The Feminish Guide to Submission and Authority

In which we trust that what the Church asks of us is eminently reasonable

*This is a LONG POST WARNING. If you’re reading in your email inbox, you will need to click through to the website in order to read the whole thing. Consider yourself warned.*

If you are following along with our Rule of St. Benedict Book Club, a lot of the themes we discuss today will also come up in the coming weeks. I wanted to return to your regularly scheduled programming with a discussion on arguing mercifully, but as I was drafting this week’s Book Club, I decided that I really think this needs to come first

Photo by Sandy Millar on Unsplash

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

- Ephesians 5:22-33

My husband and I like to joke around that one day we’re going to write a book about all the arguments conversations we’ve had over the years. When we got married, he was not quiiiiiiite a rad-trad and I was not quiiiiiiite a feminist. (What do you call this kind of person? A feminish? That’s my vote.) He knew that the trad movement has some significant flaws, and I knew that feminism has a whole host of issues, but by virtue of the circles we’d been running in, we were both in need of pruning.¹ Four years into our marriage, we’ve each grown a lot and softened a lot, both in our views and in our tone. Even so, there are still days when we discover a new area in one or both of our hearts that must be brought to the Lord. Since I joined Substack, this has involved reading something by

Isa Ryan

or

Julie Voth | Mrs. Prairie Wife

and then having ~ q u e s t i o n s ~ about it. I’m raising two daughters and am in a season of trying to pull weeds from the garden of my own heart so that I can teach them to tend to theirs well. I am trying to recognize that there are problematic ideas baked into my worldview, trusting that what the Church asks of us is eminently reasonable, possible with the help of God’s grace, and ordered towards my good and the good of my family. I want to align my own compass to true North so that I can guide my children to do the same. But there’s been a lot of wrestling and a lot of humility required, and we’ve spent hours in conversation about the topic of submission, authority, leadership, responsibility, and holiness over the last week or so.

As

James Dietz

is wont to say, we must build our understanding and our rules based on the ideal, so that even when we see and live imperfection, we are able to work towards that ideal. In other words, everything we’ll discuss below is a high calling, and one we will regularly fail to live out in one way or another, but it is crucial that we understand our destination and our goal so that we don’t get lost in the weeds or the “what ifs”.

Here is, to the best of my ability to both remember and summarize, where we’ve landed on the topics of authority, submission, Ephesians 5, and marriage:

Authority, service, and responsibility

Any time we talk about dynamics of authority and submission in the church, it’s important to clarify that the Church’s understanding of these things is oftentimes different from how the world understands them. If we don’t define our terms at the beginning of the discussion, we’re apt to spend hours talking in circles around one another, saying the same thing in different terms or objecting to points that the other person isn’t intending to argue. So that’s where we’ll begin.

Authority in the Church both originates in God and imitates or images Him. Thus, to understand what an ideal authority looks like lived out, we can turn to the Scriptures and see that God’s authority is an authority of self-sacrifice and service:

And Jesus called them to him and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

- Mark 10:42-45 ESV

We see this in the way that the Lord washed the feet of his disciples, much to Peter’s scandal and surprise. We also see it in the fact that the Pope is known as servus servorum Dei, or “the servant of the servants of God”. This title originated as the personal motto of St. Gregory the Great in the sixth century, and by the ninth century it was solidified as a title of the office itself. In the Church’s eyes, having authority doesn’t mean having the ability to wield unlimited power and control or to abuse those subject to you. Rather, it’s a leadership of service to those for whom you are responsible.²

Furthermore, accepting authority also means accepting responsibility. In other words, individuals with authority will be held liable, at least to some degree, for the actions of those over whom they have authority, for whose sanctification they are responsible:

Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

- Matthew 18:5-6 ESV

This is a daunting task, and not one that is to be taken on thoughtlessly. You’ll hear many stories in the Catholic Church about holy priests who are appointed Bishops, much to their disappointment. Taking on that title is not “a good career move” or “an increase in power”, but a grave responsibility that many would rather avoid. Treating authority in marriage as a power grab completely misses the point, and an insistence on equal power is both destabilizing and misguided. Equal power could only be considered a goal if (a) power is seen as a good worth pursuing and (b) the authority involved in marriage was a trick to establish an unequal power dynamic, rather than a weighty responsibility.

Why does someone have to be “in charge” at all?

