Am I being a jerk about chastity?

[57thDimension]

why would a timeline, his masters degree, job, and married siblings be important to the issue of his girlfriend being unsuitable marriage material because she is an “experienced woman”? this part of the OP looks like a check-the-box list of things to do, or, more accurately, a bucket list. which may be OK, if its a script for one’s personal goals, but when those items include a person? I predict nothing good out of situations like this.

That sounds like someone who is taking marriage seriously. If you think his criterion is a judgment upon you, or someone else, perhaps you are being too sensitive about it? Why wouldn’t he have criterion for who he married? Do you or did you have any criteria for marriage? Just because you disagree with the criteria, doesn’t mean you can bash him for it, or suggest that he is just checking off a list of things to do. It’s an uncharitable interpretation on your part.

+Sebastian

 

[KostyaJMJ]

This isn’t entirely true. There are many deal-breakers that people have that leave them in position to become, as you say “lonely, embittered” old people. I know a few women who would only marry a Catholic man - they are still unmarried. I don’t think the “lonely, embittered” part is entirely the thing we should be emphasizing - just the fact that more stringent criteria will lower the number of people he can marry. That’s it. But I think he already knows that, so why we bother telling him is beyond me.

+Sebastian

I don’t know how much he knows. He honestly seems extremely naive to me. He called a woman who made a mistake when she was a child and then spent the next decade living chastely “experienced”. He seemed honestly surprised a woman could have engaged in premarital sex. I don’t assume he knows anything.

 

[57thDimension]

the OP asked for an opinion. I gave it. if the OP didn’t want one, he wouldn’t have asked.

my opinion is set out in 137.

That’s not permission for uncharitableness.

+Sebastian

 

[57thDimension]

I don’t know how much he knows. He honestly seems extremely naive to me.

Perhaps he is naive - there isn’t anything wrong with that. I’m not saying it’s wrong, either, to assume he is naive.

He called a woman who made a mistake when she was a child and then spent the next decade living chastely “experienced”.

She wasn’t a child. Please don’t understate things. She could very well have been an adult (e.g. 25-7 = 18). Seven years is not a decade. Please don’t overstate things. Changing well-known facts like that gives the impression of bias and doesn’t help with the argument.

He seemed honestly surprised a woman could have engaged in premarital sex. I don’t assume he knows anything.

I think it’s more about Catholic women, than women in general. Beyond that, if he is naive about that, then so be it. If you feel that you should assume that he doesn’t know anything, then I don’t anything wrong with that.

+Sebastian

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Come on… He brought up a valid concern (virginity is something good in a future wife, what happens when it isn’t there), we helped him see that although he is right, having had sex before marriage is not good, it does not mean that this young woman cannot be a good spouse/mother, and that he should (and did) apologize if he told her otherwise.

There is no need to put him down for giving virginity such a high value… because virginity does have a high value! My gosh, this is starting to sound like my secular friends that thought I was crazy for wanting to stay a virgin before marriage and if possible marry one. That was God’s plan for marriage!!! There is no need to put him down for recognizing that he has evaluated his situation and he feels financially, educationally, and emotionally prepared to marry and start a family. That is good, that he is trying to prepare himself to be in a good position to marry and start a family.

 

[The_Bucket]

With all due respect 57thDimension, your posting history indicates that you have a very warped view of human sexuality. I mean, you described yourself as “squeamish” towards the very concept of sex. The fact that you were “wishfully thinking” that St. Thomas Aquinas was advocating for the idea that seeking pleasure with one’s spouse is a mortal sin pretty much underscores my point here.

(By the way, St. Thomas Aquinas is wrong that marital intimacy for the sake of concupiscence is even venially sinful.)

Unless you’ve grown in leaps and bounds since your initial foray onto this forum a year ago, I think you should examine whether you are actually positively adding to these types of discussions.

 

[Fairwinds]

That sounds like someone who is taking marriage seriously. If you think his criterion is a judgment upon you, or someone else, perhaps you are being too sensitive about it? Why wouldn’t he have criterion for who he married? Do you or did you have any criteria for marriage? Just because you disagree with the criteria, doesn’t mean you can bash him for it, or suggest that he is just checking off a list of things to do. It’s an uncharitable interpretation on your part.

