Is it allowable for a Catholic husband to be the sole provider for his wife?

[floresco]

Pope John Paul II wrote in Familiaris Consortio (1981)

While it must be recognized that women have the same right as men to perform various public functions, society must be structured in such a way that wives and mothers are not in practice compelled to work outside the home, and that their families can live and prosper in a dignified way even when they themselves devote their full time to their own family.

Furthermore, the mentality which honors women more for their work outside the home than for their work within the family must be overcome. This requires that men should truly esteem and love women with total respect for their personal dignity, and that society should create and develop conditions favoring work in the home.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio_en.html

 

[Mike30]

What in the world does this question have to do with the spirituality and practices of Traditional Roman Catholicism, which is, even though it is widely disregarded and ignored the stated purpose of this sub-forum?

 

[TrueLight]

What in the world does this question have to do with the spirituality and practices of Traditional Roman Catholicism, which is, even though it is widely disregarded and ignored the stated purpose of this sub-forum?

Take a look at the wide range of topics on this forum.

The idea that it is better for the wife to stay home and raise the children is a very traditional idea. And folks who tend to advocate it, tend to be traditionally minded.

But I suppose it can also go on the Family life subforum. That’s up to the moderator.

 

[Mike30]

**Take a look at the wide range of topics on this forum. **The idea that it is better for the wife to stay home and raise the children is a very traditional idea. And folks who tend to advocate it, tend to be traditionally minded.

But I suppose it can also go on the Family life subforum. That’s up to the moderator.

That is exactly what I am talking about. This forum is intended to be for discussion of Traditional Roman Catholic practices, rituals and spirituality. The idea for a wife to stay home is a traditional idea that is in no way limited to Catholicism or even Christianity for that matter. It just seems that this forum has become the dumping ground for all kinds of non sensical questions and ideas that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the stated purpose of the forum. It gets very old sometimes.

 

[newyorkcatholic]

That is exactly what I am talking about. This forum is intended to be for discussion of Traditional Roman Catholic practices, rituals and spirituality. The idea for a wife to stay home is a traditional idea that is in no way limited to Catholicism or even Christianity for that matter. It just seems that this forum has become the dumping ground for all kinds of non sensical questions and ideas that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the stated purpose of the forum. It gets very old sometimes.

I disagree, and agree with TrueLight.

The fact that one poster asked for evidence from within the last 60 years shows that this topic, the role of women in the family and the world, was discussed very differently in the past, within the Church, than it is now.

It’s a traditional Catholic topic because traditional Catholicism isn’t just about the 1962 Missal or the 1960 Divine Office, but about older spiritualities and older Church teachings that are now being less and less emphasized (e.g. the older style of “ecumenism” focusing on converting non-Catholics to the True Faith, or the older emphases on family life, and so on).

 

[floresco]

What in the world does this question have to do with the spirituality and practices of Traditional Roman Catholicism, which is, even though it is widely disregarded and ignored the stated purpose of this sub-forum?

There actually has been a fair bit of teaching from the Church on the topic of husband as provider of the family, some of it going very far back. Of course, until recently there was no question that it was allowable for the husband to be the sole provider. It was assumed that he would be. Church teaching was about his duty as provider, not whether he was allowed to be one.

 

[TrueLight]

I disagree, and agree with TrueLight.

The fact that one poster asked for evidence from within the last 60 years shows that this topic, the role of women in the family and the world, was discussed very differently in the past, within the Church, than it is now.

It’s a traditional Catholic topic because traditional Catholicism isn’t just about the 1962 Missal or the 1960 Divine Office, but about older spiritualities and older Church teachings that are now being less and less emphasized (e.g. the older style of “ecumenism” focusing on converting non-Catholics to the True Faith, or the older emphases on family life, and so on).

 

[floresco]

The fact that one poster asked for evidence from within the last 60 years shows that this topic, the role of women in the family and the world, was discussed very differently in the past, within the Church, than it is now.

And I’m pretty proud of myself for finding that Familiaris Consortio quote. Yes, I beat the the 60 year challenge.

 

[newyorkcatholic]

And I’m pretty proud of myself for finding that Familiaris Consortio quote. Yes, I beat the the 60 year challenge.

 

[mick321]

Provide links or other evidence to modern Church documents teaching that it’s preferable for men to be sole income providers. Modern, like, within the last 60 years. I can find teachings from the 19th Century that allude to this, but I’d like to see something from the time when all of us have been alive.

