Ephesians 5:22....revisited

[severus68]

But 30 years ago, every shred of Church writing from Cathechism to Encyclicals to Scripture that dealt with marriage stated very explicitly that the husband is the head of the family. So in order to be obedient to Church teaching, would a couple not have had to acknowledge that? I maintain that the writings of JPII and the current catechism do not contradict that it any way, but because they are not as explicit that previous documents, until very recently there would have been no other possible view from Church teaching than the husband as head of the family.

If you feel your marriage can only be a marriage with the headship of the husband and your spouse agrees, that is fine but please stop insisting others should follow as it is doctrine.

 

[MaryHelene]

I can tell that you are not married - and you shouldn’t (nobody shouldn’t) rush it either.

Jokes aside, I have a lot of sympathy to your thoughts, as I’m not married and I’m not rushing it myself.

I was quite surprised when I read St. Teresa of Avila’s autobiography, where she said that she was afraid of becoming a nun, but she was even more afraid of getting married. However later I realized she made a lot of sense. Marriage is fraught with many perils. Women were risking their lives with every pregnancy and childbirth, especially back then. Also, yes the Church teaches that the husband is head of the wife, and what if a woman marries someone who’s not going to be a perfectly selfless and wise husband? - he is still going to be head of the family, and in a position of authority over his wife!

So, I think, there’s not wrong to be extremely careful when thinking about marriage, or even to not consider it as a viable calling for ourselves. My mother wanted nothing to have with another man, and with marriage again, once she divorced my father. She separated and divorced more than 40 years ago, she is now 83, and she is doing just fine as a single lady. St. Teresa of Avila didn’t want to get married. There is plenty of precedent of other female canonized saints in the Catholic Church who didn’t want to, and never got, married.

To expand these considerations a bit, I’m a man, but I can immediately cite St. Francis of Assisi - although he struggled occasionally with singleness, ultimately he realized he was A LOT better off having stayed single - no wife, no children, no servants to take care of! You could almost say, what a lazy bum! But yeah, he valued his freedom from all those family obligations that would have faced him as a husband and HEAD (yup, HEAD ) of family - by staying single, he could totally dedicate himself to God’s things. So, I have a lot of sympathy for guys who don’t rush into marriage or simply aren’t interested at all, even though we guys are supposed to have this “perk” of becoming the head of the family!

You can tell I’m not married? Please let my husband and three children know!

 

[mini_me640]

But, your boss is your superior at work. While you are equal in human dignity because you are both people, you are not on equal footing in the workplace. You are subordinate and must ultimately obey the boss’ judgment, unless it is criminal/unethical or you want to lose your job. Your boss as perks you don’t have. Your boss goes to meetings you aren’t invited to. Your boss makes decisions about issues you don’t have the authority to make decisions about. You might do your job quite well, and have some flexibility and freedom, but your boss is still in charge of you. You are NOT your boss’ equal in the workplace.

**Are you saying that type of relationship has any place in a marriage?/**QUOTE]

No, I am trying to point out that roles and responsibilities can differ without meaning that one person is superior to another. I realize it’s a poor analogy.

I believe that partnership, compromise, and mutual give and take can easily coexist with the concept of a husband being head of the family. If the husband is committed to Christ and is able to love his wife as Christ loves the Church and give himself up for her, as he is commanded to do by scripture, his leadership will be unselfish, not prideful, and will be used only to lead his family toward God and toward their betterment. I belive that God gives us the graces and guidance we need to fill the roles he has assigned us, and that it has nothing to do with superiority of one gender over another.

 

[MaryHelene]

MaryHelene;8895278:

But, your boss is your superior at work. While you are equal in human dignity because you are both people, you are not on equal footing in the workplace. You are subordinate and must ultimately obey the boss’ judgment, unless it is criminal/unethical or you want to lose your job. Your boss as perks you don’t have. Your boss goes to meetings you aren’t invited to. Your boss makes decisions about issues you don’t have the authority to make decisions about. You might do your job quite well, and have some flexibility and freedom, but your boss is still in charge of you. You are NOT your boss’ equal in the workplace.

Are you saying that type of relationship has any place in a marriage?/

QUOTE]

No, I am trying to point out that roles and responsibilities can differ without meaning that one person is superior to another. I realize it’s a poor analogy.

