How Practical is it for Women to be Submissive to Their Husbands in Modern Society

  • Thread starter Thread starter MargaretofCortona
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wouldn’t things like determining what parish we will be members of,
Parish membership is determined by Canon Law and is geographic. Every human on earth lives inside the boundaries of a parish, just like they live inside a nation or a state or a county.

We are free to go to Mass at non-geographic parishes, and in the US (and maybe Canada ?) most Bishops are okay with a family deciding to put their names on the parish mailing list - commonly called “parish registration” - at a foreign parish, but, we are always members of the parish where we domicile.
 
40.png
Vonsalza:
On the other hand, God didn’t tell Abraham to go to the promised land “after really talking it out with Sarah and making sure she was really on board with this major life decision”. Nope. God just told him to go. And Sarah was expected to follow as a godly wife.
It appears Abraham would be considered an abusive and inconsiderate husband by the standards of this generation.

In a Catholic marriage – subjection is Not one side ( wife to husband) – it is mutual.
APOSTOLIC LETTER MULIERIS DIGNITATEM
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF JOHN PAUL II
ON THE DIGNITY AND VOCATION OF WOMEN
ON THE OCCASION OF THE MARIAN YEAR

The author of the Letter to the Ephesians sees no contradiction between an exhortation formulated in this way and the words: “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife” (5:22-23). The author knows that this way of speaking, so profoundly rooted in the customs and religious tradition of the time, is to be understood and carried out in a new way: as a “mutual subjection out of reverence for Christ” (cf. Eph 5:21). This is especially true because the husband is called the “head” of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church; he is so in order to give “himself up for her” (Eph 5:25), and giving himself up for her means giving up even his own life. However, whereas in the relationship between Christ and the Church the subjection is only on the part of the Church, in the relationship between husband and wife the “subjection” is not one-sided but mutual.

The apostolic letters are addressed to people living in an environment marked by that same traditional way of thinking and acting. The “innovation” of Christ is a fact: it constitutes the unambiguous content of the evangelical message and is the result of the Redemption. However, the awareness that in marriage there is mutual “subjection of the spouses out of reverence for Christ”, and not just that of the wife to the husband, must gradually establish itself in hearts, consciences, behaviour and customs. This is a call which from that time onwards, does not cease to challenge succeeding generations; it is a call which people have to accept ever anew. -------

But the challenge presented by the “ethos” of the Redemption is clear and definitive. All the reasons in favour of the “subjection” of woman to man in marriage must be understood in the sense of a “mutual subjection” of both “out of reverence for Christ”. The measure of true spousal love finds its deepest source in Christ, who is the Bridegroom of the Church, his Bride.

Mulieris Dignitatem (August 15, 1988) | John Paul II
 
On the other hand, God didn’t tell Abraham to go to the promised land “after really talking it out with Sarah and making sure she was really on board with this major life decision”. Nope. God just told him to go. And Sarah was expected to follow as a godly wife.
And Mary didn’t tell the angel, “I need to talk to my betrothed about this.” She said, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.”

Wasn’t that a bit unsubmissive?
 
40.png
Vonsalza:
On the other hand, God didn’t tell Abraham to go to the promised land “after really talking it out with Sarah and making sure she was really on board with this major life decision”. Nope. God just told him to go. And Sarah was expected to follow as a godly wife.
And Mary didn’t tell the angel, “I need to talk to my betrothed about this.” She said, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.”

Wasn’t that a bit unsubmissive?
I don’t see how.
Joseph simply wasn’t her husband at the time.
 
Last edited:
And if I’m wrong, is there actually a real life example of a proper submission? Or is it just filled with flowery language to make us modern women feel less afraid of a Christian marriage? In my time here, I’ve seen the same things being said over and over in threads like this, but never a decent example to illustrate it 😣
I don’t know if you ever saw this, but I really like this Protestant lady’s approach (she’s isn’t Catholic, but she’s been married a long time, she has some very interesting ideas about what submission is, and she seems to be a good and loving wife):


"When I speak at marriage conferences, I often ask wives what they think submission means. The room grows silent as they hem and haw, until finally a few hands are raised. “When you disagree, he gets the final say.”

