| Author | |
lapazfarm
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 21 2005
Location: Alaska
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6082
|
| Posted: Sept 06 2006 at 9:23pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Helen,
That was my point exactly. Submission does not have to mean wimpy. In our home it certainly does not. I consider myself an example of how one can be both submissive and strong (though hardly saint-like, I am trying!LOL!).
It takes strength to recognize your husband's superiority in some areas and follow his lead, and to be there with your own strengths to fill in for his weaknesses. This is why God made us two halves but joined us into one. So that we can be whole.
__________________
Theresa
us-schooling in beautiful Fairbanks, Alaska.
LaPaz Home Learning
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Sept 06 2006 at 9:54pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I have a lovely friend who talks about submission being a dance between the particular husband and wife.. beautiful when they're moving together no matter what moves they're doing.. but not at all pretty when they're not cooperating. Meaning that while the theory of submission is the same for all, how it works for a particular couple will look different than it looks for other couples.
As far as being a strong personality.. second in command can be strong too. Ever heard of an elite military group with a weak second in command? Or that such a person would be ashamed of being second instead of first?
My dh is a firefighter and I also, need to be strong to be a true helpmeet to my husband. He needs to know that I can handle anything that comes up while he's gone.
But I do have a rather strong personality and it would be easy enough to run roughshod over him even when he is here. But what I've found is that when I back off and don't rush him he does just fine without me trying to "help".
For us what works best is for me to mention something coming up, then mention again that I'll need an answer by such and such time, and then ask when such and such time happens for the answer. Some dh's would find this nagging. And it could be with the wrong tone/attitude.. I think of it more like the secretary telling the boss.. you have 3 appointments today and lunch with the president.. not telling him what to do or trying to make him do something in particular.. but giving a heads up, this is coming, type of info.
What that's doing is giving him time to stew on it.. and then brings it up again so he knows that he needs to put some thought in on it asap.
But it is not me telling him what to do.
And the more agreeably I take and follow the things he does decide on.. the better he becomes at doing the deciding.. because I'm not there making it harder for him.. he knows I'll back him up.. and he also knows that I'll give him information and my opinion.
It does feel lopsided at times when discussing what you should do.. because you only see your side.. but you need to do your side of things.. even if he's not doing his so well either.
Jodie
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Dawnie
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 30 2005
Location: Kansas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 841
|
| Posted: Sept 06 2006 at 10:34pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I was recently introduced to a different way of looking at the whole "submission" issue.
In confession, my priest encouraged me to look at the verses in Ephesians being discussed here and think of how my husband is like Christ in our home ("husbands, love your wives as Christ loves the Church"). He also encouraged me to pray for that grace for my husband. Whenever I read that passage of scripture before, I focused on St. Paul's instruction to wives, and never thought of how his instruction to husbands might be useful for me to meditate on, too. While thinking about it, I realized that I often make a greater effort to see Christ in my children than I do in my husband. It was a whole new perspective, for me, to try to respond to my dh as I would to Christ. If Jesus walked into the kitchen and asked me to make his lunch for him before He went to work, would I roll my eyes and go "all riiiiiiight..," making it clear that I'd much rather keep surfing the Internet? No way! Yet I've done that to my dh.  If Jesus said something that was difficult for me to understand, would I automatically jump to conclusions, or would I humbly and charitably ask for clarification so I could understand? If Jesus didn't do an errand or a chore that I asked him to do, would I get mad at Him, or assume that he innocently forgot or didn't have time for it? If Jesus came home from work needing to talk about some tough things He dealt with, would I tune Him out, or would I listen?
Maybe another way of thinking of this whole issue could be like the verse in Matthew..."whatever you do to the least of these, you do to Me," except it would read "whatever you do to your husband, you do to Me..."
Just a different way of looking at things, at least for me it was...
