“There is no greater blessing on earth than when husband and wife rule their home in harmony of mind and will.”
Aristotle, Economics
The notion of ‘ruling’ a home might seem outdated. We can wonder whether some other notion or term could better capture the blessing of what man and wife do together.
In answer I suggest the notion of ruling highlights precisely what is sorely missing in our understanding and practice of household. Household is a central venue of human life. It’s not a side-stage; it’s not ancillary; it’s not a mere steppingstone. It’s also not simply a nursery of the young—as noble as that would be.
It is a suitable place to raise up the young precisely because it is first center stage of enacting human life. If a husband and wife do not make a life together in the home, what would they pass on to their children?
That a household calls for rulers—and two at that!—is a function of its being a community naturally ordained to the whole human good itself, not some mere part or aspect of it. Here especially, ruling is an office of deep significance demanding as much and more than a man and woman can muster in service of human flourishing.
To rule is to direct what is ruled to its end, its fulfillment. Done well it is a masterpiece. Yet the lily that rots smells the worst. There always have been and will be perversions of ruling—and this perhaps especially in the household. Aware of this, Plato expresses in the Republic a cornerstone of human life: “No one in any position of rule, insofar as he is a ruler seeks or orders what is advantageous to himself, but what is advantageous to his subjects; the ones of whom he is himself the craftsman.” True ruling then is to craft that greatest of crafted-things: the good life with those we love.
In the text cited from Aristotle, having noted that husband and wife will encourage and support one another in all things, he continues:
In the first place they will strive to perform all duty toward their parents, the husband towards those of his wife no less than toward his own, and she in her turn toward his. Their next duties are towards their children, their friends, their estate, and their entire household which they will treat as a common possession; each vying with the other in the effort to contribute most to the common welfare, and to excel in virtue and righteousness; laying aside all arrogance, and ruling with justice in a kindly and unassuming spirit.
What a masterpiece of human relations, including even (perhaps especially) the in-laws! This a husband and wife craft together, discerning a wonderful plan written into nature, and giving order to the life they share with one another, and so many others. It is of this Aristotle made bold to say, “There is no greater blessing on earth.”
**ANNOUNCING** SIGNUP NOW: Take Man of the Household or Woman of the Household in a guided group this March. More Information Here.
TODAY’S VIDEO: A Husband’s Mission: Choosing to Accept it
Note: The text ‘Economics‘ is traditionally attributed to Aristotle, though this attribution is disputed. It might be written by someone of his school.
Join the Community.
Become a LifeCraft Member and gain access to our online courses and exclusive content. It's FREE of charge. Period.
If you join as a contributing member, you will help make this content available to an increasing audience and enable me to spend more time in this work. I thank you in advance.
Join the LifeCraft community today and get access to:
- Man of the Household (Course)
- Woman of the Household (Course)
- Concepts Made Clear (Mini-course)
- Dinner at Home (Mini-course)
Friendship and the Conversations that Really Matter
“One must always tell what one sees.” Charles Peguy So many great conversations never happen. There is nothing like sharing insights with a friend into things that matter, and even things that don’t matter so much. But why is it so difficult? One of the great...
What Makes Home a Home
The words ‘home at last’ are uniquely powerful. The desire to be at home is so deeply rooted in us that we don’t question it. If we see these words on a tombstone we scarcely notice; or we smile and think, of course. In the end where else would one want to be? It is...
Hospitality: Finding Our Way Home
It is perhaps a sign of our times that we speak of a hospitality ‘industry.’ Rooms-for-the-night and meals away from home can certainly be bought and sold. But hospitality is something no exchange of money will ever effect. Hospitality is intimately tied with being...
Husband, father, and professor of Philosophy. LifeCraft springs from one conviction: there is an ancient wisdom about how to live the good life in our homes, with our families; and it is worth our time to hearken to it. Let’s rediscover it together. Learn more.
You should be aware the “Economics” is almost certainly a spurious work written after Aristotle (perhaps by Theophrastus) and thus should not be attributed to him Indeed, the idea that husband and wife could order the household together–appealing as it is to our modern minds–would seem to be in tension with Aristotle’s other statements about women in the Politics, Nichomachean Ethics, and various remarks scattered throughout his biology.
Thank you, Matt. I am aware that the authorship of ‘Economics’ is reasonably contested. But given that it continues to be included among his works, though with an asterisk, I continue to attribute it to him without further explanation in this non-academic context. Regarding whether it fits with his other works, I do not concur with your judgment that it is at odds with them, though I understand why you raise the issue. In the Nicomachean Ethics (1160b32-35) Aristotle says, “But the authority of husband and wife seems to be aristocratic, because the husband has dominion over affairs pertaining to him according to his dignity and he hands over to the wife whatever pertains to her.” This is a clear reference to their ruling together. Note, I do not imply that it is ‘shared’ in the sense of co-equal. He certainly holds the authority of the husband is first. Again I thank you.
