My wife will never submit to me...should that matter?

[felsguy]

Bleary eyed and brain numbed after slogging through all 104 posts in one sitting, I’m left with the thought that apparently not all segments of “psychology” have “evolved” at the same pace.

ME TARZAN, you Jane

 

[Sochi]

Felsguy, LOL!

 

[Sochi]

Scripture is still Catholic, the Catholic Church teaches scripture, it is part of their infallible doctrine. Just because it is not ALL they consider doctrine does not make the scripture part go away.

Of course not, and no one implied that. It wasn’t the point.

 

[severus68]

I guess I shouldn’t be reading this thread when I’m taking cold medicine, because I have failed to see the word partnership in any of the responses. At age 61, the only marriages I have ever seen where the men considered their wives subservient to their decisions all ended in divorce. In one situation the man paid for a mail order bride so he could be the master of his universe with no complaining. Thank goodness that this concept us never taught in the parishes I have attended. I don’t think that the women or men would think it appropriate in the year 2014.

Yes and agreed. To add, where is real love in a marriage where subservience is required by one partner of the other.

JPII said that the dominance of men over women was a result of the Fall and sin.

 

[Xantippe]

I was just thinking about this (because I am not a perfected saint), and there is a way to short-circuit a well-meaning guy who takes this stuff too seriously and is a micromanager. (I don’t think this would work on an actually abusive person, but I think it might work pretty well on a normal guy.)

What you do is, whenever you have some sort of finicky decision that you normally spare them, ask for their (name removed by moderator)ut and run through all of the different options and nuances while their eyes glaze over. “I wonder how many pairs of uniform pants to buy our 3rd grader. He has normal uniform on Monday, chapel on Tuesday, normal uniform on Wednesday, normal uniform on Thursday and school spirit dress with jeans on Friday, with PE on Tuesday and Thursday. I wonder if he can get by with three pairs of uniform pants or if he needs four. The pants are on sale today and if a pair wears out mid-term, I won’t be able to get free shipping for just one item. He’s also growing pretty fast, so maybe he’ll be in the next size soon, also even if he stays the same size long enough to wear a couple out, I may be able to get some hand-me-downs from the Joneses–they have a 4th grade boy.” And on and on as the eyes glaze over. At some point, the husband (if he’s a normal guy and not abusive) is going to say something like, “Whatever you want to do honey” or “Just spend no more than the clothing budget. I’m sure you can do OK on this without me.”

And yes, there is somewhat gender neutral. I don’t know exactly what it was my husband did to the ceiling fan this weekend to get it to work, but I’m really happy that I was spared the long recital of the details. He’s a smart guy. I don’t need to micromanage him. And I’m a smart gal–he doesn’t need to micromanage me. Sure we have disagreements about this and that family policy issue, but we also have spheres of specialized competency where we respect the other’s skills and leave each other to get on with it.

 

[holy_face]

I think the “submission” talk definitely has a strong fundamentalist flavor.

I think a big reason for the difference between the fundamentalist approach and the Catholic approach is that Catholics are much more concerned about having the relationship last, we have a much longer track record of thinking about the fine print, and much more pastoral experience. The Roman mind is always thinking, “but what about…?” For example, what about dementia, pedophilia, sex addiction, mental illness, gambling addiction, alcoholism or heavy drinking, drug addiction or drug use, brain damage, ADHD, mixed marriage, or any number of fairly common complications. At some point, we start realizing that those “special cases” cover easily 50-75% of the male population, to some degree or another, at some point in their lives (a lot of us are eventually going to suffer dementia).

Also, based on the body of his writings, I feel that St. Paul was a very practical, pragmatic person. If we had the chance to ask him, “Fr. Paul, my husband wants to use our rent money for hard drugs–What should I do?” or “Fr. Paul, my husband is senile and keeps wanting to drive–What should I do?” or “Fr. Paul, my husband wants me to prostitute myself” I think you’d get very reasonable, practical, pastoral answers from him. I suspect St. Paul would think absolutism on the subject of wifely obedience ridiculous–of course there are always limits to our obedience to any earthly authority.

St. Paul would maintain what he said as a general rule because he said it and it is part of infallible scripture. But I think it really goes without saying if the husband is a drug addict, mentally disabled, or wants to prostitute you then he should not be listened to.

