Do men have obligation to provide for their family materially?

[The_Rigbys]

Sunniva:

If women shouldn’t “compete” with men for education and jobs how should the women who are single or widowed provide for themselves?

Throughout most of history, older widows have been regarded as “charity cases,” to be supported by family, churches, or government aid. In many cases, they live with their adult children. In modern times, they also get income from their late husbands’ pensions.

As for single women, here are some of the roles they had in European society, until the last century or so. (This is not meant to argue we can, or should, go back to these practices; I just think they’re food for thought.)

• Working-class young women often took positions as live-in maids or governesses, hoping to quit when they got married. In the meantime, they sent much of their pay back home, to help their parents and younger siblings.
• Women from wealthier families generally didn’t work for pay. They remained in the family home until they got married…which didn’t always happen. (Think of all those Jane Austen spinsters.) Some became idle gossips, but others did productive work to help their families and communities.
• After the Industrial Revolution, many young single women took jobs in factories and shops. Even if they held the same positions as men, they weren’t paid as much, nor promoted as readily. This wasn’t so much from a sense that their work was inferior, but rather because employers favored the men who had families to support. This was widely believed to be fair at the time.

Another thing, not all married couple have children. Many are involuntarily infertile. Should the wife stay home in a, at daytime, empty house?

It would be up to her and her husband to discern how her talents could best be used. For instance, Alice von Hildebrand has taken advantage of her childless state by sharing in her husband’s theological work. This has obviously been a great service to the Church and the world.

On the other hand, I know a lovely and educated Catholic woman who has no children due to medical problems. At her husband’s request, she’s always been a full-time housewife. I’ve never thought to ask “what do you do all day?” because she’s always busy, wherever she’s needed: involved in Church activities, helping out with extended family, planning celebrations, etc. She’s also a mighty prayer warrior.

Both of these women are hard-working and productive…truly the salt of the earth!

God bless,
Mrs. R

 

[Ghosty]

Ghosty, this cannot be true. Before the advent of modern appliances and electricity, laundry and cooking were very time consuming chores and history records that women did them. They could not have done nearly as much farm work while cooking, cleaning, and laundering for large families.

Actually history records that, in many cultures, men did the cooking and food preparation. I’m not sure where you’re getting the notion that this was all “women’s work”, as no modern or historical evidence shows that this was the case across all cultures. Even today in places such as Bangledesh, women do the same amount of farm work as the men. Furthermore, in the past people didn’t wash their clothes every day, and had far less clothing to wash, particularily in Europe. We’re talking about people who took full baths once every season or so. Again, this is true in many societies even today.

 

[sparkle]

george eastlake:

Why are we so willing to sacrifice love for our children for the love of money. Why can’t we settle for less and be happy, as Jesus promised?

Peace and Love in our God

Because I feel here in America, especially, we are in the midst of a very, very sick culture. Where the desire for money, fame and power seems to be more important than anything, even more important than our Catholic faith. Because most are in the midst and caught in the middle of the trap (as even evidenced on this forum) those desperately trying to justify women should work as hard as men…earning money…that there is no role distinction–that men and women are totally and completely equal–that women can “have it all”, etc. Well this is pure and utter hogwash.

Had some visiting relatives from Europe here last month, and my cousin said to me: “no wonder all women are working here–they have houses they can’t afford, 2 cars (with payments), too many “things”, credit cards, etc. etc. what a shame”----the “keeping up with the Jones’ mentality”…WOW–he’s so right!

Appreciate your insight and your post George and may God Bless You~~

 

[sparkle]

Sunniva:

If women shouldn’t “compete” with men for education and jobs how should the women who are single or widowed provide for themselves?

Then how should/men who might also become widowed themselves get along too? Shouldn’t they voluntarily be pursuing and attending classes on housekeeping, child-rearing, cooking, (a biggie), how to do laundry, how to save money when grocery shopping, how to discipline 5 kids, sibling rivalry, etc…??? Just a thought? Then we might as well train all men on these things as well------

 

[Fortiterinre]

Ghosty:

Actually history records that, in many cultures, men did the cooking and food preparation. I’m not sure where you’re getting the notion that this was all “women’s work”, as no modern or historical evidence shows that this was the case across all cultures. Even today in places such as Bangledesh, women do the same amount of farm work as the men. Furthermore, in the past people didn’t wash their clothes every day, and had far less clothing to wash, particularily in Europe. We’re talking about people who took full baths once every season or so. Again, this is true in many societies even today.