I think that, in order to understand the answer to this question fully, we have to look at the nature of marriage itself. To this end, we must (of course) quote at length the double wedding at the end of the Pride and Prejudice miniseries:

Dearly beloved, we are gathered here in the sight of God, and in the face of this congregation, to join together this man and this woman (and this man and this woman) in holy matrimony, which is an honourable estate, instituted by God in the time of man’s innocency, signifying unto us the mystical union that is between Christ and his church, and therefore is not by any to be enterprised lightly or wantonly to satisfy man’s carnal lusts and appetites, but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly and in the fear of God, duly considering the causes for which matrimony was ordained.

First, it was ordained for the procreation of children. Secondly, as a remedy against sin and to avoid fornication. Thirdly for the mutual society, help, and comfort that the one ought to have of the other both in prosperity and adversity, into which holy estate these persons present come now to be joined.

We learn a few things from this speech. First, we hear that marriage is something instituted by God, which means that we do not define it. It is an objective reality into which we, as individuals with free will, can choose to enter. Marriage is something bigger than us, something in which we participate. This free choice is, in fact, a necessary condition to enter into a valid marriage, and getting married means, of necessity, that you are consenting to do what marriage is. In other words, a sacramental marriage is not just an expression of your love for one another; it’s not just the natural next step in your relationship; and it’s not just a social framework to authorize tax breaks or release of medical records. So if that isn’t marriage, then what is it?

Marriage is a symbol of the union between Christ and His Church. This is a big deal. Each of the vocations to which we can be called is a particular living out or foreshadowing of the union with Christ that we hope for in Heaven.³ The priesthood and religious life point toward Heaven by forgoing participation in the worldly goods of marriage, intimacy, and children/family life in order to remind the world that we hope for something even greater than these goods. Marriage, on the other hand, points toward Heaven by offering a glimpse - a finite, imperfect glimpse - of the Wedding Feast of the Lamb in which we one day hope to participate. In this light, we can see through our marriage to the love between Christ and His Church, and we can acknowledge that our marriage is holy to the degree to which it conforms to this pattern.

These two things combined should indicate to us that our goal in marriage should be to change and shape ourselves to meet the high calling we have been given, rather than shaping our marriages to meet our own ideas of what’s best for us as individuals.

And then, because the Lord is never outdone in generosity, there is a purely practical or social benefit as well. Authority and hierarchy within the family are ordered toward the good of the family (particularly the children) and society as a whole. Children thrive on structure, stability, and predictability, and having an ordered family provides these circumstances in which children can flourish.⁴ Furthermore, we want to model a habit of virtuous obedience for our children to help them come to understand that adulthood does not include absolute license, and to form them to be good citizens and good people. A rightly-ordered family will not only pursue order and proper authority within the family, but will also see itself as the first society of the children and the smallest cell of the wider society, and as a result will pursue order and proper authority in relation to the church, the local and national government, and any other communities of which it is a part. If our families are well-ordered, and if we are raising good, virtuous children to become good, virtuous adults, then society as a whole will benefit.

While this passage in the Gospel is not directly related to marriage or even to society in general, I cannot help but read these words of the Lord as a commendation of a rightly-ordered society, whether a family or a military unit or a nation:

When he had entered Capernaum, a centurion came forward to him, appealing to him, “Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering terribly.” And he said to him, “I will come and heal him.” But the centurion replied, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I too am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. And I say to one, ‘Go,’ and he goes, and to another, ‘Come,’ and he comes, and to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” When Jesus heard this, he marveled and said to those who followed him, “Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith.”

- Matthew 8:5-10, emphasis mine

In other words, authority exists for the benefit of individual Christians, family units, societies, and the universal Church. With this foundation in mind, we can move on to considering the particular way in which authority plays out in the family.

Why does the husband get to be “in charge”?

I’ve wrestled with this question a lot, but ultimately, I think the answer is simple, “because that’s how the Lord made us.”

Physical, psychological, and social differences between men and women exist. And in a Christian worldview, those differences point beyond the body to spiritual differences as well, and differences in role. AND THAT’S OKAY. It’s not to say that anyone is better or worse, worth more or less. There is no hierarchy of value implied in a hierarchy of authority.

Biologically, a man’s self gift is external, while a woman’s is internal. As much as a very finite, fallen family can image the Trinity, the man “represents” God the Father, who pours Himself out in an eternal act of love, while the wife “represents” God the Son, who receives that love and “through Whom all things were made”. In this analogy, then, the child “represents” the Holy Ghost, the overflow of abundant love that Himself becomes a new person.

Historically, of course, there have been ways in which secondary sex characteristics have defined male and female roles beyond simply gamete production and procreation. But it’s late, this article is long, and my brain is tired. If you have thoughts to add, I’d love to hear them!

