Wives be submissive?

Resa77 · September 2012

If you've studied Catholic theology regarding sexuality at all, you know that it kinda always points back to the image of the husband being like Christ, and the wife being like the Church. And that, of course, gets you right to St. Paul's lovely quote about wive's being submissive to their husbands, and husbands loving their wives as Christ loves His Church.

In some repsects, I can totally see it. In others, I just can't. I don't get it. So I thought it would be nice to discuss it

I will also add that my H would never be all "I'm a man, so you must obey me" about anything, so I thankfully never have to worry about him abusing that teaching!

agapecarrie · September 2012

Look at the language and definitions:

Sub: under under the mission (job).

To love: a decision...an act of the will for the good of the other. The "good" of the other person is ultimately heaven.

Husbands love your wives...means to will her to get to heaven.

As Christ loved the church....Christ died for the church.

So the husband's job is to get his wife to heaven, even if it kills him.

The wife is to place herself under that mission-- meaning, allow him to love her.

This does not mean be a doormat. This does not mean power struggle. It means that he is ultimately going to be held somewhat accountable for how he led his family in their faith and worked to sanctify his wife.

He's got the way harder job here.

Riss91 · September 2012

I think the problem is the word "submissive"

It is not meant as we use it today. The idea is that women should 'submit' (or support) the will of their husband. The husband's will is to protect the souls of his family. He is expected to die for them. It is honestly a circular reference.

In no way is it supposed to mean that a husband is superior to his wife. Unfortunately, when the words are translated, the translation isn't perfect and the meaning is twisted a bit.

Calypso1977 · September 2012

i did struggle with this and the whole "man is the head woman is the heart" concept at pre-cana. while i grew up in a home where both my parents were catholic, i did see my mom make many decisions for the family and my dad was fine with it. they really had a true partnership where decisions were not made solely by one party.

my sister, in her household, completely defers to her husband for everything, even if she doesnt like it. she recently had a job opportunity that would have been good for her and good for their family, and she literally let her husband decide whether or not she could apply. i really sometimes wonder how we grew up in the same household.

if your husband isnt catholic or is not actively practicing the faith i would think it would be challenging to defer to his lead and expect him to get you to heaven. so in these instances i assume this is where the church insists that the non-catholic spouse not interfere with the catholic spouse's faith or the upbringing of the kids.

caitriona87 · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:09c92eaf-13bd-4e3b-a3fd-2c2b56cd3b63">Re: Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE] It means that he is ultimately going to be held somewhat accountable for how he led his family in their faith and worked to sanctify his wife. He's got the way harder job here.
Posted by agapecarrie[/QUOTE]

Yes but then doesn't it stand to reason that the husband may sometimes have to make decisions his wife doesn't like or agree with? Obviously I think a man who is sincerely trying to live this will of course want to discuss and make decisions together etc but that doesn't always bring a perfect resolution. One example I am thinking of is a couple we know when they were deciding on a baby's name (not us by the way lol...even though I was just talking about that subject!) were going back & forth for months and couldn't agree. Eventually the husband said "I'm the head of the household, his name is x." And she said "Ok."

ootmother2 · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural Wedding BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:f4805b12-37c7-491c-82cf-d1acec3eadb0">Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE]If you've studied Catholic theology regarding sexuality at all, you know that it kinda always points back to the image of the husband being like Christ, and the wife being like the Church. And that, of course, gets you right to St. Paul's lovely quote about wive's being submissive to their husbands, and husbands loving their wives as Christ loves His Church. In some repsects, I can totally see it. In others, I just can't. I don't get it. So I thought it would be nice to discuss it :) I will also add that my H would never be all "I'm a man, so you must obey me" about anything, so I thankfully never have to worry about him abusing that teaching!
Posted by Resa77[/QUOTE]

So I see you were llistening to the Gospel last week ;)

If you had looked closer, you would have seen that section was in brackets and our reader skipped over the word "submissive". I've seem that done at a few churches, Franciscan primarily, although church is not.

