So, let's give it a try!
#41
(10-19-2010, 08:30 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: If you really think neglecting your family will help them get to heaven, you are insane and delusional.

LOL...

You obviously have a very special temper. I won't argue.
Reply
#42
(10-19-2010, 08:26 PM)Iolanthe Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 08:17 PM)Walty Wrote: That is the man's job, but it's not his primary job, as if the Church endorsed some kind of utilitarianism or functionalism.  His primary job is to be a spiritual leader of the family.

And I am serious that I would allow my daughter to marry a poor man so long as it wasn't going to endanger her health or anything extreme like that.  There's a difference between laziness and being poor.  One is a vice, the other blessed by the Lord.

It's not his primary job? So he can just disregard it? I think you're wrong. If a man can't provide for a family, he shouldn't get married. This is how it always was. Marriage comes with responsibility.

I suppose you mean endangering her health as in not having health insurance when a baby is born....or, like in the case of a friend of a mine, parents who don't take their kids to the doctor for a check-up so one of them grows up with scoliosis without anyone knowing until it's too late to do anything about it. She'll have a crooked back for the rest of her life, but hey, she'll still get to heaven (possibly) so who cares?

When the father of a family neglects his duties to provide, it hurts those whom it is his primary duty to protect and care for. This is not something minor or optional. You should check your facts.

I said there's a difference between laziness and poverty.  As long as he is doing what he can to take care of his duties as a husband and father what more can you ask?

So do you have some sort of minimal income in mind for guys who you'll let date your daughters?  Will you turn away a good Catholic guy who your daughter loved simply because he makes only $30,000 a year?  What if he's working his arse off and 30k is the best he can do?
Reply
#43
(10-19-2010, 08:37 PM)Walty Wrote: I said there's a difference between laziness and poverty.  As long as he is doing what he can to take care of his duties as a husband and father what more can you ask?

So do you have some sort of minimal income in mind for guys who you'll let date your daughters?  Will you turn away a good Catholic guy who your daughter loved simply because he makes only $30,000 a year?  What if he's working his arse off and 30k is the best he can do?

I don't know. Do you think $30,000 a year can support a family of, say, ten? You tell me.

Laziness is only one factor. Imprudence is another. I personally would not marry a guy who had the attitude that he only had to do the bare minimum to support a family. I would not respect him in any way. I see a lot of traditional Catholics who go the route of "oh, he's a good Catholic so it'll all be fine." And then the family suffers. This is real problem and it bothers me that there is so little emphasis among trads on the husband's duty in this regard. It takes money to run a family; I'm sorry if that offends your spirituality, but it's how it is. I've seen this problem a lot and actually for the first time in my life heard it addressed in a talk on marriage by a traditional priest. He was complaining about people with big families who send their kids to the traditional Catholic school who can't and don't pay the tuition. He said people were getting married before they were ready and having children they couldn't provide for and expecting the Church to help them out. The same thing went on at the trad school I went to. I'm tired of traditional men with endless opinions about women and marriage who can't even do the basic, traditional thing of providing for their families. It's nothing but hypocrisy.

I think it's a little weird that you're talking about some guy "working his arse off" when I'm responding directly to VO's gold-digging jokes and his insistence on marrying a rich woman.
Reply
#44
(10-19-2010, 08:56 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: I think it's a little weird that you're talking about some guy "working his arse off" when I'm responding directly to VO's gold-digging jokes and his insistence on marrying a rich woman.

Something never condemned by Holy Mother Church, thank God.
Reply
#45
(10-19-2010, 08:36 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(10-19-2010, 08:30 PM)Iolanthe Wrote: If you really think neglecting your family will help them get to heaven, you are insane and delusional.

LOL...

You obviously have a very special temper. I won't argue.

I have opinions. If this makes you uncomfortable then you should reconsider marrying a women who will be providing for you--because I'm pretty sure she'll be calling the shots. Not arguing is a good place to start.
Reply
#46
Everybody has opinions, there's nothing particularly special about it. In any case, I already specified what I'm looking for in my application. You can re-read it if you will.

Otherwise, must I interpret your continuous posting in this thread as some sort of search for approval? Your bitterness is rather dainty, I must confess.
Reply
#47
Vetus and Iolathe, sitting in a tree
A-R-G-U-I-N-G!
Reply
#48
(10-19-2010, 09:23 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Everybody has opinions, there's nothing particularly special about it. In any case, I already specified what I'm looking for in my application. You can re-read it if you will.

Otherwise, must I interpret your continuous posting in this thread as some sort of search for approval? Your bitterness is rather dainty, I must confess.

Stop trying to be patronizing. I'm pretty sure that if a woman posted a profile that said she had no intention of doing her duties as a wife and just expected to be waited on her whole life, many people would jump all over her.

Your statements deserve condemnation because they're unCatholic and untraditional. It's the husband's duty to be the financial provider. This is not something I invented and I don't know why you're accusing me of bitterness.
Reply
#49
My "statements deserve condemnation" because they go against your perceived notions of marriage. Nothing I said goes against Church teaching so don't go over the top. It's perfectly possible and legitimate for a man to look for and marry a rich woman.

I'm sorry you're not rich. You can't really blame me for having standards.
Reply
#50
(10-19-2010, 09:44 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: My "statements deserve condemnation" because they go against your perceived notions of marriage. Nothing I said goes against Church teaching so don't go over the top. It's perfectly possible and legitimate for a man to look for and marry a rich woman.

I'm sorry you're not rich. You can't really blame me for having standards.

The Church teaches that the husband must provide for his family. Again, I didn't make this up, nor is it my "perceived notion of marriage."

I'm sorry I'm not rich, too. Probably for different reasons, though.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)