Sins of Omission- Part 1

As I indicated in my last post, I believe that Christian disunity is a huge enabler of the “Churchian” cancer which is infecting most Christian sects. As I explained:

“Churchianity” is not merely some modern contrivance that resulted from the emergence of feminism. Instead, Churchianity is a natural and logical outgrowth of Christianity when there is no longer a single scriptural authority for the Church.

However, my admonition against Christian disunity was not meant to be a denominational attack. Far from it. As I said earlier, nearly all, if not all, Christian sects in the West have fallen under the spell of Feminism, whether they realize it or not. I happen to be a Catholic, but the Catholic Church, whether Latin or Eastern Rite, has not escaped the pull of feminism. Since I don’t believe that those who live in glass houses should throw stones, I decided to read up on official Catholic teaching with regards to marriage, especially sex inside marriage and the role of the husband and wife. That official teaching is found within the Catechism of the Catholic Church, found here. The section for marriage is somewhat lengthy, and the introduction can be found here.

So what did I find? To the best of my abilities I couldn’t find any direct reference to the role of sex in the marriage. Only a few oblique references to consummation effecting the marriage, and the importance of fertility to marriage. A lot of time was spent covering consent, and the indissolubility of marriage, and the role of God in the sacrament of marriage. But nothing concerning sex. Certainly no mention of 1 Corinthians 7.

Ok, so nothing about sex… but what about the roles of men and women in marriage? Well, Genesis and the concept of a helpmate does warrant a mention.  That’s something. What about Ephesians 5, does that show up anywhere? Why yes it does. But what actually makes it into the document? This:

This is what the Apostle Paul makes clear when he says: “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her,” adding at once: “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one. This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church.

Something seems a little off, doesn’t it? Oh wait, that’s because there are huge chunks of scripture missing here. Here is the full language of Ephesians 5, beginning with Eph 5:22 and ending with 5:33:

22 Wives, be subject to your husbands as you are to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church, the body of which he is the Savior. 24 Just as the church is subject to Christ, so also wives ought to be, in everything, to their husbands.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 in order to make her holy by cleansing her with the washing of water by the word, 27 so as to present the church to himself in splendor, without a spot or wrinkle or anything of the kind—yes, so that she may be holy and without blemish. 28 In the same way, husbands should love their wives as they do their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hates his own body, but he nourishes and tenderly cares for it, just as Christ does for the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” This is a great mystery, and I am applying it to Christ and the church. 33 Each of you, however, should love his wife as himself, and a wife should respect her husband.

I have bolded everything that was not included in the abridged version. Notice what got left out of the Catechism? That’s right, everything which referenced how wives were supposed to act in marriage. Interestingly enough, the command for men to love their wives as Christ loved the church still found it’s way in though. Well, maybe they included that rather important information in the conclusion or brief summary at the bottom…:

1659    St. Paul said: “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the Church…. This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church” (Eph 5:25, 32).
1660    The marriage covenant, by which a man and a woman form with each other an intimate communion of life and love, has been founded and endowed with its own special laws by the Creator. By its very nature it is ordered to the good of the couple, as well as to the generation and education of children. Christ the Lord raised marriage between the baptized to the dignity of a sacrament (cf. CIC, can. 1055 § 1; cf. GS 48 § 1).
1661    The sacrament of Matrimony signifies the union of Christ and the Church. It gives spouses the grace to love each other with the love with which Christ has loved his Church; the grace of the sacrament thus perfects the human love of the spouses, strengthens their indissoluble unity, and sanctifies them on the way to eternal life (cf. Council of Trent: DS 1799).
1662    Marriage is based on the consent of the contracting parties, that is, on their will to give themselves, each to the other, mutually and definitively, in order to live a covenant of faithful and fruitful love.
1663    Since marriage establishes the couple in a public state of life in the Church, it is fitting that its celebration be public, in the framework of a liturgical celebration, before the priest (or a witness authorized by the Church), the witnesses, and the assembly of the faithful.
1664    Unity, indissolubility, and openness to fertility are essential to marriage. Polygamy is incompatible with the unity of marriage; divorce separates what God has joined together; the refusal of fertility turns married life away from its “supreme gift,” the child (GS 50 §1).
1665    The remarriage of persons divorced from a living, lawful spouse contravenes the plan and law of God as taught by Christ. They are not separated from the Church, but they cannot receive Eucharistic communion. They will lead Christian lives especially by educating their children in the faith.
1666    The Christian home is the place where children receive the first proclamation of the faith. For this reason the family home is rightly called “the domestic church,” a community of grace and prayer, a school of human virtues and of Christian charity.

Nope, not there either. But the command for husbands to love their wives showed up again.

So how is it that the command for men to love their wives appears twice, but the command for women to be subject to their husbands, or to respect their husbands, can’t even make a single appearance? The catechism is a lengthy summary of critical beliefs of the Church. There was plenty of room for a few more lines concerning the duties of wives within marriage. What I think is happening here is that the Catholic Church is acting just like the pastor from Church B in my previous post:

[The pastor of Church B] comes to understand that if the subject of Ephesians 5 and wifely submission, or something like it, comes up in church he will be forced to either support the biblical command and risk losing membership, or toss out parts of scripture in order to keep his pews and coffers full. Not wanting to lose members, but also not wanting to jettison scripture, he decides to play the role of King Solomon and split the baby by simply ignoring the parts of scripture which his members oppose.

