Limits of "Headship"

[aspirant]

I am not advocating a “unilateral subjection” of wife to husband.

I don’t recall saying you did.

I am merely saying that someone has to lead a family in certain situations

And who leads should depend on the situation, competence, and willingness of the parties. In matters of truth and morality, everyone has a responsibility to seek the truth, form his or her conscience according to truth, obey his or her conscience, and do what is right. John should not follow Sally in doing something he believes to be wrong, and vice versa. In practical matters, if one party has greater experience and wisdom than the other, and/or is willing and able to acquire it, that party can either do or lead the necessary task. If Sally is a better bookkeeper and budget maker than John, for example, Sally should be making financial decisions of import. If John is a more experienced repairman than Sally, or John has more time and willingness to study home repair than Sally, John should be working on the fridge. If neither is capable of figuring out their tax forms, let them consult someone who is. In matters of two opinions, like whether to have spaghetti or baked potatoes for dinner, let it be made amicably by mutually agreed methods like a coin toss or alternation.

Is Casti Connubii worthless now?

Not at all, as long as one understands it in light of St. Paul and Pope John Paul II. A reading of Casti Connubii that contradicts St. Paul and Pope John Paul II is clearly a misreading. Much like any reading of 1Peter 2:18-25 that contradicts the Church’s condemnation of human slavery is a misreading.

I don’t see how we can say that Christian wives were once obliged to be subject to their husbands, but that it changed one day and that obligation no longer existed.

Wives must still submit to their husbands, just as husbands must submit to their wives.

I don’t see anything in Casti Connubii that says a husband can unilaterally impose his will on his wife, forcing her to do something she has a good reason not to want to do.

Because it doesn’t.

 

[eucharisteo]

read Ephesians 5

 

[LongingForLight]

As someone once pointed out to me, it doesn’t say, “Husbands, make sure your wives submit to you.” Ensuring the submission of the wife to the husband is the wife’s duty.

Now, if the wife is interested in submitting to her husband’s authority upon his request, then I see no problem with him requesting that this matter be placed under his authority, and him exercising that authority by requesting with that authority that she join him to seek the opinion of a priest.

In the case of the example, schooling and social pressures, I personally can definitely see ways that involving the priest could be appropriate or inappropriate. For example, let’s say there are the following arguments:

Wife: I think our child needs to be in a school because we are called to be “salt for the earth”, and we can trust God to protect our child from social ills if we are faithful.
Husband: I think we need to homeschool because we need to give our child a good moral foundation before we send her out to be salt for the world, instead of sending her out before we have prepared her.
(I’ve heard both of these positions, roughly, before here on CA forums).

In this case, I think the following could be appropriate:

Husband: As head of the household, I think we should go to talk to the priest.
Wife: I really don’t want to do that. I don’t think it’s appropriate.
Husband: I am asking this as head of the household.
Wife: I still don’t like it. But if you are asking as head of the household, then I’ll go.

Of course, if the wife still refuses (instead of following the discussion above), the husband cannot force her to submit, and should not try to. It’s not his place to demand submission from her (and she might have good, moral reason for not submitting). But using Ephesians 5 to put some weight behind a suggestion intended for the good of the family seems appropriate - provided he does not attempt to enforce her submission, but is merely requesting it, and conveys this to her clearly. Charity requires that he take into consideration his wife’s attitude towards wifely submission when selecting his wording.

This is my opinion, formed from reading a number of threads on this topic and their various church documents.

Personally, I don’t see what is wrong with the question. The parts of the Bible about submission are very difficult to interpret. I think this question has brought up lots of interesting discussion . . . clouded by people’s assumptions that a specific husband was attempting to insist on things with a specific wife.

 

[dbmus]

To OP and former catholic,
It doesn’t matter at all that Chris33 doesn’t want to give the details of the situation. The situation is none of our business. And he obviously is NOT looking for advice about the situation. Which is fine. Don’t lambast him just because he hasn’t asked for advice you are so eager to give. What purpose would such advice serve? It’s NEVER a good idea to go to a third party for support when you’re arguing with your spouse. This is especially true of internet strangers. So give him a break.

