A reader (dear Claire) asked what the animal was that came so close at the zoo.
A Hip-Pippo, of course!
Speaking of zoos, I made Pippo his very own little boy quilt! I took it to California all assembled, but not quilted.
It's all part of my grand over-crafting scheme.
I had to make this quickly. I knew I didn't want to cut up that adorable zoo fabric too much, but I had no plan.
Something cute! Something perfect! Something NOW! No pressure! He's only just growing up without a quilt from his grandmother!
He's just going to go off to college with NO ZOO QUILT!!
So this is what I made. The red backing was something I had in my stash, as is the bright blue, which is authentically vintage. Everything else I had gotten on purpose (as opposed to fog-headedly and without a plan, my usual) a while ago to make this boy a zoo quilt. How it was to go together, I had no idea. I just started piecing until it was done! I started in the middle and worked my way out to the edges.
Rosie needs to take a picture of the back, because we totally forgot to (most of these pictures are Rosie's), and it's CUTE!!
Okay, so a little picture gallery of the quilt, and then on to some heavy-duty document reading.
First look at the 10% quilted quilt. He loves it. Phew, because he is definitely train oriented — CHOO CHOO!! — and I was worried. But also in love with this fabric. |
Curious George went to the zoo, not without drama, as you will recall. |
“Zoo qui duh? Zoo qui duh, Hah?” {Zoo quilt done, Habibti?} |
He really did just spend a lot of time pointing at bits of it. He'd be in mid run from one busy truck moment to another important train moment and have to pause to point at the “zoo qui.” |
So, Casti Connubii, paragraphs 19-30 (I'm just following that handy-dandy outline).
“Fidelity.”
Once, long ago, the Chief and I were taping a TV interview on a Catholic program. Another guest was a young man who had overcome addiction to drugs and all sorts of adversity to come home to the Lord. I can't remember anything about the whole episode except a little exchange we had in the parking lot afterwards.
This young man was full of that energy and intensity that, if not channeled, often do land the person in difficulties. I liked him. He asked if the hosts (an older married couple) and Phil and I would like to go out to grab a bite after our interviews were over, and honestly, I would have enjoyed that.
But we were young parents with at least four children (can't remember), very young, at home — children who were almost certainly being naughty right at that moment and driving their grandmother crazy, and we were at least 45 minutes away. If nothing else, staying out late (and by late I mean until, gasp, maybe eleven o'clock! on a weeknight!) would make the next day somewhat purgatorial.
We looked at each other, Phil gave the eyebrow (you know, the “thumbs-down” eyebrow), and we cheerfully made our excuses. We were genuinely regretful not to get to know him better, but we explained our situation and took our leave.
As we parted, the guy said, “It's okay! I have nothing to go home to. You — you are building something.”
That is the meaning of fidelity in marriage.
When you are married, you are building something. Whether you know it or not, that is what you are doing. Only time will reveal what that edifice is.
Some things take a short time to build. A family takes a lifetime.
Just like last time, we need to step back from our worries and anxieties and see what this thing is that we are working on, this lifetime project.
A prescription from Dr. Auntie Leila for your anxiety ailment:
Read the text.
Read it.
Not just the parts that make you want to run screaming to your nearest NOW-approved group therapy gender workshop. If you look at it through the lens of power, you will understand nothing. If you look at it through the lens of love — the kind of love we all want, which is the love that wants the good of the other — you will find wisdom!
For a good instance of wisdom, you know what it means when it says (in 23) that the couple must have “an especially holy and pure love, not as adulterers love each other.” He is asking us to put our sexual love in the context of the whole of God's plan. To keep it free of anything ugly, pornographic, or vulgar. I don't know, but porn is a multi-billion dollar industry and shows every sign of gaining mainstream acceptance, if fashion and entertainment are any indication.
Maybe that goes without saying, but maybe not.