"I’ve never heard an answer other than that one. If you think about it, though, that sounds rather peculiar–as if God’s command for women in marriage can be summed up as, “in the case of ties, husbands win”! Perhaps when it comes to submission, the immortal words of the Princess Bride apply, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” So let’s look at what submission does–and doesn’t–mean.

“Does the same God who sets high standards for us–whose will is that “there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought (1 Corinthians 1:10)”–turn to marriage and say, “obviously agreement isn’t possible there”? Why is unity the starting point in every other Christian relationship, while disunity is the starting point in marriage?”

"Finally, viewing submission through the decision-making lens makes submission too small. Christianity is about servanthood and living out God’s purposes in our daily lives. Shouldn’t submission be about that too—something we do daily, not just when we have decisions to make?

"In most marriage ceremonies, Genesis 2:24 is read aloud: “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” God’s desire for us isn’t a tug-of-war relationship where one person gets his way; it’s for true oneness!

"And I think that submission—“putting ourselves under” our husbands and willingly pursuing our husband’s best—is the primary tool to attain this oneness. In humility, we think of his needs, his wants, his interests, his desires, before we think of our own. We pursue his best before we pursue our best.

“I think that’s a taller order than just “in the event of ties, he wins.” We don’t just defer to his decisions. We emotionally and physically invest in building him up and pursuing his best. And that sounds much more like the nature of the gospel to me. We serve. We love. We show grace. And our husbands serve us too, as they love us as Christ loved the church—even as they love their own bodies. That’s the recipe for unity, and it’s what Jesus really wants for us.”

That’s a very appealing message, and it shows the connection between love and submission.
 
Last edited:
I could see that as inconsiderate. Women didn’t work back then and man was the main provider. Nowadays women work and it would inconsiderate to up and leave as if she has no duties of her own. I can’t imagine someone calling this abusive honestly.
 
40.png
Vonsalza:
I don’t see how.

Joseph simply wasn’t her husband at the time.
The Jewish system meant that the betrothed husband actually did have a fairly official position.
I know it reasonably well; particularly from my days with the seminarians.

My position remains unchanged. They simply weren’t married at that time. This is an irrefutable fact.

Read up on what would happen to a 1st century Jewish man if he tried to sleep with his betrothed and her family (read: dad) found out. Not pleasant.
Hence Joseph was thinking of putting Mary away when he learned of her pregnancy–why would he put Mary away if there was no legal bond between them?
Oh I’m not challenging that they were betrothed. I’m just challenging any errant claim that attempts to equate this status to “marriage”.
 
Last edited:
40.png
Xantippe:
It’s also not very appropriate for a Catholic husband to think of himself as his family’s pope.
You’re right. He’s actually the family’s Christ.
For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.
Ephesians 5:23

I assume this has already come up in the thread. I’ve glanced through the thread, and want to support this particular statement. In my observation, this bible verse has become utterly void in practical Catholic marriage advice, except to emphasise, along with other verses, that the husband is to serve and “die” for the wife.
 
Last edited:
I assume this has already come up in the thread. I’ve glanced through the thread, and want to support this particular statement. In my observation, this bible verse has become utterly void in practical Catholic marriage advice, except to emphasise, along with other verses, that the husband is to serve and “die” for the wife.
Because that has nothing to do with Jesus at all.
 
That’s the game they play. You act like Christ and love me unconditionally. But I will decide what submission really means, I will decide when to submit, and I will decide if you deserve submission at all.

But we have to remember that nearly two millennia of Christain understanding of marriage and submission is wrong because a bunch of secular feminists don’t like it.
 
That’s the game they play. You act like Christ and love me unconditionally. But I will decide what submission really means, I will decide when to submit, and I will decide if you deserve submission at all.

But we have to remember that nearly two millennia of Christain understanding of marriage and submission is wrong because a bunch of secular feminists don’t like it.
And (flipping the coin), “I get to decide what loving you like Christ loved the church means, and by the way, it means that I get to do whatever I want whenever I want to.”

There are a lot of people doing this stuff on either side.

