One more thread about submission

  • Thread starter Thread starter Markus2007
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
One thing that reading this thread, which has so many really beautiful and serious responses on it, has made me start to consider is that authority in a husband - if he is a truly good, loving, sensitive and well-disposed man - can be the most incredible gift to his wife, and open up new kinds of security and peace for her.

Submission, honestly, frightens me. But so does love. So does marriage. So does the giving up of one’s self to another. Submission only makes sense to me in that context - that both DH and I would give up our autonomy, him by his promise to stand like a rock between me (and our children) and the often-hostile forces of the outside world, putting our needs and feelings above his own with Christ as his model, and me by allowing him to do that, placing myself and the children under his leadership and protection.

In truth I think the Church has almost nothing to say about how this dynamic works itself out between individual couples. There is no list of “he must do this” and “she must do that”, which is why this subject usually descends into banality and farce once people start arguing over whether the wife can take charge of the family finances, and whether it makes a difference if her husband is a recovering gambler, etc. But I think that submission, like marriage, can be a gift of God IF it is undertaken as seriously, lovingly, broadmindedly and prayerfully as marriage itself should be. And like marriage, it can go very wrong if there is selfishness or miscommunication. Submission is not a reason to throw away your common sense, sense of humour, capabilities, or good judgement as an adult woman. But although submission makes me nervous, I also wish for it. When I think about DH’s authority, the best image it gives me is of his arm around my shoulders, warm and strong, that I can lean against. I need to be a sensible, capable woman with the capacity to survive without that arm if he were not here - that’s just common sense. But being able to lean against him like that is a gift.
 
Some women are not satisfied with this. They want to be in charge. But realistically, marriage cannot work this way. Unity requires relational structure. We see this pattern in other relationships. But submission is never a sign of value. Jesus submitted to the will of His Father (Matthew 26:39). It would be heresy to say that Jesus is of lesser value than the Father. They are One, and Jesus cannot be of lesser value. His submission had nothing to do with His value—it had to do with God-ordained structure. It is the same with husband and wife.
 
hesso12 said:
Some women are not satisfied with this. They want to be in charge. But realistically, marriage cannot work this way. Unity requires relational structure. We see this pattern in other relationships. But submission is never a sign of value. Jesus submitted to the will of His Father (Matthew 26:39). It would be heresy to say that Jesus is of lesser value than the Father. They are One, and Jesus cannot be of lesser value. His submission had nothing to do with His value—it had to do with God-ordained structure. It is the same with husband and wife.
Click to expand...
The desire to be in charge, rather than the desire to be faithful to one’s duty to the perfect designs of God is not according to the mind of Christ. We have to appreciate that this desire to be an independent ruler over others is fatal to charity, and in a marriage this is true whether it is the husband, the wife, or both who fall prey to it.

In the World, it is known that unity requires relational structure, this is true. The pagans knew that a society without authority would quickly become a society in chaos. What the pagans did not understand is how the principles of charity which underpin the universe make demands on both those in authority and those who accept authority. These things can be understood by humans–as Jeremiah and Paul knew, the demands that the nature of the universe places on us is written in our hearts–but are more easily obscured by concupiscence and the desire we have as fallen humans to be our own law and our own arbiter of good and bad.
 
hesso12 said:
Some women are not satisfied with this. They want to be in charge. But realistically, marriage cannot work this way.
Click to expand...
Here’s a little problem for you to think about.

As long as wives are responsible for some area, they have to be in charge of that area. Let us say, for instance, that I am in charge of getting my family to church more or less on time on Sunday. There is a great deal of effort involved in managing five people and making sure that they are dressed and ready for church, that the toddler has a clean, dry diaper and some soft toys and a sippy cup and a snack in the car, and that we all get into the minivan at the right time with appropriate emergency supplies (more dry diapers, a change of clothes for baby, cell phones, etc.). My husband (an excellent person in countless ways) is somewhat chronologically and organizationally challenged, so he wants me to be in charge of getting us out on time.

In my experience as a wife and a mother, there is a very strong relationship between responsibility and authority. Taking responsibility generates authority. If people do not take responsibility, they will not have authority. (I have to add here that my husband takes responsibility in a lot of areas, but getting us all successfully out of the house is not one of them. He has authority in other areas.)
 
