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

[minkymurph]

So this issue is not a matter of preference. If a family has children, the mother should stay home and care for the children and raise them well. If they don’t do that, there is no point blaming culture, school systems, Church, or governments for your utter failure. If you take a look at our culture, the church attendance, the amount of people born and raised here entering University, we can see the results of our own failure to be good mothers.

How people still insist that it is a matter of preference is beyond me.

I don’t think it’s an issue of preference either - it’s often one of necessity. Mothers who don’t need to work are very fortunate. Perhaps there are some families were both parents work and don’t need to, but choose to do so because they are materialistic. I don’t know very many of those. I know one mother who’s working three jobs to make ends meet. Her husband can’t get a job and she’s not alone.

It’s true culture, schools, church and government cannot compensate for bad parenting. However, I don’t think we can blame all societies ills on working mothers. Many mothers worked during the war years and managed very well.

 

[minkymurph]

Then I guess it will need to remain beyond you. I’ve been a veteran in the “Mommy Wars” and I’m done!!

:yeah_me:

 

[OurBeloved]

I don’t think it’s an issue of preference either - it’s often one of necessity. Mothers who don’t need to work are very fortunate. Perhaps there are some families were both parents work and don’t need to, but choose to do so because they are materialistic. I don’t know very many of those. I know one mother who’s working three jobs to make ends meet. Her husband can’t get a job and she’s not alone.

It’s true culture, schools, church and government cannot compensate for bad parenting. However, I don’t think we can blame all societies ills on working mothers. Many mothers worked during the war years and managed very well.

Well, I could hypothesize that the war period is where the first major degradation of values happened. With the mothers working, there was no one to hand down the values to the children.

So yes, the mothers did a good job in terms of feeding, taking to school etc. But they just couldn’t do the passing down of values.

The passing down of values doesn’t work in the sense of just giving the list of things not to do. You have to be behind child and see when he is about to go wrong or when he makes the first mistake. Then correct him then and there.

In this sense, I think we might have lost a lot during the war.

 

[OurBeloved]

This is the sort of blanket statement that I just can’t accept without some evidence for it. Sometimes my mother is more attuned to my thoughts and feelings than my father; other times its the reverse. The same goes with who I am more open to.

Now what I am sure you will say is that “Well, that’s because our culture has degraded motherhood”, but don’t you see that your argument has no basis in anything other than your own declarations? You have no evidence to present other than saying “This is natural. This is the way it is.”, and if it isn’t that way, you say its because the culture has degraded motherhood.

It seems you believe very strongly in this, which is fine, and are willing to insist that things should be a certain way for everyone, which is also fine, but you can’t really expect to convince anyone because you have very little evidence to offer.

Actually, that is not what I would have said.

What I would have said was that your parents didn’t do a good job of getting close to you so it has come to the point that other people can read you better than your own parents. As for the mother and father difference, I think you might be saying who can identify with you more. That is a different issue. Sometimes a father can indeed identify better with a male child. What I am saying however is the ability to read a person.

Naturally, a mother is the one to first be able to read you. Lets perhaps go beyond natural for a bit an enter the Theological. In biblical history, including that of Christ, the mother was the more prominent role in raising the children and being attune to their needs. In the case of Isaac and Ishmael for an example, Sarah was the one who saw the danger from Ishmael and took the steps to correct it. Rebekah was the one who stood by Jacob and read where Esau was going by his character even when Isaac was totally won over by him. I could go on and on like this but you are really denying something that is in general held in every culture in the East (and in the West prior to our spiral down) i.e. Mother is more closer to the child.

 

[Lujack]

Actually, that is not what I would have said.

What I would have said was that your parents didn’t do a good job of getting close to you so it has come to the point that other people can read you better than your own parents.

Now where did I say that other people can read me better than my own parents? Maybe sometimes my brothers can, but that’s because they are my brothers. You’ve certainly got quite a bit of arrogance in you to say that my parents didn’t do a good job.

As for the mother and father difference, I think you might be saying who can identify with you more. That is a different issue. Sometimes a father can indeed identify better with a male child. What I am saying however is the ability to read a person.

And I’m saying you’re wrong.

Naturally, a mother is the one to first be able to read you. Lets perhaps go beyond natural for a bit an enter the Theological. In biblical history, including that of Christ, the mother was the more prominent role in raising the children and being attune to their needs. In the case of Isaac and Ishmael for an example, Sarah was the one who saw the danger from Ishmael and took the steps to correct it. Rebekah was the one who stood by Jacob and read where Esau was going by his character even when Isaac was totally won over by him. I could go on and on like this but you are really denying something that is in general held in every culture in the East (and in the West prior to our spiral down) i.e. Mother is more closer to the child.

