Catholic Meeting/Singles websites

[1ke]

that is a lot of money though. especially for a student. when who even know if my age group is on it and if a even would meet anyone, you know?

They have a discount for students under 26, the price is $59 for the base or $69 for the full package.

You can review the demographics. As a former member, I can tell you they have many young members in the 20-30 range.

 

[Fidelia]

are there any free ones?

 

[1ke]

are there any free ones?

You get what you pay for.

I think some allow you to post a profile free, but then you pay if/when you want to correspond with someone.

if you saved $10 a month, you could join in 6-7 months.

 

[chevalier]

@catholicsingles: I apologise if my post sounded too negative. As for certain misunderstandings, regardless of who’s right (if anyone), the difference in itself is a problem. And let’s not even get started on the non-exclusive dating thing. There are many understandings of what’s allowed and I don’t think Aquinas would agree with those modern “speakers” who claim romantic multipartnership without sex is great and the right Catholic way. In fact, I believe it’s intrinsically disordered.

And yeah, the use of the adjective “Catholic” for marketing purposes only is one of the reasons I distrust the idea. Even if it’s actually owned by Catholics, what guarantee do I have that they have a good understanding of moral theology? Profiles are a worthy source of information, but, and here I’ve had a lot of experience actually (I’ve been an internet portal staffer and a sort of journalist for a long time, moderator, chat operator, webmaster, admin, website maker, for a couple of years, you get the idea), profiles can be misleading even without direct intent. You don’t need my personal stories here, but suffice to say people are able to do things they don’t seem to be able to do given their profiles and posts.

Photos are a must, I think. I don’t think overly comfortable with being linked to a site in the wrong circumstances, but all in all, I hate deception and it’s not like I care that much. I’ve been through worse. Besides, I can only gain from that because while I’m believed attractive and it could help me, I’m certainly not the sexy type that would get messaged and met with for the sake of hotness alone and I don’t seem to appeal to those women who are heavily on the hormonal side.

And yeah, profiles without pictures are generally out of circulation.

Thanks for the advice. I can generally tell a good picture from a bad one and I think I know how to show what I want to show. I generally smile at people and I collect a couple of smiles every day as well. I even wished a stranger a good day yesterday, in such circumstances, actually.

@SimpleFaith:
I’m glad to hear about your positive experiences and I’m even happier with your ability to identify both the good and the bad. “You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” (No, Fidelia? )

As for your points:

#1 Even devout Catholics can have very strange ideas. Devout is one thing, I’d make sure they know what they believe in and they get their theology right and they have a sober mind, before associating too intimately.

#2 I doubt spammers would care enough to go to meetings in person for one e-mail address or something. They have better means of fishing and they don’t really do it by hand anyway. They have robots for that. Neutral ground is how it’s always been for me and I have few regrets (admittedly, at least one).

#3 I admit I don’t fully get the whole family thing, though at the stage of engagement it does look different to me. Then it’s quite necessary. It would be different if we were talking about a local girl or a friend or something, but if it were a person I met online and who probably lived some distance away and weren’t habitually around me, I don’t think the need to meet the family or have her meet mine would be so big. Then again, I like the thing itself, I just don’t like the drama coming with it.

#4 Very true, women often want to marry right off the bat. Guys are inclined to call it boyfriend and girlfriend the soonest possible, in turn, I think, which is probably a secure-the-prey-but-don’t-commit-yet reflex. As for Mary, well, I’d rather spend on praying to Mary the time I could spend on a wrong relationship, especially a bad marriage.

#5 Apart from the mere presence of that person on your prayer list, such as with friends and cousins, prayer requests and worthy causes, doesn’t it look like the person’s being special to us in some way that might be understood as romantic? Before you reply, I try to pray for my ex every day (and it’s rare that I don’t), but I was already praying for her years before we got together, back when she was my best friend. Are you sure you’re over that guy? I know for example that I’m not really.

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

are there any free ones?

You DO get what you pay for. I am concerned that you would aloow money to be a barrier to potentially finding a great person who could end up being your spouse. I completely understand what it is like to not have much money. I am 30 years old, married, and a mom. I still know how it feels to consider spending $100 on anything. It makes me ill.

---

BUT, you can’t tell me that you don’t spend money on anything. You have to eat. You aren’t walking around naked. I bet if you thought for a minute, you could come up with many things you spent more money than that on and have nothing to show for it. If you saved just $10/month you could do it. But maybe money is just an excuse and the idea of actually finding a great guy scares you? Just coming out of a relationship as you have, that would be understandable. But at least be honest with yourself. “I am not ready to get back into dating. I am scared that I won’t find a great guy” Whatever it is you are REALLY thinking.

