Practical ways that a wife should be submissive to her husband

[yellow8yellowM]

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.

 

[Avocadomom]

I feel like, if every day, both husband and wife get up and ask themselves “What can I do to make today a better day for my spouse?” then no one has to worry about submitting to anyone.

Your examples about Disneyland and the Rosary are a little odd. Obviously, if either spouse proposes doing something that is financially irresponsible, the other should kindly veto the idea.

If either spouse would like to add a reasonable amount of prayer to family life, the other should agree.

Why would the answer change based on which spouse was making the request?

 

[EasterJoy]

In the verse immediately before the verse in which the Apostle says that wives ought to be submissive to their husbands as to the Lord, he says, “Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ.” Eph 5:21 As soon as the section pertaining to the wife is finished, the Apostle turns to the husband’s sacrificial love, in which he says, *“So (also) husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.” *Eph. 5:28

The Lord also said this:
They came to Capernaum and, once inside the house, he began to ask them, “What were you arguing about on the way?” But they remained silent. They had been discussing among themselves on the way who was the greatest. Then he sat down, called the Twelve, and said to them, “If anyone wishes to be first, he shall be the last of all and the servant of all.” Mark 9:33-35

In the Disney example, you might say, “The family would enjoy Disneyland, but we have to look at the budget and see where we could squeeze it out.” Honestly look. Then discuss. Each needs to listen to the other.

Likewise, if you try to institute a family rosary, of course she ought to ask sensible questions and yet try to find a way to at least try to accommodate what is obviously a laudable idea. Having said that, it is still a discussion. You can’t drag the mother of the house in by the hair when the destination is a family rosary.

 

[LongingSoul]

I think a wife should always be publically supportive of her husband even when she thinks he is wrong about something. (Unless his behaviour is abusive or criminal). I think she should teach her children to respect his authority. (Unless his behaviour is abusive or criminal).

I also think it is the wifes place to let/encourage/strongly urge her husband to make choices about the direction of the family, even if she is the ideas person or the bread winner.

 

[Ad_Orientem]

Very generally speaking, I would answer affirmative in both cases, because they are in accord with right reason and for the good of the family. It doesn’t go both ways because the wife is not the head. There are caveats to this, however, spelled out Leo XIII, Casti Conubii, para. 27-28.

 

[fpt]

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.

The marriage is a mutual, reciprocal, bilateral, equal and equitable donation of persons (body, soul and heart) without fusion (merger). The union is not an fusion: no negation and no denial of the other. Each one is respected because wife and husband are members of the humanity (equality in link the human dignity, the same rights, the same obligations, the same duties) and because each one has is an own sexuation (equity in function of sex, the particular rights, the particular duties, the particular obligations). In the couple and / or in matter of the conjugal sexuality, there is no leader, no chief, no boss, no superior, no inferior: equality and equity are the rules. The wife is not the servant / slave of her husband, the husband is not the servant / slave of his wife. There is a mutual, reciprocal, bilateral, equal and equitable submission between wife and husband. The use of force by the wife or the husband is always morally wrong. The true moralism, the true culpabilism and the true scrupulism in order to get some stuff is not very sane.

In sus, the conjugal faith being a natural thing,* the husband cannot impose strict disciplines to his wife that are stronger than the natural moral law:** the marriage is not a seminary and a monastery.*

 

[fpt]

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.

Are you a follower of Colleen Hammond’s view on the notion of submission of wife???
Are you a follower of Raylan Alleman’s view about the notion of submission of wife ???
Are you a follower of Ronald Conte Jr’s view on the notion of submission of wife ???

If by exemple, you are on the same page than these three persons about the notion of submission of wife, you can be uneasy and should be uneasy, in my humble opinion.

Their views are unacceptable, in my humble opinion

 

[fpt]

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.

Practical ways that a husband should be submissive to his wife. A wink!!!

