L
Latinitas
Guest
What’s the point of this? Nothing I said resembled fascism. My position here is entirely in consonance with the tradition of the Church.
Benedicat Deus,
Latinitas
- Status
Benedicat Deus,
Latinitas
A
anon67074017
Guest
What you said is very similar to fascist beliefs. Fascists believe that women are inferior and they must submit to the men over them. This is an error in thinking. The Church does not want women to submit to their husbands because men are superior. They want couples to submit to each other. This is the view of the modern Church.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
If my wife left it up to me to be the Leader/Head of the Household/etc. we’d be your next door neighbors. Except you’d be in a car and we’d be in a cardboard box.
P
pianistclare
Guest
L
Latinitas
Guest
Re-read my post above. Submission and obedience is not dishonorable and denigrating. Having to submit doesn’t mean you’re an inferior person. It’s a means of sanctification. “The view of the modern Church” is exactly the same as the view of the early Church, the view of the Church fathers, the view of the Medieval Church etc. On matters of faith and morals one is not permitted to stray from the consensus of the fathers. This is a defined point of faith as was declared by the First Vatican Council (see Dei Filius). The Church fathers are unanimous in declaring that the wife has to submit to her husband. Leo XIII in his marriage encyclical Arcanum declares the same thing. What I’m saying is that a Christian attitude towards submission is one which, far from holding such requirements as dishonorable and denigrating, sees them as a powerful means of sanctification, in which our happiness ultimately consists.
Frankly, modernity values liberty and equality too much - this is what the Church has been saying since the time of the French Revolution. Freedom is indeed a good, but not the ultimate good. Requiring obedience is not fascism. Do you think the Catholic Church is fascist because we’re required to obey the Pope? He is our superior, who has been given his authority by God, and we are required to obey him, unless what he commands is directly sinful (God forbid a Pope should command somthign like this).
Benedicat Deus,
Latinitas
L
LethalMouse
Guest
This is so loaded in that we live in a fallen world. Some people hear “submissive wife” and can only see a battered woman living in misery.
Some people hear “practicing catholic” and only see a person with a zillion rules to follow, and someone constantly miserable as they are a terrible sinner doomed to hell.
If you can not see Catholic without elements of scruples or hypocrisy, you can not see accurate marital submission.
Then there is always social factors. People have different ideas and wants and situations.
If I go to a tattoo parlor and ask for a tattoo of a cross and get one. It is EXACTLY WHAT I WANTED.
Then my friend comes and tells me how he was chloroformed and given a horrible tattoo he never asked for nor wanted. He complains of the evils of the tattooer.
Then I decide that my cross tattoo artist was clearly an evil meanie head…
(Many might not get this, tis not for you
)
Some people hear “practicing catholic” and only see a person with a zillion rules to follow, and someone constantly miserable as they are a terrible sinner doomed to hell.
If you can not see Catholic without elements of scruples or hypocrisy, you can not see accurate marital submission.
Then there is always social factors. People have different ideas and wants and situations.
If I go to a tattoo parlor and ask for a tattoo of a cross and get one. It is EXACTLY WHAT I WANTED.
Then my friend comes and tells me how he was chloroformed and given a horrible tattoo he never asked for nor wanted. He complains of the evils of the tattooer.
Then I decide that my cross tattoo artist was clearly an evil meanie head…
(Many might not get this, tis not for you
)
A
anon67074017
Guest
I do not think that the Catholic Church is fascist. The Pope is not fascist. He is our religious leader. The idea that women have to obey men because they are superior is practically fascist. It is also blatantly sexist. Sexism is a tenet of fascist ideology. Submission in the way that you describe it does not provide true happiness either. I would never require a woman to submit to me just because I am a man. It would make both of us unhappy.
L
Latinitas
Guest
I didn’t say it’s because the man is superior. I said it’s because God commands it. Our Lord submitted Himself to His parents, even tough He was infinitely superior to them in wisdom, holiness etc. And yes, submission is the way of happiness, since happiness consists in uniformity to the will of God and contemplation of Divine truth.
Benedicat Deus,
Latinitas
L
LethalMouse
Guest
A
anon67074017
Guest
You would do well in a totalitarian world like Nineteen Eighty-Four.
C
CenturionSlave
Guest
Trying to get back on topic, I agree with Deacon Jeff in that we should not get so hung-up on the term “submissive”. It is a term that (in today’s world/English) can obviously generate negative feelings. I would suggest stepping back and considering what was probably a little different meaning to 1st century Jews AND to try to keep the verse(s) in context. I believe the theme is largely based on what 1st century Jews understood a marriage to be; what was expected of both the bride and bridegroom. Paul references this marriage as he depicts the Church (bride) and Christ (bridegroom) in a holy matrimonial bond. Our own sacramental marriages are then to reflect this Holy Marriage (Christ to Church). There is an excellent book that does a way better job of explaining this bond/relationship (bridegroom to bride) than I have tried to describe here. It is written by Dr. Brant Pitre called Jesus, the Bridegroom—The Greatest Love Story Ever Told. Hope this helps.
