The Duties of a Catholic Wife

[severus68]

The Catholic teaching is that the husband is the ruler of the family. That is explicit. What is not is what that means.

You can repeat that as many times as you want and it does not make it so. You have not responded on the question whether those who do not have/do not want such a marriage are offending God/commiting a sin.

 

[Baelor]

Excluding priests, no man is acting as if he is Christ. All men and women should try to be Christlike. Obviously JPII did not read it.

Casti Connubii – a papal encyclical, I will note, has the following to say:
CC:

The man is the ruler of the family, and the head of the woman; but because she is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone, let her be subject and obedient to the man, not as a servant but as a companion, so that nothing be lacking of honor or of dignity in the obedience which she pays. Let divine charity be the constant guide of their mutual relations, both in him who rules and in her who obeys, since each bears the image, the one of Christ, the other of the Church

In persona Christi is more specific than someone acting symbolically like Christ.

 

[Baelor]

You can repeat that as many times as you want and it does not make it so. You have not responded on the question whether those who do not have/do not want such a marriage are offending God/commiting a sin.

I am not obligated to respond to every question. The fact remains that the Church has taught definitively on an issue and has not abrogated its previous position.

 

[Walking_Home]

I am not obligated to respond to every question. The fact remains that the Church has taught definitively on an issue and has not abrogated its previous position.

---

Look at the CCC on marriage. You will not find — the husband as “ruler”. Neither is the husband as “ruler” in the Charter.

 

[moon1234]

More specifically, there are almost no conceivable circumstances in which a husband would morally assert his authority over an unwilling wife when her own preferences are not intrinsically immoral.

For example, the husband could not morally compel his wife to wear skirts if she prefers pants.

This could very well be an issue, but it would depend on the situation. If the husband and wife are expected to attend a busniess gathering where their is an expectation of certain level of decorum and the wife is arguing about wearing “pants” vs a more formal dress or skirt, then it could fall to the husaband to require his wife to dress appropriately.

Most husbands will not LORD their authority over their wife. That never goes well, but my wife and I have had “issues” where there were directly opposing viewpoints. She says yes and I say no about X. It has only been a few times, but I HAVE had to say NO. She did respect the decision, but was not very gracious about it.

I always listen and try to take some time before making a decison, but sometimes it is a man’s duty to lead. THE CHILDREN DO WATCH! If mom can say no to Dad to walk away, just guess what trouble mom will have have with the kids! It is strange, but the children in more patriachal families tend to behave better when mom OR dad ask them to do something.

My wife and I almost always talk most things out, but on those rare occasions where I need to make an executive decision and end the endless “discussion” it always means the cold shoulder for a few days. I don’t usually regret my decison, but it very hard to assert that authority on the rare occasions it is needed.

 

[severus68]

This could very well be an issue, but it would depend on the situation. If the husband and wife are expected to attend a busniess gathering where their is an expectation of certain level of decorum and the wife is arguing about wearing “pants” vs a more formal dress or skirt, then it could fall to the husaband to require his wife to dress appropriately.

Most husbands will not LORD their authority over their wife. That never goes well, but my wife and I have had “issues” where there were directly opposing viewpoints. She says yes and I say no about X. It has only been a few times, but I HAVE had to say NO. She did respect the decision, but was not very gracious about it.

I always listen and try to take some time before making a decison, but sometimes it is a man’s duty to lead. THE CHILDREN DO WATCH! If mom can say no to Dad to walk away, just guess what trouble mom will have have with the kids! It is strange, but the children in more patriachal families tend to behave better when mom OR dad ask them to do something.

My wife and I almost always talk most things out, but on those rare occasions where I need to make an executive decision and end the endless “discussion” it always means the cold shoulder for a few days. I don’t usually regret my decison, but it very hard to assert that authority on the rare occasions it is needed.

I think it is rather disrespectful of you to speak about your wife like this here. CAF is about discussion and learning not about being personal. I could well say that that is not the way a man should treat his wife.

 

[moon1234]

---

Look at the CCC on marriage. You will not find — the husband as “ruler”. Neither is the husband as “ruler” in the Charter.

