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

[St_Francis]

Because submission does not seem to be loving. For example if I am arrested than I have to submit to the police officer. Or if my boss asks me to do something than I submit to him. I dont do this because of love but because there are consequences If I don’t. A covenant relationship is all about love not submission. As Catholics we have more than St. Paul to go on. For example St. Francaisa(from the thread that was cited) explained it as conformity not submission. And that it was mutual…

You are going around in circles: you do not see submission as loving because you do not see loving submission.

These examples that you give do not involve individual love. The police officer does not know me; he does not love me as an individual. But a good police officer loves the people, that is why he puts his life at risk by being a police officer.

There was a case many years ago where I used to live of a women who had many drunk driving tickets. She had weaseled out of them because her dad worked in the justice system so people let her slide. One day she got drunk and killed 4 teenagers.

Was it loving of those people to let her slide–they did not submit themselves to the law and ultimately they contributed to these deaths. Was it loving of her to go her own way and not submit to the law? No, and she sees that now, locked up in jail for decades.

When we see submission as a bad thing, we cannot see any love around it. When you submit to the police officer, the laws around that are for your mutual protection: his and yours, and the surrounding people’s.

Within a family, submission is a good thing. Our children should submit to us parents, otherwise they will grow up warped. Have you see those types of children? I saw a 6yo boy kicking his mother and calling her names using *foul *language because she told him it was time to leave and he did not want to go. She did nothing. Imagine what he will grow up to be.

And within the wife and husband situation, the submission for the wife *comes with *the sacrifice of the husband–this is not some sort of uneven situation. In fact, I would say that the husband has the *worse *end of the deal.

You seem to think that submission is some sort of doormat deal, but the reality is that it is the wife’s contribution to a loving family. I could decide the question every decision my husband made, make him prove to me that what he wants is best, make him submit to me if he couldn’t do so–but, does it really matter? Rarely. And it would lead to a lot of fighting and nothing ever getting done.

Does it mean a wife can never speak up? No. It just means that when the husband is acting as a loving and sacrificing head of the household, the wife should recognize that and let him be.

 

[LucyLight]

wow cool down, im sure your guy is having a tough time, you sound like ‘iron lady’. It seems you are really interested in argueing the title ‘head’, it is a pity st paul is not around to defend himself. But im pretty certain that if you marry a xtain guy he will certainly assume that title im surprised that even a title make you unconfortable, have you ever consider that you misinterpreted the meaning of the title?
Ubenedictus

In fairness she was responding to personal attacks and insults. The person who needs to cool down is the poster who attacked her.

Calling the husband the head of the wife implies boss. The boss does not submit to his VP, employee (whatever lesser title you want to give the wife). The idea that the husband is the head and the wife in the heart sets up this whole hierarchy. These titles come from the belief that men are thinkers and women feel. This is offensive as we all know decisions are best made from thinking not feeling. So of course it would follow that men would lead the family so the family doesn’t fall astray by following the wife who is lead by her feelings.

Sure maybe some women may feel more but that does not mean that they think less or are less capable of making the right decision. It comes down to the couple and realisticly if there are roles they probably go back and forth between who is the head and the heart.

My husband is not the head of our family. We are partners. We are both mature capable adults. Setting up a hierarchy between the two of us would seem really silly. This is not something that we sat down and discussed. It’s just common sense and what comes naturally.

 

[LemonAndLime]

wow cool down, im sure your guy is having a tough time, you sound like ‘iron lady’. It seems you are really interested in argueing the title ‘head’, it is a pity st paul is not around to defend himself. But im pretty certain that if you marry a xtain guy he will certainly assume that title im surprised that even a title make you unconfortable, have you ever consider that you misinterpreted the meaning of the title?
Ubenedictus

He’s not having a tough time. And I’m not an “iron lady”. I would never think to expect him to defer to me always and he would never expect that of me.

Marriage is called a partnership, not a business contract. And I think we compliment each other very well, so if we were to get married it would be absurd for one of us to suddenly become the “head” and one to be given the somewhat condensending title of “heart”. As LucyLight said, we’re mature adults, and we can sort out our own strengths and weaknesses between us.

 

[LucyLight]

You are going around in circles: you do not see submission as loving because you do not see loving submission.

These examples that you give do not involve individual love. The police officer does not know me; he does not love me as an individual. But a good police officer loves the people, that is why he puts his life at risk by being a police officer.

