Women/Wives

[Lea101]

Ok first of all, please do not derail this thread and start arguing. I know this is a sensitive topic.

A friend of mine, who is rather anti-religion, brought up the whole famous “submit to your husband” and other verses from the bible that seems very misogynistic. And then she asked me to explain. I tried my best but then I started doubting myself.

I tried saying that women are equal but different. She asked me how are they different besides looks and qualities that seems to be enforced on us as children (for example, the whole “math geniuses in the past are usually men” thing is invalid because women in the past were not encouraged to go to school, etc.

I could not think of anything.

Then she asked about the whole “submission” thing, like why women are the ones to submit. I couldn’t give a proper answer besides “because of Adam and Eve”.

I tried explaining that women are not to “obey” their husband and husbands should love their wives etc etc. But then she asked more practical, modern day examples of a wife submitting to her husband. I couldn’t think of one

Then she asked me about the whole “It is wrong to deny sex to your spouse without a valid reason”. My gosh, I could not answer. I always felt like if for example, the wife simply isn’t in the mood, the husband should not pressure her. And if she gives into the pressure and just “lies there”, I mean…a lot of people would consider that rape! And I am not sure if Catholics agree with this or not. If they do, then what’s with the whole “marital debt”?! I’m sure we want our spouses to be willing, not because they feel like they are sinning if they said no?

Then she asked about modesty. About how it’s only emphasized on women. Now I could kind of explain it well-that women are sexualized and our bodies are seen as objects and she roughly got it. Although she brought up about how modesty could be used to oppress, but I told her it’s more of the people’s fault, not the Church.

Could you guys help me? I told her I would get back to her. Give me your answers for each of the points she brought up (I may try to refute you, but that’s because I want you to explain fully so I won’t be caught in the headlights if she says the same thing as me to you)

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

“Wifely submission” is not a Catholic teaching. Most people who quote that bit conveniently forget the part that comes right before, where Paul instructs husbands and wives to “be subordinate to one another, out of respect for Christ.” The only man a woman is obliged to obey is her father, and even then only while she is still a minor child. Compromise is always a good skill for a wife to have, but she is not her husband’s child.

 

[Lea101]

“Wifely submission” is not a Catholic teaching. Most people who quote that bit conveniently forget the part that comes right before, where Paul instructs husbands and wives to “be subordinate to one another, out of respect for Christ.” The only man a woman is obliged to obey is her father, and even then only while she is still a minor child. Compromise is always a good skill for a wife to have, but she is not her husband’s child.

But i have seen Catholics talking about wifely submission. Why would he say that both must be submissive, and then say that a wife must be submissive and a husband should love her? It’s so confusing to me

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

From what I’ve garnered, the whole “wives submit, husbands love” thing was directed to the particular community he was preaching in, while mutual subordination was a general directive.

 

[AdamP88]

The Church does have an official exegesis for this and many Popes have written on it. I would draw your attention to this article which states the following:

ewtn.com/library/Marriage/wivesubmis.htm

*But going back to St. Paul’s passage for today, like I said, it is often taken out of context! It is often misunderstood! Let me read to you what Pope Pius XI taught in 1930 which is still very relevant. He said (Casti connubii, 10 cf. The Navarre Bible — Captivity Epistles):
“The submission of the wife neither ignores nor suppresses the liberty to which her dignity as a human person and her noble functions as wife, mother, and companion give her the full right.

It does not oblige her to yield indiscriminately to all the desires of her husband; and his desires may be unreasonable or incompatible with her wifely dignity.

It does not mean that she is on a level with persons who in law are called minors. And minors are ordinarily denied the unrestricted exercise of their rights because of their immature judgment and not having enough experience.

That’s what Pope Pius XI taught regarding submission of wives to their husbands. And this is the proper and authentic interpretation on St. Paul’s teaching:

1. it does not mean violation of her rights according to her dignity as a human person;
2. it does not mean for her to submit to her husband’s desires blindly, totally, and completely because his desires may be unreasonable and not compatible to his wife’s dignity;
3. it does not mean she is to be treated like minors who are not able to make mature judgment.*

This passage is often taken out of context in this day and age but it basically is deeper than what people think.

