Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: ServusSpiritusSancti on April 22, 2012, 03:30:50 PM
-
It appears that some people on the "18 year old daughter wants to be a marine or cop" thread disagreed with my statement that women who intend to marry shouldn't go to college. I think this topic deserves its own thread.
My argument is that, if married women are supposed to stay home while their husbands bring home the money, why waste time going to college?
What do others here say?
-
I say 2 things:
1. Men and women can easily loose theirs souls by going to college. Unfortunately, if one has an aspiration to learn a vocation or skill to benefit humanity and earn an income from a worthy endeavor, they have the right to do so. However, one must be a very STRONG CATHOLIC to weather, navigate through the garbage of teachers and the deviate lifestyles of students, to be able to evangelize and learn that skill at the same time. VERY difficult.
2. If one is hoping to mary, one still cannot 'sit around' and either wait for romeo or pick someone just to hurry up and fulfill that desire. One must keep busy and not chance either having no income from worthy employment obtained either through appropriate training or legitimate opportunity otherwise, while there is a possibility that one may never marry.
I know moms who are SAH home school moms who left their careers. If anything ever happens that they MUST return to work, they MUST, unless they have lots of family and friends to help.
Life goes on. However, careers of selfishness for selfish reasons are not good for married women or single women.
We do the best we can. Yet, an educated mom (maintaining her Faith and strong to avoid sin) can be a great teacher and provider, when called upon out of necessity.
-
I think college is a waste for most, male or female. Don't get me wrong: engineering, medicine, natural sciences, accounting, computer science, Thomistic philosophy, etc. are all worthy endeavors and need advanced learning, for which a university/college is needed. But most majors and degrees are utterly worthless. I have close to a 150,000 dollar hole to pay off. Granted, I have a great career, but I could see myself just as happy working on a leaky pipe, repairing a printer, or managing a restaurant for the same income(OK, maybe a little less, but the difference in loan payment cancels this out).
So, should a girl go to college, rack up tens of thousands in student loans, get a worthless degree in 'management' or sociology? I don't believe so. But if a young woman has a calling to a religious vocation and wants to become a nurse to care for fellow religious, that is something entirely different.
I have to say that a young woman should not go to college but learn to raise children and care for a household. Good planning(savings, disability insurance, family, community, and life insurance) will take the place of a trade skill or 'degree' if something tragic should happen to the breadwinner. Sounds easier said than done, but God is most pleased with many happy children with mom at home. He will provide.
-
Well, I had a girl break up with me once essentially because she was too busy with her studies and hence didn't have time for a relationship. Not that I would expect her, or any woman, to drop everything all of a sudden for my sake, hardly. Still, it's food for thought.
-
It appears that some people on the "18 year old daughter wants to be a marine or cop" thread disagreed with my statement that women who intend to marry shouldn't go to college. I think this topic deserves its own thread.
You didn't even say "shouldn't go" - you said, didn't need to go. Apparently certain feminist thinking individuals believe that Catholic girls need to go to college.
My argument is that, if married women are supposed to stay home while their husbands bring home the money, why waste time going to college?
What do others here say?
Yes, wasting time and money. It's about the feminist belief that a young woman who hasn't gone to college and submits to her husband is somehow being cheated.
You're dealing with people who it's far more important for a girl to be educated and have more power in marriage, and to have some "fun" finding herself, than to be a virgin at her wedding.
-
Ok, well I meant they shouldn't go. Sorry for any confusion. I certainly do not believe that Catholic girls should go to college.
-
Ok, well I meant they shouldn't go. Sorry for any confusion. I certainly do not believe that Catholic girls should go to college.
Well SS, there can justifications for Catholic girls to go to college, but I agree with you, generally speaking, they shouldn't.
When girls went to college before Vatican II there were rules on campuses to prevent many of the excesses that occur today. Still, it's clearly a bad environment for most women, it's an occasion of many sins, and confers a dubious benefit, dubious for any woman who wishes to be married and raise children.
-
I agree with the opening post. Although, I wonder how men are supposed to support a wife and kids on their own, when the median wage for a full time worker in America is 25k per year and the unemployment rate is around 10%, all the while most folks commute long distances to and from work as well as too church and even just to go to the grocery store. I know it can often be done somehow, but it sure seems pretty tough. So, I guess I'm not surprised that most of the married women I know, go back to work as soon as their kids are grown enough. Although, I think it would be much better if our culture and economy encouraged women to stay home and raise families, instead of working and really helped men to be able to support a family on their own, without having to work so much, they have no time to spend with it. But Democrats will just call me sexist and Republicans will just call me anti-business :jester: So, I'll just pretend that everything is pretty good, but just needs a little tweaking from whatever side is in control of the group I find myself surrounded by :scared2:
-
The killer is that everything is geared toward girls being more successful than boys these days. I noticed this, as an older mother with my son in first grade, how much the times had changed!!!
Seriously, I know God made each of us alive today because it is the perfect opportunity to save our soul, but these are confusing times.
My Mom was extremely well -educated at a convent school. She was married at 18. She never worked outside of her house, except at volunteer activities. Her mother, my Grandma, worked at some job after she was widowed. Most of her 8 children lived within the same block and helped out.
Nobody talks about girls being nuns anymore. When was the last time any of us even saw one outside of a few places? Girls never see them, only a lucky few are educated by them, none of us are going to have them care for us on our death-beds -- it's an immense tragedy.
I have only done some volunteer work since I was married, and my mother-in-law and others have been very "concerned" about this, and sorry for my husband having to be the wage-earner.
Topsy-turvy times we are in.
-
The killer is that everything is geared toward girls being more successful than boys these days. I noticed this, as an older mother with my son in first grade, how much the times had changed!!!
Yes, but the most pernicious thing is the way that so many boomer parents want to tear down boys, treat them contemptuously, while keeping an unrealistic exalted view of their daughters. This happens even in "traditional" homes. It's pretty clear the reason is that having a "successful" daughter gives social status, more than having a successful son. Having a daughter that marries early detracts from one's social status.
-
It appears that some people on the "18 year old daughter wants to be a marine or cop" thread disagreed with my statement that women who intend to marry shouldn't go to college. I think this topic deserves its own thread.
My argument is that, if married women are supposed to stay home while their husbands bring home the money, why waste time going to college?
What do others here say?
Thank you, Spiritus, for stating the truth.
Obviously, women should not go to college.
The vital, vital, vital point is that the truth about this and all of these related issues about Feminism should be
obvious to every Catholic.
However, it does not seem to be obvious to every Catholic.
These things really are obvious.
I fear that bad will on the part of many so-called traditional Catholics stops them from embracing the truth.
Even some traditional Catholic girls risk eternal fire and damnation because they are tricked by the evil cult of
Feminism.
Pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary to see the truth and to accept it.
We should all do that.
Dear Catholic girls and women, Pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for the graces to understand and to
accept the truth about the evil ideas of Feminism.
Dear Catholic men, Pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for the graces to understand and defend the truth
about the evil ideas of Feminism.
-
If I'd been able to choose the way things worked out in our family, it would look something like this:
I'd have been raised Traditional Catholic and so would my husband.
We would either have been farmers and lived out in the country, fulling self-sustaining....but we would have been within a reasonable distance to a traditional Catholic parish...OR,
We would have lived in a city that had a traditional Catholic parish.
We would have had a large family of homeschooled children. The parish community would provide tons of masses, tons of volunteer activities and tons of clubs and groups to provide myself and my family contact and interaction with fellow traditional Catholics.
Instead we are a small family. I did not become Catholic until after we married (in 1990) and didn't learn about Tradition until around 2002. We moved from a larger city to a tiny town (pop. 1,200) in 1998; and then another slightly larger town "next door" to the first (pop. 3,500) in 2007.
There is only Novus Ordo parishes in this county. Our neighborhood parish is n.o. and is filled with working mothers and publicly schooled kids.
We live in the nearly bankrupted state of California....businesses have failed everywhere .. and very noticeably in our town and in this county,. The ONLY thing going on around here is the schools, some small businesses and the local community college which is very limited in course selection due to lack of funding.
We can't sell our home because we owe more on it than it's "worth" and we can't rent it out because our mortgage is high.
What would you suggest for my daughter in this situation? Our son found his way out of the limitations by joining the fire dept. He's been to Academy, and he's got most of his certifications and his EMT. Only problem? He has yet to find a paying fire fighting job...and he's been applying all around for 2 years.
The local community college and maybe a part-time job, are her only options that I can see at this point to get out of the house. I don't have children for her to help me with ...and other than volunteering at the local church, I can't see any other options for her.
Any thoughts? What would YOU do?
-
Dear Mrs. Z,
Do you attend the Novus Ordo?
If so, you should stop.
It is idolatrous.
That alone could cause discord and problems in your Family.
If you make the mistake of seeing a psychiatrist, he will only convince you to leave your daughter to join up.
Please do not seek advice from such people. You are obviously tempted to do so out of desperation.
If you temporarily enable your PM feature- you could PM me.
Then I could give you some important advice by PM.
Perhaps you are unaware of the PM feature.
For some reson it is not on your account. Or perhaps you got rid of it by choice.
You could always temporarily enable it for a day or two.
And you do seem to be very much in need of help.
I do not want to discuss you Family problems in public.
God Bless you, Mrs. Z.
Yours, Sede Catholic.
-
In the old days meetings with suitors would have been arranged. Might be hard to do these days.
-
This all sounds great, and I actually agree with you in theory, but not regarding practical necessity. True enough: college is a cesspool of evil that any Saint would have difficulty navigating through. Yet, not everyone meets Mr. or Mrs. Right at 18: I met and married my husband when we were in our early 30's - it just didn't happen before that. I was grateful I had a skill that provided me with income to eat and pay my necessities. If I COULD HAVE stayed in college, I would be able to find a decent job now that my children are grown; but, I cannot because no one wants to hire a broken down old musician without a teaching degree for anything.
Necessity dictates I help my husband before we loose the house. I post on a borrowed computer that I do not always have access to.
I found eating is good. I gave up much when I home schooled, and that was great with me! Right now, I wish I had that diploma. My husband works 2 jobs that pay little.
When was the last time any of us was in need of a nurse? A doctor? Dental Assistant? Paralegal? Teacher? Seamstress? Waitress? Some of these careers require college; other are the result of not going to college, but we all employ these from time to time.
Marriage means babies: YES! If one is fortunate enough to marry, and marry a man with means.
My point is, God does not want us to sit around and grab the first $$$ available male we see just to fill the bill of baby making. Children come from love and learn love.
Women are not rabbits! And I agree Feminists are self-centered and go against God's Will. But, we must be prudent. Women need to be educated and even STAND UP to DEFEND THE FAITH when called upon.
You all might as well arrange marriages like the old days when people were miserable and often took it out on their children. Today, people divorce becaue they marry without waiting for the appropriate mate. Who suffers???
-
it is not for us to dictate the paths or the choices of people. @mrsZ. we live in a world that is very different from what it was even 30yrs ago. women in the military, yes not a good idea but if your daughter has chosen that path then so be it, every choice is made for a reason. God gave us free will for the purpose of showing him weather we love Him enough to gain heaven. the choices we make determine our future but God and our guardian angel are always there to help us stay on track.
the role of a parent is to instruct and guide but never to enforce a way of life that they, the children, have not chosen. if parents force ideas on children then 99.9% of the time they rebel against that idea. the #1 thing to do is pray to God that your daughter never strays from the faith but there again that is her choice, her crosses. The mother of St. Augustine, St. Monica, never stopped praying for him even though he led a life full of sin in the beginning but by the power of prayer he came around and is considered the greatest doctor of the church.
We cant determine the hearts and minds of men, nor the plans God has in store for us. We must go on praying, trusting, and having faith in God
veritas
-
Today, people divorce becaue they marry without waiting for the appropriate mate. Who suffers???
That isn't why they divorce. Today women wait longer than ever to marry (they're generally the ones making the decision) and the divorce rate is higher than ever.
It's true no one should marry someone unless they really believe in the match. I've read accounts of many women confessing after divorces that they knew on their wedding day they were marrying the wrong person.
There are justifiable reasons for women to attend college, but there are no justifiable reasons for putting off marriage. but this talk about "waiting for the right one to come along" is a form of rationalization. Why is it rationalization? Because people literally get angry at young women marrying. So-called Catholics get angry with it. They'd much rather the young women be "having fun" in college. Where are their priorities? With the bourgeois values of the world, not with Catholic values.
-
But, we must be prudent. Women need to be educated and even STAND UP to DEFEND THE FAITH when called upon.
You can learn how to defend the Faith without going to college, if that's what you are saying.
-
God gave us free will for the purpose of showing him weather we love Him enough to gain heaven.
He didn't give us "free will" to do evil without consequence or interference. Why is it whenever we hear discussions of women wanting to do things that are wrong we hear talk about "free will." and letting them do it. When it comes to men doing things that are wrong we hear talk about compulsion and punishment.
the role of a parent is to instruct and guide but never to enforce a way of life that they, the children, have not chosen.
There are legitimate paths and illegitimate ones. Parents do have a duty to refuse to support, and to take steps to prevent, evil paths.
if parents force ideas on children then 99.9% of the time they rebel against that idea.
"Force" - who's talking about force? There's only so much power she has. We're talking about disapproving of an immoral decision. If parents take steps to prevent immoral behavior in their children, that will cause the children to behave immorally?
That's absurd reasoning. It's also feministic reasoning. It's saying: "if you tell me to do x, I'll just do the opposite" - you're justifying rebelliousness, teaching acquiescence to bad decisions by claiming that opposition to bad decisions only encourages bad decisions.
-
I find that college is a good thing for women. I know a lot of mothers who have gone to college after their husbands have died and were left with very little to go on. however if a mother has her degree in anything it is a very useful tool for homeschooling your children or getting a job to support the family you now have to be the bread winner for.
-
I find that college is a good thing for women. I know a lot of mothers who have gone to college after their husbands have died and were left with very little to go on. however if a mother has her degree in anything it is a very useful tool for homeschooling your children or getting a job to support the family you now have to be the bread winner for.
This is absurd. A degree does not play any real role in homeschooling. Even if the woman suddenly had to get a job, she could do what most Traditional Catholic men do anyway and go into self-employment, something that does not require a degree.
-
He didn't give us "free will" to do evil? Why is it whenever we hear discussions of women wanting to do things that are wrong we hear about "free will."
it is not intrinsically evil there is no law of man or God saying women are forbidden to serve their country.
-
To clarify that point, SpiritusSanctus, I meant to stand up for The Faith IN college. I did not state that clearly.
I hate college, and true, people should not "put off" getting married. All I'm saying is that we need to find the best school we can because not everyone finds the right mate or not at 18.
My friend is a Teacher - she stayed at home to home school and is happy. Yet, she will be able to get a job, PT or FT as needed, if her husband dies, gets sick, etc., and when the children are grown. Why? To eat. Otherwise, well, we do accept our crosses from God, but, He has a plan for all of us.
We should not pigeon-hole every women into one mold. That is all I am saying.
-
it is not intrinsically evil there is no law of man or God saying women are forbidden to serve their country.
No, no, no. The Church teaches that women are not to work outside the home unless absolutely necessary. And even if they must, they should stay away from jobs that are meant for mean, and especially jobs that put them in an ocassion of sin.
-
I find that college is a good thing for women.
The main reason young women go to college is to "have fun" and because they're told to do it, and shamed into not doing it. The sad reality is that even the most ostensibly traditional girls end up being drunken party girls - and don't even try to kid us into believing most of them are chaste. The career aspect is clearly secondary for most of them. Indeed, those that intend to marry, but have a career first, are typically going into jobs and displacing would be bread earners when they're at the height of their fertility.
In 50 years since college education has become the norm for women, what has happened to values about marriage, family and sex?
They've been destroyed. Literally so gone that even most Trads don't follow them, despite all the lip service.
I know a lot of mothers who have gone to college after their husbands have died and were left with very little to go on. however if a mother has her degree in anything it is a very useful tool for homeschooling your children or getting a job to support the family you now have to be the bread winner for.
College is really not necessarily that useful for finding work. Being a woman though, and trying to displace men from careers and positions that used to go for bread-winners, is useful for finding a career, because women are favored.
-
I find that college is a good thing for women. I know a lot of mothers who have gone to college after their husbands have died and were left with very little to go on. however if a mother has her degree in anything it is a very useful tool for homeschooling your children or getting a job to support the family you now have to be the bread winner for.
This is absurd. A degree does not play any real role in homeschooling. Even if the woman suddenly had to get a job, she could do what most Traditional Catholic men do anyway and go into self-employment, something that does not require a degree.
Self-employment isn't always easy - it takes money to make money, unless you are most clever in the world of business. Again, one mold does not fit every woman or man.
-
I find that college is a good thing for women. I know a lot of mothers who have gone to college after their husbands have died and were left with very little to go on. however if a mother has her degree in anything it is a very useful tool for homeschooling your children or getting a job to support the family you now have to be the bread winner for.
This is absurd. A degree does not play any real role in homeschooling. Even if the woman suddenly had to get a job, she could do what most Traditional Catholic men do anyway and go into self-employment, something that does not require a degree.
Self-employment isn't always easy - it takes money to make money, unless you are most clever in the world of business. Again, one mold does not fit every woman or man.
It may not be for every man, but it's one sure way to avoid ocassion of sin. It doesn't bring in a tremendous amount of money, sure. But Trad families are willing to be more poor than rich.
I, personally, plan to go into self-employment.
-
He didn't give us "free will" to do evil?
He gave us free will to freely choose good, not to do objectively evil things without other people interfering.
it is not intrinsically evil there is no law of man or God saying women are forbidden to serve their country.
It is intrinsically evil for women to be "soldiers" - it's not about serving the country. The roles between men and women in the military have been hopelessly blurred. It's entering an occasion of sin, for an illegitimate purpose, to be a female "soldier."
The military culture is godless and corrupt. But it's full of strapping young men. What kind of parent could tolerate their sheltered daughter going into such a miserable situation?
Only a parent who really doesn't have Catholic values.
-
This is absurd. A degree does not play any real role in homeschooling. Even if the woman suddenly had to get a job, she could do what most Traditional Catholic men do anyway and go into self-employment, something that does not require a degree.
how does a degree in math not help in the education of children? a degree in english? a degree in history? chemistry? science? biology? physics? etc,etc....
-
BTW: I am NO FEMINIST!!!
Remember the no-women-should-ever-go-to-college concept the next time one of you needs a major operation and the best educated and trained man for the job happens to be a woman. With children. Home schooled by Dad.
There are good women who remain single and chaste in order to serve God and society as well. Not one-size fits all.
-
This is absurd. A degree does not play any real role in homeschooling. Even if the woman suddenly had to get a job, she could do what most Traditional Catholic men do anyway and go into self-employment, something that does not require a degree.
how does a degree in math not help in the education of children? a degree in english? a degree in history? chemistry? science? biology? physics? etc,etc....
My mother doesn't have a degree, yet she did a heck of a good job homeschooling me...
-
you needs a major operation and the best educated and trained man for the job happens to be a woman. With children. Home schooled by Dad.
I've never had experience with a female surgeon that did major surgeries. Never encountered one.
-
you needs a major operation and the best educated and trained man for the job happens to be a woman. With children. Home schooled by Dad.
I've never had experience with a female surgeon that did major surgeries. Never encountered one.
A highly educated and trained Heart Surgeon saved my Dad's life about 15 years ago. I was grateful.
-
you needs a major operation and the best educated and trained man for the job happens to be a woman. With children. Home schooled by Dad.
I've never had experience with a female surgeon that did major surgeries. Never encountered one.
I know one that lives in Arizona, never met her though. I, of course, prefer male surgeons.
-
This is absurd. A degree does not play any real role in homeschooling. Even if the woman suddenly had to get a job, she could do what most Traditional Catholic men do anyway and go into self-employment, something that does not require a degree.
how does a degree in math not help in the education of children? a degree in english? a degree in history? chemistry? science? biology? physics? etc,etc....
