God Gave Marital Headship to Men

God gives headship in marriage to husbands

The Catholic Church teaches that men and women are equal and complementary: of equal dignity and of equal value as human beings and with complimentary gifts from God. Nonetheless, there is tremendous and unignorable Scriptural evidence that God gives headship in marriage to husbands. This is not a contradiction to or a negation of the equality and complementarity of men and women, as taught and embraced by the Catholic Church and other parties, but is a bestowal of authority within marriage and family on husbands that takes nothing away from the dignity of women, but is a compliment to their femininity and is meant to be a blessing upon women.

In addition to scriptural evidence, there are vast references to male-marital-headship-as-planned-by-God in papal encyclicals and other Catholic sources. Exhausting all of said sources would be beyond the scope of this article. This multi-part article will make use of a sampling of well-known sources to support that headship in marriage is meant to belong to husbands in Christian marriage.

What constitutes marital headship, how marital headship is best exercised, and if and/or when male marital headship may be invalidated or nullified, are all essential questions of colossal magnitude. Nonetheless, such questions are beyond the scope of this article. All references to male marital headship in this article are to be taken as a general assumption of a husband endeavoring selflessly (with God’s grace) to be a benevolent leader and the ultimate decision-maker in his marriage.

The Flight into Egypt

Scripture presents tremendous evidence that God gave marital headship to husbands. Proof of God giving marital headship to husbands, and a helpful illustration of marital headship, is found when one looks closely at the travels of the Holy Family.

"...an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, ‘Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there till I tell you; for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him.’ And he rose and took the child and his mother by night, and departed to Egypt, and remained there until the death of Herod." Matthew 2:13-15 (Revised Standard Version Second Catholic Edition)

The angel told Joseph to take Mary and Jesus to Egypt. Later, the angel told Joseph to take his family from Egypt to their next destination. The angel did not speak to Mary. The angel did not speak to Joseph and Mary together. The angel spoke to Joseph only. The burden of responsibility was given by God (via the angel) to Joseph to protectively lead the Holy Family to safety. Mary, presumably, got to rest and sleep and tend to the infant Jesus while Joseph was learning all that God was demanding of him as the husband and father from the start.

Even though Mary would become the Queen of Heaven, even though she was full of grace (Luke 1:28)---unlike Saint Joseph (who though saintly, was not full of grace as uniquely Mary was)---even though Mary was the Ark of the Covenant, Joseph was the head of the Holy Family. The Litany of Saint Joseph calls Saint Joseph the “Head of the Holy Family.”

Even though Mary, in holiness, outranked any other person to walk the planet, Jesus aside, God did not make her the head in her marriage or family. The Flight Into Egypt shows this. With all of Our Lady’s glory and responsibility as the Mother of God, why would God burden Our Lady with the further responsibility and earthly work and hardship of being a co-head or the head in her marriage? The answer is that God would not and God did not. God gave Mary the gift of Saint Joseph to be the head of their family, so she could sleep while Joseph received the message to get her and their child out of harm’s way. This is a microcosm of God’s bestowal of marital headship on husbands and its purpose. The example of the Holy Family shows that God’s plan of husbands-having-headship-in-marriage, is not related to the holiness or amazingness of either spouse, since if it were, Mary would have been the head of the Holy Family.

Nuptial imagery

Moving from the Gospel to Ephesians, Ephesians could not be more clear in stating that God gave marital headship to the husband:

"Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the Church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her…" Ephesians 5:22-25 (RSVSCE)

As many know from basic catechesis, the Church is the bride of Christ and Christ is the head of the Church. Earthly marriage is analogous with Christ and His Church. The Church is not the head of Christ and Christ is not subjected to the Church. This critical analogy is one proof of God giving marital headship to husbands. Just as celibate religious vocations are an eschatological sign of the glory to come in heaven of singlehood in heaven (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 931-933), human marriage is a sign of the relationship of Christ and the Church (Matthew 22:30 (RSVSCE)).

This point is referenced countless times in papal encyclicals—as will later be mentioned in this article. St. Paul’s aforementioned statement of Christian marriage as a sign of Christ and Christ’s church, connects male marital headship with the sacramentality of Christian marriage. It is no surprise that in his Summa Theologiae, St. Thomas Aquinas called marriage-as-a-sign-of-Christ-and-the-church, res tantum, "The third dimension of marriage consists of res tantum (contained and uncontained), meaning the grace in the bond, and the union of Christ and the church, respectively.”