Dawn
__________________
Mom to Mary Beth (99), Anna (02), Lucia (04), Clara (06), and Adelaide Victoria (2/28/09)
Visit my blog!Water Into Wine:Vino Per Tutto!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
lapazfarm
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 21 2005
Location: Alaska
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6082
|
| Posted: Sept 06 2006 at 11:07pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Dawn, I find that way of looking at it very appealing. Thanks!
__________________
Theresa
us-schooling in beautiful Fairbanks, Alaska.
LaPaz Home Learning
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Sarah
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 17 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1624
|
| Posted: Sept 06 2006 at 11:33pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Great everybody! TONS to digest here.
What do you all think of this opinion:
I once had a spiritual director tell me that submitting to your husband was only needed in matters that pertained to YOU, not the children. He explained further that mothers were given a special insight to the needs of their children that fathers may not see.
I wouldn't put big issues like educational choices and such under that umbrella, because they fall under the "head of the household" category, if that makes sense. I think he meant more like the basic care of the kids. For example, let's say your husband wants to add just one more errand to your afternoon, but you KNOW that it means a total meltdown for the baby who NEEDS to nurse. The errand is important. Would you not be wrong in telling him that we just needed to get home?
Perhaps attachment parenting could be viewed the same, Rebecca.
Could a husband ask a wife to bottlefeed? Could he ask her to put the newborn to sleep in another room, if she believed this to be an inferior method of mothering? Can a husband ask a wife to put a small child in day care, if they will survive without her working?
She has a duty as mother to these little people. Are those reasonable requests that she must submit too? (I'm talking under ordinary circumstances here).
Common sense I guess has to be part of all this, which is why MacBeth reminded us to see the WHOLE PICTURE St. Paul wrote about.
__________________
Six boys ages 16, 14, 11, 7, 5, 2 and one girl age 9
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ALmom
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 18 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3299
|
| Posted: Sept 06 2006 at 11:39pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Jodie:
I love your description. My dh is soft spoken - a good leader but needs to have time to ponder. He is not one to be rushed. He sometimes thinks he has given an idea of what he wants, when in fact he has never said a thing about it. I have to make sure I understand what it is he may have in mind. He grew up with only a brother so it has taken a while to understand how my mind works and he sometimes thinks he has elicited my opinion or expressed himself - when, in fact, I've never heard any such thing (not to say he hasn't done it in his own way, but I just didn't pick up on it) We have had some really hysterical conversations at the dinner table of late with dd discussing what they are discovering about the difference in the way men and women communicate. I see my dh taking mentatl notes - this has been a tremendous help to him.
I am opinionated (never in danger of being a doormat), strong - willed and generally impatient. I am sure people see my strong opinions in my posts. My dh certainly respects my abilities (sometimes he overestimates what I am capable of) and does not expect me to ask for every little thing. Nor do I ask when I am certain that this is an area he wants me to handle. But I do avoid getting impatient and just taking over - sometimes not easy for me to do. I am not likely to be a Yes, dear. I found myself really rebelling against the Protestant, evangelical versions of submission that I ran into as they sounded more like doormat wives. Yes, my dh would not like that and I doubt that I could last more than a second like that.
I am not hesitant to express a disagreement, but I need to do it in such a way that it does aknowldege my dh as head of the household (I am its heart). I don't think this is against submission - actually it is an important part of it.
#1 never in front of anyone else #2 with the clear understanding that I will respect his decision if this is final and if that is what he really does think is right, but I want to try and understand (and I really do want to understand and am not just saying this to get my way #3 Respectfully submitting my input - what I have seen, what aspects will make this difficult, etc. when I have that go ahead from him (he always wants my opinion and often thinks he has elicited it and generally asks for it in the course of this conversation - he is a man of very few words and somehow thinks I read his mind so is very glad to finally get my opinion usually). #4 after we have both completely expressed ourselves, then I must be able to accept and follow through and support whatever decsion he makes. Now, the more I support in the decision, the more willing he is to take and maintain his leadership. I have to be most careful at this stage as I can be arguemenative - cause sometimes I just love a good debate for the sake of the exercise of gray matter and I still have my fallen nature that always wants its own way and not that of another. I have never regretted submitting - whether the decision has turned out to be the wisest or not (and usually it is a great decision cause my dh is a very smart guy and doesn't do knee jerks on emotion but thinks things out very carefully) This is why I sometimes think he takes soooo long to decide and must exercise a bit of patience. I do think God put us together because we do complement each other so well - and we each have to work on areas of weakness in order to understand the other!