Now, there's this:
This outward expression of love in the home demands not only mutual help but must go further; must have as its primary purpose that man and wife help each other day by day in forming and perfecting themselves in the interior life, so that through their partnership in life they may advance ever more and more in virtue, and above all that they may grow in true love toward God and their neighbor, on which indeed “dependeth the whole Law and the Prophets.” (23)
What is this interior life that he speaks of? Ah, a world … the Kingdom of Heaven is within. And marriage is not only being a family and educating children, but more: The blending of life as a whole and the mutual interchange and sharing thereof.
Life!
And then there's this:
Domestic society being confirmed, therefore, by this bond of love, there should flourish in it that “order of love,” as St. Augustine calls it. This order includes both the primacy of the husband with regard to the wife and children, the ready subjection of the wife and her willing obedience, which the Apostle commends in these words: “Let women be subject to their husbands as to the Lord, because the husband is the head of the wife, and Christ is the head of the Church.”(26)
Before you have a panic attack, look at the words “confirmed…by this bond of love. And go back and read (23) again. The part about
“This precept the Apostle laid down when he said: “Husbands, love your wives as Christ also loved the Church,”[24] that Church which of a truth He embraced with a boundless love not for the sake of His own advantage, but seeking only the good of His Spouse.”
I bet you can have a good discussion after having a look at (27) — “does not deny liberty… nor does it bid her obey every request not in harmony with right reason or dignity.”
The Church is trying its hardest to protect you from two evils.
Let me try to unpack this for you quickly.
First, it's just missing the point to think that in marriage, the husband gets a slave or even wants a slave. He married his wife because he loves her. He is a work in progress himself, and he knows it. “Flesh of my flesh, bone of my bone.”
Lots of women show no respect for their husbands — even the respect due to another human being, let alone one you have committed yourself to for life. But lots of women attempt a subservience that veils a contemptuous and discontented attitude that ultimately destroys their friendship. Neither of these types will readily yield in anything, large or small. (I feel like we might need to talk about this another time.)
Of course the husband not a petty god who demands trivial offerings. According to the Catholic Church, he must not be. The wife is not a child. It really sins against the love this document is talking about, which is only ultimate, sanctifying love, for him to be anything but sacrificial in his love and honor for his wife.
The second evil has to do with the fact that you don't know what challenges life will bring. Jobs. Moving. Sickness. Danger. Your adventure of love, your marriage, requires unity.
Why must the primacy belong to the man? Now we are approaching the mystery. Part of it is that men and women are equal but different.
More: Reality is hierarchical — did you know that? What is marvelous is that supernatural hierarchy reflects something that is in God, which was summed up by St. Paul when he said that Jesus, one of the Persons of the Trinity, did not deem equality something to be grasped at.
You are making a classic blunder if you equate hierarchy with inequality, or think that it demeans a wife, the heart of her family, to grant primacy to her head, her husband.
Husbands: Your wife is making a sanctuary for you, as well as all the other things she does. Your home. This sanctuary is hidden from most. But it is your delight. Belittle this gift at your peril.
Wives: Your husband is making it possible for you to be a maker of a sanctuary, the heart of what you build together. If you tear it down with your own hands, you are tearing out your own heart. (Proverbs 14)
And let's not skip too lightly over paragraph 28, in which the document readily affirms that subjection varies according to conditions!
In other words, you are free to interpret this according to many criteria, including your personalities! Just keep in mind that “the structure of the family and its fundamental law (unity and fidelity: “The two shall be one flesh”), established and confirmed by God, must always and everywhere be maintained intact.”
And then figure it out!
Done!
Go here for a PDF file of the document. You can print it out.
|
Here is Part II of our discussion: God has no grandchildren.
Kate says
I really like that quilt!
Breanna says
You don't choose wimpy, namby-pamby reading material, do you?
This was so good. I'm still thinking about it. Every single sentence is packed, yes, jammed full of things to consider. Thank you for pointing me at the document!