+Sebastian

you like that word “uncharitable”, I’ve noticed you use it frequently on this and other threads in a last-line / last word sort of way. but you use to disparage any disagrees with you. I don’t buy that.

the OP asked for opinions. if he didn’t want comments, he wouldn’t have asked. ask yourself why you’re so offended by opinions directed towards someone who invited them.

 

[Rachel126]

New here and looking for some honest advice. I am 29 years old and very interested in getting married within the next couple of years. So far I have worked hard to obtain a Masters degree and an excellent job so that I am fully prepared to start a family financially, educationally and spiritually. I am one of five kids, and all my siblings are married including my little sister. So I am really only looking to seriously date for a potential marriage.

About four months ago I started dating a girl who is a Masters student at the college where I work. She is 25 years old. She’s pretty, funny, smart, comes from a good family and is very religious. I really like her. I think she would make a good mom and wife from what I know so far. We are totally on the same page as far as faith goes - we are both practicing and active Catholics.

Here’s the problem. After four months of pretty serious dating, I told her that I liked her very much and could see a future with her. I told her how glad I was that I’d saved myself for marriage, too. Unfortunately she took that time to tell me that she had had sex with a boyfriend when she was a senior in high school, 7 years ago. She told me that they were both Catholics, cared for one another very deeply, caved to temptation on about 5 occasions and then both went to confession and agreed to continue ahead chastely. When they left for college the relationship ended and she said she has fully repented of her sins and has been chaste for 7 years and intends to not have any more sex until marriage.

Okay, I was shocked. I never thought I would marry an experienced woman who gave her body to anothwr guy. I get that people mess up, but the thought of my wife having been with another man grosses me out big time. I told her I was really hurt that ahe had given away her virginity so easily and I have not called her since Sunday.

I know she’s embarrassed and hurt and probably thought I would say it was not a big deal, but it is. She won’t ever be able to give me the gift of her virginity and yet I have held out. She’s a great girl in every other way except she lost her virtue. I don’t want to be a jerk or have too high of expectations. I just don’t know if this should be a dead breaker or if I am passing up a great woman who simply made a mistake when she was a kid.

Can I get over this? Should I? Is she fit to be a mother if she can’t honestly say she waited for her husband? I know the Lord says to forgive but He also says to use good judgment.

I think if Christ has forgiven her, you should also. If you like this woman and see a future with her, it would be a shame if you could not get over this. I think you should pray about it and ask for God’s help. We are to strive to be like Christ, are we not? He has already forgiven her. There is nothing He will not forgive us for.

 

[The_Bucket]

Come on… He brought up a valid concern (virginity is something good in a future wife, what happens when it isn’t there), we helped him see that although he is right, having had sex before marriage is not good, it does not mean that this young woman cannot be a good spouse/mother, and that he should (and did) apologize if he told her otherwise.

There is no need to put him down for giving virginity such a high value… because virginity does have a high value! My gosh, this is starting to sound like my secular friends that made fun of me for wanting to stay a virgin and if possible marry one. That was God’s plan for marriage!!! There is no need to put him down for recognizing that he has evaluated his situation and he feels financially, educationally, and emotionally prepared to marry and start a family. That is good, that he is trying to prepare himself to be in a good position to marry and start a family.

See I don’t think anyone was putting this guy down except at the beginning where he did sound like a jerk. Now he’s come out and said he was being naive. Well ok then.

It’s important that the faithful understand the difference between virginity and chastity… and understanding that virginity in and of itself is not a virtue. Chastity is a virtue. And it’s plenty possible for people with extensive histories to be chaste.

We’re in a culture right now that is telling everyone that they can do whatever they want and that chastity is not a thing. In those circumstances it’s only natural for the side that recognizes chastity as a virtue to “dig in” against the secularism but also lose sight of what actually constitutes chastity as opposed to treating as a one-time deal that you can either hang on to or blow it forever. That kind of mentality needs to be swept clear because it radically undermines the concept of forgiveness, pushes people into shameful dark corners and shrinks the lines at the confessional. We need more people at reconciliation and more people partaking of the Eucharist. Pulling people out of the shadows and ending the alienation of sinners is key to the mission of the New Evangelization.