Does the CCC define everything in Church? The catechism is a teaching aid. So are all of the papal bulls, encyclicals, etc. In a marraige where there is no clear head of the family, then chaos will eventually rule. Just because there is a defined head of the family does not mean that head just runs roughshod over the family.

Can you imagine a kingdom where the Queen and King just do their own thing and there is no defined head? It would be chaos for the country. Does that order diminish the queen? Not in any way. She is a trusted advisor whom the king does well to listen to and take her counsel. The king will seek her (name removed by moderator)ut in his decisions. In many situations a mutual understanding will be arrived at. When that is not possible then there MUST be a clear head to make a final decision.

 

[moon1234]

So if a wife is being Christlike in making a decision, shouldn’t the husband follow, in fact he should follow, yes? You would disagree because you state that the husband has authority to lead. Why does he have this authority? Because of his gender? Then it follows that all men have authority over women. Where then is the equality under Christ?

God originally created Eve FOR Adam as a companion, equal in dignity, but not in function. God could have comanded that they be equal to each other in ALL things, but he did not. Modern society tells a women she is equal in ALL things to a man. This is a false truth and it ultimately leads to the downfall of many families.

 

[moon1234]

I think it is rather disrespectful of you to speak about your wife like this here. CAF is about discussion and learning not about being personal. I could well say that that is not the way a man should treat his wife.

Everyone is beating around the bush here with no concrete examples. Putting out a few examples is one way of expressing HOW this situation works.

There are times when my wife and I are working through a big decision and we reach an impass. A decision NEEDS to be made, so who makes it?

To cite a different recent example, our 4 year old son needs dental work. My wife was unhappy with the dental office he was being taken to. She wanted a change, I was fine with this. She picked a new place and we went to the initial appointment. My son, according to the new dentist, has 8 cavities. They wanted him to go to the hospital as soon as possible and be knocked out to have the dental work done. We were being pressured to set this up before we even got out of the room.

I was NOT comfortable with this and my wife was. She wanted to schedule the appointment that day. How would you handle this situation? There was no discussing anything. I simply said No. Not now, I want a second opinion and a day or two to think about this. She was upset, but after a day or two and another opinion, we have a better idea of how to handle the situation. (It turns out only a few of the cavities are “urgent” and the dentist can do those in the office instead of the hospital)

Did I disrespect my wife by saying NO to immediatly scheduling the appointment? Did I somehow lower her dignity?

This whole idea of equality today is so strange. It is what is causing the emasculation of men as husbands. People wonder where all of the “men” are.

 

[severus68]

Does the CCC define everything in Church? The catechism is a teaching aid. So are all of the papal bulls, encyclicals, etc. In a marraige where there is no clear head of the family, then chaos will eventually rule. Just because there is a defined head of the family does not mean that head just runs roughshod over the family.

Can you imagine a kingdom where the Queen and King just do their own thing and there is no defined head? It would be chaos for the country. Does that order diminish the queen? Not in any way. She is a trusted advisor whom the king does well to listen to and take her counsel. The king will seek her (name removed by moderator)ut in his decisions. In many situations a mutual understanding will be arrived at. When that is not possible then there MUST be a clear head to make a final decision.

In the UK, the Queen tells everyone including her husband what to do. Actually) she just advises, in a constitutional monarchy, the monarch has no real power. Two points 1) the ruler/boss/president does not have to be male and 2), its a shame that a marriage has no real foundation that it will run so easily into chaos that it needs the husband to rule with a ruler in hand like a headmaster.

 

[severus68]

God originally created Eve FOR Adam as a companion, equal in dignity, but not in function. God could have comanded that they be equal to each other in ALL things, but he did not. Modern society tells a women she is equal in ALL things to a man. This is a false truth and it ultimately leads to the downfall of many families.

Strange, I was always taught and thought Christ and Christianity was about equality of all.Neither a man nor a woman has to be told he/she is equal. Before Christ all are equal.

 

[JackieMom]

Does the CCC define everything in Church? The catechism is a teaching aid. So are all of the papal bulls, encyclicals, etc. In a marraige where there is no clear head of the family, then chaos will eventually rule. Just because there is a defined head of the family does not mean that head just runs roughshod over the family.