Xantippe said:
Here’s a little problem for you to think about.

As long as wives are responsible for some area, they have to be in charge of that area. Let us say, for instance, that I am in charge of getting my family to church more or less on time on Sunday. There is a great deal of effort involved in managing five people and making sure that they are dressed and ready for church, that the toddler has a clean, dry diaper and some soft toys and a sippy cup and a snack in the car, and that we all get into the minivan at the right time with appropriate emergency supplies (more dry diapers, a change of clothes for baby, cell phones, etc.). My husband (an excellent person in countless ways) is somewhat chronologically and organizationally challenged, so he wants me to be in charge of getting us out on time.

In my experience as a wife and a mother, there is a very strong relationship between responsibility and authority. Taking responsibility generates authority. If people do not take responsibility, they will not have authority. (I have to add here that my husband takes responsibility in a lot of areas, but getting us all successfully out of the house is not one of them. He has authority in other areas.)
Click to expand...
Remember that we are all sinners,and that the management cannot be perfect all the time,but we must not give up.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
hesso12 said:
Some women are not satisfied with this. They want to be in charge. But realistically, marriage cannot work this way. Unity requires relational structure. We see this pattern in other relationships. But submission is never a sign of value. Jesus submitted to the will of His Father (Matthew 26:39). It would be heresy to say that Jesus is of lesser value than the Father. They are One, and Jesus cannot be of lesser value. His submission had nothing to do with His value—it had to do with God-ordained structure. It is the same with husband and wife.
Click to expand...
hesso12 – you are pulling “quotes/interpretations” from protestant sites.

What you have above is from here: – carm.org/apologetics/womens-issues/what-does-it-mean-wife-submit-her-husband

Your post #15 – the one with the “veto” – comes from this anti-Catholic site : jesus-is-savior.com/Mens%20Page/mutual_submission.htm
 
Walking_Home said:
hesso12 – you are pulling “quotes/interpretations” from protestant sites.

What you have above is from here: – carm.org/apologetics/womens-issues/what-does-it-mean-wife-submit-her-husband

Your post #15 – the one with the “veto” – comes from this anti-Catholic site : jesus-is-savior.com/Mens%20Page/mutual_submission.htm
Click to expand...
Except I don’t pick the anti-catholic part,I speak from the universal Christian perspective.

For example,If I say Jesus is the son of god all Christians would know that it’s universal,and that’s my point whether your a catholic or protestant you would know that and its the same with the other parts as well,except there are difference’s by 20%.
 
“Walking home” am not here to argue with you,am not here to win my point,am only saying what is best for your families,what’s successful and what has been successful in my family.I speak from experience.
 
 
hesso12 said:
40.png
Walking_Home:
hesso12 – you are pulling “quotes/interpretations” from protestant sites.

What you have above is from here: – carm.org/apologetics/womens-…it-her-husband
Click to expand...
Your post #15 – the one with the “veto” – comes from this anti-Catholic site : jesus-is-savior.com/Mens%…submission.htm

Except I don’t pick the anti-catholic part,I speak from the universal Christian perspective.

For example,If I say Jesus is the son of god all Christians would know that it’s universal,and that’s my point whether your a catholic or protestant you would know that and its the same with the other parts as well,except there are difference’s by 20%.
Click to expand...
Except – when it comes to marriage – you are in fundamentalist ground.
 
hesso12 said:
Don’t think wife submission is anti-catholic its universal.
see catholic sites.

catholicstand.com/what-it-is-really-like-to-be-submissive-to-your-husband/

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1200

catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/apologetics/the-authority-of-women.html

catholicplanet.com/articles/article72.htm

staycatholic.com/marriage.htm

catholicprodigaldaughter.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/wives-submit-to-your-husbands-catholic.html

catholicwomengathering.com/wives-submit-to-your-husbands/

catholicexchange.com/submissive-wives
Click to expand...
There’s a bunch of misinformation-- through out the internet. Stick to the Catechism of the Catholic Church – the mutual submission of husband and wife – in reverence to Christ. There is only one head in a marriage — God himself.
 
hesso12 said:
“Walking home” am not here to argue with you,am not here to win my point,am only saying what is best for your families,what’s successful and what has been successful in my family.I speak from experience.
Click to expand...
Seems to me – you are saying what is best for you-- the “man”.
 
