Wives, Submit to your own husbands as to the Lord

[ac_claire]

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.

LOL really? Well I haven’t got that same impression at all, and we’re reading the same materials. Where exactly did you read that, if I may ask?

There’s nothing about a woman’s service being simply to boost her husband’s ego. Loving service and submission, yes. Selfless service is the epitome of Christianity. The man is called to the same thing in his own way, only he has even more to sacrifice than we do.

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.

Yeah, like I said it is lengthy but you can bookmark it and scroll through the first couple pages. It’s a lot of good information.

Also I think you specifically asked for JPII? I found two apostolic letters at the Vatican website that JPII wrote to women. Remember that the Holy Father upholds the Church’s teaching of the husband being the head of the wife, and the family.

Letter to Women.

Mulieris Dignitatem: On the Dignity and Vocation of Women..

 

[Shin]

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?

Since when did I say not to talk to him about ideas and what’s right or wrong? Or that you should obey in any sin or anything truly harmful?

No I did not say that. I think you are imagining this all wrong, you haven’t put it into your mind how the family works properly with this arrangement. You should give it a good shot.

For examine, when working properly, for the sake of authority and unity in the family, if there is a problem one should not debate it in front of the children but discuss it privately.

This prevents playing off of one parent against the other. You should always present a united front.

 

[rwillenborg]

Since when did I say not to talk to him about ideas and what’s right or wrong? Or that you should obey in any sin or anything truly harmful?

No I did not say that. I think you are imagining this all wrong, you haven’t put it into your mind how the family works properly with this arrangement. You should give it a good shot.

For examine, when working properly, for the sake of authority and unity in the family, if there is a problem one should not debate it in front of the children but discuss it privately.

This prevents playing off of one parent against the other. You should always present a united front.

I guess I don’t understand how this passage would indicate that parents shouldn’t argue in front of children. I don’t really see how reading that passage would lead to that conclusion. I’m not advocating that one SHOULD argue in front of them mind you, just that I wouldn’t conclude that from this particular passage.
To take your example, if the mother says the children can’t go ride their bikes tonight, and the father walks in and thinks they should, why SHOULDN’T he say to the kids ‘Ah, it’s all right, go ride your bikes!’ Now, we know doing that sort of thing is a bad idea, but if the husband is the HEAD of the wife and he disagrees with her decision, he needs to override her decision, no?
And, I will tell you…I am the head of my company, well, at least the financial part of it. And, sometimes, there are tight deadlines, there are political issues, or other matters which would prevent me from consulting those in my employ as to what their opinions are. Furthermore, there are times when they reach a particular conclusion which I feel to be wrong, and, well, since it’s MY head that will roll if any information is incorrect (I can’t really say 'Blame Joe over there! He told me to do it!) there are times when I completely disregard their ideas.
I’m the head.
That’s my job.
So, isn’t this passage directing the husband to treat his wife the same way?
I’m never uncharitable about it or disrespectful, but for me to override my employee’s is not unusual.
So, doesn’t the husband have the same right?
So, he can tell the kids it’s okay to go outside and ride your bikes, because HE thinks it’s best, even if the wife doesn’t, right?

And you said ‘give it a good shot’. Give what a good shot?

 

[rwillenborg]

LOL really? Well I haven’t got that same impression at all, and we’re reading the same materials. Where exactly did you read that, if I may ask?

There’s nothing about a woman’s service being simply to boost her husband’s ego. Loving service and submission, yes. Selfless service is the epitome of Christianity. The man is called to the same thing in his own way, only he has even more to sacrifice than we do.

Yeah, like I said it is lengthy but you can bookmark it and scroll through the first couple pages. It’s a lot of good information.

Also I think you specifically asked for JPII? I found two apostolic letters at the Vatican website that JPII wrote to women. Remember that the Holy Father upholds the Church’s teaching of the husband being the head of the wife, and the family.

Letter to Women.

Mulieris Dignitatem: On the Dignity and Vocation of Women..