Now dh has always welcomed my input, mostly he is expressing his opinion to elicit my comments - though if I am unsure whether or not this is a decision or a request for input, I certainly ask. At times he has reversed a decision or opinion after discussion - but if I have been submissive in heart, I know that it was not because of my badgering but because he truely thought it best. ( I remember one time in particular and I knew dh had been dead right about so much with our oldest dd and what was going on. I was clear on this. I also knew he had decided to say no to something based on these things that he was so right about. I had been so slow to see some of this myself so I really wanted him to know that I didn't want him to change his mind if he felt it wasn't right - but I did feel a need to express a simple gut instinct that maybe we should say yes this time as it was a very controlled circumstance with built in limit of very little time and a safe opportunity for our dd to discover for herself that we had been right about all that we had been telling her. I told him I didn't have any real, hard information to back any of this and I really wanted him to do whatever he felt best, but I just felt I needed to give him this piece of my gut to consider. He thought about it for a while - and agreed with me and went up to tell our dd that he felt she could do this this once. Well, it all turned out very well. DD was eternally grateful to her dad (as far as she knew this was all him, and it really was his call), she discovered that everything we'd been saying was very true and learned some important lessons without being in harms way.
Now I have also done the begging routine (not necessarily intentionally mind you) and simply worn dh out - these were not submissive and I promise you, I regretted every single time. It always turned out badly and I wished I'd just listened to my dh in the first place.
I have found that I have to do much like you describe - but it is all in my attitude. I also have to be careful. Sometimes when I express my opinions too strongly, I will doubt whether it is really my dh deciding or me being overwhelming and then, even if my dh did do the deciding on his own, I am insecure because of the manner in which I expressed my opinions. I love a good, strong debate just for the fun of exercising the grey matter. And there are certainly times when my dh wants and asks me to take charge on certain things - I do but it is important for me to occassionally report back to make sure we are still in tune (kind of like with the boss I had that would give a generic assignment and you were never quite sure what he wanted. I learned to do my darndest to read his mind, but then come back to him with a sample when there was still plenty of time to change directions. It forced him to clarify exactly what he had in mind, cause he wasn't the best communicator in the world. I got along with this retired Marine Corps boss just fine and he always seemed pleased with my work even when I was totally misreading what he wanted cause maybe he hadn't quite decided yet and whatever I did put together clarified for him what he really had in mind - at least it forced him to stop long enough to communicate just a bit better, whereas many folks got their heads chewed off by him in very public ways for doing what they thought he asked for. Now, because I am so strong willed and opinionated, I find myself being uncertain of dh if I haven't been submissive in heart and attitude (despite the fact that I know my dh stands on his own two feet and is not likely to be pushed around by me, I still know that I have the ability to wear the best down when I am at my worst).
