The Value of Education

[Michael_Saint]

I obviously did not post the uncharitable part of my thoughts about your posts. Let’s just say that posts such as:

I know a couple who is practicing NFP, and he makes $100,000 a year. That is immoral. They may be doing it with a moral method, but they have an immoral intent - the contraceptive mentality.

assumes so much about people’s intents and personal situations that I don’t give a lot of credibility to the things you post.

Don’t give me that nonsense. I know much more about his “intents” and “personal situations” than I posted - I wasn’t going to go into great detail.

Such a response to my post simply sidesteps the issue - quite conveniently, I might add. The POINT was that “grave reasons” are necessary to MORALLY practice NFP, and these days, most Catholics seem to think there doesn’t need to be ANY reasons to practice NFP.

 

[Michael_Saint]

:
While religious education is first and foremost, the Church does not limit the role of parents in education to only religious education. The catechism 2367 tells of parents’ responsibility to “educate their children”. Pope John Paul II wrote in a document called Letter to Families, “*Parents *are *the first and most important educators *of their own children, and they also possess a *fundamental competence in this area: they are educators because they are parents.” *Hence, as I said before, the woman you marry will share with you in the education of your children.

Now you are the one who is not reading properly. I said the PRIMARY education, not the ONLY education. Of course the secular sciences are part of a parent’s education for children.

 

[Michael_Saint]

Michael Saint, it seems to me that a lot of what you’re saying is people are ignoring the will of God and just doing whatever they want. If that is correct, could you please share your foolproof way of determining what the will of God is? Also, how do you know the people getting married young or with debt are not following God’s will? Who are you to judge what the will of God is in other people’s lives?

Let me ask you this - if a child steals a chocolate bar, do we know for a fact it was NOT God’s will to steal that chocolate bar? Of course, because it is against the moral law.

Now, if a person uses NFP for other than the morally-permitted “grave reasons”, we know for a fact it is not God’s will, because it is against the moral law.

 

[peregrinator_it]

First of all, I did not say the only point of an education was to make money. I think there are other benefits to education - though I am not sure for SAHM’s (or future SAHM’s) that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.

Learning “biology” and “chemistry”, pursuing a “love of learning” and fulfilling your “desire to know the truth”, “using your brain to make connections”, etc.: A college education to the tune of 10K to 20K a year is NOT AT ALL necessary for this. You want to learn about biology? Go on the internet, go to the library and take out books.

I’ll admit up front that I haven’t read the entire thread… because I saw the above post and it gave me a pause, to say the least. So, apologies if I comment on ground already covered.

First, I commend the OP on her very admirable valuation of education as a part of the pursuit of truth separate from any money-making aspirations.

Second, I want to respond to the post above.

The following info may put my views in perspective- I hold a degree from a 4-year Great Books program (similar to the one at Thomas Aquinas College.)

Michael Saint asserts that it is not necessary to attend (or spend money on) a college education in order to satisfy one’s desire for learning/knowledge. I disagree. A student only learns to seek the truth properly and to test his understanding through conversation with others (if you disagree consult Plato.) Learning cannot take place in a vacuum; it needs interlocutors.

He also questions whether a future SAHM really needs a college education. I don’t think every person (male or female) necessarily needs a college education; however, reason is integral to humanity and should be trained in accord with each person’s capacity. Christ calls to “love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your mind and all your strength.” It’s a part of being a well-developed human-being to have a well-trained mind. Secondly, a future SAHM needs (almost more than anyone else) to have as good an understanding of God’s world and human knowledge as she possibly can, for the sake of the children she will raise.

I find the emphasis placed by Michael Saint on the cost of education and the undesirability of bringing debt into a marriage troubling. I could understand being concerned that a future spouse was bringing personal and frivolous credit card debt into a marriage; but not debt incurred from tuition, etc.

Besides, I think there’s entirely too much concern among my contemporaries (particularly in secular society) today that one not get married without being “financially stable.” Most of my friends have gotten married straight out of college, without much money, with debt and it didn’t seem to hurt them one bit. Being a little poor never hurt anyone.

But, I will say that tuition (particularly at private colleges) is outrageously high; and I would not object to a child of mine attending a good state school, so as to avoid incurring debt.

I did take out quite a bit of money in student loans to cover my college education and I have since paid it all off, but I would never consider a gentleman with Michael Saint’s opinions a fit prospect for marriage.

 

[peregrinator_it]

You want an education? Do it responsibly - don’t spend a whole pile of money, try to pay a good portion of it off before you start “dating”, unless you have a rather small debt - in which case it’s not so bad. I would “date” (actually “court”) a Steubenville girl if her parents had chipped in a bit, if sponsors had chipped in a bit more, and if most of it was covered by her working her butt off (with a few student loans here and there to help her). If she had a small amount to pay back after that (ie. 10 to 15 K), that would be fine - I would gladly fit the bill for it. The situation I just described with Miss Anonymous would certainly demonstrate character, and I guarantee she’d make one heck of a wife.

