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.
You’d want to thoroughly brief a potential wife on your expectations for your role as husband (“the final authority”) well in advance, eh?
 
Colossians and 1 Peter (I think) told wives the same thing but didn’t mention mutual submission or husbands dying. So as much as it pains me to say this, I’m pretty sure husbands were supposed to have the final say as long as they don’t abuse their wives…? Whether that’s binding or not…idk but I am pretty sure an egalitarian marriage was not in his mind when he wrote that. It seems weird how the word ‘submit’ is used a couple of times specifically for the wife yet Christians will bend over backwards trying to prove it meant anything but that?

I swear, trying to understand the trinity or quantum physics is easier than this topic!
 
It is good that the Catholic Church is not sola scriptura and has the Magesterium which has clearly stated that man and wife are equal.
 
Last edited:
The Church doesn’t go by the scriptures alone. There is also Tradition and the Magisterium. There is a complete lack of actual tradition of the Church enforcing or emphasising submission of the wife in marriage.
The essentials are present in the marriage vows: Love and Honour. If obedience was so important you’d think it would be reflected in the vows.

Paul does talk about mutual submission as well so we have that.
 
omgriley said:
Have you read anything I’ve written?

Who said anything about “unlimited power”? Please stop twisting the argument to make it seem like some boogyman.

I never said I think of myself as my family’s pope. I set up an analogy in order to show you the similarities between the roles of Christ, the pope, and the husband. It’s exactly what St. Paul did in Ephesians 5.

This will be the last time I respond to your posts because you obviously are not interested in having an actual discussion about this issue. You’re only interested in tearing down men who actually carry out God’s call to be the chief authority of the household. All you have done so far is equate my position, which is the Church’s position, to maniacal child abuse. I’m sorry that you Father mistreated you as a child and I sincerely hope that one day you can put it behind you and stop letting it affect your view of husbands and fathers.
Click to expand...
The average person would understand “final authority” as meaning unlimited power. If that’s not what you mean, use different terminology.

And yes, if the husband is the “final authority” in the family, that does set him up as a sort of Pope. Again, if that’s not what you mean, use different terminology.

What I’m asking you is, where are the safety features in your model to prevent abuse? That’s why I mentioned dire cases–what safeguards do you believe in for preventing and dealing with dire situations? And you can’t say that they are freakishly rare, because there are people all over this board who can (and in fact already have) told you about serious cases of abuse and neglect. So far what I’ve heard from you is that the husband will simply automatically make better decisions for the family by virtue of being the husband, which is empirically false.
 
Of course I know that, but even the Church’s documents on marriage all point to some sort of headship in marriage?
 
Spiritual headship. The man is responsible for being a model of faith to children and leading the family toward heaven.

A wife can do this as well but even secular studies show that in families where the father engages in religious practice, children will be more likely to practice.
 
Where does it say that’s only for spiritual matters (not trying to start anything, I’m genuinely curious)
 
Leah101,

–There are so many “submits” used in the New Testament that it can’t mean total obedience, just because there are too many different authorities in play.
–Also, there are at least two examples in the Bible where it’s assumed that wifely disobedience would be a good thing. See, for example, the story of Abigail and David (1 Samuel 25) where Abigail’s husband insultingly refuses to provide food to David’s men when David was a rebel warlord with hundreds of men under his command. Abigail, realizing that David could easily have their entire household slaughtered (and in fact David was gearing up to do so), secretly offers David provisions, saving the lives of many innocent people.

David praises her saying, "32 David said to Abigail, “Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, who sent you to meet me today! 33 Blessed be your good sense, and blessed be you, who have kept me today from bloodguilt and from avenging myself by my own hand! 34 For as surely as the Lord the God of Israel lives, who has restrained me from hurting you, unless you had hurried and come to meet me, truly by morning there would not have been left to Nabal so much as one male.”

Ay yay yay!

Here, as elsewhere, the Old Testament is very pragmatic. There’s not even a hint that it would have been more virtuous for Abigail to submit to her husband’s terrible decision-making.

–In the New Testament, we have the Sapphira and Ananias (Acts 5). Sapphira, the wife, backs up her husband’s lie to the apostles and is struck dead for her trouble.

"5 But a man named Anani′as with his wife Sapphi′ra sold a piece of property, 2 and with his wife’s knowledge he kept back some of the proceeds, and brought only a part and laid it at the apostles’ feet. 3 But Peter said, “Anani′as, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land? 4 While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.” 5 When Anani′as heard these words, he fell down and died. And great fear came upon all who heard of it. 6 The young men rose and wrapped him up and carried him out and buried him.

“7 After an interval of about three hours his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 And Peter said to her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for so much.” And she said, “Yes, for so much.” 9 But Peter said to her, “How is it that you have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Hark, the feet of those that have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.” 10 Immediately she fell down at his feet and died. When the young men came in they found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband.”

The wifely submission passages in the Bible have to be tempered by the other calls for submission in the NT (submission to parents, masters, secular authority and Church authority), as well as by the rather vivid counterexamples in the stories of Abigail and Sapphira.
 
omgriley said:
What about my examples looks like lording over my wife to you? Are you saying it’s not a father’s responsibility to prevent harmful material from entering his house and affecting his family? Is it not a father’s responsibility to ensure his children are properly educated? Give me a break
Click to expand...
In my family, this is a situation in which my husband and I submit to one another after (sometimes heated) discussion. I tend to be the guardian of the the media in our home and my husband is much more relaxed and less vigilant than I am. In short, I’m better at it. It isn’t that we disagree in principle, I’m just much more aware of the details. The end result is that sometimes I will walk in, see something that he’s watching with the kids, and ask him to turn it off. And he does. Then we have a discussion about why I believe that it is inappropriate for our kids. He usually comes to agree with me after hearing my explanation, but not always. In those cases in which he does not agree, he generally defers to my greater knowledge of our children and sensitivity toward the media that they take in. Every once in a while, he puts up a strong argument in favor of letting the kids watch something that I have a problem with. When he still feels very strongly after a discussion, I will defer to him against my own misgivings. This is how mutual submission works in my family. It might look differently in somebody else’s family.