Oh, and by the way, dh cooking depends. Is he doing it because he wants to or because wife has been too lazy or disorganized to do it. Maybe he simply wants to lend a hand. I know my sis's dh will tell her that he is in charge of thanksgiving dinner. He was a head baker when they first married - before getting masters in engineering and he simply likes to relax with it at times. He has also insisted on teaching the dd how to cook - he teases us that we never learned to cook right (and that is true) but he really enjoys it. My my sis does have dinner on the table when he comes home from work. My grandfather insisted on serving my grandmother in bed every Sunday for the duration of their married life. It was his way of expressing appreciation for her and insisting that she had some Sunday rest, too. I don't think it is a matter of who does what - but the dh is the one who is overall in charge of the family. He is the head who has the final right and responsibility for decisions. As helpmeet, I am responsible for implementing these, acting in his stead in areas he has implicitly or explicitly delegated to me and when he is not present. Obviously, I would strive to do this in a way that is in keeping with the general rules, desires, etc. that he has expressed. My dh could care a less about beds made, but he cannot stand clutter on the living room floor. If time is short and I cannot get to everything, then the floor gets cleared, the beds remain unmade. I try to be attentive to quietly expressed desires. Dh said he was running low on work shirts (even if it was in passing), then I need to try to make sure I have ironed his shirts, or looked them over to see that they are not all worn out - and perhaps pick up a few more shirts for him. If he is annoyed at my computer time then I get off. (And, yes, this has happened and I found how easy it is for me to ignore dh when I should be paying attention to him). Now I know that he likes for me to wait till after dc are in bed - but I know I need to balance the time with him as this is our prime visiting time so I may need to limit computer time a lot.
Just some thoughts. And, yes, I do agree, our own temperments play into how this all looks in our families, but there have to be some common threads in the attitude of acknowledging the dh as head of the family.
Janet
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bridget
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2198
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 7:01am | IP Logged
|
|
|
MacBeth wrote:
But doesn't it (mustn't it?) work both ways? Shouldn't a husband have a deep respect for the thoughts and feelings of the wife, especially in the home?
|
|
|
Of course it should. But we can only control ourselves. Our call to submission is not dependent on him answering his call.
i married a VERY difficult man. He has always been a good man, but very difficult. When he had a heart attack 3 years ago, I realized we may not have much time left with him. I wanted a great marriage and the kids to have a great relationship with their father.
That is when I began to learn about and live submission. It went against everything in me. But I submitted WITH JOY AND LOVE AND ENTHUSIASM in everything. I wanted him to be happy, proud of his home and family.
It's hard to even express how great the rewards have been. He lives the role St. Paul outlined for husbands. He adores us all and wants to be home with us as often as he can. He is a confident, capable leader. He has gotten quite fit and healthy. He is excelling at work. He looks at me with such tenderness and love. We tease and laugh. He is faithful in his prayer life.
I'm sure some of this is the result of maturing and his own journey after his heart attack. But he often tells me how thankful he is that I'm his wife and how good I am for him.
I'm sure this is way TMI, and I could go on and on, I feel like I'm hogging this thread.
There is much we can do to make our marriages so much richer.
__________________
God Bless,
Bridget, happily married to Kevin, mom to 8 on earth and a small army in heaven
Our Magnum Opus
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
esperanza
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 17 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 855
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 7:32am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Bridget wrote:
[QUOTE=MacBeth]
I feel like I'm hogging this thread. There is much we can do to make our marriages so much richer. |
|
|
Not at all ...Bridget...I love when you post about marriage. You are always an inspiration to me! Thank you for sharing your love of God and your family.
__________________
In His Peace,
Tammy Gonzalez in VA
dh-Johnny
mom to Tara-'85, Noelle-'88, Jeremy-'91, Elizabeth-'93, Emma-'96, Dominic-'99, Gabriel-'01, Elijah-03
and Jacinta-06
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Jen L.
Forum All-Star
Joined: Oct 18 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2148
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 8:14am | IP Logged
|
|
|
esperanza wrote:
Not at all ...Bridget...I love when you post about marriage. You are always an inspiration to me! Thank you for sharing your love of God and your family. |
|
|
Ditto.
__________________
Jen
dh Klete,ds (8/95),dd (12/97), dd (11/00), and ^2^ in heaven
"...the best state in which to glorify God is our actual state; the best grace is that of the moment..." St. Peter Eymard
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MacBeth
Forum All-Star
Probably at the beach...
Joined: Jan 27 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 10:50am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Bridget wrote:
But we can only control ourselves. Our call to submission is not dependent on him answering his call.
|
|
|
Oh, I agree. I hope you didn't think I was missing that point , though I bet it sounded that way. I was just pointing out that St. Paul was not being one sided, but was calling both husband and wife to Christian duty.
