Practical ways that a wife should be submissive to her husband

[PhiloMed]

This is my final post in this thread as I have nothing further to add to the discussion. Trust that my posts have helped clarify the topic under review and that they have dispelled some of the misunderstanding and false teaching that sadly prevails. Thankyou again for your time.

But you didn’t address the original point of the post. What are the practical ways in which a woman should do this? Practical. As in real work day-to-day life.

We’re all speaking in generalities here and some are holding to Ephesians and others are taking it fast and loose.

Still, we haven’t said in what practical ways one can do this. I woke up this morning and made breakfast for my husband. Does that mean I’m submissive to him? What if he went to and bought me breakfast, or what if he fed the kids while I cooked (or vice versa). Of course, this is all ridiculous because, again, what works in one family will not necessarily work for another. Is one scenario not living out what the Church asks us to do, though?

 

[severus68]

Personally, I would be very hesitant to say they are not

following this headship as the Church asks. Just because they don’t have a formalized rule that the husband has the last say doesn’t mean they aren’t following the head/heart relationship as the Church asks them to. In fact, my reading of Casti Conubii has actually led me to the conclusion that those who claim that the husband must always have the last say are actually contradicting Church teaching on the matter as laid out in Casti Conubii.

Firstly, that is not what I said. I was referring to people going on about what a husband must do for his wife, that its about service etc and likening that to saying a slave has a kind master.
I am clear as to what I believe in so why are you telling me words to use which are not what I believe?

 

[Sochi]

We all know the passage from Ephesians 5 and elsewhere that a wife should be subject/submissive to her husband. But what does this mean in practical terms? Let’s please try to limit this discussion to practical examples. For example:

If my wife wants to go to Disneyworld for the 2nd time in the last month, and I say no due to financial difficulties, should she submit to my decision not to go?

If I try to institute a weekly family rosary, should she agree?

Obviously, the line is drawn when the husband asks the wife to violate God’s law or violates her dignity (part of God’s law), the wife should not submit, but there is a lot gray area in between.

As a mental health practitioner, I seriously worry about anyone who uses the word “submissive” in this context. Sounds like religious legalism and emotional immaturity to me.

 

[Bookcat]

As a mental health practitioner, I seriously worry about anyone who uses the word “submissive” in this context. Sounds like religious legalism and emotional immaturity to me.

Cause your using ears that are used to hearing things in a culture and a profession that do not use these terms ordinarily in the Christian sense.

The Theological and Spiritual realities and meanings are important here. It is very important not to mishear or misread such.

 

[Sochi]

Cause your using ears that are used to hearing things in a culture and a profession that do not use these terms ordinarily in the Christian sense.

The Theological and Spiritual realities and meanings are important here. It is very important not to mishear or misread such.

No kidding! Sure don’t see those in the OP!!!

 

[sailor28]

“Still, we haven’t said in what practical ways one can do this. I woke up this morning and made breakfast for my husband. Does that mean I’m submissive to him? What if he went to and bought me breakfast, or what if he fed the kids while I cooked (or vice versa). Of course, this is all ridiculous because, again, what works in one family will not necessarily work for another. Is one scenario not living out what the Church asks us to do, though”

It is true this whole thread and all the arguments and no one has even answered the questions. Seems to be common on these forums, a lot of pontificating but no practical answer.

Sochi, I agree with you. There are some serious mental health problems in some of the marriages I know that follow this “headship” ideology to an unhealthy and imbalanced degree. One popular speaker around here was quoted as saying, “sometimes I say no just because I can” in relationship to his wife. Some follow this ideology to a more balanced degree. But the misuse of this scripture verse has done far more damage to marriage and women than any other verse I can think of.

Marriage is about mutual submission and respect. Not arguing over who is the head of whom. My marriage is egalitarian, scripture based, and I am grateful my husband and I can grow together in this way.

If is obvious when we read some of what the Church Fathers wrote that there were serious deficiencies in their understanding of the role of women in society and in marriage.

 

[thewanderer]

Firstly, that is not what I said. I was referring to people going on about what a husband must do for his wife, that its about service etc and likening that to saying a slave has a kind master.
I am clear as to what I believe in so why are you telling me words to use which are not what I believe?

I am telling you that official Church teaching says that the husband is the head. And so, as a Catholic, you cannot go around claiming that to say the husband is the head is always false. That fact is a part of scripture as well as an official part of Church teaching. You can debate what is meant by saying the man is the head, but you cannot deny that he is the head.

As for your claim that just because the people you know don’t think about their husbands as the head, that doesn’t mean they are not following Church teaching in their relationship dynamic. The man being the head does not have to mean there is some formal arrangement whereby the man makes decisions rather than the wife. I know some people insists it means that, but it really doesn’t have to.