 

[JewishCatholic]

Hmm…

For one the Catholic Church doesn’t believe in Wife Submission. Not even for wrestling matches.

Two the Bible was written thousands of years ago, just 100-200 years ago women were treated like property of the male no matter what religion they were. Society has obviously changed.

 

[phil19034]

The “submit to your husband” is really about the husband’s willingness to die for his family.

A worthy husband, in times of peril, is willing do lay his life down to protect his family. In those times of peril, the wife (for the safely of the family) must submit to her husband. In those instances, there is no time for debate.

For example: some one breaks into your house when the husband, wife and kids are home. Is it appropriate for the wife to argue or debate the husband over what the correct actions are? Or follow his command?

Married couples become one flesh. They should agree on also everything they do. But in emergancy situations, you can’t have two Chiefs. 99% of the time, it is the husband who must be ready to lay down his life (not that wives and mothers are not equally ready to do the samething) but typically the mother protects the kids while the husband protects the wife.

This is what submit means. The wife understand that it’s the husband who must die to himself for the protection of his bride and family.

It’s not about the women sacrificing their independence or dignity. It’s about the men manning up to become the woman’s chivalrous knight in shining armor.

The Church teaches that sex is sacred and that a woman’s honor is sacared, and that a man must be worthy of her. No better way for a man to prove his worthiness than being willing to lay down his life for his wife and family.

This is what that submital is truly about.

This is also why the groom wears black while the bride wears white. The black symbolizes death, just like the black a priest wears. It symbolizes the man’s willingness to die for his vocation. A priest for the Church and the groom for his bride. While the white signifies beauty, purity, love, etc… All things worth dying for.

FYI - most non-believers have a Protestant understanding of that verse, which unfortunately is often wrong.

I pray this helps!

God Bless

 

[phil19034]

Hmm…

For one the Catholic Church doesn’t believe in Wife Submission. Not even for wrestling matches.

Two the Bible was written thousands of years ago, just 100-200 years ago women were treated like property of the male no matter what religion they were. Society has obviously changed.

Women were not treated like property… That’s a modern misinterpretation of the past. Women were considered sacred and worth protecting and cared for. Things to modern eyes which looks like oppression was really over-protectivism. “Men’s work” used to be dangerous and filled with manual labor. That’s not to say that some men treated women badly, some men did and still do. But for thousands of years men and women had different jobs which took up all of their time. Those different jobs were biologically selected. Babies needed to be nursed, which meant mom need to be home with the kids. With child mortality rates, etc. The wife was also pregnant or nursing for most of her prime years. Kids were seen as a financial asset, because the boys could get a job and the girls could help mom.

There were no office jobs, etc. The industrial revolution and the beginning of the service industry (which practically didn’t exist at all 200 years ago) allowed men to stop performing hard, manual labor and to begin using his mind for work. This is when the belittling of women began. Egotistical men with soft hands and a silver spoon felt women couldn’t handle the cushy jobs they were doing. However, for thousands of years women were de-feathering chickens & chopping their heads off before cooking, etc. The house work took forever and was hard. Women knew how to work hard, but these new silver spoon men (who didn’t know how to work hard or fight) took women for granted because they no longer knew how to be men. The industrial revolution also made household chores easier, allowing women more free time. This eventually lead to married women wanting to remain as teachers, nurses, etc. (which nuns did for over a 1000 years).

The point is that job conditions changed thanks to the industrial revolution which gave women more time on their hands to do other things and make the work place less dangerous and less physically demanding.

 

[Lea101]

The “submit to your husband” is really about the husband’s willingness to die for his family.

A worthy husband, in times of peril, is willing do lay his life down to protect his family. In those times of peril, the wife (for the safely of the family) must submit to her husband. In those instances, there is no time for debate.