This is not and never has been a Catholic teaching. Show me a Church document from any time, ever, that insists that a mother is closer to the child than the father.

 

[severus68]

Actually, that is not what I would have said.

What I would have said was that your parents didn’t do a good job of getting close to you so it has come to the point that other people can read you better than your own parents. As for the mother and father difference, I think you might be saying who can identify with you more. That is a different issue. Sometimes a father can indeed identify better with a male child. What I am saying however is the ability to read a person.

Naturally, a mother is the one to first be able to read you. Lets perhaps go beyond natural for a bit an enter the Theological. In biblical history, including that of Christ, the mother was the more prominent role in raising the children and being attune to their needs. In the case of Isaac and Ishmael for an example, Sarah was the one who saw the danger from Ishmael and took the steps to correct it. Rebekah was the one who stood by Jacob and read where Esau was going by his character even when Isaac was totally won over by him. I could go on and on like this but you are really denying something that is in general held in every culture in the East (and in the West prior to our spiral down) i.e. Mother is more closer to the child.

More personal insults I see.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Thanks for being honest about this. There are a lot of people who are so defensive about wanting to have a career AND have children, that the truth gets obscured.

In our case, I have been the homemaker while hubby worked. I can tell you that if both of us had worked, the kids would have had NO ONE to count on. Hubby’s work is so involving to him that even when he’s home, he’s still got a lot of his attention fixed on it. Plus, he now works for himself so he also has things he must do in his “off” hours. He literally could work 24/7/365 and still need more time. He has made a good living over the years, but as far as spending tons of time with his sons, no.

I am not an ambitious person by nature so I know that the corporate world would drain me. I would not have much left at the end of the day to give to my children. They would be getting the dregs while my paying job got the best of me. I am glad that I didn’t have to make them suffer that way.

I was a “latch-key kid” before the term was invented. I coped, but it was lonely. My sister got into a lot of trouble because no one was there to ride herd on her. It’s better when someone is home when the kids are, from birth up through high school.

I completely agree with you. Once I have kids, if I can afford it, I would love to stay at home. As I said before, that’s what my mum did for me and it was good that I always had someone at home in terms of being able to have friends over, have meals at regular times and not having to have babysitters, etc.

But then the downside is what happened to my mum too. I’ve flown the nest and live on my own, and my sister is now a teenager and thinking about university and again, moving away. She’s too scared of getting a job, or doing a course and meeting new people. Every time I ring her and say I’ve been working, etc she says she’s been “really busy too” but I know she isn’t. What I don’t want to happen to me is to be defined by children, and have little left once they’re grown.

 

[OurBeloved]

Now where did I say that other people can read me better than my own parents? Maybe sometimes my brothers can, but that’s because they are my brothers. You’ve certainly got quite a bit of arrogance in you to say that my parents didn’t do a good job.

That is not the point. You were wrong in assuming what I would say. Now you are more upset that you were wrong in assuming what I would say and then hearing what I did say

And I’m saying you’re wrong.

And I think you aren’t reading properly. Are you saying identifying with someone is the same as being able to read someone?

This is not and never has been a Catholic teaching. Show me a Church document from any time, ever, that insists that a mother is closer to the child than the father.

I just gave you biblical evidence of how mothers played a more important role. Why are you denying the obvious?

Not everything is about Catholic teaching either. Catholic teaching tells you what you should do i.e. raise good children. Cultural values together with some wisdom would tell you how to best do it. The problem you are facing is that there are no Cultural values in our society today. Perhaps it will help you take advice from other non-Western cultures that haven’t completely abolished their values?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I think that carrying my sons inside my body, mingling their cells with mine, growing an entire organ just to nourish them, does create a special type of knowledge of who they are. I knew my 2nd son was going to be more active than my 1st, he was a tasmanian devil even in utero. And we are very close. With my first, I can read him much more easily than my husband can, although they are similar in temperament.

Why can’t people accept that 1) God created males and females differently and 2) Being a mother counts for more in life than any other role?

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

If you choose to stay at home, great. If you choose to work, that’s fine, too. So, can we please, please, please end these “Mommy Wars” on this forum?

As long as there are women who dare raise their children in a manner different from the way we raise ours now, or in a manner different from the way we raised ours decades ago, or in a manner different from the way we were raised, or in a manner different from the way we plan to raise children we don’t even have yet, the Mommy Wars will rage. :sad_yes:

There’s enough condemnation, blame, shame, and guilt for moms of all stripes to get equal doses of the stuff.

