Only a stricter impediment of age would be an objective remedy.
http://whyiamacatholic.com/SSPX/Tissier1.htmThere is no doubt that the delay of marriage today is part of the general trend towards the revolutionary goal of abolishing marriage.
A woman who wants to "settle down" because her "clock is ticking" after having lived a dissolute life, who does not offer her husband a virginal maidenhood, but instead a desperate and baggage-laden pre-menopausal demand for a child and means of support, is not at all an ideal candidate for marriage.
An unnatural delay of marriage is clearly against St. Paul's advice.
It clearly does not help to alleviate concupiscence, which means that the typical man is unable to marry a virginal bride.
It is also well known that delay of marriage on the part of a woman is very harmful to the primary end of marriage: procreation.
Many Catholic women who could find a husband when they are young find themselves increasingly at risk of spinsterhood as they go on in their 20s.
High School and College Education of women has had disastrous effects on the chastity and fecundity of women.
It is absolute madness to suggest that Catholics should marry later to conform to these times of "immaturity."
And yet Bishop Tissier suggests the remedy of an "age impediment." He has also suggested that the age of majority should have been raised instead of lowered!
Such a view is madness and is absolutely in concord with feminism, and absolutely in discord with Catholicism.
In the late 18th Century, when anti-Christian enlightened despotism was making its mark on Spain, there was an attempt by the state to suppress the liberties of young Catholics seeking a spouse:
As we can see, what Tissier speaks of is exactly what the anti-Christian masonic despots wanted:
Delay of marriage and parental control of marriage.
That is not Catholic.