St. Paul said wives should be submissive to their husbands and husband must love their wives. If the husband completely abandons his end of the deal then I don’t see why the wife should be held to it anymore, if the circumstances are extreme. But this is not to say that a wife has a right to look a every mistake he does as some reason to take over the relationship, she must advise him and bring up her concerns.

If it is extreme and he has abandoned his responsibility as the leader then the first officer has the right and perhaps even the obligation to take over the ship.

A wife is not a pawn while the husband is a King, she is a Queen, the 2nd in command and quite capable of taking over if the King is completely failing or gone. Or put another way, the husband is the captain and she is the first officer, the captain doesn’t usually boss around the first mate like he would the crew, she shares in the leadership and is responsible for many things on her own. The first officer will often voice disagreement to Captain on offer alternative solutions, or take over in the captain’s absence or abandonment of his duty.

St. Paul was obviously not calling for dictatorial relationships where the man bosses his wife around. He is called to love, respect, and serve his wife and family.

It is a benevolent leadership, not abusive, pushy or bossy.

 

[holy_face]

I think this whole thread is spinning wheels over a unreal situation. Holy Face, I honest beleive along with the books you recommended which are not Catholic that you are interpreting this with a good old fashion fundamentalist mindset straight out of Bill Gothard seminars. Even if another poster quote the CCC, you haven’t changed. I don’t know what to say to you. Your ideas are not supported by the CCC and are straight from the fundamentalist playbook.

Go ask a reputable Catholic theologian and get back to me. They will tell you the same thing as I have about the husband’s headship .

The CCC is a SUMMARY of the Catholic doctrine, not the complete doctrine of the Church.

It is only fundamentalist to read scripture alone and live by it alone without also living by holy tradition and the doctrines established by the Church. The doctrines of the church regarding the husband’s headship has not changed from scripture.

 

[holy_face]

St. Paul would maintain what he said as a general rule because he said it and it is part of infallible scripture. But I think it really goes without saying if the husband is a drug addict, mentally disabled, or wants to prostitute you then he should not be listened to.

St. Paul said wives should be submissive to their husbands and husband must love their wives. If the husband completely abandons his end of the deal then I don’t see why the wife should be held to it anymore, if the circumstances are extreme. But this is not to say that a wife has a right to look a every mistake he does as some reason to take over the relationship, she must advise him and bring up her concerns.

If it is extreme and he has abandoned his responsibility as the leader then the first officer has the right and perhaps even the obligation to take over the ship.

St. Paul was obviously not calling for dictatorial relationships where the man bosses his wife around. He is called to love, respect, and serve his wife and family.

It is a benevolent leadership, not abusive, pushy or bossy.

 

[Walking_Home]

Originally Posted by robwar

---

The ones with the authority to interpret and bring forth teachings is the Church- Not “Tom/Dick/ or holy face”.

DEED FOR THE PIOUS TRANSFER OF
HIS HOLINESS JOHN PAUL II

He promulgated the Catechism of the Catholic Church in the light of Tradition, authoritatively interpreted by the Second Vatican Council. He also published several volumes as a private Doctor.

vatican.va/gpII/documents/rogito-jp-ii_20050408_en.html

 

[holy_face]

and again the CCC is a SUMMARY, does not contain the full doctrine of the church

 

[Walking_Home]

And again my response is the same, **scripture is part of the infallible doctrine of the Church **just as much as anything else, such as holy tradition of new doctrines that the Church has adopted over time.

There is no new doctrine that says the husband is no longer the head of the family.

This is NOT an fundamentalist interpretation! Reading scripture is not fundamentalist, only if it is Sola Scriptura, believing in scripture alone and not accepting any other teachings and traditions of the Church.

The Church still teaches that that man has the headship in the church based on scripture, I have heard it from no less than 5 different pastors during their homilies.

Please prove otherwise because the Church, regardless of their ability to make new doctrine, can not simply overrule and dismiss holy scripture which is deemed infallible by them.

Nothing has changed regarding those many passages in scripture, the husband is the head of the family, there is really no question about it at all.

---

Again – The Church is the only one with the authority to interpret and bring forth teachings. You’ve fallen into a fundamentalist protestant mindset.

 

[holy_face]

The passage about the husband’s headship from St. Paul is included in the daily readings of the Church, universally.

Why? because it is part of the doctrine of the Church

I hear it every year and my pastor comments on it in his homily, different priests will emphasize one part or another but all of it is still doctrine.