Yes, we are responsible for our own behavior. Absolutely; and holding my tongue is OFTEN a struggle  .
One more thing to think about before I return to domestic work...when I married Don, I had that pesky "obey" part left out of the vows (this was before I was a more clueful Catholic  ). We were having dinner on our 10th anniversary, and I apologized for leaving it out, saying that I was sorry I did not trust him enough to promise to obey. He laughed and replied, "That's OK. I trusted you enough not to have you have say it."
__________________
God Bless!
MacBeth in NY
Don's wife since '88; "Mom" to the Fab 4
Nature Study
MacBeth's Blog
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 11:19am | IP Logged
|
|
|
MacBeth wrote:
Oh, I agree. I hope you didn't think I was missing that point , though I bet it sounded that way. I was just pointing out that St. Paul was not being one sided, but was calling both husband and wife to Christian duty.
|
|
|
Yes, to me it is central to the whole truth that it is reciprocal -- a parallel to Christ's relationship to the Church (deeper and more sacramental than a parallel but a better word isn't coming to mind right now).
Of course that does NOT mean that it's fifty/fifty. Christ poured Himself out like water for his Spouse, who in the old Testament had been unfaithful and adulterous, and we are to do the same. That means we do all of our part, not conditionally, not waiting for the other one in the marriage to do his part.
But without the whole truth of a reciprocal relationship, the part is not complete. If it stood by itself in objective terms -- all the duties owed only by one partner in the marriage -- then it wouldn't be ontologically right. It would be a sort of power struggle with all the power on one side, sort of as the feminists claim.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Martha
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 25 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2291
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 12:00pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Bridget wrote:
MacBeth wrote:
But doesn't it (mustn't it?) work both ways? Shouldn't a husband have a deep respect for the thoughts and feelings of the wife, especially in the home?
|
|
|
Of course it should. But we can only control ourselves. Our call to submission is not dependent on him answering his call.
....I feel like I'm hogging this thread. |
|
|
Bridget! Please don't feel that way. You are a great inspiration and I think this thread is great so far. I actually agree with you on this.
Willa wrote:
| But without the whole truth of a reciprocal relationship, the part is not complete. If it stood by itself in objective terms -- all the duties owed only by one partner in the marriage -- then it wouldn't be ontologically right. It would be a sort of power struggle with all the power on one side, sort of as the feminists claim. |
|
|
I would disagree. If someone doesn't love me the way God says they should, that does not absolve me of the obligation to love them the way God says I should. It certainly makes it harder and maybe less personally gratifying. But I still must love them. In fact, I may need to love them even more! I can only imagine this truth multiplies in need when we are dealing with our husbands.
Now, I'm not saying women who don't "submit" don't love their husbands! Please don't think that.
I'm saying that what is true and what is commanded by God doesn't change for us because someone else doesn't do it - even if that someone is our beloved.
"I love Him, because He first loved me?"
I think this may be very true in marriage as well. As a wife, I feel I must always be willing to love him first.
__________________
Martha
mama to 7 boys & 4 girls
Yes, they're all ours!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Patty LeVasseur
Forum Pro
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 238
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 12:39pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I have found this all very interesting and it has made me think about those times when I have obeyed my husband. My husband was the one that wanted to attachment parent. My husband was the one that wanted to homeschool. And my husband was the one that wanted to nurse our children (well, really he wanted me to do that  ).
But the other thing that I got from your posts that I found very helpful, was your comments about how different you are from your husbands and how you can still make it work. My husband and I have been known to wonder what God was thinking when he matched us up, because we are very different--he is more of a rush in and change the world kind of person and I am really, really cautious.
Just wanted to let you know the thought of different people living together in harmony and complimenting each other made my day.