Kathy says
Thank you Leila, my heart is filled with this message and I love the conversation you've begun by discussing Casti Canubi section by section – it has been such a source of inspiration this Lent for my husband and myself.
The quilt is precious!
Kathy says
Oops, I've been spelling Casti Connubii wrong, glad I finally caught that *smile*
Nancy says
Excellent, excellent post!
abby says
Exactly what I needed this morning, as I just made the hard decision to cut back on almost all my weekend activities. Good things, like my classical book club that reads things like Dante and Chesterton, and regularly visiting a widow, too! But I am working, working, working all week, which always spills into my weekend, and I can't cut back on that as my husband is in grad school. I am exhausted. So I had to say: that's it. Church, husband, business, ministry, home ONLY. And… we just got chickens. I'm trading my widow visits and Dante discussions for backyard chickens? Yes. Because we're building something. Or maybe God is building something in us? However you want to say it. This morning we drank coffee and laughed at ourselves as the sun shone through our windows, and watched our little chickies drink and hobble around their box. This is building something holy, but it's easy to doubt when I look at these “good things” I'm saying NO to until school lets out, and I'm so thankful for your reminder.
Mamabearjd says
I am trying to keep up. Trying, because it is so good. Not mentioning it to my husband, because he's just not ready to discuss things like this, and I only share that because I know there are other women in the same place and I don't want them to go away discouraged.
Love the quilt and also Pippo's apron! I have 3 boys and only one boy apron, one girl and maybe 20 girl aprons. I'm going to see what I can do about that today. My youngest is out of the crib and needs a bigger quilt. I'm about to give it a go! Will be revisiting your quilt posts for sure.
Katie says
I've always had trouble understanding that Pauline passage, with the whole business of subjection, and loving as Christ loves the Church. In our household, I tend to plan and orchestrate everything, and my loving husband goes along. One of our reading group members shed some light: he sees the husband as a protector and the wife as a natural servant. Not like a slave-servant, but as wanting to serve. That totally clicks with me–that's definitely what we've got going on, even if Mrs. Type A is “calling the shots.”
_Leila says
Katie, it's so true. And we wives who get everyone where they need to be, doing what they need to do, we have to be careful that we are not bustling our husbands along with the kids.
It's all too easy to treat him, quite unjustly, as a kid. And all the while, he's making it all possible and in fact bearing the burden if things don't go well. That is his leadership, that's what we have to respect and honor in word and deed.
A @ Classical Quest says
Wisdom. Pure and simple. All this is stuff my heart knows, but I struggle with just the same. Hoping offline now to work on our sanctuary! Thank you for the encouragement. ♥
Mary says
Loving the conversation on Casti Cannubii!!
But I do have an unrelated question. What types of “thread” did you use to do the hand quilting on Pippos quilt?
Thanks Auntie Leila!!
_Leila says
Mary, it's pearl cotton (or perle) — it comes in big twists and is quite sturdy. I said more about it here: http://www.likemotherlikedaughter.org//2013/01/c… and here: http://www.likemotherlikedaughter.org//2012/03/b…
Mary says
thank you, thank you, thank you! off to purchase some…
wanderingsue says
Been away for a bit, and just catching up- missed your world, my dear. Especially the quilts, and the wisdom. Funny how much this little firm atheist gets from your faith- you mentioned a long time ago that one day you would tell us how you came to Catholicism. I don't think you've gotten to it yet, forgive me if I'm wrong, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd love to hear about it. Not that you don't have plenty else to talk about, and please take that in the very positive and grateful and admiring way it's intended.
With love, Sue.
Liz says
I've been reading along, and in fact skipped ahead to parts of the encyclical which seem to be written precisely and perhaps prophetically for our times. I'm sure you will get to that. 🙂
Thanks for delving into this! I'm sure I would never have read it otherwise, and that would be a shame because it is a gem. And so, so, so relevant on so many levels.