My mother doesn't have a degree, yet she did a heck of a good job homeschooling me...
I also did a good job homeschooling mine, but, some subject were problems for me. Math, especially.
-
He didn't give us "free will" to do evil?
He gave us free will to freely choose good, not to do objectively evil things without other people interfering.
it is not intrinsically evil there is no law of man or God saying women are forbidden to serve their country.
It is intrinsically evil for women to be "soldiers" - it's not about serving the country. The roles between men and women in the military have been hopelessly blurred. It's entering an occasion of sin, for an illegitimate purpose, to be a female "soldier."
The military culture is godless and corrupt. But it's full of strapping young men. What kind of parent could tolerate their daughter going into such a sheltered situation?
Only a parent who really doesn't have Catholic values.
and who are you to dictate weather its evil or not. its only evil if you make it evil women in the military are not in and of itself intrinsically evil.
-
you needs a major operation and the best educated and trained man for the job happens to be a woman. With children. Home schooled by Dad.
I've never had experience with a female surgeon that did major surgeries. Never encountered one.
I know one that lives in Arizona, never met her though. I, of course, prefer male surgeons.
I prefer the best surgeon available.
-
He didn't give us "free will" to do evil?
He gave us free will to freely choose good, not to do objectively evil things without other people interfering.
it is not intrinsically evil there is no law of man or God saying women are forbidden to serve their country.
It is intrinsically evil for women to be "soldiers" - it's not about serving the country. The roles between men and women in the military have been hopelessly blurred. It's entering an occasion of sin, for an illegitimate purpose, to be a female "soldier."
The military culture is godless and corrupt. But it's full of strapping young men. What kind of parent could tolerate their daughter going into such a sheltered situation?
Only a parent who really doesn't have Catholic values.
and who are you to dictate weather its evil or not. its only evil if you make it evil women in the military are not in and of itself intrinsically evil.
It's what the CHURCH teaches, and they teach that career women are in sin.
-
[how does a degree in math not help in the education of children? a degree in english? a degree in history? chemistry? science? biology? physics? etc,etc....
There's nothing preventing a married woman who really wants to from taking courses and studying math, history, chemistry, etc.
If that was the real reason young women went to college, to help to educate their children, they would do it whether they were married or with children or not.
But married women with children would quickly realize the folly of spending time and money on such pursuits. The idea that a girl would go to college to study math to later teach her homeschooled children math is absurd.
That's not why they go. The motivations have to do with pride, and far worse.
-
This is absurd. A degree does not play any real role in homeschooling. Even if the woman suddenly had to get a job, she could do what most Traditional Catholic men do anyway and go into self-employment, something that does not require a degree.
how does a degree in math not help in the education of children? a degree in english? a degree in history? chemistry? science? biology? physics? etc,etc....
My mother doesn't have a degree, yet she did a heck of a good job homeschooling me...
I also did a good job homeschooling mine, but, some subject were problems for me. Math, especially.
every one has a weak subject. my mom homeschooled as well.
-
and who are you to dictate weather its evil or not. its only evil if you make it evil women in the military are not in and of itself intrinsically evil.
Is it moral to draft women to serve in the military? Is it moral for women to be soldiers, like men? That's crazy. The Church teaches there are different roles for men and women. Women should not be soldiers.
There was a time when the role of women in the military was feminine and compartmentalized. It still was probably a bad environment for women, but now it's an utterly corrupt and horrible environment.
-
[how does a degree in math not help in the education of children? a degree in english? a degree in history? chemistry? science? biology? physics? etc,etc....
There's nothing preventing a married woman who really wants to from taking courses and studying math, history, chemistry, etc.
If that was the real reason young women went to college, to help to educate their children, they would do it whether they were married or with children or not.
But married women with children would quickly realize the folly of spending time and money on such pursuits. The idea that a girl would go to college to study math to later teach her homeschooled children math is absurd.
That's not why they go. The motivations have to do with pride, and far worse.
I only agree with that because it is true of many women. NOT ALL.
The Church does NOT TEACH that this is THE ONLY role of women!
It teaches to be fruitful and multiply, but if we do not find a good and loving mate right away, we ought to get some kind of education in the best possible school armed with the True Faith and be a true helpmate to our husbands if the need arises. Or, to be a good Doctor like St. Giana Molla. This sounds more like a Chauvenist position rather than a rational one.
-
It teaches to be fruitful and multiply, but if we do not find a good and loving mate right away, we ought to get some kind of education in the best possible school armed with the True Faith and be a true helpmate to our husbands if the need arises.
When has the Church ever taught this?
This sounds more like a Chauvenist position rather than a rational one.
I think men who lazily encourage their wives to work are the ones with the Chauvenist position.
-
I only agree with that because it is true of many women. NOT ALL.
Yes, not all, but it's so common these days. It's important we not pretend that the exception is the rule, just because a girl is trad. Being exposed to a college environment will have a negative influence on young women. It has. Look at the last 50 years.
-
He didn't give us "free will" to do evil?
He gave us free will to freely choose good, not to do objectively evil things without other people interfering.
it is not intrinsically evil there is no law of man or God saying women are forbidden to serve their country.
It is intrinsically evil for women to be "soldiers" - it's not about serving the country. The roles between men and women in the military have been hopelessly blurred. It's entering an occasion of sin, for an illegitimate purpose, to be a female "soldier."
The military culture is godless and corrupt. But it's full of strapping young men. What kind of parent could tolerate their daughter going into such a sheltered situation?
Only a parent who really doesn't have Catholic values.
and who are you to dictate weather its evil or not. its only evil if you make it evil women in the military are not in and of itself intrinsically evil.
It's what the CHURCH teaches, and they teach that career women are in sin.
understandable if she is a mother neglecting her duty to her children and husband, but single women are free to choose. If its not morally wrong then it cant be mortally wrong.
-
Women tend to respond to the values of the dominant social group.
If young women, during the most fertile years, are sent to colleges that promote incredibly corrupt morals, then how can anyone expect the influence to be positive?
They will lucky to come out from the experience with the Faith, and their suitability for motherhood will likely be diminished.
Look at the social trends in all societies where women typically go to college.
It has been absolutely disastrous for marriage and family.
-
It teaches to be fruitful and multiply, but if we do not find a good and loving mate right away, we ought to get some kind of education in the best possible school armed with the True Faith and be a true helpmate to our husbands if the need arises.
When has the Church ever taught this?
This sounds more like a Chauvenist position rather than a rational one.
I think men who lazily encourage their wives to work are the ones with the Chauvenist position.
Genesis 2:18
And the Lord God said: It is not good for man to be alone: let us make him a help like unto himself.
Again, you speak of some men. Many men do not wish their wives to work, but must support them when need arises. Or they are Doctors. Good ones with the Faith.
Don't discount there are many good women who God calls to do good and holy waork in many fields. There is not one path that fits everyone.
-
understandable if she is a mother neglecting her duty to her children and husband, but single women are free to choose. If its not morally wrong then it cant be mortally wrong.
It's wrong to go into bad company without a legitimate reason. There's not a legitimate reason for women to be soldiers. And I don't believe for a second that the motivation is to "serve the country."
This isn't some Joan of Arc, acting on angelic voices, leading men into battle to save her country.
This is a young woman going into a corrupt military, with corrupt values a corrupt military culture, fighting wars that are probably unjust.
And for what purpose? What's the real motivation? To get out of the house?
-
We have two different threads, here:
1. Military
2. College
Perhaps it would be better to separate these. The posts are getting confusing.
I am going to sleep, folks. The peace of Christ.
-
[how does a degree in math not help in the education of children? a degree in english? a degree in history? chemistry? science? biology? physics? etc,etc....
There's nothing preventing a married woman who really wants to from taking courses and studying math, history, chemistry, etc.
If that was the real reason young women went to college, to help to educate their children, they would do it whether they were married or with children or not.
But married women with children would quickly realize the folly of spending time and money on such pursuits. The idea that a girl would go to college to study math to later teach her homeschooled children math is absurd.
That's not why they go. The motivations have to do with pride, and far worse.
I only agree with that because it is true of many women. NOT ALL.
The Church does NOT TEACH that this is THE ONLY role of women!
It teaches to be fruitful and multiply, but if we do not find a good and loving mate right away, we ought to get some kind of education in the best possible school armed with the True Faith and be a true helpmate to our husbands if the need arises. Or, to be a good Doctor like St. Giana Molla. This sounds more like a Chauvenist position rather than a rational one.
@tele. WHO ARE YOU TO JUDGE THE INTENTION AND MOTIVES OF YOUNG WOMEN IN COLLEGE! I KNOW PLENTY OF YOUNG WOMEN GOING TO SCHOOL FOR THE REASON OF BEING AN EDUCATED WIFE AND SOMEDAY, GOD WILLING, TEACHING THEIR CHILDREN. NOT TO MENTION RELIGIOUS, SUCH AS NUNS WHOSE ENTIRE LIVES ARE SPENT EDUCATING THE IGNORANT; NOT ONLY IN THE FAITH BUT ALL ASPECTS OF EDUCATION. YOU ARE A CHAUVINISTIC, NARCISSISTIC, BELLIGERENT PIG. OF ALL THE CRISIS' FACING THE CHURCH YOU WASTE YOUR TIME ARGUING FEMINISM WHICH SEEMS TO SUGGEST A STRONG INSECURITY IN YOURSELF AGAINST THIS SEX.
-
egoveritas, you are a Feminist.
Sometimes your posts do not make sense.
You do not appear to be logical in some of them.
Some of what you post is rubbish.
Do not lose your soul over the anger and madness that is Feminism.
-
@tele. WHO ARE YOU TO JUDGE THE INTENTION AND MOTIVES OF YOUNG WOMEN IN COLLEGE!
I don't judge them as individuals. I look at how they as a group behave, and the temptations they're subject to, and the way in which they scorn those who marry early, and the way endless excuses are made for loose conduct. Sometimes they no doubt convince themselves their intentions are good. But that easily becomes a rationalization.
I KNOW PLENTY OF YOUNG WOMEN GOING TO SCHOOL FOR THE REASON OF BEING AN EDUCATED WIFE AND SOMEDAY, GOD WILLING, TEACHING THEIR CHILDREN.
It's certainly possible to teach children without a degree. Women don't go to college and spend all that money just to take a job (that they probably took from a man) and then quit after a few years when they decided to "settle" and have children.
NOT TO MENTION RELIGIOUS, SUCH AS NUNS WHOSE ENTIRE LIVES ARE SPENT EDUCATING THE IGNORANT; NOT ONLY IN THE FAITH BUT ALL ASPECTS OF EDUCATION.
As though I were mentioning religious. Is that why the young women go to college? And like to party until they're 25? Right.
YOU ARE A CHAUVINISTIC, NARCISSISTIC, BELLIGERENT PIG. OF ALL THE CRISIS' FACING THE CHURCH YOU WASTE YOUR TIME ARGUING FEMINISM WHICH SEEMS TO SUGGEST A STRONG INSECURITY IN YOURSELF AGAINST THIS SEX.
The destruction of the family caused by the destruction of the chastity of women (because women's chastity is more crucial to the existence of the family) is destroying the Catholic religion.
I'm secure enough to assert that women who are unchaste because of spending the best 10 years of their lives "looking" do not make suitable wives.
-
Clelia,
You say that you are not a Feminist.
You possibly genuinely mean that.
But you have imbibed Feminist principles.
You are simply wrong in some of what you have posted on this thread.
Try to see the truth.
Pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for the grace to see the truth and to accept it.
Pray to God the Holy Ghost for guidance.
I do hope that you come to understand what God really intends for girls and women in life.
God Bless you, Clelia.
-
It's natural for women to want to be courted. To find a mate.
The problem is that college has become a terrible place to find a mate, especially for a traditional Catholic.
It has become a place where immorality and promiscuity reigns.
Everyone knows that most women go to college in large part to seek a mate. This is part of their motivation, and they find rationalizations for it.
The danger is that this natural desire in an evil society becomes an occasion of uncontrolled concupiscence. And in modern society, it leads some young Trad Catholic girls into harlotry.
-
Again, you speak of some men. Many men do not wish their wives to work, but must support them when need arises. Or they are Doctors. Good ones with the Faith.
No, they should not support them. The man can get another job if he needs to. It's his job to bring home the money, and if he is unable to, the responsibility lies on him, not his wife. The woman may only work if her husband becomes disabled or seriously ill and cannot work.
-
YOU ARE A CHAUVINISTIC, NARCISSISTIC, BELLIGERENT PIG. OF ALL THE CRISIS' FACING THE CHURCH YOU WASTE YOUR TIME ARGUING FEMINISM WHICH SEEMS TO SUGGEST A STRONG INSECURITY IN YOURSELF AGAINST THIS SEX.
Anyone who calls a Trad chauvinistic for saying women shouldn't work outside the home is not right in the head.
Feminism is just as important to discuss as the crisis in the Church. We are free to discuss what we want. Perhaps you would be more comfortable on FishEaters.
-
egoveritas, you are a Feminist.
Sometimes your posts do not make sense.
You do not appear to be logical in some of them.
Some of what you post is rubbish.
Do not lose your soul over the anger and madness that is Feminism.
-
Dear egoveritas,
I wrote what I wrote to protect others from being adversely influenced by your erroneous ideas.
I really do hope that you come to see the truth.
CathInfo is such a good forum.
If you persevere here, you will learn the truth about these issues and many other things.
I will say a prayer for you.
I hope that you will end up with the truth. It is so important.
Feminism makes women miserable on earth. And it also imperils their eternal happiness in Heaven.
-
YOU ARE A CHAUVINISTIC, NARCISSISTIC, BELLIGERENT PIG. OF ALL THE CRISIS' FACING THE CHURCH YOU WASTE YOUR TIME ARGUING FEMINISM WHICH SEEMS TO SUGGEST A STRONG INSECURITY IN YOURSELF AGAINST THIS SEX.
Anyone who calls a Trad chauvinistic for saying women shouldn't work outside the home is not right in the head.
Feminism is just as important to discuss as the crisis in the Church. We are free to discuss what we want. Perhaps you would be more comfortable on FishEaters.
I am strictly speaking of single women in my last comment when I say that I find no evil in a college education. If you would have read further back in the thread, you would have seen that I agreed that married women who go off to find a career and neglect their children and husband are making a severe mistake.
-
. Perhaps you would be more comfortable on FishEaters.
I'd rather she stay here for the time being that have her mind corrupted over there.
-
I only agree with that because it is true of many women. NOT ALL.
The Church does NOT TEACH that this is THE ONLY role of women!
It teaches to be fruitful and multiply, but if we do not find a good and loving mate right away, we ought to get some kind of education in the best possible school armed with the True Faith and be a true helpmate to our husbands if the need arises.
One also does not have to go college in order to be "educated." We must understand the word education in a Catholic sense and not in a modern way.
Or, to be a good Doctor like St. Giana Molla.
The St. Gianna Molla's are the expections, not the rule. The enthusiasts would have us believe that such things are possible for all women, but such is not the case.
A highly educated and trained Heart Surgeon saved my Dad's life about 15 years ago. I was grateful.
And your father's soul?
-
I am strictly speaking of single women in my last comment when I say that I find no evil in a college education.
That I doubt very much. Perhaps you don't wish to see any evil in it?
Because the reality of what goes in colleges is very obvious. It was obvious to my mother in the early 70s. I'm sure it's ten times as pernicious now. if you think godless companions and their values are not harmful, you are deluding yourself.
-
I have been and still am very concerned about negative influences on my children...at jobs, or college ...or really anywhere. I don't want to send our daughter off to war, or even to college (Catholic or not) hundreds or thousands of miles from where we live.
But as I mentioned earlier in this thread: we live where we live. The options are very limited. We don't have family around, we have no Catholic friends (who aren't worldly and sending their kids to college miles away)...There is no Traditional Latin Mass parish within 250 miles from here.
I have been beseeching God for years to change our circuмstances and He has continued to will or allow this situation to remain. My task all this time is to stop railing against Him, and trust in His Divine Plan. Maybe it's been my lack of trust all this time that has caused us to find no opportunities that would change our circuмstances.
-
Yes, Mrs. Z,
You are right in your concern.
College is another very bad option for your daughter.
These places are incredibly anti-Catholic.
If she is troubled in her soul now, then think what could happen to her precious soul at college.
They could turn her against the Faith.
Then there is the totally immoral and carnal atmosphere at colleges.
It is good that you are not hoping college is the answer.
It could start new problems instead of solving the present ones.
Has she ever thought of the religious life?
Are things this bad because she was intended by God for the religious life, and she has not understood?
I do not know the answer to that at all. I am just wondering if it is a possibility.
But I am only a layman. And I am just wondering.
How happy if your daughter does have a vocation.
The Council of Trent infallibly teaches us that marriage is not to be preferred to the state of virginity:
If anyone saith that the marriage state is to be preferred before the state of virginity, let him be anathema.
Sede Catholic.
-
I only agree with that because it is true of many women. NOT ALL.
The Church does NOT TEACH that this is THE ONLY role of women!
It teaches to be fruitful and multiply, but if we do not find a good and loving mate right away, we ought to get some kind of education in the best possible school armed with the True Faith and be a true helpmate to our husbands if the need arises.
One also does not have to go college in order to be "educated." We must understand the word education in a Catholic sense and not in a modern way.
Or, to be a good Doctor like St. Giana Molla.
The St. Gianna Molla's are the expections, not the rule. The enthusiasts would have us believe that such things are possible for all women, but such is not the case.
A highly educated and trained Heart Surgeon saved my Dad's life about 15 years ago. I was grateful.
And your father's soul?
Who said anything about "The Rule?" My point is there are possibilities for women to further their education for the good of their souls, their families, and society. God calls us in different ways to serve.
BTW: my Father's soul is a work in progress like you, me, any everyone else. What are you trying to do, challenge his Faith because a woman Doctor saved His life by the grace of God? Mighty uppity.
Dad was a seminarian who left because of the garbage that existed even back on the 40's. Obviously, he wasn't meant to be a priest, but, he lives an life as a devoted Catholic and CREDO is his motto. He reads and studies his Vulgate and prayers in Latin, and has been a good Catholic man, husband, and Father. He goes to Confession like every other struggling Catholic and puts his Traditional Catholic pants on like you and everybody else.
I didn't realize a female doctor would cause so much scrutiny and judgement of his soul for allowing an educated woman to be his surgeon.
I am not uncharitable, here - I am not a feminist, either.
People need to answer God's call for worthy service. Indeed, marriage is to beget babies and train souls. If there is no marriage and those people choose a holy life of chaste service, that is not a sin. That service may entail training. Get over it. God's Will be done; NOT our own "superiority". Men and women are not equal; but St. Catherine of Sienna might have a thing or two to say to you men.
-
Clelia,
You say that you are not a Feminist.
You possibly genuinely mean that.
But you have imbibed Feminist principles.
You are simply wrong in some of what you have posted on this thread.
Try to see the truth.
Pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for the grace to see the truth and to accept it.
Pray to God the Holy Ghost for guidance.
I do hope that you come to understand what God really intends for girls and women in life.
God Bless you, Clelia.
I am NOT a feminist!
I went to college in the 70's, and I AGREE that it CAN be a cesspool of filth and erroneous teaching to boot.
YET - the subject here seems to have drifted from the quality of college in general to women not being given the opportunity to answer God's call for her which may not be to marry just anybody at 18. There are schools that are better than others, and good and holy Catholic women have been able to learn to be excellent Catholic nurses, doctors, social workers, AND good mothers and NOT ALL WOMEN WHO GO TO COLLEGE are putting off marriage and family - THAT is the point: not all women loose their souls IF they are fortified with The True Faith and PRAYER. I am not addressing those women who are faint of heart. weak in faith, or have not the True Religion.
