Naw, Augistine wasn’t overly strict. His experience came in the trenches as a pastor and he was well aware of what men were capable of and compassionate with their weakness. It was Pelagius, the guy Augustine was writing against that was impossibly strict and puritanical. It’s never the men who believe that human nature is fallen that are impossibly strict but those that believe we are capable of perfection if we only have the willpower.
I certainly don’t think asking or disclosing virginity status extremely early on is wise.
jmjZeile, I think your take on this issue is balanced and fair. Christian forgiveness does not mean abandoning prudence. As for St. Augustine, I do think there are indeed people who have had bad experiences with premarital sex and “repented” but also come away with an understanding that sex itself is “dirty”, or an inherently selfish thing, that should be avoided as much as possible, even within marriage.
Certainly it is something to look for. But not necessarily something to advertise that you are without being fairly sure of the character of the person you are revealing it to.
Very good!
Well, I’d use the analogy that it might make a very nice surprise once you know and love the person well, just as discovering that your sweetie had enough savings to pay off your student loans, or was the heir to a major corporation would be a nice surprise once you knew you already cared about them. It’s when it drives the relationship that things get WEIRD.
I agree with most of what she says. The one thing I do think though is that she goes on about the bride’s history being hers alone. I do tend to think that if you’re not a virgin it’s worth a mention if the relationship is getting serious. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe you should be obliged to shout your sexual history (or lack thereof) from the rooftops but I do think it’s something a couple might have to work through.
I don’t think virgin status is irrelevant. I think it’s an admirable thing to be able to say that you’ve saved yourself for your husband/wife. I think it’s beautiful and precious and sacred. I just think that there is more to a person than any history of sexual sins (or any sins for that matter) and that it reduces the person to their sin if you were to rule them out for that reason.I actually agree with this, and voted “Yes”. However, note that the way you worded your question, whether one would consider dating a non-virgin, not “do you find virginity status completely irrelevant when dating”, makes it difficult for anyone to answer “No”, unless you are speaking of someone with an extreme “I’d rather die single than marry a non-virgin” mentality. I know there are some people like that on CAF, but I really think such people are in the extreme minority.
Also, while you clarified later that by “non-virgin” you meant someone who had actually been unchaste before marriage, I do think most CAFers would consider a widower or divorcee with annulment, etc. I also can only recall one poster on CAF who stated he wouldn’t even consider a victim of rape or sexual abuse – and even that person claimed it was because he knew he couldn’t deal with the baggage of the trauma, PTSD, etc…not because he’d consider such a person to actually be guilty of unchastity or “not good enough”.
However, I also suspect that there are many people who WOULD consider a non-virgin, but also DON’T think virginity status is completely irrelevant, either. Though even they might be reluctant to post about it, for fear of being attacked.
But, I also think some of the attitudes expressed on the other topic you speak of, that even having a “general preference” was shallow, selfish, immature, etc,was also extreme. Or that sexual history is “none of your business”. (Though to be fair, that particular poster also seemed to think a financial or credit history was also “none of your business” and totally irrelevant, which I actually disagree with even more strongly than whether a sexual history is relevant).
Yet, I’d hazard a guess that if someone had been 100+ partners before marriage, depending on the context, that actually might indicate a disordered sexuality that can’t just be cured with a trip to the confessional. Indeed, as columbkille noted, there is actual research out there that suggests that it does matter.
I certainly think it’s more important what someone’s current attitude is about sex. What some of the “history doesn’t matter” crowd seem to naively ignore is that many people are NOT honest while dating. Not just in the sense of lying about the past, either. Some lie about their current beliefs, or at least minimize differences, naively believing “true love” will overcome it all.
There are cases where a sexually active person might agree to a non-sexual dating relationship, NOT because they’ve repented or changed their minds, but merely because they “respect” the values of a prospective spouse. Much like some go through the motions of a faith conversation to appease someone into marriage. Only to show their true colors after marriage. And note that Catholics do NOT hold to the “anything goes in the marriage bed” attitude that many Protestants do, and don’t see marriage as a cure for sexual sin.
I suppose one can argue that even such liars can be found out, if one dates long enough and discerns hard enough. But I just find it flies in the face of common sense that past actions aren’t at all a predictor of future ones. Unless of course you are speaking of someone who had a major conversion/repentance experience. That certainly does happen. But sometimes, it only seems to happen, or the person backslides – think of Father Corapi, for example.
I think even among the more chaste type of men you often find this attitude. Virginity in modern society is often seen as a feminine virtue, or at least much more important for women than for men. In turn I think many women (even chaste ones) resent that a man is offered forgiveness for sexual sins in a way that the church community often does not offer it to women.
It can be kind of a fetish thing–as you can see from DCM’s story about her first husband.
That was a very good blog post!
The other thing that I wanted to mention about this is that when people are very vocal about their insistence on marrying a virgin, it’s very hard on anyone who has been a victim of sexual assault.
That is a small portion of the population. At some point these things should be discussed. A non virgin make or female may have stds or even unknown or known children. Also a guy or girl should know if the person they are falling in love with has been assaulted or abused as well. This can and does affect marital relations. Someone who is dicerning a person to marry should also have a right to know if this person has pledged thier bodies to another in an act designed to be unifying. A type of marriage vow with thier bodies.
I’m ashamed of my past. I repent of it. I was several people’s first. And there is a sick culture of it. Especially amoung men. In locker rooms we would challenge each other.
I think that is an odd way to look at it. Our society does not prize virginity. If a rape victim “feels” a certain way because someone would misunderstand that idea if virginity then better to know that before a lot of dates happen
It’s one of the reasons victims of sexual assault can turn to promiscuity - if they’re already “ruined” there’s no real reason not to sleep around.
Or, maybe it’s that they’re trying to have control over the situation.