(Of course, depending on your sex and your perspective, this question might change from “why does the husband get to be in charge?” to “why does the husband have to be in charge?”. It’s no trivial responsibility.)

Does the husband being “in charge” mean that the wife gets no say in her life?

Short answer, no, it does not mean that. And, honestly, most of the time that I bring up this question or some variation of it, I’m just being intentionally obtuse or trying to grasp at excuses for my pride.

When we talk about this stuff, at least in our family, we like to use some perhaps non-traditional terms. These serve two purposes: they form a reference point that the two of us can understand without constant re-explaining, and they nuance the conversation more than the two overblown, extreme, stereotypical positions of “Ephesians 5 is proof that the Church hates women” and “if you don’t ask permission to go to the grocery store, you’re going to hell”. So before we go any further, we’ll take a moment to look at these off-label terms in more depth.

Pride of Place: This term comes from #41 in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal:

“All other things being equal, Gregorian chant holds pride of place because it is proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other types of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful.”

Applying this to the dynamics of a holy marriage, then, we will often say that the husband has “pride of place” outside of the home while the wife has “pride of place” in the management of the home. In other words, all things being equal, it is proper for husbands to support their family in more external-facing ways, and it is proper for wives to support their family in more internal-facing ways. But we don’t live in a perfect world, and there are certainly circumstances in which a wife and mother might need to work outside of the home, or even be the sole breadwinner for her family. This possibility is “in no way excluded”, with the understanding that she is doing so in a way that corresponds to her feminine genius and fosters the sanctity of all members of the family.⁵

Ex cathedra: This is a technical term in the Catholic tradition (literally “from the chair”). The pope is considered to be infallible when he is speaking ex cathedra on matters of faith and morals. In other words, when he is speaking in his position as the successor of Peter on matters over which St. Peter was given authority to bind and loose, we trust that the Holy Spirit will not allow him to speak falsehood. A great example of this is the encyclical Humanae vitae. Everyone expected, both (in my understanding) by personality and by social pressure, that Pope Paul VI would reverse the Church’s teaching on artificial contraception and allow Catholic couples to use it at their discretion. Instead, he doubled down on the Church’s teaching, adding for good measure an incredibly prophetic statement on the effects that widespread contraceptive use would have on society. If you’ve never read it, I would highly encourage you to do so.

When we use this term to talk about marriage, we’re using it by analogy only. No one in their right mind would claim that any (let alone every) husband, by virtue of his marriage, has infallibility in any particular area (let alone in everything). We personally use this term to describe situations in which a husband asks his wife to do something explicitly by virtue of his authority, as opposed to merely a favor or a wish. In other words, he’s pulling rank, to put it crudely, or invoking his authority to make a decision as husband and father for the good of his family.⁶

With all this in mind, we can now circle back to the question of what say (if any) a wife ought to have over her life. I think there are two important things to keep in mind here:

1. The goals of marriage are “bonding and babies” and, ultimately, holiness. Ideally, both spouses are seeking to build one another up, encourage one another, and hold one another accountable. Mutual friendship and affection are an important part of this. However, in the case where one spouse does not have this attitude, sanctification is still possible!

2. All other things being equal, most women are naturally oriented toward relationships and hospitality in a way that men are not. As a result, if one parent is to be a full-time homemaker, it is often more fitting for this to be the mother.

I see a lot of people assume that a wife having “pride of place” within the sphere of the home means that she will (should?) be doing chores all day every day, without a moment to rest, while Dad does none of them. But this is a backwards approach. To say that the husband has authority in the home means that everything that happens within the home is primarily his responsibility. As we’ll see in St. Benedict’s Rule, a wise authority will seek counsel from his community when they have knowledge he does not or when he needs advice, but he still has ultimate decision making ability and responsibility. In many cases, if not all, a husband simply cannot know all of the details about every item that falls within the scope of his authority. So in the matter of housework or child-rearing, if Dad works full time outside of the home, he ought to regularly consult with his wife, his children if appropriate, and the wider community if needed, so that he can delegate to other members of the family the authority and responsibility for particular tasks.