The priest always over explains that word anyhow. He wants to make sure that no one takes offense by the words.

Riss91 · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:f9a3c274-81b1-499b-84d9-ab44c63e4b16">Re: Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wives be submissive? : Yes but then doesn't it stand to reason that the husband may sometimes have to make decisions his wife doesn't like or agree with? Obviously I think a man who is sincerely trying to live this will of course want to discuss and make decisions together etc but that doesn't always bring a perfect resolution. One example I am thinking of is a couple we know when they were deciding on a baby's name (not us by the way lol...even though I was just talking about that subject!) were going back & forth for months and couldn't agree. Eventually the husband said "I'm the head of the household, his name is x." And she said "Ok."
Posted by caitriona87[/QUOTE]

In that example, I would think that the husband should be yielding to his wife. If he is supposed to do everything for her, to love her, to die for her, certainly he should be determined to make her happy, out of love.

Resa77 · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:50a9b346-4e8e-4ed8-b976-f926c1ce439f">Re: Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wives be submissive? : In that example, I would think that the husband should be yielding to his wife. If he is supposed to do everything for her, to love her, to die for her, certainly he should be determined to make her happy, out of love.
Posted by Riss91[/QUOTE]

Good point, Riss. See, in that sort of instance, I think that's where you see a man abusing his role.

Agape, I totally see what you're saying, and I am at this point where I almost grasp it, but I'm just a centimeter too short, you know? Becuause I start thinking "well, isn't a wife supposed to do all she can to get her husband to heaven? Isn't a wife and mother supposed to make sure her family is living in a moral, upright way? Isn't a mother expected to risk her life for her family at times, for instance when she becomes pregnant and it threatens her life? And that's when I say "husbands should submit to their wives, too!"

Riss91 · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:fd79fced-df4a-4669-915f-2151e63121cf">Re: Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wives be submissive? : Good point, Riss. See, in that sort of instance, I think that's where you see a man abusing his role. Agape, I totally see what you're saying, and I am at this point where I almost grasp it, but I'm just a centimeter too short, you know? Becuause I start thinking "well, isn't a wife supposed to do all she can to get her husband to heaven? Isn't a wife and mother supposed to make sure her family is living in a moral, upright way? Isn't a mother expected to risk her life for her family at times, for instance when she becomes pregnant and it threatens her life? And that's when I say "husbands should submit to their wives, too!"
Posted by Resa77[/QUOTE]

Yup! You are right! Yes, a woman should do what she can for her husband and kids... and that is part of "submitting" to the "will" of the husband.... lol.... see?.....circular reference!

newlyseliski · September 2012

My husband and I went to a Cana Dinner where the speaker discussed this passage. He first emphasized how completely radical this was in Paul's time as it essentially declared that spouses were equal in dignity and were mutual helpmates... which definitely went against the prevailing notion at the time of women in a marriage being slaves to their husbands' whims. Frankly, I think the husband gets the tougher end of the deal... Christ died an incredibly painful, humiliating and drawn out death for the salvation of His bride, the Church, and Paul is asking husbands to do that for their wives... daily! Just as we (the bride of Christ) are asked to submit our will to God (the groom), wives must also serve their husbands.

caitriona87 · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:50a9b346-4e8e-4ed8-b976-f926c1ce439f">Re: Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wives be submissive? : In that example, I would think that the husband should be yielding to his wife. If he is supposed to do everything for her, to love her, to die for her, certainly he should be determined to make her happy, out of love.
Posted by Riss91[/QUOTE]

But then where's the sacrifice for the wife? I think about these verses a lot myself and definitely have trouble with exactly what it is supposed to look like in practice, but I don't know that it means *only* submit to being lavished upon and all of that. If it is truly an image of Christ and the Church, certainly we are expected to obey Him even when it is painful and we feel like running in the other direction instead.

Here's another example (with more of a moral dimension than the name thing) that was used in this book we were given for marriage prep--a family has a soccer game on a Saturday but one of the grandparents is really sick. The mom and kids all want to go to the game. The father says he's decided they're going to skip it and go visit the grandparent and take the opportunity to perform a work of mercy. Legitimate use of authority? Even if not, what are mom's choices other than 'submit'? Keep arguing, or take kids to the game herself over dad's objections? Would she be justified in doing that?