---

**Because if you are actually thinking “$100 is just too much (or 59 or 69, whatever) to spend on something that could change the rest of my life” then you might have some issues **

---

Malia

 

[Fidelia]

I have never spent $100 on anything. All of my food/clothing/necessity purchases probably add up to more than that, but i have never gone and bought something for $100 itself. and it seems like a lot just to be a member of a website. Do I have that much to my name, yea, more than that. But a year from now when I am graduating from college and will be on my own, what if I need it? and what if nothing comes from joining it?

How does the profile thing work, also? I actually joined a vegetarian one that has free membership (saying that I want to find someone Catholic, of course) and there are all these questions, like describe yourself, describe what you want someone to look like, and it seems really superficial. I am tinking about cancelling it, actually.

 

[chevalier]

Actually, that’s a valid point. Even a nominal fee is a barrier to spammers and trolls. A more than nominal fee is a barrier to those who don’t care much. Well, $100 is not little (e.g. I wouldn’t be able to get it right away), but how much does a pizza cost or a night out or something like that? There’s surely something that can be removed from the spending list in favour of it. If you feel it’s worth it, spend the money. If you don’t feel it’s worth it… well, then it’s probably not for you.

I really think $100 is about the right fee to keep the people who are honest and who care, closing gates to a minimal amount of people who would sign up and use the service in good faith but can’t afford the fee, preventing most of the temporal world’s virgin hunters, spammers and other citizens of the civitas terrena, God bless them all but in a comfortable distance from Catholic girls. Well, and guys too.

 

[1ke]

But a year from now when I am graduating from college and will be on my own, what if I need it? and what if nothing comes from joining it?

You know, it’s not for everyone. If you can’t see investing money in this, then don’t. For many of us, it has proven to be more along the lines of the pearl of great price. Worth it.

How does the profile thing work, also?

Much like the one you joined, although on Ave you also answer questions regarding areas of faith and morals. For example, you must disclose your freedom to marry (never married, divorced w/annulment, etc) and aswer questions regarding your adherence to church teaching in areas such as contraception.

The profiles are much deeper than something on a secular site. And, you will meet people all along the spectrum. I met one man who thought I was too liberal for him. Why? Because I did not attend the Tridentine, and because I wear pants! I met one man who seemed to be really nice, but then as I got to know him he was not as he presented himself (ie, he ended up being more dissenting from church teaching on conraception than he said in his profile).

But, then I met my husband, who of course is perfect for me!

However, such experiences are not limited to a website: you can easily meet someone at a church activity who turns out not to be all that concerned with being faithful to church teaching. I got sick of that, and that’s why I joined Ave.

Ave, in my mind, allowed me to expand the geography and find others who were like-minded regarding their vision for marriage.

 

[chevalier]

However, such experiences are not limited to a website: you can easily meet someone at a church activity who turns out not to be all that concerned with being faithful to church teaching. I got sick of that, and that’s why I joined Ave.

You can go canon by canon in real life too.

 

[SimpleFaith]

#1. You’re absolutely right about “devout” being defined in a multitude of ways. At “AMS” one must define their views on points of faith and doctrine. Also, you can screen out those whose views differ from yours on matters of doctrine, faith and morals.
#2. I was joking about the “spammer thing.” I think you were too, but just to clarify …
#3. No one knows a person better than his/her family. I agree with you – I would run from a formal family “meet the girlfriend/boyfriend” get-together. Once you start getting serious, however, it is crucial that you meet his/her friends and/or family. And if the family turns out to be nuts – it’s good to know what you may be getting into.
#4 My point, of course, was that some of the men on the site have absurd expectations and that they expect to meet a woman who is nearly infallible. As for women wanting to marry immediately after meeting a man on the website, that certainly didn’t apply to me!
#5. Interesting point. It is hard to consciously stop praying for someone whom you have spoken to everyday and prayed for everyday for close to 3 years. You have to make the decision to do so. It seems wrong somehow to just purposely choose not to pray for someone. Also, my ex is a whole other story, which I’m certainly not going to get into. Suffice it to say … he needs prayers.

 

[chevalier]

#1. You’re absolutely right about “devout” being defined in a multitude of ways. At “AMS” one must define their views on points of faith and doctrine. Also, you can screen out those whose views differ from yours on matters of doctrine, faith and morals.

Sounds like a great idea. Manual screening would be so tedious if you got several hundred or thousand results sorted by some criteria of matching, then you’d have to take a look inside and no matter the percentage and degree of compatibility or whatever else it were, you’d have wasted time looking at the profile of someone who’s the right embodiment of Canon 1095.