Which is why maybe it makes a bit more sense for both sexes to have more modest aspirations. Be nice! Be respectful! Don’t go charging forward with brilliant ideas without buy-in from your spouse! Listen to your spouse! Compromise! Take turns!

It may not be how the “cool kids” do it, but it works.
 
The reasoning that the command for husbands to love their wives is a heavier cross to bear is reasoning that, to me, is flummery of the highest order. It’s post-modern reconstructionust.

It’s built on the notion that women don’t like to be commanded to be submissive (I’d venture that women never wanted this, and it’s only in the past 100 years they they finally made their feelings known to the world) . Since women don’t want to be commanded to be submissive and the Church didn’t want to either clamp down on half of its membership or abandon its doctrines, some legal eagle on staff in the Magisterium figured out a way to split the difference, have it both ways, play a bait-n-switch.

Yes, you’re supposed to be submissive, but the men have it way harder! They’re supposed to love you to the point that they’d lay down their lives for you! Now settle down, ladies and appreciate how good you have it.

Flummery! Every man, regardless of religion, is willing to lay down his life for his wife and children. And I challenge you to find a woman who wouldn’t do the same.

And let’s face it, my brothers: the chances of any of us being in that position are essentially zero. Whereas the act of submitting to one’s husband would be pretty much a way of life.

Herein ends my lesson. And I’ll add that I don’t expect, nor do I want my daughters to grow up thinking that “being submissive” leads them closer to God.
 
My husband lays down his life almost every day for me when he does what I want when it is diifficult for him. The thing is at least for our marriage we both submit and we both love as much as is humanly possible because we want this marriage to work.
 
Last edited:
NOOOOOOO do not send people there, that is a virulently anti-Catholic website!!!
 
I didnt know that… I just googled for some explanation and thought it sounded ok…😟
 
I mention Theology of the Body earlier. I found this:
It is expressed in the reciprocal relationship, even though the author of the letter indicates it especially from the part of the husband. This results from the structure of the total image. The spouses should be “subject to one another out of reverence for Christ” (this was already made evident in the first verses of the text quoted: Eph 5:21-23). However, later on, the husband is above all, he who loves and the wife, on the other hand, is she who is loved.
https://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/jp2tb91.htm
 
Last edited:
But if you have a “traditional” marriage in which your wife is the one staying home and therefore doing the homeschooling (I use quotes because this is a very, very new phenomena), then telling someone “you might have objection X, Y, and Z to taking on sole responsibility for the educational formation of our children, but that’s too bad because I say you have to, end of subject,” is a very good way to ensure that your kids aren’t going to be homeschooled well.

This is a particularly troublesome example because homeschooling of several children, done well, is a more than full time job by itself. That’s leaving out entirely the standard house chores that need to be done, the laundry, cooking, watching of and caring for babies and toddlers. Just the schooling alone is a full-time job which you and you alone get to decide she has to take on in addition to her other responsibilities. That’s a pretty terrifying prospect.

I have several friends who homeschool. Of those who are ensuring that their kids receive a genuinely well-rounded education, they report about 3 hours per day spent per homeschooled kid on lesson planning and preparation, worksheet copying/writing, actual instruction, grading, record-keeping, and so on. These are well-educated, intelligent, well-organized moms who are doing a good job with their kids, but make no mistake: this is a huge, HUGE commitment, especially with more than one kid involved. It can also lead to logistical issues that can negatively influence family life in ways that someone who isn’t at home while the schooling is going on may not realize–I’m thinking of the mom I know who homeschools the older kids while the youngest cries behind the baby gate for hours because, while her food/diapering/etc needs are met, she is lonely and doesn’t have anyone playing with her because mom and the older kids are locked off in the kitchen for studies. Dad’s not home during the day to see this, of course. The kids and mom are all somewhat stressed, and I’m betting that in the long term, they’ll associate both homeschooling and family life with either being terribly lonely and sad or having to listen to baby sis cry for attention.
 
It means that the Husband is the HEAD of the house

it does NOT mean a dictatorship without discussions; nor does it imply being subservient.

Important matters should be discussed; BUT the husband should take and accept the leadership role GOD has intended.

The talents, education and life experiences of both partners should also be given due consideration.

God Bless you,

Partick
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top