Why is the USCCB so big on women working?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FaithBuild18
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, I just want to return to this point. It’s easy to think that all Americans are pioneers, entrepreneurs, or even private sector workers, but the reality is that the vast majority of workers, yes, can be substituted for in the work force like widgets.
I beg to differ simply because my husband and I just went through a 3.5-year job search that was partly caused by many of today’s living-wage jobs requiring licensure or some kind of educational/professional qualification.

He was finally hired as a truck driver, but to get that job he had to go through a four-week vocational program, pass three qualifying written and driving tests - one for his driving license and two for his employer - and pass a six-week on the job training in order to get first seat status and his own rig. His fleet manager didn’t hire him, hand him a set of keys, and wish him good luck in getting things figured out.

I don’t know the exact amount, but I’d reckon his employer has spent at least 6K in trainers’ salaries, hotels, transportation, and licensing fees to get him up and running for them. And that’s on top of his salary. If he quit tomorrow, yes he could be replaced. With another truck drive that the company will have to spend thousands on to get up and going in a rig.

Same with my job. If I quit tomorrow, of course I could be replaced. With another teacher with the same state-mandated set of degrees and credentials that I have. And my district would again spend thousands on professional development training to get that person going in their own classroom.

Truck drivers, teachers, paralegals, welders, nurses, xray technicians, dental hygienists, office managers, I’m hard pressed to think of many living-wage jobs that don’t need employer-funded training and qualifications.

This is what I mean by employees not being interchangable cogs. Replaceable cogs, yes. All of us are replaceable. But if we’re making enough to support a family, replacing us is going to cost our employers lots of money I’m sure they’d rather not spend.

Now, if you want to talk about minimum-wage jobs, people come and go from those all the time. Employers expect that. And generally they don’t spend a whole lot in training and developing those employees and instead expect those employees to learn as they go. But at least where I live, it’s nigh-on impossible to support one person much less a family on a minimum-wage job.

Luna
 
Actually, I just want to return to this point. It’s easy to think that all Americans are pioneers, entrepreneurs, or even private sector workers, but the reality is that the vast majority of workers, yes, can be substituted for in the work force like widgets.

Yes, if you’re smart enough you can obtain the American dream and start your own business and slide yourself into a clever niche in the market, but this is rare and becoming increasingly rare in society. There are millions upon millions of jobs in this country held by people who learned everything they know only after getting the job, and which require only highly common skills that can be learned virtually by anyone.
Luna L, not to speak for FaithBuild18 but I think the point was not that most jobs are easy or menial but that women were sold on the theory that outside work would invariably be mentally stimulating, challenging, and if not fun, at least more exciting and enriching than the “drudgery” of housework and childrearing.

What most have found is something men have known for many years, most jobs are just that, jobs. Necessary to provide for a family and perhaps bringing self satisfaction but not the reason you get up in the morning.

Lisa
 
Luna L, not to speak for FaithBuild18 but I think the point was not that most jobs are easy or menial but that women were sold on the theory that outside work would invariably be mentally stimulating, challenging, and if not fun, at least more exciting and enriching than the “drudgery” of housework and childrearing.

What most have found is something men have known for many years, most jobs are just that, jobs. Necessary to provide for a family and perhaps bringing self satisfaction but not the reason you get up in the morning.

Lisa
My heart goes out to the women and men who don’t find challenge, stimulation and fun in their employment. I am truly blessed to be able to get up in the morning and look forward to doing what it is that I do. If I saw my job as drugery and little more than a paycheck, I’d be looking for the exit door as soon as possible.

My grandfather was a dairy farmer who found great joy in running his farm. He was a man of his times and therefore wasn’t the most expressive of people, but if you spent enough time around him you could tell how much he enjoyed being around his animals. It was through his inspiration that I was determined to find a vocation that was more than a job.

In my mind, there’s nothing boring or tedious about running a house or taking care of children. Again, my heart goes out to people who can’t see or don’t see what an incredibly demanding and important job it is to raise up children.

Luna
 
Luna L, not to speak for FaithBuild18 but I think the point was not that most jobs are easy or menial but that women were sold on the theory that outside work would invariably be mentally stimulating, challenging, and if not fun, at least more exciting and enriching than the “drudgery” of housework and childrearing.

What most have found is something men have known for many years, most jobs are just that, jobs. Necessary to provide for a family and perhaps bringing self satisfaction but not the reason you get up in the morning.