I believe that partnership, compromise, and mutual give and take can easily coexist with the concept of a husband being head of the family. If the husband is committed to Christ and is able to love his wife as Christ loves the Church and give himself up for her, as he is commanded to do by scripture, his leadership will be unselfish, not prideful, and will be used only to lead his family toward God and toward their betterment. I belive that God gives us the graces and guidance we need to fill the roles he has assigned us, and that it has nothing to do with superiority of one gender over another.

What if the wife is quite a bit more intelligent than the husband?

Do you know any man who loves his wife exactly as Christ loved the Church, always gives himself up for her, and is always unselfish, always lacking pride, and only ever makes the right decisions? While being like Christ is a noble goal, no man will ever come close.

That’s why God gave us two adults per family!

My husband and I currently have different roles. We decided, together, that he would work outside the home and earn money while I stayed home and took care of the children and the household. When he’s home, we split the housework and childcare 50/50. But that does not mean, on any planet, in any universe, that if we disagree about a decision, that he gets the final say because he happens to be the male half of our partnership. Sheesh!

 

[mini_me640]

mini_me640;8895321:

What if the wife is quite a bit more intelligent than the husband?

Do you know any man who loves his wife exactly as Christ loved the Church, always gives himself up for her, and is always unselfish, always lacking pride, and only ever makes the right decisions? While being like Christ is a noble goal, no man will ever come close.

That’s why God gave us two adults per family!

My husband and I currently have different roles. We decided, together, that he would work outside the home and earn money while I stayed home and took care of the children and the household. When he’s home, we split the housework and childcare 50/50. But that does not mean, on any planet, in any universe, that if we disagree about a decision, that he gets the final say because he happens to be the male half of our partnership. Sheesh!

Authority is given by God and does not provide exceptions for who is more intelligent. I think I am more intelligent than the last several presidents, but they still have had authority over the federal government If a priest is more intelligent than his Bishop, that does not diminish the Bishop’s authority over him. A husband should take into account his wive’s intelligence and strengths and always seek her (name removed by moderator)ut, advice, and wisdom. That should go regardless of their respective intelligence levels. It IS a partnership, a vocation to take each other through life and lead each other to God.

Certainly no man will ever love his wife as perfectly as Christ loved the Church. It is not possible with our human nature. However, that is what God calls a husband to strive toward, and scripture admonishes wives to submit themselves to the sacrifical servant leadership of their husband. Of course we are both adults in a marriage. Quite frankly, the issue of authority should probably rarely come up in a healthy marriage between sensible partners with good communication who are both properly focused on God.

So what do you do if you just can’t agree? Go around in circles forever causing anger and frustration for both of you? St. Paul (and Peter for that matter) along with numerous Popes and Bishops along the way have given us a guideline establishing the husband as the head of the family so I believe that gives him the final word in a case where no consensus or compromise can be reached. However, his aim should be for the good of his wife and family, not for his selfish wants. I have to believe that Paul, Peter, and nearly 2000 years of Church Tradition know more than I could ever hope to.

 

[L_piperatus]

You can tell I’m not married? Please let my husband and three children know!

Sorry I misjudged the situation.

Well, good luck to you, and please obey your husband.

It’s in the Bible, and it’s in the Church’s teaching documents (see the thread for many quotes from the Old and New Testaments, for Papal Encyclicals and for the Catechism of the Council of Trent).

 

[MaryHelene]

MaryHelene;8895356:

So what do you do if you just can’t agree? Go around in circles forever causing anger and frustration for both of you? St. Paul (and Peter for that matter) along with numerous Popes and Bishops along the way have given us a guideline establishing the husband as the head of the family so I believe that gives him the final word in a case where no consensus or compromise can be reached. However, his aim should be for the good of his wife and family, not for his selfish wants. I have to believe that Paul, Peter, and nearly 2000 years of Church Tradition know more than I could ever hope to.

Yeah, I just disagree with that. First of all, I married someone who has very similar values and goals to my own, so we rarely have an impasse. Secondly, we have a rule in our household that the “no” wins. If a topic comes up and one of us says “no” (Do you want to visit my parents tomorrow? Can Annie go to Lauren’s house on Saturday? Should we plan a trip to Disneyworld? Should we get a new car? Should we euthanize the cat? Do you want pizza tonight?), then that position “wins.” Doesn’t matter whose “no” it is. We simply do not move ahead with anything when there is a dissenting party. The scales, in our home, favor inaction over action when one person doesn’t agree.

I can’t imagine saying “no” to something and having my husband go ahead and do it anyway.

 

[L_piperatus]

Here’s something I don’t understand: why are some people coming to a Catholic forum, only to argue against the teachings of the Catholic Church?