Prayers for you and your wife, Chris.

 

[former_Catholic]

I think this question has brought up lots of interesting discussion . . . clouded by people’s assumptions that a specific husband was attempting to insist on things with a specific wife.

The OP has already stated that this is by no means a merely hypothetical case, but that it involves 2 parents with irreconcilable differences over a childrearing issue that affects their child.
Bringing particulars in to the situation I am afraid could bias the outcome as people’s emotions would run one way or the other with the issue(s).
The only emotions running anywhere are the OP’s which are clearly running away in fear that if experienced Catholic parents and grandparents on the boards were allowed to know anything about the actual childrearing issue in contention… that it would influence their opinion on the issue of the husband’s (God-given(?)) authority to insist his wife seek resolution of this childrearing issue (which counseling has not resolved) from the 3rd party of his choice that she has already refused.

 

[former_Catholic]

To OP and former catholic,
It doesn’t matter at all that Chris33 doesn’t want to give the details of the situation. The situation is none of our business. And he obviously is NOT looking for advice about the situation. Which is fine. Don’t lambast him just because he hasn’t asked for advice you are so eager to give. What purpose would such advice serve? It’s NEVER a good idea to go to a third party for support when you’re arguing with your spouse. This is especially true of internet strangers. So give him a break.

I am not a Catholic and have absolutely no expertise nor advice for the OP on raising Catholic children whatsoever.
The problem is that the OP is obviously NOT looking for 3rd party advice about the situation, *but simultaneously suggesting that the husband has some sort of God-given authority to INSIST that the wife must seek out and heed the husband’s personally-selected-for-her 3rd party advice about the situation. * The hypocrisy of this strikes me as truly impressive.

 

[Chris33]

To Formercatholic:

You say “I am not a Catholic and have absolutely no expertise nor advice for the OP on raising Catholic children whatsoever. The problem is that the OP is obviously NOT looking for 3rd party advice about the situation,”

True. I am looking for principles that can be universally applied. Why is that concept so troubling to so many on this forum??? It almost appears that some might come hear to satisfy morbid curiosities.

" but simultaneously suggesting that the husband has some sort of God-given authority to INSIST that the wife must seek out and heed the husband’s personally-selected-for-her 3rd party advice about the situation."

Nothing in what I have said supports the assertion that 1) I am the husband, 2) that the husband has some sort of God given authority, 3) that the priest in question is personally selected by husband - it could well be “her” spiritual director, for all you could tell.

“The hypocrisy of this strikes me as truly impressive.”

Hmm!!?? A former Catholic going by the name of “former catholic” on a Catholic forum giving advice on the issue of authority? Glad you are here, but I do suggest you consider the issue of authority a little more thoroughly before counseling on the matter.

I for one am not threatened by the concept of authority. I welcome the idea of submitting to authority. I do not believe that submitting to authority is in any way humiliating or degrading. If it were, Christ would not expect us to submit to his or the Church’s authority. I am here simply seeking to know where that authority lies. I start by accepting the fact that I am not the ultimate authority.

Again, the issue of education was brought in just as an example. Is it not possible here say to discuss the principles of a just war without brining the complex details of a particular war into the discussion?

