Education and Girls... is of the Bad

Girls at University... Williamson says no. The SSPX bishop's letters are definitely interesting. I'm not trying to stir up debate or commentary or even humor. I just don't get the mindset of this man. I firmly believe that he will never be a good standing bishop in the Roman Catholic Church. I don't even think that the SSPX leadership will ever accept the terms offered by the pope and the vatican. Maybe some SSPX members who left Rome may find a way to come back, but I think that the SSPX as a whole will stay separated from Rome, which might be for the best. I think it has moved so far away that the differences between Rome and the SSPX may never be able to be resolved. Still, it's fascinating to read this man's letters. It saddens me to think that there are people who think this way, who follow him and believe as he does.

I really enjoyed this quote:

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.

This makes me really sad to read all this. It's like stepping back in time. And there were women educated in universities throughout history. Granted, not in the numbers we see today in modern history, but an educated woman was/is not trying to be a man, by pursuing man things. I could go on and on why a woman needs an education, but I'd be preaching to the choir to those who happen to read this blog.