Ghosty, these are excellent points. Through time women have had the opportunity to become educated (could be spared from family work, etc) and have now typically delayed their marriage age and work as independent adults for 5, 10, even 15 years prior to marriage. We have technology that gives each of us a better lifestyle which can be mechanically and electronically supported rather than by hand. The women I know who choose to stay home are upper middle class and are not personally doing a lot of home tasks anyway. If in the past wealthy women became professional volunteers and socialites with their spare time, why shouldn’t the doctor’s wife who has a master’s in engineering work as an engineer rather than be president of the Wednesday Afternoon Fine Arts League? (Familiar to Lucille Ball fans as Lucy’s chosen pursuit!) After a certain amount of wealth and technology, women generally seem to abandon certain areas of domesticity. Not all, and some women love the day to day tasks and do them all themselves. But I see no sin in working in one’s chosen field–it’s simply a variation on what women of means have done for ages. They are working not FOR money but IN SPITE of money.

 

[Minerva]

I’ve read both letters (JPII’s and Casti Conubii) CC makes it very clear that the man is the head of the wife. There is nothing in the Catechism about this, nor is there anything about submission, mutual, wifely, or otherwise, in Catholic wedding vows. I thought it was interesting that in both letters there are lots of quotes from Paul, lots of quotes from Genesis, lots of quotes from Augustine, but precious little from Christ Himself. Which just reinforces my point that all this talk about gender roles has its roots in something else besides the Gospel message.

 

[kellyw]

My thought on working women comes down to my own situation. My husband was supporting us when we first were married. I had to work after the 1st child because he was drinking. The next child, he was injured on his job and I was the only support. He became sober and I was able to stay home for a year. Life was good. Our third child has autism and other mental problems. To receive the medical/physical interventions needed, the state stepped in. I had to work to pay our share of the medical. All my income went to his condition and the state paid the rest, and the state paid the daycare bills and the food stamps. That is how government works. Our last child is fine, but now I have a decent job and so does my husband. I know that every penny I earn is striving to stay on top of the bills, you know the luxury of food, lights and heat. Our house is mortaged to the hilt to stay out of bankruptcy. When I look back, if we would of had free medical care for this child from birth, I would of been able to stay at home and care for my family. It is not greed that keeps both of us working, it is the way the system works. When the government gets into your life, they control you. If you need thier help, you are going to work for it, even if you earn less than thier help.

Now, just when there was hope because this child will probably leave home in 5-8 years, be self-supporting(as much as any child ever is!) and be a contribute to society…my husband has come down with a progressive form of MS. I don’t think I will be quitting my employment outside the home anytime in the future.

Don’t take it wrong. In spite of the interference in our lives from government, I am so grateful that God blessed us with this child.

I just wonder how many parents are forced out-of-the home to work, so that they can get “welfare”.

I also wonder how many of us want these people to work so that they are not lazing around on welfare, not realizing that we are taking the only parent out of the house.
Kelly

 

[sparkle]

kellyw:

In spite of the interference in our lives from government, I am so grateful that God blessed us with this child.
I just wonder how many parents are forced out-of-the home to work, so that they can get “welfare”. Kelly

YES–Praise God Kellyw–your children are indeed a blessing!!!

How is it that parents are "forced out of the home to work, so they can collect welfare? I don’t get it!!! Thought they must NOT work to be eligible for welfare? In any event, YES, God always provides our needs doesn’t HE?

 

[kellyw]

In the new era of welfare, you are not given cash, food benefits, etc. you are given help to get a job in a set amount of time and then you work. This is a great concept, you know teach a man to fish instead of giving him a fish. However, if you are the only parent at home, you must leave the home and work. Welfare will pay for childcare, medical, food, etc., but your cash payment depends on your job or job search. I was forced to work and put all my children in daycare, just to get the medical coverage by the state. We could not afford this child on my husband’s salary. It doesn’t matter if the money the parent makes is less than the benefit, at least they are working is the state’s motto. Its called welfare to work. MN limits the family unit to 5 years total help also. If you have a child after the 5 years starts, to bad. I agree that charity alone is not good. But if you have little ones at home or a severe medical condition, I don’t think forcing you out of the home makes sence. Our county in MN only allows you 3 months after the birth of a new baby before job requirements begin.

Thats what I meant with forcing the parent out. Obviousely, I am a little touchy on this.

Kelly