For example: some one breaks into your house when the husband, wife and kids are home. Is it appropriate for the wife to argue or debate the husband over what the correct actions are? Or follow his command?

Married couples become one flesh. They should agree on also everything they do. But in emergancy situations, you can’t have two Chiefs. 99% of the time, it is the husband who must be ready to lay down his life (not that wives and mothers are not equally ready to do the samething) but typically the mother protects the kids while the husband protects the wife.

This is what submit means. The wife understand that it’s the husband who must die to himself for the protection of his bride and family.

It’s not about the women sacrificing their independence or dignity. It’s about the men manning up to become the woman’s chivalrous knight in shining armor.

The Church teaches that sex is sacred and that a woman’s honor is sacared, and that a man must be worthy of her. No better way for a man to prove his worthiness than being willing to lay down his life for his wife and family.

This is what that submital is truly about.

This is also why the groom wears black while the bride wears white. The black symbolizes death, just like the black a priest wears. It symbolizes the man’s willingness to die for his vocation. A priest for the Church and the groom for his bride. While the white signifies beauty, purity, love, etc… All things worth dying for.

FYI - most non-believers have a Protestant understanding of that verse, which unfortunately is often wrong.

I pray this helps!

God Bless

So the submission thing is basically wives allowing their husbands to do their duty (protecting the family)? Not day-to-day arguments/disagreements?

 

[Lea101]

The Church does have an official exegesis for this and many Popes have written on it. I would draw your attention to this article which states the following:

ewtn.com/library/Marriage/wivesubmis.htm

This passage is often taken out of context in this day and age but it basically is deeper than what people think.

I understand that it’s not like the Church sees women as inferior, I’m just wondering what on earth does submission even mean in the bible! I mean an employee must submit to his or her boss. The employee is equal to God’s eyes and he or she is worthy of respect but the employee must listen to what the boss tells him/her to do, right? So is it the same thing in marriage? If not, then what do St Paul mean by submission

 

[Lea101]

And also please help me with the whole “Are men and women really born different/have different strengths and weaknesses or is it just a result of society” thing!

And the marital debt. Why would anyone want to sleep with their spouse if he or she knows that the other is not willing? Isn’t that a mood killer? And why is it wrong to refuse your partner if you’re just tired/not in the mood? No means no to me. As a teenager (or a young adult, I’m 18), this scares me. A lot.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

There’s a passage in the Book Theology for Beginners that explains it quite well (I think that’s where I saw it anyway). I can’t remember the details but it’s more about a mutual respect/submission.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

And also please help me with the whole “Are men and women really born different/have different strengths and weaknesses or is it just a result of society” thing!

And the marital debt. Why would anyone want to sleep with their spouse if he or she knows that the other is not willing? Isn’t that a mood killer? And why is it wrong to refuse your partner if you’re just tired/not in the mood? No means no to me. As a teenager (or a young adult, I’m 18), this scares me. A lot.

Yes we are born different, physically, biologically and psychologically - that’s just a scientific fact. It doesn’t mean we are unequal. Our hormones are different, our bodies need different amounts of energy, our physical abilities are different (I would love to see a man cope with child birth for example!). Now there are exceptions. A woman who body builds is probably going to be stronger than a weaker man. I’m quite strong for a woman but most men are stronger than me (again unless he is particularly weak). That’s usually down to testosterone. I think women have an emotional strength though - ever heard the stories of a mother who can lift a car off their injured child? We have different emotional needs, we handle situations differently etc etc. Even atheists who claim that we all exactly the same turn around and say “it’s a man thing” “it’s a woman things” I wish people would start to embrace our differences instead of turning everything into an equality competition - that’s not what it’s about!!

