Wives, Submit to your own husbands as to the Lord

[Lost_Lamb]

Don’t forget the part about husbands loving their wives just as Christ loved the Church.

As far as I learned, that meant that while the husband is “the head” of the household, he still listens to his wife. Christ loved the Church enough to put His life on the line, and husbands are told to do the same for their wives. That doesn’t really sound like the wife should be a doormat to me.

 

[ac_claire]

Don’t forget the part about husbands loving their wives just as Christ loved the Church.

LOL nobody has forgotten! How could we, this is maybe the 20th post in this thread alone that’s made that point. But it is of course a good point.

 

[ac_claire]

Don’t forget the part about husbands loving their wives just as Christ loved the Church.

LOL nobody has forgotten! How could we, this is maybe the 20th post in this thread alone that’s made that point. But it is of course a good point.

(btw- I love the nice Irish names you gave your kids!)

 

[mrpathetic]

LOL nobody has forgotten! How could we, this is maybe the 20th post in this thread alone that’s made that point. But it is of course a good point.

(btw- I love the nice Irish names you gave your kids!)

That is why you need to read Scripture passages in toto, and interpet them as such. That is why you need to ready the whole of Scriptures, not just parts of them. (Read Dei Verbum, if you want to know how Catholics should read and interpret Scriptures.)

Plenty of men probably ready down to verse 22, and stop - and never get to verse 25. Nor do they understand what verse 25 really means. It means that you must be willing to be crucified for your family. Christ gave everything for His bride - the Church. Husbands in Christian marriages are called on to do the same. You have to be willing to give it all - mind, body, and soul.

Now, very few men will be asked to be nailed to a tree for their family. But they may need to get up at 3 A.M. in the morning to change diapers. Or clean up vomit on the floor, after your child has a nausea episode. Or track down their daughter, after she runs off with a bad boyfriend. Or fork over the cash, so that your adult child can start their own business. Or go to work a few days after back surgery, and you are still in excrutiating pain. And on and on and on and on. It never ends - so long as your child is on earth, and so are you.

Do most Christian men get this, when they are first married, and have their first child? Probably not. But if you spend 10, 15, 20 years as a husband and father, and make the sacrifices that the position entails - you’ll understand.

 

[severus68]

*I think the problem that some of you are having with the verse, is that you reading it to mean that a woman can’t be ‘herself’ anymore, once she is married. That is not true. When two marry, they become one flesh. They make decisions together, but the man of the relationship has a responsibility to his wife, and the wife to her husband. It doesn’t mean she loses her identity, or is treated like an endentured servant. lol She submits to better the marriage, and to do what is best for the marriage…but she doesn’t lose who she is as an individual. She doesn’t lose her uniqueness. Any man who wishes his wife to lose who she is as an individual, misinterprets the passage, also.

Simply put in modern terms, God doesn’t want us competing with one another in marriage. My husband’s role is different than mine. I can’t be a husband, and he can’t be a wife. We are a team, I think…but I do trust in him with decisions. This SHOULD bolster the relationshp, but in many marriages, the passage is misinterpreted, and bullying and abusive men think the passage gives them license to be cruel to their wives.

Jesus stooped down to wash His Apostles feet! We are called to do the same. Men are called to respect and love their wives as Jesus loved the Church. We don’t place our husbands before God, however. If my husband were to be leading the family down a dark path, I wouldn’t submit to this. I wouldn’t stray from God, and His teachings, to please my husband. We are not to put our husbands before God. That is the key, here. In the partnership of marriage, a wife and husband are trying to help one another to heaven. Their respective roles are pleasing* to God.

Thank you for putting forward your views in a non offensive, charitable manner. I do agree with a lot of what you have said here. However, with repect I have issues with your first and second last sentences of you 1st paragraph.

I do not believe submission of the wife to her husband is required in a Christian marriage. I do believe that that view will and is used to justify dominance by husbands, and why not ,if they are told that their wives should submit to them and that they must lead their wives to salvation.

I do agree that marriage should not be a competition and it should be a partnership. I Women and men are equal but different physiologically. Only women can bear children and thus should be the only difference in their roles. I do believe in mutual reverence and in both submitting to God.

I have referred to commentaries on those passages partly on which my view is based and I have been told that these are wrong. Below is a passage from what was wriiten by the late Pope John Paul II in 1988.

