"Wives submit to your husbands" and Catechism?

[ChiRho]

At any rate, I was not arguing with the idea of the wife being “under the mission” of her husband; I was simply stating that it is not correct to call that the definition of the word submission. ** I maintain that it is often explained that way because it is a more pleasant way to look at things** (if I’m under his mission, and his mission is to take care of me, I’m helping him help me, not making myself subject to him) than something along the lines of obedience. Again, I’m not saying the concept is wrong; just that it is not accurate to call that the definition of the word.

Precisely

 

[agapewolf]

I never said it was the definition of the word.

2nd, it is your perception that it is a more pleasant way of looking at things, as I said before. You are giving a mere vocabulary slant to what “under the mission” means. Practically, it can be very difficult. How exactly does one put herself under the mission? This can be an extremely difficult call, and in fact, possibly more so than just mere “obedience.” My perception of what it means is most definitely not easier than simple obedience.

 

[Sillara]

I never said it was the definition of the word.

2nd, it is your perception that it is a more pleasant way of looking at things, as I said before. You are giving a mere vocabulary slant to what “under the mission” means. Practically, it can be very difficult. How exactly does one put herself under the mission? This can be an extremely difficult call, and in fact, possibly more so than just mere “obedience.” My perception of what it means is most definitely not easier than simple obedience.

And what do you mean by “under the mission” that is more difficult than simple obedience? Obedience, after all, is a beautiful thing, and, though not complicated, it can often be quite difficult.

Maybe I’m just old-fashioned (my husband says I’m a 1250s kind of girl), but I do not see how obedience to one’s husband – except in matters of sin – could be anything other than good. St. Teresa of Avila, for example, was given orders by her superiors to do something (I think it was ignore her visions) which was both difficult and, given that the visions were from Our Lord, would have seemed to be the wrong thing to do. Later, however, Our Lord told her that it was then, during her period of difficult obedience to people who did not understand what was happening, that she pleased Him most. Obedience can be painful, especially to one’s pride, but it is a wholesome medicine. (Remember, I am not talking about obedience to an order to sin.)

 

[agapewolf]

And what do you mean by “under the mission” that is more difficult than simple obedience? Obedience, after all, is a beautiful thing, and, though not complicated, it can often be quite difficult.

Maybe I’m just old-fashioned (my husband says I’m a 1250s kind of girl), but I do not see how obedience to one’s husband – except in matters of sin – could be anything other than good. St. Teresa of Avila, for example, was given orders by her superiors to do something (I think it was ignore her visions) which was both difficult and, given that the visions were from Our Lord, would have seemed to be the wrong thing to do. Later, however, Our Lord told her that it was then, during her period of difficult obedience to people who did not understand what was happening, that she pleased Him most. Obedience can be painful, especially to one’s pride, but it is a wholesome medicine. (Remember, I am not talking about obedience to an order to sin.)

obedience to one’s spiritual director is completely different than obedience to a husband. And where in the world did you get that I said obedience was bad? I never said that, nor did I say it was easy.

 

[Sillara]

obedience to one’s spiritual director is completely different than obedience to a husband. And where in the world did you get that I said obedience was bad? I never said that, nor did I say it was easy.

Why would it necessarily be different? If the husband has authority over his wife, then she owes him obedience.

And I picked up, perhaps wrongly, the impression that you considered your interpretation of “being under the mission” of one’s husband as both superior to obedience and also more difficult. If that is not what you meant, please clarify it for me. I still do not understand what YOU mean by “being under the mission” of one’s husband.

 

[agapewolf]

Why would it necessarily be different? If the husband has authority over his wife, then she owes him obedience.

And I picked up, perhaps wrongly, the impression that you considered your interpretation of “being under the mission” of one’s husband as both superior to obedience and also more difficult. If that is not what you meant, please clarify it for me. I still do not understand what YOU mean by “being under the mission” of one’s husband.

I did say it could be more difficult than obedience…that doesn’t lessen the difficulty of being obedient.

religious actually vow to obedience to their superiors. Wives do not. When a religious superior gives direction, they are meant to be obeyed without question, discussion, or hesitation. This is most definitely NOT true of a married couple. In fact, it can be helpful for the wife to nurture and aid in decision making.

There is a lot of word twisting going on here and assumptions being made without really reading what I’m saying.

 

[Sillara]

There is a lot of word twisting going on here and assumptions being made without really reading what I’m saying.