The Catholic Church teaches that the husband is the head of the household, and that wives should obey their husbands. FatherOfTwelve gave a bunch of quotes from the Old and New Testaments in post #98 - they say exactly that the husband is the head, and the wife should obey him. Then, other posters gave a bunch of Church documents that uphold and further explain the same principle.

So then, why, o why?

Why come and try to tear down the teachings of the Catholic Church, at a Catholic forum dedicated to teach and build up people in the Catholic faith?

If you want to disagree with the Catholic Church’s teachings, can’t you please do it somewhere else?

Also, let’s not forget that nobody is forced to get married, if they don’t like God’s design for marriage. Husbands are called to love their wives and sacrifice themselves for their wives even as Christ sacrificed himself for his Church; wives are called to submit to their husbands and obey their husbands just as the Church submits to and obeys Christ. That’s the plan for marriage, these are God’s instructions, take them or leave them. If you don’t like this plan, why don’t you just stay single. The Church does NOT say that ALL men and all women should get married (at least not the Catholic Church, and we are not Mormons ).

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

The Catholic Church teaches that… wives should obey their husbands.

The Church does not teach this.

.If you want to disagree with the Catholic Church’s teachings, can’t you please do it somewhere else?

Wow. Are you a moderator?

---

And on that note, I need to step away from this thread. It’s disrespectful and dismissive of Church teachings as well as every Catholic marriage, including my own, that I know away from this forum.

Luna

 

[Walking_Home]

Here’s something I don’t understand: why are some people coming to a Catholic forum, only to argue against the teachings of the Catholic Church?

The Catholic Church teaches that the husband is the head of the household, and that wives should obey their husbands. FatherOfTwelve gave a bunch of quotes from the Old and New Testaments in post #98 - they say exactly that the husband is the head, and the wife should obey him. Then, other posters gave a bunch of Church documents that uphold and further explain the same principle.

So then, why, o why?

Why come and try to tear down the teachings of the Catholic Church, at a Catholic forum dedicated to teach and build up people in the Catholic faith?

If you want to disagree with the Catholic Church’s teachings, can’t you please do it somewhere else?

Also, let’s not forget that nobody is forced to get married, if they don’t like God’s design for marriage. Husbands are called to love their wives and sacrifice themselves for their wives even as Christ sacrificed himself for his Church; wives are called to submit to their husbands and obey their husbands just as the Church submits to and obeys Christ. That’s the plan for marriage, these are God’s instructions, take them or leave them. If you don’t like this plan, why don’t you just stay single. The Church does NOT say that ALL men and all women should get married (at least not the Catholic Church, and we are not Mormons ).

---

You are sounding more like the SSPX and the sedes – who use their interpretation of the past —to “prove” the Church is off Her foundations.

 

[severus68]

Here’s something I don’t understand: why are some people coming to a Catholic forum, only to argue against the teachings of the Catholic Church?

The Catholic Church teaches that the husband is the head of the household, and that wives should obey their husbands. FatherOfTwelve gave a bunch of quotes from the Old and New Testaments in post #98 - they say exactly that the husband is the head, and the wife should obey him. Then, other posters gave a bunch of Church documents that uphold and further explain the same principle.

So then, why, o why?

Why come and try to tear down the teachings of the Catholic Church, at a Catholic forum dedicated to teach and build up people in the Catholic faith?

If you want to disagree with the Catholic Church’s teachings, can’t you please do it somewhere else?

Also, let’s not forget that nobody is forced to get married, if they don’t like God’s design for marriage. Husbands are called to love their wives and sacrifice themselves for their wives even as Christ sacrificed himself for his Church; wives are called to submit to their husbands and obey their husbands just as the Church submits to and obeys Christ. That’s the plan for marriage, these are God’s instructions, take them or leave them. If you don’t like this plan, why don’t you just stay single. The Church does NOT say that ALL men and all women should get married (at least not the Catholic Church, and we are not Mormons ).

Really??? If you think we are doing such a terrible thing why dont you and Dan report us and remind Dan to mention that he says we (at least) are heretics.

 

[severus68]

---

You are sounding more like the SSPX and the sedes – who use their interpretation of the past —to “prove” the Church is off Her foundations.

Yes, and the cheek of telling us to leave CAF.

 

[MaryHelene]

Sorry I misjudged the situation.

Well, good luck to you, and please obey your husband.

