What if a couple disagrees on more kids?

[thewanderer]

I agree that the wife needs to provide (name removed by moderator)ut and her own views on the decisions and should never just blindly follow her husband. However, there may be a time when God asks the wife to trust Him by following their husbands loving lead for the salvation of the Family just like God asked Jesus to submit to His will for the salvation of his bride (the church).

Well, yeah, obviously, just like there will be times when God asks the husband to recognize that his wife is right and give in to her instead. I think thats all part of EasterJoys point, the couple shouldn’t be fighting a power struggle about who gets their way, they should be jointly working together to figure out God’s will and follow that. Which will mean mutual submission as needed to ensure they follow God’s will.

 

[Paul_Fekete]

Well, yeah, obviously, just like there will be times when God asks the husband to recognize that his wife is right and give in to her instead. I think thats all part of EasterJoys point, the couple shouldn’t be fighting a power struggle about who gets their way, they should be jointly working together to figure out God’s will and follow that. Which will mean mutual submission as needed to ensure they follow God’s will.

Couples could be waiting and waiting for mutual submission to happen and then the time window expires. It is called the stalling game and people use it in marriages. I think mutual submission is always the goal but it naïve to think that in some cases that somebody does not have the make the best call possible for the team.

 

[BioNerd]

Actually I was taught this whole thing about husband “headship” has nothing whatsoever to do with dominance, authority, or “having the last say.”

I was taught that by headship, it means the husband has a greater responsibility to see to it that the family makes it to heaven. A spiritual leader sort of thing.

Of course, women tend to be more spiritually inclined by nature, so in the majority of cases it’s the wife/mother who ends up being the spiritual leader of the household. But that is a burden she should not have to bear.

I like this WAYYY more than the whole “husband always has the last call” patriarchal answer. Thank you.

 

[EasterJoy]

Couples could be waiting and waiting for mutual submission to happen and then the time window expires. It is called the stalling game and people use it in marriages. I think mutual submission is always the goal but it naïve to think that in some cases that somebody does not have the make the best call possible for the team.

I think it is naïve to think that a wrong joint decision is the worst thing that can happen to a marriage.

Usually the best possible call is “Do nothing out of selfishness or out of vainglory; rather, humbly regard others as more important than yourselves, each looking out not for his own interests, but (also) everyone for those of others.” Phil. 2:3-4 Otherwise, the clock that is going to be ticking is the amount of time left in the marriage…as the physicians say, “First, do no harm.”

I think I’ve given this opinion already, but I think the story of the wedding feast at Cana is a good example of how it can be that true authority gives into true submission. This is not an idea that is foreign to Christianity, and it is not an impossible ideal.

Another example (among many in the lives of the saints) is how St. Thérèse of Lisieux lobbied to get into her Carmelite convent when she was just 15. She was totally in submission to those with authority over her, but she didn’t give up. I’m not saying a husband is the equivalent of a 15 year old’s bishop, but saying that submission does not mean “I don’t have an opinion, and if I do, I never voice it.” A person in a position of obedience can still be a lobbyist!

I have this rule, though, and it has been a very good one: When I give in, then we have made a decision. There is no room for “I told you so” if it turns out what I wanted was based on a better understanding of the facts. We decided, and we live with our decision. Otherwise, the one “giving in” puts too much on the person who “wins”, and robs them of the security they ought to feel when a decision has been reached: that is, that they won’t feel rejection if it turns out they’re wrong. That is very important, far more important than getting the best possible answer to every important question.

If you give in to your spouse, or wait for them to come around, and the window is closed and they realize too late that they were wrong, your job as a spouse is to comfort them with the truth that “we decided, and we’ll live with this. We were doing the best we could at the time.” The one who was “right” does not have the luxury of wallowing in bitterness or recrimination…they need to treat their spouse as they wanted to be treated when the table is turned. (Which it will.)

 

[thewanderer]

Couples could be waiting and waiting for mutual submission to happen and then the time window expires. It is called the stalling game and people use it in marriages. I think mutual submission is always the goal but it naïve to think that in some cases that somebody does not have the make the best call possible for the team.

Honestly, if you have two people who love each other with Christ’s love, the need for such a thing would be exceedingly rare. When you have two people dedicated to each other and to their marriage, to loving the other and putting the other’s good before their own this really isn’t going to be a problem. In small matters, one of them will give in. It is inconceivable that you have two people who truly want to live for the other holding out for days or weeks or more on small unimportant matters. Its just not going to happen. So all that is left is the few important decisions that they can’t come to a decision on. (which, again, would be a rare occurrence when both are trying to do their best to follow God’s Will rather than their own), but, on the occasion that it did happen, yes, someone is going to have to give in. But what if the wife giving in means that the kids go through some kind of trauma? That the family ends up on the street? Is it still right for the wife to submit to her husbands will and allow her children to go through that? No, of course not. So even for those cases it just simply is not a clear-cut universal of the wife gives in to the husband. Such an idea is contrary to the Catholic understanding of marriage.

