Wife won't let husband be spritual leader of house?

[Bannan]

Eph 5:21 and onward.

usccb.org/bible/ephesians/5#57005021-2

In verse 21, Paul starts with a generalized serve one another, which you appear to have no issue with.

Then in verse 22, he clarifies what he means when the woman serves the man. Pay special attention, as this says, “submit to your husband as you submit to the LORD” It takes another 3 verses to really clarify the depth to which he is speaking a woman should submit to her husband.

As the church is subordinate to Christ…

In everything…

Is the Church more authoritative than Christ? No, the Church is given authority BY Christ. Does “in everything” leave leeway for excuses? I agree he’s not talking about EVERYTHING, but he used strong language here to make a point.

Then, in verse 25, he clarifies what he means when he says husbands should submit to their wives. This role is equally important, but note its manifestation is different. Husbands submit to their wives by way of loving them, and sanctifying them with teaching them the word.

How on earth can you reach the conclusion that their authority is equal, after reading this? Honestly, what stronger wording could even be used?

He finishes by establishing the relationship between the man and the woman as one of love and respect. The notes at the bottom give a little clearer picture in that the man does not have the right to dominate his wife, because through love this will be impossible, and the woman does not have the right to reject her husband, by virtue of respecting him.

Just as the Church has a hierarchy, so the family has one. Just as you would not doubt the Churches authority in dogma or doctrine, or make up your own for that matter, you should not seek to make yourselves equal with your husbands authority as the head of the family.

If you aren’t convinced by Paul, then I’m done trying.

 

[Walking_Home]

Bannan:

And a protestant comes to defend me! .

Which rather supports our points.

---

Ditto.

 

[Bannan]

EasterJoy,

The reason I’m advocating this is not because I wish to “lord it over them”.

The reason I’m fighting for the recognition of a husbands greater authority is a cultural one. The general perception I get today is that there were no differences between a man and a woman. Many women don’t even understand why women can’t be priests! Some people feel as though you are born a woman in a mans body, as if God, by some error, made a mistake.

This line of thinking is folly, and if we as Catholics don’t do our part in setting good examples and defend truth when an entire culture begins to believe a lie, we will be held accountable for never opening our mouths in contrast.

 

[AnnArbor]

EasterJoy,

The reason I’m advocating this is not because I wish to “lord it over them”.

The reason I’m fighting for the recognition of a husbands greater authority is a cultural one…

It’s interesting – there are so many posts on this forum about “rabid” feminism, and explanations of why it is not needed. But this is exactly the sort of thing that gives rise to that. Of course men and women are not the same – but they are equal.

How in the world would you deal with answering to a female supervisor in your job if you feel this way?

 

[POJIUJH]

I have had many replies to this!

While I agree with you in idea, you got one word upside down. Let me explain.

I understand. I’m not so much intending to leave the word upside down as avoiding extra writing, but it is an amazing thought indeed. It is a holy paradox that the the greater calling is the one of lowliness, but yet there is still objectivity involved.

For instance, the great callings (like the Papacy) aren’t made lower because of this call to lowliness, but greater. In this sense the calling to the Papacy is superior to other callings (read: of course leaving beside suitability) paradoxically because of it’s calling to lowliness. It isn’t that it is lowest because of it’s highness.

In this sense the Papacy is higher than regular human thought would have understood, as regular human thought would insist that it is high because of it’s highness. But God informs us that it is high because of it’s lowness. God is greater than all, of course, yet He is not inferior to everyone because of His lowliness or highness, but higher because of his lowliness.

What does it mean to be “equal in dignity,” in practice?

In practise, equality in dignity would make itself known through an equal respect. But, I understand you are asking what the Church means by this rather than by application. It would be simplest to say that every person is worth as much as each other. There isn’t any human being that is worth more or worse less than any other.

“Women are naturally of a lower order” is not insulting. Why? If I went up to someone right now and told that person that they are “naturally of a lower order,” do you think they would feel insulted? Man or woman, I suspect that they would.

They might be, but yet they might also not understand what you are saying.