 

[AdamP88]

I understand that it’s not like the Church sees women as inferior, I’m just wondering what on earth does submission even mean in the bible! I mean an employee must submit to his or her boss. The employee is equal to God’s eyes and he or she is worthy of respect but the employee must listen to what the boss tells him/her to do, right? So is it the same thing in marriage? If not, then what do St Paul mean by submission

He does mean that a wife must listen and to a certain extent, obey the husband. However, what he says to the husbands is to love their wives as Christ loves His Church. Christ loves the Church so much he was tortured and died on the cross for Her. The emphasis in this passage is not on wives being submissive to their husbands but on husbands being willing to sacrifice everything for their wives.

 

[Kliska]

A friend of mine, who is rather anti-religion,

This is going to be the main concern right there. If they are anti-religious, anti-God, anti-Bible, etc… they are going to constantly move the goal post. If you start making headway on this issue, another issue will be brought up. Just pointing that out so you may be prepared for frustration. In short, your conversation is about much more than just gender roles. It sounds as if she is mad at God perhaps.

I tried saying that women are equal but different. She asked me how are they different besides looks and qualities that seems to be enforced on us as children (for example, the whole “math geniuses in the past are usually men” thing is invalid because women in the past were not encouraged to go to school, etc.

This is a strange pushback as we are different down to our very DNA. We don’t just look different, we are built different in many many ways, we have a womb… men don’t. Our bones, muscles, fat content, etc… etc… are all different, our brains function differently. As believers in God, we are called to different roles.

Then she asked about the whole “submission” thing, like why women are the ones to submit. I couldn’t give a proper answer besides “because of Adam and Eve”.

It does boil down to Adam and Eve many times. They upset the God-ordered structure for relating to one another. Adam failed to protect Eve and Eve failed to listen to Adam. We are meant to learn the lesson.

I tried explaining that women are not to “obey” their husband and husbands should love their wives etc etc. But then she asked more practical, modern day examples of a wife submitting to her husband. I couldn’t think of one

There are plenty of women who obey their husbands and plenty of husbands loving their wives still today. Obedience isn’t a bad word, and it is never applied to anything that runs counter to God’s will. If one’s husband orders a wife to worship a false god, that wife is under no command to obey. The wife and husband are one flesh, and who abuses their own flesh unless there is an underlying severe mental issue? Husbands are to love their wives and take care of them to the point of giving their lives… how can anyone call that misogynistic?

Then she asked me about the whole “It is wrong to deny sex to your spouse without a valid reason”.

Wife and husband belong to each other. With love there is no compulsion and only respect and intimacy. One of the reasons of marriage is the physical act, so to deny that to a spouse without reason is wrong. The flipside is also true, to demand it of a spouse that isn’t interested for a reason, is just as wrong.

Then she asked about modesty. About how it’s only emphasized on women. Now I could kind of explain it well-that women are sexualized and our bodies are seen as objects and she roughly got it. Although she brought up about how modesty could be used to oppress, but I told her it’s more of the people’s fault, not the Church.

When modesty is upon pain of death, then yes, it is oppressive. Men are expected to be modest as well, as modesty isn’t just about what we wear but our actions, and even how we think, and that is for both sexes.

 

[Reepicheep]

@Phil19034: Yes, yes, and again yes.

So the submission thing is basically wives allowing their husbands to do their duty (protecting the family)? Not day-to-day arguments/disagreements?

Exactly. “Wives, submit to your husband’s authority” does not mean “Husbands, you get to throw your weight around and bully your wives.”

The husband’s authority is given him solely to let him protect and provide for his wife and children. “My cherished partner in life, we will do it this way so that you may be safe from harm.” Not: “Woman, get your *** in the kitchen and make me a sandwich”.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Lea, while I’m no apologist, I want to point out to you, when reviewing posts that the Catholic perspective on this issue is very different from the non-Catholic Christian perspective. Some believe in mutual submission, and think the comments Paul made were to emphasize the need for wives to submit, and husbands to love, but not to override the general command for all Christians to submit to one another. I tend to agree with this. For if he only meant for the wife to submit to the husband, but not vice versa, then it must follow, that he only meant for the husband to love the wife, but not vice versa.

