What’s wrong with 1566? How long does it take for Church teachings to get moldy and go bad? The apostles creed is still older than that. So is the Bible.
In any case, I never asserted that Pope Leo XIII was being “unbalanced”, and as I said earlier in the thread I’m not claiming that a married woman is wrong to work outside the home in every case. I’m not arguing that Pope Leo XIII said that either. I am arguing that being a “stay at home mom” is the ideal situation for a married woman, and I believe Rerum Novarum supports that argument.
I think comparing construction work to motherhood is an insult to motherhood.
Pax Christi
Dear Dan Daly,
Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou for your (name removed by moderator)ut to the discussion.
Indeed, you are quite right, dear friend, Sacred Tradition does not “go bad” with the passage of time and to state that it does, or imply that it is no longer permenant teaching of the magisterium, is surely jolly un-Catholic. Unfortunately, there is this notion that prevails among some contemporary Catholics, that the only valid and authoritative teaching today is what is contained within the current
Cate**chism of the Catholic Church and that any part of Sacred Tradition not integrated into the same is, by definition, no longer current authoritative teaching. This is a very narrow understanding of our most holy religion and I have never read anywhere, dear friend, where our Church officially teaches this, have you? *Casti Connubii *is an encyclical and hence a part of the Ordinary Magisterium and so requires religious submission of the mind and will of the faithful. Dissent from papal teaching in encyclicals is not a part of the creed of a Catholic. The only time that such teaching could be disregarded is if it could be proven that a specific aspect of the teaching had been
officially abrogated by a later pontiff. This has simply not been the case with papal teaching rigorously declaring that a married woman’s proper sphere is within the home, attending to domestic affairs.
Moreover, the essence of this teaching is not based upon the historical situation of the day in which it was uttered, but rather upon, as you correctly state, “the nature of a woman that does not change”. Therefore, it has perpetual validity and Catholics today have no authority to challenge this teaching and declare it invalid and irrelevant, for even Holy Mother Church has not done so, and indeed, would not do so because it is a timeless truth that does not become obsolete. What has changed over time is the secular understanding of the nature of women, which has, of course, become riddled with feminist ideology, especially since the permissive 1960’s, but as Catholics we do not conform ourselves to the godless and often pernicious mindset of the world (cf. Rom. 12: 2). We look to the good and wholesome teaching of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, which, as in the topic currently under review, almost providentially anticipated the emergence of the anti-Christian feminist ideology of our troubled times. Of a truth, God is with His Church and forever guiding it with godly wisdom.
For the record, I have freely admitted that motherhood will not be possible in every circumstance, for example, where the husband simply cannot be the breadwinner owing to a severe ongoing mental or physical illness. Moreover, there are those women who will be called to the religious life and others who will not meet a suitable chap with which to enter into holy wedlock. Thus, motherhood cannot be the calling of *every *woman without exception, but I would contend that, for a married woman, being exclusively a mother and a housewife is the ideal family arrangement and
Rerum Novarum most certainly supports that, dear friend
If more Catholic women today gave heed to what has been said in Sacred Tradition, not dismissing it as next to worthless on account of its antiquity, then I am of the opinion that our Western society would be far better place, evidenced by greater family stability, happier spouses and less children and young people with emotional disturbances and behavoural problems.
God bless and may I wish you, dear friend, and all contributors to the present discussion a jolly splendid weekend, whatever are your plans.
Warmest good wishes,
Portrait
Pax:tiphat:
. I think Pope Leo XIII is being more balanced than you give him credit for. He clearly favors women working at home but notice he does not say that a woman can’t or should not work outside of the home. He only says that woman are not suited for certain occupations. And says that woman are better at housework. You could also say men are better suited for construction because of reasons x,y and z. That would not mean that men should only seek out an occupation in construction.