It’s in the Bible, and it’s in the Church’s teaching documents (see the thread for many quotes from the Old and New Testaments, for Papal Encyclicals and for the Catechism of the Council of Trent).

There is a lot of stuff in The Bible that we haven’t adopted as part of our tradition, or don’t take literally - and I fail to see where “obedience to husband” is part of canon law or our catechism.

And no, I will not be “obeying” my husband - ever. We’ve had an absolutely lovely marriage as equals. He’s not the type of man that needs his woman to obey him.

Obedience is for dogs.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Here’s something I don’t understand: why are some people coming to a Catholic forum, only to argue against the teachings of the Catholic Church?

Not arguing with the teachings of the Church, arguing with some people’s interpretations of those teachings which, IMO, belittle and demean wives and treat them as “subordinates” rather than partners.

It also, IMO, disrespects the sacrament. The relationship between husband and wife is not that of boss and secretary as we implied earlier. Do you not see how this is disrespectful?

BTW I am a married man if that makes any difference to you. So this is not about me being a “rebellious female” in case you were planning to go that route.

 

[Dan_Daly]

There is a lot of stuff in The Bible that we haven’t adopted as part of our tradition, or don’t take literally - and I fail to see where “obedience to husband” is part of canon law or our catechism.

And no, I will not be “obeying” my husband - ever. We’ve had an absolutely lovely marriage as equals. He’s not the type of man that needs his woman to obey him.

Obedience is for dogs.

This gets to the heart of the problem again. So if obedience is for dogs, then the Catholic Church has officially taught that women are to be treated as dogs. The Church can not teach error on matters of faith and morals. If you believe that Church teaching can be wrong, how does one know that “current” teaching is correct? The answer is that there is no seperation between “past” and “current” teaching nor any contradiction.

It’s good to remember that the rebellion of Lucifer all started over obedience. “Non Serviam” or “I will not serve” was the battle cry of the fallen angels.

Severus, I have showed you in this thread and others that the CCC explicitly endorses the Catechism of Trent. You continue to argue that I favor the latter over the former, but I have never said that. I rely on both and don’t see any contradictions between them on matters of faith and morals.

Now your turn to answer a question I’ve asked a few times. What date did the Catechism of Trent go from being a universal catechism of the Church to an irrelevant historical relic? Was it good up until the CCC came out? If so, why would the CCC endorse it? It seems there would obviously be some Church document recording a momentus event like the Catechism of Trent being discarded. So please show me where it is.

If there is no document, please explain why you have the authority to reject it on your own. Please answer another one of my questions: how long are the CCC and John Paul II’s writings good for before they become irrelevant?

Pax Christi

 

[Art321]

There really seems to much confusion when it comes to this topic. I would encourage the series known as The Domestic Church, which gives the Church’s teaching very clearly so once you see it there will be no more confusion. It is on the ewtn religious catalogue and here is the link:

ewtnreligiouscatalogue.com/THE+DOMESTIC+CHURCH±DVD/shop.axd/ProductDetails?keywords=marriage&page_no=2&edp_no=16420

I am still advocating this series. I recommend everyone to buy this and see for themselves what Dr. Joseph Atkinson says. He presents the Church’s teaching on this matter very clearly and in a very humble way. And quite honestly, does so better than anyone who has tried on this thread, although there has been some who have done a good job.

 

[L_piperatus]

There is a lot of stuff in The Bible that we haven’t adopted as part of our tradition, or don’t take literally - and I fail to see where “obedience to husband” is part of canon law or our catechism.

And no, I will not be “obeying” my husband - ever. We’ve had an absolutely lovely marriage as equals. He’s not the type of man that needs his woman to obey him.

Obedience is for dogs.

Quote from the New American Bible on the Vatican website (see at vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PWL.HTM ) - Luke Chapter 2:

**48

When his parents saw him, they were astonished, and his mother said to him, “Son, why have you done this to us? Your father and I have been looking for you with great anxiety.”

49

And he said to them, “Why were you looking for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?” 13

50

But they did not understand what he said to them.

51

He went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them; and his mother kept all these things in her heart.

52

And Jesus advanced (in) wisdom and age and favor before God and man.

---

13 [49] I must be in my Father’s house: this phrase can also be translated, “I must be about my Father’s work.” In either translation, Jesus refers to God as his Father. His divine sonship, and his obedience to his heavenly Father’s will, take precedence over his ties to his family.**

Soooo…

I didn’t know that all my efforts to be obedient to the Church… trying to imitate the child Jesus who was obedient to his heavenly Father, and to St. Joseph and Mary, his earthly parents… was something meant for dogs… but nevermind… I would rather stay in the doghouse with Jesus… than curry favors with those who despise God’s word, and despise obedience!

