Catholic Candle note: This is a
“companion” article to these two articles:
❖ The one
regarding men being more blamable than women or children for the ongoing
destruction in civil society and in the human element of the Catholic Church.
That other article is entitled: The Crisis in Society is Caused by Unmanly
Men, and can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/07/22/the-crisis-in-society-is-caused-by-unmanly-men/
❖ The article entitled:
The False Principle of “Diversity and Inclusion”: https://catholiccandle.org/2022/01/05/the-false-principle-of-diversity-and-inclusion/
God created man to lead his family and
society. He created the all-male clergy to lead the Church. But in all of
those contexts, God gave this role and authority to man for the good of his
family, society, and the Church, not merely to enable a man to fulfill his own
selfish desires.
St. Paul puts this same duty as follows:
We that are
stronger, ought to bear the infirmities of the weak.
Romans, 15:1.
From this principle (which is a
commandment) springs the unselfish gentlemanliness of a good man towards his
family and also, secondarily, towards all women, children, and all those in
need.
St. Paul explains how this true manliness is practiced in
marriage, when he compares the husband to Christ Himself:
The husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the
Church.
Ephesians, 5:23.
We know that Christ has loved us and gave everything
for our sake:
Walk in love, as Christ also hath loved
us, and hath delivered Himself for us, an oblation and a sacrifice to God for
an odor of sweetness.
Ephesians, 5:2.
Thus, a man must be Christ-like and be
an oblation and a sacrifice first of all, for God, then for his wife and children.
But after that, he must be a gentleman and be chivalrous for all women,
children, and all those in need because:
We that are
stronger, ought to bear the infirmities of the weak.
Romans, 15:1.
A man’s sacrificial love must extend to a man “delivering
himself up for” his wife especially, in order to sanctify his wife, as St. Paul
makes clear:
Husbands, love your wives, as
Christ also loved the church, and delivered Himself up for it; that He
might sanctify it, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of
life.
Ephesians, 5:25-6.
This shows that man must be a spiritual director of
his wife.
But this also shows that a man must have Christ’s spirit of self-sacrifice and
this is eminently honorable, magnanimous, and manly.
Fatherhood and Manhood
Fatherhood and manhood are so intertwined that they are
virtually inseparable. This is like the inextricable connection between
womanhood and motherhood.
A man who is not called to be the father to children in his own family, is
still called to be a father in other ways, e.g., a priest, who is the
spiritual father of a parish. There are also many other ways a man is called
to be a father, a protector, an advisor, and a guide, such as an employer
should be a father to his employees.
So, fatherhood (patriarchy) is simply men fulfilling the
role for which God created them and which role is His Will for them. Here is
how anti-feminist author, Mrs. Donna Steichen, stated this truth of Nature and
of the Catholic Faith:
The term patriarchy refers to the
male-headed family form and social system expressed in Scripture and existing
everywhere in human society. In the Church, it is a title referring to bishops
who rank just below the Pope in jurisdiction, though Catholic feminists use the
word to mean the male priesthood and the entire male hierarchy. In all
cases, it is properly an office, not a declaration of qualitative superiority.
St. Athanasius, a Model of Fatherhood
We see this fatherhood in the life and work of the great St.
Athanasius, Doctor of the Church, in his care for his flock. Look at his
fatherly solicitude for his flock in the letter below, written during the
persecutions they suffered:
Letter of St. Athanasius to his
flock
May God console you! … What
saddens you … is the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence,
while during this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the
premises – but you have the apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but
they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but
the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the
place or the Faith? The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won
in this struggle – the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the
Faith?
True, the premises are good when
the apostolic Faith is preached there; they are holy if everything takes place
there in a holy way. … You are the ones who are happy: you who remain within
the church by your faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which
has come down to you from apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy
has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are
the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis.
No one, ever, will prevail against
your faith, beloved brothers. And we believe that God will give us our
churches back some day.
Thus, the more violently they try
to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the
Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are
the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray.
Even if Catholics faithful to
Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church
of Jesus Christ.
The Selfless Duty of a Man Corresponds to the Duty of
Obedience of Those under His Care.
We saw above that God made man to be the leader of his
family and made man to lead society and the Church. Along with this God-given
role, God made man with the obligation to unselfishly fulfill his role for the
good of those under his care. This is the natural and supernatural source of
the gentlemanliness and fatherliness that God intends to be part of manhood and
to be exercised by men everywhere.
