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

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...

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...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5b - How Did We Get Here??? ... A Continued Anlaysis using ChatGPT.

 + JMJ Part 5b How Did We Get Here??? So in the previous ChatGPT analysis the LLM ‘concluded’ that there was continuity in doctrine. So now we’re going to explore this element. There is some repetition but I don't have time right now to do a lot of editing.  I think instead we'll have a Part 5c where I try to pull it all together with some old fashioned human sense making. At the end point, I think the LLM collects an interesting if somewhat skewed perspective: The SSPX mapping hinges on this claim: That Vatican II affirms (at least implicitly) propositions that the Syllabus of Errors explicitly condemned. The broader Church response is: The same propositions are still rejected—but Vatican II is addressing different categories (political, pastoral, anthropological) rather than reversing doctrine. While the summary of the SSPX position seems close, that of the broader Church seems to be either an outright AI hallucination or a consensus point from the literature that it used...

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

 + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

 + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...