Please do explain, then, what you DO mean. What does being “under the mission” of one’s husband mean? How is that different from obedience? How is it more difficult than obedience?

(And “obey” was in my marriage vows, for the record.)

 

[agapewolf]

Please do explain, then, what you DO mean. What does being “under the mission” of one’s husband mean? How is that different from obedience? How is it more difficult than obedience?

(And “obey” was in my marriage vows, for the record.)

Obey has never been in any Catholic marriage vows. It certainly isn’t in the 2 options today.

 

[Sillara]

Obey has never been in any Catholic marriage vows. It certainly isn’t in the 2 options today.

First of all, it is a bit presumptuous to say it has “never” been in Catholic vows. Catholic vows have been around for about 2,000 years.

Secondly, I am a convert, as is my husband. We were married in the Book of Common Prayer form. The one that goes like this:

M. WILT thou have this Woman to thy wedded Wife, to live together after God’s ordinance in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou love her, comfort her, honour, and keep her in sickness and in health; and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto her, so long as ye both shall live?

The Man shall answer, I will.

Then shall the Priest say unto the Woman,

N. WILT thou have this Man to thy wedded Husband, to live together after God’s ordinance in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou obey him, and serve him, love, honour, and keep him in sickness and in health; and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto him, so long as ye both shall live?

The Woman shall answer, I will.


Anyway, I really do want to know what you mean by “under the mission”. I have asked three or four times now. I ask because this something I have OFTEN heard in Protestant circles but rarely in Catholic ones.

 

[agapewolf]

First of all, it is a bit presumptuous to say it has “never” been in Catholic vows. Catholic vows have been around for about 2,000 years.

Secondly, I am a convert, as is my husband. We were married in the Book of Common Prayer form. The one that goes like this:

M. WILT thou have this Woman to thy wedded Wife, to live together after God’s ordinance in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou love her, comfort her, honour, and keep her in sickness and in health; and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto her, so long as ye both shall live?

The Man shall answer, I will.

Then shall the Priest say unto the Woman,

N. WILT thou have this Man to thy wedded Husband, to live together after God’s ordinance in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou obey him, and serve him, love, honour, and keep him in sickness and in health; and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto him, so long as ye both shall live?

The Woman shall answer, I will.


Anyway, I really do want to know what you mean by “under the mission”. I have asked three or four times now. I ask because this something I have OFTEN heard in Protestant circles but rarely in Catholic ones.

but being married in the Catholic church does not include such a promise.

What it means probably cannot be specified too much. Each couple is different. As I said earlier, aiding and nurturing decision making is definitely one way.

 

[Sillara]

What it means probably cannot be specified too much. Each couple is different. As I said earlier, aiding and nurturing decision making is definitely one way.

Aiding and nurturing decision making – how does that play out in your marriage? What does that mean in your experience? For example, I DO obey my husband. However, he respects my opinion sufficiently to ask what it is. I tell him; I tell him why I think what I do. In the end, however, the responsibility for the decision is his, and I abide by his choice. I do not complain about it, nor do I say “I told you so” if it does not work out. Once the decision is made, it is over.

 

[Serap]

I don’t submit to my husband. I have my own mind and ability to make decisions.

If my husband is angry (or putting his foot down) about something, I then assess, “is it worth it for me to fight this battle? How important is it to me?” If it’s not that important, then I let my husband have his way. If something is very important to me, I won’t back down…no way! I am not my husband’s servant and it’s not a father/daughter relationship.

This is what Pope JP II summed up in Letter to Women. I again recommend to read it.

 

[severus68]

I don’t submit to my husband. I have my own mind and ability to make decisions.

If my husband is angry (or putting his foot down) about something, I then assess, “is it worth it for me to fight this battle? How important is it to me?” If it’s not that important, then I let my husband have his way. If something is very important to me, I won’t back down…no way! I am not my husband’s servant and it’s not a father/daughter relationship.

This is what Pope JP II summed up in Letter to Women. I again recommend to read it.

I like what you say above. Marriage is a partnership and about give and take.

 

[ac_claire]

Simply because a word can be broken down into two parts, and each part have a meaning, does not mean that the word put together has the same meaning. The sum is greater than its parts, in other words. It might help to understand the origin of the word, but this shouldn’t take place of the actual meaning. In no dictionary I’ve checked does “submit” translate to “be under the mission”. Furthermore, it comes from the Latin “submittere”. Sub: to place under, mittere: to send.

