"The woman who marries, intending at all costs to retain her own career, or who absolutely refuses to be dependant on her husband, does not know the meaning either of Christian marriage or even of true human love. If she is in love with anybody, it is with herself. Marriage means abandoning one's self to enter into one new life, shared with her husband. There cannot be two "careers" where there is only one life. Nor can there be independence. For man and wife are dependant upon one another for everything. Where there is love, all joy or pleasure that cannot be shared, loses its value.
...There is no need here to give the true name of such unions where independence of life is insisted upon, but that should not prevent clear thinking as to their nature. Further it must be remembered that as regards their work and their place in civil society, husband and wife are in different positions. The husband has a direct connection with the civil economy, the wife integrated into it only through her husband. To put it another way: husband and wife form one unit; and the wife's role in that unity is to assist her husband, not to rival him; she must be an accompanist as regards his public life.
St. Paul's exhortation to wives to be subject to their husbands as the Church is to Christ, raises much comment. Let it be noted that the husband whom St. Paul wants a wife to be subject to is one who, he insists, must love her so much, that he is ready to lay down his life for her, and who actually does give his whole life to her. One must understand what this "subjection" really means. A woman does not lose her personal liberty or freedom or dignity in marriage. She is not bound to obey her husband's every request if it is not in harmony with right reason or with the dignity due to a wife. She is not a minor, not immature, nor incapable of judgment. As Pius XI says, this subjection merely forbids that in this body which is the family, the heart be separated from the head to the great detriment of the whole body and the proximate danger of ruin. For if the man is the head, the woman is the heart, and as he occupies the chief place in ruling, so she may and ought to claim for herself the chief place of love.My Response:
The wife is not her husband's servant. They are partners. They complement and supplement one another. She has a right to her own opinion and her husband ought to take cognizance of it. It is not because he is the more expert or more intelligent, or has the better judgment or the greater courage, that the ultimate decision is his; for in fact, the contrary is often the case. The real reason is because where there are two minds in partnership, someone must take responsibility for their work; God has made the husband the responsible partner; therefore he must have ultimate authority.
He has the grace of state. This is a notion that has been lost sight of in the world today, but which is of essential importance in the spiritual life. It comes to this in practice. Where God has appointed someone to decide things for others, those others may securely follow his decisions where they are in accordance with reason and inside the limits of allowed authority; and they may be sure that God's providence will adjust itself (or has adjusted itself, if one prefers to look at it that way) so that in the long run, things work out for the best as so decided. This is not inspiration, although it often does mean a special help to decide correctly. But it is one way of finding out the will of God, and putting one's part in life in perfect harmony with the rest of His providential symphony.
The true woman rules by submitting; she humbles her husband by the generosity of her love. She strengthens him by her dependence, she builds up his character by throwing responsibility upon him; she is queen of his heart by her love. Now the woman who leaves her throne to do by masculine crudeness and guile what she cannot do by feminine love and tact, admits her own incompetence, and in the modern phrase, "let's herself down," very, very badly. Not only herself, in fact, but also her husband. Not only her husband, but also Christ. For in refusing to be subject to her husband or to be loyal to him, she is also refusing to be subject to Christ or to be loyal to Him. And her plans and achievements of this sort always go wrong in the long run; for she is working against God. The harm done by such a policy is incalculable.
It is here that many souls err. They see the spiritual life as a service of God, and so it is. But they imagine that the principle value of their service is found in the results they achieve; whereas in God's eye the result - the increase from their sowing - are the fruits of His goodness and His grace and of His Son's merits and sufferings. As far as that particular soul is concerned, it is rather the love that should inspire the service, that God is seeking. And to make things worse, it often happens in the service of God, that those who are seemingly zealous for His service are really serving themselves. They are pursuing their own career. Their zeal is not so much for God's glory as for their own. They resemble those modern wives who insist on having their own career. They are living their own life - not the new life in union with Christ."
- Eugene Boylan, This Tremendous Lover, 321-324, 365
I agree that women are helpers and accompanists, as Boylan says. However, different men with different callings need different kinds of helpers. Some need active, social, and entrepreneurial helpers to assist him in his life calling. Some men need stay at home wives to help them. Men who are missionaries need helpmates who are also called to missions work, and usually were called to that vocation prior to marrying the husband. That said, I don’t think anyone can say definitively what a “helpmate” looks like, should be like, or do. (I say this in contradiction to those who think that women are only in their right place as stay-at-home mothers).
