will be away from her husband.

But I thought the Catholic Church didn’t tolerate divorce?
Moreover, wouldn’t leaving be a rejection of the man’s husbandly authority?

 

[carn]

If there were no negative consequences, what would the problem be?

Mostly the negative consequences of a husband skipping family duties to drink beer and watch TV are not immidieately felt by the husband. Therefore i do not understand, how a wife should accept his decision to drink and watch and let him feel negative consequences. It would seem more appropiate to immidieately be “disobedient” regarding his “commands” he offers, so he can watch undisturbed tv and drink beer.
E.g. husband wants to drink and watch way too early and tells children to go to their rooms and stay there and wife to get him some beer. Assuming its realy not the appropiate time/situation for such relaxing, it would be strange for the wife to accept those “orders” and then somehow later let him feel the consequences (which you seem too suggest). Instead some disobedience would be in my eyes better and justified, e.g. “Children Daddy just informed me that we are free to ignore all rules, so you go and jump on the sofa, while i take a long bath listening to some nice music.”

All of life is like that. I was not talking about situations in which the consequences of a husband’s decision would be so terrible that a wife ought to step in. I was talking about relatively normal people both of whom are Christians, since the original context was Catholic.

But thats not how people being critical of church teaching (and this thread was started because of such positions) view it. They think about a lazy, fat guy wearing a too short t-shirt and threatening to hit his wife, if she again does not buy/bring hin his beer, because of being busy/having to spend money on all those stupid children.
Obedience in such circumstances looks (and probably is) cruel and therefore when discussing this issue with critics, one has to illustrate if and what limits are to this obedience.

In my eyes there are many marriages (and mine is unfortunately not always an exception), where the behavior of husband is often too far from optimal, so that obedience can often not be expected and the wife would be more wise to be disobedient in such way, that her husbands behavior hopefully changes to the better. (Of course to complicate things, in many marriages the wifes beahvior is often also far from optimal.)

 

[St_Francis]

Except in practice, God is like an absentee landlord and the husband is the one left in charge of the property.

First of all, we are Catholics, so we believe that God is physically with us at Mass. He’s not hard to find. Moreover, we have the Church. Also not hard to find. And we can talk with God whenever we want.

Can you do all that with an absentee landlord?

Why would the husband (or the boss for that matter) ever have to discuss anything?
He’s the one in charge.
If the wife disobeys isn’t she rebelling against his Godly authority?

The Catholic Faith is one of love–we are not protestants who look at one bit of the Bible and make a whole (flawed) theology out of it.

I know that others posted the verses about what the husband is supposed to do: he is supposed to love his wife as Christ loves His Church. Did Christ never speak to members of His Church? Did Christ lay down the law like some tyrant, which is what you seem to be implying a husband would frequently do?

The point of *Godly *authority is that the person who has it is responsible *to God. *He has to follow what God wants.

So the wife is at the bottom of the hierarchy (except for small children, who can get promoted if their boys).

If I believed that I would thank God (literally) that I’m not a woman.

Do you think that every person who has a boss/superior is at the bottom of the hierarchy?

I was under the impression that Catholic marriages were supposed to be partnerships:shrug:

No, they are not. Again, we are not Protestants. A partnership can be dissolved.

Sacramental marriage is a covenant relationship, like adoption. It cannot be dissolved.

 

[St_Francis]

But I thought the Catholic Church didn’t tolerate divorce?

You thought wrong.

Moreover, wouldn’t leaving be a rejection of the man’s husbandly authority?

A person who is abusing his authority is not to be obeyed. We are not supposed to obey immoral orders, for example. Just as a soldier does not have to obey orders which violate the Geneva Convention.

We *all *obey God *first, *then the appropriate authorities.

 

[carn]

But I thought the Catholic Church didn’t tolerate divorce?
Moreover, wouldn’t leaving be a rejection of the man’s husbandly authority?

As some tried to tell you with limited sucess, a husband authority is conditional.

According to my understanding its conditional upon him not being a lazy and egoistic tyrant, but acting with the best of the family in mind and placing the family above his needs.

And that, as i already said above, means that if a husband faces the choice of his life or his wives life, the “choice” is easy for him from a catholic point of view because in such situation there is no choice.

 

[St_Francis]

Mostly the negative consequences of a husband skipping family duties to drink beer and watch TV are not immidieately felt by the husband. Therefore i do not understand, how a wife should accept his decision to drink and watch and let him feel negative consequences. It would seem more appropiate to immidieately be “disobedient” regarding his “commands” he offers, so he can watch undisturbed tv and drink beer.
E.g. husband wants to drink and watch way too early and tells children to go to their rooms and stay there and wife to get him some beer. Assuming its realy not the appropiate time/situation for such relaxing, it would be strange for the wife to accept those “orders” and then somehow later let him feel the consequences (which you seem too suggest). Instead some disobedience would be in my eyes better and justified, e.g. “Children Daddy just informed me that we are free to ignore all rules, so you go and jump on the sofa, while i take a long bath listening to some nice music.”