ETA I believe the book was "Marriage is For Keeps"

Resa77 · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:3921c32e-1539-4476-be7c-17dc378cd73c">Re: Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wives be submissive? : But then where's the sacrifice for the wife? I think about these verses a lot myself and definitely have trouble with exactly what it is supposed to look like in practice, but I don't know that it means *only* submit to being lavished upon and all of that. If it is truly an image of Christ and the Church, certainly we are expected to obey Him even when it is painful and we feel like running in the other direction instead. Here's another example (with more of a moral dimension than the name thing) that was used in this book we were given for marriage prep--a family has a soccer game on a Saturday but one of the grandparents is really sick. The mom and kids all want to go to the game. The father says he's decided they're going to skip it and go visit the grandparent and take the opportunity to perform a work of mercy. Legitimate use of authority? Even if not, what are mom's choices other than 'submit'? Keep arguing, or take kids to the game herself over dad's objections? Would she be justified in doing that? ETA I believe the book was "Marriage is For Keeps"
Posted by caitriona87[/QUOTE]

Ok, but here's where it's weird to me: what if thefather wanted to go to the soccor game when the mom felt like it was really important to go visit a sick grandparent? Does the husband need to listen to her? Or does it only work the one way?

And as for the name....I'm thinking if my husband pulled the "wives be submissive" card to name our child after I endured 9 months of labor and a (presumably) painful labor/delivery, I would probably never want to look at him again. And I would seriously doubt whether he actually loved or respected me. But maybe that's why I have a problem with this passage LOL

agapecarrie · September 2012

Talking practicalities and "what ifs" I don't think do the passage justice, because there are too many variables:

Regarding the naming of the kid: If the husband asserts "head of the family" in order to "get his way" only, then that is abuse of the power. Is it an argument worth winning for the crushing of his wife's heart and the harm it will do his marriage?

But if the naming of the kid has been important to him his whole life, like a family name, and hopefully that was made clear before marriage, or he perhaps has an extremely close connection to the saint, then asseting "head of the family" for that name would be good as it has a spiritual good connected to it.

being head of the family does not mean asserting power, or requiring "obedience"

caitriona87 · September 2012

See, I don't know about if it was reversed. Lol. Like I said I’m trying to figure this out myself. Again if we go back to the analogy—now obviously Christ cannot be wrong, and the Church cannot be wrong on faith and morals. However the general rule is that authority (secular as well as religious) must be obeyed as long as they’re not asking us to sin, right? And that even if they are in the wrong, we will be rewarded for our obedience and they’ll take the fall for leading wrongly (again with the caveat that the moral law supersedes all others.) This is my understanding anyway.

As far as the name thing, I think how I’d personally take it would depend a lot on the husband’s attitude…I think you can usually tell when somebody’s being selfish and having a tantrum to get their way, vs. a true conviction that x route is best for the family…I mean if he’s the spiritual leader, and he’s accountable to God for the way he leads the family…then wouldn’t he maybe sometimes be *obligated* to exercise that authority? Like how about the naming of John the Baptist? Wasn’t Elizabeth wanting/expecting the baby to be Zechariah after the father as was the tradition but he insisted on John because God had revealed it to him. Now I am not saying this husband I’m talking about had a revelation or anything, lol, I have no idea. Just thinking out loud about the whole thing.