So just as God made parents to be wiser than the children
whom they are raising and to be well-suited for directing their children, so
God gave parents the corresponding duty to selflessly raise those children and
to govern their children for the good of those children, rather than for any
selfish advantage of the parents.
Because God made the father and the mother wiser and
well-suited to direct their children, He declared that children have the
corresponding obligation to the parents to be subject to them. Thus, God
commands children:
Honor thy father and thy mother.
Exodus, 20:12.
So, we see that God requires the parents’ efforts to
selflessly raise their children and requires the corresponding obedience of the
children to enable the success of those efforts.
Analogously, just as God made man to be wiser than woman and
to be adept at guiding her, so God gave man the duty to guide his wife
selflessly and to govern her for her own good, rather than for any selfish
advantage to himself.
As God requires the man’s diligent efforts to guide his
wife, so God requires the obedience of the wife in a way analogous to the way
that God requires the obedience of the children to both parents. Thus, God
commands:
Let women be subject to their
husbands, as to the Lord.
Ephesians, 5:22.
With children obeying their parents and with wives obeying
their husbands, we see the orderliness and harmony of God’s All-Wise Plan.
Further Reflections on the Connection between a Man’s Duty to Selflessly Guide
and His Wife’s Duty to Diligently Obey
St. John Chrysostom shows the orderliness and concord of
God’s plan (i.e., the man’s selfless governing and the wife’s careful
obedience), in these words addressed to each man:
Govern your wife, and thus
will the whole house be in harmony. Hear what St. Paul says. ‘And if
they [wives] would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home’ [1
Cor. 14:35].
St. Paul shows a man’s selfless governing of his wife must
be Christlike just as her diligent obedience to her husband must be like the
obedience of the Church to Christ:
Wives, be in subjection unto your
own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as
Christ also is the head of the Church: being Himself the Savior of the body.
But as the Church is subject to Christ, so let the wives also be to their
husbands in everything.
Ephesians, 5:22-24.
The Obedience We Must Give to Those Whom God Places over Us Is Not Vexing
Some women, with a less womanly (and more tom-boyish or
manly) spirit, might dislike the truth that they must obey their husbands. But
women should no more be saddened by the Catholic Faith (and true philosophy – i.e.,
reason) telling them to obey their husbands, than children should be saddened
to obey their parents raising them.
Similarly, laymen should not be saddened or minimize the
obedience that God willed that they give to their priests and to the hierarchy
throughout the entire history of the Church. To be saddened or to minimize the
obedience we owe, shows an imperfect spirit and stinginess with God – just as (analogously)
being saddened by the approach of Lent with its obligations of greater penance.
How happy and attractive is the willing obedience of
children to their parents and students to their teachers! How happy and
attractive is willing obedience of wives to their husbands, of laymen to the
Church authorities, and of citizens to the rulers God has given to them!
This Duty of a Man to Govern Well and the Duty of Obedience of those under
his Care, Show the Orderliness of God’s Creation and His All-Wise Plan
God does everything is a way which is most orderly and
perfect. Let us look at what is required for this orderliness.
Difference is the basis for the order in things. If there
were no differences between things, there could be no order between them. The
very idea of order includes within it the concept of priority and of
posteriority, and hence, of difference and inequality. In fact, that very
separateness, i.e., the distinctions among things, is the principle of
all order.
Summa, IIa IIae, Q.26, a.1 respondeo.
God makes creatures unequal.
God made difference and inequality in all creatures. As Ecclesiasticus
teaches:
Why does one day excel another, and
one light another, and one year another year…? By the knowledge of the Lord,
they were distinguished.
Ecclesiasticus, Ch. 33, vv. 7-8.
Therefore, just as God’s Wisdom is the cause of His making
all creatures, so His Wisdom is the cause of Him making creatures unequal.
Here is St. Thomas Aquinas’ fuller explanation of this
truth:
[I]t must be said that as the
wisdom of God is the cause of the distinction of things, so the same wisdom is
the cause of their inequality. This may be explained as follows. A
twofold distinction is found in things; one is a formal distinction as regards
things differing specifically; the other is a material distinction as regards
things differing numerically only. And as the matter is on account of the
form, material distinction exists for the sake of the formal distinction.