I should have been clearer in my post. The first link reiterated the church’s position - which is wonderful, but it didn’t really explain WHY or HOW this happens. That’s okay - I’m always glad to see that the church is consistent! But what I read all over these boards is that a wife should allow her husband to be head in all matters so as to ‘build him up’. So sorry - the kids woke up mid-post and I left out about half a sentence!!
Anyway, I don’t understand this ‘build him up’ thing. Encourage, love, adore, absolutely. ‘allow to make all decisions, good or bad’, well, if someone just let me go ahead with bad decisions at work, well, i’d probably get fired pretty quickly, but moreover, I don’t think that’s a very kind thing to do! I guess I don’t understand what is meant by ‘build him up’ and I see that phrase thrown around alot. What specific action would be a ‘build him up’ action? And thanks for the JPII links - I swear I can never find a THING on the .va website. Some people just learn better from different teachers, and he’s one of those ‘teachers’ that I just click with, y’know? I will read those links too and get back to you! Thank you so much for all of the legwork!

 

[Rach620]

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??

As far as reading material goes, JP2’s Wednesday Audiences that compose his general theology of the body went through quite a bit of material, and he reflected on Ephesians 5 for quite awhile. Go to the Theology of the Body library on EWTN and scroll down to lectures 87-103, then 113 and 129. There’s not a lack of material there, that’s for sure, but I think you’d be interested most in 88-91.

“Reverence for Christ the Basis of Relationship Between Spouses”

The author speaks of the mutual subjection of the spouses, husband and wife, and in this way he explains the words which he will write afterward on the subjection of the wife to the husband. In fact we read: “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord” (5:22). In saying this, the author does not intend to say that the husband is the lord of the wife and that the interpersonal pact proper to marriage is a pact of domination of the husband over the wife. Instead, he expresses a different concept: that **the wife can and should find in her relationship with Christ—who is the one Lord of both the spouses—the motivation of that relationship with her husband **which flows from the very essence of marriage and of the family. Such a relationship, however, is not one of one-sided domination. According to the Letter to the Ephesians, marriage excludes that element of the pact which was a burden and, at times, does not cease to be a burden on this institution. The husband and the wife are in fact “subject to one another,” and are mutually subordinated to one another. The source of this mutual subjection is to be found in Christian pietas, and its expression is love.
…
Love excludes every kind of subjection whereby the wife might become a servant or a slave of the husband, an object of unilateral domination. Love makes the husband simultaneously subject to the wife, and thereby subject to the Lord himself, just as the wife to the husband. The community or unity which they should establish through marriage is constituted by a reciprocal donation of self, which is also a mutual subjection. Christ is the source and at the same time the model of that subjection, which, being reciprocal “out of reverence for Christ,” confers on the conjugal union a profound and mature character.

 

[rwillenborg]

Thanks Rachel!
I’ll say this for the Catholics - there’s no shortage of reading material!!!

 

[adopted_heir]

If I can chime in briefly on the “build him up” stuff (really briefly cuz I can sense the baby working up to go nuclear before long), this isn’t flattery or BSing your husband to puff up his ego and turn him into an arrogant, misdirected jerk. But (start music) when a man loves a woman, he’ll do anything for her, she means the world to him, and she has the power to make him a better man, or wreck him. You can start with your dream man, the “strong, silent type,” and either make him stronger and be the person he opens his heart to, so those rare times he does speak and reveal himself, you’re the first and only person he thinks of–or you can nag about “you never talk to me anymore, why can’t you show your feeeeelings?” and break him down till he doesn’t have anything to say anyway, and if he did, well, the secretary at work values his (name removed by moderator)ut and thinks he’s, well, a dream guy of the strong, silent type, not henpecked and soul-burdened.

If your husband knows you’re proud of him, that builds him up. If he knows he’s your hero, even if he screws up royally, he’s built up. If he knows you won’t hold bad decisions over his head, belittle him, refuse him sex as a punishment for something he did or didn’t do, but knows you’ll treat him gracefully and lovingly, it will build him up. In the face of bad decisions, does it really help to point out what he’s done wrong? Except in cases of mental instability or downright stupidity, he probably knows. But a man is a challenge-motivated creature: God made him to go out and conquer the world, put up a fight, beat down the predators before they eat him alive, and bring his kill back home to feed his family. If you push against him (“Don’t invest in that venture, it’s stupid and you’ll lose all our money, and prove my mother right about you!”) even if he knows you’re right and doesn’t want to do it anymore, goll durn it he’s going to do it anyway because that’s his nature. If he loses all the money or not, he’s learned his wife doesn’t trust him, he’s not her hero, he’s a moron and a slob and irresponsible and useless, and he’s broken down. It starts a downward spiral for him that no nagging will ever pull him out of.