"The author of the Letter to the Ephesians sees no contradiction between an exhortation formulated in this way and the words: “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife” (5:22-23). The author knows that this way of speaking, so profoundly rooted in the customs and religious tradition of the time, is to be understood and carried out in a new way: as a “mutual subjection out of reverence for Christ” (cf. Eph 5:21). This is especially true because the husband is called the “head” of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church; he is so in order to give “himself up for her” (Eph 5:25), and giving himself up for her means giving up even his own life. However, whereas in the relationship between Christ and the Church the subjection is only on the part of the Church, in the relationship between husband and wife the “subjection” is not one-sided but mutual.

In relation to the “old” this is evidently something “new”: it is an innovation of the Gospel. We find various passages in which the apostolic writings express this innovation, even though they also communicate what is “old”: what is rooted in the religious tradition of Israel, in its way of understanding and explaining the sacred texts, as for example the second chapter of the Book of Genesis.49

The apostolic letters are addressed to people living in an environment marked by that same traditional way of thinking and acting. The “innovation” of Christ is a fact: it constitutes the unambiguous content of the evangelical message and is the result of the Redemption. However, the awareness that in marriage there is mutual “subjection of the spouses out of reverence for Christ”, and not just that of the wife to the husband, must gradually establish itself in hearts, consciences, behaviour and customs. This is a call which from that time onwards, does not cease to challenge succeeding generations; it is a call which people have to accept ever anew. Saint Paul not only wrote: “In Christ Jesus… there is no more man or woman”, but also wrote: “There is no more slave or freeman”. Yet how many generations were needed for such a principle to be realized in the history of humanity through the abolition of slavery! And what is one to say of the many forms of slavery to which individuals and peoples are subjected, which have not yet disappeared from history?"

APOSTOLIC LETTER
MULIERIS DIGNITATEM
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
JOHN PAUL II
ON THE
DIGNITY AND VOCATION
OF WOMEN
ON THE OCCASION
OF THE MARIAN YEAR

“Given in Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on 15 August, the Solemnity of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in the year 1988, the tenth of my Pontificate.”

Thank you.

 

[ac_claire]

I do not believe submission of the wife to her husband is required in a Christian marriage.

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.

I do agree that marriage should not be a competition and it should be a partnership. I Women and men are equal but different physiologically. Only women can bear children and thus should be the only difference in their roles. I do believe in mutual reverence and in both submitting to God.

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 have referred to commentaries on those passages partly on which my view is based and I have been told that these are wrong. Below is a passage from what was wriiten by the late Pope John Paul II in 1988.

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.)

In our times the question of “women’s rights” has taken on new significance in the broad context of the rights of the human person. The biblical and evangelical message sheds light on this cause, which is the object of much attention today, by safeguarding the truth about the “unity” of the “two”, that is to say the truth about that dignity and vocation that result from the specific diversity and personal originality of man and woman. Consequently, even the rightful opposition of women to what is expressed in the biblical words “He shall rule over you” (Gen 3:16) must not under any condition lead to the “masculinization” of women. In the name of liberation from male “domination”, women must not appropriate to themselves male characteristics contrary to their own feminine “originality”. There is a well-founded fear that if they take this path, women will not “reach fulfilment”, but instead will deform and lose what constitutes their essential richness. It is indeed an enormous richness.

 

[whatevergirl]

*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.*

 

[whatevergirl]

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. *

 

[whatevergirl]

Thank you for putting forward your views in a non offensive, charitable manner. I do agree with a lot of what you have said here. However, with repect I have issues with your first and second last sentences of you 1st paragraph.

I do not believe submission of the wife to her husband is required in a Christian marriage. **I do believe that that view will and is used to justify dominance by husbands, and why not ,if they are told that their wives should submit to them **and that they must lead their wives to salvation.