Luna

Perhaps you would care to provide links or other evidence to any Church documents teaching that it’s preferable for every woman in the world to be an extraordinary minister of holy communion. Any, like, within the last 2000 years. BTW, are you an EMHC? Why or why not?

Happy Holidays.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Sorry, I should have made clear in my posting, that I was thinking that it would be okay for the husband to provide. It really floored me when every guy I talked to said he insisted that his potential wife one day contribute along with him, as if it was a deal-breaker of some sort that she didn’t.

Hmmmm…so she is supposed to work…and care for the children?

Let me guess this guy is still single…

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Perhaps you would care to provide links or other evidence to any Church documents teaching that it’s preferable for every woman in the world to be an extraordinary minister of holy communion. Any, like, within the last 2000 years. BTW, are you an EMHC? Why or why not?

Happy Holidays.

What in the heck does EMHC’s have to do with this topic? Let’s not derail the thread.

 

[ballin]

The traditional position of the church is that it is preferable for the Catholic husband to be the sole provider, leaving the wife to educate and raise the children and keep a harmonious home.

I think this view makes a lot of sense. Something else I have heard from Marriage Councillors is that the number 1 reason couples break up is due to confusion of gender roles. The husband would claim that the wife didn’t do something she should and vice-versa. I guess the problem with two bread winners in the same family is that there is lack of definition between who does what.

Another important issue I think is the passing down of culture. Now by culture I don’t just mean the sociological values but also religious values and family values of the parents. If a mother is not at home, who will pass down the values to the kids? The kids are continuously forming their “culture” till they reach at least 20. But the working mother will only be there for the children when they are infants. The child will then grow up in a day-care where they will adopt any set of values given by the day care provider. Eventually, they will start adopting the values from their peers and the mother will not be around to correct them.

A good mother at home can easily detect a child going astray or deviating. A good mother at work will find it more difficult to detect such deviance till it is very far pronounced.

Sometimes I see young girls wearing stuff that is so revealing and my friend would go “Does she have parents?”. At first it seemed like a random saying but I think there is a lot of wisdom in that. If there was a mother at home who is looking out for her kids, she would have first explained to the girl how to dress. Then when she wore something this revealing the first time, she would have stopped her from going outside in it. The mother would have helped shape a healthy degree of personal sensitivity in this case. But alas, such passing down of values is lost due to the loving mother having to go to work and only see her kids when she gets back or on the weekends.

I personally believe that the reason why there is so much of a widening gap between generations and such rapid cultural deterioration is due to lack of a loving mother at home.

 

[Diana_Catherine]

I think this view makes a lot of sense. Something else I have heard from Marriage Councillors is that the number 1 reason couples break up is due to confusion of gender roles. The husband would claim that the wife didn’t do something she should and vice-versa. I guess the problem with two bread winners in the same family is that there is lack of definition between who does what.

Another important issue I think is the passing down of culture. Now by culture I don’t just mean the sociological values but also religious values and family values of the parents. If a mother is not at home, who will pass down the values to the kids? The kids are continuously forming their “culture” till they reach at least 20. But the working mother will only be there for the children when they are infants. The child will then grow up in a day-care where they will adopt any set of values given by the day care provider. Eventually, they will start adopting the values from their peers and the mother will not be around to correct them.

A good mother at home can easily detect a child going astray or deviating. A good mother at work will find it more difficult to detect such deviance till it is very far pronounced.

Sometimes I see young girls wearing stuff that is so revealing and my friend would go “Does she have parents?”. At first it seemed like a random saying but I think there is a lot of wisdom in that. If there was a mother at home who is looking out for her kids, she would have first explained to the girl how to dress. Then when she wore something this revealing the first time, she would have stopped her from going outside in it. The mother would have helped shape a healthy degree of personal sensitivity in this case. But alas, such passing down of values is lost due to the loving mother having to go to work and only see her kids when she gets back or on the weekends.

I personally believe that the reason why there is so much of a widening gap between generations and such rapid cultural deterioration is due to lack of a loving mother at home.

Those are very good points.

Another saying that used to be and still is heard is, “where is that girl or boy’s mother?”

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

I think this view makes a lot of sense. Something else I have heard from Marriage Councillors is that the number 1 reason couples break up is due to confusion of gender roles. The husband would claim that the wife didn’t do something she should and vice-versa. I guess the problem with two bread winners in the same family is that there is lack of definition between who does what.

