My husband is changing!

[mommamia]

There is none.

That is what I thought. If I had to stay home full time with my kids, I would have been the worlds worst mother . If dh had insisted without giving my needs and feelings any validity, I would have resented that. I am very happy with my kids, and by continuing to work part-time, for me, meant that I enjoyed my time with them more than when I tried to stay home full time.

 

[ac_claire]

Just wondering if anyone can provide a link to where the Church says that women must stay home with their children?

As you probably already know, nobody is going to be able to provide you that link. The Church doesn’t make dogmas about every single little thing. But her pastoral teachings on the role of mothers and fathers has always been consistent. That I can provide you links to, if you want.

And nobody has said here that mothers can’t work. Just that, all else being equal, it’s better for the children to have as much of their mother’s full attention as possible in their early years.

That is what I thought. If I had to stay home full time with my kids, I would have been the worlds worst mother . If dh had insisted without giving my needs and feelings any validity, I would have resented that. I am very happy with my kids, and by continuing to work part-time, for me, meant that I enjoyed my time with them more than when I tried to stay home full time.

I’m glad you’ve enjoyed your part-time work and your part-time parenting. But what about your kids, which do they enjoy more?

 

[Leonius]

Just wondering if anyone can provide a link to where the Church says that women must stay home with their children?

CASTI CONNUBII - ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI

 

[mommamia]

I’m glad you’ve enjoyed your part-time work and your part-time parenting. But what about your kids, which do they enjoy more?

That is incredibly judgmental and uncharitable response.

 

[ac_claire]

That is incredibly judgmental and uncharitable response.

I’m sorry it came across that way to you, because my intentions are only charitable. It was a sincere question.

And when I said before that there was no Church teaching re: the responsibilities of motherhood? I stand corrected, as Leonius pointed out above. There’s at least two papal encyclicals which address all of the issues in this thread.

God bless

 

[wanner47]

I’d love to stay at home with my kids. But I also like eating, electricity, warm water, and wearing clothing. So, unfortunately, I have to work. I send my kids to a daycare that’s nationally accredited, so no “minimum-wage strangers” are talking care of my children – and, I might add, all of their teachers *adore *them. They get plenty of love and affection.

Parenting is a 24/7/365 job, and I do it way more than the daycare workers do. My kids are happy, healthy, and very lovable despite the fact they’ve both been in daycare.

 

[wanner47]

CASTI CONNUBII - ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI

Perhaps you should try actually reading the encyclicals.

This emancipation in their ideas must be threefold, in the ruling of the domestic society, in the administration of family affairs and in the rearing of the children. It must be social, economic, physiological: – physiological, that is to say, the woman is to be freed at her own good pleasure from the burdensome duties properly belonging to a wife as companion and mother (We have already said that this is not an emancipation but a crime); social, inasmuch as the wife being freed from the cares of children and family, should, to the neglect of these, be able to follow her own bent and devote herself to business and even public affairs; finally economic, whereby the woman even without the knowledge and against the wish of her husband may be at liberty to conduct and administer her own affairs, giving her attention chiefly to these rather than to children, husband and family.

…]

As, however, the social and economic conditions of the married woman must in some way be altered on account of the changes in social intercourse, it is part of the office of the public authority to adapt the civil rights of the wife to modern needs and requirements, keeping in view what the natural disposition and temperament of the female sex, good morality, and the welfare of the family demands, and provided always that the essential order of the domestic society remain intact, founded as it is on something higher than human authority and wisdom, namely on the authority and wisdom of God, and so not changeable by public laws or at the pleasure of private individuals

What this says is that a woman should not devote herself to work if it means her family is neglected as a result, not that women who work outside the home are evil.

So what are widowed mothers supposed to do, for example? Are they not allowed to support their families at the risk of being called evil? If this is the case, then the Church should step in and provide for the family so the mother can stay at home. Is this being done for ALL widowed Catholic mothers?

 

[ac_claire]

I’d love to stay at home with my kids. But I also like eating, electricity, warm water, and wearing clothing. So, unfortunately, I have to work. I send my kids to a daycare that’s nationally accredited, so no “minimum-wage strangers” are talking care of my children – and, I might add, all of their teachers *adore *them. They get plenty of love and affection.