Lisa
Most jobs are just jobs. And the “drudgery” is easier, more rewarding, and has to get done either way. While there are rewarding jobs out there, most women would rather be at home with their babies if they have them. The reason for their working isn’t selfishness, but because their family is depending on them to do so.
 
Perhaps don’t agree with the statement that women shouldn’t be in jobs held traditionally by men (other than those requiring physical ability that few women possess) but I do agree that the change in traditional roles has been a huge disaster for children and families. Women have forged their way into the working world outside the home, taking on that breadwinner (traditionally male) role. and sadly some men particularly in certain communities have thus abdicated their role as provider and protector leaving our country with a massive percentage of single mothers without a male in the home to both provide for and protect his family. There are two words that describe the cause of poverty in this country “single mothers” and no that doesn’t mean they are bad people but the reality is that children raised in intact families with a mother and father married to each other are far less likely to be living off the rest of the taxpayers, dealing with drugs, teen pregnancies, and other unproductive behavior.

As a female who lived through “Women’s Lib” as they called it, I can assure you this movement bore evil fruits even if the intentions were noble. Males and females have different natures and when you force either into an unnatural way of life, it does not bring out the best in either sex. We are now plagued with a bastion of irresponsible sperm donors, women who do not have the financial or emotional reserves to provide a good environment for raising children and the poor children who are dragged through the parents’ chaotic lives. And before the onslaught of “well my mom was single and she was a saint” begins, I am talking about the average situation, not the exception. The statistics are clear. “Breadwinner mom” and no father is a recipe for poverty. Women being expected to work, and they are these days, has completely changed the way children grow up in this country. Free love, free sex, do what feels good have created some of the evil fruits previously described. Women being “liberated” from the ‘chains’ of taking care of their families to go out and earn money has only made them over worked, over tired and overwhelmed.

Lisa
Hi Lisa, interesting post but I’d really like to know what statistics you have on single parenting and poverty since I saw some eye-opening figures this weekend.
 
Hi Lisa, interesting post but I’d really like to know what statistics you have on single parenting and poverty since I saw some eye-opening figures this weekend.
Please share them! Every source I have seen indicates a much higher incidence of poverty among single mothers than for married mothers. I just saw a list of poverty rates by country for single mothers and the US was among the highest, nearly 50%. This was based on having income less than 50% of the median.

If you have statistics that single mothers and their children are at a financial advantage I’d love to see this.

Lisa
 
Please share them! Every source I have seen indicates a much higher incidence of poverty among single mothers than for married mothers. I just saw a list of poverty rates by country for single mothers and the US was among the highest, nearly 50%. This was based on having income less than 50% of the median.

If you have statistics that single mothers and their children are at a financial advantage I’d love to see this.

Lisa
Not a financial advantage but not near as dire a picture as I’ve seen painted. According to this article (which I haven’t double-checked for accuracy), 27% of single mothers and their children live in poverty - not the percentages in the mid-40’s that I’ve seen elsewhere. I don’t know the comparable percentage for married couples for the same period but it’s likely much lower. Again, I suppose household financial situation depends on whether ‘single parent’ means divorced with alimony/child support, versus sole breadwinner, vs unmarried but in a ‘committed’ relationship.
 
Not a financial advantage but not near as dire a picture as I’ve seen painted. According to this article (which I haven’t double-checked for accuracy), 27% of single mothers and their children live in poverty - not the percentages in the mid-40’s that I’ve seen elsewhere. I don’t know the comparable percentage for married couples for the same period but it’s likely much lower. Again, I suppose household financial situation depends on whether ‘single parent’ means divorced with alimony/child support, versus sole breadwinner, vs unmarried but in a ‘committed’ relationship.
Per the US Census 2010 the rate of poverty for families consisting of married parents and children is 6.4%.

So even if not as bad as you thought, the poverty rate for single mothers is almost FIVE TIMES as high.

Overall poverty in America with this economy is 15.1%. So again, nearly double the rate of all Americans.

I think we can all conclude, encouraging marriage before the baby is a good thing for all concerned!.

