If your wife wants something ridiculous and harmful for the family, you should think of ways to make her see that that don’t involve telling her you’re the boss. If you’re the one who wants something ridiculous and harmful, you should be the one “submitting” to her. If you have a disagreement about some neutral thing, where either way of doing things works, you need to find a way to resolve the conflict and come to some kind of a compromise.
Agreed. “Aim for restoration, comfort one another, agree with one another, live in peace; and the God of love and peace will be with you.”
Hasn’t headship been redefined in the 20th century to mutual submission/self sacrificing love?
Pope John Paul II
condemns the historical tendency of men to dominate women as a consequence of sin, one that the redeemed must strive in every generation to
overcome:
The biblical description in the Book of Genesis outlines the truth about the consequences of man’s sin, as it is shown by the disturbance of that original relationship between man and woman which corresponds to their individual dignity as persons. A human being, whether male or female, is a person, and therefore, “the only creature on earth which God willed for its own sake”; and at the same time this unique and unrepeatable creature “cannot fully find himself except through a sincere gift of self”. Here begins the relationship of “communion” in which the “unity of the two” and the personal dignity of both man and woman find expression. Therefore when we read in the biblical description the words addressed to the woman: “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (Gen 3:16), we discover a break and a constant threat precisely in regard to this “unity of the two” which corresponds to the dignity of the image and likeness of God in both of them. But this threat is more serious for the woman, since domination takes the place of “being a sincere gift” and therefore living “for” the other: “he shall rule over you”. This “domination” indicates the disturbance and loss of the stability of that fundamental equality which the man and the woman possess in the “unity of the two”: and this is especially to the disadvantage of the woman, whereas only the equality resulting from their dignity as persons can give to their mutual relationship the character of an authentic “communio personarum”. While the violation of this equality, which is both a gift and a right deriving from God the Creator, involves an element to the disadvantage of the woman, at the same time it also diminishes the true dignity of the man. Here we touch upon an extremely sensitive point in the dimension of that “ethos” which was originally inscribed by the Creator in the very creation of both of them in his own image and likeness.
This statement in Genesis 3:16 is of great significance. It implies a reference to the mutual relationship of man and woman in marriage. It refers to the desire born in the atmosphere of spousal love whereby the woman’s “sincere gift of self” is responded to and matched by a corresponding “gift” on the part of the husband. Only on the basis of this principle can both of them, and in particular the woman, “discover themselves” as a true “unity of the two” according to the dignity of the person. The matrimonial union requires respect for and a perfecting of the true personal subjectivity of both of them. The woman cannot become the “object” of “domination” and male “possession”. But the words of the biblical text directly concern original sin and its lasting consequences in man and woman. Burdened by hereditary sinfulness, they bear within themselves the constant “inclination to sin”, the tendency to go against the moral order which corresponds to the rational nature and dignity of man and woman as persons. This tendency is expressed in a threefold concupiscence, which Saint John defines as the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life (cf. 1 Jn 2:16). The words of the Book of Genesis quoted previously (3: 16) show how this threefold concupiscence, the “inclination to sin”, will burden the mutual relationship of man and woman.
These words of Genesis refer directly to marriage, but indirectly they concern the different spheres of social life: the situations in which the woman remains disadvantaged or discriminated against by the fact of being a woman. The revealed truth concerning the creation of the human being as male and female constitutes the principal argument against all the objectively injurious and unjust situations which contain and express the inheritance of the sin which all human beings bear within themselves. The books of Sacred Scripture confirm in various places the actual existence of such situations and at the same time proclaim the need for conversion, that is to say, for purification from evil and liberation from sin: from what offends neighbour, what “diminishes” man, not only the one who is offended but also the one who causes the offence. This is the unchangeable message of the Word revealed by God. In it is expressed the biblical “ethos” until the end of time…
The personal resources of femininity are certainly no less than the resources of masculinity: they are merely different. Hence a woman, as well as a man, must understand her “fulfilment” as a person, her dignity and vocation, on the basis of these resources, according to the richness of the femininity which she received on the day of creation and which she inherits as an expression of the “image and likeness of God” that is specifically hers. The inheritance of sin suggested by the words of the Bible - “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” - can be conquered only by following this path. The overcoming of this evil inheritance is, generation after generation, the task of every human being, whether woman or man. For whenever man is responsible for offending a woman’s personal dignity and vocation, he acts contrary to his own personal dignity and his own vocation.