For example, in our family, I stay home full time. As a result, I am in our home much more frequently and consistently, and I have a much greater investment in the state of said home. (Not to mention that I generally have more of a heart for making our physical space warm and welcoming.) My husband has essentially delegated to me the authority and responsibility of maintaining our home. But from there, I must be able and willing to evaluate my own capacity and let him know what things I am unable to handle, especially when my duties as the primary caretaker of our children is taken into account. One way that we do this practically is that I handle all of the laundry and he does all of the dishes. We learned very early on that if we didn’t have a clear delineation of responsibility, neither of these essential tasks would get done, no one would have clean underwear, and the German cockroaches that lived in the walls of our old apartment complex would take over our kitchen.⁷ So we sat down and discussed, and it turned out that I hate doing dishes but don’t mind laundry, and vice versa for my husband. This has been our arrangement for three years or so, and I’m not sure it will ever change.

All that to say, if a husband has delegated too much to his wife, she can and ought to communicate this (kindly) and ask that he find another solution. Since it is his responsibility, he can either take care of it himself or find someone else (perhaps a friend, child, or member of the extended family) to whom he can delegate the tasks that go beyond her capacity. Recognizing the limitedness of ourselves and our spouses can be a powerful way to grow in humility and minimize the likelihood of resentment, even as we try to continually stretch ourselves and offer ourselves as a sacrifice in union with Christ on the Cross.

Furthermore, if the holiness, health, and happiness of each spouse is a priority - and it ought to be - then each spouse will take care to intentionally prioritize the other’s needs for personal prayer, quiet time, close friendships, and fulfilling hobbies or projects. (And, of course, their physical needs for food, water, sleep, etc.) Getting to know one another’s preferences and desires is a key to establishing and maintaining a close friendship, and acting on those preferences can help maintain affection, respect, and gratitude toward one another.

In other words, the relationship here is simply not one of dictator to subject, and it is neither true nor fair to assume that in every household where the husband embraces his authority and leadership role, the wife will be kept as a slave, barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.

All that being said, there certainly will be circumstances in which one or both spouses will need to do something they don’t “like” - deny themselves, take up their Crosses, and follow Him.

What does it look like to submit to your husband like the Church loves Christ?

I heard an absolutely beautiful and convicting homily at a friend’s wedding two years ago, and of course, I haven’t been able to get hold of them to ask for a recording. The homily was on Ephesians 5 and focused on practical traits and virtues that we see lived out in Christ and in the Church that we as spouses ought to imitate. I can’t remember many of the details, but I remember the priest asking us to reflect on the ways in which the Church loves and submits to Christ:

• passing on tradition and teaching

• following the moral code laid out by Christ

• evangelization both within and outside the Church

• welcoming new members of the Mystical Body of Christ

• forgiveness of sins through the authority of Christ

• offering the Eucharist to sinners as spiritual food for the journey

• modeling and teaching prayer and intimacy with Christ

• inspiring martyrs, priests, religious, and lay people to holiness

We can look at these actions and extract from them some key attitudes that ought to define our role in our marriages:

• JOY!

• generosity

• fruitfulness (physical and/or spiritual)

• humility

• obedience

• interiority // reflection

• mercy // willingness to forgive

• self-gift and openness to life (physical and/or spiritual)

• charity toward the needy in strangers and in the beloved

Rather than offering a practical list of tasks you must do in order to live out your role in your marriage, I offer you these attitudes as a starting point for reflection. I know that I have a long way to go before I can identify with this list to the degree I would like.

What does it look like to love your wife like Christ loved the Church?

Likewise, when we look at the way that Christ loves His Church, we see plenty of examples throughout scripture:

• His suffering and death in order to bridge the chasm between God and man

• teaching and preaching throughout Judea

• healing the sick and raising the dead

• giving us the priesthood and the sacraments for our spiritual nourishment

From this list, we can extrapolate the following traits:

• self-sacrifice

• consideration of her good

• humility // meekness

• servant leadership

• charity

• generosity

Once again, I don’t have a concrete list, nor do I think one would be helpful. But I hope that this attitude check is beneficial as you examine the particular situations in your own life.

Who has to start? (In other words, do I still have to do my part if my spouse isn’t doing theirs?)

Yes. You. You have to start. It is a basic principle of raising children that they learn their role in the family by watching their parents, siblings, and wider communities, and I think we often underestimate how true this is for adults as well. If you start leaning into and embracing your role in your family, your spouse (by the grace of God and in His time) will follow.

If you are a wife, start training yourself to pause a moment before responding, correcting, or taking charge in a situation. This might require a lot of patience as you wait for your husband to realize that you will consistently hand him the reins and look to him for leadership.⁸ Make sure that you wait for an appropriate moment before bringing up any corrections to ensure that your husband is least inclined to become defensive. Be willing to wait, to swallow your pride, and to endure a time of relative chaos as he adapts to the new dynamic.