Hence, we see that in incorruptible things there is only one individual of each
species, forasmuch as the species is sufficiently preserved in the one; whereas
in things generated and corruptible there are many individuals of one species
for the preservation of the species. Whence it appears that formal distinction
is of greater consequence than material. Now, formal distinction always
requires inequality, because as the Philosopher says (Metaph. viii, 10), the
forms of things are like numbers in which species vary by addition or
subtraction of unity. Hence, in natural things species seem to be arranged in
degrees; as the mixed things are more perfect than the elements, and plants
than minerals, and animals than plants, and men than other animals; and in each
of these, one species is more perfect than others. Therefore, as the divine
wisdom is the cause of the distinction of things for the sake of the perfection
of the universe, so it is the cause of inequality. For the universe would not
be perfect if only one grade of goodness were found in things.
Summa, Ia, Q.47, a.2 respondeo (emphasis
added).
By making some creatures inferior to other creatures, the
whole of creation is more perfect than it otherwise would be.
Here is St. Thomas Aquinas’ fuller explanation of this
truth:
It is part of the best agent to
produce an effect which is best in its entirety; but this does not mean that He
makes every part of the whole the best absolutely, but in proportion to the
whole; in the case of an animal, for instance, its goodness would be taken away
if every part of it had the dignity of an eye. Thus, therefore, God also made
the universe to be best as a whole, according to the mode of a creature;
whereas He did not make each single creature best, but one better than
another. And therefore, we find it said of each creature, “God saw the light,
that it was good” (Genesis 1:4); and in like manner of each one of the rest.
But of all together it is said, “God saw all the things that He had made, and
they were very good” (Genesis 1:31).
Summa, Ia, Q.47, a.2, ad 1.
So, we see that the different roles of men and women are
part of God’s wise plan and the order of the family and society. The man’s
duty and the corresponding obedience of those under his care are an inequality which
results in God’s creation being more orderly, since inequality is necessary for
order.
That very idea of order includes within it the
concept of priority and of posteriority, and hence, of difference. In fact, those
very differences, i.e., the distinctions among people, is the essential
principle of all familial, social, political, economic, military, and religious
order. For example, in a proper military order, an army cannot have all
generals or all privates. The army cannot have all equipment operators or all
cooks. And so on.
St. Paul emphasizes that God made men unequal and made them
to have different roles, strengths, and weaknesses. Here are St. Paul’s words:
For as the body is one, and hath
many members; and all the members of the body, whereas they are many, yet are
one body, so also is Christ. For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one
body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free; and in one Spirit we have
all been made to drink. For the body also is not one member, but many. If the
foot should say, because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it
therefore not of the body? And if the ear should say, because I am not the
eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body
were the eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where
would be the smelling? But now God hath set the members every one of them
in the body as it hath pleased Him. And if they all were one member, where
would be the body? But now there are many members indeed, yet one body. And
the eye cannot say to the hand: I need not thy help; nor again the head to the
feet: I have no need of you. Yea, much more those that seem to be the more
feeble members of the body, are more necessary. And such as we think to be
the less honorable members of the body, about these we put more abundant honor;
and those that are our uncomely parts, have more abundant comeliness. But
our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, giving
to that which wanted the more abundant honor, that there might be no schism in
the body; but the members might be mutually careful one for another.
And if one member suffers anything, all the members suffer with it; or if one
member glory, all the members rejoice with it.
1 Corinthians, 12:12-27 (emphasis added).
As St. Paul shows us, God did not make every man to play
whatever role that man chooses. Some men are made more honorable members of
society, some, less. Some men are made the “eyes” of the collective group and
some are made the “feet”. Id.
St. Paul emphasizes that these differences between men give
rise to the obligation that “the members might be mutually careful one for
another”. Id.
Part of this inequality which is planned by the Wisdom of
God, is the inequality between men and women. Although, in a way, the Eternal
Wisdom made all unequal creatures to be complementary (as well as unequal),
this is especially true of men and women.
Thus, God made man and woman to be especially complementary
because of the very different and harmonious roles that He intends them to have
in life.
Man must Fulfill the Role for which God Created Him
We saw above that God’s order in creation is most perfect
and that God made the most perfect possible universe. Part of the perfection
of this order is God creating men to have the authority and the responsibility
of unselfishly protecting, guiding, and caring for those whom God put under
their charge (their wives, children, and, perhaps, others).