Parenting is a 24/7/365 job, and I do it way more than the daycare workers do. My kids are happy, healthy, and very lovable despite the fact they’ve both been in daycare.

You mention elctricity, clothing, running water, etc. so it seems you are one of the ones who has no choice. As I said a couple posts back, sometimes (obviously) daycare is a regrettable necessity.

But we should all be honest with ourselves as to what constitutes “true necessity”…I’m talking mostly about 2-parent households who have gotten used to a certain standard of living that necessitates both parents working, despite the fact that the kids would be better off with more personal, hands-on parental attention. It’s called “the two-income trap” and there’s been a lot written about it.

Or, you also have situations like the OP, where the husband is willing to support the wife and kids. In these cases, the mother really doesn’t have to work, but still wants to work instead of being a full time, hands-on mother.

 

[sanctamaria17]

That is incredibly judgmental and uncharitable response.

I have to agree with Mommamia on this one. My mother also worked as I grew up and she parented me way more than a lot of kids’ parents who stayed at home. She stood up for me when my teachers treated me unfairly, stayed active in my school and social life, made sure she knew all of my friends and their parents, taught me my morals, encouraged my interests in foreign language and community service, and though not Catholic at the time (she converted after I did), was the first one to teach me about God.

Yeah, my mom works. She works two outside jobs. But she does the same for my two younger siblings. Our friends go to her for advice because they’re comfortable with them. She opens her home and heart to everyone. She has her own friends and interests but her family comes first and she is not a “part time parent” by any means. Her parenting is full time and she even keeps in contact with us throughout the day (her book keeping job allows her to talk to us online and through emails).

I would say it’s quite un-Catholic and uncharitable to judge mothers simply because they don’t fit into the American, upper-middle class, gender paradigm.

 

[gardenswithkids]

This thread is not about whether or not women should or shouldn’t stay home with their children. … Its about a man who changed, and his wife for whatever reason does not like the change. …

You are very correct and this thread is getting off that subject. Debating on this thread about mothers working or not working doesn’t help the original poster with her situation. The issue about working mothers is rather moot at the present time as the op and her don’t have any children yet. The bigger issue is the op doesn’t know how to deal with her husband’s changing.

(from the original post)

When I married my husband almost two years ago he was not a Catholic. He converted some months later. Then he started listening to catholic podcasts and that is when he really started being interested in his new faith. He learned a lot and got fired up. But now the problem is that he is listening a lot to men-podcasts. I mean talks from men, for men, about mens’ role and position and it is always about the man’s Godgiven authority/role/leadership/responsibility etc etc.

The reality is people change. In the case of the original poster, she married a non-Catholic who is now a practicing Catholic trying to learn what his role is as a husband. That’s a change for the better.

I married a non-Catholic man who is now Catholic. His becoming Catholic forced me to confront some issues about my own faith. There were some reason why I married a non-Catholic, beyond his being so very wonderful. In my own life I had to confront my use of contraception. I hadn’t fully understood the Church teachings on that matter and incorrectly thought we were exempt from following the Church rules on contraception when my husband was Protestant. When he joined the Church, it changed things.

I suggest that the op do some soul searching and honestly ask herself* why* she wanted to marry a non-Catholic, non-religious man in the first place. She married a man who clearly wasn’t the religious leader in the house–because he wasn’t even religious. Now he is Catholic. I suspect the op being Catholic had much to do with leading her husband into the Church. Perhaps somewhere deep inside she prefers the leadership role??? I don’t know if that’s true, I’m just throwing that out for her to consider.

Someone earlier suggested the op listen to the men’s talks her husband is listening too. I think that is a great idea.

Even if she doesn’t agree with what she hears, it will at least put her in a better position to understand where her husband is coming from. It sounds to me like he wants very much to be a good Catholic man and a good husband. Yet she’s taking these changes in him with the worst possible interpretation. Her husband is growing in faith. She needs try to grow with him. God designed marriage to help us grow in sanctity. Marriage and parenthood does change us–and hopefully it helps change us for the better.