I’d go on, but the baby bomb just went off.

 

[ac_claire]

adopted heir: Good post! I could never put it as well as you.

Since I started some of this, I’d like to clarify that I have brought up the concept of building your husband up instead of tearing him down as a response to the “what if I don’t believe my husband is wise/competent/prudent, etc., etc. enough to be my ‘head’ in anything!” -type ideas I’m seeing floating around here. No man is perfect, and if your man isn’t up to your standards, the only sane, workable solution is to either a.) lower those standards or b.) help him to be better.

And anyone who knows men knows that the best way (speaking generally here) to do that isn’t to sit down and lay out all the failings of your man in hopes he’ll change. Or to constantly complain and belittle everything he does so he’ll be sure to notice you’re not satisfied with him. Those types of things don’t usually work. Best to work positively. So yes, build your man up. Some very wise advice I’ve been given: Respect is like oxygen to a man, it’s like what affection and closeness are to us ladies. If you can’t respect him for who he is, then respect him for his role as your husband and head. Only good things will come of this if you’re sincere and you place your trust and your family in God’s hands.

 

[whatevergirl]

adopted heir…your post is so well stated…thanks for sharing that. I agree…I tried to explain things in my own way…I don’t know if I made things more confusing though. lol Ultimately, how can we go wrong as couples, if we follow Jesus’ teachings for marriage?

 

[JaneGrey]

Well I keep seeing this statement/idea/whatever you want to call it being thrown around that men’s oxygen is respect while a woman’s is love/affection/mushiness. I realise that this idea is nothing new and is conventional wisdom in most of society. I understand it certainly was a very prevalent view in Biblical times and this might have had influence.

However as far as I know it is not taught in Catholicism that there is this difference specifically between men and women. Im almost certain that someone will post a document etc that proves me wrong so be it. Its just strange because science, as much as it says men and women have differences, proves that there are more differences between individuals than between the sexes. I do not think that it is good to use the argument that men=respect and women=love to show that husbands should have authority over wives. It simply does not hold up. Generalisations of this kind are dangerous. I personally know of many men who are looking for/yearn for love the way Hollywood portrays women to be doing. Personally Id deeply resent it if my husband were to not respect or acknowledge my abilites and accomplishments. Of course I have to be humble at the same time but thats another story

 

[severus68]

Well I keep seeing this statement/idea/whatever you want to call it being thrown around that men’s oxygen is respect while a woman’s is love/affection/mushiness. I realise that this idea is nothing new and is conventional wisdom in most of society. I understand it certainly was a very prevalent view in Biblical times and this might have had influence.

However as far as I know it is not taught in Catholicism that there is this difference specifically between men and women. Im almost certain that someone will post a document etc that proves me wrong so be it. Its just strange because science, as much as it says men and women have differences, proves that there are more differences between individuals than between the sexes. I do not think that it is good to use the argument that men=respect and women=love to show that husbands should have authority over wives. It simply does not hold up. Generalisations of this kind are dangerous. I personally know of many men who are looking for/yearn for love the way Hollywood portrays women to be doing. Personally Id deeply resent it if my husband were to not respect or acknowledge my abilites and accomplishments. Of course I have to be humble at the same time but thats another story

Exactly! Some of these ideas about men and women seeem to come straight from some not terribly well written romance novels. Rachel posted part of John Paul II’ letter which I believe reflects the RCC’s teachings. These ideas also demean men. We are not cavemen. Our grandparents and those women before that may not have had much choice as theycould not work and it was a male dominated world. Women have brains too and we are told not to use them or you may upset your husband’s fragile feelings.Humilty and repect work both ways. Submission is only to God.

I have been verbally bashed for my beliefson this and on another thread. I may stop posting on this thread as it is more about a personal issue. Where is the religious police to chastise and penalise such unsubmissive women!