Thus, we see that men are to blame for most of the evil of
the feminism that we see all around us. Men are really the evil “fathers” of
feminism and are more responsible for the feminist revolution than women are.
Because man is the head of woman, it is principally man’s
failure in his role and duty of manhood that gives rise to feminism.
Man’s failures of his responsibilities are of two types:
1. He sometimes fails
because he is irresponsible and lazy. This results in him failing to be selfless
and diligent in expending himself to rule, to guide, and to promote the welfare
of those under his care – and to do his duty even when he does not feel like
doing so.
2. A man sometimes
fails because he is selfish and predatory. This results in him abusing the
authority that God gave him by using it for his own self-interest and
advantage, instead of for the interests of those under his care.
We will look at each of these failures in turn.
Man’s Failure to do His Duty because He is Irresponsible or Lazy
A man is not only responsible for governing himself, but also
for the proper order in the other members of his family (and of society to the
extent part of it is under his care).
A man commits this type of failure when he does not want to
correct or guide someone who needs it and for whom he is responsible. Although
this failure can be a mortal sin, it is not as grave a sin as the second type
of failure mentioned above (viz., using his authority to aggrandize
himself).
Men are most to blame for disorder in their families and
similarly are most to blame for disorder in society. If we had more true men, then
feminism would come to an end, and society would have more true women.
A man who is not so evil as to promote the feminist
revolution, is still to blame if he fails in his duty to diligently do his part
to lead women and all of society to reject feminism (as well as other evils).
Part of a man’s duty is to govern and guide his own wife. By failing to do
this, he is derelict in his duties like a king who does not rule his kingdom
because he wants to devote all his time to gambling, or the chase (e.g.,
foxes), or some other pastime.
Here is how St. John Chrysostom taught this truth (preaching
to the men of his congregation):
Govern your wife, and thus will
the whole house be in harmony. Hear what St. Paul says. ‘And if they
[wives] would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home’ [1 Cor.
14:35].
We see here that St. John Chrysostom is reminding men that
they must govern their wives so that the home and family are orderly and
harmonious.
Of course, it is not only a man’s wife that he must guide
but also anyone else for whom he is responsible – most commonly his children.
We see an example of this duty being breached in the first book of Kings, where
God says concerning Heli:
I will judge his house for ever,
for iniquity, because he knew that his sons did wickedly, and did not
chastise them.
1 Kings, 3:13 (emphasis added).
Besides a man’s responsibility for his wife and children, he
might have various responsibilities for leading society (or part of society) in
some other way. He must use his authority and carefully fulfill his
responsibility in order for society to be orderly and harmonious. This is why
Pope St. Pius X admonished men that:
In our days more than ever, the
greatest strength of evil men is the cowardice and weakness of those who are
good.
When men fail to fulfill their duties to their families or
to society, – and most men are failing in our times – it causes chaos and
strife in society. So, it is plain that men are most to blame for the problems
in society that we see all around us.
The Second Way a Man can Fail in His Duty to Care for those in his Charge is by
being Selfish and Predatory.
In the Charles Dickens novel, Nicholas Nickleby,
there is a memorable example of a man using his authority for his own selfish
advantage. This novel depicts an English country schoolmaster, Squeers, who
uses his authority over his students for his own advantage, instead of
selflessly seeking to benefit his students, as he should have. Below,
Schoolmaster Squeers explains to his new assistant schoolmaster, Nicholas
Nickleby, how he “teaches” his students:
‘This is the first class in English
spelling and philosophy, Nickleby,’ said Squeers, beckoning Nicholas to stand
beside him. ‘We’ll get up a Latin one, and hand that over to you. Now, then,
where’s the first boy?’
‘Please, sir, he’s cleaning the
back-parlor window,’ said the temporary head of the philosophical class.
‘So he is, to be sure,’ rejoined
Squeers. ‘We go upon the practical mode of teaching, Nickleby; the regular
education system. C-l-e-a-n, clean, verb active, to make bright, to scour.
W-i-n, win, d-e-r, der, winder, a casement. When the boy knows this out of
book, he goes and does it. It’s just the same principle as the use of the
globes. Where’s the second boy?’
‘Please, sir, he’s weeding the
garden,’ replied a small voice.