You men make it sound like women are not worth educating, rather than give rational caveats and warnings that indeed would be helpful to readers here, instead of one-size pantyhose fits all.
There are the notions of ideal and real. In the real world, not all women find AN ACCEPTABLE MATE either at 18, 20, or 30, if at all, because there are many more pagan jerks walking the earth than good Traditional Catholic Men, like YOU all profess to be.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if there were more men like YOU for a Traditional Catholic young lady to choose from. Otherwise, she must learn to support herself, perhaps help her future husband even if only part-time while raising the children, and maybe she will not find a suitable and loving mate at all. Maybe she will choose to be chaste and not selfish, but serving in her field. Maybe many realities that do not fit your one-way thinking.
What about saints who did not copulate? Or separate like St Nilus and his wife to be married religious after having (at least as far as I can remember reading) two children, one went with him to a monastery, and the other with mom, I believe.
Reality; not idealism.
God Bless you all.
-
BTW: my Father's soul is a work in progress like you, me, any everyone else. What are you trying to do, challenge his Faith because a woman Doctor saved His life by the grace of God? Mighty uppity.
No that was not my point. My point was closer to that of Queen Blanche's famous statement about mortal sin to King St. Louis IX. You said that she saved his life, but my thought was, what about his soul, did she save that? I'd also warn about being uncritical about modern technology and how it is used to upset the natural, creational order.
-
The example of the Good Samaritan shows that it would be up to the injured man to save his own soul; it's not The GS's job.
My Dad is responsible for his own soul. Not the doctor.
BTW: we are using technology right now....
I am outta here - time to snooze.
I shan't return to this discussion - I have to return to my duties as helpmate.
May The Lord Bless and keep you all.
-
BTW: we are using technology right now....
But we can still be critical of it and the effects that it can have on people.
-
True. Anything (and any concept) can be used properly or abused, don't you agree?
Good night, sir.
-
Clelia,
You say that you are not a Feminist.
You possibly genuinely mean that.
But you have imbibed Feminist principles.
You are simply wrong in some of what you have posted on this thread.
Try to see the truth.
Pray to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for the grace to see the truth and to accept it.
Pray to God the Holy Ghost for guidance.
I do hope that you come to understand what God really intends for girls and women in life.
God Bless you, Clelia.
I am NOT a feminist!
I went to college in the 70's, and I AGREE that it CAN be a cesspool of filth and erroneous teaching to boot.
...You men make it sound like women are not worth educating...
God Bless you all.
Dear Clelia,
God Bless you as well.
Women are worth much more than educating in a way that only does harm.
My point was that you have imbibed some of the lies told to you.
I do not disparage women at all.
It is just frustrating that they are being led away from what God has planned for
them by all these lies and
deceptions.
I think you have many good points and I hope that you can iron out the confusion that these liars have instilled
into your soul.
God Bless you, Clelia.
-
Who said anything about "The Rule?" My point is there are possibilities for women to further their education for the good of their souls, their families, and society. God calls us in different ways to serve.
Again, women who intend to marry should not go to college.
Men and women are not equal; but St. Catherine of Sienna might have a thing or two to say to you men.
She'd have a thing or two to say to all the career women out there, I think.
There are schools that are better than others, and good and holy Catholic women have been able to learn to be excellent Catholic nurses, doctors, social workers, AND good mothers and NOT ALL WOMEN WHO GO TO COLLEGE are putting off marriage and family - THAT is the point: not all women loose their souls IF they are fortified with The True Faith and PRAYER.
I personally think the average Catholic woman would be better of marrying at a young age than going to college. Just because she is a good Catholic does not mean she should put herself in such an ocassion of sin. I can say I'm a good Catholic all I want.... wouldn't change the fact that I shouldn't go to a bar, for instance.
You men make it sound like women are not worth educating, rather than give rational caveats and warnings that indeed would be helpful to readers here, instead of one-size pantyhose fits all.
There have been plenty of women (and men) throughout history who received proper education without attending college.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if there were more men like YOU for a Traditional Catholic young lady to choose from. Otherwise, she must learn to support herself, perhaps help her future husband even if only part-time while raising the children, and maybe she will not find a suitable and loving mate at all. Maybe she will choose to be chaste and not selfish, but serving in her field. Maybe many realities that do not fit your one-way thinking.
This is simply an uncharitable ad hominem attack on us for saying women should not go to college. We all know you're not a feminist, but you are unintentionally supporting a view that feminists themselves hold. We're trying to help you realize why that is wrong, not put you down.
-
Clelia, you seem like a kind woman that strives to be a good Catholic, but we are just trying to help you realize that women who intend to marry shouldn't go to college. In fact, college should pretty much be avoided by both men and women, as Spork pointed out on page one of this thread. That's not to say there aren't certain situations where people have to attend, but in general it is an ocassion of sin.
-
I think you guys need to attend courses in reality.
But, getting to know this much about you, being practiced in the art of politely but firmly putting down women and making sure they stay in their place utilizing just the right little slams and labels so we might cry and run away from a discussion that is simply too much for us little women who have been imbibed with liberal ideas has been very enlightening.
Save it for yourselves.
And have a nice day.
-
I think you guys need to attend courses in reality.
But, getting to know this much about you, being practiced in the art of politely but firmly putting down women and making sure they stay in their place utilizing just the right little slams and labels so we might cry and run away from a discussion that is simply too much for us little women who have been imbibed with liberal ideas has been very enlightening.
Save it for yourselves.
And have a nice day.
Clelia, let's talk about the reality today.
1) The reality today is that most young men are treated very badly by most young women, and have fewer opportunities for earning a respectable family wage than before.
2) The reality today is that most young women delay marriage a long time, and are not chaste before marriage. Not just a matter of impure thoughts or bad movies or magazines and novels, but giving themselves to men not their husbands. The excuse given for delaying marriage is that they need "education" and "career" - and that they "have their whole life in front of them" - what's the reality? The reality is that most, at least a plurality of women are interested in the sort of men who will never marry them, but who will use them as harlots.
3) The birth-rate is lower than ever before
4) The rate of illegitimacy is higher than ever before.
5) the rate at which people live in marriage is lower than before
6) the rate of divorce has never been higher.
Men have nothing to gain and only to lose by marrying unchaste women who want a man to take care of them and a baby or two. The laws are absolutely stacked against them.
No respectable man wants the sort of woman who would have rejected him 10 years ago, but now wants him as a meal ticket and as a way to get pregnant. Only a fool will marry a woman like that. And to think there are wicked people trying to shame men into that!
Now these are generalizations. They obviously don't apply to everyone. The idea that women should not go to college is a generalization. It need not apply to everyone.
But it's common sense. What is she doing there?
A young woman who wants to marry is at the peak of her desirability. She only loses desirability as she waits. So why do women wait? Because no man will marry them? That is a rationalization. There are men who will marry them. The men they desire as young women are not the sort of men who will commit to women like that. More often than not. Indeed, it's so bad I think that some of these women will reject a man if they think he's in love with her, whereas when they didn't think that, they sought his attention! Loving a girl has become "creepy"!
-
I think you guys need to attend courses in reality.
You hit the nail on the head. Ignore these fools Clelia; they're known to cause hernias.
-
I sense your frustration.
Remember: I have been talking about good, Traditional Catholic women who have a genuine calling from God to pursue a good and worthy profession or skill to support herself, give back to society, and help her future/present husband when needed, and in a holy and wholesome way.
Many women DO loose their souls in college - but you are not dealing with reality, you are fixated on EVERY WOMAN becoming sinful, unfaithful, selfish, and a libber. You abscond with the conversational topic and keep fixating on 'harlots.'
Maybe the women you are so obsessed with talking about wouldn't have the opportunity to sin so much if men who attended college didn't pursue them for sinful purposes. Maybe it's the men who should not attend college. Are all men who attend college good and faithful married men? Do they not also (as in the case of 'harlots' and other women libbers) put off marriage until they have enough money for a cruise Honeymoon and put off children so they can live a little first? Do not men who go to college become selfish these days and make sure they have all the perks before marriage: new cars? nights out with the boys? their own home first? a promotion first? a raise first? but, who usually sleep with their fiance or live together first, so they will not miss being without a woman around?
Oh golly gee - we could go on.
Should I classify ALL MEN into ONE CATEGORY because there are men around like this?
I agree MEN AND WOMEN can loose their souls in ANY institution: but not if their parents give them The True Faith. These are the ladies I speak of.
I know men at my chapel who are creeps.
Where did that come from???
Pray instead of ragging on all women -- and don't label me falsely, because you refuse to have a conversation but rather insist on being the macho-hammers.
Men and women ought not to sell each other short.
-
You are correct, s2srea.
My husband almost busted a gut laughing after hearing about this last night.
-
I sense your frustration.
Remember: I have been talking about good, Traditional Catholic women who have a genuine calling from God to pursue a good and worthy profession or skill to support herself, give back to society, and help her future/present husband when needed, and in a holy and wholesome way.
Many women DO loose their souls in college - but you are not dealing with reality, you are fixated on EVERY WOMAN becoming sinful, unfaithful, selfish, and a libber. You abscond with the conversational topic and keep fixating on 'harlots.'
Right, and since we're mostly dealing with imbeciles, who have no, or purely negative, experience in dealing with women, or in being the head of a household, nor are they trained to deal with such things, as a priest might, they can not reconcile these ideas. They may remain single forever, and not realize it until its too late.
-
Right, and since we're mostly dealing with imbeciles, who have no, or purely negative, experience in dealing with women, or in being the head of a household, nor are they trained to deal with such things, as a priest might, they can not reconcile these ideas. They may remain single forever, and not realize it until its too late.
I remember a joke years ago from David Steinberg:
"It's like trying to explain cross-street parallel parking to a cranberry."
(Or as in this case, two or three gathered in their own names.)
Well it's really getting old. I threatened to go before, but now I must.
On to better things. I got me some book-larnin' ta do. :reading:
-
Maybe the women you are so obsessed with talking about wouldn't have the opportunity to sin so much if men who attended college didn't pursue them for sinful purposes.
Clelia, this is classic feminist rationalization. There are always going to be such men. What many men in churches discover, to their dismay, that it is precisely such men that women are interested in, whereas devout men who do not wish to seduce them are treated coldly.
Maybe it's the men who should not attend college.
Men as prospective bread-winners have a more legitimate reason to attend college.
Are all men who attend college good and faithful married men?
That men sin doesn't remove the importance of women not sinning. Marriage depends on female chastity more than it does on male chastity. That has always been recognized. Female unchastity is more destructive to marriage because of the possibility of introducing a child not of the husband into the family. It is more destructive because an unchaste woman will find it harder to be faithful to her husband, and because her infidelity will be more likely to destroy the marriage.
Do not men who go to college become selfish these days and make sure they have all the perks before marriage: new cars? nights out with the boys? their own home first? a promotion first? a raise first? but, who usually sleep with their fiance or live together first, so they will not miss being without a woman around?
No one is apologizing for male sin, but the fact is, women are the ones who are not held to account for their sinning. Young women are more promiscuous than young men in this society. Young women are on birth control and when that doesn't work they often resort to abortion. And if they bear their child then a man is on the hook for 18 years of child support, whereas a woman can give the baby away. Women are not being held responsible for their choices. That is why illegitimacy is out of control. It's not men who are forcing women to bear children out of wedlock. It's not men who are initiating most divorces. It's the behavior of women that's changed the most for the worst in the past 50 years, and they're the ones who are going to have to change back to set society right. Men cannot, simply by being virtuous, cause women to be virtuous. Society must hold women to account.
Oh golly gee - we could go on.
Should I classify ALL MEN into ONE CATEGORY because there are men around like this?
Women in fact do make generalizations about men all the time. They generally commit ridiculous fallacies when doing so. One is that they do not even consider men who are not the men they are interested in. So when they say men lie and cheat - they are committing the fallacy of judging all men by the men they give their attention to. And they make generalizations about the men they're not attracted to as well. They call them creepy. The ironic thing is when they go from being attracted to a man, to calling him creepy, simply because of social pressure. It really shows the incredible shallowness of women.
I agree MEN AND WOMEN can loose their souls in ANY institution: but not if their parents give them The True Faith. These are the ladies I speak of.
That is presumptuous. Catholics given the true Faith can lose their souls if they willfully enter occasions of sin. Especially if they enter into an occasion of sin without a legitimate reason: that is sinful in and of itself.
I know men at my chapel who are creeps.
Where did that come from???
How effortlessly you say that. But God forbid a man ever even suggest a chapel has sluts. Women are given a pass to calumniate men in these chapels.
Pray instead of ragging on all women -- and don't label me falsely, because you refuse to have a conversation but rather insist on being the macho-hammers.
Did I label you?
Men and women ought not to sell each other short.
It's the women who are behaving badly these days, more often than not. When men are criticized, they do not bring up the faults of women as an excuse. The family is breaking down because women refuse to submit to their role, and men refuse to impose it on them.
-
I think you guys need to attend courses in reality.
You hit the nail on the head. Ignore these fools Clelia; they're known to cause hernias.
Who are the fools you are refering to? Would that happen to be me, Tele, Sede Catholic, and Carraffa?
The Bible says we aren't supposed to call others fools.
-
I think you guys need to attend courses in reality.
You hit the nail on the head. Ignore these fools Clelia; they're known to cause hernias.
Who are the fools you are refering to? Would that happen to be me, Tele, Sede Catholic, and Carraffa?
The Bible says we aren't supposed to call others fools.
Latins have a different way of following (ie not following) our religion.
-
I think you guys need to attend courses in reality.
You hit the nail on the head. Ignore these fools Clelia; they're known to cause hernias.
Who are the fools you are refering to? Would that happen to be me, Tele, Sede Catholic, and Carraffa?
Well since you've lately taken to eating the cake Tele dishes out lately, yes- you too.
The Bible says we aren't supposed to call others fools.
I shouldn't have used the word fools, thanks for the correction.
-
I think you guys need to attend courses in reality.
No thanks, I will pass on going to some liberal brainwashing college. If a man wants to earn a degree, I think online college courses are the way to go.
-
I think you guys need to attend courses in reality.
You hit the nail on the head. Ignore these fools Clelia; they're known to cause hernias.
Who are the fools you are refering to? Would that happen to be me, Tele, Sede Catholic, and Carraffa?
The Bible says we aren't supposed to call others fools.
the bible is divinely inspired reading not the laws of the church.
-
Well since you've lately taken to eating the cake Tele dishes out lately, yes- you too.
So anyone who agrees with Tele is a fool, huh? I think that is pretty uncharitable. Your statement is also false and ridiculous. My views on feminism actually come from my mother (who is a Traditional Catholic), not Tele. My views on the subject were like this even when Tele and I were rivals.
I must say, s2s, that is a pretty low level to sink to. I wouldn't have expected that from you.
-
I think you guys need to attend courses in reality.
No thanks, I will pass on going to some liberal brainwashing college. If a man wants to earn a degree, I think online college courses are the way to go.
Hobbledehoy, Vladimir, and others here have gone (or will go) to college and turned out okay. I've done both online and traditional schooling; though online courses have vastly improved, they still are not better than sitting in front of a human being. But you must be focused and weary when attending schools today.
-
Well since you've lately taken to eating the cake Tele dishes out lately, yes- you too.
So anyone who agrees with Tele is a fool, huh? I think that is pretty uncharitable.
Are you serious? I think you're turning into Tele. I said on this specific point, yes I would disagree with you. Be careful in how you interpret things, or you'll be just a jacked up as he is.
Your statement is also false and ridiculous. My views on feminism actually come from my mother (who is a Traditional Catholic), not Tele. My views on the subject were like this even when Tele and I were rivals.
I must say, s2s, that is a pretty low level to sink to. I wouldn't have expected that from you.
Reread what I've said, and get that chip off your shoulder.
-
This "discussion" is turning ugly I suggest as good Catholics need to abandon this thread. It is not because anyone is either defeated or bowing out; it is because it is better to stop this anger and make peace and call it a day for the sake of Christ and His holy and Immaculate Mother.
Right or wrong, may we all cool down get some rest here.
I wish Matthew would close this thread for these reasons.
God Bless all.
-
Thanks Clelia I think you're right. I will now leave.
-
You have a chip on your shoulder, obviously. You said I'm "eating the cake Tele dishes out lately", thus that includes me as being a fool. Very, very arrogant and wrong comment to make. Again, my stance on this matter is the same as it was a year ago, when I was criticized on the now in-active Council of Trent forums for making comments about career women.
-
Anyway, I would agree with what Tele, Sede Catholic, and Carraffa have said. s2s is free to disagree with it if he wants, but to accuse others of being fools for holding these beliefs is not moral. I couldn't sleep at night if I did that to someone.
I always defend the truth no matter who it means siding with. I would have agreed with Tele on this particular topic even when we were still rivals. Heck, I publicly agreed with roscoe the other day because he defended Pope Pius IX. If others don't like me for it, too bad. I don't "play the percentages" here. I defend truth.
-
Here is what the Catechism of the Council of Trent says about the duties of husbands and wives:
Duties Of A Husband
It is the duty of the husband to treat his wife generously and honourably. It should not be forgotten that Eve was called by Adam his companion. The woman, he says, whom thou gavest me as a companion. Hence it was, according to the opinion of some of the holy Fathers, that she was formed not from the feet but from the side of man; as, on the other hand, she was not formed from his head, in order to give her to understand that it was not hers to command but to obey her husband.
The husband should also be constantly occupied in some honest pursuit with a view to provide necessaries for the support of his family and to avoid idleness, the root of almost every vice.
He is also to keep all his family in order, to correct their morals, and see that they faithfully discharge their duties.
Duties Of A Wife
On the other hand, the duties of a wife are thus summed up by the Prince of the Apostles: Let wives be subject to their husbands. that if any believe not the word, they may be won without the word by the conversation of the wives, considering your chaste conversation with fear. Let not their adorning be the outward plaiting of the hair, or the wearing of gold, or the putting on of apparel: but the hidden man of the heart in the incorruptibility of a quiet and meek spirit, which is rich in the sight of God. For after this manner heretofore the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling hint lord.
To train their children in the practice of virtue and to pay particular attention to their domestic concerns should also be especial objects of their attention. The wife should love to remain at home, unless compelled by necessity to go out; and she should never presume to leave home without her husband's consent.
Again, and in this the conjugal union chiefly consists, let wives never forget that next to God they are to love their husbands, to esteem them above all others, yielding to them in all things not inconsistent with Christian piety, a willing and ready obedience.
-
The wife should love to remain at home, unless compelled by necessity to go out; and she should never presume to leave home without her husband's consent.
Thank you.
-
Here is what the Catechism of the Council of Trent says about the duties of husbands and wives:
Duties Of A Husband
It is the duty of the husband to treat his wife generously and honourably. It should not be forgotten that Eve was called by Adam his companion. The woman, he says, whom thou gavest me as a companion. Hence it was, according to the opinion of some of the holy Fathers, that she was formed not from the feet but from the side of man; as, on the other hand, she was not formed from his head, in order to give her to understand that it was not hers to command but to obey her husband.
The husband should also be constantly occupied in some honest pursuit with a view to provide necessaries for the support of his family and to avoid idleness, the root of almost every vice.
He is also to keep all his family in order, to correct their morals, and see that they faithfully discharge their duties.
Duties Of A Wife
On the other hand, the duties of a wife are thus summed up by the Prince of the Apostles: Let wives be subject to their husbands. that if any believe not the word, they may be won without the word by the conversation of the wives, considering your chaste conversation with fear. Let not their adorning be the outward plaiting of the hair, or the wearing of gold, or the putting on of apparel: but the hidden man of the heart in the incorruptibility of a quiet and meek spirit, which is rich in the sight of God. For after this manner heretofore the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling hint lord.
To train their children in the practice of virtue and to pay particular attention to their domestic concerns should also be especial objects of their attention. The wife should love to remain at home, unless compelled by necessity to go out; and she should never presume to leave home without her husband's consent.