 

[ac_claire]

Well I keep seeing this statement/idea/whatever you want to call it being thrown around that men’s oxygen is respect while a woman’s is love/affection/mushiness. I realise that this idea is nothing new and is conventional wisdom in most of society. I understand it certainly was a very prevalent view in Biblical times and this might have had influence.

However as far as I know it is not taught in Catholicism that there is this difference specifically between men and women. Im almost certain that someone will post a document etc that proves me wrong so be it. Its just strange because science, as much as it says men and women have differences, proves that there are more differences between individuals than between the sexes. I do not think that it is good to use the argument that men=respect and women=love to show that husbands should have authority over wives. It simply does not hold up.

No, men needing respect doesn’t show that husbands should have authority over their wives. Christiany teaches that husbands DO have authority over their wives, and in the larger discussion about this on this thread, the Love and Respect model has been mentioned.

The husband being the head of the wife doesn’t need to be proven by practical examples, or by anything else. This thread isn’t an “argument for” the idea of a husband’s authority. It’s the truth that God has revealed through the scriptures and His Church. What it comes down to is you either accept it or you don’t. Some people have a big, big problem with it and can’t accept it for whatever person reasons.

Generalisations of this kind are dangerous. I personally know of many men who are looking for/yearn for love the way Hollywood portrays women to be doing. Personally Id deeply resent it if my husband were to not respect or acknowledge my abilites and accomplishments. Of course I have to be humble at the same time but thats another story

Come now, you really don’t think the Love and Respect thing implies that men don’t need love and women don’t need respect? Let’s be sensible, it’s no good taking things to unreasonable extremes.

 

[ac_claire]

Exactly! Some of these ideas about men and women seeem to come straight from some not terribly well written romance novels. Rachel posted part of John Paul II’ letter which I believe reflects the RCC’s teachings. These ideas also demean men. We are not cavemen. Our grandparents and those women before that may not have had much choice as theycould not work and it was a male dominated world. Women have brains too and we are told not to use them or you may upset your husband’s fragile feelings.Humilty and repect work both ways. Submission is only to God.

Worship is only to God. The Church teaches we are to submit to our lawful authories; men and women. Jesus, our model, submitted all the way to the Cross.

I have been verbally bashed for my beliefson this and on another thread. I may stop posting on this thread as it is more about a personal issue. Where is the religious police to chastise and penalise such unsubmissive women!

LOL nice try. The Bible says that women are to submit to their husbands, not to all men in general.

 

[severus68]

Worship is only to God. The Church teaches we are to submit to our lawful authories; men and women. Jesus, our model, submitted all the way to the Cross.

LOL nice try. The Bible says that women are to submit to their husbands, not to all men in general.

I do not submit to people, yes, my mistake, I do submit to the authority of institutions and to law. When I enter a court of law ( do not know about the US), I bow in repect to the institution, the judge bows back to us. Christ submitted to the Will of God the Father. He was humle. He said all of us are as one.

I am not trying , I am saying as it is.

 

[Fundamntal_wife]

What do you say to a husband who married me as a Catholic and has now turned to Fundamentalism. I admit I haven’t respected him as a probably should but now he boasts that he is supposed to be the biblical “spiritual leader” of the household. He said that “based on the Bible, he has the right to go through and throw away all of my Catholic material.” He challenges all my Catholic beliefs and says “Either let him lead and choose to follow him or he’ll challenge everything I believe as long as I’m Catholic.”

He wants me to trust him and go to his Fundamental Bible Studies and church, but I refuse because I’m Catholic!

 

[whatevergirl]

What do you say to a husband who married me as a Catholic and has now turned to Fundamentalism. I admit I haven’t respected him as a probably should but now he boasts that he is supposed to be the biblical “spiritual leader” of the household. He said that “based on the Bible, he has the right to go through and throw away all of my Catholic material.” He challenges all my Catholic beliefs and says “Either let him lead and choose to follow him or he’ll challenge everything I believe as long as I’m Catholic.”

He wants me to trust him and go to his Fundamental Bible Studies and church, but I refuse because I’m Catholic!