 

[LongingSoul]

I admire people like Queen Elizabeth and Hilary Clinton. I admire my mother in law and my paternal grandmother.

These women put the institution of marriage above their own needs, for the sake of their families. Husbands of women like these are perhaps incapable of appreciating a wifes loyalty, but they are the good women who ‘take one for the team’ so to speak. They embody the role of a good wife even when the rewards elude them.

I model my own decisions on these women.

 

[SecretCatholic]

You ask an interesting question. Our contemporary interpretation of the submission of the wife to the husband can certainly be different, as the social context has changed. But if it means nothing at all, then how could it be the word of God?

Men and women have different ways of thinking. Of course, these are just generalizations, but men tend to think in economic terms, women in social. Perhaps we can interpret “submission” as allowing the husband to have the last word if there are differences of opinion in how to proceed, as long as he gives her the respect that the Bible also demands.

 

[yellow8yellowM]

I feel like, if every day, both husband and wife get up and ask themselves “What can I do to make today a better day for my spouse?” then no one has to worry about submitting to anyone.

Your examples about Disneyland and the Rosary are a little odd. Obviously, if either spouse proposes doing something that is financially irresponsible, the other should kindly veto the idea.

If either spouse would like to add a reasonable amount of prayer to family life, the other should agree.

Why would the answer change based on which spouse was making the request?

This is exactly the point. When the wife disagrees with the husband, in what respects must she in the end submit to him?

 

[yellow8yellowM]

…
Likewise, if you try to institute a family rosary, of course she ought to ask sensible questions and yet try to find a way to at least try to accommodate what is obviously a laudable idea. Having said that, it is still a discussion. You can’t drag the mother of the house in by the hair when the destination is a family rosary.

For the sake of this thread let’s just assume the husband is passive in his leadership position. He suggests something and the wife is given the free choice to submit to his decision or not. There is no dragging of anybody by the hair.

So the question remains, if they disagree about my two examples, should she submit in the end?

 

[Petaro]

If a wife lives with the knowledge that every decision that her husband makes is made for her benefit and that of their family, then she should support him even if it turns out to be a mistake. This does not mean that there should not be a collaborative partnership of discussion, but if there is eventually no agreement on areas that come within his competence then the wife has a duty to submit to his decision. He , on the same hand should recognise her expertise and defer to her knowledge and wisdom. If both look to act for the benefit of the other and their children, no one should complain if mistakes are made.
I also believe that a wife should support her husband and vice versa, in public as they are as one, even if either speaks privately about inappropriate behaviour later. This does not of course apply to immoral or illegal actions.

 

[fpt]

What is the interest of this question? Why? What for? Which purpose?

The conjugal equity and the conjugal equality are the rules of marriage. In the natural moral law and in the couple,* there is no boss, no chief, no leader, no president, no prime minister, no superior, no inferior.*

*The mutual, reciprocal, bilateral, equal, equitable and reasonable submission between wife and husband is the rule. *

EQUITY AND EQUALITY. NOT MORE NOT LESS.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

This is exactly the point. When the wife disagrees with the husband, in what respects must she in the end submit to him?

Depends how strong willed the wife is?

Seriously though I think it’s more to do with mutual respect and a discussion. If the family honestly cannot afford to go to Disneyland, then the wife would be silly to push to go. However if there are ways the family could afford it which maybe the wife has thought about but the husband hasn’t, then there should be a calm discussion about possibilities etc. a mutual decision.

In my case (we have a very similar situation although not involving Disney), my husband said no, I left it for a while and then he eventually asked me how we could afford it (I’m better at planning and figures than he is). I wasn’t submitting to him, just respecting that he didn’t want to get us into financial difficulty which is a valid point! He thought about it and then wanted to hear my ideas…he is now more excited than me! An honest husband who respects and loves his wife, would be wrong to not listen to her ideas as he may have genuinely missed something.

If you sit down, discuss it and genuinely cannot afford it…then both persons involved should agree that it’s not the thing to do anyway.