Liz
Mena says
My husband and I – married only a month now! – were given Casti Connubii to read by our priest as homework for our marriage prep meetings (he met with us as a couple six times before the wedding, in addition to sending us to the required diocesan marriage prep weekend). It was excellent, even if our naturally rebellious natures initially made us want to question certain parts of it. Once you understand it, it makes so much sense. He also spent an entire session on the passage from Paul. Far from being some archaic command that women be subservient slaves, Father showed us how the majority of that passage was instructions for the husband. In fact, as my fiance drove me home that night, I couldn't help asking him, “So… are you sure you still want to get married? That hasn't scared you off?” Because I only have to obey him in reasonable ways, which I'm fine with; but he has to love me through thick and thin, do his best to make me happy and ensure that ours is a happy home, lead us as a couple and hopefully as a family, and be responsible not only for our happiness here on earth but for our eternal salvation. It's a tall order.
Jenny says
I don't know if this belongs here or when we get to errors, but I'll throw it out.
How does a wife subject herself to a husband who is not really interested in having someone subjected to him? I don't know really how to explain it. I don't mean in an abandoning the family kind of way. I mean in a defers the decision to the wife 99% of the time kind of way.
Is it just the principle of knowing she would defer if he voiced a strong opinion on something or does it play out in a more concrete way?
_Leila says
Jenny, submission is simply two things. First, it's respect — and John Paul spoke of “mutual subjection” because of course, both should show respect to each other.
However, the wife particularly needs to show respect in her everyday dealings with her husband precisely because she does make most of the day-to-day decisions and in fact is competent with the myriad details — and easily falls into the habit of issuing orders to husband and children alike. For years that can work, but when a rough patch arises, the husband suffers from feeling bossed and feeling that his opinion isn't important to his wife. Not in the first decade, maybe, but later. This is what I'm trying to tell you. It's wear and tear on the relationship for no good reason. You can make most of the decisions with a subtle scorn for him or with a loving kindness. Some women are good at being kind and supportive and positive. The vast majority are not good at that. Women as a group tend to affirm everyone but their husbands.
Second, I suspect that you are taking for granted a certain basic submission that you already have — the submission to the plan. For instance, if he got a job in another place, you would go with him. You would perhaps argue and plead and cry, but in the end, the ultimate decision is his, for the sake of the family. A man needs to know that his wife will go with him wherever he has to go. In spirit as well as in body. The burden is on him, because the blame is on him if he fails to protect you.
The submission is to the unity. His headship is in doing what needs to be done to protect his family and provide for his loved ones.
Jenny says
You are completely right about taking the basic submission for granted. I hadn't even considered submission to the plan as being submission at all. That makes me feel better.
I do struggle with exasperation–not scorn–with carrying so much of the mental weight. To me scorn implies that I do not think he is capable. I'm not great at bossing people or at being decisive and get frustrated when so many decisions are left at my feet. I probably need to work on not letting my frustration at feeling overwhelmed spill into my words and attitudes.
Mrs. Pickles says
May I add to the discussion? This is something I've noticed with my own husband (of 12 yrs) — whenever I'm feeling overwhelmed and resentful that so much is left to me, it's not b/c my husband is neglecting his leadership role or anything. He honestly doesn't know what needs to be done or how to help me. When I ask him for help with a task or decision, he is more than willing — in fact, I think he feels relief. It's important for him to feel needed.
Christina A says
Love this idea of submission to “the plan”! Years ago, our pastor in Santa Cruz did a series on “The Mission of the Family” and talked about how submission often means the wife making sure her mission is under the husband’s mission (“sub-mission”), not operating contrary to it. It can be easy to drift off into pursuing our own ends individualistically, instead of realizing that the many things we do each day should lead to accomplishing the greater mission of the family as a whole. His first message in the series is called Mission of the Family #1 from February 2012, and can be found here for free: http://www.wordmp3.com/ministry/default.aspx?id=trinitycovenantchurchca
Sheila says
Pope John Paul II didn't actually believe that women should submit to their husbands more than the other way around. Mutual submission is about BOTH spouses looking for the needs and desires of the other. Neither my husband nor I really see him as the “leader” or “boss” at all. For awhile I was worried that made us heretics, but JPII has an explanation I like, about how we should BOTH make decisions while thinking of the other first.