I agree that, in lifestyle, a woman must remain submissive and sacrificial to her husband (in 1 Cor 11:3, it states that man is the head of woman, as God is the head of Christ, and Christ is the head of man). By simple analogy, and not reading anything more into this verse, this is placing Christ in the submissive position to God just like women are in the submissive position to man. And Christ was absolutely not “less” than God. Submissive is not “inferior.”
But my heart really hurts at any insinuation that a woman pursuing a career and trying to faithfully develop and invest her gifts and talents is in any way antithetical to a loving marriage partner. It is not a sin to work outside the home, or to have one’s own friends, interests, and challenges independent of one’s husband. However, when they conflict, the woman must submit.
Behind this, though, there is this niggling lie that has crept into my head that I am trying to dispel: that is, that a Godly man faithfully pursuing the Lord will not want me, a strong and ambitious woman. Although I am willing and able to compromise and submit, I fear that he will discount me off the bat because I have a distinctive academic degree and want to use it. My concern is that Godly men, influenced by the strong words and exhortations like this article, will look at me as less than worthy as a potential wife because I have a vision for my life that I would like to pursue.
God gave me certain talents and skills and gifts and I want to use them to His Glory. Therefore, I will wait until I meet a man that will be uniquely helped and edified by my gifts. I will wait for a man who feels loved and supported through my interests in evangelism, intellectual endeavors, and relational gifts, since these are what God has put in my heart and my life.
4 comments:
Believe me.
A strong, ambitious, brilliant, godly woman is the most desirable thing in the world.
I agree completely with Juliet! (Umm... not that I had such a creative, articulate critique...). While he makes some good points, it is too one-dimensional. He quickly transitions from describing a woman who would pursue her career "at all costs" to saying that "there cannot be two careers where there is only one life." The problem with this sweeping generalization (*cough* -besides the fact that several individuals have two careers) is that several women work so that their husbands can pursue his vocation (let's say to be an artist) to the greater glory of God. A woman often has a career because (1) she cannot have children (so now what is she supposed to do?) (2) her husband has a disability (3) because she has children and she realizes one day that her husband is lazy/incompetent/adulterous, etc. (4) she's ridiculously smart (see Juliet's response), full of energy, and has the TIME to do both ad maiorem Dei glorium.
Further, the author does seem to conflate the ideas of "dependency" on your husband with dependency on God. I know Scripture says to be submissive to your husband, and dependent on God. But where in scripture does it say we are to be dependent on our husband? (that's a real question...).
Finally, I also had eerie voice in the back of my mind while reading this that perhaps no "good Christian" man would want someone with a law degree. But that is ridiculous. Three of my closest friends in Boston (all law students/grad students) are engaged, and the rest are in serious relationships. I don't think God called them to their graduate programs for a more sophisticated "MRS" degree.
Anyway, that is all for now. Back to homework.
The only line I entirely agree with is "She strengthens him by her dependence, she builds up his character by throwing responsibility upon him."
I really like this concept of how we can support our husbands in this way!
But there are so many circumstances that this article doesn't take into account, like Laura has said.
I got this response from a Christian male, anonymous:
"What are guys yearning for? - A girl who is excited (not just resigning herself) to leave her career to be a mother, stay home with the kids, raise them well, cook, and keep the house in order. We see the man's role as one who helps with those responsibilities, but we see his primary responsibility as being the provider for the family.
Want to know what DC christian guys say when they get together? We'll be in a room talking about girls we are interested in and one guy will say, "So I went on a date with this girl and she talked about how she is totally stoked to be a Mom." And as he says this everyone in the conversation gets jealous and gives him high fives and asks if she has any sisters. I'm not joking."
-----But in response to this another Christian guy said, ""well, I could get a group of guys together in DC who think the sky is green."
So I think that this is an extra conservative subgroup of a Christian subgroup that feels this strongly. But who knows? Clearly God knows, and his will provide for all concerned in whatever way He sees fit.
Post a Comment