Author Topic: Disciplining wife (Read 40643 times)

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #430 on:** May 30, 2020, 05:10:14 PM »

Quote from: Jaynek on May 29, 2020, 07:27:31 PM

You are making false claims about what the Church teaches and I am identifying them as false and showing that they are by contrasting them with the actual Church teachings. That is sticking to the argument, not using ad hominems.

Projection.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #431 on:** May 30, 2020, 07:50:10 PM »

As I recall Saint Thomas also said the Earth was flat and had problems dealing with the Immaculate Conception. Ephesians5:25 Husbands love your wives, as Christ loved the Church and delivered himself up for it. You talk of disciplining your wife like it is something from the 1800's women have rights to. Maybe you should separate from your wife if you feel she needs to be disciplined so much. If you have the need to discipline something so bad buy an animal.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #432 on:** May 30, 2020, 07:56:16 PM »

Quote from: Anonymous on May 30, 2020, 05:08:43 PM

Cowards are those who won't accept Catholic teaching.
And being anonymous on a topic just makes me smarter than you. No need to be jealous.

No, you’re just an ordinary run-of-the-mill coward. Nice try attempting to spin it as a virtue. You’re probably just worried that your wife will see your posts because this is nothing but pure fantasy on your part ... as she actually wears the pants in your household.

Geremia · « **Reply #433 on:** May 30, 2020, 08:55:34 PM »

Quote from: Anonymous on May 30, 2020, 07:50:10 PM

Saint Thomas also said the Earth was flat

No, he did not:
Physica lib. 2 l. 3:

Quote from: St. Thomas Aquinas

the fact that the earth is spherical is demonstrated by natural science
quod terra sit sphaerica demonstratur a naturali

Jaynek · « **Reply #434 on:** May 31, 2020, 07:38:38 AM »

Quote from: Anonymous on May 30, 2020, 05:06:27 PM

Subsidiarity applies always.
Most crimes would be against the common good and would be public. If a wife was punished in private it would not be one for the history books. So there would be only a small amount of records about it.

If your misunderstanding of subsidiarity were correct then a husband would be permitted to kill his wife if she committed a capital crime. However, St. Thomas clearly says that this is not so in this discussion of adultery, something which could be punished by the death penalty in his time:

Therefore in no case is it lawful for a husband to kill his wife on his own authority.... The law has committed the infliction of this punishment not to private individuals, but to public persons, who are deputed to this by their office. Now the husband is not his wife's judge: wherefore he may not kill her, but may accuse her in the judge's presence.

He further says:

There are two kinds of community: the household, such as a family; and the civil community, such as a city or kingdom. Accordingly, he who presides over the latter kind of community, a king for instance, can punish an individual both by correcting and by exterminating him, for the betterment of the community with whose care he is charged. But he who presides over a community of the first kind, can inflict only corrective punishment, which does not extend beyond the limits of amendment, and these are exceeded by the punishment of death. Wherefore the husband who exercises this kind of control over his wife may not kill her, but he may accuse or chastise her in some other way.
https://www.newadvent.org/summa/5060.htm

Yet again he specifies that a husband is limited to "corrective punishment, which does not extend beyond the limits of amendment".  He does not have any authority to inflict any other kind of punishment. He is not his wife's judge and has neither the duty nor authority to impose penal compensation to satisfy justice. This distinction is clear in the Summa and you cannot claim to be doing traditional Catholic moral theology if you ignore its definitions and distinctions. You commit the fallacy of equivocation by treating all punishment as if it were the same.

The principle of subsidiarity is not an absolute statement that all actions must be carried out at the lowest level of social organization, as you seem to think. Rather, they should be taken at the lowest level that is competent and authorized to perform the action.

The principle of subsidiarity was first introduced into Catholic teaching by Pope Leo XIII in the encyclical Rerum Novarum in 1891 and further developed forty years later by Pope Pius XI in Quadragessimo Anno. These encyclicals are about political/economic issues and the principle is used to critique the errors of individualism and collectivism. There has never been any Catholic teaching that even comes close to suggesting that this principle means that a husband has any authority to punish his wife for crimes against the state or sins against God in order to satisfy justice, protect the common good, or any reason other than correction. Obviously, any authentic Catholic teaching is not going to contradict the Summa that a husband's authority is limited to correction ordered toward repentance and amendment.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Disciplining wife (Read 40643 times)

Änσnymσus

Re: Disciplining wife

Änσnymσus

Re: Disciplining wife

Ladislaus

Re: Disciplining wife

Geremia

Re: Disciplining wife

Jaynek

Re: Disciplining wife