 

[Debora123]

I agree that the wife needs to provide (name removed by moderator)ut and her own views on the decisions and should never just blindly follow her husband. However, there may be a time when God asks the wife to trust Him by following their husbands loving lead for the salvation of the Family just like God asked Jesus to submit to His will for the salvation of his bride (the church).

How exactly would God go about “asking” the wife to do what the husband says? Are there ever times when the husband should do what the wife says? Does God ever ask the husband to follow her lead? You seem to be staging this whole male dominance thing as some sort of direct order from God…

Honestly, I just don’t understand why you seem to have such a struggle with the idea of compromise and equal partnership in a successful marriage.

Are you married? There have been many issues that have come up in my marriage where my husband and I don’t agree, and the final decision doesn’t go to him at all times. We compromise and take turns sacrificing for the other.

Here are a couple of the more petty child-related examples I can share in which my husband and I disagreed and ended up having to compromise:

(No kids yet, this is all just planning for the future). My husband’s family has a tradition of making every first son’s middle name be the first name of the father, the second son’s middle name be the first name of the paternal grandpa, the third son would be the great grandpa, and so on. Quite frankly, I don’t like this idea one bit, and as you can imagine he wasn’t too happy about me not liking this idea. Something else petty we disagreed on is that I don’t want him present in the delivery room when I give birth. I am South American and it is not in our culture to have the husband present during that time, and I’d rather not have him there while I’m involuntarily pooping myself as I’m pushing for the baby to come out. Well, he’s gonna wanna be there.

So what happens? Do I let him have his way with both those things because he’s a man and I’m a woman? Absolutely not. We compromised. I agreed that when the time comes he can be present to witness me giving birth, and he promises to be OK with picking other middle names for our sons. I sacrificed, and he sacrificed.

Another thing is that my husband wants a larger family. The problem with that is that he’s in the military and actually going through pilot trainning right now for the Air Force. He’s not going to be around too much and there will be times when he’ll be gone for several months at a time, leaving me alone in whatever part of the world the military has assigned us to. I don’t want to be alone in South Korea with five kids while my husband is on a year long deployment to Afghanistan.

So what to do? Should I suck it up and give him the big family he wants because it’s what HE wants and he’s a MAN? Not at all. Him being an Air Force pilot will definitely put a strain on me and be very difficult for me, but I promised to be supportive and accommodating so that he can be successful in living his dream. In turn he has put aside his desire for a large family and has said that it’ll be up to me when I feel I’ve had enough kids.

Those were petty examples, but do you see how that works? We won’t always agree, and when we don’t, we sort of “take turns” doing the will of the other. He doesn’t always automatically get the final word on everything just because he’s a man. That’s ridiculous. Compromise goes a long way.

 

[Debora123]

Perhaps the unofficial delegated leader is you?

Nope. We sort of compromise and “take turns” letting the other have their way. Sometimes I’ll give in and we’ll do it his way, and other times he’ll give in we’ll do it my way. As if should be. It’s really not rocket science. Please read my response above.

 

[Paul_Fekete]

Nope. We sort of compromise and “take turns” letting the other have their way. Sometimes I’ll give in and we’ll do it his way, and other times he’ll give in we’ll do it my way. As if should be. It’s really not rocket science. Please read my response above.

I read your other post as well. Here is my concern…The fact that you are not in agreement of letting your husband make the final decision in the best interest of the family (after you have given all the (name removed by moderator)ut on the decision and after you can not come to a mutual agreement) suggests that you do not fully trust your husband. If you think you can trust your husband to follow the example of Jesus as a servant leader, then why not trust him to make the decisions for the family when mutual agreement can not be found? This idea of taking turns means that you have to keep score. Keeping score in a marriage is a very dangerous habit that can cause division and resentment over time. Again, if you trust your husband you should have no issue following his loving sacrificial leadership. If you do not trust your husband to think of your best interests then that is a foundational issue that needs to be worked out in your marriage. I am married and my wife trusts God, but trusting my leadership. She is always giving me (name removed by moderator)ut and I always want to hear what she says. It has only been a few times in our 6 years that I have had to make a decision where we did not agree…but those were some very big decisions (like what city to live in) that God used to strengthen our marriage.

 

[Paul_Fekete]

I think it is naïve to think that a wrong joint decision is the worst thing that can happen to a marriage.

I never said that joint decisions should not be the initial plan when making decisions. Joint decisions should always be the initial plan, but if plan A fails you need a plan B.

 

[thewanderer]

I never said that joint decisions should not be the initial plan when making decisions. Joint decisions should always be the initial plan, but if plan A fails you need a plan B.