__________________
Patty
mom to four blessings
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 1:50pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Martha wrote:
Willa wrote:
| But without the whole truth of a reciprocal relationship, the part is not complete. If it stood by itself in objective terms -- all the duties owed only by one partner in the marriage -- then it wouldn't be ontologically right. It would be a sort of power struggle with all the power on one side, sort of as the feminists claim. |
|
|
I would disagree. If someone doesn't love me the way God says they should, that does not absolve me of the obligation to love them the way God says I should. It certainly makes it harder and maybe less personally gratifying. But I still must love them. In fact, I may need to love them even more! I can only imagine this truth multiplies in need when we are dealing with our husbands. |
|
|
I don't mean to answer for Willa but I didn't get the sense that she was saying it released us of our obligation to love. Nothing does that, but rather the point is that if the relationship is only one-sided, it isn't as God intends. While the cooperating party (husband or wife as the case may be) can do what they are able - and of course what God requires - it still remains defective. That's not to say that God can't work through that because we know He can and does but we need to recognize that there are situations where it doesn't work out that way and families, most often children, still suffer. Free will on the part of the spouses means they can reject the movement of the Holy Spirit. They can still choose to sin and the rest of the family still suffers for it. I have watched someone close to me go through this and while her marriage is doing well now there was a time when it was not and she could not just be submissive to her husband and still protect her children. She had to be very strong and firm with her husband (as her spiritual director agreed she needed to be) and in the end things have come around. BUT, as is so often the case with sin, there are lingering effects to all this and while her marriage is certainly much better now she struggles with fear and trust issues (which I know she prays regularly about). There are lasting effects and they are still painful. If she had simply been submissive to her husband who knows where they would be now. I can't go into details because it is not my place but this was not a case of just be submissive and all will come out right. My point is that I am not arguing against being submissive but that one-sided it doesn't work and that's because it's not how God intends it. Mind you there's a difference between the extreme cases and the less difficult ones but it still goes back to what Willa wrote about it not being ontologically correct. It isn't and there are consequences to that.
I agree with what Elizabeth wrote previously about embracing the entire deposit of the faith learning from every bit of it. However, I do wonder if the more recent writings on this topic might prove more useful since we know that Church's understanding of certain teachings do in fact grow and develop, and reflection and study by later Popes (specifically JPII) and theologians can and often does, bring new insights and deeper penetration.
Lastly, I wonder how much of our thinking in this area has been affected by Protestant teaching which does not have the fullness of truth. I don't know the answer to these questions as I am still studying and trying to get a clearer picture of authentic Catholic teaching on this issue.
God bless,
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Helen
Forum All-Star
Joined: Dec 03 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2826
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 1:51pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Martha wrote:
| As a wife, I feel I must always be willing to love him first. |
|
|
Just beautiful.
__________________
Ave Maria!
Mom to 5 girls and 3 boys
Mary Vitamin & Castle of the Immaculate
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Martha
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 25 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2291
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 2:35pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
MicheleQ wrote:
| I don't mean to answer for Willa but I didn't get the sense that she was saying it released us of our obligation to love. Nothing does that, but rather the point is that if the relationship is only one-sided, it isn't as God intends. While the cooperating party (husband or wife as the case may be) can do what they are able - and of course what God requires - it still remains defective. |
|
|
I don't think she meant that either. I was responding to the often heard, How or why should I have to do this if he is not holding up his end of the covenant? scenario.
I agree we are never allowed to stop loving. Thank goodnes!
Yes, such a marriage would be defective and not as God intends.
However, imho, the first step to getting closer to repairing it and making it Godly is to do our best to be as whole and Godly wife as possible. I would think anything else would actually make it less so? By being willing to be the first. To repeatedly be the first, even when rejected. We not only set an example for how we want to be loved and the marriage God intends, we create a situation where doing so is desirable to both the husband and wife.
I can't claim to "get" the submissive wife concept.
But I can say when my dh is confident of my love and trust for him and knows that all I do is truely out of love - it makes him more comfortable loving me and doing all he does for us. I know he'd quit his job this very day if not for that. Not only does he not quit, he does not resent us or become bitter and angry about it. In fact, he is proud to do it for us and works hard to do better.
