Author Topic: Men who wont work (Read 11831 times)

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #55 on:** February 23, 2013, 10:20:01 AM »

I've been pondering this topic and the only conclusion I come to is that a man REFUSING to adequately provide financial support to his family is a problem of emotional problems. I can find nothing among Catholic moral teachings that allow a man to live with his family yet refuse to support them.

If a husband is counseled by a priest to separate from his wife (for grave cause and there aren't many of those) he is obligated to take the children as well and continue to provide support to wife and children.

I wonder if it is implied in some of the posts that some Catholic men [secretly] want their wives to work jobs to help lighten the burden but feel unable to state this for fear of reprimand? And no doubt a traditionalist man would be reprimanded by family and priest. Society has done it's best to destroy marriages and it appears to be succeeding.

Perhaps the first step is better communication. It seems to me a husband who keeps secrets from his wife (even if he thinks he has a good reason) is not a good communicator? They should begin with improving communication.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #56 on:** February 23, 2013, 10:24:09 AM »

I think if a man wants to write his "opus magnus" he should do it in the context of being married to a wealthy woman and leaving his honor aside to allow a woman to support him. In that case, he would be definitely a "man of the world", kind of an effeminized creature the modern world has created. Just wonder what his childhood may have been like, if he had a hard working dad from which to pattern his life.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #57 on:** February 24, 2013, 12:30:46 AM »

I think that traditional catholic values prescribe particular roles for married couples. One of the roles for husbands is to provide for the family. I think most traditional catholics agree with that. Although, I think there is some disagreement about what constitutes adequately providing and not adequately providing for the family.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #58 on:** February 24, 2013, 05:24:21 AM »

Problem is there is provide and "provide".

Does living in a trailer park and claiming welfare and your children wearing clothes from charity stores count as providing? Never taking a holiday, never having a day out in the big city? Some might consider that not providing others would disagree.

What about being well off but so busy with running a business or being a corporate man you never spend enough time with your children? Their material needs are met but not their emotional. You say the rosary and take them to Mass and instruct them, but never build a castle from styrofoam and old packaging and pretend to be a dragon for them. This is not to say all business people or highfliers are this busy. I know of Traditionalist man who works hard in small bursts of a few days, earns much in that time and then behaves like he is semi retired until the next job, does chores around his home etc. His children and wife see more of him than most because he works from home.

These things are often subjective judgements. Here, in North America, few people ever actually starve. A Trad man could make a case that since his children are well instructed in the faith and don't have ringworm, or shingles, or malnutrition they are well "provided" for. Other people would look on a family on food stamps with pity and think it a shame that the father had settled for such a low baseline.

However, if the said father is using his unemployed status to take his children on daily hikes, capture mini beasts and study them, dissect plants, study the motions of the planets in the night sky then his children could be having a childhood to be envied by middle class children.

Most workshy fathers are not doing this though. They are smoking their home grown tobacco and waste their day posting their ideas and opinions in the Internet.

ggreg · « **Reply #59 on:** February 24, 2013, 05:33:36 AM »

Quote from: Guest

I heard a story that I found very interesting, and it shows the way of thinking that seems prevalent in the SSPX and how its members reject people they deem unworthy.

There is a young unmarried woman with child. The father is trad and was going with her for a year, speaking of marriage often, but never proposing, before finally the likely consequence of overly long courtship occurred.

Here is what was shocking. The father refused to marry the girl, and insinuated to the priests the girl was too sickly, wasn't cut out for it, etc. The so-called "Catholic" PRIESTS basically gave him carte blanche to refuse to marry the girl. He told her to put the child up for adoption. It's sickening.

Does the SSPX prefer to have "troublesome" people out of the way, even if it means splitting up families, children being raised without their fathers?

I have to conclude the answer is yes. Not all the priests are like that, but the new generation of priests seems to practice and encourage destructive meddling.

That is a sickening story, but as a Trad of 33 years and 20+ of those in the SSPX I have to sadly admit it does not surprise me.

Man should be horsewhipped.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Men who wont work (Read 11831 times)

Änσnymσus

Men who wont work

Änσnymσus

Men who wont work

Änσnymσus

Men who wont work

Änσnymσus

Men who wont work

ggreg

Men who wont work