Lisa
 
A woman who works outside the home isn’t a true wife? I would argue that a woman who refuses to works outside the home, would rather take money from relatives, charities that are not designed to help the able-bodied, or would rack up dept against her family’s home, is less of a wife and less of a mother. Do you decide who has the right to procreate? Are the children of teachers, retail workers, and others who don’t make enough to run a household less worthy of life? Or are their parents just less worthy of being parents? Both my parents worked my whole childhood and guess what, my brothers and sisters and I turned out to be capable, moral human beings. We learned a to have a decent work ethic and to do our part around the house instead of treating our mother like some sort of perpetual slave. We have a strong family relationship and we went into our adult lives knowing how to take care of ourselves, and others as well if needed. As for your imaginary golden days where no one got married until they had four bedroom house and a years worth of bills in the bank, they’re nonsense. Such a world never existed. Young couples have always struggled. Women have always had to find other sources of income to make ends meet. People have always gone through unstable periods in their families. There have always been men who didn’t make quite enough money at a job to sustain the family and they’ve always sired children into this world. Please keep in mind all the brave, strong woman who have worked their butts off to support and nurture their families when you go about bragging of the superiority of the lives of the privileged.
Well, a couple of things here. First off, a lot of women work outside the home because they want to. It isn’t so much a question of “work or lose the house” as it is “work so we can have an even bigger house”. Secondly, no matter what the reason for such a work arrangement, I think it does have a largely negative impact on kids. It means less time for family, more latchkey kids raised by the pop culture rather than by parents, less time in general because the few times that parents and kids are together, they’re either so tired from work that they can’t do much beyond the TV, or they use the family togetherness time to do chores, or shopping or things like that. All of those things mean that for the sake of greed (at least for most of us Americans) we spend a lot less time being a family, doing family activities, and having the time and energy to really form a deep lasting bond.

I have no problem with families working when they have no choice, but when a mother of small kids decides to take a job out of boredom or a desire for a bigger house, that’s not a good thing. Kids need someone to lean on, and if mommy and daddy aren’t around (or at least an aunt or Granny) they’ll turn to whatever other helps they can find, and those may not be good.
 
Per the US Census 2010 the rate of poverty for families consisting of married parents and children is 6.4%.

So even if not as bad as you thought, the poverty rate for single mothers is almost FIVE TIMES as high.

Overall poverty in America with this economy is 15.1%. So again, nearly double the rate of all Americans.

I think we can all conclude, encouraging marriage before the baby is a good thing for all concerned!.

Lisa
That’s another part the article I cited deals with: divorce produces a significant percentage of these single parent household. As a matter of fact, only 34% of these parents are never married, so I don’t think it’s a question of getting married before having babies as much as it’s a question of committing to parent one’s kids regardless of what happens. Yes, ideally parents should marry before having kids, but the stats don’t support failure to marry first as being the main contributor to single-parent families. Failure to commit for a lifetime - whether to marriage or to parenting is what appears to be the real problem.
 
That’s another part the article I cited deals with: divorce produces a significant percentage of these single parent household. As a matter of fact, only 34% of these parents are never married, so I don’t think it’s a question of getting married before having babies as much as it’s a question of committing to parent one’s kids regardless of what happens. Yes, ideally parents should marry before having kids, but the stats don’t support failure to marry first as being the main contributor to single-parent families. Failure to commit for a lifetime - whether to marriage or to parenting is what appears to be the real problem.
Absolutely but that is still over a third and according to recent studies, we are experiencing a huge demographic shift in that marriage is becoming more and more something that happens in middle and upper class families while poor women are far less likely to be married ever although have a series of males in their life (I always liked Dr Laura’s term “Sperm Donor”) who impregnate them and move on.

I think the key is promoting responsibility, to children and spouse. Even if a divorce occurs, the father should continue to support and have contact with his children. Sadly it’ all too common that the divorced father skates and the state does little to force him to continue to support his children.

Marriage is really the best anti poverty program. Too bad it’s heresy to say so!

Lisa
 
Absolutely but that is still over a third and according to recent studies, we are experiencing a huge demographic shift in that marriage is becoming more and more something that happens in middle and upper class families while poor women are far less likely to be married ever although have a series of males in their life (I always liked Dr Laura’s term “Sperm Donor”) who impregnate them and move on.

I think the key is promoting responsibility, to children and spouse. Even if a divorce occurs, the father should continue to support and have contact with his children. Sadly it’ all too common that the divorced father skates and the state does little to force him to continue to support his children.

Marriage is really the best anti poverty program. Too bad it’s heresy to say so!

Lisa
👍
 
Absolutely but that is still over a third and according to recent studies, we are experiencing a huge demographic shift in that marriage is becoming more and more something that happens in middle and upper class families while poor women are far less likely to be married ever although have a series of males in their life (I always liked Dr Laura’s term “Sperm Donor”) who impregnate them and move on.