I think we also have to remember (like somebody mentioned upthread I think) that at the time it was written this passage was “offensive” from the OTHER direction—much too dignity-of-women for the liking of the people of that day just like people in our day tend to be offended from the opposite angle by the submission piece. The proper balance is probably somewhere in the middle but I think we’ve got to be open to the possibility that certain errors of our age may cloud our own view of it just like the opposite errors of another age did for those people.

erin5286 · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural Wedding BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:753930cd-08c7-4181-b4bf-7271d72b48b2">Re: Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE]Talking practicalities and "what ifs" I don't think do the passage justice, because there are too many variables: Regarding the naming of the kid: If the husband asserts "head of the family" in order to "get his way" only, then that is abuse of the power. Is it an argument worth winning for the crushing of his wife's heart and the harm it will do his marriage? But if the naming of the kid has been important to him his whole life, like a family name, and hopefully that was made clear before marriage, or he perhaps has an extremely close connection to the saint, then asseting "head of the family" for that name would be good as it has a spiritual good connected to it. being head of the family does not mean asserting power, or requiring "obedience"
Posted by agapecarrie[/QUOTE]

See, and I think we have to be able to talk practicalities and "what ifs" in order to really be able to understand the passage and how it should apply to our lives. I feel like I understand the idea behind the circular reference, and spouses submitting/deferring to one another, but if I can't figure out how to actually apply it to situations that will come up in my real life, it won't do me any good.

agapecarrie · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:26a98d52-c809-4c09-bb98-01db298ecde3">Re: Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wives be submissive? : See, and I think we have to be able to talk practicalities and "what ifs" in order to really be able to understand the passage and how it should apply to our lives. I feel like I understand the idea behind the circular reference, and spouses submitting/deferring to one another, but if I can't figure out how to actually apply it to situations that will come up in my real life, it won't do me any good.
Posted by erin5286[/QUOTE]

<div>But you're trying to prepare for every situation then, because you can't possibly know all the variables that will come up. It may even be detrimental because you could go into things having a certain understanding of how things should go, but then the situation has extra variables that completely change the nature of everything.</div><div>
</div><div>I understand having an idea, but the family should always be rooted in prayer, praying together. A situation comes up, you pray about it, seek spiritual direction, talk it out, and always have an attitude of giving completely of oneself, unconditionally. That is the path to holiness. </div>

Resa77 · September 2012

Agape, I totally agree with that. But that doesn't sound like wives submitting as much as it sounds like spouses submitting, so that's where I get confused. It's a lot to wrap my mind around!

erin5286 · September 2012

I didn't mean to imply that every situation or "what if" should be talked about beforehand, just that I don't think it inherently lessens the passage to use a few examples as we talk about it. Any decision on how best to handle a situation should be made by the couple after talking and praying about it, but I don't see any harm in talking things over with others. Sometimes hearing another's opinion or interpretation can help guide me in the right direction or get me thinking in a way I might not have on my own.

Riss91 · September 2012

stolen off the interwebs - I thought this was a good sumamry:

Wives are not called to submit to husbands merely for the sake of submission to an authoritarian. They are called to submit to their husbands as they would to Christ because the husband in the marital relationship signifies Christ. Likewise, husbands are called to serve their wives, not for the sake of mere servility, but as Christ served the Church. The wife in the marital relationship signifies the Church. Just as wives are called to submit to husbands even when they'd rather not, so husbands sacrifice for their wives even when they'd rather not because that is what Christ did out of obedience to the Father for the sake of his bride, the Church (cf. Luke 22:41-42). This sometimes may mean that the husband may have to sacrifice his will in a particular matter when he realizes that what his wife proposes is the greater good. Likewise, a wife submits her will to her husband's when he calls her to a greater good.

Wives submitting to husbands is only slightly different than husbands serving/sacrificing for their wives. I think this is why it seems like both spouses are submitting/sacrificing to each other. It's important to remember that really you are both working towards the greater good, God's will.

Resa77 · September 2012

I actually started thinking about this because of reading Christopher West (Good News...), and it didn't quite click for me. I agree with Erin, that sometimes hearing something explained in a different way, with a different example, from a different person is what it takes for things to finally click.

Riss91 · September 2012

I think the general rule can apply in all practical situations:

Husband's job is to sacrifice for his wife and family, to ensure that they are all working towards God's will. (NOT the husband's will, God's). Wife's job is to participate in this mission. If the husband is leading them astray of God's will, she is NOT to yield to her husband.

