Wives, Submit to your own husbands as to the Lord

[severus68]

I’m so sorry you can’t accept this, severus. Not sure what else anyone can say since your mind seems to be made up and you’d evidently rather believe your own ideas than the truth.

The Church would agree with this except for the part about the only difference between men and women being woman’s ability to bear children.

I’m glad you posted from Mulieris Dignitatem…it’s a great letter. But the paragraphs you just posted don’t back up your denial of the Church’s teachings on marriage, which haven’t ever fundamentally changed.

I’ll post another passage from the same letter. (The entire document can be found here: Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem.)

There is a big difference between you and I. This is not an issue of God’s eternal truth. While I can accept that others may differ in their views,you don’t.

The passage you have posted does not say what you are saying it does.Kindly read “the rightful opposition…” onwards. Please do not be presumptious, I have read the entire letter and more.

 

[severus68]

*Sometimes I wonder, and this may be ‘‘daring’’ to put it this way…but if you can’t submit to your husband, it might not mean that you don’t like the verse, or think of it in a negative way–but submit and trust go hand in hand (to me) Maybe if a woman can’t submit to her husband, it’s because she doesn’t fully trust him to make good decisions, for the betterment of her and the family. When we submit,we are in essence telling our spouses…I trust you to make wise decisions. But, if we can’t submit, I think it shows that either a) the husband isn’t fit to be trusted, that could be true but maybe more than b) we just have an issue with completely trusting our husband’s judgement.

Again, my dh doesn’t take it upon himself to go out, make decisions that affect the entire family, without a discussion with me. That’s just rude. If you’re married to that type of man, my sympathies. That’s not what the verse means…what it means is that we should build our husbands up as faithful wives, to being the best man they can be. Men can’t do it alone. They need us. See? It’s really a beautiful verse, to submit…when we as wives submit…we are telling our husbands we trust them…and this SHOULD cause a harmonious marriage. It doesn’t diminish our worth, it actually augments it.

PS–This doesn’t mean women shouldn’t pursue educations, or careers…but we always should put our families before ourselves. God calls us all to live out our roles differently, but still…submission is more about being a trusting wife than anything else, in my eyes. Trusting your husband to do the right thing…if you can’t do that, you might have to take an inventory of why.*

I am sorry but that is not the issue to me and perhaps many othere. If you are responding to me, I am not married to any man.. Again it is my sincere belief that that is not the meaning the Church takes today.

 

[whatevergirl]

Your husband has a serious psychological condition, and should be under the care of a mental health professional. This is no joking matter. That show on television is a comedy, but I find nothing about this real-life situation that is comedic.

If one spouse has diminished mental capacity, then the other spouse should be in charge. If that other spouse is you, then you should be the one in charge of this family, until your husband can begin acting in a sane, logical manner.

I recommend you take him to see a psychologist, or some other person who can help him. And if your husband begins issuing orders or commands, that endanger the health or safety of your children, you should ignore them, and do what is best.

*I agree with this, in a general sense, also. If one’s husband is not functioning mentally, etc at his best, a wife needs to be making the decisions…

I really don’t think Christ meant for this statement to get so complicated. I think He figured we wouldn’t assume that He meant ‘be submissive at all costs.’ *

 

[severus68]

Please forgive me if my above post seemed even remotely insulting…was not my intent. I’m not attempting to tell women who interpret the verse differently than its intent, that they don’t trust their husbands…but,* something ***is causing the tripping up of that verse. Could be our culture. Our culture really puts men down, sadly. I think if we want to be real about that, as women, we have to deep down admit that we can’t always tune that message out. But, we have to fight against the temptation to compete with our mates. Two people can lead together, but there will still be one who makes the final call on something.

In companies, there are not two CEO’s…there’s one. But, he/she might have a strong partner at the top with him/her, to help whether the storms, and make decisions. That is what a wife should do…I was a wife who used to compete with my husband…I no longer do, and our marriage is 1000% better for it.

You just gotta trust me, here.

You are forgiven..Its not about competition, it is about Christ’s message. by the way the CEO heads the company, there is no one above him/her.