I think the key is promoting responsibility, to children and spouse. Even if a divorce occurs, the father should continue to support and have contact with his children. Sadly it’ all too common that the divorced father skates and the state does little to force him to continue to support his children.

Marriage is really the best anti poverty program. Too bad it’s heresy to say so!

Lisa
I think you are partly correct but there is a chicken-egg scenario here. Is it not also the case that poverty puts a woman (and, to be fair, men as well) at a disadvantage with regard to marriage? I have no supporting stats - just lots of personal stories of relationships abandoned in search of greener economic pastures.
 
I think you are partly correct but there is a chicken-egg scenario here. Is it not also the case that poverty puts a woman (and, to be fair, men as well) at a disadvantage with regard to marriage? I have no supporting stats - just lots of personal stories of relationships abandoned in search of greener economic pastures.
But it’s even worse with a live-in situation where the couple has children. Far more likely to break up than a marriage. There is a lot of concern about this demographic phenomenon because it’s relatively new. I think there was a big article recently by someone not necessarily from a conservative point of view. Her conclusion is that marriage is becoming less and less common among uneducated and low income people of both sexes. Worse in minority populations as well

I think rather than focus on throwing money at the problem, look at what causes it and see if something more effective can be done.

Lisa
 
But it’s even worse with a live-in situation where the couple has children. Far more likely to break up than a marriage. There is a lot of concern about this demographic phenomenon because it’s relatively new. I think there was a big article recently by someone not necessarily from a conservative point of view. Her conclusion is that marriage is becoming less and less common among uneducated and low income people of both sexes. Worse in minority populations as well

I think rather than focus on throwing money at the problem, look at what causes it and see if something more effective can be done.

Lisa
I agree about the throwing money part since that generally accomplishes very little. Effective action to improve people’s prospects is what will make the difference and in my book that starts with education.
 
I have no problem with families working when they have no choice, but when a mother of small kids decides to take a job out of boredom or a desire for a bigger house, that’s not a good thing. Kids need someone to lean on, and if mommy and daddy aren’t around (or at least an aunt or Granny) they’ll turn to whatever other helps they can find, and those may not be good.
You alluded to this a bit, but I’d like to stress there are also plenty of fathers of small children who work crazy hours for the boat, the trip to Disney World, the home theater, the quad bike…

And a bored mother needs to do something stimulating, job or no. A bored mother isn’t going to do a very good job parenting kids. And she will probably grow to resent her situation, which her children will pick up on.

Luna
 
‘It is an intolerable abuse, and to be abolished at all cost, for mothers on account of father’s low wage to be forced to engage in gainful occupations outside of the home.’

Pope Pius XI, ‘Quadragesimo Anno’

"We see a woman who, in order to augment her husband’s earnings, betakes herself also to a factory, leaving her house abandoned during her absence. The house, untidy and small perhaps before, becomes even more miserable for lack of care. Members of the family work separately in four quarters of the city and with different working hours. Scarcely ever do they find themselves together for dinner or rest after work – still less for prayer in common. What is left of family life? And what attractions can it offer to children?

"To such painful consequences of the absence of the mother from the home there is added another, still more deplorable. It concerns the education, especially of the young girl, and her preparation for real life. Accustomed as she is to see her mother always out of the house and the house itself so gloomy in its abandonment, she will be unable to find any attraction for it, she will not feel the slightest inclination for austere housekeeping jobs. She cannot be expected to appreciate their nobility and beauty or to wish one day to give herself to them as a wife and mother.

"This is true in all grades and stations of social life. The daughter of the worldly woman, who sees all housekeeping left in the hands of paid help and her mother fussing around with frivolous occupations and futile amusements, will follow her example, will want to be emancipated as soon as possible and in the words of a very tragic phrase ‘to live her own life.’ How could she conceive a desire to become one day a true lady, that is, the mother of a happy, prosperous, worthy family?

"As to the working classes, forced to earn daily bread, a woman might, if she reflected, realize that not rarely the supplementary wage which she earns by working outside the house is easily swallowed up by other expenses or even by waste which is ruinous to the family budget. The daughter who also goes out to work in a factory or office, deafened by the excited, restless world in which she lives, dazzled by the tinsel of specious luxury, developing a thirst for shallow pleasures that distract but do not give satiety or repose in those revue or dance halls which are sprouting up everywhere, often for party propaganda purposes and which corrupt youth, becomes a fashionable lady, despises the old Nineteenth Century ways of life.