Wow. If my parents had followed your advice, I wouldn’t be here (nor most of my siblings.) If my friends had taken your advice, my godchildren wouldn’t be here crying: at the very thought!)

Forgive me, but I don’t think this is the proper attitude of one seeking marriage. Marriage is about self-giving. Part of being a spouse is sacrificing for your spouse. I can’t imagine putting qualifications on what you will and won’t sacrifice for.

Forgive me again, if I’m harsh (or pedantic in my first post) but I’m frankly aghast and hardly know where to begin with such opinions…

 

[bookgirl32]

Let me ask you this - if a child steals a chocolate bar, do we know for a fact it was NOT God’s will to steal that chocolate bar? Of course, because it is against the moral law.

Now, if a person uses NFP for other than the morally-permitted “grave reasons”, we know for a fact it is not God’s will, because it is against the moral law.

Michael, please list all “morally permitted grave reasons”, applicable to every single couple, period. I think that would really help.

 

[PaulinVA]

Don’t give me that nonsense. I know much more about his “intents” and “personal situations” than I posted - I wasn’t going to go into great detail.

Such a response to my post simply sidesteps the issue - quite conveniently, I might add. The POINT was that “grave reasons” are necessary to MORALLY practice NFP, and these days, most Catholics seem to think there doesn’t need to be ANY reasons to practice NFP.

Michael - You can not expect people to read into your post things that you do not post.

I am not questioning the idea that people can do the right thing for the wrong reasons. I agree with you.

However, a marriage is between three people, if you will - God, the husband and the wife. Not four - Michael Saint, God, the husband and the wife. What you said about that particular couple was not called for. It might be true, actually. But when you judge people like that, most people get turned off.

How is it that you are able to post some things that I essentially agree with, but still make me want to strangle you? I say that in all Christian charity, really.

Since not a lot of people are agreeing with your posts, but do agree with the thinking behind them ( I think), I would ask you to re read them and ask yourself why.

 

[tapiocapudding]

I think an education is valuable even for SAHMs. I intend to stay at home with my baby as long as we can, but due to financial realities may have to go back to work at least part time.
Many families come across tough times here and there- maybe the provider is laid off or becomes disabled. There are just too many unknowns in life.
Anyways, I also believe education has an instrisic value.

 

[journey137]

Let me ask you this - if a child steals a chocolate bar, do we know for a fact it was NOT God’s will to steal that chocolate bar? Of course, because it is against the moral law.

Now, if a person uses NFP for other than the morally-permitted “grave reasons”, we know for a fact it is not God’s will, because it is against the moral law.

Stealing is a clear cut case. Use of NFP is not necessarily clear cut, especially for those not directly involved in the marriage. There is no list of acceptable reasons to use it. Concerning the couple you mentioned previously, If anyone besides God, husband, and wife have that kind of intimate knowledge about that particular marriage, there’s something wrong with that marriage in my opinion.

My point is simply that the decision to use NFP or not to use it is up to an individual couple. They have no list to consult to determine if their reasons are moral. They must discern God’s will (again, not a clear cut thing in all situations because God doesn’t often talk directly to people). Whatever they decide is between them and God, period.

 

[Carolinagirl411]

Michael Saint

i want to apologize for misconstruing your statements. That was not my intention in the slightest. I understand how frustrating it can be when people put words in your mouth/keyboard.

I’ve read some more of yours posts as well as the many responses to them lol and I’ve decided it is best for us to just agree to disagree on some points. Personally I think it will be very difficult for you to find the “right” one given your restrictions and qualifications…but I do not know you except through what you post so that may be the best option for you to be happy. For me…which is the only thing I truly know and can say with conviction…those type of restrictions just don’t work. I can’t place rules and guidelines on something like love. If I told my finace…“Listen I think you are absolutely perfect, you treat me better than anyone else (besides my mom) you love me unconditionally, you have a strong moral code, etc. but you just have too much debt and I have to break off the engagement for fear of children” I would consider myself the stupidest person alive. Granted pursuing the relationship was a decision but now that I have made the decision I will not go back on it and I will not regret it.

But I understand the root of your problem was people using NFP b/c they have debt and then things just got out of hand. That will not be a problem for us since I will not use NFP. Too complicated for me lol

 

[Michael_Saint]

I find the emphasis placed by Michael Saint on the cost of education and the undesirability of bringing debt into a marriage troubling. I could understand being concerned that a future spouse was bringing personal and frivolous credit card debt into a marriage; but not debt incurred from tuition, etc. .