It may be best to allow Dad to relax and bring him some beer, and at another time, discuss what the results of his behaving like that are, if he does it frequently.

Since the husband is to love his wife as Christ loves the Church, he should listen to her when she comes to him with her concerns.

But thats not how people being critical of church teaching (and this thread was started because of such positions) view it. They think about a lazy, fat guy wearing a too short t-shirt and threatening to hit his wife, if she again does not buy/bring hin his beer, because of being busy/having to spend money on all those stupid children.
Obedience in such circumstances looks (and probably is) cruel and therefore when discussing this issue with critics, one has to illustrate if and what limits are to this obedience.

Again, one has to look at the totality of what is being asked. It is not simply that the wife is being asked to obey; it is that the husband is being asked to love his wife as Christ loves His Church. Christ gave His (physical) life for the Church.

If a wife is having terrible problems with her husband, then she can ask for advice and help.

In my eyes there are many marriages (and mine is unfortunately not always an exception), where the behavior of husband is often too far from optimal, so that obedience can often not be expected and the wife would be more wise to be disobedient in such way, that her husbands behavior hopefully changes to the better. (Of course to complicate things, in many marriages the wifes beahvior is often also far from optimal.)

Wow, both husbands and wives can behave badly

The point of marriage is for each spouse to help the other to attain Heaven. God gave us individual spouses because each situation is unique. We are supposed to do our best to behave in a Godly fashion and pray for God’s help for both ourselves and for our spouses.

I think the perception problem is two-fold: one is that when people were more stable and settled into a community, the men would kind of ride herd on a misbehaving husband (there have been sociological studies on this). The other problem is that some strains of Protestantism are very tyrannical with regards to wives. The fact that some obscure Protestant sect allows such-and-such does not mean that this is acceptable to every Christian on the planet.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

**First of all, we are Catholics, so we believe that God is physically with us at Mass. He’s not hard to find. Moreover, we have the Church. Also not hard to find. And we can talk with God whenever we want.
**
Can you do all that with an absentee landlord?

The Catholic Faith is one of love–we are not protestants who look at one bit of the Bible and make a whole (flawed) theology out of it.

I know that others posted the verses about what the husband is supposed to do: he is supposed to love his wife as Christ loves His Church. Did Christ never speak to members of His Church? Did Christ lay down the law like some tyrant, which is what you seem to be implying a husband would frequently do?

The point of *Godly *authority is that the person who has it is responsible *to God. *He has to follow what God wants.

Do you think that every person who has a boss/superior is at the bottom of the hierarchy?

No, they are not. Again, we are not Protestants. A partnership can be dissolved.

Sacramental marriage is a covenant relationship, like adoption. It cannot be dissolved.

Of course.
There’s nothing to prevent someone from talking to an absentee landlord when he’s not there. Moreover he’s more likely to reply too (as long as you’re using a phone or something)

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Why would the husband (or the boss for that matter) ever have to discuss anything?
He’s the one in charge.
If the wife disobeys isn’t she rebelling against his Godly authority?

The Catholic Faith is one of love–we are not protestants who look at one bit of the Bible and make a whole (flawed) theology out of it.

I know that others posted the verses about what the husband is supposed to do: he is supposed to love his wife as Christ loves His Church. Did Christ never speak to members of His Church? Did Christ lay down the law like some tyrant, which is what you seem to be implying a husband would frequently do?

The point of *Godly *authority is that the person who has it is responsible *to God. *He has to follow what God wants.

.

And who decides what God wants?
Why the head of the Church of course (domestic or otherwise)

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
So the wife is at the bottom of the hierarchy (except for small children, who can get promoted if their boys).

If I believed that I would thank God (literally) that I’m not a woman.

Do you think that every person who has a boss/superior is at the bottom of the hierarchy?

.

No, but in the hierarchy of marriage as outlined women are firmly at the bottom.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
I was under the impression that Catholic marriages were supposed to be partnerships

No, they are not. Again, we are not Protestants. A partnership can be dissolved.

Sacramental marriage is a covenant relationship, like adoption. It cannot be dissolved.

I notice that you’re comparing women to children once more.

Speaking from personal experience, all the people I know in relatively happy marriages view theirs more as a partnership than something along the lines of the parent/child or boss/employee relationship.