*Bolded, emphasis is mine. I think that could be the rub. It’s more maybe? about trust for you, than anything else. That this passage justifies any and all behaviors. The thing is…we are not called to be robotic or drones. lol We are called to submit, but the husbands have a job too. If my husband for example, was abusing me and using the passage to justify it…I would find a way to leave. I would not submit to an unsafe situation, mentally, physically, or verbally. I think submission is required by the wife, because it really bolsters trust in the man. Men are a mystery. They are to me, anyway. lol But, the one thing I know of my own husband, is that he likes to be trusted. He likes for me to trust him and his decisions. He is a rational, sound man though. But, oddly enough, I didn’t always submit…because I didn’t trust him. I didn’t trust men. (that’s a long story) So, when I meet women who say that they disagree with the submissive part of things in living the Christian married life, I think it has more to do with like I said above…either a) the guy shouldn’t be trusted or b) the woman has a tough time with trusting her man to treat her well, without her being more in control. THIS DOES NOT MEAN that we don’t make decisions…but we don’t seek to compete with our husbands. My husband used to smoke. I used to harp about it…and get angry. Was I not being submissive? No, in this case…he was hurting his health…he needed my help to see this. But, I couldn’t force him…he had to finally quit on his own. He finally said one day, ‘‘sharon, I’ll quit when I am ready.’’ I had to submit to that…I couldn’t fight it anymore. But, I had to trust that he would one day quit. And I replied? I trust you, honey…I’m done harping…I trust you’ll quit. And, he did. That story brings tears to my eyes as I type this, because my dad died of cancer, from smoking, and I just have such a passion about people quitting smoking. But, anywho…Í hope that helps to illustrate my point? *

I do agree that marriage should not be a competition and it should be a partnership. I Women and men are equal but different physiologically.

I agree…husbands don’t have higher intrinsic value than their wives. True.

Only women can bear children and thus should be the only difference in their roles.

*So crucial though. As the ones who God trusted to carry our babies…He gave us more patience than men. lol *


I do believe in mutual reverence and in both submitting to God.

Yes, me too.

I have referred to commentaries on those passages partly on which my view is based and I have been told that these are wrong. Below is a passage from what was wriiten by the late Pope John Paul II in 1988.

"The author of the Letter to the Ephesians sees no contradiction between an exhortation formulated in this way and the words: “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife” (5:22-23). The author knows that this way of speaking, so profoundly rooted in the customs and religious tradition of the time, is to be understood and carried out in a new way: as a “mutual subjection out of reverence for Christ” (cf. Eph 5:21). This is especially true because the husband is called the “head” of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church; he is so in order to give “himself up for her” (Eph 5:25), and giving himself up for her means giving up even his own life. However, whereas in the relationship between Christ and the Church the subjection is only on the part of the Church, in the relationship between husband and wife the “subjection” is not one-sided but mutual.

In relation to the “old” this is evidently something “new”: it is an innovation of the Gospel. We find various passages in which the apostolic writings express this innovation, even though they also communicate what is “old”: what is rooted in the religious tradition of Israel, in its way of understanding and explaining the sacred texts, as for example the second chapter of the Book of Genesis.49

The apostolic letters are addressed to people living in an environment marked by that same traditional way of thinking and acting. The “innovation” of Christ is a fact: it constitutes the unambiguous content of the evangelical message and is the result of the Redemption. However, the awareness that in marriage there is mutual “subjection of the spouses out of reverence for Christ”, and not just that of the wife to the husband, must gradually establish itself in hearts, consciences, behaviour and customs. This is a call which from that time onwards, does not cease to challenge succeeding generations; it is a call which people have to accept ever anew. Saint Paul not only wrote: “In Christ Jesus… there is no more man or woman”, but also wrote: “There is no more slave or freeman”. Yet how many generations were needed for such a principle to be realized in the history of humanity through the abolition of slavery! And what is one to say of the many forms of slavery to which individuals and peoples are subjected, which have not yet disappeared from history?"

APOSTOLIC LETTER
MULIERIS DIGNITATEM
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
JOHN PAUL II
ON THE
DIGNITY AND VOCATION
OF WOMEN
ON THE OCCASION
OF THE MARIAN YEAR

“Given in Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on 15 August, the Solemnity of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in the year 1988, the tenth of my Pontificate.”

Thank you.

*I appreciate you posting that, I think we agree more than we disagree! I love how Pope JP2 made everything so clear and easy to understand. *

 

[Rach620]

*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.*

Whatevergirl, this was an awesome post!! Thank you for sharing your insights

I would say that the number one lesson I have learned in my marriage has been TRUST, just as you said. I find that my vocation as a wife is one which teaches me to trust God’s will for my life by trusting my husband. We both take a servant’s attitude towards our marriage (the passage we chose for the gospel reading at our wedding Mass was John 13, where Christ washes His disciples’ feet and tells them to do the same for one another). Because I know that my husband takes his role so seriously, because I know he is so dedicated to giving everything he can to our marriage, our family, and to me, I am able to trust Him and in turn trust God’s plan for our life.