So, in the case where the wife wants to go to a game, but the husband wants to visit/pray for a sick relative - God's will would be to choose helping others over entertainment, so the wife should follow the husband's lead.

In the reverse situation, the wife should insist that they visit/pray for the relative as it would be God's will to do so.

In a situation where either option is equally part of God's will, I would hope the couple can figure out a way to include both, or prioritize.

In a situation where both options are neutral to God's will (should we make ziti or ravioli for dinner), the couple should discuss and come to an agreement together, though personally I would expect the husband to make the sacrifice.

bibliophile2010 · September 2012

Using the name example, I can see this working in my own life.

Before we were married, H and I agreed that any children would have saint's names. In addition, I was adamant that, if we ever had a daughter, I wanted to use "L" as a middle name in honor of my late mother. The whole thing was still sort of a fantasy, so there was never anything final about it.

Fast forward a few years, and I was pregnant with a daughter. H really wanted to consider other middle names for our LO, but saw how important L was to me, and so C's middle name is L. I vaguely assumed that future children would also have family names for middle names.

The other day, we were talking about names for future children, and I made a remark that I was having trouble thinking of middle names from his side of the family. He said that he didn't necessarily want to use family names for middles in the future, but wanted to use additional saint's names. I said I was okay with this and the conversation turned in that direction (which Saints' names we like as middles).

Subtly, I think these are an example of this. In the first case (naming C), H surrendered his will to mine, seeing how important the choice was to me. The fact that L is the name of a saint -- just one to whom neither of us has a particular devotion -- made this an easier decision to make, because it is still aligned with the spiritual health of the family. In the second case (middle names for future children), I surrendered my will to H's. I didn't have any strong reason to hold my ground, so I relented to his "authority," recognizing that his choice was for the spiritual health of the family.

I agree with Agape that "what ifs" don't really enlighten situations very well. Decisions should be made through prayer and communication. There are times when the loving thing is for a husband to submit his will to his wife's. There are times when a wife should be submissive to her husband. Our married vocation means working to get one another to Heaven. When the tough decisions need to be made, we need to rely on the Spirit to guide us, not merely pull some "what if " rubric out of a hat.

NOLAbridealmost · September 2012

I really am finding this post interesting and I really appreciate the enlightened opinions about the husband sacrificing for the wife and the wife serving the husband all to ultimately try to do God's will. But I do think it sort of begs the question, if the roles aren't really that different from each other, why specify the roles in gender terms anyway? Why not just adopt the view that marriages are strongest when each spouse takes on one of those roles--and pay no mind to which one takes which role?

agapecarrie · September 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_wives-be-submissive?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:dae11fda-1bbc-440d-9f09-ccda82f44ca5Post:bf920c97-9c3e-4de2-a999-9a6d476d2b9f">Re: Wives be submissive?</a>:
[QUOTE]I really am finding this post interesting and I really appreciate the enlightened opinions about the husband sacrificing for the wife and the wife serving the husband all to ultimately try to do God's will. But I do think it sort of begs the question, if the roles aren't really that different from each other, why specify the roles in gender terms anyway? Why not just adopt the view that marriages are strongest when each spouse takes on one of those roles--and pay no mind to which one takes which role?
Posted by NOLAbridealmost[/QUOTE
<div>
</div><div>Well, I think its obvious today.. with the distorted understanding that we even have to define that there must actually be a husband and a wife. That the Husband images God the Father to his children. This is how the beginning of our relationship with God starts. The man is the initiator, woman is the receiver. The husband is accountable as head of the family. Love and Responsibility goes into this a lot more.</div><div>
</div>

Riss91 · September 2012

Also, it is the simple fact that there is a difference between and man and a woman. Our society today is so concerned about trying to prove that thu are equal that it almost seems like we try to pretend that we arent different. Having a designated role doesn't mean you are incapable of the other role. Men are fathers, women are mothers. Thay doesnt mean men cant do "motherly" things and vice versa. It is just the designation that we give to men/women. Similarly, Men represent Christ and women represent his Church.

Wives be submissive?

Re: Wives be submissive?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards