Can someone explain courting?

[ac_claire]

–I think ‘refusing to let our children date’ in HS, carte blanche, is really, really unwise, with a capital “U,” for many reasons:

1. I think the biggest issue is how we see dating. Must ‘dating’ be confined to looking for spouse? Or can some form of dating - i.e., a senir prom, where your date may or may not kiss you on the steps at the end of the nite - simply be for fun and/or social interaction? If the latter is acceptable – and IMHO it is – then why prevent it?

I do believe that “dating” should be confined to looking for a spouse. I believed that as a teenager as well, and my parents were not even Catholic- they were as liberal and lenient as they come! (My grandma was a good influence on me though. ) So in a way, I imposed that rule on myself and it turned out really well for me.

I understand that most people don’t share that value, but in any case it’s what my husband and I believe to be the ideal. Of course reality doesn’t always conform to the ideal, and sometimes there are exceptions-- good and bad. If we’re ever faced with any of these exceptional situaitons, I can tell you our world won’t come crashing down around us. We’ll deal with it. But still, the ideal is the ideal.

1. Anecdotally, I know TONS of well-intentioned Christian people who took the 'no dating in HS!" approach to/with their kids…and every one, I mean every single one I know, had the situation end badly.

Anecdotally, in *my *experience, I know a few people who were raised under such a “restirction” and it turned out beautifully. They don’t resent their parents. They’re happy an well adjusted, some of them are already married and I’m willing to bet all of them, if asked, would say they’d raise their own kids the same way.

1. As I posted earlier – ‘dating’ is part of learning how to interact with others of the opposite gender. AC Claire or anyone else who wouldn’t allow dating is HS: Are you saying you children couldn’t go their senior HS prom? If not, why not? Are you so sure they wouldn’t simply enjoy the experience, learn something, or simply have a bit of plain old 'fun?" Is simply going to a prom so bad? If we are at the stage where ‘fun’ is off the table, wow, no wonder Catholics get a bad rap!

If our child went to a public school and really wanted to go to senior prom, I’m sure we’d probably allow it. The prom is a speical one-time-only occasion. But it’d need to be with a group of people, not with a single “date”. And they’d be expected to be home at a reasonable time.

Also to answer your question, no I don’t want my daughters to end up single, unmarried and alone. That’s exactly why I don’t want them to particiapte in the modern “dating game”. I want to protect their chastity and won’t advocate anything that might compromise their self-respect or their ability to trust and form healthy relationships with men.

We woudn’t be doing that if we allowed or encouraged her to engage in casual, romantic/sexualized relationships before she’s even ready to think about marriage. A person can have all kinds of friends and a great social life without dating. I know because I’ve lived it, and I’ve seen other people live that way.

 

[Advocatus_Fidei]

Hey! Coco and Advatacus-stop using personal attacks on each other like , “arrogant” or other names…

Don’t make me whip out my Bichon, the loyal guard dog of Catholic Answers-he bites people who get nasty!

Please don’t unleash the hounds I was only quoting him! lol

 

[chevalier]

Courting is just a way of relating and communicating. In a way I think it’s timeless, it’s definitely not “Victorian”. You don’t have to wear petticoats and top hats and whatnot when courting, although I think that’s the problem a lot of people have with it. They have this mental picture.

It’s just like dating, only chaste and with a specific goal (marriage) in mind.

I think in discussing the semantics I gave a hint that I knew what “courting” meant, especially when I said that dating should be understood as a variant of it, properly speaking. You can’t really say that “courting”, whatever you understand there, is chaste while “dating” is not. It doesn’t work so automatically. As for Victorianism, it’s not in the clothes, it’s in the theatrical interaction full of playing out roles and using old-fashioned formal language that doesn’t meet the occasion let alone the times (pot calling kettle black). I speak not quite contemporary language myself, but some of the “courting” language makes me shiver when delivered by people living in the 21st century, especially the tension, repression, seriousness and the whole fire and brimstone in it (sounds like a pre-1850 puritan manual on running the family right). That is a huge scare factor. It makes me question whether the people act and think freely or are stuck in some form of roleplaying.

This comes from someone who’s no fan of dating, let alone the dating scene. (Dating doesn’t sit well with me philosophically, so to say.)

Hey, I happen to like their snappy clothing!

Remove the hat and the horse and it doesn’t look much different from me on most days. I can talk that kind of English too (and sometimes I fall back on it), but still.

 

[Rascalking]

Please don’t unleash the hounds I was only quoting him! lol

Ok…I’ll let him stay near my side…you two just keep it nice!

 

[VonDerTann]

I’m sorry, Advocatus, we will simply have to agree to disagree.

I checked out your link to the Catholic encyclopedia on parenting. In all candor, I found it totally unhelpful, as to any real aspect of parenting. Why? Becuase it doesn’t tell us anything we don’t know already. What the entire link boils down to is, “parents need to love their children and take care of them, and children need to love their parents.” (We will leave unaddressed the part which suggests it is a sin to send your children to public schools).

The view that “any child who breaks the fourth commandment is a bad kid” seems awfully…uh…harsh, to say the least – particularly since that seems to suggest that the first time your son/daughter wilfully disobeys you (which in my experience comes at abut age 5 or so), they automatically become a “bad kid”…but then again, you were the one who said, ‘bad kids come from bad parents.’

As I think you will find - and as I surely have - being a “good kid” or a “good parent” is much more complex than an encyclopedia. Can your daughter get her ears pierced? When? What happens when coach is a little too hard on your 14 year old boy? Do you respond? Or tell sonny to? My point is, life isn’t a catholic encyclopedia.

So I guess we have to disagree. Plus, my daughter wants to build a snowman, so I am going to go do that…

 

[Advocatus_Fidei]

I’m sorry, Advocatus, we will simply have to agree to disagree.

That was always going to be the outcome, you forced me to defend my position so I have done.

The view that “any child who breaks the fourth commandment is a bad kid” seems awfully…uh…harsh, to say the least – particularly since that seems to suggest that the first time your son/daughter wilfully disobeys you (which in my experience comes at abut age 5 or so), they automatically become a “bad kid”…but then again, you were the one who said, ‘bad kids come from bad parents.’

The act of wilful disobedience is bad, it should be corrected by the parent, how diligent the parent is in correcting bad behaviour and encouraging good will be what ultimately decides whether the child develops into a well behaved child or a badly behaved one. As such the parent is completely responsible for the behaviour of their own child.

As I think you will find - and as I surely have - being a “good kid” or a “good parent” is much more complex than an encyclopedia. Can your daughter get her ears pierced? When? What happens when coach is a little too hard on your 14 year old boy? Do you respond? Or tell sonny to? My point is, life isn’t a catholic encyclopedia.

As I already mentioned I Iearned how to be a parent primarily from my own parents and also my older siblings who began parenting ahead of me I am very aware of both the complexity involved with each child who are their own individual person, the great responsibility of holding but also honour of been entrusted by God with the headship of a family and the severe repercussions that can occur to me and the people I am responsible for if I am negligent in performing my duties as a husband and father.

 

[agapewolf]

to insinuate that “unmarried, single, and alone” all belongs together is ridiculous.

First of all, there is already an unnecessary grouping of words to illicit a negative emotional response “unmarried” and “single” do not both need to be used. “Unmarried” implies lack of something rather than a full person as they are.

The proper way to refer to a single person is single.

2nd, single does NOT mean alone.

This absolutely horrible negative attitudes towards those that are single as if they are someone to be pitied is what makes so many people marry out of fear from avoiding it. Perhaps those that pity them should examine themselves as to why they are so afraid of it and what strength they lack in being able to handle it.

 

[Advocatus_Fidei]

to insinuate that “unmarried, single, and alone” all belongs together is ridiculous.

First of all, there is already an unnecessary grouping of words to illicit a negative emotional response “unmarried” and “single” do not both need to be used. “Unmarried” implies lack of something rather than a full person as they are.

The proper way to refer to a single person is single.

2nd, single does NOT mean alone.

This absolutely horrible negative attitudes towards those that are single as if they are someone to be pitied is what makes so many people marry out of fear from avoiding it. Perhaps those that pity them should examine themselves as to why they are so afraid of it and what strength they lack in being able to handle it.

Completely agree with you.

I was single for years by choice because in my opinion a decent period of been single helps you to properly discern your vocation and to prepare for it. In all that time I was never alone for even a single day.

The negative attitude towards been single is one of the reasons people rush into relationships they would be better of avoiding, they think some how been single is mark of shame.

 

[CountrySinger]

Completely agree with you.

I was single for years by choice because in my opinion a decent period of been single helps you to properly discern your vocation and to prepare for it. In all that time I was never alone for even a single day.

The negative attitude towards been single is one of the reasons people rush into relationships they would be better of avoiding, they think some how been single is mark of shame.

In my family, it is a big ol’ mark of shame. Every woman in my family was married by 25, and I’m like a freak. I think they might try to trap me and send me to an university for scientific study. Believe me, I’m done with “discerning”, I know that I’m supposed to be married. I’m close to packing it up and living with my best guy friend and his boyfriend (they have a house in the country, and I can sit on a rocking chair with my two cats). I don’t have many good years left. I wish arranged marriages were still common, and my mom would have set me up with a good man when I was born, and I wouldn’t have to head into the dating battlefield.
To quote Carrie Bradshaw from “Sex and The City”: “I’m one bad date away from being bitter”.

 

[Kit15]

1. Anecdotally, I know TONS of well-intentioned Christian people who took the 'no dating in HS!" approach to/with their kids…and every one, I mean every single one I know, had the situation end badly.

I didn’t want to bring it up because it seemed too TMI but just to throw another anecdote on the pile, my MIL was one of those well intentioned parents back in high school.

Now…ever since I was in preschool, I’ve been a bit of a tomboy. And I’ve always been more comfortable hanging around with the guys than with the girls. So in high school I had my little group of buddies roughly consisting of 4 geeky boys and 2 girls.