This has been the only real way I’ve been able to find peace in my life and my future. It’s not to say that I’ve “given up” on finding a fulfilling career by any means, but marriage has definitely put things in perspective for me–a perspective that I know many of my recent college grad friends don’t have. And I know that I’m learning every day what God’s will is for me and for my family–and those things go hand in hand.

 

[rwillenborg]

*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.

What if a husband DOESN’T make good decisions though?
Should the wife support his poor decisions, even to the detriment of herself and her children? A husband who makes poor decisions does not necessarily lack the love that is required for a marriage, but he may lack prudence, or wisdom, or any other of a host of traits necessary to make a good, qualified decision on a matter. That does not make him a bad husband or father. It simply makes him a human being.
Still, the bible calls on the wife to submit to her husband - it provides no exceptions for when he’s being unreasonable, is ill-informed, or simply obtuse.
What then?
Why presume that the husband is required to consult with his wife? The bible doesn’t say that he is. I know you said it would be rude for him not to, but rudeness is not prohibited, and I, as a matter of fact, though I love my children dearly, I am often rude to them - forcing them into their car seats when they don’t want to and the such. Rudeness doesn’t show a lack of love.
Wasn’t it woman’s PUNISHMENT for sin to be under the dominion of her husband?
I will multiply your pains in childbirth.
You shall give birth to your children in pain.
You will long for your husband,
but he will lord it over you.’

A woman’s submissive position to her husband is her punishment.

 

[ac_claire]

What if a husband DOESN’T make good decisions though?
Should the wife support his poor decisions, even to the detriment of herself and her children? A husband who makes poor decisions does not necessarily lack the love that is required for a marriage, but he may lack prudence, or wisdom, or any other of a host of traits necessary to make a good, qualified decision on a matter. That does not make him a bad husband or father. It simply makes him a human being.
Still, the bible calls on the wife to submit to her husband - it provides no exceptions for when he’s being unreasonable, is ill-informed, or simply obtuse.
What then?
Why presume that the husband is required to consult with his wife? The bible doesn’t say that he is. I know you said it would be rude for him not to, but rudeness is not prohibited, and I, as a matter of fact, though I love my children dearly, I am often rude to them - forcing them into their car seats when they don’t want to and the such. Rudeness doesn’t show a lack of love.
Wasn’t it woman’s PUNISHMENT for sin to be under the dominion of her husband?
I will multiply your pains in childbirth.
You shall give birth to your children in pain.
You will long for your husband,
but he will lord it over you.’

A woman’s submissive position to her husband is her punishment.

I believe the Church teaches that part of Eve’s punishment was her wanting to have dominion or control over men. The husband being the head of the wife, and submissive to him, and the two being one flesh is part of the natural order. Not part of Eve’s punishment. HTH

 

[whatevergirl]

What if a husband DOESN’T make good decisions though?
Should the wife support his poor decisions, even to the detriment of herself and her children? A husband who makes poor decisions does not necessarily lack the love that is required for a marriage, but he may lack prudence, or wisdom, or any other of a host of traits necessary to make a good, qualified decision on a matter. That does not make him a bad husband or father. It simply makes him a human being.
Still, the bible calls on the wife to submit to her husband - it provides no exceptions for when he’s being unreasonable, is ill-informed, or simply obtuse.
What then?
Why presume that the husband is required to consult with his wife? The bible doesn’t say that he is. I know you said it would be rude for him not to, but rudeness is not prohibited, and I, as a matter of fact, though I love my children dearly, I am often rude to them - forcing them into their car seats when they don’t want to and the such. Rudeness doesn’t show a lack of love.
Wasn’t it woman’s PUNISHMENT for sin to be under the dominion of her husband?
I will multiply your pains in childbirth.
You shall give birth to your children in pain.
You will long for your husband,
but he will lord it over you.’

A woman’s submissive position to her husband is her punishment.

*(bolded, emphasis mine)

No, it’s not…not sure why you think that?