There was a case many years ago where I used to live of a women who had many drunk driving tickets. She had weaseled out of them because her dad worked in the justice system so people let her slide. One day she got drunk and killed 4 teenagers.

Was it loving of those people to let her slide–they did not submit themselves to the law and ultimately they contributed to these deaths. Was it loving of her to go her own way and not submit to the law? No, and she sees that now, locked up in jail for decades.

When we see submission as a bad thing, we cannot see any love around it. When you submit to the police officer, the laws around that are for your mutual protection: his and yours, and the surrounding people’s.

Within a family, submission is a good thing. Our children should submit to us parents, otherwise they will grow up warped. Have you see those types of children? I saw a 6yo boy kicking his mother and calling her names using *foul *language because she told him it was time to leave and he did not want to go. She did nothing. Imagine what he will grow up to be.

And within the wife and husband situation, the submission for the wife *comes with *the sacrifice of the husband–this is not some sort of uneven situation. In fact, I would say that the husband has the *worse *end of the deal.

You seem to think that submission is some sort of doormat deal, but the reality is that it is the wife’s contribution to a loving family. I could decide the question every decision my husband made, make him prove to me that what he wants is best, make him submit to me if he couldn’t do so–but, does it really matter? Rarely. And it would lead to a lot of fighting and nothing ever getting done.

Does it mean a wife can never speak up? No. It just means that when the husband is acting as a loving and sacrificing head of the household, the wife should recognize that and let him be.

Words matter. The reason why I used the word submit and subject earlier is because those were the words used in the discussion. The examples I gave of the cop and the boss were to illustrate the way that the word submit is used in our modern culture. It does not imply love. For example, I would never use the word submit or subject when speaking of my relationship with my children. I would use obey. However, I would never use the word obey when speaking of a marriage. That is a word that is used when speaking of children or of following the law. It implies authority. The core meaning of words may not change but to different cultures and times they invoke different things.

JReducation said this when speaking of St. Francis(you may want to view entire post for further context):

“Francis understood that the word “submit” as used in Paul’s writings does not mean to be submissive. It means to cooperate with as the Church cooperates with Christ. Christians introduced their own cultural baggage into what Paul taught and turned women into children rather than partners. Francis was not going to have that, because that was contrary to what Paul and Genesis teach.”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9171891&postcount=159

This makes a lot of sense to me. I would also add that when posters feel the need to add the word lovingly before the word submit might suggest that the word is no longer a good descriptive of what Paul meant.

 

[Armyvet007]

Marriage is called a partnership, not a business contract. And I think we compliment each other very well, so if we were to get married it would be absurd for one of us to suddenly become the “head” and one to be given the somewhat condensending title of “heart”. As LucyLight said, we’re mature adults, and we can sort out our own strengths and weaknesses between us.

How exactly is the title of “heart” condensending?

 

[LemonAndLime]

How exactly is the title of “heart” condensending?

“I’m the head of the family hunny, so I’ll make the decision. But don’t forget, you’re the heart! Now what’s for dinner?”

 

[Armyvet007]

“I’m the head of the family hunny, so I’ll make the decision. But don’t forget, you’re the heart! Now what’s for dinner?”

Ah,yes in that context it is insulting. When I hear/read “heart” I think of “core”, “center”, or “essential”.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Ah,yes in that context it is insulting. When I hear/read “heart” I think of “core”, “center”, or “essential”.

Okay, so if the “head” means they make the decisions, what does the “heart” do?

 

[Armyvet007]

Okay, so if the “head” means they make the decisions, what does the “heart” do?

Well if “head”=makes decision I would have to guess “heart”= let’s “head” thinks it makes the decisions.

Frankly, the whole idea that one person is the decision maker and the idea that no one is the decision maker/both are always equally the decision maker are both faulty. Going with the head/heart thing, sometimes the head makes them, sometimes the heart makes them. Who does what depends on the situtation. The only time there isn’t a “the decision maker” is when there isn’t a decision to make. If the focus of a relationship is power [who gets to be the boss] then that relationship has bigger issues then who is or isn’t the boss.

 

[LucyLight]

Well if “head”=makes decision I would have to guess “heart”= let’s “head” thinks it makes the decisions..

lol

decision maker and the idea that no one is the decision maker/both are always equally the decision maker are both faulty. Going with the head/heart thing, sometimes the head makes them, sometimes the heart makes them. Who does what depends on the situtation. The only time there isn’t a “the decision maker” is when there isn’t a decision to make. If the focus of a relationship is power [who gets to be the boss] then that relationship has bigger issues then who is or isn’t the boss.