Obedience

Obedience is an irreplaceable theme in Christianity. The Catholic Church teaches that obedience is beyond important. There would be no Christianity or Catholic Church, had not Jesus substituted his obedience for the disobedience of humankind (Romans 5:19 (RSVSCE)). The Catechism teaches of the importance of civil obedience and obedience to government authorities (CCC, 2242 and 1900). Obedience is an evangelical counsel and Christ wants obedience from all of his followers (CCC, 915). Along with the other evangelical counsels, the profession of obedience distinguishes consecrated life from other states of life (CCC, 915). People in the consecrated life are consecrated “more intimately to God’s service and to the good of the whole Church” (CCC, 945). They are essentially married to the Church, with the Church being their bridegroom.

With those in religious vocations being brides of the Church and vowing obedience, this analogy to earthly marriage is another proof of this argument (i.e. those with religious vocations, both male and female, are brides of the Church and promise to be obedient to their bridegroom the Church, and analogously, literal brides are to be obedient to their literal bridegrooms, their husbands).

Venerable Fulton Sheen, Pope John Paul II, and other sources

The Venerable Fulton Sheen wrote essentially in Three To Get Married, that what matters most is not if a person has a fancy career or is a stay-at-home parent, if a person has ten children or two children, or is rich or poor. He wrote that what matters is keeping one’s focus on God above all things and in all things (Fulton J. Sheen, Three to Get Married (Strongsville, Ohio: Scepter Publishers, 1996)). In marriage, an obvious and critical way of doing that would be hierarchically mirroring the relationship of Christ and His Church, of which marriage is a sacramental sign. In Life Is Worth Living, Fulton J. Sheen wrote:

"When a man loves a woman, he has to become worthy of her. The higher her virtue, the more noble her character, the more devoted she is to truth, justice, goodness, the more a man has to aspire to be worthy of her. The history of civilization could actually be written in terms of the level of its women." (Fulton J. Sheen, Life Is Worth Living (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1999)). 

Sheen’s harrowing last sentence in the above quote calls to mind that contraceptive and abortive culture, by arguably no coincidence, have grown alongside secular cultural messages that present male marital headship as tyrannical or antiquated. As written in Pope John Paul II’s Familiaris Consortio:

"...signs are not lacking of a disturbing degradation of some fundamental values: a mistaken theoretical and practical concept of the independence of the spouses in relation to each other…the growing number of divorces; the scourge of abortion; the ever more frequent recourse to sterilization; the appearance of a truly contraceptive mentality." (Pope John Paul II, Familiaris Consortio, https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-co nsortio.html, 6.)

Sheen’s writings suggest that he would agree that the twenty-first century secular culture’s condemnation of male marital headship is part of a cultural moral degradation in character, seeing as leadership (i.e. male marital headship) is demanding on men with regards to morality and responsibility. Like many Catholic writers, including popes, before him, the Venerable Sheen referenced Ephesians in writing that Christian marriage is a sign of Christ and the Church, “All love craves unity. As the highest peak of love in the human order is the unity of husband and wife in the flesh, so the highest unity in the Divine order is the unity of the soul and Christ in communion.” (Fulton J. Sheen, Life Of Christ (New York: Doubleday, 1990)).

Continuing St. Paul’s teaching of marriage as a sign of the Church, the maleness of the priesthood is a further sign of male headship in marriage. The priest is the leader of the parish and this parallels marriage. If gender were irrelevant, then there could be female priests—which is not the case. Going further, a parish has a pastor who is the ultimate and final head. There may be multiple priests but there is one pastor. There are no co-pastors, co-bishops, or co-popes. Marriage is similar. Headship is singular. With aforementioned religious leaders having grave responsibility in relation to their charges, the same is mirrored in a husband’s headship.

Genesis states that Adam is the head of Eve and he will rule over her. This is further punishment from the Fall, that Adam has the burden of having that much more work to do by way of marital headship. (In light of Christ’s teachings and how Christ treated women as seen in Scripture, it should go without saying that Adam being made to “rule over” Eve, when contemplating marriage, is not to mean that Adam should treat Eve as his footstool, but that he is benevolently responsible for her.) Genesis shows that male headship in marriage is Scriptural.