 

[ryecroft]

Just a thought on all of this - and before I go on, I too wish that we could know the specifics of this situation - part of me is wondering if we’re just here to debate a point without there being something really going on - but the poster has said so, so I’ll go with what he (I believe he) said. That being said, if you can get your wife to go talk to the priest with you, I will tell you what a Priest friend of mine did. Both the husband and wife came to speak with the Priest. The Priest first spoke with the wife alone and then spoke with the husband alone and then brought them together and spoke to both of them and was really able to get a better idea of what was going on. When there is some debate as it sounds like in this situation with regards to an issue in a marriage, sometimes it’s best to hear from each party without the other there - regardless of how sweet the husband or wife, sometimes the spouse can feel like he/she might hurt the feeling of the other spouse and won’t say certain things in front of the other. This way, the Priest gets a true idea of each spouse’s views and desires. I seriously suggest that this method might be something that your wife might agree to. If this matter has gotten “heated” it keeps it from getting so “heated” in front of Father, which can keep this from turning into a debate of the “wills”. Personally, if my husband wanted me to do something and said that I should do it, even if I didn’t agree (which I’m not saying has occured here), because as husband he was “head” of the household, (he would never do this - but) he’d have a difficult situation on his hands and I seriously doubt he’d enjoy the repercussions. He’s smart enough NOT to bring that in as a reason to try to get me to do something. (Not trying to imply that you’re not smart but that you might want to try to emply other methods to make your case).
One of my female relatives told me something - and I know I’ve heard it other places : something like “The man may think he’s the head of the household, but if he is then the woman is the neck and she can turn the head any way she needs to…”
God Bless
Rye aka Annie

 

[eucharisteo]

My 2 Cents worth of wisdom:

Listen to your wife when it comes to rearing children. Unless what she says is immoral or against God’s word. A man is to love his wife like Christ loves the Church. That means sacrificially. Christ does not force us, the Church, to do what he commands us to do. He doesn’t go to the father to have and “intervention” to cover His position. We, as “real” men, must follow the example of Christ if we want things to work well for us. It sets a good example to our children to follow later on in life. Priests are not equipped with the proper training when dealing with rearing children. Anything outside of His vocation dealing with Pastoral counseling and the sacraments is really not covered his skill sets. If you read your catechism you’ll find that parents are entrusted by God, under their vocation to properly despense discipline to their children. If something is in question dealing with Church teaching, hopefully you’ll have a good priest available to help direct you. But he’s going to be directing you with the Holy Spirit in pastoral care issues.

If for example its about which method to choose for teaching the children. Listen to your wife. The truth of the matter is that there are people on here that could give you good advice. But if you don’t know which advice is best you may have difficulty knowing which is which. If you want further advice, don’t be so closed to non-Catholic advice. Why? Because many of the therapists and counselors are Christian. I’ve spoken with many Protestant counselors and I know knuckleheads when I hear them.

But in a patriarchal society it is still best that you allow your wife to make mistakes and forgive her. That’s what Christ does. If she is not Catholic then you’ll have issues no matter how you approach this. If she is not even Christian or practicing, you’ll have even a tougher time unless she is from a culture where women are subordinate to men. Let me make this very clear for you. If you try to force your wife to do anything you’re headed down divorce lane. Which is better for your children - children to have both parents working through disagreements or only one parent at a time? I chose the first.

When I married outside of my faith I left the Church thinking I was lost. But once I entered into that relationship in marriage (invalid) I discovered later I discovered that she had believes I was opposed to - birth control, sterylization, definition of being charitable, etc. These were major deal breakers that the Church in her wisdom mandates that we discuss before entering into a life long relationship by taking marital vows. I never understood this until I made the mistake. I love my wife and therefor found myself lost in how to I convey God’s love to her other than following Ephesians 5. When she got sterylized against my wishes it broke my heart (still hurts) but never saw the problem until she converted to Catholicism. However, as much as I would have jumped at the chance to reverse the procedure, she refuses based on a valid reason going under the knife always presents risks. We have 3 children and the risk is unecessary since she has already confessed it contritely I believe now. But that wasn’t even my business - even in a valid marriage. A sinful spouse is not required to tell the other spouse about their sins or improprieties. If you look at it in this light you might be able to reflect this concept onto your current situation.

I hope you find something in this that helps. My heart still hurts for not being allowed to have more children, but that is what happens when we sin. We separate ourselves from the protection of the Church. Then we have to lie in the bed we make.