#2. I was joking about the “spammer thing.” I think you were too, but just to clarify …

Hehe. No, actually, I think my sense of humour failed me… it was a bit of a tense day. Spammers are evil, anyway. They infested my self-made site once, all over the comment scripts I wrote by hand in notepad, as well as the message board. I wonder who was it. Chances are someone who knew me, because of the particular circumstances, perhaps the actual advertising didn’t really matter as much as cluttering up my site. Those people should be banned from all sites and generally locked off the Internet if they can’t reform. Erm, okay, [/rant].

#3. No one knows a person better than his/her family. I agree with you – I would run from a formal family “meet the girlfriend/boyfriend” get-together. Once you start getting serious, however, it is crucial that you meet his/her friends and/or family. And if the family turns out to be nuts – it’s good to know what you may be getting into.

Oh yes, “look at the mother,” principle. For the reverse - if a guy treats the mother or sister badly, he won’t likely treat the wife well. There are certain aspects of certain people’s family life, and certain habits, which I would find hard to take in my own house, so surely would I like to know beforehand. For example, I’m very serious about hygiene, while I’m not obsessive about it (I don’t accept the possibility of living with someone who doesn’t wash hands, or wash daily, whereas I don’t feel like vacuuming my room every day, picking things up the instant they fall on the floor (okay, this doesn’t include socks and stuff) and I don’t need my CDs or books to be in a straight line and I just have to have my papers messy), I don’t like pajamas at day time or head covers indoors, I don’t like TV and beer as the foundation of family life, I obsessively fear controlling in-laws (I’m offended if the woman doesn’t respect her parents, but I’m dismayed when she’s unable to stand up to them while they’re being toxic). It would only save hurts if a person unable to put up with me were to find out soon enough, or I were. I could multiply examples ad infinitum. Family contact is absolutely necessary. But, “mum, dad, this is my new boyfriend!” well… depends how it were handled. I’d rather be introduced as a friend or by name. I hate the “boyfriend/girlfriend” thing, it annoys me. “Friend” is noble, “boyfriend” is silly. Besides, I have a name. And I bite when referred to as a boy. I’m fully a dolt. I mean, fully adult.

#4 My point, of course, was that some of the men on the site have absurd expectations and that they expect to meet a woman who is nearly infallible. As for women wanting to marry immediately after meeting a man on the website, that certainly didn’t apply to me!

Nah, I don’t want a Pope Joan in my house. I like people more or less as fallible as they think they are, with some margin of fallibility in that regard… hehe. At any rate, I guess my expectations are quite high, although they are reasonable in many aspects they normally are not. Admittedly, some guys really overdo it. I’ve been told my expectations are unrealistic, but I just seem to expect the woman to make more sense and have more spine that the typical man expects one to. Otherwise I’m pretty reasonable, I guess, wanting compatibility rather than specific traits.

#5. Interesting point. It is hard to consciously stop praying for someone whom you have spoken to everyday and prayed for everyday for close to 3 years. You have to make the decision to do so. It seems wrong somehow to just purposely choose not to pray for someone. Also, my ex is a whole other story, which I’m certainly not going to get into. Suffice it to say … he needs prayers.

Yep, as does mine, and similarly, the story would rather not be shared. As you describe, it would take a decision and one that felt bad. On the other hand, I’m not sure if a rosary a day for an ex, or something like that, doesn’t prevent the getting over. When I’m really over, I try to go one by one or pray for all of them exes and could-have-beens, though the last one is a special case indeed. Oh well, I’m single and not hurting anyone by praying.

 

[chevalier]

Well, this is something I recalled too late, so let me post again. Those get-togethers after meeting someone online can be weird. All the talking about how you met online and all. People’s comments and speculations and the general talk of online relationships and such. I mean, it can be sweet and all, and surely no one means ill, but it can be embarrassing. I know from experience, just before I’m accused of theorising.

 

[Fidelia]

I actually joined CatholicMatch. it is free. I made a profile, but no photo. Doesn’t mean I am trying to date someone right away, though. But someone already invited me to a chat. It was friendly and brief. I can’t believe a actually did this though. lol My friend told me i should.

 

[Fidelia]

Yep, as does mine, and similarly, the story would rather not be shared. As you describe, it would take a decision and one that felt bad. On the other hand, I’m not sure if a rosary a day for an ex, or something like that, doesn’t prevent the getting over. When I’m really over, I try to go one by one or pray for all of them exes and could-have-beens, though the last one is a special case indeed. Oh well, I’m single and not hurting anyone by praying.

I still want to pray for my boyfriend who I just broke up with.

 

[SimpleFaith]

Well, this is something I recalled too late, so let me post again. Those get-togethers after meeting someone online can be weird. All the talking about how you met online and all. People’s comments and speculations and the general talk of online relationships and such. I mean, it can be sweet and all, and surely no one means ill, but it can be embarrassing. I know from experience, just before I’m accused of theorising.