L
LethalMouse
Guest
I read somewhere…though I thought the source was perhaps advocating on the side of mild danger
An interesting note that there is much redefine to what submit means now and to make everyone easy there is a interesting point made in that the main thing is to be submissive is separate form listening to.
And the writer said that since it is related to submission to Jesus, does that mean if Jesus comes back we are to not have to listen to him?
It does seem a bit dicey and interpretation… on both sides.
L
Lea101
Guest
We can talk about this all day, and use the most flowery words to describe women and perhaps give them all crowns, or shame women and call them all sorts of names etc but we will get to nowhere if we don’t give examples of submission God wants from women tbh. This isn’t really a topic that makes sense if we just quote the catechism and argue over the word submission.
Just my opinion!
Just my opinion!
X
Xantippe
Guest
Riiight.
Husband has Alzheimer’s and wants to wander around outside barefoot in his pjs–submit or not submit?
As a smart lady says:
“I think the problem is that we define submission wrong. We define submission as in going along with someone’s WILL. Letting him make the decisions, and following him in that. But that makes no sense as the definition of submission because of the verse immediately before, in Ephesians 5:21: Submit to one another. How can we all be letting someone else make the decisions? Then no one would make decisions!”
“Maybe submission is about something else. Maybe submission means that we consider other’s welfare before our own. If that’s the case, then we DO always submit–even in cases of alcoholism or adultery or abuse.”
tolovehonorandvacuum.com/2015/05/on-submission-wedding-showers-and-choosing-a-mate/
L
LethalMouse
Guest
This is good, I am reminded of an example about following military orders.
The order stands to place a glass in a spot.
In context the spot is where a table is that will hold the glass up.
When you go to put the glass where the spot is you see the table is gone.
Common sense says you dont release the glass.
However the issue becomes is the table really there?
It goes both ways with impwrfect humans as the human ordering to put the glass may never believe you that the table is gone (potentially abusive husbamd type)
On the flip side you may think the table is not there if it is
The latter can be summed up by the fact that most often humans spend much time on this forum trying to reason that God is mean.
If humans can convince themselves a perfect God is a bad leader… how can a human follow an imperfect human and not cry foul?
Rebellion of the perfect means the imperfect stands no chance to seem like a halfway decent person
L
LightBound
Guest
That’s what these threads always come down to, isn’t it? We can have teenage boys and single young college males quoting from the Catechism of Trent and Aquinas all day long, but notice they never can give actual, real-life examples of day-to-day things that require******** a woman to be submissive to her husband. On other threads with a similar topic, it’s the happily married practicing Catholic men and women sharing how they make decision together and often, if the wife feels her choice is that important, the husband, for the sake of harmony and his own “dying to self” will go with the wife on it. Women are given special intuition for keeping themselves and their children safe and a wise man will recognize that if his wife is that adament about something. Perhaps we should be listening to those couples on how this works in the real world.
S
SilverShadow22
Guest
Find a worthy leader, pledge your allegiance, and then follow up until conflict with your well-formed conscience.
Can it get much simpler?
Can it get much simpler?
X
Xantippe
Guest
That isn’t in the marriage vows, though.Find a worthy leader, pledge your allegiance, and then follow up until conflict with your well-formed conscience.
Can it get much simpler?
So, maybe, just maybe, that isn’t what marriage is supposed to look like?
The vows are: "“I, ______, take you, ______, to be my wife/husband. I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. I will love you and honor you all the days of my life.”
L
LethalMouse
Guest
Very modern to take out the last part.
I read somewhere that has become quite common in the world full of divorce.
It is funny because there are many a blog and foruns where women seek advice how much they need to figure out if they can drop that term from the vows… mentality ma’am mentality.
Goes both ways but wrong breeds cycle. When you dont trust me I dont trust you then we are two people protecting ourselves
And we all know the best defense is a good offense. We all destroy eachother
S
SilverShadow22
Guest
Honor.
That means acknowledge his status as leader.
What I said also applies to military service. You don’t get to quibble with orders, you ONLY get to choose (if not drafted) whether or not to put yourself under that authority. And you only get to disobey orders when it CLEARLY violates natural law (the most basic form of conscience) because ‘I was just following orders’ did not excuse the Nazis for war crimes.
If he’s not worth following, he’s not worth marrying. And he’s not worth following if you think he’ll never listen to you. This is discernment… We don’t have to marry someone we don’t like or don’t trust.
- Status