But according to the Catholic Church it is incorrect to claim that plan B is the universal “the husband gets the final say”.

 

[Paul_Fekete]

Honestly, if you have two people who love each other with Christ’s love, the need for such a thing would be exceedingly rare. When you have two people dedicated to each other and to their marriage, to loving the other and putting the other’s good before their own this really isn’t going to be a problem. In small matters, one of them will give in. It is inconceivable that you have two people who truly want to live for the other holding out for days or weeks or more on small unimportant matters. Its just not going to happen. So all that is left is the few important decisions that they can’t come to a decision on. (which, again, would be a rare occurrence when both are trying to do their best to follow God’s Will rather than their own), but, on the occasion that it did happen, yes, someone is going to have to give in. But what if the wife giving in means that the kids go through some kind of trauma? That the family ends up on the street? Is it still right for the wife to submit to her husbands will and allow her children to go through that? No, of course not. So even for those cases it just simply is not a clear-cut universal of the wife gives in to the husband. Such an idea is contrary to the Catholic understanding of marriage.

Following your husband should not cause a wife to sin by putting her kids in harms way. A wife should never follow her husband if the husband is asking her to sin or disobey God’s commands.

 

[Paul_Fekete]

But according to the Catholic Church it is incorrect to claim that plan B is the universal “the husband gets the final say”.

So when a couple can not reach agreement you will just let them duke it out until finally someone gives in? Could that not cause a lot of damage to the marriage? If a wife can not trust a husband to make the call in the best interest of the family is there not a foundational issue of the wife not trusting the husband in the marriage?

 

[Walking_Home]

So when a couple can not reach agreement you will just let them duke it out until finally someone gives in? Could that not cause a lot of damage to the marriage? If a wife can not trust a husband to make the call in the best interest of the family is there not a foundational issue of the wife not trusting the husband in the marriage?

---

Duke it out – you make it sound like – the only alternative-- is the couple pounding each other over the head. From what I have observe – the matter does come to a conclusion. Sometimes the conclusion will favor the wife – sometimes the husband.

There is no way to fit – the husband having the final say – without injuring the dignity and undermining the equal rights of the wife.

CHARTER OF THE RIGHTS OF THE FAMILY

Article 1

c) The spouses, in the natural complementarity which exists between man and woman, enjoy the same dignity and equal rights regarding the marriage.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_19831022_family-rights_en.html

 

[thewanderer]

Following your husband should not cause a wife to sin by putting her kids in harms way. A wife should never follow her husband if the husband is asking her to sin or disobey God’s commands.

Yeah, and how does the wife know when it would be wrong to follow her husbands judgement? She uses her own reason and judgement. And her husband needs to respect that. There is no universal rule of “the husband always gets the final say”.

Also, I’m going to repeat this point I made earlier as I think it is very pertinent to the current discussion. From CC:

1. Again, this subjection of wife to husband in its degree and manner may vary according to the different conditions of persons, place and time.

In other words, the exact form of the decision-making process between husband and wife is going to be different depending on the particular couple and the place and time in which they live. This is straight from Casti Conubii. So its a matter of so long as it involves mutual submission to God’s Will and keeps the peace between the spouses so that they agree on their decisions and stay united then its perfectly fine and in keeping with Church teaching. Just because the particular form it takes for you is different than the particular form it takes for Debora doesn’t mean that one is right and one is wrong. Different forms have different strengths and weaknesses, but whatever form a couple can make work for them is great and perfectly acceptable.

 

[thewanderer]

So when a couple can not reach agreement you will just let them duke it out until finally someone gives in? Could that not cause a lot of damage to the marriage? If a wife can not trust a husband to make the call in the best interest of the family is there not a foundational issue of the wife not trusting the husband in the marriage?

I’m just letting you know Church teaching. Its in Casti Conubii, if you don’t like it take it up with the Church.

 

[thewanderer]

So when a couple can not reach agreement you will just let them duke it out until finally someone gives in? Could that not cause a lot of damage to the marriage? If a wife can not trust a husband to make the call in the best interest of the family is there not a foundational issue of the wife not trusting the husband in the marriage?

Yes, damage could be caused this way, just as damage could be caused by the husband always getting the final say and being unfair to the wife and causing resentment. Both ways of dealing with it have pitfalls. We’re all human. What I do know, however, is that the Church explicitly teaches that the authority of the husband over the wife is not universal. In other words it is contrary to Catholic teaching to claim that the husband always gets the last say. If you want to claim that the husband always gets the last say, feel free, but know that in doing so you will be in conflict with official Church teaching.

 

[EasterJoy]

I never said that joint decisions should not be the initial plan when making decisions. Joint decisions should always be the initial plan, but if plan A fails you need a plan B.

After 60 years of marriage, my uncle said this: I make all the major decisions, and she decides all of the little stuff. So far, we’ve been lucky, because nothing major has come up.

