tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post879382185826973906..comments2024-03-26T12:56:54.350+00:00Comments on LMS Chairman: Mutual submission of spouses: coherent, Pauline, true?Latin Mass Societyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17951084157414901564noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-35610793894380312882017-10-31T20:27:45.332+00:002017-10-31T20:27:45.332+00:00I address that here:
http://www.lmschairman.org/20...I address that here:<br />http://www.lmschairman.org/2016/02/patriarchy-and-symmetry.htmlJoseph Shawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06587987442560784792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-5798479944446826182017-10-31T20:04:15.161+00:002017-10-31T20:04:15.161+00:00Thank you for this article. I have a question that...Thank you for this article. I have a question that I haven't been able to find an answer to elsewhere. WHY is it the case that men have authority over their wives? It's obvious why parents have authority over their children and CEOs over their employees. That's because a CEO has more experience, is more important to the company's success, is less replaceable etc, than the employees; and parents know better than children, etc. I don't see any analogous reason why men should have authority over their wives. If you think there is a reason, I see only two options for you: (1) the reason is that men are ontologically just superior to women in the way that Christ is ontologically superior to the Church (and yet this is explicitly denied by JPII and Fulton Sheen and the Church in general) or (2) men have authority over women for similar reasons that parents have authority over children, in virtue of their 'knowing better'. But this is clearly factually untrue. I don't know where to go from here. Does anyone have thoughts on this? mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12948372566379931348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-22819694372042132642017-01-13T18:16:00.060+00:002017-01-13T18:16:00.060+00:00Well I agree with this, and I have made the first ...Well I agree with this, and I have made the first point on this blog.Joseph Shawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06587987442560784792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-23743714075595222752017-01-13T17:40:12.800+00:002017-01-13T17:40:12.800+00:00I don't mean to argue with the husband's a... <br />I don't mean to argue with the husband's authority. It is clear that this is God's order and will for the family, and I can see how men are gifted in this area. Men have the detachment and objective overview, even regarding those they love deeply, to make sound decisions. What I am saying is that, while the husband's headship is clear and right, the man himself should not be thinking "authority, authority" but rather "how do I love?" (This includes 'tough love.')<br /><br />~ "But Jesus summoned them and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and the great ones make their authority over them felt. But it shall not be so among you. Rather, whoever wishes to be great among you shall be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave. Just so, the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many.” [Mat 20:25]<br />This is in regards to our approach to the positions of authority conferred upon us. I would say this includes the position of authority conferred upon a man over his wife. <br />Scripture also says "Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God." The authority of a husband over his wife is God-given, and should be exercised with 'fear and trembling' and not with a sense of entitlement. We will all have to answer for our actions before the Lord.<br /><br />An additional point I’d like to add is that the husband’s call is more difficult. For example: <br /> a. You are told to love person X as Christ loved the Church, implying that you would even give your life for the sake of that person. <br />Or, alternatively, <br />b. You are told to obey and respect this person. <br /><br />Which is harder? Obviously the husband's calling is harder than the wife's. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-67442996027789374952017-01-13T11:15:52.351+00:002017-01-13T11:15:52.351+00:00Perhaps I should have used the word 'subjectio...Perhaps I should have used the word 'subjection' more, would that have better reflected Scriptural language?Joseph Shawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06587987442560784792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-64141731862906106882017-01-13T11:14:48.855+00:002017-01-13T11:14:48.855+00:00Colossians 3:18 'Wives, submit yourselves to y...Colossians 3:18 'Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.'1 Corinthians 11:3 'But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.'<br />1 Corinthians 11:7-10 'A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels.'<br />Ephesians 5:22 'Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.'<br />1 Timothy 2:12 'But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.'<br />1 Peter 3:1 'Likewise, ye wives, [be] in subjection to your own husbands.'<br />1 Peter 3:5 'For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands.'<br />Titus: 2:3-5 'Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored.'Joseph Shawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06587987442560784792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-18363228323074564592017-01-13T05:16:02.696+00:002017-01-13T05:16:02.696+00:00I see that you mention the word 'authority'...I see that you mention the word 'authority' repeatedly, but the command to husbands in Scripture is to 'love' their wives as Christ loved the Church, handing Himself over for her (Eph. 5:25), and to love their wives as they love their own bodies. "He who loves his wife loves himself." (Eph. 5:28) The focus for husbands is to love the wife, doffing his own glory and sacrificing himself for her as Christ did for the Church. The focus for wives is to respect the husband. (Eph. 5:33) So I think it would be wise for husbands to put their focus on loving sacrificially instead of on exerting authority, and for wives to focus on treating the husband with respect, and yielding to his will when it differs with hers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-76531356792329644442016-06-09T19:14:30.319+01:002016-06-09T19:14:30.319+01:00Don't forget that the same 'mutual submiss...Don't forget that the same 'mutual submission' also applies between parents and children!!!Peter Kahnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01728547922057026660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-2317003867489154062016-05-02T18:43:09.373+01:002016-05-02T18:43:09.373+01:00"What does it mean to submit to the authority..."What does it mean to submit to the authority of a person who, in exactly the same way, is submitted to your own authority? I might have authority over you as the Secretary of a club you have joined, and you may have authority over me as a traffic warden over the driver of a car, but we can't have authority over each other of exactly the same kind. It just doesn't make sense."<br /><br />Indeed, this is obvious even from an etymological consideration of "submit," from the Latin "sub" (under) + "mittere" (to place). Hence to submit is to place oneself, or be placed under, another, i.e., under the authority of another. And now thing can be below the thing which is below it.Sean W.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10085184456489549231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-20207067649734779172016-04-29T21:25:38.193+01:002016-04-29T21:25:38.193+01:00Hmm. I always just assumed Ephesians 5:21 was the ...Hmm. I always just assumed Ephesians 5:21 was the header to Ephesians 5:22 - 6:10, so that "be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ" clearly means something like "respect the legitimate authorities in your own lives," rather than "everyone must obey everyone else." After all, St. Paul, after telling wives to submit to their husbands and husbands to love their wives, goes on also to tell children to obey their parents and parents to love their children, and servants to obey their masters and masters to respect their servants, and no one concludes that St. Paul means parents must obey their children or masters their servants.Sean W.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10085184456489549231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-46750185847113478442016-04-29T12:52:03.294+01:002016-04-29T12:52:03.294+01:00But do you not miss the clear and essential point...But do you not miss the clear and essential point that the headship of the male is Christlike and that of a humble servant and the submission of the woman is as one with dignity and as a partner? Thus scripted, the traditional roles cancel each other out in Christian charity and human dignity. In practice, in most marriages there is dialogue and consultation, giving way to each other on this and that, deferring to the partner who has more expertise in an area. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01681603101198080770noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-25057837363104684152016-04-29T03:39:24.008+01:002016-04-29T03:39:24.008+01:00Great stuff Dr. Shaw! I love your articles which d...Great stuff Dr. Shaw! I love your articles which deal with these sort of points. <br /><br />I guess the reason why people find it "scandalous" to accept the fact that St. JP II erred is the same reason why they insisted on his canonization i.e. many liked him for those very things he said and did in deviation with tradition.T-C-https://www.blogger.com/profile/08263638091427859851noreply@blogger.com