Again, and in this the conjugal union chiefly consists, let wives never forget that next to God they are to love their husbands, to esteem them above all others, yielding to them in all things not inconsistent with Christian piety, a willing and ready obedience.
This is the mind of the Church.
What a wonderful statement of Catholic teaching.
The beauty and clarity of expression.
The truth which can be found in these words is such a relief.
It is so pure.
Compare that to the anger and trash of Feminism.
-
The Catechism of the Council of Trent is possibly the best summary of Catholic doctrine in a single volume.
The TAN Books edition is not very good. They republished the Frs. Callan & McHugh translation, which is not accurate.
The A.D. 1829 translation by Fr. Donovan is the best translation of the Catechism of the Council of Trent.
Fr. Donovan made three translations of the Catechism of the Council of Trent.
The A.D. 1829 translation was Fr. Donovan's third and final and best translation.
It has been reprinted by the Christian Book Club of America.
I simply cannot recommend it highly enough.
It is one of the most important books that a Catholic can read.
-
It is never necessary to go to University if it means going into debt. But if you are a woman and you have the money to go to University before you are married I think it is the best choice. No husband wants a dumb wife. If a woman is educated she can be of more use to her husband. College also gives women confidence when they know they can finish something that is very difficult. And hopefully enable her to teach her children more effectively. As for her soul- watch out.
I went to college far far away from my parents and was led astray by the freedom school offered. My first year was fine- great in fact- no trouble at all. But that was in a dorm and I was fortunate to have respectable room mates. But in my second year, out of the dorm, I began a decline. I hit bottom on my third year and crawled my way out by the 4th year. I woke up and realised what a few years had done to my soul! I have been recovering ever since.
Saying that- maybe I woud have never been saved if it had not been for my great sins. My parents were Catholic 'LITE' and by the time college came I was only attending Mass twice a year. Oddly enough the begining of my decline in my second year was the begining of my salvation. My room mate that year was a serious Christian and challenged my ways. I set about proving the Bibile wrong and by reading it discovered it was right! But returning to my Catholic roots was far away.
I think I would have been ok if it were not for some of the friends I made. All of which were into trouble before I came along. But I easily fell into their ways wanting to be accepted. After I finished school and was back home with my parents I had several meltdowns which clearly indicated I was damaged. If it were not for a graduation present from my dad's sister of the book 'My Catholic Faith' I may have been lost for ever!
But through the grace and mercy of Gods forgiveness I have been made a strong and faithful Catholic. If it were not for my experience at school and overcoming my problems maybe I would not be so devout.
If I was to give any advice to parents sending their girls off to school it would be to stay in touch. My parents never called me- they did not want to be 'over bearing'. I spoke to them seldom and even asked my mom to call me more!
-
But if you are a woman and you have the money to go to University before you are married I think it is the best choice. No husband wants a dumb wife. If a woman is educated she can be of more use to her husband.
I'm sure there have been plenty of women throughout history who didn't go to college yet weren't dumb.
College also gives women confidence when they know they can finish something that is very difficult.
They could say the samr thing about pregnancy. Also, what you're talking about is self-esteem, which comes from satan. Humility comes from God. If I think to myself "Wow, I can complete something very difficult, I must be one smart person", is that an example of humility or pride? I'm not saying we should only never see any positives about ourselves, but humility does not factor in to what you are saying.
-
But if you are a woman and you have the money to go to University before you are married I think it is the best choice. No husband wants a dumb wife. If a woman is educated she can be of more use to her husband.
I'm sure there have been plenty of women throughout history who didn't go to college yet weren't dumb.
College also gives women confidence when they know they can finish something that is very difficult.
They could say the samr thing about pregnancy. Also, what you're talking about is self-esteem, which comes from satan. Humility comes from God. If I think to myself "Wow, I can complete something very difficult, I must be one smart person", is that an example of humility or pride? I'm not saying we should only never see any positives about ourselves, but humility does not factor in to what you are saying.
Any gifts we have are of not gifts that we possess because of any of our own doing but are gifts given to us by God and we should praise and thank Him for them rather than sing our own praises.
-
Whilst some even in SSPX laugh at him, I do believe Bishop Williamson is one of the few applying common sense on the subject of Women going to college. I'm probably in the camp of those who don't believe women should go to university or wear trousers.
I notice this has not been posted to the thread.Woe to those who refuse to heed His Lordship.His letter makes sense. Common sense.
Girls at University
Girls at University
Emancipation’s Mess of Pottage (Gen. XXV, 29-34)
Winona, September 1, 2001
Dear Friends and Benefactors:
Canadians strike me as a gentle people; but "strike" is the word! Ten yeas ago I was innocently asked in Canada whether women should wear trousers. Some ten weeks ago, also in Canada, I was asked whether a girl should go to a conservative Novus Ordo university. The answer now to the second question may be as stormy as the answer to the first:- because of all kinds of natural reasons, almost no girl should go to any university!
The deep-down reason is the same as for the wrongness of women's trousers: the unwomaning of woman. The deep-down cause in both cases is that Revolutionary man has betrayed modem woman; since she is not respected and loved for being a woman, she tries to make herself a man. Since modem man does not want her to do what God meant her to do, namely to have children, she takes her revenge by invading all kinds of things that man is meant to do. What else was to be expected? Modem man has only himself to blame.
In fact, only in modern times have women dreamt of going to university, but the idea has now become so normal that even Catholics, whose Faith guards Nature, may have difficulty in seeing the problem. However, here is a pointer in the direction of normalcy: any Catholic with the least respect for Tradition recognizes that women should not be priests - can he deny that if few women went to university, almost none would wish to be priests? Alas, women going to university is part of the whole massive onslaught on God's Nature which characterizes our times. That girls should not be in universities flows from the nature of universities and from the nature of girls: true universities are for ideas, ideas are not for true girls, so true universities are not for true girls.
NATURE OF UNIVERSITIES
Let us begin with the true university. As defined by Cardinal Newman in his famous "Idea of a University", it is "a place of teaching universal knowledge". Universities in this sense were a creation of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, and, as the Cardinal splendidly recalls, theology held pride of place there because, as science of the Supreme Being, it is the supreme science which alone can appoint to all other sciences their proper place. So a true university is a place for all-round learning of reality beneath the queenship of Catholic theology. The value of sciences and this need of theirs for theology is why the Catholic Church is always tending to create universities, and why she alone can create true universities, directing all study ultimately to the glory of God and the salvation of souls.
From which, one must question what kind of queenship can be exercised by Novus Ordo theologians, even conservative. Normally, "conservative" Catholics who have left Tradition are in bad faith, so will be bad teachers, while those who have never known Tradition will be ignorant, and so bad teachers. Both will make a point of "rescuing" a damsel in"schismatic" or "excommunicated" distress. Therefore a Traditional girl putting herself under "conservative" teachers will, to keep her Faith, require a special effort to resist the menfolk whom God designed (and her parents paid) her to follow. She will then be voluntarily so setting her true Catholic Faith against her true feminine nature that one or the other is almost bound to suffer.
It also follows from the queenship of Theology that a democratic age like ours, rejecting God and dethroning Theology, will make a nonsense of universities. Sure enough. All around us we see "universities" which are much worse than brothels, because not only does democratic "equality" indiscriminately herd there together all kinds of boys and girls with little or no interest in ideas so that they should not be studying in the first place, but also, by silencing Theology and rendering Philosophy ridiculous, these "universities" corrupt the highest part of the youngsters' nature, their minds, leaving their lower nature with little or no means of resisting the aided and abetted promiscuity of the two young sexes. Survey the waste on any "university" campus today - feckless unmen and trashy unwomen whose noblest activity is throwing frisbees at one another!
Such "universities" dedicated to the defiance of God and Nature, make mincemeat of the youngsters' Faith (if they had any), of their morals and of their common sense. Poor parents. But they have mocked God, and God is not mocked. Obviously no boy, let alone any girl, should be sent to such a "university". What needs to be proved is that even to a decent university, if such could be found, few or no girls should be sent. This is because of the God-given nature of girls. Which, despite today's massive propaganda to the contrary, is quite different from the God-given nature of boys!
NATURE OF GIRLS
For a sane grasp of woman's nature, let me appeal to the Church's Common Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas, distant now by three-quarters of a millennium from our own disturbed times. The three reasons he gives in his Summa Theologiae (2a, 2ae, 177,2) why woman should not teach in Church in public can all be applied to why she should not teach or learn in a public university. Firstly, he says, teaching is for superiors, and women are- not to be superior, but subject, to their men (Gen III,16). Secondly, women stepping up to teach in public can easily inflame men's lust (Ecclus IX,11). Thirdly, "Women are not usually ("communiter") perfect in wisdom".
To grasp these three reasons, let us back up another five millennia, to Adam and Eve. Since the word "nature" comes from the Latin word for "being born", then to study a thing's nature one goes back to its birth. Eve was created by God to be a "help" to Adam (Gen. 11,18). She was to help him, says St Thomas Aquinas elsewhere (1a,92,1), not for any other work than that of generation (or reproduction), because for any other work man could be more suitably helped by another man. It follows that woman's nature is intrinsically geared to motherhood, so that in all things pertaining to motherhood she is man's superior, in all else she is his inferior, and in none of all the things in which the two sexes are complementary are they equal.
Now to attract a man so as to marry and become a mother, to nurture and rear children and to retain their father, she needs superior gifts of feeling and instinct, e.g. sensitivity, delicacy, tact, perspicacity, tenderness, etc. by which her mind will correspondingly be swayed, which is why no husband can understand how the mind of his wife works! For to do the work of generation, i.e. to ensure nothing less than the survival and continuation of mankind, God designed her mind to run on a complementary and different basis from her man's. His mind is designed not to be swayed by feelings but on the contrary to control them, so that while his feelings may be inferior to hers, his reason is superior. And reason being meant to rule in rational beings, then he is natured to rule over her (Gen. III, 16), as can be seen for example whenever she needs to resort to him for her feelings not to get out of control.
Correspondingly, while she senses family (and loves to talk about it), he responds to the world around and wants to master it (Gen II,15,19,20). While she is people-oriented, he is reality-oriented. (How often will a woman pull an idea or a question of reality back to family! - "You're against drink? You're attacking my husband!" This is in woman's nature. One does not mock her for it.) So while she is queen of feeling within the home, he must be king of reason over the home. So while he must love her and listen to her, at the end of the day she must obey him, because he is natured to take the broader view and to be the more reasonable (Eph V 22,25: Col III, 18,19).
FIRST REASON
Now what does a university call for? Whereas in modem "universities" the males all believe in "if it feels good, do it," which is why they are, as they wish, overrun by feeling females, on the contrary in a true university one thinks about universal reality, which is the prerogative of men. A woman can think in this way, or do a good imitation of handling ideas, but then she will not be properly thinking as woman. The dilemma is inescapable: she cannot do what is properly men's thinking or work without cutting across her deepest nature. Did this lawyeress check her hair-do just before coming into court? If she did, she is one distracted lawyer. If she did not, she is one distorted woman.
Moreover, true university thinking tends to produce leaders because true students have pondered on more or less universal reality. Cardinal Newman may argue that the cultivated mind is an end in itself, but if Mother Church has always raised universities, is it not because an elite of all-round minds will in any society powerfully help many souls to get to Heaven, if those minds' studying has been governed over all by the true Faith? But women are neither meant, nor normally gifted, to be leaders! Therefore girls should not be at university. As for a Queen Isabella the Catholic, Spain was her family and she never went to university! Nor did Theresa of Avila, Catherine of Sienna or Joan of Arc.
Concretely, if a girl devotes several years of her youth and much money of her parents to acquiring a university education, especially a decent one, how easily will she submit to her husband, especially if he has not had that education? And how may she not argue with him if he has had it? And if she has a "degree", how will she not think herself above the multiple humiliations of being "barefoot and pregnant"? And if she is a "graduate", how will she not hold-herself superior to being-a “vegetable at the-kitchen-sink"? And if making a family makes her forget in the right kind of way all about "graduating", "degrees" and "university", why go there in the first place? The dilemma is inescapable: in doing manly things like going to a university, either she is merely going through the motions or she is damaging her potential for motherhood - conclusion: she should not go there.
SECOND REASON
We come to St Thomas' second reason: the inflaming of lust. Enough said about today's unibrothels. What will happen if heaps of boys and girls are thrown together with mention of God even forbidden is massive common sense, but that is not the whole story!
Just suppose that a decent girl can find a decent university which is cultivating on a broad front minds of an elite of boys who will provide tomorrows world with its leaders. If she is smart enough to study, will she not be smart enough to know that even if she does not wish to distract the boys, she will still be a distraction? To this reason there is no exception. So if she is that decent, will she not prefer to hang back from distracting the future leaders that she and all her society tomorrow will need? Then the more decent the university, will she not the more keep away? What woman can be imagined taking part in Plato's Dialogues? Not even the Blessed Virgin Mary took part in the Last Supper. Girls at university are a double source of confusion, both doing what girls were not created to do, and distracting the boys from doing what the boys were created to do.
At any true university, the worthwhile students do not want to be distracted by girls. Those are exactly the potential husbands that the really intelligent girls will go after. That is why even really intelligent girls should not be at university.
THIRD REASON
For indeed - St. Thomas's third reason - "women are not usually perfect in wisdom". This is because woman's family-wisdom is priceless, it comes straight from God, but it is as wisdom, because it orders only a part of reality.
Woman's thinking is subjective, inward, intuitive, concrete, small-scale, with a gift for loving details. University thinking needs to be objective, outward, rational, abstract, large-scale, with a drive towards the grand principles. Her thinking follows her heart. University thinking can only follow the head. While a university professor is teaching, the boy will be listening to and learning from the words but the girl will naturally be listening to the man and learning by osmosis. Only by an effort will she listen to the words, because her heart is elsewhere - usually on the boys. Naturally docile and possibly possessed of more than sufficient brains, she can always do a good imitation of a good student, especially if she wishes to please a particular male professor. Nor, again, should she be mocked for that, insofar as God designed her to please and to attract - a husband. Rarely, however, will the impressive studentess be a really good student, because the Lord God simply designed her heart and mind for a quite other task. Girls, do you really want to spend so much of your time and of your parents' money on doing something God almost for sure did not mean you to be doing?
OBJECTIONS
But Pius XII encouraged you to make the best of being forced out into the world? - Maybe he was making the best of an already bad situation in the 1940's and 1950's, when he hoped women would bring to bear their femininity on the public domain. However, by the definitions of "feminine" and "public", that is a contradiction in terms. Fifty years later, who can deny that the public domain has de-feminized, woman? As a friend said, "Women used to have careers open to them only in nursing and teaching, which they did well. Now they no longer know how to do either!"
It is high time for Catholics to buck the current and to buck the world! Europe, center of Christendom, is collapsing, because European girls are all being taught to go to "university" and to "put off' having babies! Woman and family are in desperate crisis - do we want to follow the swine over the cliff?
But men today are unfit to lead, so you have to go to university to take their place? – You cannot take their place!!!! (The exception proves the rule). Today you are merely following them into "universities", tomorrow you will be following them out. By hook or by crook, do something motherly, play your part as God meant you to do, and God can give you back from above the manly leaders and the husband that you pray for and need, but that you cannot by the nature of things wrest to yourselves from below. You cannot restore God's order by breaking it. Get behind your men! Behind, you have an enormous power to inspire and guide. In front, you will merely make them more irresponsible than ever...
But what about the Dominicans' school for girls in Idaho? - As much as St Thomas Aquinas disapproves women teaching in public, he approves their teaching in private, in other words at home, "or in a home-like setting". A university cannot resemble a home, but wise Mothers can keep a girls' secondary school like a home. See the enclosed flyer for an encouragement to support the same Dominican Mothers' primary and secondary schooling in France.
But where will girls' secondary schools find women teachers if no girls go to university? -One needs no university to learn most of what secondary schoolgirls need to be taught, for instance "domestic economy, setting up home, running a house, the care and education of children, the spiritual and social preparation for marriage" - Pius XII's timeless list, to the Union of Catholic Women, June 24, 1949. Of course if the law of the land, as now in France, demands "university" "diplomas" for women to teach or to open girls' schools, then some women's "university" attendance becomes, for the duration of that law, an exceptional necessity. However, exceptions make bad rules!
But what about the co-educational college of the Society of St Pius X at St. Mary's in Kansas? - It is still a family-scale operation, typical of the true Church's drive to teach the true Faith in as much depth as possible amidst difficult circuмstances, but according as it may expand and rise in the future to a truly university level of teaching, I for one piously hope that the boys will by then be giving such a lead and example, creating such a new world, that the girls will no longer feel any need to attend.
But what are girls in the meantime to do, who have a brain and are not ready to get married? - Let them use their brain: firstly, to grasp how God designed them, and for what role; secondly, to pray God He grant us all some men; thirdly, to read at home on their own (for instance Jane Austen, a classic example of how much domestic woman can do); fourthly, to devise with their parents a feminine place and function where they can mature towards marriage. Or - for Heaven's sakes - let them think of a vocation! Old saying: "A woman is once a woman, a nun is twice a woman"!
CONCLUSION
For all these reasons, domestic girls are not by nature for public universities. Where did modern man go wrong?
As man puts himself in the place of God, so this life on earth blocks out of view any after-life in God's Heaven or Hell. Man's pride unchains his inclination to pleasure here below. Self comes first But children - however unconsciously -demand and reward selflessness in their parents. Therefore the children, and the demand, and the reward, most go. But woman's life is natured to center around children. Therefore woman's life in particular becomes empty, as does her home, especially if working conditions take her husband also away. She will inevitably follow him into his domains, eg. university, where she is liable to impose female patterns that do not belong, but that are frustrated at home. She will not let her being remain meaningless!
As this letter has often argued, such a breaking of family, home and woman is too deep a violation of Nature for the modem way of life to be able to survive. With men in the lead, Catholics, whose Faith should give them a handle on Nature, will be wise, according to circuмstances, to take remedial action now. The journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.
Men, think! Give substance to the home! Girls, I bless you, your parents and all dear readers.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
-
Marriage depends on female chastity more than it does on male chastity. That has always been recognized. Female unchastity is more destructive to marriage because of the possibility of introducing a child not of the husband into the family.
And with male unchastity, there's the possibility of introducing a child into someone else's family... But that's not so serious....?
-
It is never necessary to go to University if it means going into debt. But if you are a woman and you have the money to go to University before you are married I think it is the best choice.
Thank you for your story, but I must vehemently disagree with you.
No husband wants a dumb wife. If a woman is educated she can be of more use to her husband.
First off, going to university and being intelligent are two different things, so we can ignore that statement forthwith.
Second, what do you mean by use? A woman with a degree in sociology or literature is arguably of much less use than one who learned to sew and cook etc., and that's without considering the damage done to the 'educated' woman's mind and moral character, which in most cases will greatly subtract from her amenity as a wife and mother.
As for her soul- watch out.
Well, exactly. It's crazy to recommend college to young Catholic women. I even advise young Catholic men to avoid it if possible. How can you recommend it knowing full what it is?
Saying that- maybe I woud have never been saved if it had not been for my great sins. My parents were Catholic 'LITE' and by the time college came I was only attending Mass twice a year. Oddly enough the begining of my decline in my second year was the begining of my salvation. My room mate that year was a serious Christian and challenged my ways. I set about proving the Bibile wrong and by reading it discovered it was right! But returning to my Catholic roots was far away.
I think I would have been ok if it were not for some of the friends I made. All of which were into trouble before I came along. But I easily fell into their ways wanting to be accepted. After I finished school and was back home with my parents I had several meltdowns which clearly indicated I was damaged. If it were not for a graduation present from my dad's sister of the book 'My Catholic Faith' I may have been lost for ever!
But through the grace and mercy of Gods forgiveness I have been made a strong and faithful Catholic. If it were not for my experience at school and overcoming my problems maybe I would not be so devout.