I really think the analogy of the head and heart speaks to two becoming one. Some people just take this analogy too far and think that this means the husband is the boss and the wife is to obey. And I agree with you that who makes the decision just depends on the situation. It’s common sense really.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Sorry it took me so long to reply everyone.
I was busy working.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Obedience is not servility. When your boss asks you to write a report and you do so, you are obeying him. Do you feel servile?

No, but his authority on me is limited in many ways.
Moreover, it is only in effect when I have that particular job.
If I leave, get promoted, etc. his authority over me disappears.

The traditional authority that a husband has over a wife in a Christian society isn’t like that.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I cannot speak of other situations, but Paul speaks very directly about this. A woman’s body belongs to her husband and a man’s body belongs to his wife.

Further, Paul says that women are co-heirs (if I remember the correct word) to the same grace and that in God, there is no woman nor man. On the other hand, the Bible also states in the same letter if I recall correctly that women should not speak at all in church, when earlier it says that women should speak with their heads covered. One has to be very careful when singling out a verse or two with the Bible.

We also have to be careful not to ignore verses just because we don’t like them. Personally, I think Paul’s commands about the relationship to men and women applies mostly to that community, but that men and women of our age should take them seriously. Women should be obedient and men should protect the way Jesus protects the Church. But in our age in particular but also in all ages we should not deny that men are also called to be obedient to their wives just as women are called to be protective of their husbands. Paul even cites one form of ‘obedience’ when he says that a man’s body belongs to his wife. To emphasize the obedience of the wife is not to deny the obedience demanded of the husband. Indeed there are quite a few husbands who are obedient to their wives for which the Church does not say that he is wrong for doing so.

The Bible contradicts itself.
That’s one of the reasons I have trouble taking ‘Biblical authority’ seriously:shrug:

 

[AngryAtheist8]

ok good point, but i really dont believe that the hierarchial structure is the reason for abuse. Some People are alway gona abuse another wether their above or below, the check against that is a true respect for each other. That is what a marriage is about and obedience is not absolute.
Ubenedictus

True enough.
But I think its fairly self-evident that the potential for abuse goes way up when you give people authority.
Especially when the basis of that authority is how the people in charge differ from those that they have authority over (such as men in relation to women, masters with regard to slaves, whites over blacks in the Jim Crow South, etc.). Because it encourages those in power to think of themselves as a priviliged elite and to not empathize with those they have dominion over.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
It does if you interpret the text literally:

22Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23For 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. 24Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
-Ephesians 5

Now of course you don’t have to interpret the text literally, but if you leave yourself free to interpret Scripture at your own discretion then it could mean anything.

it seem so to you because you ignore eph5:21

No, its because I am interpreting the text literally.
Its theoretically possible you could really expect wives to be utterly submissive AND expect husbands to be the self-sacrificing ones.
It just doesn’t work that way in real life most of the time.
In reality, those in charge seldom select themselves to be sacrificed (and say I seldom because I know it happens sometimes).

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Originally Posted by LucyLight
This is just wishful thinking on your part. I’ll go with Pope John Paul II over you

A lot of the official documents Pope John Paul II released concerning women stressed their equal value and dignity (in relation to men). He also wrote about how it was unfair to reduce them to servitude.

has anybody said that a woman does not have equal dignity and value? Is anybody saying the woman should be a slave?
Ubenedictus

Many people actually.
In the modern era the Muslims are probably the most shameless about it.
Saying that a women’s worth is literally half that of a man’s.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
Most men are never actually called upon to do that (even if their faithful).
And I would rather die once than be servile for a lifetime.

and where did you get the servile idea? It seem we are talking about two different things. Im talking about a relationship of respect and you seem to be talking about a master-slave relationship. I feel like asking, did you mistake this thread for another?
Ubenedictus

Christians are supposed to be utterly obedient (even fearfully obedient) towards God.
Paul commands wives to obey their husbands the same way.
It is not that complicated:shrug:

 

[AngryAtheist8]

im sorry if this question sounds personal, have you met a really respectful guy?
Ubenedictus

I guess.
Its not something I actually think about that much.