Second, the whole wives being submissive passage, isn’t meant to be like a father-child relationship. You comparing putting your kids into car seats, you’re the parent. That’s totally different. My husband doesn’t order me around like a kid. That is not how Christ meant it…Why would Christ ask husbands to treat their wives in a degrading way, when He Himself does not treat any of us that way? Christ’s example is what husbands should follow. Further, if a husband turns his back on God and turns into a tyrant, OR makes horrible decisions continuously to the detriment of his family…do we suppose he is truly following Christ or his own ego? I say the latter. AND if the husband doesn’t follow Christ…should we put our husbands before Christ? NO! (sorry, not shouting at you…lol)

Any wife who follows her husband away from God, fears her husband, and puts him above God. (unintentionally, she may have deep love for God, but she fears not pleasing her husband)Fear will make many people do things against their wills…sometimes, women stay in abusive marriages…not because they like it, or because they don’t know what’s happening is wrong…but because they fear leaving him…for a variety of reasons.

But, suffice to say…that this passage isn’t meant for husbands to treat their wives as their parent and they are to love us the way Christ did…A great example is if a husband says…‘ok, family, we are going to cut down on using so much water in this family.’ Then the wife who is not interested in submission says…‘what? no we’re not! you don’t decide for this family what we do and don’t do.’ That is what the passage means…to not USURP our husbands when they are trying to work in the family’s best interest…you’d be surprised how many men just try to do the very best for their families, and their wives still want to have the last word…why? It’s about control. The passage itself actually is about a give and take. The husbands gives to his wife, all he is…and the wife gives back by trusting his decision making, etc. It is not about the husband controlling the wife, or treating her like his kid. It’s about mutual respect, albeit DELIVERED differently. Hope that helps better clarfify my stance. *

 

[whatevergirl]

What if a husband DOESN’T make good decisions though?
Should the wife support his poor decisions, even to the detriment of herself and her children? A husband who makes poor decisions does not necessarily lack the love that is required for a marriage, but he may lack prudence, or wisdom, or any other of a host of traits necessary to make a good, qualified decision on a matter. That does not make him a bad husband or father. It simply makes him a human being.
Still, the bible calls on the wife to submit to her husband - it provides no exceptions for when he’s being unreasonable, is ill-informed, or simply obtuse.
What then?
Why presume that the husband is required to consult with his wife? The bible doesn’t say that he is. I know you said it would be rude for him not to, but rudeness is not prohibited, and I, as a matter of fact, though I love my children dearly, I am often rude to them - forcing them into their car seats when they don’t want to and the such. Rudeness doesn’t show a lack of love.
Wasn’t it woman’s PUNISHMENT for sin to be under the dominion of her husband?
I will multiply your pains in childbirth.
You shall give birth to your children in pain.
You will long for your husband,
but he will lord it over you.’

A woman’s submissive position to her husband is her punishment.

*Further to your point about the Bible not coming out and telling husbands that they should consult their wives…The Bible is clear though…Jesus was crystal clear…"Love your neighbor as thy self, and Love God with all of your heart, mind and soul.’’ If a man is treating his wife like a child…or doesn’t include her in decisions that can affect the family…does he really love her? Does he really love her like Christ does? Does Christ force Himself on any of us? No, He doesn’t…likewise, neither should husbands. If a husband consults his wife…that shows he cares about her. That shows he values her opinions, too. And being rude to one’s spouse does show a lack of love in action. If I tell my husband I love him, but I’m rude all of the time to him…will he REALLY believe that I truly love him? Actions will always speak louder than words…and if a man loves his wife…he will be genuinely concerned about her feelings, not that he will never mess up or make a bad decision. That happens. I’m talking more about chronic behaviors, not isolated bad decisions, though. *

 

[whatevergirl]

Whatevergirl, this was an awesome post!! Thank you for sharing your insights

I would say that the number one lesson I have learned in my marriage has been TRUST, just as you said. I find that my vocation as a wife is one which teaches me to trust God’s will for my life by trusting my husband. We both take a servant’s attitude towards our marriage (the passage we chose for the gospel reading at our wedding Mass was John 13, where Christ washes His disciples’ feet and tells them to do the same for one another). Because I know that my husband takes his role so seriously, because I know he is so dedicated to giving everything he can to our marriage, our family, and to me, I am able to trust Him and in turn trust God’s plan for our life.

This has been the only real way I’ve been able to find peace in my life and my future. It’s not to say that I’ve “given up” on finding a fulfilling career by any means, but marriage has definitely put things in perspective for me–a perspective that I know many of my recent college grad friends don’t have. And I know that I’m learning every day what God’s will is for me and for my family–and those things go hand in hand.