If you are a husband, be willing to take the lead in self-gift, service, and sacrifice. This might require a lot of gentleness, especially if your wife tends toward anxiety, a desire to feel in control, or hyper-feminist thought.⁹ Make sure that you wait for an appropriate moment before bringing up any corrections to ensure that your wife is least inclined to become defensive. Be willing to wait, to swallow your pride, and to endure a time of relative discontent as she adapts to the new dynamic.

Ultimately, the ideal is that both spouses will embrace and lean into their role together, discovering and growing toward one another as they grow toward God. If only one spouse is beginning - or even if, after many years, still only once spouse is embracing their role - there will be areas of imperfection and frustration. But, like we said last week, all that we can control is our own heart, and we can (and must!) continually pray for the grace of conversion within our families.

How does this dynamic lead to the sanctification and salvation of souls?

A well-ordered family life virtually demands constant mortification, self-denial, detachment from the things of the world, and attachment to the things of the Lord. Living out our God-given roles facilitates easier growth in virtue for ourselves, and better ability to pass those virtuous habits to our children and community. When we lean into God’s plan for marriage, we become more and more transparent, pointing more effectively to that Heavenly Wedding Banquet of which our marriage is a sign. The goal is that, we “let [our] light shine before others, so that they may see [our] good works and give glory to [our] Father who is in heaven.”¹⁰ The fruits of a well-ordered family are a growth in authentic humility, a habit of obedience to the will of the Lord as it is made known to us, and a deep sense of peace and joy “in good times and in bad”.

But what about…

Look, I get it. I want to ask all of the whatabouts too. There are some very real and deeply disturbing stories of husbands abusing their authority, and we all want to protect against those scenarios. As a general rule, let’s say that if it doesn’t support the sanctification of the family, it is an improper use of authority. I’ll briefly address a few common situations below, and if you have specific questions, I’d love to hear them in the comments.

• The husband’s authority cannot be used to abuse his wife, of course.

• He cannot ask her to do something immoral, as this does not fall within the realm of his authority, and “disobeying” such a false order would be the proper response.

• It would not be charitable or ordered toward anyone’s holiness for him to make unreasonable demands, such as “I want to eat oysters for dinner every night this week even though they’re expensive and our children hate them”, but it might still be within the scope of his authority. Authority can make mistakes or be poorly used. In that case it is perhaps the most charitable response to let the authority experience the consequences of his actions, instead of shielding him from them, so that learning can occur.

• He can ask her “ex cathedra” to do things that are possible for her to do (and can’t for things that are not possible, such as picking up two children across town at the same time). He can also ask her casually for things that are possible, because spouses being friends is a good, and friends ask for and offer favors, affections, gifts, etc.

• If what he is asking of his wife and/or children is beyond the scope of what they are mentally or emotionally capable of (as opposed to the physical impossibility of bilocation), then it is appropriate for the wife to bring this up with him; however, every effort should be made to do so in a way that is gentle, not accusatory, and in a state of mental and emotional peace on both sides. (We call this a “teachable moment”.) Discussing grievances from a place of anger or in a contemptuous way is a guarantee of raising defensive hackles and spiraling the argument further.¹¹

If you are married to someone who is not currently practicing the faith, I highly encourage you to check out

Mrs. Prairie Wife’s Guide to Homemaking

or reach out to Julie, as she has some excellent resources on this topic.

Why the ever-loving heck do we not tell all of this this to couples before they get married?

This is the question I’ve been asking myself lately, as I see my friends and my parents’ friends increasingly pursuing divorces and annulments.

We focus so much in marriage prep on the skills we think couples need to have, and even that is often done poorly. Budgeting, celebrating holidays with extended families, having difficult discussions, planning family traditions… all of this is well and good, although I think it could be done much better. And we ensure that we’ve met, as best we can, the canonical requirements for validity. But on the topic of authority, our attitude is often, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?”¹² We shy away from talking about authority and submission in theory/theology, let alone in practice, because we fear it will push couples away from choosing sacramental marriage in favor of cohabitation.

But beyond the possibility of invalid or unhappy marriages, there’s also something to be said for the fact that this is not being taught to young people who are beginning to think about and play for their future. High school students are not taking these things into consideration when they declare a major in college, enter trade school, or pursue a first professional role. Frankly, I think that it’s ridiculous that we ask teenagers to make major life decisions like career trajectory in the first place. And then to withhold (intentionally or otherwise) information about the way that their career will interact with their vocation? This article at The Public Discourse raises some interesting points - while I don’t think this would ever happen, it certainly much more suits my own opinion of the matter.