The Catholic Church appears to have decided to follow this path, by pretending that certain parts of scripture don’t exist. There is no other logical explanation for the  disparity in the Catechism concerning the duties of the spouses in marriage. This is very disheartening. In many respects it had appeared to me that the Catholic Church had done a better job than other denominations of resisting feminist pressure. That belief was clearly mistaken. Now I will have to devote some more effort in the future to investigating how far the feminist rot has infected the Church.

Of course, the Catholic Church has more teachings than what shows up in the Catechism. The US Conference of Bishops has created an initiative called For Your Marriage, which might contain a more detailed explanation of Church doctrine when it comes to marriage. In part 2 of this series, likely out Thursday, I will review this website and see if it provides a clearer picture of how the Church addresses some of the big issues inside marriage.


Update: It occurred to me that I might be expecting more of the Catechism than I should, so I decided to compare this latest version with older versions. I started with the 1884 US Catechism, known as the Baltimore Catechism (The link goes to the expanded version). Interestingly enough, it also didn’t cover sex or the roles of husband and wife in marriage. Given the time it was written, before First Wave (Modern) Feminism, that was somewhat reassuring.  Perhaps I was simply expecting too much. Then I found the 1941 Revised Edition of the Baltimore Catechism. The section on marriage can be found here. It is set up in a question and answer format, and one of the questions was this: What are the chief duties of husband and wife in the married state? The answer:

The chief duties of husband and wife in the married state are to be faithful to each other, and to provide in every way for the welfare of the children God may give them.

Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is becoming in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives and do not be bitter towards them. (Colossians 3:18-19)

So the official answer is simplistic,  but then it cites Colossians for support. And here at last we get both sides of the story… the commands for both husbands and wives are mentioned. The new Catechism dates from 1992, which means that in the space of fifty years the leaders of the Catholic Church decided that mentioning the duties of wives in the state of matrimony in the official teaching of the Church didn’t warrant mentioning.



Filed under Churchianity, Feminism, Marriage, The Church

3 responses to “Sins of Omission- Part 1

  1. Deep Strength

    That’s pretty scary that the catechism only has “man up”

  2. deti

    I was raised in the United Methodist Church. Its counterpart to the RCC Catechism is the “Book of Discipline”. It consists less of “rules”. It is more a set of policy statements and creeds.

    On human sexuality: “We affirm that sexuality is God’s good gift to all persons. We call everyone to responsible stewardship of this sacred gift.
    Although all persons are sexual beings whether or not they are married, sexual relations are affirmed only with the covenant of monogamous, heterosexual marriage.

    We deplore all forms of the commercialization, abuse, and exploitation of sex. We call for strict global enforcement of laws prohibiting the sexual exploitation of children and for adequate protection, guidance, and counseling for abused children. All persons, regardless of age, gender, marital status, or sexual orientation, are entitled to have their human and civil rights ensured and to be protected against violence. The Church should support the family in providing age-appropriate education regarding sexuality to children, youth, and adults.
    *** The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. We affirm that God’s grace is available to all. We will seek to live together in Christian community, welcoming, forgiving, and loving one another, as Christ has loved and accepted us. We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons.”

    On Marriage: “We affirm the sanctity of the marriage covenant that is expressed in love, mutual support, personal commitment, and shared fidelity between a man and a woman. We believe that God’s blessing rests upon such marriage, whether or not there are children of the union. We reject social norms that assume different standards for women than for men in marriage. We support laws in civil society that define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.”

    On divorce,: “God’s plan is for lifelong, faithful marriage. The church must be on the forefront of premarital, marital, and postmarital counseling in order to create and preserve strong marriages. However, when a married couple is estranged beyond reconciliation, even after thoughtful consideration and counsel, divorce is a regrettable alternative in the midst of brokenness. We grieve over the devastating emotional, spiritual, and economic consequences of divorce for all involved, understanding that women and especially children are disproportionately impacted by such burdens. As the church we are concerned about high divorce rates. It is recommended that methods of mediation be used to minimize the adversarial nature and fault-finding that are often part of our current judicial processes, encouraging reconciliation wherever possible. We also support efforts by governments to reform divorce laws and other aspects of family law in order to address negative trends such as high divorce rates.
    Although divorce publicly declares that a marriage no longer exists, other covenantal relationships resulting from the marriage remain, such as the nurture and support of children and extended family ties. We urge respectful negotiations in deciding the custody of minor children and support the consideration of either or both parents for this responsibility in that custody not be reduced to financial support, control, or manipulation and retaliation. The welfare of each child is the most important consideration.
    Divorce does not preclude a new marriage. We encourage an intentional commitment of the Church and society to minister compassionately to those in the process of divorce, as well as members of divorced and remarried families, in a community of faith where God’s grace is shared by all.

    Did you notice? No references to scripture. No references to husbandly headship or wifely submission. No reference to wifely respect toward her husband (but plenty of reference to mutual love and support).

  3. Yes, I did notice. At least the Catechism cites scripture or sometimes canon law after each “rule.”

    What I did notice is this line:

    “We reject social norms that assume different standards for women than for men in marriage.”

    Ok, I can understand rejecting social norms. After all, the Church is supposed to be spiritual, not worldly in nature. But what about scriptural commands that assume different standards for women and men in marriage? No mention there. At first glance the UMC follows the path of the pastor from Church B, and just ignore scripture. But that line about social norms, plus the whole section on divorce… it seems like they aren’t even following the pastor from Church C. Instead, they appear to be taking a “path D”, where they outright disregard scripture.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s