I’m so happy for you, Rach! I think that it is a tough passage to swallow if we don’t trust our spouses. Trust, not meaning that we are afraid he won’t be faithful. Trust in a different sense. Trust him with our lives, and our children’s lives. Once the Holy Spirit pointed that out to me, so much changed. Basically, we wives have to trust the men we married to make good decisions…if we don’t, so many bad things can happen. Again, this doesn’t mean we surrender decision making solely to him, or we become drones…or we follow a man away from God. If my husband wanted to change religions, for example…I would not submit and follow him. That would be very tough…because I’d want to follow him and trust him…but not if he is leading me away from The Church. I think common sense comes into play here, ladies!

 

[rwillenborg]

I believe the Church teaches that part of Eve’s punishment was her wanting to have dominion or control over men. The husband being the head of the wife, and submissive to him, and the two being one flesh is part of the natural order. Not part of Eve’s punishment. HTH

Why was the part about the husband having dominion over his wife in the same passage as the part about how she would now have pains in childbirth? I thought the pains in childbirth was part of her punishment, as was the dominion of her husband over her?

 

[Shin]

Why was the part about the husband having dominion over his wife in the same passage as the part about how she would now have pains in childbirth? I thought the pains in childbirth was part of her punishment, as was the dominion of her husband over her?

Each gender has sins particular to it. Genesis displays these, if you actually look at the particular sins each of our original parents committed.

One of the original sins of Eve was to seek dominion over Adam and to place herself above him… One of Adam’s first sins was to be persuaded because of his desire for Eve to listen to her and not God. . .

I think you already know God’s sense of justice, i.e. perfectly balancing the scales in the opposite direction. And I think you also should know that we have a tendency to repeat the sins of our first parents as well, and even according to gender.

 

[rwillenborg]

*(bolded, emphasis mine)

No, it’s not…not sure why you think that?

Second, the whole wives being submissive passage, isn’t meant to be like a father-child relationship. You comparing putting your kids into car seats, you’re the parent. That’s totally different. My husband doesn’t order me around like a kid. That is not how Christ meant it…Why would Christ ask husbands to treat their wives in a degrading way, when He Himself does not treat any of us that way? Christ’s example is what husbands should follow. Further, if a husband turns his back on God and turns into a tyrant, OR makes horrible decisions continuously to the detriment of his family…do we suppose he is truly following Christ or his own ego? I say the latter. AND if the husband doesn’t follow Christ…should we put our husbands before Christ? NO! (sorry, not shouting at you…lol)

Any wife who follows her husband away from God, fears her husband, and puts him above God. (unintentionally, she may have deep love for God, but she fears not pleasing her husband)Fear will make many people do things against their wills…sometimes, women stay in abusive marriages…not because they like it, or because they don’t know what’s happening is wrong…but because they fear leaving him…for a variety of reasons.

But, suffice to say…that this passage isn’t meant for husbands to treat their wives as their parent and they are to love us the way Christ did…A great example is if a husband says…‘ok, family, we are going to cut down on using so much water in this family.’ Then the wife who is not interested in submission says…‘what? no we’re not! you don’t decide for this family what we do and don’t do.’ That is what the passage means…to not USURP our husbands when they are trying to work in the family’s best interest…you’d be surprised how many men just try to do the very best for their families, and their wives still want to have the last word…why? It’s about control. The passage itself actually is about a give and take. The husbands gives to his wife, all he is…and the wife gives back by trusting his decision making, etc. It is not about the husband controlling the wife, or treating her like his kid. It’s about mutual respect, albeit DELIVERED differently*. Hope that helps better clarfify my stance.

I don’t know how to break up someone’s post to only respond to pieces at a time, so please be patient here.

I read the genesis passage as such because the Lord is explaining the consequences of ‘the fall’ and says that woman will have pains in childbirth and that is followed by the part that man will have dominion over her.