If a woman were married to Haron Monis (the Sydney hostage taker), would he be the head of the household? And what would that mean, exactly, in practice?

He would still have the calling to be the head of the household. Whether or not he chooses to abide by that calling. Whether he is a good person or an evil person or good at his role or bad at it, His role was given to him by God. It’s a difference of God’s intended role, not human dignity. Sin does not reduce human dignity it only offends it.

I have NEVER heard that unless a woman can be a man she is not equal. Ever. We’re equal because we’re thinking human beings.

We are equal because we are human beings. But I knew what you meant. The lie that society gives women is that unless they are given duties of men that they are not equal in dignity to men. This stems from the fundamental lack of respect and/or understanding of human dignity instead of because of it, as is the claim.

In this way it really isn’t uncommon to find women that are taught to feel that they are worth less when they find out that there are some things that men are given to do and women aren’t. This is actually quite a shallow thought, as roles don’t denote worth. There are some things that are given to women only to do, such as bear children and mother them. Men don’t usually feel inferior when they call this to mind as much as some modern women do when, for example, they learn that the priesthood has been given to men alone.

The reason for this will be down to the fact that men and women really do think differently and so will fall prey to different things. This mindset of society (and there are plenty more that affect only men) is principally geared to insult women. Relevant to what we are talking about, it is actually the men who have the prominent role to fight to protect the women from this insulting ideology - precisely because women are equal in dignity.

In short, all people are equal in dignity but in no other way. Some people are made taller, stronger, more handsome, more intelligent, wiser. Some are made to live long, others are made to live for a very short while. Some are made to be incredibly influential saints, some are made to be never-known saints. Some are made to be monks or nuns. Some are made to be priests, Bishops, Popes.

All in all, I’d gladly say that St Thomas Aquinas is far more intelligent than I am because I know that isn’t an insult to my human dignity. I’d gladly say that people that have been made to be priests have been given a superior role than someone that might have a call to be a layman. I’m not jelous of that, it’s all what God gives, yet He gives us all equal worth.

In the same way men are made to have a higher role. It’s the same, and doesn’t insult the dignity of women. If it weren’t for my politically correct indoctrination I probably would never have been made to think of it any differently than someone with a longer arm. I think many people are the same, as although there was genuine abuse of the dignity of women at certain times and in certain places in the past, the current way of thinking is still abusive, but something that seems to have never even affected humanity before.

 

[Bannan]

It’s interesting – there are so many posts on this forum about “rabid” feminism, and explanations of why it is not needed. But this is exactly the sort of thing that gives rise to that. Of course men and women are not the same – but they are equal.

How in the world would you deal with answering to a female supervisor in your job if you feel this way?

I wish I could emphasize the equal while still making my point, but no matter what I say about our equality, all that you see is me bashing women. Authority doesn’t make males superior, I don’t know how I could be more clear on that.

Sure, authority in a worldly sense where you work, authority might just mean someone is superior to you in the context of the corporate ladder. In the kingdom of God though, this is not so. Authority is a service, just as respect is a service. The family unit isn’t accounted in worldly terms because we are a mirror of Gods kingdom. We are more than the sum of our flesh. I don’t feel that talking about these issues is the cause of “rabid” feminism, I feel that not talking about these issues is partially to blame, as well as miscommunication in the few times we do. Like a famous priest once said, there are not 100 people who disagree with the Catholic Church’s teaching, but there are thousands who disagree with what they think the teaching truly is. Plus or minus a few words, my memory is vague.

Believe it or not, I recently had a female supervisor at work, and she was much more capable in her professional capacity than the male underlings in her care, myself included. I think of myself rather highly professionally, so that’s saying something. She left because she tried so hard her health was giving out, and I still miss having her around from time to time. Sometimes I felt her pursuits were too aggressive, but now that she’s gone, I can see how right she was on the few issues I ever disagreed with her on.

 

[gracepoole]

Easiest way to initially establish yourself as a (not the) spiritual leader in your family? Begin praying the rosary nightly as a family. Get down on your knees and lead the prayers. Show your children and wife what true spiritual leadership looks like, and show them that you have a deep, reverent respect for Christ’s mother, a simple woman.