And I am guessing most of them practiced NFP for a number of years after marriage. That I consider immoral or at least imprudent. Read the Vatican documents on how open parents have to be to children and how central it must be before you can properly enter into marriage.

 

[Michael_Saint]

Marriage is about self-giving. Part of being a spouse is sacrificing for your spouse.

And what kind of “sacrifice” is it for a woman to rack up a huge debt getting an education that will only tend towards the education of children that most SAHM’s have to do without (and manage just fine in the process?)

Isn’t that a bit “selfish”?

 

[Michael_Saint]

Michael, please list all “morally permitted grave reasons”, applicable to every single couple, period. I think that would really help.

How can I do this when the Vatican has not done so?
Every single couple has to gear this towards their situation - but how many do it with complete openness? According to you, every couple does. According to me, many choose “other reasons” and consider them “grave” because it suits their purposes.

 

[Michael_Saint]

What you said about that particular couple was not called for. It might be true, actually. But when you judge people like that, most people get turned off.

How is it that you are able to post some things that I essentially agree with, but still make me want to strangle you? I say that in all Christian charity, really.

Since not a lot of people are agreeing with your posts, but do agree with the thinking behind them ( I think), I would ask you to re read them and ask yourself why.

Point 1: “Judgment” is sometimes necessary, and normally people who find it offensive are guilty and want to do you harm because they resent the fact that you convict them with the truth. St. John the Baptist “judged” Herod to be doing wrong by marrying his brother’s wife. Herod had him beheaded. Jesus told the Pharisees they were “liars just like their father - the Devil”, and they had Him crucified. The lives of the Saints are full of similar “judgments” and punishments.

Point 2: I would say the reason you feel this way is because of the way I say things. True, I should be more “diplomatic” about the way I say things. Something to work on, I suppose.

Point 3: Why do most people disagree? Could be the way I am saying things. Could also be that they are guilty of what I am mentioning, and they go for the natural reaction to such a thing - to attack the person speaking the truth. I don’t know - could be either one, or a mix.

 

[Michael_Saint]

Stealing is a clear cut case. Use of NFP is not necessarily clear cut, especially for those not directly involved in the marriage. There is no list of acceptable reasons to use it. Concerning the couple you mentioned previously, If anyone besides God, husband, and wife have that kind of intimate knowledge about that particular marriage, there’s something wrong with that marriage in my opinion.

My point is simply that the decision to use NFP or not to use it is up to an individual couple. They have no list to consult to determine if their reasons are moral. They must discern God’s will (again, not a clear cut thing in all situations because God doesn’t often talk directly to people). Whatever they decide is between them and God, period.

True, not a “clear cut case”, but the fact that “there is no list of acceptable reasons to use it” is a “clause” that is used by some couples as a “loophole” to do it “for whatever reason”, and to claim that reason is “grave”.

It IS up to an individual couple - but ONLY if that couple CONFORMS their consciences to the MORAL LAW and PROPERLY discern “grave reasons”. Whatever they decide is NOT just between them and God - the DOCTRINE of the Mystical Body of Christ holds that ANY who commit immoraity AFFECT THE WHOLE BODY (read 1Cor 12:26). That is why a penitent must confess to the priest and not “just to God” - because he has committed offense against not only God, but the WHOLE CHURCH, and must be reconciled to BOTH PARTIES, represented by the priest.

 

[Michael_Saint]

Michael Saint

i want to apologize for misconstruing your statements. That was not my intention in the slightest. I understand how frustrating it can be when people put words in your mouth/keyboard.

I’ve read some more of yours posts as well as the many responses to them lol and I’ve decided it is best for us to just agree to disagree on some points. Personally I think it will be very difficult for you to find the “right” one given your restrictions and qualifications…but I do not know you except through what you post so that may be the best option for you to be happy. For me…which is the only thing I truly know and can say with conviction…those type of restrictions just don’t work. I can’t place rules and guidelines on something like love. If I told my finace…“Listen I think you are absolutely perfect, you treat me better than anyone else (besides my mom) you love me unconditionally, you have a strong moral code, etc. but you just have too much debt and I have to break off the engagement for fear of children” I would consider myself the stupidest person alive. Granted pursuing the relationship was a decision but now that I have made the decision I will not go back on it and I will not regret it.

But I understand the root of your problem was people using NFP b/c they have debt and then things just got out of hand. That will not be a problem for us since I will not use NFP. Too complicated for me lol

Apology accepted.

Now, for this comment: …“Listen I think you are absolutely perfect, you treat me better than anyone else (besides my mom) you love me unconditionally, you have a strong moral code, etc. but you just have too much debt and I have to break off the engagement for fear of children”. I would not consider debt to be an impediment because I might not be able to pay it off. For instance, if my fiance racked up $100,000 in medical fees because she got cancer during our engagement, I would STILL marry her, and pay off her debts HAPPILY! I guess that the whole “racking up the big debt” thing would strike me as a sign of [and forgive the bluntness] great imprudence and stupidity that I would find difficult to live with for the rest of my life.