 

[ac_claire]

I have to agree with Mommamia on this one. My mother also worked as I grew up and she parented me way more than a lot of kids’ parents who stayed at home. She stood up for me when my teachers treated me unfairly, stayed active in my school and social life, made sure she knew all of my friends and their parents, taught me my morals, encouraged my interests in foreign language and community service, and though not Catholic at the time (she converted after I did), was the first one to teach me about God.

Yeah, my mom works. She works two outside jobs. But she does the same for my two younger siblings. Our friends go to her for advice because they’re comfortable with them. She opens her home and heart to everyone. She has her own friends and interests but her family comes first and she is not a “part time parent” by any means. Her parenting is full time and she even keeps in contact with us throughout the day (her book keeping job allows her to talk to us online and through emails).

Hey, my mom worked too. She was a single parent and literally had no choice. And I went to daycare. And she was a great mom, I love her dearly and we’re still close.

But the point is, as has been said over and over in this thread-- sometimes it is necessary for a mother to work and for a child to go to daycare. When it’s not necessary for a mother to work but she does it anyway instead of being a full-time, hands-on mother? Then yes, I question whether that’s in the best interest of the child, or of any child. I’m sorry if you don’t like that, but it’s what I believe and-- incidentally-- what the Church believes as well.

I would say it’s quite un-Catholic and uncharitable to judge mothers simply because they don’t fit into the American, upper-middle class, gender paradigm.

LOL, I’m sorry sanctamaria but I’ve been looking at this for 5 minutes and I still have no idea what it means. Translation please?

 

[Leonius]

I would say it’s quite un-Catholic and uncharitable to judge mothers simply because they don’t fit into the American, upper-middle class, gender paradigm.

No one is judging mothers who HAVE to work, but those who would rather work than take care of their own children? Yes that is wrong, it is completely unnatural, how is the child supposed to feel loved when the mother would rather spend her day at work with strangers than with her own flesh and blood, her own child? Such a mother is unfit of the the honoured title of mother and should never have married if she was not wiling to sacrifice herself for her children.

It has nothing to do with any “American, upper-middle class, gender paradigm.”, I am British lower working class. What it has to do with is God’s plan for the family and the natural laws concerning mothers and their children, the natural laws are universal not been restricted by nationality or class.

And I don’t know how it is in the US but in Britain most middle class women work for exactly the same reasons as the OP, they find playing the worker more fun than housework and child care and so selfishly pursue whatever they desire and everyone else must come second.

The OP’s husband is wiling to sacrifice his wife’s income for the good of the children, the wife on the other hand wants to continue working for her own selfishness. The husband should be commended for not wanting to pimp his wife out to others just to get a few extra dollars.

 

[wanner47]

The husband is wiling to sacrifice his wife’s income for the good of the children, the wife on the other hand wants to continue working for her own selfishness.

Are you Jesus?

If not, then you cannot read the OP’s heart and mind and you should not be making such a judgment. The OP didn’t say, “I want to work because I’m selfish.” And perhaps when the OP actually has a child she may feel differently – I know I did – but your comment is very much lacking in charity.

 

[AveSantaMaria]

Thanks for posting this thread. I hope to read all the responses and also hope that people will post some advice from the Magisterium and various saints (hopefully married ones) on this topic.

You may want to read:

It describes the marriage of Anne and Joachim (Mary’s parents) in great detail. Yes, she was always submissive to his every need. But he loved her and always considered her desires first. I think. (Must read again)

Mystical City of God themostholyrosary.com/mystical-city.htm
In Defense of The City of God Mystica Civitate Dei: dailycatholic.org/issue/05Jun/jun10tim.htm - to summarize the research of three priests on the official decision of the Holy Roman Catholic Church regarding The Mystical City of God by Venerable Mary of Jesus of Agreda and to ascertain thereby whether it is permitted for anyone of any authority whatsoever to forbid the reading of this extraordinary book.

 

[Leonius]

Are you Jesus?

If not, then you cannot read the OP’s heart and mind and you should not be making such a judgment. The OP didn’t say, “I want to work because I’m selfish.” And perhaps when the OP actually has a child she may feel differently – I know I did – but your comment is very much lacking in charity.

Not reading hearts, reading posts

Can you read hearts? If not how can you know that I made that post in an uncharitable spirit? It was not uncharitable, she is making a big mistake, it is no more uncharitable to warn her than it is uncharitable to pull a suicide from the brink of a cliff.

