It certainly does seem a bit biased. I would welcome a text written by the pope. Perhaps he has done so. But please nothing from Trent or the 12th century or anything. How about John Paul or Benedict?
The article seems a bit biased…? Ok, so skip the article-y bits and just read the quoted texts. If you’re real ambitious, just use the bibliography as a springboard to do your own research.
Sorry, magisterial teaching doesn’t work like that. Just because it’s “old” doesn’t mean it’s no longer relevant. Remember the Church is 2000+ years old her fundamental teachings have remained consistent from the time of the apostles.
Sorry below is the link.Severus, the link you referred to in your last post never got posted. Just the title, but no link.
The article seems a bit biased…? Ok, so skip the article-y bits and just read the quoted texts. If you’re real ambitious, just use the bibliography as a springboard to do your own research.
Sorry, magisterial teaching doesn’t work like that. Just because it’s “old” doesn’t mean it’s no longer relevant. Remember the Church is 2000+ years old her fundamental teachings have remained consistent from the time of the apostles.
But since you asked…here’s a re-post of two links I provided back in post #237. Both are letters from the late Holy Father JPII:
Letter to Women.
Mulieris Dignitatem: On the Dignity and Vocation of Women.
I quoted an excerpt from one of the letters here.
Shin posted some great quotes from the saints here.
For the basics, you can try this link: 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.
Hope that helps!
Apologies for the misspelling of your name. Please see this link:-
There is an encylical by Pope Pius XI from the 1930’s called Casti Connubii. It’s full of explanation on this subject… You can find and English translation at this link:
Thanks severus.
This is actually a really good resource. Although whoever compiled this obviously has their own bias, I don’t see anything that contradicts Ephesians 5.You are welcome. This is not an issue of saying those are not the words said but what they mean. With regard to bias, everyone can come up with something to support what they say. This is a repectable source (the complier). and the letters are not to be frowned on. With respect, I will continue to choose to take the position summed up there.Thanks severus.
Several of the links were broken, but reading from the ones that weren’t, didn’t seem to reject the traditional view of Ephesians 5 either. It’s basically the same writings by the same popes, meaning the same things. Perhaps the perspective we’re coming from counts for a lot of what we see.
Which links were broken please? Were we reading the same thing?
And which perspectives would they be? I start off any discussion with an open but not a blank mind.Very true, and well said!
Of course there will be a fuss-no one likes to be told to obey someone even if they had less brains just because of their gender. If only it were as simple as you say. There is nothing unfair on the husband’s side. In real life these days, its safe to say no husband needs to worry about being crucified for his wife so I dont know what you are on about.
So are you saying wives should obey their husbands because their husbands are willing to and queueing to be crucified or to suffer such other horrible deaths for them?
Couldn’t they both get each other to heaven? Why would women (or is it only wives), need help from men/husbands on their spiritual education or help with their redemption?
Because that is the whole point of marriage. That is what marriage is for… to sanctify each other and get each other to heaven.
I have no issue with your first sentence as it stands.
The gift of self. Please read Theology of the body. We are talking about the interpretation of Eph 5.
I do know what you are talking about, thank you.
This makes sense to me as you are emphasizing the spiritual aspect of the father’s role.