Can you imagine a kingdom where the Queen and King just do their own thing and there is no defined head? It would be chaos for the country. Does that order diminish the queen? Not in any way. She is a trusted advisor whom the king does well to listen to and take her counsel. The king will seek her (name removed by moderator)ut in his decisions. In many situations a mutual understanding will be arrived at. When that is not possible then there MUST be a clear head to make a final decision.

If you think it is impossible for two people to equally run any kind of institution or organization I don’t know what to tell you. My husband and I have been equal co-heads of our home for many years and many children later. Things in a marriage are so much more complicated and nuances than one person having the trump card of xy chromosomes.

In your dental scenario… I assume that if the roles had been reversed, wifh your wife being the one with hesitation about having the procedures done, you woukd have agreed to her suggestion of a second opinion too. I don’t see how that is an example of you “ruling” over your wife. It’s only common courtesy that if one spouse is uncomfortable with something, the other does not allow it to happen until both agree.

 

[fpt]

This is my understanding of the global logic of the catholic doctrine. It is a summary with my own words for helping people to have conscience that the catholicism is in favor of the link between the soul with his corollaries and the body with his corollaries, both.

The married woman is or should be the " New Eve of her Man " and the " Saint Mary Magdalena of her husband ", I mean: the Female, the Fiancée, the Bride, the Sweetheart, the Love, the Mistress, the Lover, the Beloved, the Muse, the Friend, the Best-friend, the Girlfriend, the Helper, the Soul-Mate, the Companion, the Partner, the Associate, the Educator, the Teacher, the Professor, the Thinker, the Philosopher, the Schoolgirl, the Pupil, the Student, the Follower, the Female Opposite Number, the Alterity, the Complementarity, the Princess, the Queen, the Doctress, the Nurse, the Guide of her Husband and the Person who reveals in him, his part of feminity and helps his masculinity: his Wife and the Potential Mother of their children.
And
The married female, who is the wife, has to understand the normal sexuality of her male: wife is the teacher of the sexuality of her husband, she is also the professor of the sexuality of her husband, and then she is the doctress and the master of love of the sexuality of her husband.
Marital act is:
An act of conjugal love;
A moral obligation of conjugal love;
A moral duty of conjugal love ;
A moral right of conjugal love.

In order to express the conjugal love;
In order to improve the bonding of conjugal love;
In order to avoid the bad effect of concupiscence;
In order to be an actor of the human procreation;
In order to have the conjugal physical fun;

A catholic wife should have a huge consideration for her male. In her mind, man would be the most beautiful creature of the creation, he would be on the top of the natural creation wanted by God. He is her lover, her husband and her potential father of her children. For a catholic woman, he is her natural complementarity. For a catholic wife, husband is so divine as he is coming from the creation of God. The bashing of man/ husband coming from the wife is a social and moral scandal.
The radical feminism, the sexism from female, the misandry, the negationism of alterity and of the complementarity of male and female coming from women, the negationism of the sexuation coming from women, the relativism of the sexuation coming from women are so morally wrong, thus the catholic wife has to refuse them and must fight against, in doxa and in praxis.

The conjugal natural goodness within the couple, and the conjugal charity within the couple are the natural rules and the catholic rules.

It is from love, by love, in love, of love, for love. Love is the source, the cause and the end.
Her first devotion is her husband, because via him, it is the Jesus Christ: the conjugal charity in the mariage.

*The Duties of a Catholic Wife toward who?

God?
Her husband?
Her couple?
Their children?
Herself?
The Roman Catholic Church?
And her rights??

The duties of a catholic husband toward who??? and his rights???*

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Everyone is beating around the bush here with no concrete examples. Putting out a few examples is one way of expressing HOW this situation works.

There are times when my wife and I are working through a big decision and we reach an impass. A decision NEEDS to be made, so who makes it?

To cite a different recent example, our 4 year old son needs dental work. My wife was unhappy with the dental office he was being taken to. She wanted a change, I was fine with this. She picked a new place and we went to the initial appointment. My son, according to the new dentist, has 8 cavities. They wanted him to go to the hospital as soon as possible and be knocked out to have the dental work done. We were being pressured to set this up before we even got out of the room.

