I personally hold that the idea would be that a man work until about the age of 30, continuing to live at home, so that he can put away enough money to buy a home ... providing financial security for life and without being saddled down with a mortgage.  Many young people want to move out the second they're able to and flush $1500 a month down the toilet to pay for an apartment, utilities, etc., and render them incapable of saving significant sums, just to demonstrate their "independence" from their parents, and then becoming "dependent" indentured servants to the banks for the rest of their lives.  I encourage my older sons to stay at home and save their money, and my oldest at 22 is already a quarter of the way there.  Within a few years, he could buy a home outright and then possibly retire from the secular world by the time he's 40 or 45.  That's the way to do it IMO.

At that point, I would say, he could marry a relatively mature woman who's as young as 18 or 20 ... except that I find modern women to be very immature, even Traditional Catholic ones.  There were probably times in history where the average 15 year old young lady was more mature than the average 25-year-old today.  They had to help at home with the chores and could probably run household if they had to by the age of 12 or 13.  You see some biographies where a mother died and the oldest daughter (in her early teens) takes over the mother's role and does an admirable job.

That's why so few marriages are taking place nowadays -- women often have better careers than the men. What woman wants to marry a man with a shaky or non-existent career compared to her? What, so she can be the man of the house? Maybe he can stay home and bear children and raise them? The modern world is insane.

I think that great careers are overrated IF you take living off of debt to the banks off the table.  Many go to college and end up $50-$100K in debt before they can even start their "careers".  Meanwhile, working for $15 per hour during those 4 years while living at home, they could put away $100K, resulting in a $200K swing.  I've seen these stats demonstrated in a video called something along the lines of "the college scam".  4-year college programs are 100% scams, where you take maybe 1 year worth of classes in your Major and are required to take all these garbage "core" courses just to keep various Leftist arts, sociology, psychology, and Humanities professors employed when they'd otherwise have to bag groceries to make a living.  I have degrees/Majors in Greek and Latin and self-taught myself computer science, and I've been working in computer science now for the past 25 years and could, within about 6 months of actual practical experience, run circles around nearly all "Computer Science" majors fresh out of school.

If a young man had even a modestly-skilled line of work, something that could be acquired by 6-12 months at a trade or technical school (vs. 4 years of college), and just worked after that, while living at home, until he was in his late 20s or early 30s, he'd be set for life ... without a college degree or glamorous career of some kind.  But when you leave college with $100K of debt, no savings, and then immediately get married to assume a $250-$300K mortgage, you had better have some kind of stable and lucrative "career" to get by.

Unfortunately, I myself am caught in the debt cycle due to the time spent at seminary and graduate schools, etc. ... so that I had a very late start out of the gates, but I am encouraging my kids to stay out of this trap.  I was in my late 20s by the time I decided to focus on making a living rather than a vocation.

I hope my sons don't marry until they are at least in their 30s.  I'm grateful that neither are interested in courtship right now.  They are focused on working and establishing their careers.  They both will inherit a substantial bit of money in a few years that will help them buy homes with cash.  That should help them find good wives....I hope 

I've heard multiple Catholics online say that the ideal age of a woman for a man to marry is half the man's age + 7. Has anyone else heard this before? If so, where does this come from?

This is not the calculation for the ideal age, but for the youngest age.  It's not an exact science, but kinda makes sense.

If a man were 20, he shouldn't marry/date anyone younger than 17.
If 30, then 22.
If 40, then 27.
etc.

I personally hold that the idea would be that a man work until about the age of 30, continuing to live at home, so that he can put away enough money to buy a home ... providing financial security for life and without being saddled down with a mortgage.  Many young people want to move out the second they're able to and flush $1500 a month down the toilet to pay for an apartment, utilities, etc., and render them incapable of saving significant sums, just to demonstrate their "independence" from their parents, and then becoming "dependent" indentured servants to the banks for the rest of their lives.  I encourage my older sons to stay at home and save their money, and my oldest at 22 is already a quarter of the way there.  Within a few years, he could buy a home outright and then possibly retire from the secular world by the time he's 40 or 45.  That's the way to do it IMO.

At that point, I would say, he could marry a relatively mature woman who's as young as 18 or 20 ... except that I find modern women to be very immature, even Traditional Catholic ones.  There were probably times in history where the average 15 year old young lady was more mature than the average 25-year-old today.  They had to help at home with the chores and could probably run household if they had to by the age of 12 or 13.  You see some biographies where a mother died and the oldest daughter (in her early teens) takes over the mother's role and does an admirable job.

I agree with lad here. Most women today are not mature, so finding a GOOD wife isn't as much about age as it about maturity. Of course responsibilities forces people to mature (usually, provided they want to mature). Most women +30 today are less mature from teenagers from a few centuries ago.... You can get mature young girls in this day and age but they are rare, it depends on their upbringing. Most 'redpilled' men avoid older women because generally they come with a lot of 'baggage'.

It's from reddit. Though the real origin is probably jews. Basically it's propaganda to shame men from getting younger women. Obviously older women who wasted their youth like this age restriction even though these same women would have had relationships with older men when they were young...

And simps and the like repeat this nonsense for good boy/nice guy points. And feminists.

Just think about who benefits from men avoiding younger women.

Meanwhile the 'elites' are taking 14 yr olds (maybe even younger) to their private islands...

I agree with lad here. Most women today are not mature, so finding a GOOD wife isn't as much about age as it about maturity. Of course responsibilities forces people to mature (usually, provided they want to mature). Most women +30 today are less mature from teenagers from a few centuries ago.... You can get mature young girls in this day and age but they are rare, it depends on their upbringing. Most 'redpilled' men avoid older women because generally they come with a lot of 'baggage'.

Agree on all counts.  I often tell people that I've met 16 year old women and 70 year old girls.  It's a mentality thing.  You can be old but not have the maturity to be an actual adult.  A lot of this comes from many women having "daddy issues" now so most are a train wreck and will only cause problems for any decent man.  

One harsh reality that older women don't want to see is that any man they would want wants women who are younger and more attractive than they are and many become bitter over the fact and will try to convince themselves in vain that it's not true.  

I've heard multiple Catholics online say that the ideal age of a woman for a man to marry is half the man's age + 7. Has anyone else heard this before? If so, where does this come from?

While I've never heard this before, I surprisingly find it pretty reasonable especially as a lower limit as someone here suggested. However, I think maturity of both individuals matters way more than age.