Yet again you bring up a good point. Since I am somewhat private, I remained in the … closet … so to speak with the “online dating thing.” When I finally began introducing the man I met, and it was clear that he was part of my life, we had to give some explanation about how we met. We just found it easier to respond with “through church!” It isn’t a lie, after all. And usually people don’t ask for details.

 

[chevalier]

I still want to pray for my boyfriend who I just broke up with.

Yep, same for my ex, God bless the girl. Hope she gets things sorted at some point.

Yet again you bring up a good point. Since I am somewhat private, I remained in the … closet … so to speak with the “online dating thing.” When I finally began introducing the man I met, and it was clear that he was part of my life, we had to give some explanation about how we met. We just found it easier to respond with “through church!” It isn’t a lie, after all. And usually people don’t ask for details.

Hehe. I guess I’d be more inclined to say, “Through a certain website. But we’d rather not discuss online relationships.” That or painfully go through everything, while smiling graciously as I’m gnashing my teeth. People usually mean well anyway. What I’ve just realised is that I apparently wouldn’t name a dating site, either. Well, dating is a broken concept and I have more than one reason to hate the dating culture and paradigm.

 

[Fidelia]

Yep, same for my ex, God bless the girl. Hope she gets things sorted at some point.

Yea. Him too. I still really care about him.

Well, dating is a broken concept and I have more than one reason to hate the dating culture and paradigm.

Yea. I have been told that ‘serial monogamy’ isn’t necessary for relationships in colIege, but I don’t like dating in general, so why would I date more than one person at once?

 

[chevalier]

Yea. Him too. I still really care about him.

I think I know what you feel. In my case, if the girl wanted to be with me but didn’t change some attitudes, I would still be unable to marry her, so I guess it’s probably less painful that she’s over me now. Wouldn’t like her to be crying her eyes out after me or something.

Yea. I have been told that ‘serial monogamy’ isn’t necessary for relationships in colIege, but I don’t like dating in general, so why would I date more than one person at once?

I have issues with the term “serial monogamy” applied to non-sexual relationships. When I speak against non-exclusive dating, I get the “serial monogamy” label thrown at me. I retort by equating non-exclusive dating to “restricted polygamy”, then I face objection to -gamy terms used by me with regard to… non-sexual relationships. So it looks like they can use it against me but I can’t against them. Double standard like there’s no tomorrow.

Basically, it’s a normal thing that some relationships don’t work out. People fall in love, follow it, build on it, they try - sometimes it doesn’t work out, it looks like marrying for life is not the best choice for the two. Then they split up. Note that this arrangement and this situation is inevitable when it comes to engagament. The whole non-exclusive thing, and dating in general gravitates towards that, is some kind of an open polyamorous relationship perma-stalled at an early stage in an artificial way. It just can’t be healthy. What’s healthy is getting to know many people, finding out what one likes, not being blinded by the suave charm of the first person met and so long and so forth. But all this is distorted by those who think it’s such a great idea to avoid “wasting time” on one person but instead try out a couple at the same time. That’s egoism and egocentrism at its finest. It places emphasis on one’s own needs: the finding, the chase, even the pleasures of the romantic kind are all more important than real living people on the other side, who are basically tools, items. To this day I’ve never been shown a single saint who would have had a couple boyfriends or girlfriends or several “chaste lovers” or whatever at a single time.

Dating is broken as a concept because it already gives a romantic or even sexual hint, while as it happens between relative strangers, it doesn’t give title to exclusivity - you won’t really tie yourself to the nice girl or guy you’ve just met. At the same time, there doesn’t seem to follow any obligation of self-control, so enter happy kissing and the obligatory smooching with a different man or woman for every day of the week. That’s sickening. If that’s Catholic, I’m Khomeini. One might as well play spin the bottle. I’m sure there’s enough good Catholic people to rush in defence of that “innocent” children’s game, I am. And that just because it doesn’t include sex, and someone will soon invent the argument that it probably reduces the chance of sex actually happening, et voila, the excuse will have been created… Except that excuses are just excuses and it really doesn’t take that much to notice there’s basically something horribly wrong with the whole thing at the very foundation.

This is also why I prefer the natural way of meeting people. That is simply coming across them as life goes on, making friends, pursuing the romantic interest if there are no impediments, when it comes.

 

[chevalier]

Of course, I forgot to add that online dating generally had a natural tendency towards gravitating there by virtue of the fact that profiles are open to general audience and the circulation is high, while the people are even more complete strangers, so there’s even less tendency towards any sort of exclusivity.

 

[jc-servant]

I am a member on Ave Maria Singles, but no other website. They are for finding a faithful Catholic spouse, not for mere dating which is one reason why I have no interest in the other sites. Ave Maria does not let non-members or people on “trial memberships” just troll the waters and gawk at profiles.