The CCC is a summary of the beliefs of the Catholic Church, you can not say that because one particular passage is missing from it that it is no longer Church doctrine, because it is a summary.

 

[Walking_Home]

The passage about the husband’s headship from St. Paul is included in the daily readings of the Church, universally.

Why? because it is part of the doctrine of the Church

I hear it every year and my pastor comments on it in his homily, different priests will emphasize one part or another but all of it is still doctrine.

The CCC is a summary of the beliefs of the Catholic Church, you can not say that because one particular passage is missing from it that it is no longer Church doctrine, because it is a summary.

---

No matter what machinations you go through – the teachings set forth in the CCC are the teachings of the Catholic Church. That is Not going to change – no matter how loud you yell – how you oppose it.

 

[Edmundus1581]

The passage about the husband’s headship from St. Paul is included in the daily readings of the Church, universally.

Why? because it is part of the doctrine of the Church

I hear it every year and my pastor comments on it in his homily, different priests will emphasize one part or another but all of it is still doctrine.

The CCC is a summary of the beliefs of the Catholic Church, you can not say that because one particular passage is missing from it that it is no longer Church doctrine, because it is a summary.

I noticed the OP’s question when it first came up, and have followed, somewhat, the discussion.

I have heard all this recent stuff about “headship” as “service” (without headship) before and it just doesn’t add up.

I would like to contribute this verse from Titus which is rarely mentioned:

Similarly, older women should be reverent in their behavior, not slanderers, not addicted to drink, teaching what is good, so that they may train younger women to love their husbands and children, **to be self-controlled, chaste, good homemakers, under the control of their husbands, **so that the word of God may not be discredited.

Titus 2:3-5. (from the Bible approved by the USCCB).

 

[holy_face]

---

No matter what machinations you go through – the teachings set forth in the CCC are the teachings of the Catholic Church. That is Not going to change – no matter how loud you yell – how you oppose it.

How many times do I have to say the same thing until you get it?

**
THE CCC IS A SUMMARY, NOT HE ENTIRE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH!!!**

It is incomplete, it is general guide not a listing of all of the catholic doctrine.

I am not opposing the CCC at all

 

[UnCatholicBride]

OK, so just a tad of background. When my wife and I married neither of us were Christian. I came back to a childhood (protestant) faith later on. I also later converted to Catholicism. Through the years I’ve done a lot of stupid stuff (changing jobs often, dropping out of college when I could easily have finished, porn, et al). Also, my wife is a pretty smart cookie.

OK, so forward to now. My wife is still not a Christian. She is embittered because of the stupid stuff I’ve done and how I haven’t loved her as I should (at times I’ve been a downright jerk). She thinks I’m stupid (and being honest, rightfully so). All this being said, I don’t think she’ll ever submit to me as her husband. She will always try to “rule the roost”. I can fight with her and get her to back down on some things, but therein lies my query. Should it matter?

Here is what I mean. Obviously I can’t change her mind. Also, if I do try to “make the decisions”, she gets upset. Jesus said that one desiring to be the leader, should become the servant. Should I take that to mean that I should let her make most of the decisions (unless they are against my faith) thereby demonstrating the way? Or put another way, should I “lead by example?”

Be your wife’s partner, not her master. Marriage is about compromise- not about one person (husband OR wife) ruling the roost.

 

[Walking_Home]

How many times do I have to say the same thing until you get it?

**
THE CCC IS A SUMMARY**, NOT HE ENTIRE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH!!!

It is incomplete, it is general guide not a listing of all of the catholic doctrine.

I am not opposing the CCC at all

---

Well – you can come back as many times “yelling” – but “yelling” doesn’t change – that you indeed are** not **in conformity with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[Edmundus1581]

---

No matter what machinations you go through – the teachings set forth in the CCC are the teachings of the Catholic Church. That is Not going to change – no matter how loud you yell – how you oppose it.

The teaching of the Church has not changed:

1. Domestic society being confirmed, therefore, by this bond of love, 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.”[29]

CASTI CONNUBII. ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI ON CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE.(emphasis added)

 

[holy_face]

The teaching of the Church has not changed:

26. Domestic society being confirmed, therefore, by this bond of love, 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."[29]

I guess i should be expecting some apologies

 

[holy_face]

---

Well – you can come back as many times “yelling” – but “yelling” doesn’t change – that you indeed are** not **in conformity with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Ok whatever you say