 

[Bookcat]

No kidding!

This is a long thread -I invite you to read it all or good deal of it. Such is important when there has already been much water under the bridge. For example I have posted various posts that can be helpful - including recently by a Priest who gives an extensive sermon on the subject.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

I am telling you that official Church teaching says that the husband is the head.

The head of a Catholic marriage is Christ.

 

[sailor28]

The head of a Catholic marriage is Christ.

AMEN!!!

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I am telling you that official Church teaching says that the husband is the head. And so, as a Catholic, you cannot go around claiming that to say the husband is the head is always false. That fact is a part of scripture as well as an official part of Church teaching. You can debate what is meant by saying the man is the head, but you cannot deny that he is the head.

Seems like a good number of people don’t understand this, for some reason. Protestants often accuse Catholics of ignoring or discounting Scripture, which is usually a baseless accusation. But most of the Catholics I see in this thread are ignoring or discounting Scripture.



As you said, you can argue about the interpretation, but you can’t argue about the language. A husband is head of his wife, as Christ is head of the Church. This headship is a headship based on self-sacrificial love. The Scriptures are unambiguous about this.

 

[Bookcat]

The head of a Catholic marriage is Christ.

Yes Christ is head of the Church (which includes married persons and marriages, as well as those in consecrated life: monks, nuns, hermits as well as Priests, Bishops, and the Pope! – within the Church though there are various heads in the order of love)

But yes there is a role of the husband as head.

“the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church”

~ Ephesians 5:23 RSVCE

 

[thewanderer]

The head of a Catholic marriage is Christ.

Just because Christ is the head doesn’t"t mean there is no way that the husband is a head as well. Again, you can argue about what it means to say the husband is the head, but you cannot deny that both scripture and official Church teaching say that the husband is the head. There really is no way around that fact.

 

[severus68]

I have explained -see other posts. Try to keep up

Try some manners.

 

[Xantippe]

sailor28 said:

“One popular speaker around here was quoted as saying, “sometimes I say no just because I can” in relationship to his wife. Some follow this ideology to a more balanced degree. But the misuse of this scripture verse has done far more damage to marriage and women than any other verse I can think of.”

Yes. The abuse of Ephesians 5 is also a source of great scandal and it is spiritually harmful to the men who embrace it, not just to marriage and to women.

 

[Sochi]

sailor28 said:

“One popular speaker around here was quoted as saying, “sometimes I say no just because I can” in relationship to his wife. Some follow this ideology to a more balanced degree. But the misuse of this scripture verse has done far more damage to marriage and women than any other verse I can think of.”

Yes. The abuse of Ephesians 5 is also a source of great scandal and it is spiritually harmful to the men who embrace it, not just to marriage and to women.

Agreed.

 

[Bookcat]

Try some manners.

Huh? I followed the practice that I have read from Catholic Answers Staff of adding a little when one is posting something that is not meant to be offensive etc but more in the line of jest.

I try to always post with manners and charity.

(I had answered that question already and that was a playful way of saying to see the other post).

 

[BlueEyedLady]

sailor28 said:

“One popular speaker around here was quoted as saying, “sometimes I say no just because I can” in relationship to his wife. Some follow this ideology to a more balanced degree. But the misuse of this scripture verse has done far more damage to marriage and women than any other verse I can think of.”

Yes. The abuse of Ephesians 5 is also a source of great scandal and it is spiritually harmful to the men who embrace it, not just to marriage and to women.

There’s a regular poster on this site that I have a lot of respect for who said on a thread a while back that he’s the head of the house, and as such, he makes sure that he gets to watch football every Sunday and even plans the family’s travel around it.

In my marriage, we each bring up things that we want to make sure to carve out time for-and the other does their best to accommodate.

I guess at the end of the day, one of these outlooks seems a lot more loving to me.

 

[thewanderer]

There’s a regular poster on this site that I have a lot of respect for who said on a thread a while back that he’s the head of the house, and as such, he makes sure that he gets to watch football every Sunday and even plans the family’s travel around it.
**
In my marriage, we each bring up things that we want to make sure to carve out time for-and the other does their best to accommodate.**

I guess at the end of the day, one of these outlooks seems a lot more loving to me.

This should be happening in every marriage, whether or not the couple considers the husband to be the head. Unfortunately it happens too often that men will take up this idea of them being head and twist it and use it to attain selfish goals harming the family and their wives in the process.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

Just because Christ is the head doesn’t"t mean there is no way that the husband is a head as well. Again, you can argue about what it means to say the husband is the head, but you cannot deny that both scripture and official Church teaching say that the husband is the head. There really is no way around that fact.

I don’t think there is any way for a Catholic marriage to have two headships - Christ and the husband. The comes awfully close to making an idol out of the husband, IMO.