Plan B is that you keep talking until you figure something out. IOW, you don’t play chicken with your marriage. Somebody gives in. When both parties think it is their unique place to do it, then someone does.

---

Duke it out – you make it sound like – the only alternative-- is the couple pounding each other over the head. From what I have observe – the matter does come to a conclusion. Sometimes the conclusion will favor the wife – sometimes the husband.

There is no way to fit – the husband having the final say – without injuring the dignity and undermining the equal rights of the wife.

Sure there is…if she is the one deciding to concede. She can give in every single time, and if that is her *honest *decision, if she is not talking out of both sides of her mouth about it, then it will be OK. Sure a wife can submit and not feel her dignity has been injured. Christ submitted, Our Lady submitted…what loss of dignity is there in submission, per se?

The one who concedes must concede freely, in any case. There is no forcing this…no, “It is your turn to be Jesus.” Someone has to remember it is better to be faithful to your marriage than to be right about anything else.

You have to be willing to have your spouse stand up for what he or she believes is important, and not want them to concede falsely. You have to be willing to live with the “wrong” decision as the price for having chosen the right person. You have to be willing to live in the tension of not knowing what the answer is going to be, and you have to be willing to let an opportunity pass rather than to force something down your spouse’s throat. And yes, sometimes you give in because someone needs to…you don’t have to admire your spouse at the time you are conceding every time. You only have to choose to give them the honor of conceding to them, sometimes even when you think they are out in left field, because they are worth it. (I’ve often said that you shouldn’t marry someone unless you’d live in a house you hate for their sake!)

A free concession comes in its own time, and it there are times when it will not be rushed. That is a decision to submit, too, on both sides, really–to submit to a process of deciding that proceeds according to its own timeline.

This is what the natural impulse to say, “I’d do anything for him/her” looks like in its mature (and really supernatural) form. With grace to help you, you really would.

 

[thewanderer]

After 60 years of marriage, my uncle said this: I make all the major decisions, and she decides all of the little stuff. So far, we’ve been lucky, because nothing major has come up.

Plan B is that you keep talking until you figure something out. IOW, you don’t play chicken with your marriage. Somebody gives in. When both parties think it is their unique place to do it, then someone does.

Sure there is…if she is the one deciding to concede. She can give in every single time, and if that is her *honest *decision, if she is not talking out of both sides of her mouth about it, then it will be OK. Sure a wife can submit and not feel her dignity has been injured. Christ submitted, Our Lady submitted…what loss of dignity is there in submission, per se?

The one who concedes must concede freely, in any case. There is no forcing this…no, “It is your turn to be Jesus.” Someone has to remember it is better to be faithful to your marriage than to be right about anything else.

You have to be willing to have your spouse stand up for what he or she believes is important, and not want them to concede falsely. You have to be willing to live with the “wrong” decision as the price for having chosen the right person. You have to be willing to live in the tension of not knowing what the answer is going to be, and you have to be willing to let an opportunity pass rather than to force something down your spouse’s throat. And yes, sometimes you give in because someone needs to…you don’t have to admire your spouse at the time you are conceding every time. You only have to choose to give them the honor of conceding to them, sometimes even when you think they are out in left field, because they are worth it. (I’ve often said that you shouldn’t marry someone unless you’d live in a house you hate for their sake!)

A free concession comes in its own time, and it there are times when it will not be rushed. That is a decision to submit, too, on both sides, really–to submit to a process of deciding that proceeds according to its own timeline.

 

[Debora123]

I read your other post as well. Here is my concern…The fact that you are not in agreement of letting your husband make the final decision in the best interest of the family (after you have given all the (name removed by moderator)ut on the decision and after you can not come to a mutual agreement) suggests that you do not fully trust your husband.

Uh, no it suggests that I know we are equals and we make decisions together, and if we cannot come to a middle ground, we compromise and take turns. Sometimes we do things his way, sometimes mine. Not to mention, that is the way he would want it anyway. If he heard someone say that husbands always got the final say in all decisions, he’d probably laugh at how misogynous and one sided that was.

I also don’t understand your double standard here. So does a husband not trust his wife then if he doesn’t always let her make the final decisions on everything??

 

[Debora123]

So when a couple can not reach agreement you will just let them duke it out until finally someone gives in? Could that not cause a lot of damage to the marriage? If a wife can not trust a husband to make the call in the best interest of the family is there not a foundational issue of the wife not trusting the husband in the marriage?

Are you understanding what I’m saying about compromise? Why do you keep seeing this as some sort of fighting match for power?

Are you even married? That’s not what a marriage is about.

Likewise, wouldn’t the husband not be trusting the wife if he never let her have the final say in anything?

How can you blame one spouse for not trusting the other with letting them make ALL the decisions, yet you don’t hold the same standard for the other way around?