 

[Dan_Daly]

I have no interest in having any 'discussion" with you. I have noticed and this is not the first time, that you ignore questions you do not want to answer like where in the current Catechism does it say the Catechism is the best way to our faith.

You are arrogant and self righteous. Since you have made personal deragatory comments to and about me, let me say one thing. I say everyone is entitled to the marriage they want because we have free choice. That does not mean at all that I necessarily think well of any particular marriage. You have volunteered information about your management of your family and ‘your’ women. I find that so very controlling and so unChrist like.

I am often arrogant and self righteous. You’ll get no excuse from me on those points. I have plenty of other faults as well.

On the other hand, if only perfect people were allowed to spread the Gospel, then we would have very few evangelists.

If a man is walking down the street yelling “Jesus Christ is not God!”, guess what? Me, lowly old me, am qualified to declare the man is shouting heresy.

In addition, me, lowly old me, am qualified to speak infallibly on certain matters. Watch:

…Our Lord Jesus Christ died and rose again on the third day…

Infallible.

See, the key in both the ability to speak the Truth and to identify falsehoods (heresy) is adherence to the Teachings of the Church. Why is that? Because the Church does not teach error. This is not through any merit of the people in the Church, but by the protection fo the Holy Ghost.

I have made no judgement of your heart. I can judge actions and words though, and I expect others will and should judge my actions and words. That is why I said you are a *material *heretic. It simply means you are in opposition to some Teachings of the Faith. There are an awful lot of material heretics these days, mainly through ignorance in large part due to the horrible state of catechesis. A formal heretic on the other hand, knows the truth, and willfully rejects it.

Pax Christi

 

[mini_me640]

mini_me640;8895424:

Yeah, I just disagree with that. First of all, I married someone who has very similar values and goals to my own, so we rarely have an impasse. Secondly, we have a rule in our household that the “no” wins. If a topic comes up and one of us says “no” (Do you want to visit my parents tomorrow? Can Annie go to Lauren’s house on Saturday? Should we plan a trip to Disneyworld? Should we get a new car? Should we euthanize the cat? Do you want pizza tonight?), then that position “wins.” Doesn’t matter whose “no” it is. We simply do not move ahead with anything when there is a dissenting party. The scales, in our home, favor inaction over action when one person doesn’t agree.

I can’t imagine saying “no” to something and having my husband go ahead and do it anyway.

I too married a man with goals and values like my own and we seldom disagree
My husband has never demanded that I obey him. He is a very easygoing guy. He comes from a very male dominated cultural background and loathes the use of “male authority” as a disguise for selfishness as he has often seen within his own family. He does not reject the idea that he is responsible for his family in a unique way, however. There are a few times when our compromise on an issue has been my deferring to him out of respect for his authority, and many more times that I should have submitted but let my pride get in the way. He has always had my best interests (and that of our children) at heart.

When I was pregnant with our first, I was working full time and going to school at night for a
professional certification. At the end of pregnancy, I had severe swelling and fatigue. He wanted me to go ahead and begin my maternity leave and rest. I am a workaholic and refused. He strongly suggested I cut my hours down but again I refused. I ended up with gestational hypertension in the hospital to be induced. I should have submitted to him even though I thought I could handle it all. I agree that no is a good default on small daily things of you cant agree. However in larger matters, inaction is not always what’s best for the family.

 

[MaryHelene]

This gets to the heart of the problem again. So if obedience is for dogs, then the Catholic Church has officially taught that women are to be treated as dogs. The Church can not teach error on matters of faith and morals. If you believe that Church teaching can be wrong, how does one know that “current” teaching is correct? The answer is that there is no seperation between “past” and “current” teaching nor any contradiction.

It’s good to remember that the rebellion of Lucifer all started over obedience. “Non Serviam” or “I will not serve” was the battle cry of the fallen angels.

Pax Christi

Please let me know where in The Bible Lucifer and his fallen angels are quoted as saying, “non serviam.”

On another note, I have no problem serving my husband. He has no problem serving me. Obedience is quite another can of worms.

To tell you the truth, if the Catholic Church really taught that women must be obedient to their husbands in a non-reciprocal capacity, I would leave it. Luckily, this is the first place I’ve heard or read such rubbish : )