 

[EasterJoy]

That sounds like someone who is taking marriage seriously. If you think his criterion is a judgment upon you, or someone else, perhaps you are being too sensitive about it? Why wouldn’t he have criterion for who he married? Do you or did you have any criteria for marriage? Just because you disagree with the criteria, doesn’t mean you can bash him for it, or suggest that he is just checking off a list of things to do. It’s an uncharitable interpretation on your part.

+Sebastian

OK, but a collection of people who’ve been married twenty years and seen marriages come and go is not a collection of people who have no idea about whether or not a single instance of unchastity at the age of 17 renders a woman unfit as a mother no matter how much she repents or amends. Nobody is saying that he has to marry her. He can decide he has to have a natural redhead who sleeps with a motorcycle in her room and a rosary across the handlebars, if he wants. We are only quibbling with his judgment that she couldn’t be a good mother or that she is just ruined as a wife. Yes, women with her past amend themselves and go on to be wonderful parents and the backbones of their parishes, as do men. So he can “hold out” for whatever he wants, but he is out of bounds if he starts insulting the future capacities of this woman. That is out of bounds, and yes, now that he knows better we would have to agree that he would indeed be a jerk for saying things like that.

 

[Fairwinds]

Come on… He brought up a valid concern (virginity is something good in a future wife, what happens when it isn’t there), we helped him see that although he is right, having had sex before marriage is not good, it does not mean that this young woman cannot be a good spouse/mother, and that he should (and did) apologize if he told her otherwise.

There is no need to put him down for giving virginity such a high value… because virginity does have a high value! My gosh, this is starting to sound like my secular friends that made fun of me for wanting to stay a virgin and if possible marry one. That was God’s plan for marriage!!! There is no need to put him down for recognizing that he has evaluated his situation and he feels financially, educationally, and emotionally prepared to marry and start a family. That is good, that he is trying to prepare himself to be in a good position to marry and start a family.

why don’t you make an effort to discern the difference between “chastity” and “virginity”, and then tell us what you think we are all called to.

speculate on why he included the need to marry a virgin in the same post where he informs us that he has a masters degree, a job, and married siblings. in what possible way is having a masters degree related to marrying a virgin?

 

[EasterJoy]

See I don’t think anyone was putting this guy down except at the beginning where he did sound like a jerk. Now he’s come out and said he was being naive. Well ok then.

It’s important that the faithful understand the difference between virginity and chastity… and understanding that virginity in and of itself is not a virtue. Chastity is a virtue. And it’s plenty possible for people with extensive histories to be chaste.

We’re in a culture right now that is telling everyone that they can do whatever they want and that chastity is not a thing. In those circumstances it’s only natural for the side that recognizes chastity as a virtue to “dig in” against the secularism but also lose sight of what actually constitutes chastity as opposed to treating as a one-time deal that you can either hang on to or blow it forever. That kind of mentality needs to be swept clear because it radically undermines the concept of forgiveness, pushes people into shameful dark corners and shrinks the lines at the confessional. We need more people at reconciliation and more people partaking of the Eucharist. Pulling people out of the shadows and ending the alienation of sinners is key to the mission of the New Evangelization.

I don’t want to split hairs, because I totally agree with a lot of what you say. Still, that’s going a little far. When you give up your virginity, even by a single act, that can have temporal consequences that absolution and a firm purpose of amendment do not erase. It needs to be clear that there is something “blown” when one does not remain chaste for life, just as there is something lost when any mortal sin is not avoided for life. If you found that your fiancé had embezzled money from work, but only done it once…well, yeah, that makes a difference. Drove drunk, but only did it once…well, yeah, that makes a difference.

In this case, though, it has to be kept in mind that the serious sin was a long time ago. It is possible to earn back trust. It doesn’t happen the minute you receive absolution and are given back a spotless soul, but after some amendment it is reasonable to return someone to a position of trust in spite of a past transgression. Again: Sts. Peter and Paul. Big violation, but a very big conversion, a very big openness to return to grace. So yes, that is the main thing.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Come on… He brought up a valid concern (virginity is something good in a future wife, what happens when it isn’t there), we helped him see that although he is right, having had sex before marriage is not good, it does not mean that this young woman cannot be a good spouse/mother, and that he should (and did) apologize if he told her otherwise.