"How could she not feel her modest home surroundings unattractive and more squalid than they are in reality? To find her pleasure in them, to desire one day to settle in them herself, she should be able to offset her natural impressions by a serious intellectual and spiritual life, by the vigor that comes from religious education and from supernatural ideals. But what kind of religious formation has she received in such surroundings?

"And that is not all. When, as the years pass, her mother, prematurely aged, worn out, and broken by work beyond her capacity, by sorrow and anxiety, will see her return home at night at a very late hour, she will not find her a support or a help, but rather the mother herself will have to wait on a daughter incapable and unaccustomed to household work, and to perform for her all the offices of a servant.

“And the lot of the father will not be any better when old age, sickness, infirmity and unemployment force him to depend for his meager sustenance on the good or bad will of his children. Here you have the august holy authority of the father and mother dethroned.”

Pope Pius XII, “On Woman’s Duties”

‘Communism is particularly characterized by the rejection of any link that binds woman to the family and the home, and her emancipation is proclaimed as a basic principle. She is withdrawn from the family and the care of her children, to be thrust instead into public life and collective production under the same conditions as man. The care of home and children then devolves upon the collectivity. Finally, the right of education is denied to parents, for it is conceived as the exclusive prerogative of the community, in whose name and by whose mandate alone parents may exercise this right.’

Pope Pius XI, ‘Divini Redemptoris’

A Cardinal once said…

“Every Christian woman ought to have two things always in her heart, – first, if married, the welfare of her husband, her children, her home; if unmarried, of her immediate family; their happiness must be her most sacred duty.”



I always find it soothing to see people who understand to some degree how in a Christian society the woman’s true place is in the home, where she can care for her family members and they can care for and protect her. Few people understand in the West that the father has responsibility for the daughter until she is married – however old she is. Instead they send her out of the home immediately upon her coming of age, alone into the world. And few also know that a husband in a marriage is bound to provide, under pain of sin. But in other cultures in the East this is still understood despite corruption from Western media. It is after all part of natural law and Our Lord’s design.

Until people give up on material things and return the wife to the home, and fathers to the work force, families will not be healed, and children will not have what they need.

Some of this thread has been very refreshing. Thank you.
 
I agree about the throwing money part since that generally accomplishes very little. Effective action to improve people’s prospects is what will make the difference and in my book that starts with education.
Yes but education in WHAT? It would seem that our schools would let the students in on that pesky little fact that single parenthood is often a fast road to nowhere. A class in basic economics, budgeting, paying bills and taking care of children seems like a far more effective focus than some of the silly things I see at our local high schools.

I do remember reading about a class where students were given a doll that they had to be responsible for 24/7. They had to write down what they did, where they went, how the doll was cared for. It was a real wake up call for girls, and boys for that matter. Cute babies are a lot of work and they cost a lot to raise. TV Shows like “Teen Mom” frankly disgust me as providing an unrealistic viewpoint of ‘children raising children.’ Too bad it’s politically incorrect to promote marriage (of a man and woman what a concept) in schools today. Someone might be offended or feel hurt…

Lisa
 
Yes but education in WHAT? It would seem that our schools would let the students in on that pesky little fact that single parenthood is often a fast road to nowhere. A class in basic economics, budgeting, paying bills and taking care of children seems like a far more effective focus than some of the silly things I see at our local high schools.

I do remember reading about a class where students were given a doll that they had to be responsible for 24/7. They had to write down what they did, where they went, how the doll was cared for. It was a real wake up call for girls, and boys for that matter. Cute babies are a lot of work and they cost a lot to raise. TV Shows like “Teen Mom” frankly disgust me as providing an unrealistic viewpoint of ‘children raising children.’ Too bad it’s politically incorrect to promote marriage (of a man and woman what a concept) in schools today. Someone might be offended or feel hurt…

Lisa
The reason I believe it begins with education (not necessarily limited to the public school variety) is that this is a great factor in women’s ability to care for their children. I’m in favor of marriage, but let’s just say I’m very realistic about its present state, particularly among kids who have grown up either seeing the worst side of it, or not seeing it at all. If a woman is equipped to cope and be a provider, then it’s easier to deal with life, whatever happens. If she is blessed with a happy marriage, great - if not, she can still keep her family out of poverty. Unless the institution of marriage gets some time in the critical care unit, it simply will not be a solution in and of itself.