Now, I noticed Kilska, who ID’s as “Christian” not Catholic, equates submission with obedience. But from what I understand, the Catholic Church does not. There’s even a whole topic in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum where a guy was looking for a Catholic Church to get married in, where they used a form of the marriage rite where the wife promised to obey – and he couldn’t find one, last I checked. Because the Catholic marriage rite doesn’t include that.

Neither does it include the “giving away of the bride” where the bride marches down the aisle with her father (or father figure) who “gives” her to the groom, the bride and groom march in together. Although it seems some priests do bend this custom if the participants really want to go the “bride comes down the aisle with her father” route.

Also, regarding the “marital debt”; note the idea is that to refuse without a *valid *reason is what is considered sinful. Not that refusing by itself is inherently sinful. Refusing because one is ill is not considered a sin. Refusing just out of spite to hurt the spouse, or because you’d rather be watching porn, etc., would be a sin, I’d think.

 

[Kliska]

Now, I noticed Kilska, who ID’s as “Christian” not Catholic, equates submission with obedience.

Here’s my quote; “There are plenty of women who obey their husbands and plenty of husbands loving their wives still today. Obedience isn’t a bad word, and it is never applied to anything that runs counter to God’s will. If one’s husband orders a wife to worship a false god, that wife is under no command to obey.”

I’m making the point that obedience has become a dirty word in modern culture, and it isn’t one. In the Greek the words we translate variously as “obey, obedient, in submission to,” etc… do share the same root. It does not mean a lesser life, or blindly obeying, or anything of the sort.

If I can quote Casti Connubii by Pope Pius XI

1. This mutual molding of husband and wife, this determined effort to perfect each other, can in a very real sense, as the Roman Catechism teaches, be said to be the chief reason and purpose of matrimony, provided matrimony be looked at not in the restricted sense as instituted for the proper conception and education of the child, but more widely as the blending of life as a whole and the mutual interchange and sharing thereof.

1. By this same love it is necessary that all the other rights and duties of the marriage state be regulated as the words of the Apostle: “Let the husband render the debt to the wife, and the wife also in like manner to the husband,”[28] express not only a law of justice but of charity.

1. Domestic society being confirmed, therefore, by this bond of love, there should flourish in it that “order of love,” as St. Augustine calls it. This order includes both the primacy of the husband with regard to the wife and children, the ready subjection of the wife and her willing obedience, which the Apostle commends in these words: “Let women be subject to their husbands as to the Lord, because the husband is the head of the wife, and Christ is the head of the Church.”[29]

1. This subjection, however, does not deny or take away the liberty which fully belongs to the woman both in view of her dignity as a human person, and in view of her most noble office as wife and mother and companion; **nor does it bid her obey her husband’s every request **if not in harmony with right reason or with the dignity due to wife; nor, in fine, does it imply that the wife should be put on a level with those persons who in law are called minors, to whom it is not customary to allow free exercise of their rights on account of their lack of mature judgment, or of their ignorance of human affairs. But it forbids that exaggerated liberty which cares not for the good of the family; it forbids that in this body which is the family, the heart be separated from the head to the great detriment of the whole body and the proximate danger of ruin. For if the man is the head, the woman is the heart, and as he occupies the chief place in ruling, so she may and ought to claim for herself the chief place in love.

1. Again, this subjection of wife to husband in its degree and manner may vary according to the different conditions of persons, place and time. In fact, if the husband neglect his duty, it falls to the wife to take his place in directing the family. But the structure of the family and its fundamental law, established and confirmed by God, must always and everywhere be maintained intact .