There is no need to put him down for giving virginity such a high value… because virginity does have a high value! My gosh, this is starting to sound like my secular friends that thought I was crazy for wanting to stay a virgin before marriage and if possible marry one. That was God’s plan for marriage!!! There is no need to put him down for recognizing that he has evaluated his situation and he feels financially, educationally, and emotionally prepared to marry and start a family. That is good, that he is trying to prepare himself to be in a good position to marry and start a family.

Did you actually read his OP? He asked us if he had been a jerk to this woman, and he had. We told him so. He can set whatever criteria he wants, but telling someone who has been honest with him, who has repented, confessed, been absolved and been chaste ever since, that she is “experienced” in sex and is worth less to him, and not talking to her for several days, is a jerky thing to do.

 

[The_Bucket]

I don’t want to split hairs, because I totally agree with a lot of what you say. Still, that’s going a little far. When you give up your virginity, even by a single act, that can have temporal consequences that absolution and a firm purpose of amendment do not erase. It needs to be clear that there is something “blown” when one does not remain chaste for life, just as there is something lost when any mortal sin is not avoided for life. If you found that your fiancé had embezzled money from work, but only done it once…well, yeah, that makes a difference. Drove drunk, but only did it once…well, yeah, that makes a difference.

Yeah but I mean, the prospects that someone committed no sexual sin ever are infinitesimally small. Masturbation? It happens, especially with teenage boys. Pornography? Rampant today. So yes, there are temporal consequences but the point I’m trying to make is that every sin has temporal consequences. There’s nothing “special” about the consequences of losing one’s virginity versus, say, watching a lot of porn or even serious sin of a nonsexual nature.

In this case, though, it has to be kept in mind that the serious sin was a long time ago. It is possible to earn back trust. It doesn’t happen the minute you receive absolution and are given back a spotless soul, but after some amendment it is reasonable to return someone to a position of trust in spite of a past transgression. Again: Sts. Peter and Paul. Big violation, but a very big conversion, a very big openness to return to grace. So yes, that is the main thing.

Indeed.

 

[Rachel126]

See I don’t think anyone was putting this guy down except at the beginning where he did sound like a jerk. Now he’s come out and said he was being naive. Well ok then.

It’s important that the faithful understand the difference between virginity and chastity… and understanding that virginity in and of itself is not a virtue. Chastity is a virtue. And it’s plenty possible for people with extensive histories to be chaste.

We’re in a culture right now that is telling everyone that they can do whatever they want and that chastity is not a thing. In those circumstances it’s only natural for the side that recognizes chastity as a virtue to “dig in” against the secularism but also lose sight of what actually constitutes chastity as opposed to treating as a one-time deal that you can either hang on to or blow it forever. That kind of mentality needs to be swept clear because it radically undermines the concept of forgiveness, pushes people into shameful dark corners and shrinks the lines at the confessional. We need more people at reconciliation and more people partaking of the Eucharist. Pulling people out of the shadows and ending the alienation of sinners is key to the mission of the New Evangelization.

 

[57thDimension]

With all due respect 57thDimension, your posting history indicates that you have a very warped view of human sexuality. I mean, you described yourself as “squeamish” towards the very concept of sex. The fact that you were “wishfully thinking” that St. Thomas Aquinas was advocating for the idea that seeking pleasure with one’s spouse is a mortal sin pretty much underscores my point here.

(By the way, St. Thomas Aquinas is wrong that marital intimacy for the sake of concupiscence is even venially sinful.)

Unless you’ve grown in leaps and bounds since your initial foray onto this forum a year ago, I think you should examine whether you are actually positively adding to these types of discussions.

I’m not sure that it is entirely “okay” to dig up posts from a year ago (that is somewhat strange, you must admit), but your concerns are valid, so I’ll answer them. Yes, my squeamishness has indeed changed.

Beyond that, though, I really don’t think it affects what I’ve written so far. My opinions are in line with other people on this thread who are themselves married (or otherwise properly-“viewed”), so I don’t believe that your concerns are entirely with basis. I would ask, though, what comments of mine you think would be affected by my previous views.

To be quite honest, I think the people who have engaged in premarital sex have their views (about the OPs situation) altered in an the same way my views are built up from not being exposed to that. If someone has had negative interactions with fornication, they may respect the OPs position moreso than someone who has had interactions that have not affected them as seriously. It’s a fairly obvious thing to say that a person’s life experiences shape their views. Since the OP grew up in a fairly sheltered way, he cannot be blamed for views and such that are shaped by that - I think some people have missed that.