Another important issue I think is the passing down of culture. Now by culture I don’t just mean the sociological values but also religious values and family values of the parents. If a mother is not at home, who will pass down the values to the kids? The kids are continuously forming their “culture” till they reach at least 20. But the working mother will only be there for the children when they are infants. The child will then grow up in a day-care where they will adopt any set of values given by the day care provider. Eventually, they will start adopting the values from their peers and the mother will not be around to correct them.

A good mother at home can easily detect a child going astray or deviating. A good mother at work will find it more difficult to detect such deviance till it is very far pronounced.

Sometimes I see young girls wearing stuff that is so revealing and my friend would go “Does she have parents?”. At first it seemed like a random saying but I think there is a lot of wisdom in that. If there was a mother at home who is looking out for her kids, she would have first explained to the girl how to dress. Then when she wore something this revealing the first time, she would have stopped her from going outside in it. The mother would have helped shape a healthy degree of personal sensitivity in this case. But alas, such passing down of values is lost due to the loving mother having to go to work and only see her kids when she gets back or on the weekends.

I personally believe that the reason why there is so much of a widening gap between generations and such rapid cultural deterioration is due to lack of a loving mother at home.

While I generally agree on raising kids.

What about the wife who does not have kids. My husband and I both work…and we do not have gender role issues…been married for almost 24 years too…

 

[ballin]

While I generally agree on raising kids.

What about the wife who does not have kids. My husband and I both work…and we do not have gender role issues…been married for almost 24 years too…

Well, you would obviously be the exception.

My point was not that it was never right for a couple to have both work. It was more along the lines of what the normative behavior should be.

Most couples in this sense do have kids as a norm. So the norm would ideally have to be that mothers stay home to care for the kids and pass on the values. If a couple has no children, they can both certainly work and the family dynamics are obviously much different. In a family with no children, it would be much more easier to get by with flexible gender roles since there are less items to disagree on as well.

For an example, a common complaint Marriage Counselors get is something like “He was suppossed to come to our child’s concert/game” or “She was suppossed to pick him up because I have to work extra for a project” etc. Such complaints would not exist in a family without children.

This being said, a couple should not therefore choose to have no kids just to pursue employment.

 

[severus68]

Pope John Paul II wrote in Familiaris Consortio (1981)
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio_en.html

This is only about respecting stay at home mums/wives. It does not say that wives should not work outside the home. It is a choice to be made by both husband and wife.

 

[severus68]

What in the heck does EMHC’s have to do with this topic? Let’s not derail the thread.

Yes.

 

[severus68]

Hi everyone,
I was wondering about something that I’m a little confused about.

It seems like every guy I talk to ( friends and aquaintances ), when asked, says that he wouldn’t want to take a woman for a wife unless she has a job to contribute to the income, regardless of whether they have children or not.
But then again, so far I’ve only been able to ask other Catholic men. At this point I have not gotten views from other types of guys ( other religions and/or no religion ).

So I was wondering, is there a rule/protocol being Catholic that the guy has to have the wife working in order for him to be a good Catholic husband? Or, is it allowable for a good Catholic husband to be the full provider for his wife?

And similarly, is there a rule that for a woman to be a Catholic wife she has to have a job in which she is bringing in income? Or, is it allowable that a woman can fully be provided for by her husband and at the same time still be a good Catholic wife?

Thanks

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=658738

Its a decision for a husband and wife to mutually make, not friends and acquaintances. It may be that a wife would need skills and experience for a job outside as a fall back in the event the husband falls ill for instance.

The Church does not tell you whether your wife should stay at home or have an outside job.

 

[CRUE_CAB]

Your thoughts on this subject are probably only meaningful to those who are contemplating marrying you. This is just as well. You seem to equate women who do not hold jobs outside the home with those who lack intelligence and with not being fully human. Apparently you put your own mother in this category.

My point was, even if you are trying to take a swipe at my dead parents, that it was very common for that to happen that way.
My parents married in the mid 1950s.
Now not so much.
My ex wife and current fiance are both hard working people who are well educated.
I personally wouldnt have it any other way.
I equate women who dont work, without reason, as a pet. Yes thats my point.
Men now a days that wish for their women to be stay at home wive, and wife only. Not a mother to children as I stated earlier. Should get a cat.
Men of that vein are nothing more than control freaks.