I hear far too often a sort of holier-than-thou sentiment, bordering on outright schadenfreude, that says more or less, “Well, woman, you should have considered your vocation when choosing your college degree… just like I did.” This often comes with specific details about why this or that degree (or lack thereof) best supports women who desire to be homemakers, which ought to be all women, so if your teenage self didn’t desire to be a homemaker, I guess you suck? The implication here is that getting a degree, especially a career-specific degree, is a complete waste of time, and women who pursue such degrees are… stupid? I’m not quite sure what is trying to be communicated.

But I’ve only ever heard this said to women, until my husband mentioned that one of his Exodus 90 buddies told their group: “You should have a job where you can work 8:00 to 5:00, and then get home and get right back to work.” In other words, your commitment to your profession shouldn’t interfere with the demands of your vocation.

Our culture already knows that men are more likely to work longer hours than women, so why are we not encouraging men as well as women to think of themselves as future spouses instead of (or, at least, in addition to) future employees? As Christians, we recognize that our “little v vocation” has to be subordinated to and in support of our “big V Vocation”, and that both are ultimately oriented toward Heaven.

Marriage is a big decision, and it can be difficult for many people to recognize and admit down the line that they didn’t fully understand the nature of marriage and the relationship to which they were committing. Rather than hiding this truth in the footnotes of our marriage prep books, hoping that it goes unnoticed or secretly considering it antiquated, let’s learn to joyfully understand and embrace it.

Lots of content here this week, so rather than asking specific questions, I’d truly love to hear any thoughts, comments, questions, concerns, clarifications, rebukes, rebuttals, or corrections you have to offer! Thanks for sticking with this one, y’all. I truly believe that having these principles under our belts will enable us to have a much more fruitful discussion (and application!) of St. Benedict’s Rule in the context of family life.

1. Me more than he, I think we’re both willing to admit, although it’s a slice of humble pie for me to eat.

2. This is something that will come up in more depth in our Book Club discussion this Thursday.

3. As a complete aside: our pastor recently gave a homily in which he shared that marriage and the religious life (ie, monks and nuns, but not the priesthood) are both vocations that are open to every Baptized person. I often hear marriage presented as the standard vocation, with the religious life being lumped in with the priesthood in terms of vocations for which a special call from God is “needed” (for lack of a better word), so it was incredible to learn that this is a somewhat flawed understanding. I deeply wish that we had a better understanding of the religious life as a standard option for anyone who feels able and desires to take that upon themselves.

4. This is yet another way in which we are called to create a home for our children.

5. Edith Stein has a lot to say about this. I recommend this volume, from her collected works, if you are interested in exploring this topic further.

6. A prime example from my real life is that, as I was typing this, James just came out and told me that it’s time for bed. He has the authority to do so, and I know that he also has my best interest at heart. So I went to bed.

7. Two thoughts here: First, if you have not yet picked up Fair Play, this turned out to be one of the biggest premises of the book. Make sure everyone knows what all needs to be done and have one person in charge of doing it so there is no oversight and no overlap. Second, I truly pray to God that we (and you) will never again have to live in a place with a German cockroach infestation because let me tell you what it is a NIGHTMARE.

8. I hate that my analogy here is potty training - EC life - but this is the same deal with potty training. Kids will rise to the occasion, but if they’re accustomed to being prompted to go potty, it often takes them a week or two to realize you’re serious about not prompting them anymore. The parent sets the expectation here, so if you’re taking forever to decide if/when to train them, hemming and hawing back and forth with diapers and naked time, etc. then your kid will see that you’re not committed and will also not be committed. If you just take the diapers away one day and choose patience as they learn and adjust to the new expectation, potty training will be a lot less anxiety-inducing.

9. There’s a big difference between “men and women deserve to be afforded the same natural rights with the protection of their society” and “men and women must be equal and treated equally in everything. I loved Isa’s post recently about letting men be men; likewise, we must let ourselves be women. To use the modern, rather cliched phrase, “Equitable treatment does not always mean equal treatment.” There are things that we can clearly see we need as women to support our femininity; we must likewise acknowledge that our husbands, friends, and coworkers need things as men to support their masculinity.

10. Matthew 5:16 ESV

11. The Gottman Institute discusses the “four horsemen of the apocalypse” in marriage, which include Criticism, Contempt, Defensiveness, and Stonewalling.

12. John 6:60 ESV