Walking_Home said:
There’s a bunch of misinformation-- through out the internet. Stick to the Catechism of the Catholic Church – the mutual submission of husband and wife – in reverence to Christ. There is only one head in a marriage — God himself.
Click to expand...
**The mutual submission of husband and wife,does not dismiss the leadership of the husband,and does not dismiss role of wife and role of husband.
**

The mutual self-giving means that women give of themselves according to their nature and men give of themselves according to their nature. Pope John Paul II gave the following explanation in Mulieris Dignitatem (“On the Dignity and Vocation of Women”).

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 …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. . . . The challenge presented by the “ethos” of the Redemption is clear and definitive. All the reasons in favor 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. (no. 24)

John Paul II also gave the Church his Letter to Women and his apostolic exhortation Familiaris Consortio. These build upon Pope Pius XI’s encyclical Casti Connubii (1930) and Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Arcanum (1880; “obey him; not, indeed, as a servant, but as a companion”).

In summary, it should be recognized that there is some distinctive headship of the husband. The Church, on her part, teaches that there is a complementarity between the spouses that maintains an equal dignity. In her wisdom, she teaches that the submission of the wife is part of a mutual subjection. This is another example of how the Gospel of Christ is a radical departure from the ways of the world.
 
hesso12 said:
In relation to the “old” this is evidently something “new”: It is an innovation of the Gospel …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. . . . The challenge presented by the “ethos” of the Redemption is clear and definitive. All the reasons in favor 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. (no. 24)

John Paul II also gave the Church his Letter to Women and his apostolic exhortation Familiaris Consortio. These build upon Pope Pius XI’s encyclical Casti Connubii (1930) and Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Arcanum (1880; “obey him; not, indeed, as a servant, but as a companion”).

In summary, it should be recognized that there is some distinctive headship of the husband. The Church, on her part, teaches that there is a complementarity between the spouses that maintains an equal dignity. In her wisdom, she teaches that the submission of the wife is part of a mutual subjection. This is another example of how the Gospel of Christ is a radical departure from the ways of the world.
Click to expand...
You copied and pasted the above from the article below . The last paragraph you have posted – the author took some liberty in coming up with the “distinctive headship” part – for you will not find that via Catechism.

cuf.org/FileDownloads/laywitness/SO09AskCUF.PDF
 
hesso12 said:
**The mutual submission of husband and wife,does not demise the leadership of the husband,and does not demise role of wife and role of husband.
**

The mutual self-giving means that women give of themselves according to their nature and men give of themselves according to their nature. Pope John Paul II gave the following explanation in Mulieris Dignitatem (“On the Dignity and Vocation of Women”).

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.
Click to expand...
You are adding your own words to Mulieris Dignitatem — for Pope John Paul II – did not put anything relating to “headship” of a husband". Don’t put words in the Pope’s mouth.
 
Walking_Home said:
Same article I previously gave the link to — and again the “distinctive headship” is a “liberty” – not found in the authentic Church teaching via the Catechism.
Click to expand...
yes it is,The Catechism: “Sure Norm for Teaching the Faith”
The Catechism contains an index of citations, useful for looking to see how a particular verse is used by the Church in her teachings. Ephesians 5:22 and Colossians3: 18 (“wives be subject”) are not cited in support of any of the teachings found in the Catechism. Further, the Catechism gives 65 paragraphs on the Sacrament of Marriage, none of which indicates a “one way” obedience of the wife to her husband. The Church,
however, does use St. Paul’s exhortation of mutual subjection to teach about a Christ-centered marriage:
Click to expand...
“Just as of old God encountered his people with a covenant of love and fidelity, so our Savior, the spouse of the Church, now encounters Christian spouses through the sacrament of Matrimony.” Christ dwells with them, gives them the strength to take up their crosses and so follow him, to rise again after they have fallen, to forgive one another, to bear one another’s burdens, to” be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ” and to love one another with supernatural, tender, and fruitful love. In the joys of their love and family life he gives them here on earth a foretaste of the
wedding feast of the Lamb. (no. 1642)
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top