The passage about wives being submissive though does not say that they are to be submissive to their husbands IF the husband is following Christ. It simply says that the wife is to be submissive. Though the same passage tells men to love their wives, their dominion over their wives is not based on them fulfilling that condition. And again, husbands can love their wives dearly, but still make poor decisions, and I don’t think Christ would want a wife to follow her husband’s poor decisions.
I don’t think a man who makes poor decisions is necessarily doing so out of what is not good for the family.
You can have two people who are genuinely trying to work in the family’s best interest and still arrive at very, very different conclusions.
Take for example…when my twin daughters were born, my husband very respectfully asked that neither I, nor the twins, have contact with the outside world for six months (except of course for my return to work at three months post-partum). He was not joking.
I asked him ‘What happens when your mom wants to see her grandchildren?’
He said ‘She can stand on the front porch and you can hold them up to the window for her to see’
I said ‘And what about Christmas?’
He said ‘I’ll go, and I’ll bring you home a plate of food’
I said ‘What about their doctor’s checkups?’
He said ‘No, absolutely not, do you have any idea how infested with germs a doctor’s office is? No, their doctor visits will have to wait’
And on and on and on. You get the idea.
He essentially wanted me and the children in solitary confinement for six months ot protect us from viruses. He wanted to make a plastic bubble for the kids to live in. He also hadn’t wanted me to deliver in a hospital because there are too many germs there, but no doctor in their right mind would allow a homebirth of twins.
He has what’s called mysophobia. He’s also slightly agoraphobic. Have you ever seen that show Monk on USA? That’s my husband. To a tee! We always laugh when we watch that show because Monk will say something crazy and my husband will look at me and say ‘It doesn’t sound that crazy when I say the same thing, does it?’ Oh boy.
I’m sure you can see why there would be times in our relationship that I would most certainly not submit to him. There are times when his phobias are stronger than others.
It’s not a big deal for me. I just know not to listen to his irrational requests during that time.
But that’s where this passage troubles me.
There is no ‘clause’ for an agoraphobic husband.
It simply says that I am to submit to him. You see, even when he has the best intentions, as he did after the birth of the twins, he can be very, very wrong.
And this passage I think very clearly states that I am to be submissive to him at all times (after all, doesn’t christ love us at all times?)

 

[whatevergirl]

I don’t know how to break up someone’s post to only respond to pieces at a time, so please be patient here.

I read the genesis passage as such because the Lord is explaining the consequences of ‘the fall’ and says that woman will have pains in childbirth and that is followed by the part that man will have dominion over her.

The passage about wives being submissive though does not say that they are to be submissive to their husbands IF the husband is following Christ. It simply says that the wife is to be submissive. Though the same passage tells men to love their wives, their dominion over their wives is not based on them fulfilling that condition. And again, husbands can love their wives dearly, but still make poor decisions, and I don’t think Christ would want a wife to follow her husband’s poor decisions.
I don’t think a man who makes poor decisions is necessarily doing so out of what is not good for the family.
You can have two people who are genuinely trying to work in the family’s best interest and still arrive at very, very different conclusions.
Take for example…when my twin daughters were born, my husband very respectfully asked that neither I, nor the twins, have contact with the outside world for six months (except of course for my return to work at three months post-partum). He was not joking.
I asked him ‘What happens when your mom wants to see her grandchildren?’
He said ‘She can stand on the front porch and you can hold them up to the window for her to see’
I said ‘And what about Christmas?’
He said ‘I’ll go, and I’ll bring you home a plate of food’
I said ‘What about their doctor’s checkups?’
He said ‘No, absolutely not, do you have any idea how infested with germs a doctor’s office is? No, their doctor visits will have to wait’
And on and on and on. You get the idea.
He essentially wanted me and the children in solitary confinement for six months ot protect us from viruses. He wanted to make a plastic bubble for the kids to live in. He also hadn’t wanted me to deliver in a hospital because there are too many germs there, but no doctor in their right mind would allow a homebirth of twins.
He has what’s called mysophobia. He’s also slightly agoraphobic. Have you ever seen that show Monk on USA? That’s my husband. To a tee! We always laugh when we watch that show because Monk will say something crazy and my husband will look at me and say ‘It doesn’t sound that crazy when I say the same thing, does it?’ Oh boy.
I’m sure you can see why there would be times in our relationship that I would most certainly not submit to him. There are times when his phobias are stronger than others.
It’s not a big deal for me. I just know not to listen to his irrational requests during that time.
But that’s where this passage troubles me.
There is no ‘clause’ for an agoraphobic husband.
It simply says that I am to submit to him. You see, even when he has the best intentions, as he did after the birth of the twins, he can be very, very wrong.
And this passage I think very clearly states that I am to be submissive to him at all times (after all, doesn’t christ love us at all times?)

*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? *

 

[mrpathetic]

He has what’s called mysophobia. He’s also slightly agoraphobic.

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.