I am glad to hear you will not be NFP’ing it. And yes, you are correct in what my point is. I can “agree to disagree” in peace now that I know SOMEONE on this forum actually sees my point.

 

[PaulinVA]

Point 1: “Judgment” is sometimes necessary, and normally people who find it offensive are guilty and want to do you harm because they resent the fact that you convict them with the truth.

Yeah, I guess. But, in my case, I am not guilty of what you accuse the couple of, so that isn’t it. Maybe it’s your attitude that you are right and everyone else is wrong that makes it hard to take what you say.

Point 2: I would say the reason you feel this way is because of the way I say things. True, I should be more “diplomatic” about the way I say things. Something to work on, I suppose.

If your goal is to COVERT you are right; you need to be more diplomatic. If your goal is to JUDGE, continue on your same course.

Point 3: Why do most people disagree? Could be the way I am saying things. Could also be that they are guilty of what I am mentioning, and they go for the natural reaction to such a thing - to attack the person speaking the truth. I don’t know - could be either one, or a mix.

I don’t know. You are on a forum that is pretty orthodox. If you can’t find agreement here, you need to look at why.

 

[peregrinator_it]

peregrinator_it:

I find the emphasis placed by Michael Saint on the cost of education and the undesirability of bringing debt into a marriage troubling. I could understand being concerned that a future spouse was bringing personal and frivolous credit card debt into a marriage; but not debt incurred from tuition, etc. .

And I am guessing most of them practiced NFP for a number of years after marriage. That I consider immoral or at least imprudent. Read the Vatican documents on how open parents have to be to children and how central it must be before you can properly enter into marriage.

Um… I really don’t understand how your response (above) relates to the part of my post you quoted.

I have read Casti Connubi, Humanae Vitae,* documents of Vatican II etc., etc, but am utterly confused as was unaware I was discussing responsible parenthood etc.*

 

[peregrinator_it]

And I am guessing most of them practiced NFP for a number of years after marriage. That I consider immoral or at least imprudent.

OK, so after re-reading the thread, I realize that maybe your odd response above was directed to my second post and my comment about my parents and friends who’ve married young and with debt.

All I can say is, if you mean “practiced NFP in order to have fewer children and less financial strain,” in the case of my parents you guessed wrong. I was born before the end of their first year of marriage (not quite a honeymoon baby.) My parents subsequently practiced NFP to space their next 6+ children (the plus is because there would’ve been 9 of us total, as my mom had 2 miscarriages.)

As for my friends, I’m not privy to that information. It’s none of my business.

 

[peregrinator_it]

And what kind of “sacrifice” is it for a woman to rack up a huge debt getting an education that will only tend towards the education of children that most SAHM’s have to do without (and manage just fine in the process?)

Isn’t that a bit “selfish”?

1. A well-developed mind is a integral part of being a whole human being. Education isn’t any more selfish than a spiritual formation.

Also, you say it’s useful “only toward the education of children” (emphasis mine.) My understanding is that the procreation of children is one of the primary purposes of marriage and that the proper education of children is the parents’ primary and most solemn duty. Even when the children are schooled outside of the home. That being the case, the qualifier “only” seems inaccurate…

1. I imagine you’re contending that for a (potential) SAHM to bring debt from education into a marriage is selfish, because it may lead to the husband having to work to help pay off the debt. And this is “selfish” and “unjust” because a SAHM wouldn’t be able to contribute financially.

This sounds horribly like the arguments I’ve heard irreligious men give to support the position that women should not stay at home with the children because “it’s not fair” that they (the men) “have to do all the work,” and I have to admit I’m just flabbergasted to meet it in “orthodox” Catholic circles.

I’m afraid I have to rely on an anecdote to get my objection to this opinion across. I have a friend who met her fiance on a study abroad semester in South Africa. They both moved to England where he was able to work and he started out with a temp job. I remember going with her to meet him at the mall so that she could buy him a suit for interviews, as he couldn’t afford one himself. (He was straight out of school and pretty poor and getting killed by the exchange rate (11 to 1.)) When they got married he did indeed take on her student loans.

I would want a marriage where the spouses took the attitude that my friends did; a marriage where spouses cheerfully carry one another’s burdens; not one marked by an ungenerous attitude such as yours.

Certainly, one should be careful when choosing a spouse and think about what sort of difficulties one would and wouldn’t be willing to shoulder. And I certainly wouldn’t pick a spouse who was truly financially irresponsible, but going into debt to pay for education is hardly irresponsible behavior.