In reality he tends to make more practical decisions because he's a practical guy. But I've never felt the need to “obey” if I think he's wrong … more, to submit out of love, to give him his way when it's important to him, knowing he does the same for me when I request it.
This is hard to explain, but I don't actually think Casti connubii is the final word on the subject.
_Leila says
Sheila, well, I know what you are referring to — a teaching of John Paul II that is an apostolic exhortation called Familiaris Consortio (The Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World). It's a beautiful, clear letter that he wrote with the whole Church and indeed the world in mind — including those parts of the world that we, here in our comfy and female-dominated world, don't think of. For instance, places where men abuse their natural authority and oppress their wives — something that Pius XI, in Casti Connubii, explicitly forbade.
One thing that everyone must always keep in mind is that it would never happen that one Pope would “disagree,” as you put it, with the teachings (in the official sense, in which an encyclical such as CC ranks higher than an apostolic letter) of a predecessor — much less with Holy Scripture! You do John Paul a disservice by saying this! The Church (in other words, the Holy Spirit, who guarantees the teachings, according to Scripture) doesn't work that way!
Familiaris Consortio, looking at the footnotes, is based on Scripture and, mainly, Humanae Vitae, the encyclical on marital relations that came after CC. HV, in turn, is based on CC.
First and foremost, a Papal document is based on Scripture and right reason. And there is no denying that Scripture says that a man must love his wife as Christ loved the Church (unto death), and a wife must submit (or obey) her husband.
Each Pope tries to take into consideration the needs of his people and the whole world at the time and then explain things to them.
One way to think of what is said about mutual subjection in FC is this: Each must subject to the other in accordance with God's plan and with his or her own characteristic strengths and weaknesses in mind — and above all, with the good of the family in mind. Don't make the mistake of thinking that “mutual subjection” means “uniformly subjected” or “subjected in the same way”!
One thing that we who have basically good marriages don't think about (but which you see after many years of observation) is the damage done when the principle of Scripture and of the authentic teaching of the Church is not followed. So, for instance, it would probably never come up in your family that you would receive a job offer so enticing that you would leave your family to pursue it, over your husband's objections. But that does happen in our world! And that is what Pius XI presciently foretold! He was the Pope of the alpha female just as much as the Pope of the burka'd Afghani woman — regardless of whether either of these poor unfortunates realizes it or not. Do you see?
This might help, from the incomparable William May of the John Paul II Institute (it's worth reading the whole article http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/may/father…
In speaking of the mutual submission of husbands and wives to each other out of love for Christ, John Paul II, as Germain Grisez has properly noted and discussed at length, in no way rejected the tradition represented by Pope Pius XI. The different papal teachings are compatible. As Grisez points out, Pius XI, while admonishing wives to obey their husbands, was careful to emphasize that a husband must respect his wife’s equal personal dignity and should not dominate her, because she is equal in dignity to her husband. John Paul II, stressing the obligation of spouses to submit mutually to one another in Christ, notes that male domination of women is the result of the latter’s vulnerability and of original sin. But at the same time he emphasizes the “specific diversity and personal originality of man and woman.” Women rightly resist domination, but in doing so they must not, he says, become “masculinized” and “appropriate to themselves male characteristics contrary to their own feminine originality.”[31] By affirming the difference between men and women John Paul II implies the legitimacy of sexually differentiated roles in marriage. Although he does not spell these out, either in Mulieris dignitatem or in Familiaris consortio, he affirms, as I have stressed, that the husband/father has a leadership (headship) role within the family, and the implication is that this role requires of the husband/father a unique kind of authority within the family.