Your opening quote reminded me of one from another rather famous Greek.
“No finer, greater gift in the world than that…
when man and woman possess their home, two minds,
two hearts that work as one. Despair to their enemies,
a joy to all their friends. Their own best claim to glory.”
This is from Odysseus’ speech to Nausicaa in book 6 of The Odyssey. The last line especially is rather striking coming from the mouth of a Homeric hero whose main motivation in life was to pile up glory and renown.
Stephen, Thanks so much for this. I love Odysseus’ interaction with Nausicaa. And it’s remarkable how similar the wording is to that in the Economics. I wonder if it was a common formulation–or simply one supposed to be resonant with the Odyssey.
I read The Odyssey for the first time late last year and I remember being struck by this also. I was in the middle of completing the Woman of the Household course and kept seeing connections in all I was reading/being exposed to. This post, like the last one on Need, is going to sit with me and be chewed over for a while, I think. Thank you John for this post and Stephen, for your helpful additional quote. Such beauty and truth in the words of the ancients.
It’s incredible to me that Aristotle places the duty to a one’s parents and in-laws above one’s children- it is so counter-cultural to our times, even within Catholic circles that define the familial common good in relation to children. Is there any deeper reason why the parents come before the offspring?
Great question, John. I was thinking about that too. I’m thinking he puts it first because it is a debt in justice that can never be repaid. For reference compare to Sirach 3:11: “For a man’s glory comes from honoring his father.” At the same time, I don’t think it implies that a couple needs to ‘think first’ of their parents over one another. Perhaps it is simply a ‘prior’ and uniquely sacred duty, even while they now owe first allegiance to one another.
Thanks a lot, for this post, on marriage, so full of hope. Christian marriage, of course, is part of salvational order: Voluntary, indissoluble, open to grace! And, that is probably why, modernity seeks to outlaw it, if not by political law, then by all kinds of social deceits. Indeed, biblical peace springs forth, only from the personal Lord God, but not from some kind of world ordering. Only the Lord God can be friends with everybody, and we can trust in Jesus, as we need only few friends in our life. Probably, the human being is capable of personal relationship with 150 souls. The human being, then, can serve in three kinds of vocation, namely, monk or nun (confer Genesis 1:27), which is not sacramental, or either the male priestly ordination (confer Genesis 2:7), or marriage (confer Genesis 2:24–25). Indeed, according to Augustine’s view, it is the main heresy, for new believers, to think that Christians must reorder the world, according to some kind of desire for social justice and peace, as these spring forth, only from hearts who convert towards the living God. Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and His justice (namely the Church), which also means, first marry before the altar and then career and all that will be gift. Serve one another in charity, says Paul. And in my personal life, it is tragedy, that I seek to build some kind of social justice and peace and joy and all that, as I am volunteer helper to refugees to Denmark, and member of a political party, and even member of a chess club, which are all too good, from the ethical point of view, but am still not married, so that the world eats me up. And it is certainly better, for a man and a woman, to quit all such ethical good deeds, and lose all their ethical friends, in order to seek marriage before the altar, and only then justice and peace spring forth, from humility under grace
Robert, Thank you for your thoughts. May God bless your good work in Denmark, and may He bless all of us in our vocations.
Thank you!
I love your quote from Plato, as it supports the notion that even on a natural level, good rule is at the service of the common good! Mutual subservience is not new with St. Paul, but it exists on a natural level for grace to build on.
For, in the same Book 3 of the Economics, Aristotle speaks about the Odyssey, calling mutual subservience love:
“ Moreover it is evident from this that the unity which the poet commends [170] is no mutual subservience in each other’s vices, but one that is rightfully allied with wisdom and understanding; for this is the meaning of the words “rule the house in mind.” And he goes on to say that wherever such a love is found between man and wife, it is a cause of sore distress to those who hate them and of delight to those that love them; while the truth of his words is most of all acknowledged by the happy pair.2”
This mutual subservience, this love, does not exclude differences between the spouses or roles, rather they can serve each other in their differences toward the same end:
“At the same time Nature, by this cycle of changes, fulfills her purpose of perpetuating existence; preserving the type when she is unable to preserve the individual.2 And so with this purpose in view Divine Providence has fashioned the nature of man and of woman for their partnership. For they are distinguished from each other by the possession of faculties not adapted in every case to the same tasks, but in some cases for opposite ones, though contributing to the same end.” Aristotle economics book 1, 1343b
Thank you, Catherine, for these excellent further quotations!