Why are you telling this story in this thread? It comes across as if you're recommending college to girls for the moral and spiritual bankruptcy they can achieve there.
-
Marriage depends on female chastity more than it does on male chastity. That has always been recognized. Female unchastity is more destructive to marriage because of the possibility of introducing a child not of the husband into the family.
And with male unchastity, there's the possibility of introducing a child into someone else's family... But that's not so serious....?
I came back to see if the inhouse expert addressed this but I'm not surprised to see it left alone. Too bad those who are so loud and forceful about leading with words and blows can't be as loud and forceful about leading by example. This hypocrisy that "cads will be cads" while women, well! they need to be punished severely may have been "recognized" all these centuries, but obviously, that didn't work out well or we wouldn't be where we are today. Perhaps it's time for men to quit trying to minimize their sins and lead by example first and foremost. Most women would be more than happy to follow such men.
-
Marriage depends on female chastity more than it does on male chastity. That has always been recognized. Female unchastity is more destructive to marriage because of the possibility of introducing a child not of the husband into the family.
And with male unchastity, there's the possibility of introducing a child into someone else's family... But that's not so serious....?
I came back to see if the inhouse expert addressed this but I'm not surprised to see it left alone.
I don't see everything on this forum wallflower.
St. Thomas Aquinas stated the same thing I did, that the severity of a woman's adultery is greater. Now I wasn't talking about double adultery.
If you have a problem with common sense and logic, like Clare does, and most women do, especially Catholic women with feminist attitudes, then it's not surprising you get offended at the teachings of Catholic saints.
Too bad those who are so loud and forceful about leading with words and blows can't be as loud and forceful about leading by example. This hypocrisy that "cads will be cads"
Yes, they will be, and they always will be to some extent because of the behavior of the women that empower them. The vast majority of men are not ladies men. I'm pretty sure most of us think that seducers should be in a certain amount of peril for their behavior, but the fact of the matter that very seldom happens these days, and that's because women empower them. Your rationalization hamster blames men as a class for feminism, just as your warped mind sees certain men as being highly promiscuous, and and you wish to blame men as a class for that. But men as a class are not to blame for the "success" of highly promiscuous men. Most can do nothing about that. It is the general conduct of women that is to blame for that.
while women, well! they need to be punished severely may have been "recognized" all these centuries, but obviously, that didn't work out well or we wouldn't be where we are today.
hahahaha, we got here because we stopped doing it! It's incredible how women try to reverse responsibility for everything. Feminism is a payback for men holding women responsible, according to wallflower, it's not about the fact that society used to hold women responsible. In fact, if men still held women responsible, there's likely there would be far less complaint about it than there is now, when it doesn't happen.
Perhaps it's time for men to quit trying to minimize their sins and lead by example first and foremost. Most women would be more than happy to follow such men.
lol, it's absolutely laughable when you women say "men need to lead" what you mean is that you're not going to do what you're told. Women today have loose morals, even a large proportion of "Trad" women, and your desire to blame Catholic men for that is positively absurd. If Catholic men are to blame for that, it's for failing to hold women accountable.
-
The vast majority of men are not ladies men. I'm pretty sure most of us think that seducers should be in a certain amount of peril for their behavior, but the fact of the matter that very seldom happens these days, and that's because women empower them.
This is something that no one brings up; it was the feminists who wanted the last of the remaining seduction laws to be either unforced and/or taken off the books.
-
The vast majority of men are not ladies men. I'm pretty sure most of us think that seducers should be in a certain amount of peril for their behavior, but the fact of the matter that very seldom happens these days, and that's because women empower them.
This is something that no one brings up; it was the feminists who wanted the last of the remaining seduction laws to be either unforced and/or taken off the books.
Do you have a source for this? What were the seduction laws about?
-
The vast majority of men are not ladies men. I'm pretty sure most of us think that seducers should be in a certain amount of peril for their behavior, but the fact of the matter that very seldom happens these days, and that's because women empower them.
This is something that no one brings up; it was the feminists who wanted the last of the remaining seduction laws to be either unforced and/or taken off the books.
Caraffa, don't these people understand the irony?
Feminists don't want to get rid of cads. A sociopathic cad at that church would still be there. It's a man who doesn't take advantage, but who believes that women behave honestly and decently that is ostracized and hated.
It's very clear to me when wallflower attacks past society and then blames the current situation on women rebelling against the old system, and talks about "not all tradition is Catholic" etc - that she is very much in favor of the feminist revolution. I really don't think she would approve of any punishment for sins or increased responsibility for women in this society, of any kind.
A lot of these Trad women are fully on board with feminism, it is a lot easier to claim to be seriously against abortion and contraception and premarital sex, than to find people who actually want to do something about it other than put on a show, wear t-shirts, etc.
Someone stated that saying mass outside an abortion clinic was reminiscent of the conquistadores.
Uh, no. The conquistadores utterly smashed the Aztec worship. The last thing the vast majority of the pro-life people will do is to seriously support steps that can lead to the end of legal abortion, just as, in their own private lives, when push comes to shove, there is typically an uspoken acceptance of loose sɛҳuąƖ mores.
I think saying a mass in the presence of murder might well be sacrilegious.
-
correction: but who believes that women should behave honestly and decently who is ostracized and hated.
-
corrections (in reverse order):
Feminism is a payback for men holding women responsible, according to wallflower, it's not about the fact that society used to hold women responsible but then stopped doing it.
Your rationalization hamster blames men as a class for feminism, just as it tries to pin the responsibility on men as a class for the small minority of very "successful" seducers- when it is women in general who are empowering those seducers - women are the ones who are responsible for their "success."
-
The vast majority of men are not ladies men. I'm pretty sure most of us think that seducers should be in a certain amount of peril for their behavior, but the fact of the matter that very seldom happens these days, and that's because women empower them.
This is something that no one brings up; it was the feminists who wanted the last of the remaining seduction laws to be either unforced and/or taken off the books.
Do you have a source for this?
Sure.
"Ironically, it was the first wave of feminists, beginning in the 1930s, who spearheaded the campaign to do away with seduction suits, says Mary Coombs, a legal historian and visiting professor at Boston University School of Law." Chicago Tribune, "Don Juan in Court," Jan 5, 1993.
What were the seduction laws about?
Seduction laws have to do with convincing someone to have illicit sex. The person doing the seducing may have used suasion or promises that they may or may not have intended to keep. A good example of a seduction law is in Scripture from Dueteronomy 22:28-29:
"[28] If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, who is not espoused, and taking her, lie with her, and the matter come to judgment: [29] He that lay with her shall give to the father of the maid fifty sides of silver, and shall have her to wife, because he hath humbled her: he may not put her away all the days of his life."
-
He's right about wallflower. I didn't realize that till lately. :judge:
-
He's right about wallflower. I didn't realize that till lately. :judge:
Wallflower isn't totally wrong. It would help a great deal if men, Catholic men, were more virtuous. If I had been more virtuous I could have won the girl I loved. However, women today very often treat virtuous men badly and reward bad behavior. Under feminism men are hated more for being angry at injustices than women are for committing injustice.
I've heard many people, when excusing the impunity for feminine conduct, speak of "free will" - it reminds me a lot of the talk about "religious freedom" - at some level, there's a secret indifferentism there. As has been said, the ideas of sɛҳuąƖ morality for women have been made into a purely theoretical matter, where judgment for sɛҳuąƖ sin is to have nothing to do with behavior in concrete circuмstances. This is of course absurd, because sɛҳuąƖ sin violates the natural law. Men are who have to raise cuckold children suffer a greater injury than women whose husbands spawn bastards. They are both committing a grave sin, but the first sin is more serious. It is a greater cause for outrage. This is really obvious. But when ideas about sɛҳuąƖ sin becomes merely a theory with no serious influence on behavior because of the fact of bad and presumptuous confessions being commonplace, and the reaction to any real check on the "free will" (ie, impunity for bad conduct) is hysteria, then there is a serious social problem.
-
The last guy I heard about talking about "free will" was talking in relation to abortion. He's an ex-Anglican orthodox married to a feminist with daughters.
How shameful it must be to be married to a feminist. What a sad life that must be.
-
He's right about wallflower. I didn't realize that till lately. :judge:
Wallflower isn't totally wrong. It would help a great deal if men, Catholic men, were more virtuous.
Of course not, that's why I took so long to recognize the feminist influence.
WRT virtue, the issue is that the conservatives have subverted the meaning of manly virtue - now it refers to making women's lives "as pleasant as possible."
I've heard many people, when excusing the impunity for feminine conduct, speak of "free will" - it reminds me a lot of the talk about "religious freedom" - at some level, there's a secret indifferentism there. As has been said, the ideas of sɛҳuąƖ morality for women have been made into a purely theoretical matter, where judgment for sɛҳuąƖ sin is to have nothing to do with behavior in concrete circuмstances. This is of course absurd, because sɛҳuąƖ sin violates the natural law. Men are who have to raise cuckold children suffer a greater injury than women whose husbands spawn bastards. They are both committing a grave sin, but the first sin is more serious. It is a greater cause for outrage. This is really obvious. But when ideas about sɛҳuąƖ sin becomes merely a theory with no serious influence on behavior because of the fact of bad and presumptuous confessions being commonplace, and the reaction to any real check on the "free will" (ie, impunity for bad conduct) is hysteria, then there is a serious social problem.
Yes, they can be sneaky, but eventually the details cease to add up, patterns emerge, and you realize that they really do have a lenient or liberal tendency.
-
Yes, they can be sneaky, but eventually the details cease to add up, patterns emerge, and you realize that they really do have a lenient or liberal tendency.
Yes, and the scary thing is that you begin to realize is the patterns among young Trads are far closer to the norms of 2012 than the norms of 1958, this despite the fact they are often given very sheltered upbringings.
Of course, what was the average age of marriage in the 1950s?
My grandfather married my grandmother within a month of coming home from the war. (Jan 1946) Today people get extremely angry at you if you don't consent to delay marriage for 6 months for a party.
There seems to be more concern about parties than about avoiding sin.
There seems to be more indignation at speaking against drunkenness than there is at drunkenness.
-
Yes, they can be sneaky, but eventually the details cease to add up, patterns emerge, and you realize that they really do have a lenient or liberal tendency.
Yes, and the scary thing is that you begin to realize is the patterns among young Trads are far closer to the norms of 2012 than the norms of 1958, this despite the fact they are often given very sheltered upbringings...
Yes, Tele and Graham, you are onto something important here.
It is often hard even for traditional Catholics to see these trends.
Many simply do not see them.
But patterns can be discerned.
And one of the reasons why things are so lax is that no one now remembers what it was like to live in a society
with a normal moral code.
The evil ideas have been around for a long time, but they only prevailed in the A.D. 1960's.
However, even that is now over half a century ago.
Therefore, only the old actually remember what even a vaguely moral society looked like.
And even they only remember it how it was in the A.D. 1950's, which was still a very wicked society.
But better by a very long way than what exists today.
It is the absence of any concrete example from living memory to look up to, which leaves everyone feeling too
calm about the state of things.
If we had all lived in the twelfth century, and suddenly ended up in modern society, we would be horrified.
And we would all have such a right sense of morality that we would be too ashamed to live openly sinful lives.
One good way to see the true moral stance in any situation is to look at what was held in Catholic Europe in,
for example, A.D. 1200.
Also, to read books written by Catholics saints.
Or even to visit very good traditional Catholic websites such as:
http://www.traditioninaction.org/
which is one of the best sites on the internet.
It is the best website that I am aware of about what the ideal Catholic society could be like.
-
And with male unchastity, there's the possibility of introducing a child into someone else's family... But that's not so serious....?
Just to make it perfectly clear, someone unmarried who would seduce another man's wife is committing a very grievous sin. It is more grievous than the sin of an unmarried woman who would seduce a married man. Both sins, of course, are very grievous, but the severity of the damage caused by the first is greater.
In a marriage, the adultery of the husband with an unmarried woman would be less grievous than the adultery of the wife.
-
If I'd been able to choose the way things worked out in our family, it would look something like this:
I'd have been raised Traditional Catholic and so would my husband.
We would either have been farmers and lived out in the country, fulling self-sustaining....but we would have been within a reasonable distance to a traditional Catholic parish...OR,
We would have lived in a city that had a traditional Catholic parish.
We would have had a large family of homeschooled children. The parish community would provide tons of masses, tons of volunteer activities and tons of clubs and groups to provide myself and my family contact and interaction with fellow traditional Catholics.
Instead we are a small family. I did not become Catholic until after we married (in 1990) and didn't learn about Tradition until around 2002. We moved from a larger city to a tiny town (pop. 1,200) in 1998; and then another slightly larger town "next door" to the first (pop. 3,500) in 2007.
There is only Novus Ordo parishes in this county. Our neighborhood parish is n.o. and is filled with working mothers and publicly schooled kids.
We live in the nearly bankrupted state of California....businesses have failed everywhere .. and very noticeably in our town and in this county,. The ONLY thing going on around here is the schools, some small businesses and the local community college which is very limited in course selection due to lack of funding.
We can't sell our home because we owe more on it than it's "worth" and we can't rent it out because our mortgage is high.
What would you suggest for my daughter in this situation? Our son found his way out of the limitations by joining the fire dept. He's been to Academy, and he's got most of his certifications and his EMT. Only problem? He has yet to find a paying fire fighting job...and he's been applying all around for 2 years.
The local community college and maybe a part-time job, are her only options that I can see at this point to get out of the house. I don't have children for her to help me with ...and other than volunteering at the local church, I can't see any other options for her.
Any thoughts? What would YOU do?
What about crafting for charity? She could take knitting lessons at yarn shop, quilting lessons at a fabric store and so forth. Learning to sew apparel would be useful if she has daughters one day to make them modest dresses. There are so many charity crafting groups both IRL and virutal.
What about volunteering at a local hopsital or nursing home once or twice a week?
-
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading all of this. It is interesting to read all the points of view. I might be a bit biased because I feel my college experience was negative .
I doubt any of my friends have the regrets that I do, but it is a matter of values and life goals. Most of my friends would laugh at my criticism of college for women.
I didn't have a strong desire to go away to school, but I wasn't given much of an option.
I was interested in learning many things (interior design, for example) that could have been achieved at a two year community college, at a much lower cost and without living on campus. It would not have required all the liberal arts courses either. My parents talked me into going away by making a 4 year degree seem like the minimal standard for life success.
Both my parents hold Master's degrees and my mother in particular felt that a 4 year (no matter how generic) was an essential back up even if I learned a trade later.
The main reason young women go to college is to "have fun" and because they're told to do it, and shamed into not doing it. The sad reality is that even the most ostensibly traditional girls end up being drunken party girls - and don't even try to kid us into believing most of them are chaste. The career aspect is clearly secondary for most of them. Indeed, those that intend to marry, but have a career first, are typically going into jobs and displacing would be bread earners when they're at the height of their fertility.
I think this illustrates some real understanding on your part, Telesphorus, as to just vulnerable young women are. Now, I personally was far from traditional when I entered college and was raised with relatively horrible values, however I was clearly way more innocent and naive than most of my college peers. I didn't manage very well and obviously made terrible mistakes. It is my fault, but a feminist society didn't help me much.
To have married at 18-19 would have been healthier for me, but would have unacceptable to family and friends so it is pointless to regret what I never knew was an option.
I will know better for my daughter. Hopefully I can find her a good father to reinforce the values I have for her.
-
Ain't no wimmin gettin no education on MY watch, by cracky!
-
In order to fulfill the holiness that God calls us to, sometimes we have to engage the world in a positive way. A woman who intends to get married may well intend to stay home and take care of the children. But then other factors that were unforseen may intrude. Her husband may take ill. He may die and then she would have no choice but to go out into the world and try to make a living. If she has a good education her chances are better than if she is uneducated.
Also, ther are certain situations in even the most masculine professions in which you cannot do without women. i.e. the guard at a womens prison, police arresting and searching female subjects etc...
Who knows it may be that God calls certain women to fulfill certain functions in society. An educated woman could more likely do it better than an uneducated woman.
-
In order to fulfill the holiness that God calls us to, sometimes we have to engage the world in a positive way. A woman who intends to get married may well intend to stay home and take care of the children. But then other factors that were unforseen may intrude. Her husband may take ill. He may die and then she would have no choice but to go out into the world and try to make a living. If she has a good education her chances are better than if she is uneducated.
Also, ther are certain situations in even the most masculine professions in which you cannot do without women. i.e. the guard at a womens prison, police arresting and searching female subjects etc...
Who knows it may be that God calls certain women to fulfill certain functions in society. An educated woman could more likely do it better than an uneducated woman.
:applause:
-
In order to fulfill the holiness that God calls us to, sometimes we have to engage the world in a positive way. A woman who intends to get married may well intend to stay home and take care of the children. But then other factors that were unforseen may intrude. Her husband may take ill. He may die and then she would have no choice but to go out into the world and try to make a living. If she has a good education her chances are better than if she is uneducated.
Also, ther are certain situations in even the most masculine professions in which you cannot do without women. i.e. the guard at a womens prison, police arresting and searching female subjects etc...
Who knows it may be that God calls certain women to fulfill certain functions in society. An educated woman could more likely do it better than an uneducated woman.
So an 18 year old woman should burden her family and/or herself with years of debt, to attend a university that is at best, promoting conservative NO values both socially and academically, on the off chance her future husband might die? A college degree is not very useful to stay at home moms who aren't using it. A huge time gap on a resume will be a huge disadvantage anyway. It seems like an awfully expensive gamble, both in terms of the moral and financial costs.
Even from a biological standpoint, I have a lot of trouble believing this is what God wants for women who intend to marry.
Just sharing my personal opinion. I don't mean to upset or offend anyone.
-
What are the assumptions of those who believe intelligent (and even average) young women should have a college education, as a matter of course?
1) that a "serious" education requires college.
2) that a successful career requires college education and "socialization"
3) that a wife cannot rely on a husband or life insurance but must have a "back-up" plan
Do I believe these are the true motivations?
No, I don't. I believe the true motivation in the parents and the women is social status, its perqs, and the avoidance of social shaming.
Is that to say there are no young women whose destiny is to be one of intellectual exertion, artistic creation and accomplishment? No, there might be very few who do not wish for marriage, who do not follow that path of seduction by the world, the world of men - but who wish instead to pursue a certain avocation for which they have unusual talents.
But such women are the great exception.
Unfortunately, the way things are now, the parents of every talented young woman thinks she must strive to achieve some high level of accomplishment - and most, in their heart of hearts believe that is more important than being a mother, which they regard as a sacrifice, rather than as a fulfillment.
-
And the investment that goes into the education and employment of women is of course investment that the young men of the community are deprived of. Of course, the "community" now is part of a vast social machine which dissolves the common interests that local families once shared.
Once the community had to invest in the young men, since they were the potential fathers and husbands of the future. Now, the community tries to give meaning to its existence by investing directly in the young women and their careers. The predictable result is the collapse of the birth rate and the breakdown of marriage, and the marginalization of a huge proportion of young men.
There are economic incentives for this, but far more powerful than that is the power of propaganda, which has reshaped values, so family has become a much lower priority, even in those who think of themselves as very conservative, they do not really value their posterity the same way people in the past did.
-
I really feel the need to mention that I do recognize that some people here have personally benefited from the formal education of women, so I hope I am not hurting any feelings by stating my opinion here. Words like “realistic” have been used a lot, so I guess my thoughts are more philosophical and maybe not always practical.
I had a conversation with a priest once (not about this topic specifically, but one from which parallels to this subject could be drawn) and I remember him saying how people are too quick to decide that if something isn’t easily labeled as sinful, we decide it is acceptable, then we decide it is good, and eventually we determine it is right. We want right and wrong to be perfectly tangible, easily identified, and something we can find specifically written about in the Bible or the Catechism. If it isn’t there, we tend to justify it, even if the motivations behind it aren’t really pure, or risks that result are very high.