I was NOT comfortable with this and my wife was. She wanted to schedule the appointment that day. How would you handle this situation? There was no discussing anything. I simply said No. Not now, I want a second opinion and a day or two to think about this. She was upset, but after a day or two and another opinion, we have a better idea of how to handle the situation. (It turns out only a few of the cavities are “urgent” and the dentist can do those in the office instead of the hospital)

Did I disrespect my wife by saying NO to immediatly scheduling the appointment? Did I somehow lower her dignity?

This whole idea of equality today is so strange. It is what is causing the emasculation of men as husbands. People wonder where all of the “men” are.

And not just to this post, but to the last few you’ve made on this thread. You talk about your wife as though she’s a child who needs you to direct her.

As for this post, the implication here is that if your wife had been uncomfortable and wanted a second opinion and you didn’t you would have put your foot down and scheduled your son for surgery against her wishes. Yeesh!

If your family can’t function without you having that sort of executive power then I don’t really know what to say. Honestly though the way you talk makes you sound brutish and like a bully.

 

[fpt]

*The Duties of a Catholic Wife toward who?

God?
Her husband?
Her couple?
Their children?
Herself?
The Roman Catholic Church?
And her rights??

The duties of a catholic husband toward who??? and his rights???*

Marriage is a mutual and reciprocal contract, a mutual and reciprocal covenant, a mutual and reciprocal donation of bodies, a mutual and reciprocal union of souls in order to form a couple, in order to be a couple (to be a wife and to be a husband), in order to live in couple, and in order to be actors of the human procreation in all responsablity and in all conscience (responsible maternity, responsible paternity, and responsible procreation).

Two spheres: The couple and the family.

In the couple, there is a mutual and reciprocal submission concerning the conjugal sexuality and concerning the life of couple: equality, equity, no superiority, no inferiority. NO CHIEF?

In the family, there the father, the mother and the children. By principle, father and mother should try to be on the same line, try to have the same view, try to decide together (each member of couple has to be respected as human being, as spouse (husband and wife), as lover, as beloved, as father and as mother. The husband is not the superior of wife, he is not the tyran of his wife and his family, he is not the dictator of his wife and his family. He (the husband) can be the leader of family, only and only if , there are, in his own heart, the conjugal love, the conjugal natural goodness, the conjugal charity. Otherwise, it is very wrong and his legitimacy is not.

 

[Baelor]

---

Look at the CCC on marriage. You will not find — the husband as “ruler”. Neither is the husband as “ruler” in the Charter.

Theological inquiry extends beyond what is stated in the CCC. Consider the words of Pope Pius XII:
PPXII:

It is not to be thought that what is set down in Encyclical letters does not demand assent in itself, because in this the popes do not exercise the supreme power of their magisterium. For these matters are taught by the ordinary magisterium, regarding which the following is pertinent: “He who heareth you, heareth Me.” (Luke 10:16); and usually what is set forth and inculcated in Encyclical Letters, already pertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their acts, after due consideration, express an opinion on a hitherto controversial matter, it is clear to all that this matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot any longer be considered a question of free discussion among theologians.

To say that the encyclicals carry no weight because their content is not reproduced in the CCC is incorrect.

 

[Baelor]

If the husband and wife are expected to attend a busniess gathering where their is an expectation of certain level of decorum and the wife is arguing about wearing “pants” vs a more formal dress or skirt, then it could fall to the husaband to require his wife to dress appropriately.

Suit pants are equally formal as dresses and skirts. Also, that would extend to the husband if he were dressed inappropriately.

More importantly, I thought my example was an obvious reference to perceived standards of modesty; apparently not.

She says yes and I say no about X. It has only been a few times, but I HAVE had to say NO. She did respect the decision, but was not very gracious about it.

That is not the case. You did not need to say no unless she was advocating an immoral position.

I always listen and try to take some time before making a decison, but sometimes it is a man’s duty to lead.

Not by making unilateral decisions.

If mom can say no to Dad to walk away, just guess what trouble mom will have have with the kids!