‘To be sure,’ said Squeers, by no
means disconcerted. ‘So he is. B-o-t, bot, t-i-n, tin, bottin, n-e-y, ney,
bottinney, noun substantive, a knowledge of plants. When he has learned
that bottinney means a knowledge of plants, he goes and knows ‘em. Thats
our system, Nickleby: what do you think of it?’
‘It’s very useful one, at any
rate,’ answered Nicholas.
‘I believe you,’ rejoined Squeers,
not remarking the emphasis of his usher. ‘Third boy, what’s horse?’
A beast, sir,’ replied the boy.
‘So it is,’ said Squeers.
‘Ain’t it, Nickleby?’
‘I believe there is no doubt of
that, sir,’ answered Nicholas.
‘Of course there isn’t,’ said
Squeers. ‘A horse is a quadruped, and quadruped’s Latin for beast, as
everybody that’s gone through the grammar knows, or else where’s the use of
having grammars at all?’
‘Where, indeed!’ said Nicholas
abstractedly.
‘As you’re perfect in that,’
resumed Squeers, turning to the boy, ‘go and look after MY horse, and rub him
down well, or I’ll rub you down. The rest of the class go and draw water
up, till somebody tells you to leave off, for it’s washing-day tomorrow, and
they want the coppers filled.’
This example, of course, is an appalling caricature of a man
abusing his authority. Squeers is in charge but his authority is for the good
of his students, in order to teach them and to develop their minds. Instead,
he seeks only his own advantage and not their good.
This is like the importance of a judge using his authority
for the sake of justice. He might not render judgment in the way desired
by those whose case is before him. But he must not render judgment in a
self-interested way (e.g., according to who pays him the largest bribes,
or by inflicting harm on someone because of hatred rather than justice).
Similarly, God made a man to be in charge of his family
(and, sometimes, in charge of others too). But He gave this authority for the
good of those he governs – not to be used selfishly.
So, the authority a man has over his family requires their
obedience to his decisions. This is why St. Paul commanded women:
Let women be subject to their
husbands, as to the Lord.
Ephesians, 5:22
But a man must use his God-given authority for the good of
those under his care. St. Paul tells men how they must use their authority,
namely sacrificially, for the good of their wives, not for their own selfish
advantage:
Husbands, love your wives, as
Christ also loved the church, and delivered Himself up for it.
Ephesians, 5:25 (emphasis added).
When a man uses his authority for his own selfish advantage,
using the levers of his power and authority to aggrandize himself, this is an
abuse.
Although a man must govern for the good of those under his
care, that does not necessarily mean exercising his authority according to their
preferences. So, e.g., if a school boy told his teacher that learning
to read was too hard and begged to be allowed to play during reading class, the
teacher would be required to exercise his authority to have the boy learn to
read.
The Proper Order: Manly Men and Womanly Women
Right-thinking people of both sexes want men to be manly men
and not act like women.
Thus, the most perfect man – viz., Our Lord – is the manliest of men. St.
Gregory Nazianzen, Doctor of the Church, stated the truth of Our Lord’s
Manhood:
There is in Him [i.e.,
Christ] nothing womanly, nothing unmanly.
Men must be clear-thinking, strong of will, virtuous, and
strong of body, to the best of their efforts. When a man’s body fails him due
to disease or age, he must continue in virtue, in the clarity of thought, in
the strength of will (and body) to the best of his ability. The manliest
thing a man can do is control himself and this is his first responsibility at
any age.
To take a parallel example, just as right-thinking persons
of both sexes want men to be manly, so in the same way, all right-thinking citizens
want policemen to have and to exercise their authority in a manly
way. Similarly, they want policemen to be strong of body and forceful (so they
can do their duty to enforce the law).
Of course, if that policeman unjustly takes a woman’s purse
(for example), this is wrong whether that policeman took her purse by abusing
his authority (e.g., by ordering her to give him her purse) or by
abusing his strength to take her purse because he is stronger than she is.
The problem is not that policemen are strong and have
authority. They must have strength and authority to do their job
well! The problem would be if they abuse that strength or
authority. Such abuse does not change the fact that policemen should have
manly authority and strength. But if they abuse these things, then they are bad,
unworthy of their position, and are deserving of punishment.