It is the responsibility of each one of us to monitor the media that comes into our home. if I were watching soap operas all day, he would rightfully insist that I stop. If he were viewing pornography, I would rightfully insist that he stop. We each possess the responsibility and authority to protect our family.

As a concrete example of this: I don’t watch much TV, but I once got into a very good and highly rated show that I really enjoyed. I was watching it when I couldn’t sleep at night so my husband wasn’t there. One time, I left the show paused at a very violent scene. my husband turned it on to see what it was and was very offended and disturbed by this one scene. The scene was not representative of the show. Nevertheless, he asked me to stop watching it. We discussed it quite a bit and he didn’t back down. He just kept saying that the scene he was offensive and he didn’t understand why I would want to watch such a thing. Frankly, I thought he was being silly and ignorant and still don’t understand why he reacted this way, but I have not watched the show since. I submitted to my husband in this case. He has submitted to me in countless other situations regarding media in the home.

We go to the parish of my choosing even though he’d be happier elsewhere. We follow his lead for family prayers, though I would prefer a different way. I park the car where he wants me to, even though I disagree that it works best. Such is the give and take of married life.
 
Be kind, supportive, and helpful as you can be. Follow the Gospel. Keep your soul from sin. Submit insofar as your husband’s will is in line with God’s. It does not mean go along with whatever stupid idea he has or whatever feeling he has at the moment – call him on that stuff. And vice versa.
 
Xantippe said:
The average person would understand “final authority” as meaning unlimited power. If that’s not what you mean, use different terminology.

And yes, if the husband is the “final authority” in the family, that does set him up as a sort of Pope. Again, if that’s not what you mean, use different terminology.
Click to expand...
Even the Pope does not have unlimited, unchecked authority in the Church. He is bound by Tradition ,by Ecumenical Councils, by previous dogmatic teachings, and by the morality.
 
I find it very funny that there are many supposed Catholics on this board who are so repulsed by Catholic teaching.

The Church has always taught that the husband is the chief authority and holds primacy in the family. This is no Protestant perversion, this is the teaching of the Church commanded by the Law of God. It is man’s responsibility to love and care for his wife and children. It is the wife’s responsibility to obey her husband as spelled out in black and white by the Church:
“The man is the ruler of the family, and the head of the woman; but because she is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone, let her be subject and obedient to the man, not as a servant but as a companion, so that nothing be lacking of honor or of dignity in the obedience which she pays. Let divine charity be the constant guide of their mutual relations, both in him who rules and in her who obeys, since each bears the image, the one of Christ, the other of the Church.” -Arcanum Divinae (On Christian Marriage)
Click to expand...
“Since the husband represents Christ, and since the wife represents the Church, let there always be, both in him who commands and in her who obeys, a heaven-born love guiding both in their respective duties.” -Arcanum Divinae (On Christian Marriage)
Click to expand...
"Domestic society being confirmed… there should flourish in it that “order of love,” as St. Augustine calls it. This order includes both the primacy of the husband with regard to the wife and children, the ready subjection of the wife and her willing obedience, which the Apostle commends in these words: “Let women be subject to their husbands as to the Lord, because the husband is the head of the wife, and Christ is the head of the Church.” -Casti Connubii (On Christian Marriage)
Click to expand...
“In fact, if the husband neglect his duty, it falls to the wife to take his place in directing the family. But the structure of the family and its fundamental law, established and confirmed by God, must always and everywhere be maintained intact.” -Casti Connubii (On Christian Marriage)
Click to expand...
Or are these just hard sayings for you all?
 
My objection and uncomfortableness is because it seems like men have full control over what happens in their house and women should have little say because he is the provider. As if husband’s do not make poor choices or do not need to consult with their wives? I guess her purpose is to serve everyone and look pretty?
I don’t like the idea a woman’s value and purpose revolves around serving others.
 
It’s a difficult subject to be sure. We want Catholic husbands to really listen to their wives and take heed of their advice.

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.

Oh how this violently conflicts with post-modern thinking on gender; particularly in the west! 😱
 
That is very true. It is unfortunate people abuse and pervert their positions of leadership. I feel the same about parenting. I’ll say 95% of the time the parents are right. I think there is such thing as over disciplining a child. Children’s boundaries should still be respected
 
Vonsalza said:
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.
Click to expand...
It appears Abraham would be considered an abusive and inconsiderate husband by the standards of this generation.
 
Last edited:
I will try and find some time to look into this, but if someone wants to beat me to the punch, for a question like this, I would go to the best, in this case, the St. John Paul the Great, who even if you don’t agree with the last part, you have to admit that his great work Theology of the Body is the definitive work on this subject, especially in the modern world. (I just noticed this is all one sentence. St Paul would be proud.)

A quick search found he referenced Ephesians quite a bit in it.
 
I wasn’t thinking of total or blind obedience, to be fair

The Bible speaks of obedience many times unless it contradicts the will of God (eg the two examples you have mentioned, as well as Sarah, I believe) so I wasn’t doubting that at all. I was thinking of submission in non spiritual matters where it has nothing to do with committing a sin (eg what kind of house to buy, where to go for a holiday, what school to send their kids to etc etc.) or the welfare of anyone (that is, nobody is going to get hurt or slaughtered). While it seems a given that a decent human being will discuss these problems, the whole husband=head of wife seems to point that the man has the trump card in situations like this where a couple cannot come to an agreement.

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 😣
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top