His point was that we are called sometimes to model our lives after the way things should be, even if it is a bit of an inconvenience to us or it isn’t the most appealing or comfortable option. We have to look beyond what is a sin on the surface, and consider how something might lead to sin, and also, how it squares up with what we do know is truly right from scripture and Catholic doctrine. If we want a Catholic world, shouldn't we live in a way that reflects it?
My thinking is that if ideally women who intend to marry are supposed to end up at home as mothers, then they should try to emulate that role as much as possible, beginning when they are old enough to be married and bear children.
Again, I’m not saying that it is realistic in today’s society, but I am thinking in very basic terms. If we push out all the outside noise and demands and perceived limitations of the world, we can ask, how did God create women? For what purpose did he create them? If we consider the answers to those questions, can we not conclude that an extended adolescence (labeled by the world as personal growth, social experience, life preparedness, a backup plan etc.) works counter to God’s design?
I just do not see a college degree as being worth the cost for women who intend to marry. A person will always be subjected to negative influences because you cannot escape at least some liberal arts (indoctrination to worldly values) courses in college. Judging from facebook posts I’ve read, my peers who went to Catholic colleges have come out more liberal and agnostic than they went in, so I don’t think you can get around anti-Catholic teachings anywhere. The stakes seem very high when a family gambles that their young daughter will be able to navigate through all the inevitable negatives unscathed.
Formal education is not the only way to gain knowledge and grow intellectually. I have a degree, but I am sure from the way I write and communicate, it is pretty hard to tell. I wasn’t blessed with the gift of intelligence, so my time in college might have been four years of applying lipstick to a pig. For other women, the benefit is greater, because college could be an outlet for academic talent, but maybe for her, the risks are even higher. Naturally intelligent women should only be surrounding themselves with knowledge that compliments her faith and values. Otherwise, her intelligence could be used by the devil for very evil purposes. Being book smart does not protect a young woman from corruption and immoral indoctrination. You can’t really get away from that with formal education.
With a few exceptions, most women will obtain a degree that isn’t useful on its own after years of sitting on the shelf. Do we then advocate all mothers work at least part time to keep their resume current in case their husbands die? How much do we alter traditional roles to adapt to modern demands?
If we are really honest, how many women are going to earn a degree and then be willing to set it aside and not use it in order to pursue marriage and family? Most women are not going to study for that long and then think nothing of never actually using it. It is like buying a second home just in case the first one burns down.
Do parents spend all this money really expecting that their daughters may never use the education they have earned, or have they gotten behind the “you can have it all” slogan of the career woman/working mother?
There are many jobs a woman could do out of absolute necessity, that do not require a degree. If she owns a home, opening a daycare is an option. All the domestic skills developed being at home could be used in some way. If we assume that there are as many widowers as there are widows, we could say that ideally, a widow could seek employment doing childcare or house cleaning for a widower.
Yes, it seems unlikely and unrealistic, but I am thinking in terms of how things should be. I am not sure how the world ever gets back to “how things should be” if we refuse to even try. We instead want to adapt, and broaden a path we were told would be narrow.
-
I wasn’t blessed with the gift of intelligence
No, you are very intelligent, and more importantly, very thoughtful, that is obvious.
-
Let's not forget that women going to universities are distracting the men, leveling downward the quality of education while absorbing more resources, and depriving likely more qualified men of seats.
-
I wasn’t blessed with the gift of intelligence
No, you are very intelligent, and more importantly, very thoughtful, that is obvious.
Thank you, Tele.
-
PenitentWoman: So an 18 year old woman should burden her family and/or herself with years of debt ...
I specifically want to address this particular point, as it seems that many/most on this forum associate college with debt.
There are many families out there who do not go into debt to pay for their child/children's college education. I come from such a family; my parents did not take out loans to pay for my college education, my father could easily afford the tuition for the private college I attended.
My own children attended college (one attended a private college) without incurring debt, as my husband easily paid for their tuition. While it is popular to portray "trads" as always having a modest or even low income, that is not always the case.
It is true that college is not *necessary* for a women who is looking at marriage/motherhood as her vocation. But for many women, especially those who are raised in the higher social/income brackets, college is simply viewed as part of the total education package, i.e. it doesn't stop with high school.
Additionally, for women who will marry professional men, college allows these women time to mature a bit more and gain additional social experience before taking on the responsibility such marriages entail. Being a Junior League member, part of the Historical Preservation Society, an adept hostess for your husband's business functions ... these are all positions that women of a certain social class undertake, along with the duties of wife and mother.
Let's not lose sight of the fact that the traditionalist movement was one primarily initiated by intellectuals ... and highly intelligent, educated men do not often marry uneducated/undereducated 18 year old girls.
Choosing a good college may take a little extra time and effort for a traditionalist, but there are many good ones out there, both in the U.S. and overseas. They be out of the financial reach of many, but they do exist.
-
It is true that college is not *necessary* for a women who is looking at marriage/motherhood as her vocation. But for many women, especially those who are raised in the higher social/income brackets, college is simply viewed as part of the total education package, i.e. it doesn't stop with high school.
And why is that? I think you're giving away the game - that college education of women has nothing to do with what's necessary, but strictly a matter of social expectations.
Additionally, for women who will marry professional men, college allows these women time to mature a bit more and gain additional social experience before taking on the responsibility such marriages entail.
Why was it not considered necessary for upper class women in the past to have this "social experience" of the coed college campus?
The difference I've noticed is that most women who've spent time in college are typically puffed up and conceited, with an exaggerated sense of their own knowledge and capacities.
Being a Junior League member, part of the Historical Preservation Society, an adept hostess for your husband's business functions ... these are all positions that women of a certain social class undertake,
So in other words, it's expected as being necessary for the maintenance of social status, whereas it was not at all required of young women historically.
along with the duties of wife and mother.
Which seem far less important by the way you say these things.
-
The difference I've noticed is that most women who've spent time in college are typically puffed up and conceited, with an exaggerated sense of their own knowledge and capacities.
And they tend to be more coarse and shrewish as well. But I guess that's necessary "social experience," in this degenerate society.
-
Let's not lose sight of the fact that the traditionalist movement was one primarily initiated by intellectuals ... and highly intelligent, educated men do not often marry uneducated/undereducated 18 year old girls.
Oh, that was the most important line I wanted to discuss.
What makes you think that? Since when has that been the norm? How many highly intelligent, educated men are in a position to court and marry 18 year old women of a similar class background, without being subjected to serious social disapproval?
In the 1950s the median marriage age for women was a few months past the twentieth birthday. There were plenty of 18 year old women marrying highly intelligent, educated men.
-
Men should never let themselves be deceived by the false pretense that the college education of women is for their benefit. Are there any heroines of great novels that spent four years in college? College effects the intellectual vulgarization of women.
I doubt you will ever find the heroine of a novel to have positively affected by her school education, except insofar as it is mortifying. On the contrary. The mystery and allure of nearly all heroines in literature is nearly always a function of their relative seclusion from the vulgarity of common social life - if not - (as in the case of Natasha Rostova) - it is compensated by youth and very high station.
You find a Thomas Hardy "heroine" in the country for a reason.
Having spent a modest amount of time in social interaction with academics, men and women, I can honestly say that their conversation in areas outside their fields tends to be very much lacking in depth and thoughtfulness. You just do not hear many deep conversations.
College vulgarizes, and in America, the vulgarization, sad to say, is the "social experience" that enables someone to engage in idle chat at social functions.
-
I would say the final test is this:
Can you imagine a saintly woman, a holy woman, entering the modern university as an undergraduate?
-
I agree Tele :) Except college is a danger to men as well as women.
If anyone goes to college, they had better have the defensive posture of Joan of Arc going into battle. They must see it as a necessary evil, and do their utmost to be completely separate from their environment, spiritually and psychologically.
It is hard to say, in the modern world, what is more evil -- Vatican II, the media, the false religions, the workplaces, or the universities. But what is not in doubt, is that the universities and the workplaces, among trads, are the most surreptitious evil. There is a uniformity of thought that they produce which is truly sinister, Russia never had such propaganda, because in Russia people were forced to obey. Here people turn themselves into clones while thinking they're free, and it is the think-tanks that make this possible.
It is clear that these universities, like Novus Ordo seminaries, will squeeze out anyone who thinks against the status quo; does anyone know of even ONE trad Catholic professor? Seriously, I have never heard of any trad Catholic with that job.
Trads also tend to be far too confident that they will not be affected by their workplaces, and too often have corrupting white-collar jobs rather than better blue-collar ones. In general, the higher you rise, the more at risk you are, though there are certain high-powered jobs that aren't dangerous. For instance, a friend's father runs a company that produces baked goods, that isn't dangerous, but working in a high-powered office is dangerous. You are around people who all think the same way, who are immoral, you start to get a worldly mentality, etc. This has been true throughout the history of the Church, but it is worse now, since there isn't even any pretense of Catholicism.
St. Francis wanted nothing to do with his dad's business. Yet many trads today have more in common with St. Francis' dad than with St. Francis. But that has been true throughout the history of the Church, I'd say. Very few seem to be truly poor in spirit.
-
As for women, I see Catholic women who have traces of feminist and worldly mentalities. They would deny it. They can fool themselves, but not those who are more aware. If I were going to marry, I would far rather marry a guileless 18 year old who is a blank slate, then someone who has had their slate covered with filthy graffiti, which I would then have to laboriously attempt to erase, when it is most likely the traces will never really come off.
Even as a pagan I had the good taste to utterly despise university. The combination of arrogant and ignorant professors with slimy, sleazy teens, whose behavior is condoned, was completely disgusting to me even when I was worldly. I was never THAT worldly.
-
In Maria dAgreda's City of God, it mentions that in order to suplement their income, the Blessed Virgin did some work as a seamstress. There was even a point when her work was the sole financial support of the Holy Family.
It should also be noted that when the Blessed Virgin appeared at Fatiima, she told the children that they should go to school and learn to read. In this society, in many circuмstances it is necessary to have a college education in order to function effectively. Also remember that there are some professions that are best done by women. (i.e. gynacology, obstetrics, etc...) It would be inappropriate for a male police officer to conduct a body search of female suspects. While it's ideal for the wife to stay at home, sometimes it is necessary for her to go outside the home in order to supplement teh income, or in some cases she may be the sole source of income for the family. The more educated she is, the better prepared she will be to do what she needs to do to do her part to provide for her family. Remember, marriage is a sacrament. But in a marriage both spouses have to work together as a team. The husband has to respect the wife and the wife has to respect the husband. When they raise their children they teach them to know what is right and what is wrong. That when they grow up they will understand what to do when they encounter situations where sometimes you have to say "no." This is how you give witness to the holiness that is teh Catholic Faith
-
In Maria dAgreda's City of God, it mentions that in order to suplement their income, the Blessed Virgin did some work as a seamstress. There was even a point when her work was the sole financial support of the Holy Family.
It should also be noted that when the Blessed Virgin appeared at Fatiima, she told the children that they should go to school and learn to read. In this society, in many circuмstances it is necessary to have a college education in order to function effectively. Also remember that there are some professions that are best done by women. (i.e. gynacology, obstetrics, etc...) It would be inappropriate for a male police officer to conduct a body search of female suspects. While it's ideal for the wife to stay at home, sometimes it is necessary for her to go outside the home in order to supplement teh income, or in some cases she may be the sole source of income for the family. The more educated she is, the better prepared she will be to do what she needs to do to do her part to provide for her family. Remember, marriage is a sacrament. But in a marriage both spouses have to work together as a team. The husband has to respect the wife and the wife has to respect the husband. When they raise their children they teach them to know what is right and what is wrong. That when they grow up they will understand what to do when they encounter situations where sometimes you have to say "no." This is how you give witness to the holiness that is teh Catholic Faith
Well said.
-
In this society, in many circuмstances it is necessary to have a college education in order to function effectively.
Is it necessary to function effectively, or is it simply something that is required by default? I don't think anyone could claim a high school diploma is necessary to function effectively. In many circuмstances specialized training might be necessary - this is something one might obtain in formal schooling. That being said, it's hardly a general requirement for "effective functioning" in society.
Also remember that there are some professions that are best done by women. (i.e. gynacology, obstetrics, etc...)
According to whom? What was the situation in the past?
It would be inappropriate for a male police officer to conduct a body search of female suspects.
A female gendarme must be college educated?
While it's ideal for the wife to stay at home, sometimes it is necessary for her to go outside the home in order to supplement the income, or in some cases she may be the sole source of income for the family. The more educated she is, the better prepared she will be to do what she needs to do to do her part to provide for her family.
It's not necessarily true that being "better educated" - in the sense of being college educated - will put her in a better position. What is needed is valued skills. The fact that affirmative action and feminism have determined that women must be hired for a large proportion of jobs does not show that time at college is necessary, only that the pro-feminist state is willing to help ensure compensation for women taking such jobs.
Remember, marriage is a sacrament. But in a marriage both spouses have to work together as a team. The husband has to respect the wife and the wife has to respect the husband.
Marriage is a sacrament, which is why the expression "teamwork" isn't the first thing that comes to mind.
When they raise their children they teach them to know what is right and what is wrong. That when they grow up they will understand what to do when they encounter situations where sometimes you have to say "no." This is how you give witness to the holiness that is teh Catholic Faith
Yes, but you don't send your child into a corrupting environment, a proximate occasion of sin, in order to give witness to the Catholic Faith.
-
There are numerous jobs in the world that do not require a college education.
Women should not go to college just because they MIGHT need a degree later in life. She also has no part in providing for her family unless she has no other choice.
-
In Maria dAgreda's City of God, it mentions that in order to suplement their income, the Blessed Virgin did some work as a seamstress. There was even a point when her work was the sole financial support of the Holy Family.
It should also be noted that when the Blessed Virgin appeared at Fatiima, she told the children that they should go to school and learn to read. In this society, in many circuмstances it is necessary to have a college education in order to function effectively. Also remember that there are some professions that are best done by women. (i.e. gynacology, obstetrics, etc...) It would be inappropriate for a male police officer to conduct a body search of female suspects. While it's ideal for the wife to stay at home, sometimes it is necessary for her to go outside the home in order to supplement teh income, or in some cases she may be the sole source of income for the family. The more educated she is, the better prepared she will be to do what she needs to do to do her part to provide for her family. Remember, marriage is a sacrament. But in a marriage both spouses have to work together as a team. The husband has to respect the wife and the wife has to respect the husband. When they raise their children they teach them to know what is right and what is wrong. That when they grow up they will understand what to do when they encounter situations where sometimes you have to say "no." This is how you give witness to the holiness that is teh Catholic Faith
Well said.
We should also note that the Blessed Mother was highly educated having been raised in the Temple.
-
In Maria dAgreda's City of God, it mentions that in order to suplement their income, the Blessed Virgin did some work as a seamstress. There was even a point when her work was the sole financial support of the Holy Family.
It should also be noted that when the Blessed Virgin appeared at Fatiima, she told the children that they should go to school and learn to read. In this society, in many circuмstances it is necessary to have a college education in order to function effectively. Also remember that there are some professions that are best done by women. (i.e. gynacology, obstetrics, etc...) It would be inappropriate for a male police officer to conduct a body search of female suspects. While it's ideal for the wife to stay at home, sometimes it is necessary for her to go outside the home in order to supplement teh income, or in some cases she may be the sole source of income for the family. The mor;e educated she is, the better prepared she will be to do what she needs to do to do her part to provide for her family. Remember, marriage is a sacrament. But in a marriage both spouses have to work together as a team. The husband has to respect the wife and the wife has to respect the husband. When they raise their children they teach them to know what is right and what is wrong. That when they grow up they will understand what to do when they encounter situations where sometimes you have to say "no." This is how you give witness to the holiness that is teh Catholic Faith
Well said.
We should also note that the Blessed Mother was highly educated having been raised in the Temple.[/quote
I'm not sure that you can really compare Blessed Mother's time in the temple, with both parental and divine protection, to a modern day University experience. No one has said women shouldn't be educated.
-
Who would ever have said anything against the Virgin Mary being a seamstress? Did she major in seamstressing at Brown University? I would even say women can go to college to learn other skills if it's necessary, but I get the feeling a lot of people think things are necessary that really aren't.
And now here you are seeing the latent feminism coming out with people demanding that women should be doctors; if that is the case, why did no one suggest this before, when women often had to submit to humiliating experiences with male doctors? Why not say women should be lawyers because only they know how to speak to other women and understand their problems? Or that women should be soldiers so that they can couple up with the men, in order to stop them from raping? You could go anywhere with this logic; and we have gone anywhere and everywhere with it.
I hope I haven't given Tele cause to go to extremes, but I do agree on this point, and always have, that the threat posed by colleges is far underappreciated, and there is a kind of poisonous tentacular aspect to the entirety of modern society that people are far too cavalier about. That is why I also mentioned the workplace.
At CMRI there is what I would call a near-epidemic of subtly inappropriate clothing, sometimes from people who have been sedes for a long time. Priests there may disagree, but that is what I see. Anyone who doesn't see that the world has almost defeated the Church has to be stone-blind. At the same time, locking kids up in a little room doesn't help either, it just makes them more rebellious.
-
Oh... only three thumbs down from the feminists? The more dislikes I receive from liberal feminists, the better, because I know what I'm saying is in line with Chuch teachings. Any feminist who doesn't like it, too bad. Get over it.
-
In Maria dAgreda's City of God
I just bought a biography of Mary of Agreda. Did you know she taught the Faith to the Indians of NM and TX via bilocation? It's a nice little booklet.
-
The husband has to respect the wife and the wife has to respect the husband.
Well maybe I am a patriarchal sexist but in my household my wife and children would abide by MY rules and thinking, not hers.
-
Ah one downvote from the liberal feminists on here, what a shame. :rolleyes:
-
Sorry Trad Guy, I mistakenly thumbed that post down. My apologies.
-
It is true that college is not *necessary* for a women who is looking at marriage/motherhood as her vocation. But for many women, especially those who are raised in the higher social/income brackets, college is simply viewed as part of the total education package, i.e. it doesn't stop with high school.
And why is that? I think you're giving away the game - that college education of women has nothing to do with what's necessary, but strictly a matter of social expectations.
Social class makes a big difference in what is considered "necessary," for men as well as women. A man who is the son of a military officer has different expectations than one who is the son of a farmer.
Additionally, for women who will marry professional men, college allows these women time to mature a bit more and gain additional social experience before taking on the responsibility such marriages entail.
Why was it not considered necessary for upper class women in the past to have this "social experience" of the coed college campus?
As far as I know, co-ed college campuses didn't exist in the past, but higher education did. Simply because the delivery system has changed doesn't mean that the value of education has. And I didn't go to college as a "social experience" in and of itself, but I gained valuable social experience in the process. Don't twist my words to suit your own agenda.
The difference I've noticed is that most women who've spent time in college are typically puffed up and conceited, with an exaggerated sense of their own knowledge and capacities.
So, that's your experience; not necessarily the experience of everyone else. Since you appear to dislike women in general, I'm not surprised by this observation.
Being a Junior League member, part of the Historical Preservation Society, an adept hostess for your husband's business functions ... these are all positions that women of a certain social class undertake,
So in other words, it's expected as being necessary for the maintenance of social status, whereas it was not at all required of young women historically.
I'm not a member of Junior League to maintain my social status, lol. My social status allows me to be a member. Big difference. Women living in the trailer park aren't generally civic-minded or interested in preserving significant historical buildings.
As for what was required of "young women historically" ... well, women have always played a big part in the social fabric of towns/cities, the higher the social/income status the bigger the part. It doesn't take a lot of study to realize how much a part married women contributed to the social/cultural milieu of the past.
along with the duties of wife and mother.
Which seem far less important by the way you say these things.
No, that's the way you decided to translate it. But, again, you appear, at least online, to be a misogynist, so it's understandable.
