A patron saint for single guys

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi @Cloisters , I really enjoy your posts as you probably know. But can I please get a patron saint who isn’t an academic? I hope blessed Contardo Ferrini will forgive me, but I look at academia as one of the root problems causing low birth rates and exceedingly late marriages. I tried Saint Anthony to no avail, and I know it’s my fault. So which patron saint should I recur to ‘for single guys’?
 
Last edited:
I do identify with him to some extent. Is there a saint with ‘cleaved habitus’ that may apply to ‘single guys seeking to marry’?
 
Last edited:
How about Bl Bartolomeo Marquez. He was a martyr during the Spanish Civil War. The night before he died he wrote a letter to his girlfriend.

Bartolomé Blanco Márquez was born in Cordoba in 1914. He was arrested as a Catholic leader – he was the secretary of Catholic Action and a delegate to the Catholic Syndicates – on Aug. 18, 1936. He was executed on Oct. 2, 1936, at age 21, while he cried out, “Long live Christ the King!”

http://www.piercedhearts.org/theolo...etter_girlfriend_memory_bartolome_marquez.htm
 
I do not know what you mean by “single”. The single saints are a plethora …
On the other hand, a saint who would have remained celibate in spite of himself, I do not think he can have any, because to be unhappy because one is single is a sign of attachment to earthly happiness, and it is not very compatible with the holiness.
 
Mboo said:
because to be unhappy because one is single is a sign of attachment to earthly happiness
Click to expand...
Ana and Sarah come to mind.

It is legitimate aspiration to constitute a family which does not in any way imply attachment and neither is marriage or parenthood an earthly thing in the trivializing temporal sense you frame it.

To the contrary, the orthodox would be the first to say that marriage is a reflection of divine nature the union between the spouses reflecting the union between the persons of the Holy Trinity. And as for aspiring to the gift of life I’d hardly call it earthly instead heavenly.

[Even the saints showed impatience and hurt at times when their vocation and state of life met impediments.]
 
Last edited:
Chicken_Pigeon said:
What’s that?
Click to expand...
An excellent question !!

Cleaved Habitus (two words.)

The second word signifies permanent embodied cognitive structures of perception and action a person acquired over life and subsequently enacts. Both socially and psychological. It’s a concept in social/human sciences.

The first word means the persons aforementioned habitus would be marked by division and inner conflict, tension and contradiction, socially so, and having become permanent inner dispositions would become his being.
 
poche said:
“Long live Christ the King!”
Click to expand...
Viva Cristo Rei !

I like bl Bartolomeo Marquez for his eloquent heroic choice of martyrdom. He lived and died not far from me geographically. The catholic social organizations he belonged to are today mostly defunct and nowhere is such sound catholic militancy anywhere left to be found in modern Iberia that I know of.

Again, a catholic with ‘cleaved habitus’ would hardly fit in socially except in a catholic organization - and even then taking on an active successful leadership role having ‘cleaved habitus’ would be absolutely remarkable. And I don’t think Bl Bartolomeo Marquez had ‘cleaved habitus’ given his lifelong good integration in social organization that in turn borrowed social sense to his choices not diminishing his merits or heroism in anyway.

It should be said, and pope Francis has said it, we are living in an age of martyrs whilst apparently in the developed world societal organization has canceled out martyrdom and bodily mercy - as if nothing meaningful is left to be done socially.
 
Last edited:
Why does he saint have to be lay and lacking education?

There are several saints who had stormy interior lives and dispositions that made them a little less than popular in the world.

In order to make it through the canonization process, you have to have a dedicated cult who is advocating for you. That’s a pretty difficult hurdle to overcome when you are a lay person who keeps your inner sanctity hidden from the world. If you are a lay intellectual you have a large body of work that reflects your inner piety. If you are a lay founder of an organization, people had a chance to get to know you and your interior life. Same for men and women religious.

Mother Theresa for instance, have a very stormy interior life, but she moved through the world projecting joy. She had a massive following. St. Bernard had similar struggles. Being a religious with an extensive body of work, his sanctity and piety was revealed to us all. St. Junipero Serra has extremely pious, but was consider overly serious and therefore was not a people person. His brothers knew him well, and they were able to demonstrate his piety despite his offputting personality.

St. Jerome was consider a bit if a jerk. The other early church father frequently complained about him.

Blessed Pier-Giorgio Frassati was a layman. Although he went to college, he was not an intellectual. He had a joyful countenance and was a social butterfly, but he suffered greatly. His personal piety and sanctity is known because he was an outspoken voice for the poor and one of the founders of the Saint Vincent de Paul society. He was also a Lay Dominican.
 
Last edited:
Come to think of it, Padre Pio was not universally loved. Many people thought he was cantankerous and mean especially those he chided in confession.

I remember reading something about St. John of Cupertino that made me think that today we might think he was on the autism spectrum.
 
Last edited:
Anne and Sarah were in a different religious context, where the earthly happiness was a sign of the blessing of God, in their context, God rewarded in this world the righteous, giving them earthly goods (children, houses, etc etc).
For a Christian to be unhappy because one is not married is a sign of imperfection because one manifests:
  • a weak Faith (we do not believe that true happiness is not of this world as Jesus taught us),
  • a weak hope (we desire earthly happiness instead of wanting Heaven)
  • a weak charity (we care more about our earthly happiness than the glory of God)
 
Last edited:
adgloriam said:
It is legitimate aspiration to constitute a family which does not in any way imply attachment and neither is marriage or parenthood an earthly thing in the trivializing temporal sense you frame it.
Click to expand...
on the contrary, marriage is a good of the earth, Jesus said it clearly, on the other side it does not exist anymore. If not on the other side, the married should continue their conjugal life, which is absurd.
adgloriam said:
To the contrary, the orthodox would be the first to say that marriage is a reflection of divine nature the union between the spouses reflecting the union between the persons of the Holy Trinity. And as for aspiring to the gift of life I’d hardly call it earthly instead heavenly.
Click to expand...
it is all nature that is a reflection of God, Jesus himself has chosen the image of the vine and branches as an image of the union he has with Christians. This does not confer on the vineyard, a dignity of Heaven.
Jesus also chose the image of a polygamous husband to show the union that exists between him and the souls, it does not give a value to the polygamous marriage.
So the fact that marriage is an image of the holy trinity does not confer on it any spiritual excellence.
adgloriam said:
Even the saints showed impatience and hurt at times when their vocation and state of life met impediments.
Click to expand...
they were religious vocations. Marriage is not a religious vocation, it is a natural vocation.

So I will say things clearly. To make his message interesting in a world that has become too sensual, the current pastoral care of the Church has chosen to overestimate marriage and couple life in general, by making believe that natural happiness can be ordered to spiritual happiness. In short, we subtly try to say that there is a Christian hedonism alongside the traditional Christian dolorism
 
Last edited:
We Dominicans founded colleges and universities for the sake of education that would help us counter heresies. The goals of the Communist Party included infiltrating academia, thus leading to that of which you complain.
 
It must be pointed out that all these saints chose celibacy, they did not suffer it.
There should be more and more talk about these saints, to encourage those who suffer from celibacy to choose what is better, that is, to offer their celibacy definitively to God by definitively renouncing marriage.
 
Which would be in the form of a secular institute. There are a couple already in existence, and my organization has their own proposal for such, as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top