It is not a matter of trust. Men and women should be careful about who they marry, there should be common values. That, to me, will bring about better marriages.

 

[whatevergirl]

I am sorry but that is not the issue to me and perhaps many othere. If you are responding to me, I am not married to any man.. Again it is my sincere belief that that is not the meaning the Church takes today.

*Hi again–I’m curious as to why you feel that way…there are many difficult passages to swallow…is this the only one that you feel doesn’t pertain to modern times? *

 

[rwillenborg]

*Aw, that is rather sweet though…in a way, I can relate to your hubby…I’m a germaphobe. But, your husband wasn’t acting in a way to hurt you…he was acting in a way to help the family. His intentions were not selfish…his intentions could have been God-centered, even. I think in some ways, noble.

I think that common sense has to take shape in a marriage, and if a woman truly feels like her husband is leading her a) away from God and His Church b) trying to harm her or the kids c) down a dark path (this can be a number of things) basically, she has to really ask herself…is this how Christ would treat me? Christ wouldn’t hit women, or belittle them…or cause them pain. So…if a husband is doing those things…then he isn’t following Christ. No the passage does not say…wives be submissive ONLY when your husband is making wise decisions…but we should never place our husbands before Christ. That’s how I view it. If my husband were not following the Lord, and wishing me to still be submissive, I couldn’t, see, because I would be placing my husband before God. That’s how I see it, anyways. In the case that you mention, you didn’t have to listen to your husband, I guess…but, truly, I think he was just acting in your and your baby’s best interest…while at the time it might have seemed an off the wall request, he still had your best interests at heart.

I also think that we as partners to our husbands…are here to help them. If my husband had an unhealthy habit, or a problem with a certain sin…it would be wrong of me to not try to help him heal. Being submissive doesn’t mean that we allow our husbands to hurt themselves, also. If my husband say had a bad drinking problem or something, I wouldn’t stand by and just let him drink himself to death…as his wife, I also want to look out for his best interests. Being submissive also doesn’t mean we stand by and watch our husbands derail their lives and ours.

I think we could run through thousands of scenarios…but truthfully, I have a husband that has always liked consulting me on most things. Not every decision that he needs to make…but this is just our way together. He 'has never bossed me around, or made me feel like if I don’t agree with every decision he makes, that I’m somehow a ‘‘bad wife.’’ Love is about sacrifice, he sacrifices for me, and I for him. If two people place God first, and then each other second, I think most marriages would be successful. Not without its bad days, but you just keep striving to serve each other. I think that if a husband loves his wife, he will want her opinion on things because he values her. I can’t imagine being with someone all these years who never consulted me on anything, or didn’t ever ask me what I thought about something. Submissive doesn’t mean invisible.

So…Did you not go out for the 6 months, then? *

You are absolutely right in that I was certain he was looking out for me and the kids. He’s got a heart that’s bigger than Texas. I never viewed this as an attempt at unkindness. Me and the kids mean everything to him. All he wants is our happiness. He just struggles with certain things, that’s all.
That said, I lasted two days without leaving the house. I just couldn’t stand to be all caged up! SO miserable!! He knows when he’s making crazy requests. I think he just throws them out there anyway to see if they stick.

 

[rwillenborg]

Your husband has a serious psychological condition, and should be under the care of a mental health professional. This is no joking matter. That show on television is a comedy, but I find nothing about this real-life situation that is comedic.

If one spouse has diminished mental capacity, then the other spouse should be in charge. If that other spouse is you, then you should be the one in charge of this family, until your husband can begin acting in a sane, logical manner.

I recommend you take him to see a psychologist, or some other person who can help him. And if your husband begins issuing orders or commands, that endanger the health or safety of your children, you should ignore them, and do what is best.

Thank you for the advice. I do appreciate it. We laugh about it, because otherwise we’d cry. Listen, I live with him. I’m ALL TOO aware of what a serious condition it can be. Most of the time, I don’t worry about it. Most of the time, he’s got it under control. I think it was the stress of the birth of the girls that just freaked him out for a minute. He’s come around.