In the same document, Pope John Paul II insists on the mutual submission of spouses to one another:
Ephesians 5:21-33] is addressed to the spouses as real women and men. It reminds them of the “ethos” of spousal love which goes back to the divine institution of marriage from the “beginning”. Corresponding to the truth of this institution is the exhortation: “Husbands, love your wives”, love them because of that special and unique bond whereby in marriage a man and a woman become “one flesh” (Gen 2:24; Eph 5:31). In this love there is a fundamental affirmation of the woman as a person. This affirmation makes it possible for the female personality to develop fully and be enriched. This is precisely the way Christ acts as the bridegroom of the Church; he desires that she be “in splendour, without spot or wrinkle” (Eph 5:27). One can say that this fully captures the whole “style” of Christ in dealing with women. Husbands should make their own the elements of this style in regard to their wives; analogously, all men should do the same in regard to women in every situation. In this way both men and women bring about “the sincere gift of self”.
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.
In relation to the “old” this is evidently something “new”: it is an innovation of the Gospel. We find various passages in which the apostolic writings express this innovation, even though they also communicate what is “old”: what is rooted in the religious tradition of Israel, in its way of understanding and explaining the sacred texts, as for example the second chapter of the Book of Genesis.
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. Saint Paul not only wrote: “In Christ Jesus… there is no more man or woman”, but also wrote: “There is no more slave or freeman”. Yet how many generations were needed for such a principle to be realized in the history of humanity through the abolition of slavery! And what is one to say of the many forms of slavery to which individuals and peoples are subjected, which have not yet disappeared from history?
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.
The Venerable Pope John Paul II was right to insist that Ephesians 5:22 can
only be understood in light of 5:21, which insists on
mutual submission. Most English translations of 5:22 are misleading when they say “Wives,
submit your husbands as to the Lord” because there is no verb in 5:22. The verb is deliberately borrowed from 5:21. What St. Paul really says is “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives, to your husbands, as to the Lord…”
It is clear from the whole passage, Ephesians 5:21-33, that being a “head” means serving as Christ served, giving oneself for the sake of the one being served.
Even if the word “head” meant “leader,” one must take into account how radically
Christ redefines leadership. The pagan
paterfamilias was a dictator, having the power of life and death over his wife, children, and servants, sometimes quite literally (as in the case of infant exposure). Christ utterly rejects this kind of “leadership” and turns it upside down; the true leader is one who serves and gives his own life up for the sake of others: “You know that
the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your
servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your
slave, even
as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
St. Paul teaches the same: “Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility
count others more significant than yourselves.
Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also
to the interests of others.
Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but
made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form,
he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.”
When Paul tells husbands, in his epistle to the Ephesians, “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,” we must not only take note of the self-sacrificial wording in the immediate context, but also remember how he defined true love elsewhere: “
Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It
does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” The Christian husband, the husband who loves, therefore, is really the opposite of the pagan
paterfamilias.
Can we just say that in an issue with no clear moral absolutes, strongly held opposing beliefs by both spouses and no possibility of compromise, is there ever a case where the “headship” of the husband can be applied?
Husbands can and should be servants who give their lives for the sake of others.
its seems that men are being held to the unreachable goal of loving as Christ
If we believe what the Lord teaches, this goal is not “unreachable”: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another… This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.”
fully think a situation through . . . and tried to gain a righteous understanding . . . in order to make an ordered mature adult righteous judgement before and in the Holy Presence of the Lord . . . as to whether to so follow her husband would result in a wholesome healthy well-ordered end for all involved . . . or a disordered and possible tragically destructive end . . . for which all would pay dearly . . .