None, because Mom can morally say no to Dad and walk away.

It is strange, but the children in more patriachal families tend to behave better when mom OR dad ask them to do something.

Proof?

My wife and I almost always talk most things out, but on those rare occasions where I need to make an executive decision and end the endless “discussion” it always means the cold shoulder for a few days. I don’t usually regret my decison, but it very hard to assert that authority on the rare occasions it is needed.

Your authority seems nonexistent.

There are times when my wife and I are working through a big decision and we reach an impass. A decision NEEDS to be made, so who makes it?

An impasse? I cannot imagine an impasse that would involve the male asserting his authority morally except in dire circumstances.

My son, according to the new dentist, has 8 cavities. They wanted him to go to the hospital as soon as possible and be knocked out to have the dental work done. We were being pressured to set this up before we even got out of the room…I was NOT comfortable with this and my wife was. She wanted to schedule the appointment that day. How would you handle this situation?

Your wife was obviously correct and you were being a negligent husband and father.

The obvious course of action would have been to schedule the appointment and then cancel if further information prompted a different course of action.

Did I disrespect my wife by saying NO to immediatly scheduling the appointment? Did I somehow lower her dignity?

Yes and yes. You were extremely rude and you could have both gotten your ways in the manner I wrote above.

I weep for your family, not only because of the way you view and treat them but also because you feel comfortable airing your dirty laundry on a public forum. I will pray for your wife in particular.

 

[Walking_Home]

Walking_Home:

Look at the CCC on marriage. You will not find — the husband as “ruler”. Neither is the husband as “ruler” in the Charter.

Theological inquiry extends beyond what is stated in the CCC. Consider the words of Pope Pius XII:

Originally Posted by PPXII
It is not to be thought that what is set down in Encyclical letters does not demand assent in itself, because in this the popes do not exercise the supreme power of their magisterium. For these matters are taught by the ordinary magisterium, regarding which the following is pertinent: “He who heareth you, heareth Me.” (Luke 10:16); and usually what is set forth and inculcated in Encyclical Letters, already pertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their acts, after due consideration, express an opinion on a hitherto controversial matter, it is clear to all that this matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot any longer be considered a question of free discussion among theologians.

To say that the encyclicals carry no weight because their content is not reproduced in the CCC is incorrect.

---

Careful with that Baelor. The “Traditionalists” view of past documents -has added to rejection of Vat II, the CCC, the new Code of Canon Law and labeling our Popes as “modernist” / “liberals”/etc.

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.

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI
TO THE BISHOPS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(REGIONS X-XIII) ON THEIR “AD LIMINA” VISIT

Saturday, 5 May 2012

I greet all of you with affection in the Lord and I offer you my prayerful good wishes for a grace-filled pilgrimage ad limina Apostolorum. In the course of our meetings I have been reflecting with you and your Brother Bishops on the intellectual and cultural challenges of the new evangelization in the context of contemporary American society.** In the present talk, I wish to address the question of religious education and the faith formation of the next generation of Catholics in your country.**

Before all else, I would acknowledge the great progress that has been made in recent years in improving catechesis, reviewing texts and bringing them into conformity with the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

[Baelor]

---

Careful with that Baelor. The “Traditionalists” view of past documents -has added to rejection of Vat II, the CCC, the new Code of Canon Law and labeling our Popes as “modernist” / “liberals”/etc.

Can you point to anything in my posts that be in support of any of the things mentioned as “traditionalist?”

If not, then I think it is fair to say that your effort is an unjust ad hominem attack, one I do not appreciate at all.

 

[Walking_Home]

Walking:

Careful with that Baelor. The “Traditionalists” view of past documents -has added to rejection of Vat II, the CCC, the new Code of Canon Law and labeling our Popes as “modernist” / “liberals”/etc.

Can you point to anything in my posts that be in support of any of the things mentioned as “traditionalist?”

If not, then I think it is fair to say that your effort is an unjust ad hominem attack, one I do not appreciate at all.

---

I was not attacking you --all I said was to be careful. And gave an example of how the use of past documents – has contributed to the rejection of Vat II, the CCC, etc.