This is a daily struggle for him, too. I know when it’s his fears talking, and when it’s him, and I just filter out what’s what.

My point in posting all of that though was just to say that the passage makes no exceptions for a husband in a ‘diminished mental capacity’. The verse very clearly states that a wife is to submit to her husband IN EVERYTHING. No exception, no ‘well, he’s not well, so maybe you should take over’.
That’s what troubles me. And I, as a wife, am to submit to my husband as the Lord. That’s where I have a problem. I can trust EVERYTHING that comes from the Lord. That is not the case with my husband, yet the Bible commands me to do so anyway.
People say ‘Well, obviously, THIS would be an exception’ but I think the verse says quite the opposite. It is very specific ‘in everything’, I am to submit to my husband as if he were Christ, and I PROMISE you, if Christ issued some crazy order, I’d do it. Because I know HE doesn’t make mistakes. So, why am I being asked to put as much faith in my husband, who does and will make mistakes? Again, I’m just going back to what the text actually SAYS.

 

[severus68]

*Hi again–I’m curious as to why you feel that way…there are many difficult passages to swallow…is this the only one that you feel doesn’t pertain to modern times? *

You misunderstand. It is not about difficulty in swallowing this message, it is difficulty in swallowing your meaning of it. For instance, Christ did say much to many for example for one to be like a child to enter the kingdom of God. I accept and understand that and though it is hard, would try to follow. Your meaning of the passage is not I believe the correct meaning and neither is it the meaning given to it by the RCC.

 

[whatevergirl]

But, I am following Church interpretation of the passage–that we as husbands and wives are to love each other with MUTUAL love and respect, the way Christ so loved and served the Church. Albeit, the method of delivering this, is commanded differently by Christ to husbands and wives…but both achieve the same goal…that of MUTUAL love and respect. With all due respect, what am I (and others here) missing?

 

[rwillenborg]

But, I am following Church interpretation of the passage–that we as husbands and wives are to love each other with MUTUAL love and respect, the way Christ so loved and served the Church. Albeit, the method of delivering this, is commanded differently by Christ to husbands and wives…but both achieve the same goal…that of MUTUAL love and respect. With all due respect, what am I (and others here) missing?

Ha! I was thinking the same thing myself.What am *I missing?
Everyone seems to read the passage one way but I’m just not seeing it!
I wonder if there’s any reflection on this passage from ECF or pjp 2 that talks about this passage in depth??

 

[Angelo_Michael]

A parody:

Now Paul was more persuasive than the other apostles and he, along with Peter, said unto the women, “Yea, hath Christ said, we shall not be called, ‘Master’?” And the women remained silent, even as they were [forcibly] ordered to do. (Yet the truth remains that Christ indeed forbade it.) And they went on to say, “In requesting that you submit unto us as, ‘Lord’, and ‘Master’, we do not sin: For only then will you will be like the favored and respectful women of old; and also ye should be silent even as you are now.” And, when the women saw that they were despised, some submitted to the demand.

of Genesis 3:1-6:
“Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.”

 

[ac_claire]

But, I am following Church interpretation of the passage–that we as husbands and wives are to love each other with MUTUAL love and respect, the way Christ so loved and served the Church. Albeit, the method of delivering this, is commanded differently by Christ to husbands and wives…but both achieve the same goal…that of MUTUAL love and respect. With all due respect, what am I (and others here) missing?

You’re not missing anything at all. Severus68 has declared in post 225 that his/her interpretation of Ephesians 5 is the correct one, and the Church’s interpretation is incorrect. So you see the larger issue here.

Ha! I was thinking the same thing myself.What am *I missing? Everyone seems to read the passage one way but I’m just not seeing it! I wonder if there’s any reflection on this passage from ECF or pjp 2 that talks about this passage in depth??

There’s been several already mentioned in this thread. Try this for a starter: Scripture Catholic - The Husband as Head of the Family. The first part just lists the Scripture verses that we’ve all been talking about. Scroll down to the ECF’s excerpts.