1. With great wisdom Our predecessor Leo XIII, of happy memory, in the Encyclical on Christian marriage which We have already mentioned, speaking of this order to be maintained between man and wife, teaches: “The man is the ruler of the family, and the head of the woman; but because she is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone, let her be subject and obedient to the man, not as a servant but as a companion, so that nothing be lacking of honor or of dignity in the obedience which she pays. Let divine charity be the constant guide of their mutual relations, both in him who rules and in her who obeys, since each bears the image, the one of Christ, the other of the Church.”[30]

 

[jmjZelie]

As a happily married wife to an amazing husband, I will say that I tend toward obedience as being part of my vocation. I have obeyed even when I disagreed, knowing that ultimately, my husband will be judged on how faithfully and lovingly he fulfilled his duties, not whether his plans were successful or not. My understanding of obedience is that I help my husband to know of the various particular needs of our family and give him ideas and feedback, and he makes the final decision, taking all things into account. And I think he is a very creative thinker, so I even go to him for help solving problems having to do with my daily duties, which I execute in his absence. And he is very solicitous of my wellbeing.

This wasn’t always so smooth. It took many years to forge a strong partnership and we both made many mistakes. And we still do. But we still use St. Paul’s instructions as the basis for our marriage, and rather than viewing obedience as a bad word, we regard it as a holy word.

With regard to the marriage debt, my understanding is that it relates to the right of spouses to conjugal relations, because the promise to forsake all others means that the only moral context for sexual relations and begetting of children is with one’s spouse. The marriage debt does not apply to a right to sexual satisfaction at any cost, nor does it apply to contracepted relations or onanism or other degrading practices. It applies only to requesting natural relations with one’s spouse. And since the purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children, and natural relations is what makes that possible, it makes sense that a spouse has a right to request that in marriage, and that to refuse a reasonable request without serious reason would be sinful, because it would be a sort of betrayal of one’s spouse. Also, marriage helps quiet concupiscence, which basically means that spouses help each other to remain chaste with holy conjugal relations, and to support each other with prayer and compassion when abstinence is necessary.

Modern scientific understanding also makes NFP possible, but I didn’t think that was the point of your questions, so I will not speak about that here.

With regards to marital rape, while that can happen, that is not what the marriage debt is about. It has to do with each spouse caring more about the needs of the other than their own needs. A husband with a wife who feels exhausted or ill might spend time caring for her and letting her rest, and putting his own desires on hold. Or she might decide to try to overcome her physical impediments and be responsive as possible because she senses her husband’s interest. This is just one example out of thousands.

Spouses do make mistakes with either obedience issues, or with marriage debt issues. Sometimes, big ones. That is why spouses must also be quick to repent and quick to forgive, and reconcile, and work on a better level of communication, so that in these delicate areas of marital partnership they are strengthened through trials, and become more appreciative of each other.

It is no easy answer to your friend’s questions. It is one of my personal griefs that so so many of our parents and grandparents have gotten these lessons wrong, and turned to hatred and resentment and divorce. We have so few lifelong married couples to teach us these lessons and give us solid answers and advice. But I trust God will teach couples in the secrecy of their marriage and within their souls, everything they need to know to build a marriage that reflects the Trinity and brings Him glory and brings us to heaven.

 

[phil19034]

So the submission thing is basically wives allowing their husbands to do their duty (protecting the family)? Not day-to-day arguments/disagreements?

Correct. The Church teaches (and always has) that husband and wife are equal.

As a matter of fact, during the first Crusade, the Pope required all men who joined the Crusade to receive permission from the wife. This was because the Church knew that the husband’s responsibilities would fall onto the wife/mother. (A few Crusades later, this was changed because many men started to make up excuses that their wives wouldn’t let them, even though they never asked their wives).

The Church has always taught that in marriage, we become one flesh. We must not argue.

HOWEVER, sometimes we don’t agree. In those instances, one must compromise. There are some topics where the husband/father has more experience/knowledge and the wife should default to him. And there are other instances where the mother has more experience/knowledge and the husband should default to here. We all know these in our own marriages, and in each marriage it’s different.

However, when it comes to protecting the family, that is typically the husband’s role. Again, this submission is about submitting to his protection, not becoming his servant.

A true man honors his wife, respects her, cares for her, loves her, and is willing to die for her. This is what we mean when we submit to one another in marriage.