Also, as a side note. I think it contributes greatly to his acceptance of my conversion to the church, the raising of our children in the faith, and our living the faith in our daily lives. I don't know that I would have converted if he had fought me on it. It's my personal little miracle.
__________________
Martha
mama to 7 boys & 4 girls
Yes, they're all ours!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 2:54pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Willa wrote:
| But without the whole truth of a reciprocal relationship, the part is not complete. If it stood by itself in objective terms -- all the duties owed only by one partner in the marriage -- then it wouldn't be ontologically right. It would be a sort of power struggle with all the power on one side, sort of as the feminists claim. |
|
|
Martha wrote:
| I don't think she meant that either. I was responding to the often heard, How or why should I have to do this if he is not holding up his end of the covenant? scenario. |
|
|
OK then I'm not understanding what you were disagreeing with in Willa's statement. I'm obviously missing something.
God bless,
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
stacykay
Forum All-Star
Joined: April 08 2006
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1858
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 3:03pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I just finished reading the Fr. John paper. Here are some things I found interesting (and the paper isn't a whole 133 pages, only 116, as the last pages from 117 on are his bibliography!)
Fr. Riccardo begins his chapter on headship with this:
"The author of the Letter to the Ephesians writes: “For [only] in the same way that the Messiah is the head of the church – he, the savior of his body – is the husband the head of his wife” (5:23). Several points must be made here. First, this is an analogy. In analogies, a judgment is being made that there is some objective feature held in common by different realities. The husband’s headship is analogous to Christ’s headship. It is most important to keep in mind here the teaching of the Church regarding the analogy of being, namely, that “no similarity can be said to hold between Creator and creature which does not imply a greater dissimilarity between the two.” Clearly, then, the husband’s headship is a limited one in comparison to Christ’s, but it is still a real one."
And he continues, in part, quoting St. John Chrysostom:
"He begins his discourse on Eph 5 by affirming, “There is no relationship between human beings as close as that of husband and wife, if they are united as they ought to be.” ... Chrysostom contrasts the husband-wife relationship to the master-servant relationship: “A servant can be taught submission through fear; but even he, if provoked too much, will soon seek his escape. But one’s partner for life, the mother of one’s children, the source of one’s every joy, should never be fettered with fear and threats, but with love and patience. What kind of marriage can there be when the wife is afraid of her husband?”...
Chrysostom even refers to the wife as “a second authority.” “The wife is a secondary authority, but nevertheless she possesses real authority and equality of dignity while the husband still retains the role of headship; the welfare of the household is thus maintained.”...
In some ways anticipating what John Paul II will write nearly 1600 years later, Chrysostom affirms both the equality in dignity and worth of the spouses and the exclusive headship of the husband. Let us assume, then, that the husband is to occupy the place of the head, and the wife that of the body, and listen to what “headship” means:
“For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church, His Body, and is Himself its Savior”…Notice that after saying “the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church,” he immediately says that the Church is His Body, and He Himself is its Savior. It is the head that upholds the well-being of the body.... One of the purposes of headship, according to Chrysostom, is to be the ultimate means of “peace” within the household, for “where there is equal authority, there never is
peace. A household cannot be a democracy, ruled by everyone, but the authority must necessarily rest in one person.”...
The model for this authority is, of course, Jesus, the head of the Church; Christ’s love for the Church “informs” the husband’s love for his bride. “To the husband he [the author of Ephesians] speaks of love, and obliges him to love, and tells him how he should love, thus binding and cementing him to his wife…Do you not see, husband, the great honor that God desires you to give to your wife? He has taken you from your father and bound you to her.”
Listed below are the writings of Pope John Paul II that Father Riccardo used in his paper (in case you want to check some of them out!  ):
"Writings of Pope John Paul II/Karol Wojtyla:
John Paul II. Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus. Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 1991. __________.