If you have some time, this link that buffalo posted is also very good, although lengthy!:

THE AUTHORITY OF THE HUSBAND ACCORDING TO THE MAGISTERIUM

 

[severus68]

But, I am following Church interpretation of the passage–that we as husbands and wives are to love each other with MUTUAL love and respect, the way Christ so loved and served the Church. Albeit, the method of delivering this, is commanded differently by Christ to husbands and wives…but both achieve the same goal…that of MUTUAL love and respect. With all due respect, what am I (and others here) missing?

I have absolutely no issue with mutual love and respect and yes that is what the Church teaches. I believe you said rather more than that about the passage.

Wiith regard o trust, it should be mutial trust too. If both love, repect and trust each other, it would be a wonderful marriage with discussions of issues and mutual decisions made

 

[whatevergirl]

I have absolutely no issue with mutual love and respect and yes that is what the Church teaches. I believe you said rather more than that about the passage.

Wiith regard o trust, it should be mutial trust too. If both love, repect and trust each other, it would be a wonderful marriage with discussions of issues and mutual decisions made

*I don’t disagree…I think we agree with things more than disagree, to be honest. *

 

[ac_claire]

But, I am following Church interpretation of the passage–that we as husbands and wives are to love each other with MUTUAL love and respect, the way Christ so loved and served the Church. Albeit, the method of delivering this, is commanded differently by Christ to husbands and wives…but both achieve the same goal…that of MUTUAL love and respect. With all due respect, what am I (and others here) missing?

You’re not missing anything at all. Severus68 has declared in post 225 that his/her interpretation of Ephesians 5 is the correct one, and the Church’s interpretation is incorrect. So you see the larger issue here.

Ha! I was thinking the same thing myself.What am *I missing? Everyone seems to read the passage one way but I’m just not seeing it! I wonder if there’s any reflection on this passage from ECF or pjp 2 that talks about this passage in depth??

There’s been several already mentioned in this thread. Try this for a starter: Scripture Catholic - The Husband as Head of the Family. The first part just lists the Scripture verses that we’ve all been talking about. Scroll down to the ECF’s excerpts.

If you have some time, this link that buffalo posted is also very good, although lengthy!:

THE AUTHORITY OF THE HUSBAND ACCORDING TO THE MAGISTERIUM

 

[Shin]

Husbands and wives have standards and roles in the world and in regard to each other that overlap to a certain degree.

Sometimes exceptions happen that override these standards, but these are exceptions that do not erase the standards but only override in their particular exception and case.

This would be for example, the case of a husband being incapacitated, or incompetent to assume his role, or issuing sinful or proximately sinful decisions, etc.

The husband has the greater authority, but both submit to each other to a degree. One simply shows more submission than the other because that is the role most fitting to the gender.

Many times God makes people who are intellectually slow and poorly educated into saints and leaders and apostles. St. Peter was a fisherman, not a prince, but God turned him into a great leader.

So, even if a wife is intellectually superior to her husband there is still the role of helper, and she must help as best she can. And if he is spiritually guided by God, sometimes he will listen and sometimes he won’t, and his decisions in both cases will be right, rather than wrong, for the time.

If instead a wife who is more intelligent than her husband despises him and his authority entirely and takes over the head of the family – there being no other extenuating cause, the family will be disordered and spiritually there will be grave problems.

A strong willed woman can easily do this, with a weak willed husband, whose will she needs to strengthen with her gifts, not overwhelm.

Someone who helps builds the other person up. A husband is there to build up his wife and his wife her husband, they are there to take care of one another, but the roles are still different if overlapping. One helps more, one leads more.

We must not think in terms of pride, we have to toss pride out of it and see the good of each role as essential.

A kingdom can be lost for want of a single nail.

 

[severus68]

*I don’t disagree…I think we agree with things more than disagree, to be honest. *

It appears we do.

 

[whatevergirl]

Husbands and wives have standards and roles in the world and in regard to each other that overlap to a certain degree.

Sometimes exceptions happen that override these standards, but these are exceptions that do not erase the standards but only override in their particular exception and case.

This would be for example, the case of a husband being incapacitated, or incompetent to assume his role, or issuing sinful or proximately sinful decisions, etc.

The husband has the greater authority, but both submit to each other to a degree. One simply shows more submission than the other because that is the role most fitting to the gender.

Many times God makes people who are intellectually slow and poorly educated into saints and leaders and apostles. St. Peter was a fisherman, not a prince, but God turned him into a great leader.

So, even if a wife is intellectually superior to her husband there is still the role of helper, and she must help as best she can. And if he is spiritually guided by God, sometimes he will listen and sometimes he won’t, and his decisions in both cases will be right, rather than wrong, for the time.

If instead a wife who is more intelligent than her husband despises him and his authority entirely and takes over the head of the family – there being no other extenuating cause, the family will be disordered and spiritually there will be grave problems.

A strong willed woman can easily do this, with a weak willed husband, whose will she needs to strengthen with her gifts, not overwhelm.

Someone who helps builds the other person up. A husband is there to build up his wife and his wife her husband, they are there to take care of one another, but the roles are still different if overlapping. One helps more, one leads more.

We must not think in terms of pride, we have to toss pride out of it and see the good of each role as essential.

A kingdom can be lost for want of a single nail.

Great post! Well stated.

 

[rwillenborg]

Husbands and wives have standards and roles in the world and in regard to each other that overlap to a certain degree.

Sometimes exceptions happen that override these standards, but these are exceptions that do not erase the standards but only override in their particular exception and case.

This would be for example, the case of a husband being incapacitated, or incompetent to assume his role, or issuing sinful or proximately sinful decisions, etc.

The husband has the greater authority, but both submit to each other to a degree. One simply shows more submission than the other because that is the role most fitting to the gender.

Many times God makes people who are intellectually slow and poorly educated into saints and leaders and apostles. St. Peter was a fisherman, not a prince, but God turned him into a great leader.

So, even if a wife is intellectually superior to her husband there is still the role of helper, and she must help as best she can. And if he is spiritually guided by God, sometimes he will listen and sometimes he won’t, and his decisions in both cases will be right, rather than wrong, for the time.

If instead a wife who is more intelligent than her husband despises him and his authority entirely and takes over the head of the family – there being no other extenuating cause, the family will be disordered and spiritually there will be grave problems.

A strong willed woman can easily do this, with a weak willed husband, whose will she needs to strengthen with her gifts, not overwhelm.

Someone who helps builds the other person up. A husband is there to build up his wife and his wife her husband, they are there to take care of one another, but the roles are still different if overlapping. One helps more, one leads more.

We must not think in terms of pride, we have to toss pride out of it and see the good of each role as essential.

A kingdom can be lost for want of a single nail.

How does this make any sense? How do you strengthen someone ELSE’s will? Isn’t that the other person’s decision? What you are saying here is not that both submit to eachother. You are saying that the wife submits to the husband, even if he is wrong. How is this good for any member of the family? How does it serve the husband if his bad ideas are told they are good ones? Isn’t that simply dishonest? How does it serve the wife or children to follow orders they know to be bad?

 

[rwillenborg]

You’re not missing anything at all. Severus68 has declared in post 225 that his/her interpretation of Ephesians 5 is the correct one, and the Church’s interpretation is incorrect. So you see the larger issue here.

There’s been several already mentioned in this thread. Try this for a starter: Scripture Catholic - The Husband as Head of the Family. The first part just lists the Scripture verses that we’ve all been talking about. Scroll down to the ECF’s excerpts.

If you have some time, this link that buffalo posted is also very good, although lengthy!:

Thank you ac. I read the ones earlier in this thread, though I must have missed Buffalo’s. But all I keep seing in them is that women are to submi to their husband’s to boost his ego, and I was hoping there was SOMETHING, ANYTHING that didn’t suggest that a wife’s only roll is to puff up her husband. I keepreading this stuff and I get the impression that the wife is ther to say ‘Oh, husband, you are so wise!’ even when he’s not.
OH well.
Back to the drawing board for me.
I’ll find some time to read buffalo’s linnk. Thank you for bringing that to my attention.