When policemen abuse their authority or strength, this shows
they are poor-excuses for policemen, just like a man is a poor-excuse for a man
(i.e., unmanly) if he is a bully.
The Poisonous Leftist Lies They Call “Toxic Masculinity”
As we saw above, God made men to be manly. This is
obviously true since God made creation perfect and He made men to be men, not
women. But how does this fit with the leftists’ continual condemnation of
so-called “toxic masculinity”?
Here is one modern dictionary which parrots the leftist
position and defines “toxic masculinity” as follows:
A cultural concept of manliness
that glorifies stoicism, strength, virility, and dominance, and that is
socially maladaptive or harmful to mental health
Similarly, the leftists say things like this:
Traditional
masculinity – marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance, and aggression –
is, on the whole, harmful.
The leftists add things like
this:
Achievement, eschewal of the
appearance of weakness, and adventure, risk, and violence, … these standards
are damaging to mental and physical health.
But God made men to be like men because that is exactly
how He wants them to be, viz., manly. The leftists say that men should
stop being men and should start being like women. For example, leftists say
things like this:
To the extent that any vision of “nontoxic”
masculinity is proposed, it ends up sounding more like
stereotypical femininity than anything else: Guys should learn to be
more sensitive, quiet and socially apt ….
But God intended that men have exactly the traits of a man.
God intends a man to be strong, clear-thinking, organized, sacrificial,
goal-oriented, virtuous, and dedicated to using his manhood for the work God
gave to him. A man must use his manhood to serve God and to guide and to care
for those that God put under his charge.
It is certainly not manly – but rather is
selfish and disgusting – for man to use his manhood to “walk all over everyone
else” for his own selfish interests and to grab from them whatever he desires.
God made a man stronger to protect those who are weaker, not to abuse his strength
to take advantage of them.
This is just like the example we gave above of the
policeman. He should be a man of authority and strength but should use these
for the good of those over whom he has authority.
In fact, a man who uses his greater strength of mind and
body as well as his authority, for his own self-interest – to selfishly grab
pleasures and wealth without regard to truth, justice, purity, and to God’s
law, is a poor excuse for a man, since he does not follow his reason,
which directs him to live according to virtue and not according to sin.
A man should live according to reason. But to live for
himself alone is most unreasonable. Such a man’s life of sin is most
disordered and shows that such a man is really a slave to his passions and is
dominated by vice.
So, the leftists fail to make the necessary (and obvious)
distinction. The traits of manhood are good, important, and are made by God
(just as are the traits of womanhood). But a man can use those traits well, as
God intends, or he can abuse them to commit sin and to abuse those under his
care. This is like the fact that a hammer is good but can be abused, e.g.,
if it were used as a weapon in a robbery.
So, it is not virility, strength, or dominance themselves that
are “toxic”, only the way that those traits are abused. If
men are not virile and strong in character, they are not fully men, after all.
Virtuous and manly men are society’s essential protectors,
guides, and managers. Human society needs traits
like these for its very preservation. By contrast, a bad and vicious
man:
➢
uses his God-given protective abilities as an armed
robber, a serial killer, etc.;
➢
uses his God-given guiding ability to guide people
toward his own selfish interests; and
➢
uses his God-given managing ability to direct
persons or society to his selfish and demonic advantage.
So, what we need to do is promote true Catholicism,
holiness, and virtue so that masculinity (which is a work of God) is used for
the good.
And plainly, man being the way God intends him to be, viz., a virtuous
and manly man, is necessary for his happiness and his success in life. This is
the opposite of the leftist lie that man being this way would be “damaging to
mental and physical health”.
Even most men who consider themselves “Traditional Catholic”
are weak because they are products of the society in which they live. Most men
nowadays are soft and habituated to a life of ease, pleasure, and comfort.
A Man’s Duty to Learn to Be Manly and to Teach His Sons
to be Manly Men
If any man were to find himself unprepared for his role in
life, he must diligently prepare himself by effort, training, and practice –
better late than never! This is analogous to the duty of a woman if she is not
prepared for the role for which God created her. She must diligently learn and
prepare herself when she comes to understand her duty.
A crucial part of the man’s selfless duty towards his family
is his obligation to raise his sons to be able to perform well this role for which
God created them. In the years before a boy or young man has entered into the
vocation to which God will call him, he is being raised in a family in which he
is “apprenticed” in the “school” of manliness, especially being trained by his
father.
Men’s Duty to be Paternal and Gentlemanly
So, we see that God’s Plan answers all of society’s
problems. That is, the Catholic life (with every person fulfilling his
God-given responsibilities) is the answer to all of society’s ills and so we
should live this Catholic life fully!
In this, we see the “recipe” for happiness: fulfilling our
duties of state according to God’s Plan – viz., men living and acting
their traditional and natural role as men, in the way God made them. And in a
complementary way, women acting in their traditional and natural role as women,
living the womanly life that God made them to live.
As our world gets more and more irrational and absurd (as
well as more pagan and immoral), we see the answer to this crisis all around us
is that our future is our past (viz.,
Catholic Tradition), as Pope St. Pius X used to remind us:
The true friends of the people
are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists.
But the devil apes this
genuine Catholic solution causing the strife of his own counterfeit “solutions”.
For example:
➢
Instead of a man’s duty to
selflessly care and govern his family, the devil promotes feminism and the
“women’s equality” movement, in which women battle for their supposed “rights”
and they declare they don’t need to be under the care of their husbands; and
➢
Instead of an employer acting as a
father to his employees, acting for their good, the devil promotes the false
“solution” of employees battling for their supposed rights as directed by Marxist
ideology.
Because of Original Sin, men
(and women) don’t always live up to their vocations and responsibilities. But
men should show respect for women and, more than that, they should honor women,
cherish them, and be chivalrous. God gave women into the care of their
men. This is the true, natural, and Catholic way of life.
Men should show this chivalry
in many ways, large and small, e.g., changing a flat tire for a woman
motorist at the side of the road, opening a door for a woman (although she is
capable of opening a door herself), giving her his seat on a crowded train,
offering to help her carry her heavy packages, even when she is capable of
lifting them herself, etc.
Men should be courteous to
women, charitable, respectful, polite, attentive, considerate, patient,
thoughtful, obliging, listening well, not failing to listen because they are
formulating a new comment while a woman is talking.
God made men to compete with
men. God made women to be man’s helpmate, not his competitor. That
is one reason why the Catholic Church overcame paganism to instill into a man
to be a gentleman and to be gallant toward women.
Women and girls have their
own role and dignity in God’s Plan. God did not put them on earth merely
for men’s selfishness (any more than men are on earth only for women’s
selfishness). Rather, God made women to collaborate with men in the work
God intends them to accomplish, in the roles for which God created them in the
family.
Men should treat all women as
images of Our Lady.
The weightiest lesson of all comes from the law to love our
neighbors as ourselves, which St. Paul applies to women (wives) in particular:
Thus, ought husbands also to love
their wives as their own bodies. Who loveth his wife, loveth himself, for no
one ever hated one’s own flesh (Eph. 5:28-29).
The Catholic Church has ever been the leaven which fosters
the dignity of women. This is what the Catholic Church has to say in the
context of the family:
Husbands, love your wives, as
Christ also loved the Church, and delivered Himself up for it.
Ephesians 5:25.
This means that, as Christ gave His Life for His Church, a
husband should give/devote his life to his wife and to her true good.
Our Lord teaches us the generosity we should have for each
other, and husbands for their wives: “Greater love than this no man hath, that
a man lay down his life for his friends.” St. John’s Gospel, 15:31.
Husbands should remember that their wives should be their best
friends.
A man who loves much does not “count the cost” and he gladly
sacrifices everything for his friend (especially his wife and children):
If a man should give all the
substance of his house for love, he shall despise it as nothing.
Canticle of Canticles, 8:7.
We should take to heart also, as regards the women in our
midst (and men, too), what our Holy Redeemer taught us:
As ye would that others should
treat you, so do ye likewise to them. … So be compassionate as your Father
also hath compassion. Judge ye not, and ye shall not be judged. Condemn ye
not, and ye shall not be condemned. Forgive ye, and ye shall be forgiven.
Give ye, and it shall be given unto you. They shall give into your bosom good
measure, pressed down and shaken together and overflowing. For it shall be
meted unto you again with the same measure wherewith ye have meted.
St. Luke’s Gospel, 12:31, 36-38.
Conclusion
God made man to be manly, to selflessly use his greater
strength of mind and body for the good of those that God has placed under his
care.
Let men be manly and gentlemanly!