*Oh wow, that is tough! I’m sorry. I know this to be true, we are not to place our husbands before God. If our spouses lead us from our faith, we should not be ‘required’ to submit to that. That is my take. We can’t serve man and God. To me, a wife who would throw away her Catholic materials to please her husband, would be putting him above God. Frankly, I wouldn’t follow my husband into the abyss, away from my faith, simply to keep the peace. I don’t believe that is what Christ meant by that passage. *

 

[JaneGrey]

*Oh wow, that is tough! I’m sorry. I know this to be true, we are not to place our husbands before God. If our spouses lead us from our faith, we should not be ‘required’ to submit to that. That is my take. We can’t serve man and God. To me, a wife who would throw away her Catholic materials to please her husband, would be putting him above God. Frankly, I wouldn’t follow my husband into the abyss, away from my faith, simply to keep the peace. I don’t believe that is what Christ meant by that passage. *

Im happy for you whatevergirl that you seem to have a good husband and its good to know that you realise that not all men are the same.

 

[JaneGrey]

Exactly! Some of these ideas about men and women seeem to come straight from some not terribly well written romance novels. Rachel posted part of John Paul II’ letter which I believe reflects the RCC’s teachings. These ideas also demean men. We are not cavemen. Our grandparents and those women before that may not have had much choice as theycould not work and it was a male dominated world. Women have brains too and we are told not to use them or you may upset your husband’s fragile feelings.Humilty and repect work both ways. Submission is only to God.

I have been verbally bashed for my beliefson this and on another thread. I may stop posting on this thread as it is more about a personal issue. Where is the religious police to chastise and penalise such unsubmissive women!

Im sorry that you have been criticised for having a differing view. The purpose of these threads are to have objective, non-personal debates, however this becomes impossible when certain people get emotional at the realisation that others out there do not see things the way they do.

 

[djeter]

An address by Fr. Cantalamessa (the homilist to the Vatican) on Marriage and family. The first part, as related in the Old Testament, focuses on God’s initial plan for marriage and family and how it came about through the history of Israel. The second is the renewal of the plan through Christ in the New Testament. The last applies this biblical revelation to the problems of today. The Biblical context is very different from today’s culture which is awash with broken or dysfunctional families. Placing ourselves in relation to the Biblical context may become an occasion for healing.

You can find it all here:

payingattentiontothesky.com/2009/08/28/marriage-and-family/

Filled with truth and the teachings of the Church

In Christ,

dj

 

[JaneGrey]

Come now, you really don’t think the Love and Respect thing implies that men don’t need love and women don’t need respect? Let’s be sensible, it’s no good taking things to unreasonable extremes.

No, men needing respect doesn’t show that husbands should have authority over their wives.

Good to know you realise that, but many others have been using that point to bolster their argument of men having authority.

Christiany teaches that husbands DO have authority over their wives,

That may be your view but many do have different interpretations which are worth listening to, even if it doesnt change your mind.

The husband being the head of the wife doesn’t need to be proven by practical examples, or by anything else.

If you want to argue that the husband is the head, then I argue that you do need to prove this using practical examples, because at the end of the day, people still need to get on with their day to day lives, and not do things that endanger the lives of those in their care. Trouble is, many practical real-life examples only go to show that many men are incompetent to be the sole head or leader of a household. Not always their fault, but it does pose a problem for the person who wants to argue for a husband’s authority.

This thread isn’t an “argument for” the idea of a husband’s authority.

Of course, this thread is a discussion. In a debate/discussion there will be an opposite view. Oftentimes, one side will be vehemently against the other. While it is very hard to change this, it does not render the whole debate worthless.

What it comes down to is you either accept it or you don’t. Some people have a big, big problem with it and can’t accept it for whatever person reasons.

What it comes down to is you accept one intepretation over another because that fits in with your personal faith and one’s understanding of the world. Of course people have a problem with it, why is that a surprise? Id be worried if people just blindly accepted whatever they were told without using their God-given common sense. The fact is most girls in today’s society are rightly brought up to believe that they are equal to men and this effectively translates to the idea that one’s sex does not entitle them to special priveleges. This view that many are brought up with contradicts to one interpretation of St.Paul’s passage, that the husband always has authority over his wife on virtue of his being male. So it seems natural that women like myself brought up this way will choose an interpretation which matches our understanding of life. It is hardly about pride.