Luna

 

[Diana_Catherine]

Naturally, a mother is the one to first be able to read you. Lets perhaps go beyond natural for a bit an enter the Theological. In biblical history, including that of Christ, the mother was the more prominent role in raising the children and being attune to their needs. In the case of Isaac and Ishmael for an example, Sarah was the one who saw the danger from Ishmael and took the steps to correct it. Rebekah was the one who stood by Jacob and read where Esau was going by his character even when Isaac was totally won over by him. I could go on and on like this but you are really denying something that is in general held in every culture in the East (and in the West prior to our spiral down) i.e. Mother is more closer to the child.

Mother’s Intuition. I can still remember being at a parenting lecture and hearing from another mom who talked about how she ignored a thought that was going through her head about her child and how she so later regretted not acting on it because it left her child in danger. She encouraged moms to listen to those feeling they get about their children and act if necessary.

Dr. Sears has an article describing the hormonal attachment between mother and child.

askdrsears.com/topics/attachment-parenting/body-chemistry-attachment

 

[Diana_Catherine]

I completely agree with you. Once I have kids, if I can afford it, I would love to stay at home. As I said before, that’s what my mum did for me and it was good that I always had someone at home in terms of being able to have friends over, have meals at regular times and not having to have babysitters,

But then the downside is what happened to my mum too. I’ve flown the nest and live on my own, and my sister is now a teenager and thinking about university and again, moving away. She’s too scared of getting a job, or doing a course and meeting new people. Every time I ring her and say I’ve been working, etc she says she’s been “really busy too” but I know she isn’t. What I don’t want to happen to me is to be defined by children, and have little left once they’re grown.

but maybe being at home is what is making your mother happy. Who says she has to go out and get a job. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a woman staying home after her kids are gone. Sooner or later she will be, if she ends up retiring and then what. Making a home is a lifestyle not something that comes and goes.

 

[Baelor]

As far as I can see all OurBeloved is saying is that SAHM have more time available to devote to their families. This is obviously a good thing. I don’t see any problem in saying that it is the ideal family situation to have a SAHM, then a SAHD or parent/s that work from home or at least have flexible hours. Obviously this is not going to work for everybody, but I see nothing wrong with calling it the ideal, or saying that it is objectively better, all else being equal.

That is not what she is saying. First of all, SAHMs are better than SAHDs according to her view. Second, I question the notion that a woman working part-time or full-time is inherently non-ideal if she works family-friendly hours, something that OB also disputes.

So provide evidence for that? What reason do I have to think I am oversimplifying? What reason do I have to believe you “achieve more”?

Just answer the question.

Going back to the past thread, our culture was the first one to start women going to work. It doesn’t look that great now does it?

Woman were working 10,000+ y.a. So…whatever.

The rise in contraception, same sex marriage, euthanasia, loss of faith, casual sex, immodesty in dress, lack of children in mass, gender confusion, all these according to your ignorant mind is a global effect.

I do not know what this means because it does not make sense.

Yes, you certainly are not in a position to judge because you demonstrate a lack of experience of knowledge. But no need to “judge” me as also suffering from the same defect you are suffering.

I will let the arrogance in this post speak for itself.

Somehow, hearing that being with her children is not satisfying enough for a mother, just doesn’t rub me the right way, you know? It never will. There is also a lot of judgment about women who DO get satisfaction out of being with their children, as if that is somehow less-than women who can’t wait to get away from their babies.

I agree. I have a problem, however, with the notion that a woman must gain satisfaction solely from this, and related claims.

 

[Diana_Catherine]

First of all, SAHMs are better than SAHDs according to her view. .

You think a SAHD is the same as a SAHM? You’re kidding.

I guess if it needed to be in a specific situation but not as a norm.

 

[OurBeloved]

Just answer the question.

Who are you to demand such things? Answer my question first!

Woman were working 10,000+ y.a. So…whatever.

Yea good job equivocating the term “Work” as if it meant the same thing 10000+ y.a. as it does now.

I do not know what this means because it does not make sense.

Of course it doesn’t make sense to you. Why else would you be even needlessly attacking me? The major problem I see here is that you seem to have a tendency to attack what you don’t quiet understand.

I will let the arrogance in this post speak for itself.

This is quiet the irony. You just caught got judging me as “judging”. So yes, I think we should let our posts speak for it-self. The term would be hypocrisy.

You also got caught projecting your own inadequacy to make a judgement on a matter on to me as well. Since I am not you, it should occur to you that it is more than possible for me to make a better judgement than you regarding a certain matter. To assume otherwise was the arrogance on your part.