Secular deception

The secular message that “male headship in marriage is wrong or evil,” sadly and sexistly assumes that men would be tyrannical, abusive, incapable, or untrustworthy as heads in marriage. Such a sad and sexist assumption undermines the humanity and dignity of men as created in the image and likeness of God. Gospel morality manifests in love. Morality is predicated on freedom. The Gospel notion of freedom is not the secular notion of freedom. The Gospel notion of freedom is about the freedom to will the good and to love God. Pope John Paul II wrote in Familiaris Consortio:

"…there frequently lies a corruption of the idea and the experience of freedom, conceived not as a capacity for realizing the truth of God's plan for marriage and the family, but as an autonomous power of self-affirmation, often against others, for one's own selfish well-being." (Pope John Paul II, Familiaris Consortio, 6.)

The secular notion of freedom is a “false freedom.” For example, “freedom” to hire a prostitute, buy heroine, or pour gasoline in the ocean, is not true freedom. “Freedom” from constraints or rules is not necessarily true freedom. Two key components of the false sense of freedom that is the secular sense of freedom, is freedom-from-objective-truth (i.e. subjective morality) and freedom-from-authority. It is secularism that says that husbands-should-not-have-headship-in-marriage, or that marriage should be defined and redefined as people wish. This is “freedom” from objective truth that comes from the false sense of freedom that is the secular sense of freedom.

The secular sense that husbands should not have headship in marriage, is part of the freedom-from-authority that is a product of the secular false sense of freedom. It is the false secular sense of freedom that says that one is free when one is free from authority. This goes in multiple directions. It is secular to say that wives are free when they are free from husbands’ authority and it is Scriptural that male headship (with God’s grace) in marriage is a blessing to women and a sign of Christ’s sacrificial love for his church. “Following Christ, the Church seeks the truth, which is not always the same as the majority opinion.” (Pope John Paul II, Familiaris Consortio, 5.)

The dignity of women & eschatology

In Casti Connubii (1930), Pope Pius XI wrote ample text affirming the dignity and strength of women. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii,
https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19301231_casti-connubii.html, 26-29.) His writing here was a perfect sample of Catholic teaching on the great dignity of women and the harmony of this great dignity with God’s bestowal of marital headship on husbands. Pope Piux XI beautifully explained, “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 in love.” (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, 27.) In a shining example of Catholicism’s unchangingness and continuity, Pope Pius XI also restated the writings of his predecessor Pope Leo XIII, in explaining God’s creation of male headship in marriage:

"With great wisdom Our predecessor Leo XIII, of happy memory, in the Encyclical on Christian marriage which We have already mentioned, speaking of this order to be maintained between man and wife, teaches: 'The man is the ruler of the family, and the head of the woman; but because she is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone, let her be subject and obedient to the man, not as a servant but as a companion, so that nothing be lacking of honor or of dignity in the obedience which she pays. Let divine charity be the constant guide of their mutual relations, both in him who rules and in her who obeys, since each bears the image, the one of Christ, the other of the Church.' " (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, 29.)

The above quote is only one of countless examples of Catholic writers drawing upon marriage as an eschatological sign of Christ as a bridegroom and the Church as his bride, to explain that God gave marital headship to husbands. One example of such comes from Arcanum, an encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on Christian Marriage, in which Pope Leo XIII clearly and unequivocally stated that the husband has headship in the marriage and that this is in perfect harmony with the dignity of the wife:

"The husband is the chief of the family and the head of the wife. The woman, because she is flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone, must be subject to her husband and obey him; not, indeed, as a servant, but as a companion, so that her obedience shall be wanting in neither honor nor dignity. Since the husband represents Christ, and since the wife represents the Church, let there always be, both in him who commands and in her who obeys, a heaven-born love guiding both in their respective duties. For 'the husband is the head of the wife; as Christ is the head of the Church. . . Therefore, as the Church is subject to Christ, so also let wives be to their husbands in all things.' " (Pope Leo XIII, Arcanum, https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_10021880_arcanum.html, 11.)

Continuing with Pope John Paul II, in Mulieris Dignitatem, he beautifully upheld the dignity of women and their importance before God:

"Everything that has been said so far about Christ's attitude to women confirms and clarifies, in the Holy Spirit, the truth about the equality of man and woman. One must speak of an essential 'equality', since both of them - the woman as much as the man - are created in the image and likeness of God. Both of them are equally capable of receiving the outpouring of divine truth and love in the Holy Spirit. Both receive his salvific and sanctifying 'visits.' " (Pope John Paul II, Mulieris Dignitatem,
https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_letters/1988/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_19880815_mulieris-dignit atem.html, 16.)