FYI-I am a straight adult male.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

we certainly interprete the word ‘weaker sex’ in different ways, it actually says to ‘honor her as the weaker sex since you are joint heir in the order of grace’, 1pt3:7 i thought the reason the for ‘ladies first’ and guy open the door for girl etc was because of this passage. It is saying the she should be treated as the delicate one, you totally missed peter’s point. And yeah i dont think the wife should ‘‘leave’’ home until a discussion. Your 1st point is from 1pt3:2 maybe your bible version is beter that the one used above and i sincerely hope you get the message.
Ubenedictus

Wait…

Are you saying that you agree that wives shouldn’t be able to leave the house without permission?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shin
Duties Of A Husband

It is the duty of the husband to treat his wife generously and honourably. It should not be forgotten that Eve was called by Adam his companion. The woman, he says, whom thou gavest me as a companion. Hence it was, according to the opinion of some of the holy Fathers, that she was formed not from the feet but from the side of man; as, on the other hand, she was not formed from his head, in order to give her to understand that it was not hers to command but to obey her husband.

The husband should also be constantly occupied in some honest pursuit with a view to provide necessaries for the support of his family and to avoid idleness, the root of almost every vice.

He is also to keep all his family in order, to correct their morals, and see that they faithfully discharge their duties.

Duties Of A Wife

On the other hand, the duties of a wife are thus summed up by the Prince of the Apostles: Let wives be subject to their husbands. that if any believe not the word, they may be won without the word by the conversation of the wives, considering your chaste conversation with fear. Let not their adorning be the outward plaiting of the hair, or the wearing of gold, or the putting on of apparel: but the hidden man of the heart in the incorruptibility of a quiet and meek spirit, which is rich in the sight of God. For after this manner heretofore the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord.

To train their children in the practice of virtue and to pay particular attention to their domestic concerns should also be especial objects of their attention. The wife should love to remain at home, unless compelled by necessity to go out; and she should never presume to leave home without her husband’s consent.

Again, and in this the conjugal union chiefly consists, let wives never forget that next to God they are to love their husbands, to esteem them above all others, yielding to them in all things not inconsistent with Christian piety, a willing and ready obedience.

• Catechism of the Council of Trent

'In like manner also let wives be subject to their husbands: that if any believe not the word, they may be won without the word, by the conversation of the wives. Considering your chaste conversation with fear. Whose adorning let it not be the outward plaiting of the hair, or the wearing of gold, or the putting on of apparel: But the hidden man of the heart in the incorruptibility of a quiet and a meek spirit, which is rich in the sight of God. For after this manner heretofore the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands:

As Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters you are, doing well, and not fearing any disturbance. Ye husbands, likewise dwelling with them according to knowledge, giving honour to the female as to the weaker vessel, and as to the co-heirs of the grace of life: that your prayers be not hindered. ’

1 Peter 3:1-7

That the husband is the head of the family, and the wife is under obedience to him, is unchangable Catholic teaching. God Himself is a patriarch and this is the model and order He has given to the family and society.

This is why it is important to choose a good husband, and if you would have a problem with a particular potential husband being in authority over you, not to marry. Because afterwards, it is a matter of virtue and sin. Obedience is a virtue and sanctifies us and gains us interior holiness and reward in Heaven. If a husband absconds from his role, that’s a sin – and so too if a wife usurps it, this is what Eve did, and so the children of Eve are constantly tempted this way, because of a predisposition to this failing now being a part of original sin. Just as the husband is tempted to either allow it, or attempt to us it wrongly to satisfy some sinful passion rather than virtuously, which is its sole purpose.

To people who have long been propagandized by both Communist originating Feminism and an over individualism that defies any subjection, these things can be at best foreign ideas. But they’re written in the natural and divine law and so we can appreciate the goodness in them, rather than mistakenly follow the propaganda, if we are open to doing so and seek to do so.

“Subjection” to God is a good thing. Subjection to those God places in authority over us is too. Obedience is how saints are made, and virtue gained. Obedience of children to parents, religious to religious superiors, and wife to husband, penitent to the confessor…

If an archangel, if such were imaginable, should envy and dislike and say it us unfair not to be in the Choir of Seraphim rather than the Choir of Archangels… what kind of respect to God in Heaven would this be? So it is not unfitting that some be in one position, and others be in another.

Awesome Shin:thumbsup: Way to evangelize! I’m sure viewers who where considering joining Catholicism just signed up for RCIA

Actually I have known quite a few women who were turned-off regarding Catholicism because of views like Shin’s (including my own mother).
They wanted their boyfriends/husbands to be their partner, not their master.