Excellent post.  A topic worth considering.  

There are so many falsehoods in modern society that people take for granted as being true.

Canon law states a male can marry at 16 and a female at 14.

I also find it interesting Fr. Faber would suggest that. Cant say I agree. I wonder why he sets this arbitrary standard of 20 years.

A tiny percentage of people back then graduated from high school (about 6%). So people were around 15-17 years of age when they were finished with formal education. I see no good reason why it is necessary for girls to wait three to five years to "seriously" consider marriage. They have their peak social status around 16-18. They are just about physically  and mentally done growing about the end of their seventeenth year. Men however take until their early to mid-twenties to fully develop. This is the reason why male brains are 10% larger than female brains. http://www.webmd.com/brain/features/how-male-female-brains-differ      A college age male (18+) is still maturing mentally and physically.

If we on Cathinfo (which most do) believe women should stay out of college, why should the woman wait until 20 to seriously consider marriage? What if it takes her a couple of years to find a husband? She will be married at 23 after a year long courtship. That's 5-6 years she could waste on whatever Fr. Faber is suggesting she do until she is 20. That could be three potential saints that never were! I cannot agree with Father's recommendation.

Didn't The Little Flower enter the Carmelite convent at age 15? If she can do that, I see no reason why most girls can't be brides by 17-18.

I'll give you the fact that Faber wrote the book in the early 1900s when communism, feminism, and modernism had solidified into powerful forces into the world and did quite a bit of damage. And as the topic of this thread suggests, the concept of adolescence solidified and probably encouraged parents to slow down the maturation process of their children. So it is possible that he witnessed the young girls at his parish mature slower over the years. I did not read the book and know his specific reasoning.

Be that as it may, I still find the year 20 an ungrounded arbitrary standard. If most girls ended their formal education at ages 15-17 back in 1907, if they were fairly well behaved girls, why did they have to grow 3-5 years in holiness until they were ready. Why not grow 10 years in holiness and wait until they were 25-27? They could still have 5+ children if they marry at 27.

Of course, just because you are ready to get married and God calls you to get married does not mean you will find a spouse within 2 years or even ever. With half the country unmarried, you are not guaranteed a spouse even if you truly desire it and follow the will of God. Telling a 17 year old to wait until 20 may force her to miss a golden once in a lifetime opportunity to follow God's will.

My point is that the Canon Law ruling is not just a moral standard but should also be viewed as a valiant goal to set for parents and the children to be ready at 14 (girls) or (16). There is no reason why anyone's overall human development should be unnecessarily delayed.

Couldn't he take it on a case-by-case basis instead of trying to update the unofficial cultural laws of the church in the United States?

The reason I mentioned St. Therese of Liseux is because she is an extraordinary model of holiness at 15. The religious life is objectively more perfect and thus more difficult. This is not to suggest marriage is imperfect and so much easier. But if she received this dispensation at 15 for a religious vocation, it can be reasonably assessed that a similar model of holiness in girls called to marriage can be reached with another year or two (age 16-17) with proper direction while Fr. Faber seems to suggest 5 years (age 20).

I'll give you the fact that Faber wrote the book in the early 1900s when communism, feminism, and modernism had solidified into powerful forces into the world and did quite a bit of damage. And as the topic of this thread suggests, the concept of adolescence solidified and probably encouraged parents to slow down the maturation process of their children. So it is possible that he witnessed the young girls at his parish mature slower over the years. I did not read the book and know his specific reasoning.

Be that as it may, I still find the year 20 an ungrounded arbitrary standard. If most girls ended their formal education at ages 15-17 back in 1907, if they were fairly well behaved girls, why did they have to grow 3-5 years in holiness until they were ready. Why not grow 10 years in holiness and wait until they were 25-27? They could still have 5+ children if they marry at 27.

Of course, just because you are ready to get married and God calls you to get married does not mean you will find a spouse within 2 years or even ever. With half the country unmarried, you are not guaranteed a spouse even if you truly desire it and follow the will of God. Telling a 17 year old to wait until 20 may force her to miss a golden once in a lifetime opportunity to follow God's will.

My point is that the Canon Law ruling is not just a moral standard but should also be viewed as a valiant goal to set for parents and the children to be ready at 14 (girls) or (16). There is no reason why anyone's overall human development should be unnecessarily delayed.

Couldn't he take it on a case-by-case basis instead of trying to update the unofficial cultural laws of the church in the United States?

The reason I mentioned St. Therese of Liseux is because she is an extraordinary model of holiness at 15. The religious life is objectively more perfect and thus more difficult. This is not to suggest marriage is imperfect and so much easier. But if she received this dispensation at 15 for a religious vocation, it can be reasonably assessed that a similar model of holiness in girls called to marriage can be reached with another year or two (age 16-17) with proper direction while Fr. Faber seems to suggest 5 years (age 20).

I am guessing that Father Faber was trying to set some basic guidelines for girls to follow and protect them from entering too hurriedly into a marriage and regretting it afterwards, just as the Church set basic guidelines for entering the convent.  There are of course always exceptions depending on a persons sanctity and maturity.  :-)

Canon law states a male can marry at 16 and a female at 14.

I also find it interesting Fr. Faber would suggest that. Cant say I agree. I wonder why he sets this arbitrary standard of 20 years.

A tiny percentage of people back then graduated from high school (about 6%). So people were around 15-17 years of age when they were finished with formal education. I see no good reason why it is necessary for girls to wait three to five years to "seriously" consider marriage. They have their peak social status around 16-18. They are just about physically  and mentally done growing about the end of their seventeenth year. Men however take until their early to mid-twenties to fully develop. This is the reason why male brains are 10% larger than female brains. http://www.webmd.com/brain/features/how-male-female-brains-differ      A college age male (18+) is still maturing mentally and physically.

If we on Cathinfo (which most do) believe women should stay out of college, why should the woman wait until 20 to seriously consider marriage? What if it takes her a couple of years to find a husband? She will be married at 23 after a year long courtship. That's 5-6 years she could waste on whatever Fr. Faber is suggesting she do until she is 20. That could be three potential saints that never were! I cannot agree with Father's recommendation.

Didn't The Little Flower enter the Carmelite convent at age 15? If she can do that, I see no reason why most girls can't be brides by 17-18.

I like the part about men's brains being bigger