In this same papal encyclical, Pope John Paul II later affirmed male headship in marriage in especially romantic terms when he drew upon St. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians: 

"When the author of the Letter to the Ephesians calls Christ 'the Bridegroom' and the Church 'the Bride', he indirectly confirms through this analogy the truth about woman as bride. The Bridegroom is the one who loves. The Bride is loved: it is she who receives love, in order to love in return." (Pope John Paul II, Mulieris Dignitatem, 29.)

In Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, Pope John Paul II addressed secular messages that presumed that male marital headship meant tyranny of husbands over wives, and he warned that such would undermine family structure:

"Recent years have seen new approaches to women's issues. A first tendency is to emphasize strongly conditions of subordination in order to give rise to antagonism: women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves the adversaries of men. Faced with the abuse of power, the answer for women is to seek power. This process leads to opposition between men and women, in which the identity and role of one are emphasized to the disadvantage of the other, leading to harmful confusion regarding the human person, which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the structure of the family." (Pope John Paul II, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040731_collaboration_e n.html, 2.)

Pope John Paul II elaborated that women share dignity with men and implied that it is only the secular culture that paints it as a presumption of male tyranny if men have marital headship:

"Their [women’s] equal dignity as persons is realized as physical, psychological and ontological complementarity, giving rise to a harmonious relationship of 'uni-duality', which only sin and 'the structures of sin' inscribed in culture render potentially conflictual." (Pope John Paul II, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, 8.)

Old Testament prophecy

Pope John Paul II put different roles in marriage as part of manifestation of Old Testament prophecy. This puts forward ideas of harmonious marriage with male as head being a healthy reversal of the issues in the Garden of Eden, with Adam blaming Eve for his eating the apple (the opposite of taking responsibility like a leader), and Pope John Paul II put forward the husband as “suffering Servant” and the wife as “Zion,” helpfully illustrating that the headship of husbands in marriage is a job and not a selfishly kingly tyrannical office. Pope John Paul II wrote:

"Likewise, the same concrete conditions of redemption are at play in the way in which prophetic statements, such as those of Isaiah, associate masculine and feminine roles in proclaiming and prefiguring the work of salvation which God is about to undertake. This salvation orients the reader both toward the male figure of the suffering Servant as well as to the female figure of Zion." (Pope John Paul II, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, 9.)

In paragraph 10 of his Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, Pope John Paul II continued the ubiquitous reference of earthly marriage as an eschatolgoical sign, writing:

"...Mary, the chosen daughter of Zion, in her femininity, sums up and transfigures the condition of Israel/Bride waiting for the day of her salvation. On the other hand, the masculinity of the Son shows how Jesus assumes in his person all that the Old Testament symbolism had applied to the love of God for his people, described as the love of a bridegroom for his bride." (Pope John Paul II, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and in the World, 10.)

Again, if Christ the King is the bridegroom, then the bridegroom has headship. In the writing of Cardinal Marc Ouellet, one can find one of the many examples of Catholic writers writing of marriage as an eschatological sign, and again if Christ, King of the Universe, is bridegroom, then any analogous party has headship. The Cardinal wrote:

“It raises human love to the dignity of a sacramental sign, that is, a visible reality that bears in itself the invisible reality of divine Love, committed in a covenant relationship with the humanity in Jesus Christ.” (Cardinal Marc Ouellet, Marriage and the Family within the Sacramentality of the Church: Challenges and Perspectives, https://www.communio-icr.com/files/ouellet41-2.pdf, p. 232.)

Extrapolating this doctrine of marriage-as-an-eschatological-sign onto earthly marriages, one finds that Christ’s headship of the Church translates to male marital headship. Saint Augustine stated that husbands are to have headship in marriage:

"For they are joined one to another side by side, who walk together, and look together whither they walk. Then follows the connection of fellowship in children, which is the one alone worthy fruit, not of the union of male and female, but of the sexual intercourse. For it were possible that there should exist in either sex, even without such intercourse, a certain friendly and true union of the one ruling, and the other obeying." (Saint Augustine, Of the Good of Marriage, Translated by C.L. Cornish, From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 3, Edited by Philip Schaff, (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1887), Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1309.htm.)

Conclusion

Secular questioning and misunderstanding of male marital headship is a microcosm of the secular sense of freedom saying that God infringes on one’s freedom and that one should want to be free from God’s rules.

God’s love and commandments are a blessing, just as a husband’s sacrificial Christlike leadership and authority (through God’s grace and the husband subjecting himself to God and to Gospel teachings) is meant to be a blessing upon wives. Male marital headship (with an assumption of benevolence and subjection to God on the part of husbands) is taught and promoted in Scripture and Catholic teaching.