 

[wanner47]

Not reading hearts, reading posts

I’m sorry, where did the OP say she was selfish?

 

[Leonius]

I’m sorry, where did the OP say she was selfish?

Don’t be so obtuse, no one goes around saying “I am selfish”. She wants to continue working for her own sake, its not for her husbands sake because he doesn’t want her to, and its not the child’s sake because the child needs its mother. Its all in the original post.

 

[lovemysix]

Amber,

I would also recommend that you seek counseling for this matter; don’t expect an anonymous internet forum someplace to give you answers to a complex matter in a marriage. I am sorry you are having to deal with this, and I will pray that you and your husband can come to an understanding.

As far as working mothers go, I will say this: if the Catholic church thought working outside the home was a sin, I highly doubt St. Gianna would have been canonized for us all to look up to as a shining example of Catholic mothering. As far as I understand it, her husband had a decent job, and she chose to work because she felt being a doctor was her calling AS WELL AS being a mother. There are plenty of us working mothers out here who also feel that we are being called to a vocation outside the home as well as the vocation we have inside our home. And our kids are growing up happy and healthy

You are in my prayers, and I wish you much happiness in your marriage and future motherhood

Lauren

 

[Serap]

I’ve read through this thread and I agree that St. Gianna was an amazing woman, but she became a saint because she saved the life of her unborn child, not because she was a doctor. She valued the life inside of her over her own life. She was a pediatrician and helped other mothers with their parenting. She was an advocate for children and being a doctor allowed her to meet other mothers and children.

You don’t have to be a doctor to have these qualities and abilities.

The bottom line is that if you work or don’t work, you have to put your children (born or unborn) as number one. I have a very good career and make great money, but everyday, I’m out of the office by 4:00 p.m. and I don’t care who wants to meet with me…I’m gone to pick up my DD from daycare. My daughter is everything to me. When she runs to me and says, “Hi mommy.”; my heart melts everytime! I wouldn’t want to be anywhere else at that moment.

I work because of economics, but I tell you, if we could afford it, I’d throw my career out the window in a second!

I really believe that the woman’s role is to nuture children. We are designed for it…we are more emotional, patient, nurturing and gentle than men. Our bodies also provide milk for our baby.

It is also the man’s role to be a hand’s on parent…nuturing, changing diapers, bathing, etc., but nothing on God’s given earth beats the love and bond that a mother can have with her child. There is just something beautiful about a woman that a man can never touch or imitate. Women are (in my opinion) far more superior to men in this capacity. Women are beautiful creatures and why would we want to be anything different?

Look at our ultimate role model as a woman…Blessed Mary. Look at her qualities…she is so feminine and beautiful. She would definitely put wordly things aside and focus on her family if she were a mother and wife today.

 

[sanctamaria17]

No one is saying, “Pick worldly things instead of your kids.” I think people should put their kids first. My mom also made sure to be home for us. And yes, St. Gianna became a saint not because she was a doctor. But the fact was, she was a doctor, she had a career she enjoyed, and she used it to benefit many families, including her own.

What we ARE saying is that in a marital relationship, men cannot just dictate whatever they want to their wives as if their wives are their daughters. We’re saying that it’s not a sin for a mother to choose to work outside of the home. We even have people on these boards who are stay at home fathers, while the mothers work. We’re saying it depends on the family. That’s what we’re saying.

And no, not every woman is naturally nurturing. I’m saying we shouldn’t prescribe a role for her when even Biblical women worked and made money for the family (Proverbs 31, anyone?).

As for upper middle class paradigm, what I’m saying is that it’s expected in our culture that women would be expected to stay at home the more money her husband makes. Unless she’s professional or poor, even today, people see no need for her to be in the work force.

I’m not saying women should be selfish and forget her children, that she HAS to work. I’m saying women should listen to God’s call for them and discern with their husbands what’s best for their families. But the husband SHOULD NOT force his wife. She’s not his daughter. And I am saying yes, if a mother wants to work and raise kids, she can make it work. As I keep saying, it’s up to the family and it’s up to God. It’s NOT up to society to dictate what a woman should or should not do, just because she’s in happy possession of a uterus.