So one day my friend calls up and invites me to go to the amusement park with his family a few days down the road. Apparently he was allowed to bring a pal and his first choice couldn’t make it. Of course I’m free so I said I’d love to come.

The day before the event, he calls again to tell me that his mom found out that I’m female and dis-invited me. He’s not allowed to date until he’s done with high school (and preferably with college) and she was afraid I was going to put the moves on him or something.

1.) She gets you to tell me this the day before? Really?! You had a week!
2.) A DATE!? The MOVES?! WHAAAAAT?! Eew! Blech! Ick! Barf! NO! (My how things can change over the course of 10 years)

The FIL was not happy. He had concerns about his son’s already apparent lack of social skills and he was probably on cloud nine that his son actually invited a girl…so they worked out a deal that if they could find another guy to tag along, I could come.

“And I’m supposed to just be perfectly okay with the fact that the guys outnumber the girl. ” -Mom sarcastically assessing the situation.

My family still makes jokes about it “You SURE he’s allowed to marry you? We’re not going to get a call after the rehearsal dinner right?”

1. Worst of all – some social skills wil be needed to help see a bad suitor from a good one. Saying 'no dating in HS!" may leave a child totally unprepared to recognize a bad guy/girl when the child – regardless of age – finally starts looking around at people of the oppose gender.

This was my mom’s reasoning for the whole thing. My family is very close. So we don’t really have privacy and we talk to each other about our relationships all the time. As long as we weren’t sneaking around and keeping secrets from her, she was okay with us dating. We all made mistakes in high school that we learned from. She said she’d rather us make our mistakes while we could still be supervised.

 

[Rascalking]

In my family, it is a big ol’ mark of shame. Every woman in my family was married by 25, and I’m like a freak. I think they might try to trap me and send me to an university for scientific study. Believe me, I’m done with “discerning”, I know that I’m supposed to be married. I’m close to packing it up and living with my best guy friend and his boyfriend (they have a house in the country, and I can sit on a rocking chair with my two cats). I don’t have many good years left. I wish arranged marriages were still common, and my mom would have set me up with a good man when I was born, and I wouldn’t have to head into the dating battlefield.
To quote Carrie Bradshaw from “Sex and The City”: “I’m one bad date away from being bitter”.

Dearest-you can’t be serious. It’s 2010! Not 1920.

 

[Advocatus_Fidei]

Dearest-you can’t be serious. It’s 2010! Not 1920.

Why is the date relevant? Do you think modern man knows better than his ancestors simply because he is alive and they are dead?

The continuing decay of western civilisations suggest otherwise.

 

[Rascalking]

Why is the date relevant? Do you think modern man can do no wrong? The continuing decay of western civilizations suggest otherwise.

LOL! I think you missed my point.

I got the feeling from my friend Countrysingers post that she thought it was time to enter a convent because she was 25 and not married. In the 1920’s-that might have been common. Now, thankfully, it’s not. You have many years left before it’s time to own 83 cats and yell at passers by from your apartment complex.

I think modern man can do wrong, as can 20th century man, 19th, and so on. Do I think civilization is in decline? Sort of. Having said all that-there is still so much beauty and love in the world, that it’s worth trying to save.

Curious-how in the world did you get the impression that I thought modern man could do no wrong? I mean, I have my BA in English, and I read into everything!

By the way-I’m British too (ethnicity, not nationality)-pure bred, as a matter of fact! Cheers my brother/sister!

 

[Advocatus_Fidei]

I thought you were referring to her wish that her parents had played a more active role in finding her a husband.

Apologies for my misunderstanding, I am just so used to seeing everything from the past rejected in favour of the modern simply because it was in the past that I tend to see it everywhere lol.

 

[Rascalking]

I thought you were referring to her wish that her parents had played a more active role in finding her a husband.

Apologies for my misunderstanding, I am just so used to seeing everything from the past rejected in favour of the modern simply because it was in the past that I tend to see it everywhere lol.

Hey, no problem man.

I totally know what you mean.

 

[StillWondering]

I’m not sure if the OP is still here, but discerning your own ability to be the father of a household is important before courting.

I know of a man who is wonderful and married immediately after meeting his future wife. He is not the type to take glances at girls and would never notice anyone. He was always about living up to his duty as a citizen, a person, a husband, a friend and took it seriously. So when he happened to see the girl he would marry, he knew and never doubted. Several months later he married her and they have been together for around 35 years without a problem. He spent a number of his early years away in the Navy and she and he never doubted their commitment.

I on the other hand is on the opposite end of the spectrum. I am very into socializing and never woke up during my early years to the responsibilities I would have to care for another human being on the most intimate and personal levels. Thus, if I know then what I know now, I would have prayerfully stuck to my studies and built up my profession so that I can learn about responsibility. After I have understand my role than I would consider courting and marriage.

You need to find out where you are on the spectrum, and most people are closer to my side than to my friend. The closer you are to my side the better it is to wait until you have a degree and work to learn responsibility.