I agree. I have a problem, however, with the notion that a woman must gain satisfaction solely from this, and related claims.

You have a problem because you seem to be brainwashed to this current culture. Only hope for you is to go outside of this culture and perhaps spend sometime in a country with less Western values.

Rather than admit this lack of experience and knowledge on your part, you keep repeating how your limited scope of knowledge can only conclude that the ones opposing your view are wrong. Why should I care?

 

[Baelor]

You think a SAHD is the same as a SAHM? You’re kidding.

I was correcting an inaccuracy in the post, not making a judgment.

Who are you to demand such things? Answer my question first!

LOL. You made a claim, I asked you to prove it, and you refuse.

Yea good job equivocating the term “Work” as if meant the same thing 10000+ y.a. as it does now.

You are right – I should have pointed out that women labored for much longer hours in the past.

You have a problem because you seem to be brainwashed to this current culture. Only hope for you is to go outside of this culture and perhaps spend sometime in a country with less Western values.

I have. I have lived in different states, countries, and continents, under different cultural, economic, and political systems. I have lived in countries that had come into existence less than ten years before my arrival. I have traveled to over thirty countries on six continents for extended periods of time. I would recommend knowing before speaking.

 

[thewanderer]

That is not what she is saying. First of all, SAHMs are better than SAHDs according to her view. Second, I question the notion that a woman working part-time or full-time is inherently non-ideal if she works family-friendly hours, Something that OB also disputes.

I wasn’t saying a SAHM was on the same level as a SAHD either. I also think that in general a SAHM is better:shrug: saying something is non-ideal is not the same as saying it is bad. A mother working family-friendly hours is better than a mother working other hours. A mother who doesn’t have to work at all though, is going to be available for her family all the more. In a particular situation that might not be possible, a family might need the extra income, in which case it is better for that particular family to have a working mother. But the ideal would still be a SAHM if that were possible. And yes, one must also take into accept the woman’s sanity, if she needs a bit of work outside the home to keep herself sane and happy, then of course it is better for that particular family if she works. But, as I said before, all things being equal it is better for a family to have a mother with more time to devote to her family than a mother who has less. I really don’t see what’s wrong wih saying that. It’s not judging anybody, or saying if you don’t stay at home you are neglectin your family or anything, it is in fact admitting that there are situations in which it is better for a particular family that thy have a working mother, but if everything else is equal not working is better.

 

[Baelor]

…But, as I said before, all things being equal it is better for a family to have a mother with more time to devote to her family than a mother who has less.

I agree completely.

By the way, it must have been posted already because it is so integral, but does anyone have the study that proves that children of SAHMs are “better” in whatever sense is quantifiable than children of SAHFs?

 

[OurBeloved]

LOL. You made a claim, I asked you to prove it, and you refuse.

You asked me to quantify, I asked you to calculate. If you are unable to calculate, you are not entitled for me to do it for you

You are right – I should have pointed out that women labored for much longer hours in the past.

You should have also noticed that the children were always close by. Oh but wait, you always seem to miss the details that are to your disadvantage. Gotcha!

I have. I have lived in different states, countries, and continents, under different cultural, economic, and political systems. I have lived in countries that had come into existence less than ten years before my arrival. I have traveled to over thirty countries on six continents for extended periods of time. I would recommend knowing before speaking.

Well, your statements seem to lack the experience of someone who has accomplished such feats as the one listed above. Such a shame. A man is measured by the what he speaks to a certain extent. You yourself are to blame for making me consider you in the state I did. Mind you, I still have to go by my inference on what you have written rather than what you claim.

 

[Lujack]

That is not the point. You were wrong in assuming what I would say. Now you are more upset that you were wrong in assuming what I would say and then hearing what I did say

You’re still wrong, though.

And I think you aren’t reading properly. Are you saying identifying with someone is the same as being able to read someone?

No, I’m saying that in some cases my father can read me as well if not better than my mother.

I just gave you biblical evidence of how mothers played a more important role. Why are you denying the obvious?

You gave Biblical examples of mothers playing an important role, and playing a more important role in given episodes. That does not come close to showing that the Bible says that mothers play a more important role than fathers.

Not everything is about Catholic teaching either. Catholic teaching tells you what you should do i.e. raise good children. Cultural values together with some wisdom would tell you how to best do it. The problem you are facing is that there are no Cultural values in our society today. Perhaps it will help you take advice from other non-Western cultures that haven’t completely abolished their values?

There are cultural values in our society today, there are just a multitude of different combinations. I don’t believe that there was ever one “Western” cultural pattern, anyway.