 

[Bannan]

Easiest way to initially establish yourself as a (not the) spiritual leader in your family? Begin praying the rosary nightly as a family. Get down on your knees and lead the prayers. Show your children and wife what true spiritual leadership looks like, and show them that you have a deep, reverent respect for Christ’s mother, a simple woman.

I wish I had a like button for this. My children on earth are 2 and 3, and my wife is pregnant with our fourth. When I finish “leading” the rosary, everyone is sleeping

 

[gracepoole]

I wish I had a like button for this. My children on earth are 2 and 3, and my wife is pregnant with our fourth. When I finish “leading” the rosary, everyone is sleeping

Oh, thank you for sharing this! What a beautiful image. May God bless you and your family.

 

[Xantippe]

I think if we read submission as some sort of combination of respect and love, it gets way easier to understand how both spouses have a duty of submission. Otherwise, what does scripture mean by demanding mutual submission? Mutual obedience makes no sense, but mutual love and respect is much more workable. And respect is always an option–we can always be respectful, even when we can’t agree or obey.

I have to add that I sometimes get the feeling in these discussions that there’s a normal Bible and Catechism and a special wife’s Bible and Catechism. The normal Bible and Catechism are normal. The special wife’s Bible and Catechism only contain the “submission” verses (which covers what, a whole 1/4 or 1/2 page of text) and then there are hundreds of totally blank pages, because the only thing a wife needs to do is submit and submission trumps every other verse in the Bible. She doesn’t need to know anything more, because all she has to do is whatever her husband tells her to do. Oddly enough, none of us here got that special wife’s Bible or Catechism. We have the normal versions and believed (silly us) that other than an extra verse here or there, we have exactly the same moral obligations as a man would have and that we can’t dispense with our moral responsibilities by just handing it all off to our husbands and going with the, “I was just following orders” defense if he steers us wrong.

 

[Sarcelle]

I have heard of marriage vows where the woman promises to obey the man. I think the Anglican church has that type of vow.

The Catholic church however does not. Anyone knows why?

 

[Xantippe]

I have heard of marriage vows where the woman promises to obey the man. I think the Anglican church has that type of vow.

The Catholic church however does not. Anyone knows why?

Presumably because Catholics know that a wife shouldn’t always obey her husband.

Here’s a CAF apologist explaining what the appropriate vows are.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=565124

The CAF apologist gives two valid options for use in a Catholic wedding in the US:

“I, (name), take you, (name), to be my (husband/wife). 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.”

and

“I, (name), take you, (name), for my lawful (husband/wife), to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part.”

 

[Boccherini]

Sorry to change the subject, but what does this mean?

a) With due respect for the traditional role of the families in certain cultures in guiding the decision of their children, all pressure which would impede the choice of a specific person as spouse is to be avoided.

 

[MJJean]

Sorry to change the subject, but what does this mean?

It means that pressure from parents to marry a certain person should be avoided. For example, if I lived within a culture where arranged marriage was common my parents would be free to present me with possible spouses but should not place pressure on me to marry any particular one of them.

 

[Boccherini]

That’s what I thought at first, but it seems to be saying that parents shouldn’t pressure their child not to marry a specific person. Is it poorly translated?

 

[Bannan]

We have the normal versions and believed (silly us) that other than an extra verse here or there, we have exactly the same moral obligations as a man would have and that we can’t dispense with our moral responsibilities by just handing it all off to our husbands and going with the, “I was just following orders” defense if he steers us wrong.

I’ve been callous, contentious, and uncharitable. In all of my conversations regarding the faith I’ve frequently made a mess and nothing more. I fought so hard on this one because I was blessed with the free time to do so, and with the passion to try. My hope is that I’ve done somewhat more than just make a mess, but even for a quarter of one of God’s pages I’d do it again, even when I feel unworthy to address you women and even when I’m clearly inadequate to the task.

You know I’m not advocating you dispense with your moral responsibilities. Never dispense with your moral obligations, this doesn’t have to mean you have to “obey” your Husband any more than you already do. It’s entirely possible that there were plenty of times you should have corrected your Husband when you didn’t. The method you employ in your correction though, shouldn’t be an authoritative correction, it should be a loving one. I would take a guess that this is what you already do.

What I’m trying to get at is the core driver of how we operate in a family. You have an idea of what your family should look like on the surface, your a strong wife, independent, caring, intelligent, autonomous. All of these things are exceptional qualities to have and I’m lucky my wife has them as well.

But I want to take something that we rarely think about in any other way than subliminally and bring it to the surface, only for a little while, to show that while we are made equally, we are not uniform. I want to chide our culture. Many have forgotten the roles we are supposed to play in the family, as a culture, and I think that is something worth fighting for.

 

[LongingSoul]

That’s what I thought at first, but it seems to be saying that parents shouldn’t pressure their child not to marry a specific person. Is it poorly translated?

The emphasis is on 'impeding the choice’ one way or the other. The validity of sacramental marriage depends on the free choice experienced in consenting.

 

[Sarcelle]

I’ve been callous, contentious, and uncharitable. In all of my conversations regarding the faith I’ve frequently made a mess and nothing more. I fought so hard on this one because I was blessed with the free time to do so, and with the passion to try. My hope is that I’ve done somewhat more than just make a mess, but even for a quarter of one of God’s pages I’d do it again, even when I feel unworthy to address you women and even when I’m clearly inadequate to the task.

You know I’m not advocating you dispense with your moral responsibilities. Never dispense with your moral obligations, this doesn’t have to mean you have to “obey” your Husband any more than you already do. It’s entirely possible that there were plenty of times you should have corrected your Husband when you didn’t. The method you employ in your correction though, shouldn’t be an authoritative correction, it should be a loving one. I would take a guess that this is what you already do.

What I’m trying to get at is the core driver of how we operate in a family. You have an idea of what your family should look like on the surface, your a strong wife, independent, caring, intelligent, autonomous. All of these things are exceptional qualities to have and I’m lucky my wife has them as well.

But I want to take something that we rarely think about in any other way than subliminally and bring it to the surface, only for a little while, to show that while we are made equally, we are not uniform. I want to chide our culture. Many have forgotten the roles we are supposed to play in the family, as a culture, and I think that is something worth fighting for.

The issue of wifely submission has a lot of intellectual and emotional baggage that accompanies it.

I have read a lot of Protestant sources who run away with this concept and declare that women, single and married are to be under the authority of men at all times. Women are not supposed to be in any position of authority (no policewomen, politicians, judges, teachers), because the natural order is man first and then following the men, women and children. Women are to remain as perpetual minors and not adults in their own right.

This is why whenever the issue of wifely submission is brought up, an image of a wife telling her husband “You can think for me” comes to mind.

Now to the poster who I am quoting above, I certainly am not attributing the view I have just described above to you. However the issue of wifely submission can act as a lightning rod for people who have been mistreated due to a faulty understanding of this doctrine. Passions tend to run a little bit high.

 

[Bannan]

I sensed passions would run hot before I even started posting on the forum, and I think its a good sign that they did! Means us Catholics have strong women, and I’m proud of the women here who’ve gotten angry enough over my commentary to engage in the conversation with me, as I’ve learned a few things as well from our dialog.

For example, I’m not as logical as I thought I was. Thanks for leaving Spock out of this Xantippe, LOL!

 

[sailor28]

Bannan (and whoever else wants to chime in)

Can you share specifically how you being head of your wife/household played out in the last week? Or in general?

You can talk about all this theoretical practice but what happens when it comes down to day to day life and practice?

I’ve seen these discussion go round and round. For me, I’ve heard it all. In my marriage God is the head and my husband and I are partners, mutual submission and sacrifice goes a long way.

For the most part I believe men who focus on this type of theology have control issues. That may be a judgment but that is what I have concluded when I’ve seen the philosophy you talk about played out in real life.