+Sebastian

 

[Fairwinds]

Did you actually read his OP? He asked us if he had been a jerk to this woman, and he had. We told him so. He can set whatever criteria he wants, but telling someone who has been honest with him, who has repented, confessed, been absolved and been chaste ever since, that she is “experienced” in sex and is worth less to him, and not talking to her for several days, is a jerky thing to do.

and its juvenile in a more damaging way. sure as the day is long H and W will have arguments about something, and if H’s response is to clam up for several days, its more than jerky, its a total disaster in the making. and if the matter is brought up, discussed, and apologies made and accepted, and he can’t let it go (as her past sins were forgiven long ago), all he’s doing now is dating his future ex-wife.

 

[57thDimension]

I’m not sure that it is entirely “okay” to dig up posts from a year ago (that is somewhat strange, you must admit), but your concerns are valid, so I’ll answer them. Yes, my squeamishness has indeed changed.

Beyond that, though, I really don’t think it affects what I’ve written so far. My opinions are in line with other people on this thread who are themselves married (or otherwise properly-“viewed”), so I don’t believe that your concerns are entirely with basis. I would ask, though, what comments of mine you think would be affected by my previous views.

To be quite honest, I think the people who have engaged in premarital sex have their views (about the OPs situation) altered in an the same way my views are built up from not being exposed to that. If someone has had negative interactions with fornication, they may respect the OPs position moreso than someone who has had interactions that have not affected them as seriously. It’s a fairly obvious thing to say that a person’s life experiences shape their views. Since the OP grew up in a fairly sheltered way, he cannot be blamed for views and such that are shaped by that - I think some people have missed that.

“Poisoning the well” should be avoided, though.

+Sebastian

 

[EasterJoy]

Yeah but I mean, the prospects that someone committed no sexual sin ever are infinitesimally small. Masturbation? It happens, especially with teenage boys. Pornography? Rampant today. So yes, there are temporal consequences but the point I’m trying to make is that every sin has temporal consequences. There’s nothing “special” about the consequences of losing one’s virginity versus, say, watching a lot of porn or even serious sin of a nonsexual nature.

Indeed.

Want a job at a bank or as an attorney? They’re going to look at whether you have serious violations against integrity. Want to play pro football? They’re going to look at whether you have serious violations against courage. Want to be a police officer? They’re going to care whether or not you have a felony assault on your record. If there is even one, that can be a deal-breaker!

The reason that chastity particularly matters to the OP is because he is choosing a wife. He’s not saying he wouldn’t allow her to be a lector at church. He’s asking about whether it is reasonable to put her in a position of trust as his wife. That is a reasonable question, and the pervasiveness of infidelity, divorce and tolerance towards accepting it in this world only makes it more reasonable, not less.

Still, I think her purpose of amendment is praiseworthy and entirely believable. I would not chastise him for asking the question, but I’d suggest that in the absence of any other red flags, I’d believe that she is trustworthy.

 

[EasterJoy]

I’m not sure that it is entirely “okay” to dig up posts from a year ago (that is somewhat strange, you must admit), but your concerns are valid, so I’ll answer them. Yes, my squeamishness has indeed changed.

Beyond that, though, I really don’t think it affects what I’ve written so far. My opinions are in line with other people on this thread who are themselves married (or otherwise properly-“viewed”), so I don’t believe that your concerns are entirely with basis. I would ask, though, what comments of mine you think would be affected by my previous views.

To be quite honest, I think the people who have engaged in premarital sex have their views (about the OPs situation) altered in an the same way my views are built up from not being exposed to that. If someone has had negative interactions with fornication, they may respect the OPs position moreso than someone who has had interactions that have not affected them as seriously. It’s a fairly obvious thing to say that a person’s life experiences shape their views. Since the OP grew up in a fairly sheltered way, he cannot be blamed for views and such that are shaped by that - I think some people have missed that.

+Sebastian

People who have engaged in premarital sex can have their views changed. That is true. If this was something this young woman did recently, I’d absolutely be concerned.

Still, people who have engaged in premarital sex and repented from it and then lost the quasi-marital relationship it set up can be more impressed about the necessity of guarding chastity and more certain of the importance of staying out of near occasions of sin. Once bitten, twice shy, sometimes that is the case, too.