 

[Phemie]

You ask an interesting question. Our contemporary interpretation of the submission of the wife to the husband can certainly be different, as the social context has changed. But if it means nothing at all, then how could it be the word of God?

Men and women have different ways of thinking. Of course, these are just generalizations, but men tend to think in economic terms, women in social. Perhaps we can interpret “submission” as allowing the husband to have the last word if there are differences of opinion in how to proceed, as long as he gives her the respect that the Bible also demands.

They have to recognize each other’s strengths. If I’d submitted to my husband when it came to money, we’d be destitute even though he had an excellent job. I learned that before our first anniversary and assumed responsibility for the budget and bill payments. That meant a good credit rating, a mortgage paid off in 13 years instead of 25 and no debts upon his retirement.

 

[Bill1125]

No one is required to be submissive to any other mortal.

 

[St_Francis]

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.

Here is the rest of the story:
22Let women be subject to their husbands, as to the Lord: 23Because the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. He is the saviour of his body. 24Therefore as the church is subject to Christ, so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things.

25**Husbands, love your wives, as Christ also loved the church, and delivered himself up for it: **26That he might sanctify it, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life: 27That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any; such thing; but that it should be holy, and without blemish. 28So also ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife, loveth himself. 29For no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, as also Christ doth the church: 30Because we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. 31For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh. 32This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the church. 33Nevertheless let every one of you in particular love his wife as himself: and let the wife fear her husband.

So husband are supposed to love their wives *as Christ loved the Church for which He gave up His life. *

These two go together. What I heard a pastor say once was that this is the case, but that wives need to be more concerned with their submitting to their hisbands and husbnads need to be more concerned with their loving their wives.

So when a husband is concerned about his wife’s submitting to him, one must ask if the husband has been loving his wife as Christ loves the Church–*and if the wife feels that love. *

If you go to you wive and say, “Honey, I would love to give you the world and everything your heart desires, but when you spend a couple hundred dollars twice in one month, it makes me so nervous about providing what the family *needs. *I would feel more confortable if we discussed all this and had a budget, Let’s sit down when you have some time and talk about this,” would she believe the first part?

And you might start the family Rosary with the children and allow your wife to choose–She is an adult, not a child, and she has her own relationship with God. It would be lovely if she joined in, bit if she doesn’t, that is her decision. In the meantime, it is your job to raise the children in the Faith, so you will now have a special time with them. You can also be telling them stories, from the Bible or about saints.

And as a side note: children are much more likely to follow what their fathers do in religion than their mothers. Everything a father can do in terms of setting an example will have so much more effect than what a mother does, like 3 times the effect! So pray the Rosary with them, take them tk Mass *and confession, *let them know you pray and study your Faith.

 

[Starrsmother]

Catholic wives are equal to their husbands and have the right and obligation to express their opinions At least I do!. Being Catholic does not mean that women are 2nd class citizens and I don’t check my person-hood or opinions at the front door to my home. I’ve been married 46 years. If my husband wants us to do something different than our usual plan, he respects me enough to come talk to me about it–and he did this when our kids were younger and at home too. The same goes for me. We didn’t always agree, but we often compromised–the key, in my opinion, is to “fight it out”, ie “discuss it” between the 2 of you so that when you approach the kids you are a united front.

 

[Avocadomom]

This is exactly the point. When the wife disagrees with the husband, in what respects must she in the end submit to him?

I guess it depends on the seriousness of the issue. If he’s wrong about a huge financial decision, she should, respectfully, hold her ground for the good of the family. If he wants Chinese and she wants Italian, it might be nice for her to agree to go out for what he wants (with the understanding that, next time, he will go for her preference.)

I never really understand these questions because my husband and I don’t have impasses like this. We just talk about the issue and come to a mutual decision. Sometimes he “wins”, sometimes I win, and most of the time we make a compromise. There is no “penile trump card.”