 

[former_Catholic]

You say “I am not a Catholic and have absolutely no expertise nor advice for the OP on raising Catholic children whatsoever. The problem is that the OP is obviously NOT looking for 3rd party advice about the situation,”
True. I am looking for principles that can be universally applied. Why is that concept so troubling to so many on this forum??? It almost appears that some might come hear to satisfy morbid curiosities.

The universal principal that can be universally applied here is that one does not use ANY 3rd party to “resolve an issue” unless BOTH PARTIES HAVE AGREED TO THAT SPECIFIC 3rd PARTY ARBITRATION. Period.

The univesal principal that can be universally applied is that one does not attempt to leverage some sort of personal authority over one’s spouse by hand-picking some authority figure from one’s religion as one’s personally selected arbiter for one’s spouse that has not been approved by the other spouse

The universal principal that can be universally applied is that when one goes to a forum of people who share one’s religion and claims wholeheartedly to support the authority of that religion, when those people quote the teachings of the HEAD of that religion, one demonstrates one’s professed devotion to that authority by wholeheartedly embracing those teachings, rather than considering them (to quote you) “problematic.”

 

[eucharisteo]

The universal principal that can be universally applied here is that one does not use ANY 3rd party to “resolve an issue” unless BOTH PARTIES HAVE AGREED TO THAT SPECIFIC 3rd PARTY ARBITRATION. Period.

The univesal principal that can be universally applied is that one does not attempt to leverage some sort of personal authority over one’s spouse by hand-picking some authority figure from one’s religion as one’s personally selected arbiter for one’s spouse that has not been approved by the other spouse

The universal principal that can be universally applied is that when one goes to a forum of people who share one’s religion and claims wholeheartedly to support the authority of that religion, when those people quote the teachings of the HEAD of that religion, one demonstrates one’s professed devotion to that authority by wholeheartedly embracing those teachings, rather than considering them

(to quote you) “problematic.”
I agree.

By the way, I’ve been doing some searching for what you claim your faith is now. What do you hold now to be your faith?

I found this and loved it:

I’ve got a 30 year marriage, 5 kids, and 2 grandkids.
The reason why I’ve got a 30 year marriage, 5 kids, and 2 grandkids is because when he felt trapped and wanted to be free, I happily smilingly packed his bags and told him not to worry because I’d be just perfectly fine without him, so goodbye and good luck. (yes, I deserved an Academy Award).

Somewhere between here and a thousand miles away searching for a former girlfriend he decided to grow up into a husband.

I know it doesn’t always happen that way, and that things could just as well have gone the other way, but a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do…
and if he isn’t interested in growing up and being your husband
he’ll end up being your son

Your husband is a lucky man and lucky to be alive in my opinion. I can’t tell you how many times my wife wanted to pack her own bags to leave for home over a dumb argument. Sorry, but I never deserved such abuse. But I stuck by her even through thick and thin like God expects us to do. we’re working on 21 years of marriage now and both of us converted to Catholicism in 2007. I left the Church thinking I knew better but after study the ancient church documents realized that the Catholic Church represents the fullness of faith. I’m sorry for your loss and whoever hurt you to motivate you out the door from under the umbrella of the Church.

 

[dbmus]

Forcing is generally not a good way of exercising authority. Most especially with a spouse.

Whether it’s within your role as “head of the household” doesn’t even really matter if it will damage your relationship with your wife.
One of my favourite quotes is from Richard Rohr: “The great commandment is not: ‘Thou shalt be right.’ The great commandment is to ‘be in love’.”
I know if I were convinced that something serious to do with our children was the best way to do it and my husband thought a different way was - I don’t think I could rightly submit to him. We all must submit to Christ above all and if I thought whatever he suggested would not be in our child’s best interest, how could I submit?

If you’re both at a stalemate I suggest you pray together for help with this matter and for a resolution from God. Pray with openness - not with the attitude: “Please God make my husband/wife agree with me.” Pray that God will soften both your hearts to each other.