Programs specially aimed at helping people use their skills to make a living can potentially be very useful in gaining a measure of self sufficiency. I’m a big fan of entrepreneurship even on the smallest of scales and it grates on me to hear the constant talk of getting a job - as though there’s supposed to be one each out there with our names stamped on them - as opposed to creating opportunity for oneself. In a sense, tying one’s future economic prospects to a particular job which we expect to be created by some unknown entity, is a big risk in these changing times.
 
‘It is an intolerable abuse, and to be abolished at all cost, for mothers on account of father’s low wage to be forced to engage in gainful occupations outside of the home.’

Pope Pius XI, ‘Quadragesimo Anno’

"We see a woman who, in order to augment her husband’s earnings, betakes herself also to a factory, leaving her house abandoned during her absence. The house, untidy and small perhaps before, becomes even more miserable for lack of care. Members of the family work separately in four quarters of the city and with different working hours. Scarcely ever do they find themselves together for dinner or rest after work – still less for prayer in common. What is left of family life? And what attractions can it offer to children?

"To such painful consequences of the absence of the mother from the home there is added another, still more deplorable. It concerns the education, especially of the young girl, and her preparation for real life. Accustomed as she is to see her mother always out of the house and the house itself so gloomy in its abandonment, she will be unable to find any attraction for it, she will not feel the slightest inclination for austere housekeeping jobs. She cannot be expected to appreciate their nobility and beauty or to wish one day to give herself to them as a wife and mother.

"This is true in all grades and stations of social life. The daughter of the worldly woman, who sees all housekeeping left in the hands of paid help and her mother fussing around with frivolous occupations and futile amusements, will follow her example, will want to be emancipated as soon as possible and in the words of a very tragic phrase ‘to live her own life.’ How could she conceive a desire to become one day a true lady, that is, the mother of a happy, prosperous, worthy family?

"As to the working classes, forced to earn daily bread, a woman might, if she reflected, realize that not rarely the supplementary wage which she earns by working outside the house is easily swallowed up by other expenses or even by waste which is ruinous to the family budget. The daughter who also goes out to work in a factory or office, deafened by the excited, restless world in which she lives, dazzled by the tinsel of specious luxury, developing a thirst for shallow pleasures that distract but do not give satiety or repose in those revue or dance halls which are sprouting up everywhere, often for party propaganda purposes and which corrupt youth, becomes a fashionable lady, despises the old Nineteenth Century ways of life.

"How could she not feel her modest home surroundings unattractive and more squalid than they are in reality? To find her pleasure in them, to desire one day to settle in them herself, she should be able to offset her natural impressions by a serious intellectual and spiritual life, by the vigor that comes from religious education and from supernatural ideals. But what kind of religious formation has she received in such surroundings?

"And that is not all. When, as the years pass, her mother, prematurely aged, worn out, and broken by work beyond her capacity, by sorrow and anxiety, will see her return home at night at a very late hour, she will not find her a support or a help, but rather the mother herself will have to wait on a daughter incapable and unaccustomed to household work, and to perform for her all the offices of a servant.

“And the lot of the father will not be any better when old age, sickness, infirmity and unemployment force him to depend for his meager sustenance on the good or bad will of his children. Here you have the august holy authority of the father and mother dethroned.”

Pope Pius XII, “On Woman’s Duties”

‘Communism is particularly characterized by the rejection of any link that binds woman to the family and the home, and her emancipation is proclaimed as a basic principle. She is withdrawn from the family and the care of her children, to be thrust instead into public life and collective production under the same conditions as man. The care of home and children then devolves upon the collectivity. Finally, the right of education is denied to parents, for it is conceived as the exclusive prerogative of the community, in whose name and by whose mandate alone parents may exercise this right.’

Pope Pius XI, ‘Divini Redemptoris’

A Cardinal once said…

“Every Christian woman ought to have two things always in her heart, – first, if married, the welfare of her husband, her children, her home; if unmarried, of her immediate family; their happiness must be her most sacred duty.”



I always find it soothing to see people who understand to some degree how in a Christian society the woman’s true place is in the home, where she can care for her family members and they can care for and protect her. Few people understand in the West that the father has responsibility for the daughter until she is married – however old she is. Instead they send her out of the home immediately upon her coming of age, alone into the world. And few also know that a husband in a marriage is bound to provide, under pain of sin. But in other cultures in the East this is still understood despite corruption from Western media. It is after all part of natural law and Our Lord’s design.

Until people give up on material things and return the wife to the home, and fathers to the work force, families will not be healed, and children will not have what they need.

Some of this thread has been very refreshing. Thank you.
Thank you Shin for this post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top