-
SouthernBelle, as a lowly peasant barmaid on a short break to pump milk for my daughter, I don't have time to respond to your comments in the detail. However I would like to at least tell you that the tone of your post is a bit arrogant and fairly condescending. I admit, I have a poor understanding of the role of class distinction in society. Despite this, I do know that our Lord speaks to the level of difficulty involved with the rich getting to heaven. Because of this, I feel it is might prove to be a blessing that I am poor, as I face enough obstacles to reaching eternal salvation.
God Bless.
-
As for what was required of "young women historically" ... well, women have always played a big part in the social fabric of towns/cities, the higher the social/income status the bigger the part. It doesn't take a lot of study to realize how much a part married women contributed to the social/cultural milieu of the past.
This sounds very feministic.
-
Social class makes a big difference in what is considered "necessary," for men as well as women.
This business of women delaying marriage for the university has very little to do with class (any more than getting a high school diploma does), and everything to do with modern times. In particular, it most has to do with dropping the expectation that a woman is a virgin at marriage.
A man who is the son of a military officer has different expectations than one who is the son of a farmer.
This is amusing, you're trying to justify the modern phenomenon of women attending university with family traditions of agrarian or military families.
I will say something more: you may be from a well-to-do family, but I doubt the fact you entered into college has anything to do with being of a "higher class" as you fancy yourself. That your father was rich and saw college as a path to maintaining social status is probably true: the fact remains it wasn't seen that way in the past. It's seen that way now because of feminism.
This idea of college being part of the "whole package." It's pretty evident it became "necessary" around Vatican II - around the same time that the median age of marriage began steadily moving up - around the time the birth control pill became common.
As far as I know, co-ed college campuses didn't exist in the past, but higher education did.
Was it typical for women, traditionally, in the past, to attend a university before marriage, in any class? The answer is simply no, it was not typical. It might have been more common among some groups of people than among others - it was hardly considered to be something that was indispensable the way it is considered today.
Simply because the delivery system has changed
Except the way education is delivered has everything to do with whether it's an acceptable path for young Catholic maidens. Particularly for chaste and innocent Catholic maidens. The old convent schools and finishing schools of the past have very strict rules.
doesn't mean that the value of education has.
I'm not seeing any value to your education in your posts. What I see is feminist attitude. Education has to have an end. I don't see your education as making you more feminine. Quite the contrary.
And I didn't go to college as a "social experience" in and of itself,
What did you go for? You just said the value of it to you was to assist in social functions.
but I gained valuable social experience in the process. Don't twist my words to suit your own agenda.
It's pretty much a given that "social experience" is the primary motivation for women going to college - not what they learn there. And for many it is "social experience" in the worst sense of the word.
So, that's your experience; not necessarily the experience of everyone else. Since you appear to dislike women in general, I'm not surprised by this observation.
I don't dislike women in general, I do have a strong aversion to the way modern women typically behave. It is a convenient pretext to say I "dislike women in general" to avoid the truth of the observation: college education tends to make vulgar and arrogant women.
I'm not a member of Junior League to maintain my social status, lol.
That's not what I said. I said, in other words, college education allows you to maintain the social status to be a member of the Junior League.
My social status allows me to be a member. Big difference.
And this is why you mentioned going to college, and that's why I said you claim it's necessary to have a college degree for social status that allows you to be a member.
Women living in the trailer park aren't generally civic-minded or interested in preserving significant historical buildings.
So in your mind, women who are beneath you in class, without time in college, are like women in trailer parks? You needed to go to college, because if not you'd be like a woman in a trailer park, rather than a woman interested in conserving old buildings?
As for what was required of "young women historically" ...
Yes, with respect to college education before marriage, what was considered normal?
well, women have always played a big part in the social fabric of towns/cities, the higher the social/income status the bigger the part. It doesn't take a lot of study to realize how much a part married women contributed to the social/cultural milieu of the past.
And that has nothing to do with whether or not it's necessary for women to attend college.
No, that's the way you decided to translate it.
No, it stands to reason that women give college priority to marriage, not because college is necessary for motherhood, but because college is necessary for social status, social status that they feel they cannot have by marrying and having children without college. It is the reality that wherever it is common for women to have college degrees the birth rate is lower. While it may have been unjust to suggest you think college is more important than motherhood, it is a fact that giving college priority to motherhood has necessary implications as to how society places value on these things. The proof that college is not about preparing for motherhood is in the statistics: women college graduates have historically had reduced fertility. If the uneducated now are catching up to them it's only because of a general break-down in marriage among the lower classes.
But, again, you appear, at least online, to be a misogynist, so it's understandable.
A good Catholic with common sense wouldn't send his daughter to a modern university. If you want to call that misogyny, feel free, but I would guess you speak the way you do in large part because of the negative influence so-called "higher education" has had on you.
-
If there were no birth control pill and no safety net and enforced child support for unwed mothers, it would not be a social custom for women to delay marriage for university.
Women today typically delay married life but they do not typically delay their sɛҳuąƖ life until marriage (or at least until they meet a man they intend to marry)
That isn't insulting women - that's a fact. That's how things are now.
And that's the ONLY reason college education of women has become normal, and the reason society insists on women going to college is that society insists on feminist values, with all that entails.
-
Timeline of women's colleges in the United States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_women%27s_colleges_in_the_United_States#First_and_oldest
-
1895: College of Notre Dame of Maryland: First Catholic women's college in the United States to offer the four year baccalaureate degree
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_women%27s_colleges_in_the_United_States#First_and_oldest
-
Timeline of women's colleges in the United States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_women%27s_colleges_in_the_United_States#First_and_oldest
While many women did receive higher education in the past (a tiny proportion compared to today), it was in a far different environment (especially for Catholics) than today.
It was often a very strict and regulated environment.
Even so, the damage caused by higher education on women was noticed a long time ago:
Earliest among the manifestations of this move-
ment was the demand for higher education for
women, a demand which was speedily met. To-day
the college education of women is so abundantly sup-
plied that In 1911-12 72,703 women were in col-
leges in the United States. College training has be-
come not merely respectable but fashionable. Little
trace remains of opposition to college training on the
ground that it is unwomanly. In twenty years the
number of women at college has more than trebled.
This feminine corps of more-or-less Intellectuals has
increased from 20,874 In 1889-90 to 72,703 in
1911-12, a rate of growth double as fast as the
men students' rate of growth.
It is in the circles from which college women come
that the woman's movement has been most pro-
nounced, for Feminism as a cult touches the less In-
tellectual levels of society but lightly. All that is In-
volved in the claims of Feminism, the liberation of
women by making their lives and work approximate
to the lives and work of men, has been attained more
by college graduates than by any other set of women. |
Their lives have been directed consciously according
to the gospel of the woman's movement more than
the lives of their wage-earning sisters in factories
and stores. They have enjoyed that free choice be-
tween domestic and business careers, following upon
the best training and preparation that society af
forded, that free choice which Feminism hopes to
offer to every woman.
When the higher education of women was in dis-
pute its advocates derided the idea that the mother-
hood of women could be prejudicially affected in the
slightest degree by college education. They argued
that maternal instincts were too deep seated and the
joys of motherhood were too much desired to be
modified by any changes of training or environment. [
What are the facts ? When they are quoted they
are usually challenged. Therefore I have taken
them exclusively from the statistical publication of
highest repute and unimpeachable integrity, the offi-
cial journal of the American Statistical Association,
verifying and correcting my statements by correspon-
dence with the writers of the articles, none of whom
is arguing against Feminism.
First, it is now provetl that half the college women
graduates do not marry at all. In an article in the
Journal of the American Statistical Association
(June, 19 14) has been brought together in scientific
fashion all the available^ marriage statistics of the
women graduates of colleges in America. The
I writer concludes her examination as follows: " The
] decade of 1890 to 1899 is undoubtedly the most
fairly representative (as respects marriage rates).
On the one hand, it falls within the epoch which ac-
cepted college education for women and looked upon
it as thoroughly respectable. On the other hand,
the graduates in the latest graduating class (1899)
are now at least thirty-five years of age.
The marriage record of the decade is therefore
fairly complete. The eight colleges graduating
more than one hundred students each during the
decade (Earlham, Swarthmore, Wilson, Indiana,
Vassar, Radcliffe, Wellesley and Bryn Mawr) show
fairly uniform marriage rates. The lowest is Bryn
Mawr, 41.8 per cent. (294 graduates), and the
highest Swarthmore, 58.7 per cent. ( 148 graduates) .
It is probable that the marriage rate for this decade
is fairly representative of the tendency in the mod-
ern women's college world." And, as shown by the
figures for this decade : " The proportion of
women college graduates who marry is approxi-
mately one-half." Possibly a few members of the
latest classes included in the calculation might marry
after the age of thirty-five or thirty-six; but so few
as not to affect the argument.
This conclusion is accepted by women leaders
themselves as indisputable. Miss M. Carey
Thomas, president of Bryn Mawr College, says
" that 50 per cent, of women college graduates
marry and 40 per cent, bear and rear children," ^
a gracious concession on their part to nature and to
society which should, in her opinion, save them from
hostile criticism. To feminists it appears "to be a
matter of astonishment, a claim on man's gratitude,
that one college woman out of two still consents to
marry and two out of five actually bear a child.
. . . .
Next, how many children do those college women
bear, who do have any at all? We know that the
376 women who graduated from Vassar between
1880 and 1889 had, by 19 12, given birth to 348
children and that the 518 women who graduated dur-
ing the same period from Wellesley had given birth
to 427 children, which means less than i child per
graduate in each case, or for every 100 graduates
who married, 167.3 ^"^ 166.1 children, respectively.
Since the youngest of these women would be over 45
years old when the count was made, it is unlikely
that their families will increase. Plainly they have
not been recklessly prolific. They have scorned the
injunction to increase and multiply.
. . . .
That is the central and stupefying fact. Women
college graduates in America bear only two-fifths as
many children in proportion to their number as other
native white American women.
It is not contended that the whole of this differ-
icnce of fertility is due to the woman's movement.
[Other factors operate — social and financial condi-
tions, the desire for luxury, the high standard of liv-
ing, the inability of their natural mates to marry as
young as formerly, the desire to give each child born
the highest training society offers. Can the influ-
ence of these factors be separated and a residuum,
the effect of the woman's movement, be left? Yes.
http://archive.org/stream/feminismitsfall01martgoog/feminismitsfall01martgoog_djvu.txt
The sɛҳuąƖ revolution has had many stages and has been happening for a long time, as has the feminist movement. (It is ongoing, and we are reaching a new stage now, marriage itself is beginning to show cracks like never before.)
The feminist revolution and the sɛҳuąƖ revolution are very closely connected to each other - one could almost say they are just different aspects of the same movement.
Nearly every issue pertaining to feminism has to do with the woman's sex life. That is really what the movement is all about, and that is why abortion is the defining issue of the feminist movement. The goal of opening opportunities for various kinds of achievement for women has always been secondary. Like the argument women should be doctors so only they can examine women, they must be gendarmes for women's prisons (which requires college?) etc, always, the same motivations are at play.
With regard to college, it's important to recognize it first became popular among classes that were already practicing birth control, and the more it was embraced, the more the women in those classes tended to have reduced fertility.
The college education of women as a social norm depends on contraception being a social norm. That is the reality.
-
There's little doubt that the sort of women who entered the university 100 years ago were less likely to be the marrying sort. They were more likely to have had "advanced" morals or be spinsters in training: in any event - the fact remains, the modern trend of women attending university depends on the widespread acceptance of contraception. Women delay marriage because sex has become separated from marriage. That is the the reality, and Catholics who stick their heads in the sand about this are collaborating with the corruption of their own daughters.
-
I have never, ever, encountered anyone who could start with a concept and then take it to a place that has little or nothing to do with the original point.
IOW, ten is a number so monkeys reside in a zoo.
Congratulations.
-
There's little doubt that the sort of women who entered the university 100 years ago were less likely to be the marrying sort. They were more likely to have had "advanced" morals or be spinsters in training: in any event - the fact remains, the modern trend of women attending university depends on the widespread acceptance of contraception. Women delay marriage because sex has become separated from marriage. That is the the reality, and Catholics who stick their heads in the sand about this are collaborating with the corruption of their own daughters.
Are you ever concerned about the inordinate amount of time you spend obsessing about the sɛҳuąƖity of women? It's the flip side of the guy who spends all his time figuring out how he can score. Same coin.
-
Are you ever concerned about the inordinate amount of time you spend obsessing about the sɛҳuąƖity of women?
The not so secret "secret" of feminism is that it's about unchaining women's desires and finding excuses and rationalizations for them.
The biggest rationalization of all is the idea that the current structure of society is about advancing the education of women - when really it's about breaking down the family.
The Alta Vendita conspirators of 19th Century mason said they would destroy Christianity by corrupting women, that they would corrupt women by means of the Church.
With Vatican II that has been accomplished.
If we want to combat "Christian" feminism we need to tear off its prim and proper mask and show what its values are all about.
It's the flip side of the guy who spends all his time figuring out how he can score. Same coin.
You are resorting ad hominem - maybe you're right in part, but every Catholic man has a right to be seriously concerned about his prospects for family life and the prospects for family life for his relatives and sons.
Women today are being corrupted, and femitrads are cooperating with that process by defending feminist values like the social expectation that young women attend coeducational universities.
It's very important for Catholic parents to explicitly recognize that the universality of college coeducation depends on the universality of contraception.
That's why the thread I posted "Trad priests and birth control" is so important. Priests know what is going on. They either resist it, like Bishop Williamson does, explaining the dangers of college education for women, or they secretly condone that if a woman "is going to offend God anyway" that she should use birth control.
-
Catherine, I don't think you realize just how dangerous the atmosphere in a college is, and we're not even talking about the fact that women who intend to marry shouldn't go to college. Even women who intend to stay single can more than likely find a job without a degree.
-
http://williamsonletters.blogspot.com/2009/02/girls-at-university.html
Is there anyone who wishes to debate the points made by Bishop Williamson?
-
Catherine, I don't think you realize just how dangerous the atmosphere in a college is,
I was there many years ago. I know very well the dangers posed, but then again, the world in general is a danger. Did you know that 40% of trad kids leave the Faith (60% in the N.O.)? That was a recent estimate by a Society priest and college isn't necessarily the reason.
We are called to live in the world, not be of it. Anyone who is afraid to leave the house and engage has a bigger problem - a lack of inner spiritual strength. I'm not hiding under my bed cowering in fear.
and we're not even talking about the fact that women who intend to marry shouldn't go to college. Even women who intend to stay single can more than likely find a job without a degree.
No, you can't always and none of my trad priests have ever agreed with you. I've asked them.
Certain fields are more suited to women and require advanced learning. Any man who claims that men can do all the professions common to women over the centuries is a male version of a feminist.
Not every person is meant to go to college. The value of a degree has been cheapened by people who have no business being there other than an extended adolescence. Those individuals are best suited to vocational training. God gave everyone a skill to survive. It's up to us to figure it out and develop it in whatever way necessary.
Men and women think differently, learn differently, and should be educated separately from early on, IMO. The level of education depends on a person's GOD given abilities and inclinations, not anyone else's opinion.
As for marriage, a person can't know whether or when he or she will marry. In the meantime bills need to be paid.
-
It's very important for Catholic parents to explicitly recognize that the universality of college coeducation depends on the universality of contraception.
Did you ever hear of a concept called self control? Chastity? You sound like the feminists who claim people can't control themselves.
-
Did you ever hear of a concept called self control
Ever hear of a concept such as "occasion of sin"?
Self-control first off depends on avoiding unnecessary occasions of temptation.
You can't tell me that women exposed to the culture of a college campus are not being subjected to a severe trial.
You want me to say "oh yes, young women with the right upbringing can control themselves, and will control themselves" - but the facts show otherwise. I'm supposed to believe Trad girls are so different, when nearly everything they say seems to suggest the opposite.
Why does St. Paul say it is better to marry than to burn?
And why do women delay marriage today, but not in the past?
Don't tell me because they're not interested in men, or that they're more interested in learning than in men.
Chastity? You sound like the feminists who claim people can't control themselves.
You need to stop rationalizing. Women are frail creatures, and in the modern coeducational university the results are too often disastrous, and collectively, the results are catastrophic. You are obviously proud of your education, but there are much better things to be proud of.
Trad Catholic parents who send their daughters to such institutions will have much to answer for on the Day of Judgment.
-
Did you ever hear of a concept called self control
Ever hear of a concept such "occasion of sin"?
Self-control first off depends on avoiding unnecessary occasions of temptation.
You can't tell me that women exposed to the culture of a college campus are not being subjected to a severe trial.
You want me to say "oh yes, young women with the right upbringing can control themselves, and will control themselves" - but the facts show otherwise. I'm supposed to believe Trad girls are so different, when nearly everything they say seems to suggest the opposite.
Why does St. Paul say it is better to marry than to burn?
And why do women delay marriage today, but not in the past?
Don't tell me because they're not interested in men, or that they're more interested in learning than in men.
Chastity? You sound like the feminists who claim people can't control themselves.
You need to stop rationalizing. Women are frail creatures, and in the modern coeducational university the results are too often disastrous, and collectively, the are catastrophic. You are obviously proud of your education, but there are much better things to be proud of.
Tele, it's obvious you don't understand women, in particular this woman.
-
I wonder if there is a correlation between the 40% number of those who leave the faith and the rise in the number of girls who go to college.
I guess I just don't understand how a degree could be so highly valued that it is worth the risks associated. It is a fact that statistically, college makes people less religious.For a woman who desires marriage, why gamble?
It was mentioned that in today's world, women might need to help supplement her husband's income. The Proverbs 31 woman seemed to do this, but selling homemade/homegrown goods has never required a degree. To take on a job that requires a degree would likely mean childcare expenses. Also, most college educated women do have school debt... this burdens the budget in the first place.
I think it makes sense to ponder why exactly it is so hard to live on one income in the first place. Some of it is political, a lot can be blamed on materialism, but some of it has to be traced back to feminism. If we can at least admit that feminism has negatively impacted the family in at least some capacity, then shouldn't we consider the possibility we are running in circles for the devil? By promoting the idea that women should earn a degree to supplement income aren't we just perpetuating the problem of why families can't rely on one working parent?
We may be called to live in the world, but certainly we don't send kids to public school "just because" or to help them gain social experience. We shouldn't expose ourselves to immoral media just so we can relate better to the secular world. I don't see women's time away at college as much different, if the desire is to be a wife and mother. I'm just not seeing the logic.
-
I wonder if there is a correlation between the 40% number of those who leave the faith and the rise in the number of girls who go to college
I guess I just don't understand how a degree could be so highly valued that it is worth the risks associated. It is a fact that statistically, college makes people less religious.For a woman who desires marriage, why gamble?
It was mentioned that in today's world, women might need to help supplement her husband's income. The Proverbs 31 woman seemed to do this, but selling homemade/homegrown goods has never required a degree. To take on a job that requires a degree would likely mean childcare expenses. Also, most college educated women do have school debt... this burdens the budget in the first place.
I think it makes sense to ponder why exactly it is so hard to live on one income in the first place. Some of it is political, a lot can be blamed on materialism, but some of it has to be traced back to feminism. If we can at least admit that feminism has negatively impacted the family in at least some capacity, then shouldn't we consider the possibility we are running in circles for the devil? By promoting the idea that women should earn a degree to supplement income aren't we just perpetuating the problem of why families can't rely on one working parent?
We may be called to live in the world, but certainly we don't send kids to public school "just because" or to help them gain social experience. We shouldn't expose ourselves to media just so we can relate better to the secular world. I don't see women's time away at college as much different, if the desire is to be a wife and mother. I'm just not seeing the logic
Trads aren't going to college in great numbers.
-
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what the atmosphere is like at St. Mary's College in Kansas? Thomas Aquinas in Santa Paula? Christendom in VA?