Post-Synodal Exhortation Christifideles Laici. Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 1988. __________.
Encyclical Letter Dominum et Vivificantem. Sherbrooke: Éditions Paulines, 1986. __________.
Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae. Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 1995. __________.
Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio. Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 1981. __________.
Letter to Families. Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 1994. __________.
Letter to Women. Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 1995. __________.
Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1988. __________.
Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte. Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 2001. __________.
Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Pastores Dabo Vobis. Vatican City: Liberia Editrice Vaticana, 1992. __________.
Apostolic Exhortation Redemptoris Custos. Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 1989. __________.
The Theology of Marriage and Celibacy. Boston: St. Paul Editions, 1986. __________.
The Theology of the Body: Human Love and the Divine Plan. Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 1997. Wojtyla, Karol.
The Collected Plays and Writings on Theater. Translated by with introduction by Boleslaw Taborski. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987. 117
____________.
Persona e atto. Translated by Giuseppe Girgenti e Patrycja Mikulska. Santarcangelo di Romagna: Rusconi Libri, 1999. ____________.
Person and Community: Selected Essays. Translated by Theresa Sandok, OSM. New York: Peter Lang, 1993. ____________.
Sources of Renewal: The Implementation of Vatican II. Translated by P.S. Falla. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980.
Secondary Writings
Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. Original Text with English Translation. New York: B. Herder Book Co., 1941.
Discorsi e Radiomessaggi di sua Santitá Pio XII. XI vols. Vatican City: Tipografia Poliglotta Vaticana, 1939-1950.
Enchiridion Familiae: Textos del Magisterio Pontificio y Conciliar sobre Matrimonio y la Familia. Edited by Augusto Sarmiento and Javier Escrivá-Ivars. 6 vols. Navarre, Rome: Universidad de Navarra y Istituto Giovanni Paolo II per Studi su Matrimonio e Famiglia, 1992.
The Roman Household. A Sourcebook. Edited by Jane F. and Wiedemann Gardner, Thomas. London: Routledge, 1991. Vatican II: The Conciliar and Post-Conciliar Documents. Gen. Ed. Austin Flannery, O.P. (Northport: Costello Publishing Co., 1975).
What an amazing Pope we had in John Paul II. I still get misty-eyed, talking about him! 
I am so appreciative for this thread. I love reading everything you all have written. The personal sharing, knowledge, wisdom and love that comes throughout it all, I am in awe.
God Bless,
Stacy in MI
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Martha
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 25 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2291
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 3:30pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
MicheleQ wrote:
Willa wrote:
| But without the whole truth of a reciprocal relationship, the part is not complete. If it stood by itself in objective terms -- all the duties owed only by one partner in the marriage -- then it wouldn't be ontologically right. It would be a sort of power struggle with all the power on one side, sort of as the feminists claim. |
|
|
Martha wrote:
| I don't think she meant that either. I was responding to the often heard, How or why should I have to do this if he is not holding up his end of the covenant? scenario. |
|
|
OK then I'm not understanding what you were disagreeing with in Willa's statement. I'm obviously missing something.
|
|
|
More likely I'm just not being very clear. sorry.
I don't think that a marriage always ends up a power struggle if the dh doesn't reciprocate. If the wife is submissive, how is he able to struggle for something she is not taking - in this case power? Are all marital disagreements or decisions about power? 
__________________
Martha
mama to 7 boys & 4 girls
Yes, they're all ours!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Sarah
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 17 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1624
|
| Posted: Sept 07 2006 at 4:41pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
If a husband is overstepping his boundaries and asking something unreasonable, or is downright mean and abusive, then a wife does not have to submit to that particular aspect.
In regards to the whole picture of the husband loving as Christ:
My husband told me that he read that C.S. Lewis wrote something to the effect that "the only crown a husband should wear is a crown of thorns." I thought that was beautiful.
__________________
Six boys ages 16, 14, 11, 7, 5, 2 and one girl age 9
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Tea and Conversation
Topic: Wives Subordinate in Everything