I have seen the “submission= under the husband’s mission” idea de-bunked a couple of times here on CAF. I can do a search to find the specific thread(s) if anyone wants to see it.

Also, the idea that wives also should obey their husbands is in the Bible, in the OT and NT. Again…this has been posted about in multiple threads but I’d be happy to pull the info up if anyone wants to see it.

 

[rdscheirer]

Don’t know if this has been offered but Adam was tasked with the protection of the GARDEN and of Eve and when he failed- all hell broke loose- we talk about Eve and the serpent but it is really Adam who did not follow God’s command to protect.

 

[ac_claire]

I like what you say above. Marriage is a partnership and about give and take.

It is. But wives are still called to submit to their husbands. HOWEVER you interpret that lol. I interpreted that one way before I got married…once I actually was married, I realized how very, very difficult a thing it is to do. The wife’s role and husband’s role are both extremely difficult and involve giving of ourselves…to a degree, they both involve “dying” to ourselves for the sake of the other. For wives, that can mean submitting our own will, when appropriate, to that of our husband.

 

[ac_claire]

Here’s the verse that uses the word obey. I think there might be a second one, in Peter, but I’ll have to check. This is Titus 2:5

"3 The aged women, in like manner, in holy attire, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teaching well: 4 That they may teach the young women to be wise, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, sober, having a care of the house, gentle, obedient to their husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed

."

 

[rusty20]

What is submission, or obedience, or whatever term you wanna use?

If you ask the average married man in America, he would probably say that, more often than not, HE is the one doing the submitting to the will of the wife. Most men will tell you that the woman in their lives is the one who is really ‘in charge.’

Are these biblical verses really meant to establish a gendered hierarchy within all marriages? Or is it perhaps more realistic to look at the verses in their context, and look at all marriage verses together (instead of just one line) and call marriage a partnership of equals?

All this talk of submission makes me think of a pre-feminist world. (I’m thinking before the ‘good’ feminism which worked for true equality, not this new radical feminism.)

 

[beafedor]

What is submission, or obedience, or whatever term you wanna use?

If you ask the average married man in America, he would probably say that, more often than not, HE is the one doing the submitting to the will of the wife. Most men will tell you that the woman in their lives is the one who is really ‘in charge.’

Are these biblical verses really meant to establish a gendered hierarchy within all marriages? Or is it perhaps more realistic to look at the verses in their context, and look at all marriage verses together (instead of just one line) and call marriage a partnership of equals?

All this talk of submission makes me think of a pre-feminist world. (I’m thinking before the ‘good’ feminism which worked for true equality, not this new radical feminism.)

Rusty and all, thanks for your replies. My husband honestly thought that the 2 verses I mentioned in the original post are to be taken literally and justify a controlling or tyrannic attitude. Please don’t judge him, we all have preconceived ideas on different subjects. Young people are not taught what marriage is. We went through Engaged Encounter, have been in Bible studies and read the lives of the Saints but we are just human and our preconceived ideas sometimes dominates on the rest. Thanks for helping us clarify what it means to be married and God Bless You All.

Rusty just a thought: isn’t it very feminist of God to choose to exalt Mary, a woman, a virgin mother and a wife whom all generations are still calling Blessed and revere as the Mother of God? and what about Jesus on the Cross giving Mary to us all as our Mother?
There are also many women in the old and new testament who are example of faith, perseverance, courage: Ruth, Judith, Esther, Susanna, Mary Magdalene, Lydia…
And what about us the Church being the Bride of Christ?

 

[LemonAndLime]

I will never submit to nor obey my future husband, no matter who he is.

I’m not some meek woman walking around with her eyes lowered. If I got married, it would be because I believe in a partnership of equals. Different, but equal.

Besides, if I got married to my current boyfriend, it would definately be equal. My strengths are in common sense, being calm when all else is chaos… yet I’m also impulsive. He considers things more before making a decision (therefore “grounds” me, if you know what I mean), he’s also got a good helping of common sense and he’s much more laid back than me (while I like control too much). We compliment each other.

However, if he told me I had to obey/submit to him… where does that leave me in the marriage? Does that mean he knows best just because, to be blunt, he has different genitals and hormones to me? Does that mean I am devalued as a woman? Does that mean my brain power is considered to be less?