I'd like to hear from someone's actual experience, not projection of bias.
-
I wonder if there is a correlation between the 40% number of those who leave the faith and the rise in the number of girls who go to college
I guess I just don't understand how a degree could be so highly valued that it is worth the risks associated. It is a fact that statistically, college makes people less religious.For a woman who desires marriage, why gamble?
It was mentioned that in today's world, women might need to help supplement her husband's income. The Proverbs 31 woman seemed to do this, but selling homemade/homegrown goods has never required a degree. To take on a job that requires a degree would likely mean childcare expenses. Also, most college educated women do have school debt... this burdens the budget in the first place.
I think it makes sense to ponder why exactly it is so hard to live on one income in the first place. Some of it is political, a lot can be blamed on materialism, but some of it has to be traced back to feminism. If we can at least admit that feminism has negatively impacted the family in at least some capacity, then shouldn't we consider the possibility we are running in circles for the devil? By promoting the idea that women should earn a degree to supplement income aren't we just perpetuating the problem of why families can't rely on one working parent?
We may be called to live in the world, but certainly we don't send kids to public school "just because" or to help them gain social experience. We shouldn't expose ourselves to media just so we can relate better to the secular world. I don't see women's time away at college as much different, if the desire is to be a wife and mother. I'm just not seeing the logic
Trads aren't going to college in great numbers.
But high enough a highly respected Traditional Bishop çhose to write about it, and express opposition to women attending university as a norm?
BTW, I'm feeling a bit guilty for challenging someone to debate the Bishop's opinion. It was really a rhetorical question, not a invite that might provoke an occasion of sin. I apologize if I did that.
-
I wonder if there is a correlation between the 40% number of those who leave the faith and the rise in the number of girls who go to college
I guess I just don't understand how a degree could be so highly valued that it is worth the risks associated. It is a fact that statistically, college makes people less religious.For a woman who desires marriage, why gamble?
It was mentioned that in today's world, women might need to help supplement her husband's income. The Proverbs 31 woman seemed to do this, but selling homemade/homegrown goods has never required a degree. To take on a job that requires a degree would likely mean childcare expenses. Also, most college educated women do have school debt... this burdens the budget in the first place.
I think it makes sense to ponder why exactly it is so hard to live on one income in the first place. Some of it is political, a lot can be blamed on materialism, but some of it has to be traced back to feminism. If we can at least admit that feminism has negatively impacted the family in at least some capacity, then shouldn't we consider the possibility we are running in circles for the devil? By promoting the idea that women should earn a degree to supplement income aren't we just perpetuating the problem of why families can't rely on one working parent?
We may be called to live in the world, but certainly we don't send kids to public school "just because" or to help them gain social experience. We shouldn't expose ourselves to media just so we can relate better to the secular world. I don't see women's time away at college as much different, if the desire is to be a wife and mother. I'm just not seeing the logic
Trads aren't going to college in great numbers.
But high enough a highly respected Traditional Bishop çhose to write about it, and express opposition to women attending university as a norm?
BTW, I'm feeling a bit guilty for challenging someone to debate the Bishop's opinion. It was really a rhetorical question, not a invite that might provoke an occasion of sin. I apologize if I did that.
St. Mary's College in Kansas is a SSPX college. If the Society as a whole condemns higher education then why have a traditional college? They accept men and women. +Williamson's view on women are not mainstream or historical.
Don't forget that long before VII the Church as an institution built the world's greatest universities and yes, women attended. Liberal feminism is irrelevant to the education issue.
-
Ah what a shame. According to some women on here there were no successful societies before 1900, since societies did not recognize rights for women back then. :wink:
In all honesty God made the sexes unequal in talent and ability, since the woman is not endowed with the competitive spirit and self-confidence that men have in this world. And just as in nature where the momma bird builds the nest, that is the role of women.
-
Did you ever hear of a concept called self control? Chastity? You sound like the feminists who claim people can't control themselves.
Hmm I thought feminists say men and marriage are evil, while at the same time telling young women to be "swingers" with the fallback of abortion or "the pill."
-
Are you ever concerned about the inordinate amount of time you spend obsessing about the sɛҳuąƖity of women? It's the flip side of the guy who spends all his time figuring out how he can score. Same coin.
Or the "swinger girl" who wants to "sow her wild oats" at the bars with some one-night stands or cheat on her husband with adultery. Why cannot women be blamed for sɛҳuąƖ sins? What do you think romance novels are for? They are for women what pornography is for men.
-
SouthernBelle, as a lowly peasant barmaid on a short break to pump milk for my daughter, I don't have time to respond to your comments in the detail. However I would like to at least tell you that the tone of your post is a bit arrogant and fairly condescending. I admit, I have a poor understanding of the role of class distinction in society. Despite this, I do know that our Lord speaks to the level of difficulty involved with the rich getting to heaven. Because of this, I feel it is might prove to be a blessing that I am poor, as I face enough obstacles to reaching eternal salvation.
God Bless.
PW don't fret. I am also a working-class man doing a night job, looking for a second job soon. What really irritates me about our college educated, men and women, is they look down on those without degrees and have a contempt for those working-class folks with their over-educated, elitist ideals.
I thank God I'm not like them reading books all day, but instead doing manual labor.
-
Sorry Trad Guy, I mistakenly thumbed that post down. My apologies.
No you're fine.
-
St. Mary's as a college, with all due respect, is not a serious college. It's non-accredited, and just not serious at all as a college. That's not to say there isn't any learning taking place there, but at best it could be seen as a sort of community college for local SSPX people, or an excuse to move to St. Mary's. People who send their children their are doing it out of enthusiasm for the SSPX, not out of practicality.
-
http://williamsonletters.blogspot.com/2009/02/girls-at-university.html
Is there anyone who wishes to debate the points made by Bishop Williamson?
No, because he's right as usual.
And don't miss do read all his letters. They're golden words.
-
I'm utterly shocked how many women hold to the Marxian view that men and women can be equal and the same, considering all of my downvotes. We need more children this day and age, and it seems these women would rather have the "good life." So much for "Traditional" Catholics.
-
Actually though everyone thinks they have the "freedom" and "individualism" to do what they want these days, so no surprise.
-
Not every person is meant to go to college. The value of a degree has been cheapened by people who have no business being there other than an extended adolescence. Those individuals are best suited to vocational training. God gave everyone a skill to survive. It's up to us to figure it out and develop it in whatever way necessary.
No, it's not up to us to "figure it out and develop it in whatever way necessary". We should pray for God's Will, and any woman intending to marry who prays for God's Will knows that her role is always in the home. This is what the Council of Trent, Pope Pius XI, and Pope Pius XII have ALL said, and you have Bishop Williamson backing up our statement about college. You won't be able to find any Church teachings that support the concept that it's ok for women to go to college or work outside the home if they desire. Feminism is built upon the woman's material desires, when what she should desire is the best for her children, and to please God.
-
http://williamsonletters.blogspot.com/2009/02/girls-at-university.html
Is there anyone who wishes to debate the points made by Bishop Williamson?
No, because he's right as usual.
And don't miss do read all his letters. They're golden words.
It's really a privilege to be down-voted for defending Bishop Williamson's words.
And I'm used to that from my rotten Europe. :-)
God save the good Bishop!
-
SouthernBelle, as a lowly peasant barmaid on a short break to pump milk for my daughter, I don't have time to respond to your comments in the detail. However I would like to at least tell you that the tone of your post is a bit arrogant and fairly condescending. I admit, I have a poor understanding of the role of class distinction in society. Despite this, I do know that our Lord speaks to the level of difficulty involved with the rich getting to heaven. Because of this, I feel it is might prove to be a blessing that I am poor, as I face enough obstacles to reaching eternal salvation.
God Bless.
PW don't fret. I am also a working-class man doing a night job, looking for a second job soon. What really irritates me about our college educated, men and women, is they look down on those without degrees and have a contempt for those working-class folks with their over-educated, elitist ideals.
I thank God I'm not like them reading books all day, but instead doing manual labor.
Thank you. I just have moments of exhaustion when I curse my financial status. Not because I desire material things, but just so I know I can pay my rent. Then the Lord finds a good way to remind me that my cross serves a purpose, and we are all blessed in different ways. Lack of money is not the reason I struggle.
Be proud of your occupation.
BTW, have you ever thought about putting this on T-shirt?
Well maybe I am a patriarchal sexist but in my household my wife and children would abide by MY rules and thinking, not hers.
Just kidding! LOL...too much coffee today!
-
Thank you. I just have moments of exhaustion when I curse my financial status. Not because I desire material things, but just so I know I can pay my rent. Then the Lord finds a good way to remind me that my cross serves a purpose, and we are all blessed in different ways. Lack of money is not the reason I struggle.
Be proud of your occupation.
Poverty is a state of mind, not material. One can be poor as dirt but happy about their vocation in life. Think about this: while those who go to college usually lose their faith, those who work hard usually don't (with some exceptions, I work around plenty of white trash who love talking about sex and porn). Being "white trash" has to do with one's moral character, not one's paycheck.
BTW, have you ever thought about putting this on T-shirt?
Ha I don't wear T-shirts unless I'm working or in the house and I don't have anything on them. :P
-
St. Mary's as a college, with all due respect, is not a serious college. It's non-accredited, and just not serious at all as a college. That's not to say there isn't any learning taking place there, but at best it could be seen as a sort of community college for local SSPX people, or an excuse to move to St. Mary's. People who send their children their are doing it out of enthusiasm for the SSPX, not out of practicality.
Thank you Tele. I appreciate the thoughtful reply. What is the social atmosphere like? Is there a semblance of morality in line with Church teachings or is it as bad as secular institutions?
Aquinas in Santa Paula and Christendom in VA take a lot of homeschooled, trad kids. They seem to be trad leaning if not Indult and have a fairly good reputation. I'm wondering about their social atmospheres.
-
You won't be able to find any Church teachings that support the concept that it's ok for women to go to college or work
The first Catholic women's college in the U.S. was built in 1895.
The Jesuits and other orders began building the major universities about a half a century before. If you like I can do the research and find out when they began admitting women.
-
Catherine, I believe those Catholic colleges were meant more for women who intended to stay single. I was actually talking about women who are married or who intended to marry.
But really, considering that most "Catholic" universities are no longer Catholic, and considering a degree is over-rated by the modern world anyway, I wouldn't even advise a woman who did not intend to marry to go to one. If they truly desired a degree, taking online college coruses would be better. And come to think of it, the same could be said for men who wish to obtain degrees.
-
SouthernBelle, as a lowly peasant barmaid on a short break to pump milk for my daughter, I don't have time to respond to your comments in the detail. However I would like to at least tell you that the tone of your post is a bit arrogant and fairly condescending. I admit, I have a poor understanding of the role of class distinction in society. Despite this, I do know that our Lord speaks to the level of difficulty involved with the rich getting to heaven. Because of this, I feel it is might prove to be a blessing that I am poor, as I face enough obstacles to reaching eternal salvation.
God Bless.
PW don't fret. I am also a working-class man doing a night job, looking for a second job soon. What really irritates me about our college educated, men and women, is they look down on those without degrees and have a contempt for those working-class folks with their over-educated, elitist ideals.
I thank God I'm not like them reading books all day, but instead doing manual labor.
I'm currently in the process of renovating a home, and have been away from the computer ... just got back online.
I'll try to reply more to comments about my last post in the coming days, but wanted specifically to reply to what I bolded.
Comments like those are not only sniffy, snarky responses, but are also examples of reverse elitism, as if manual labor and a poor or modest income are in and of themselves more worthy than an educated man who also works hard, though his labor may not be manual. This does not reflect Catholic teaching. A truly Catholic society is hierarchical, and there is as much room for the educated elite as there is for the uneducated manual laborer.
-
Catherine, I believe those Catholic colleges were meant more for women who intended to stay single. I was actually talking about women who are married or who intended to marry.
But really, considering that most "Catholic" universities are no longer Catholic, and considering a degree is over-rated by the modern world anyway, I wouldn't even advise a woman who did not intend to marry to go to one. If they truly desired a degree, taking online college coruses would be better. And come to think of it, the same could be said for men who wish to obtain degrees.
Hijack ;)
Is intending to stay single outside of religious life an option for a Catholic woman?
I've seen this "intend to marry" over and over again on this board and I thought that automatically should be the case unless she is joining a religious community.
-
I've seen this "intend to marry" over and over again on this board and I thought that automatically should be the case unless she is joining a religious community.
What does St. Paul say?
-
Thank you. I just have moments of exhaustion when I curse my financial status. Not because I desire material things, but just so I know I can pay my rent. Then the Lord finds a good way to remind me that my cross serves a purpose, and we are all blessed in different ways. Lack of money is not the reason I struggle.
Be proud of your occupation.
Poverty is a state of mind, not material. One can be poor as dirt but happy about their vocation in life. Think about this: while those who go to college usually lose their faith, those who work hard usually don't (with some exceptions, I work around plenty of white trash who love talking about sex and porn). Being "white trash" has to do with one's moral character, not one's paycheck.
BTW, have you ever thought about putting this on T-shirt?
Ha I don't wear T-shirts unless I'm working or in the house and I don't have anything on them. :P
I agree that people can happy at all economic levels including poverty. I disagree that poverty is state of mind. Hunger, cold, oppression, being unable to afford medical care and suffering with treatable illness, clothing that doesn't fit or falls apart, wages that don't pay enough for basics, being destitute with little realistic opportunity for a better life, the hardships from being on the margin of society, are not states of mind.
I don't know about those who work do not lose their faith. I was exposed to a great deal of immorality and opportunity to sin at work.
-
I've seen this "intend to marry" over and over again on this board and I thought that automatically should be the case unless she is joining a religious community.
I am one who has made this designation in my replies. I guess I do it because not all women are called to marriage, and for these women there might be exceptions regarding her education. I would still say campus life and many course offerings are unsuitable for any woman, but one not planning marriage might be more justified in exploring the pursuit of higher education (like maybe, nursing?) because time at a university isn't such a time waster for her.
I guess I don't know for certain if it is okay for a woman to pursue single life and not become a nun. I will have to read what Paul says on this subject, because I've never noticed before. Perhaps my idea of granting exceptions has feminist undertones. Sometimes I unintentionally find myself being politically correct not to hurt the feelings of others.
I do know that God has always designed women in a way where her fertility begins at a young age. It seems very counter to his perfect design of women that when fertility is fast approaching its peak, society (and even traditional Catholics, apparently) believe a woman should be ignoring her nature and instead immersed only in academic and social pursuits. Even as a young child I always knew I wanted to be a wife and Mom. Maybe I was not the norm, but by the time I could actually physically have a baby, I was already strongly desiring just that. Being able to identify at 13-14 that I wanted to get married and be a mother someday, it would have been best for my soul (and isn't that the ultimate goal?) to begin being focused on learning and living to be a keeper of the home.
I am certainly not saying that girls should be betrothed at menarche, but if the instinctive desire is there, a young girl's education and training should begin to be geared towards becoming a keeper of the home. Young teenage girls are so vulnerable, this is the time their attitudes can still be molded. Parents should be encouraging the correct values and lifestyle, not throwing her into battle (modern high school environments and college) and hoping she has enough spiritual armor to withstand immoral environments. The period of "adolescence" now extends way too far beyond physical puberty, and constantly telling girls they need a period of being "independent" before marriage is just not founded in scripture and teaching. At least not that I can find.
It is a really taboo subject, even though we are really just talking nature. I still remember what my mother said to me when I was little and I told her I was getting married at 16 because that is when Ariel from The Little Mermaid got married. :wink: I guess I've just always wondered why we are called to be fruitful, but then designed to be most fruitful when it is totally unacceptable (to the world) to do so. It seems to me that when women are having to resort to evil science to extend their fertility, it should be a sign that we are pushing too much against our nature. What is the logic in the world saying a young lady is grown up enough at 18 to be sent to live with strangers in a corrupt environment where she must constantly fight for herself, but somehow at this same she is not grown up to have a family? When she would have a husband to protect and guide her against evil, which she does not have at a University? Yes, not everyone can get married right as they become an adult, but a major reason for that is because they don't think it is a possibility and aren't prepared for it. Isn't that an easily fixed problem?
I worry about questioning God's design of women. It hasn't worked out very well so far. Maybe as a convert to tradition I romanticize too much. I've also been told that knowing I wanted a family at a young age was just me making up for having parents that fought all the time and having no siblings. I'd be really surprised though if other young girls didn't think about marriage and babies. I just think it is just how we teach them to alter and suppress such instincts. It was okay to promote lusting after male celebrities at this age, but don't dare associate certain feelings with innate desire for marriage and understanding of personal fertility! Isn't that how the world stopped courting and started "dating" in the modern sense? Separating natural feelings from their true purpose?
As far as college for social enrichment? The point was, that even if different classes have different roles in society, morals do not change. I don't recall reading anything about the purpose and role of women where there is a footnote made that said that wealthy young ladies who want to be wives and mothers should have different moral values than poor women who desire the same thing. That is what this entire discussion was about. Is going to college a good moral choice for young women?
Sorry for long this is. Middle of the night nursing sessions are when I think way too much. =)
-
I'm currently in the process of renovating a home, and have been away from the computer ... just got back online.
I'll try to reply more to comments about my last post in the coming days, but wanted specifically to reply to what I bolded.
Comments like those are not only sniffy, snarky responses, but are also examples of reverse elitism, as if manual labor and a poor or modest income are in and of themselves more worthy than an educated man who also works hard, though his labor may not be manual. This does not reflect Catholic teaching. A truly Catholic society is hierarchical, and there is as much room for the educated elite as there is for the uneducated manual laborer.
Haven't you heard? I am an anti-intellectual. :smile:
I do agree in a hierarchal society, but it is when the higher half of society looks down on the lower half is when I get frustrated. We all need eachother. If there were no manual laborers a store would not be stocked, there would be no construction, etc. And who said I was uneducated? :wink:
-
I agree that people can happy at all economic levels including poverty. I disagree that poverty is state of mind. Hunger, cold, oppression, being unable to afford medical care and suffering with treatable illness, clothing that doesn't fit or falls apart, wages that don't pay enough for basics, being destitute with little realistic opportunity for a better life, the hardships from being on the margin of society, are not states of mind.
I don't know about those who work do not lose their faith. I was exposed to a great deal of immorality and opportunity to sin at work.
Okay I do agree with you in terms of the economy. The way the American economy is set up wages have been falling for decades, and there is no time for family.
-
I still remember what my mother said to me when I was little and I told her I was getting married at 16 because that is when Ariel from The Little Mermaid got married. :wink:
While that is a good thing I wouldn't mention Disney in a positive light. :wink:
-
Comments like those are not only sniffy, snarky responses, but are also examples of reverse elitism, as if manual labor and a poor or modest income are in and of themselves more worthy than an educated man who also works hard, though his labor may not be manual. This does not reflect Catholic teaching. A truly Catholic society is hierarchical, and there is as much room for the educated elite as there is for the uneducated manual laborer.
Oh come on do lighten up. I make fun of everybody. :laugh2:
-
I don't know about those who work do not lose their faith. I was exposed to a great deal of immorality and opportunity to sin at work.
Hence why I said there are definitely some white trash out there in the labor force...
-
I still remember what my mother said to me when I was little and I told her I was getting married at 16 because that is when Ariel from The Little Mermaid got married. :wink:
While that is a good thing I wouldn't mention Disney in a positive light. :wink:
Well I put the wink smiley in for a reason. :wink: It was an example to illustrate that young girls growing up (even in modern homes) get a lot of mixed messages. Snow White married at 15, Sleeping Beauty and Ariel at 16...even in the modern (2010 Tangled movie) Rapunzel married at 18. We grow up seeing this, romanticized and everything, but then are told it is wrong. In fact, completely unacceptable.
So yeah at 7 years old I wasn't able to identify that Ariel was occult, Jєωιѕн, feminist, communist, not a real person...whatever... :laugh1: