Skip to main content

Your Future Spouse (Part 2) - Core questions that need answering ...

+
JMJ

In my last post on "Your Future Spouse Part 1", I discussed a simple three step process for achieving commitment. I also pointed out that Marriage requires commitment because when something bad happens (we live in an imperfect world so it is a "WHEN" and not "IF") any lack of commitment will result in a crisis.

The degree of commitment is directly proportional to the ability of a couple to survive a crisis.

What makes it worse is that it isn't a logical or, the equation is either/or.  It just takes one of the spouses to lack commitment to turn what could be a simple mis-understanding, into a major crisis - one that results in a separation.

So communication is essential to achieve a shared understanding of all that is included in a Catholic Marriage.  Make no mistake, the list is long and glorious and runs counter to the culture that permeates the world today.

St. Paul provided a brief summary (Ephesians 5-21-33) of the core commitments being made in a Catholic Marriage. Core because they highlight the key ways the Devil uses to break a marriage.  While I have used the Douay-Rheims translation, I will point out that the Knox translation makes clear the kind of fear that is spoken of in verse 33. 

Now on with it ...

First St. Paul speaks to the women (Douay-Rheims):
Let women be subject to their husbands, as to the Lord: Because the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. He is the saviour of his body. Therefore as the church is subject to Christ, so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things.
If there is a head of the family, then obviously someone has to be responsible and accountable for the whole family.  Notice, I didn't say 'in charge' because that would be (frankly) stupid.  Only a micro-manager would try to be in charge of everything and it would make the wife's life a living hell.  Nope, the husband is responsible and accountable for his family ... in its entirety. 

If that doesn't make every single man reading this run for the nearest monastery, then they haven't given it enough thought.  
Let me be plain, as a husband and father, I am responsible and accountable for my family for my entire life and in a way beyond it.  My influence on them and my descendants until the end of the world will carry on long after I am dust. Only at the general judgement will I know the extent of my merite or culpability as a father. Now the free-will of those under your responsibility will come into play, but Husbands and Fathers need to keep this in mind and follow the virtuous path in working out their salvation and as far as they can those for whom they are responsible.  

So why does St. Paul tell wives that they need to be "subject to their husbands"?  I've heard it put simply that this was the first fault of  Eve, disobedience to God's law and it carries on as being part of married life, because if it worked once, the Devil (being an expert at human nature) will continue to use it until the end of the world.

Now, I am more interested in what St. Paul has to say to the men:
Husbands, love your wives, as Christ also loved the church, and delivered himself up for it: That he might sanctify it, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life: That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy, and without blemish. So also ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife, loveth himself. For no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, as also Christ doth the church: Because we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh.
Notice anything at a glance?  The translation of St. Paul's words to the wive is 55 words.  To the men he spills much more ink: 137 words.  Abourt 2.5 times as many to be exact.

Why is this?

Because the fault line for a man is to treat his wife as an object / possession, a man who does this is in a fair way of becoming a tyrant. St. Paul goes to great lengths emphasizing how OLJC acted towards the Church.  A husband needs to love his wife as himself, nourishing and cherishing her thoughout their married life.

Nourish ... Cherish ...
These are important words that men need to hear and hold in their hearts.

So as a first step in communication the two parties to a possible Catholic Marriage need to ask themselves two questions:
  1. Man asks: Is this a woman that I can love above myself, can I nourish her (I don't mean just with the basics of life) and cherish her?
  2. Woman asks: Is this a man to whom I can respect and honour enough to willingly submit?
I believe that if the man can't follow St. Paul's admonition, then the woman should run screaming in the other direction and likewise for the man.

Otherwise, it will probably end badly.

The key to this will be to use communication to find out the answers to both questions.

P^3








Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too thin

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX.  This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu