Dating in the Modern World

[chevalier]

It’s tough because our culture and society has “progressed” enough that you not only look for a Catholic, you have to look for a certain “kind” of Catholic. (Obligation only Catholic? Cafeteria Catholic? Fallen-away Catholic? Lukewarm Catholic?)

Show me a Catholic that doesn’t do anything out of obligation alone, accepts everything without complaint or difficulty, never falls away on anything and always has full zeal. This is not to discredit any one of us but rather to point out that perfection is not of this world.

Therefore, in the view of this prevalent practice of courting, an obligation is laid upon parents, notwithstanding petulant protests from their teen-age offspring, to take determined and strict stance and strongly prohibit such exclusive dating. It is more wholesome for a young man or young lady to have a wide circle of friends (of both sexes), rather than becoming romantically involved with one person exclusively.

Dear Portrait, please accept my apologies for seemingly taking one point of context, but I believe there’s really just one point we need to discuss here.

Friendship is one thing, non-exclusive romantic involvement is another. While exclusive involvement of the more serious, adult kind may be too much for a child to bear (although it’s worth noting that the marrying age is 14 and 16 in canon law and people are presumed to be sound enough from that point on), non-exclusive romantic involvement is not a cure to that. Multi-romance, I believe, goes against natural law. We can obviously discern and come to the conclusion that the person we want to marry is not a person we should marry. Or we can stop wanting to marry that person. Something else can happen, sometimes something tragic, simply preventing us from the intended goal of marrying that person. Or, obviously, that person can change his or her mind and leave us.

But it’s a whole different thing to enter into multiple romantic relationships at the same time or even actually engage in romantic encounters and adventures without a trace of a formal relationship.

While I’m not a parent, if I were, I would definitely look to it that my children don’t develop any sort of polyamorous patterns. One man and one woman. We can’t teach children the responsibility of choosing by waiving the need to choose!

 

[Portrait]

Dear Portrait, please accept my apologies for seemingly taking one point of context, but I believe there’s really just one point we need to discuss here.

Friendship is one thing, non-exclusive romantic involvement is another. While exclusive involvement of the more serious, adult kind may be too much for a child to bear (although it’s worth noting that the marrying age is 14 and 16 in canon law and people are presumed to be sound enough from that point on), non-exclusive romantic involvement is not a cure to that. Multi-romance, I believe, goes against natural law. We can obviously discern and come to the conclusion that the person we want to marry is not a person we should marry. Or we can stop wanting to marry that person. Something else can happen, sometimes something tragic, simply preventing us from the intended goal of marrying that person. Or, obviously, that person can change his or her mind and leave us.

But it’s a whole different thing to enter into multiple romantic relationships at the same time or even actually engage in romantic encounters and adventures without a trace of a formal relationship.

While I’m not a parent, if I were, I would definitely look to it that my children don’t develop any sort of polyamorous patterns. One man and one woman. We can’t teach children the responsibility of choosing by waiving the need to choose!

Dear chevalier,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou for your response.

It seems, dear friend, that I have failed to make myself clear and for that I apologise. It appears that you thought that I was confounding a romantic relationship with a regular friendship, which is not the case. The point I was seeking to make was that a young person should have a wide circle of regular, non-romantic friendships with both sexes and leave the more exclusive sort of courtship until they are more emotionally developed. Moreover, cultivating ordinary multiple friendships provides a much wider choice for a prospective marriage partner at a later time. Rest assured, I was not suggesting for one moment that a young person enter into “multiple-romances”, which would surely present a very real inducement to sin, especially in the age in which our lot is cast.

At the tender age of 14, and even 16, a young person is still in a state of emotional development and therefore it is, I think, strongly advisable and prudent for them to defer exclusive company-keeping, at least until they are 18 years of age. Moreover, it must be remembered that we now live and move and have our being amidst a very licentious and promisicuous culture, which can be perilous to a vulnerable youth (even one who professes Christ’s religion), yet in a state of mental and emotional maturation. Therefore, an obligation is surely laid upon parents to protect their precious children and insist that they put off entering into a serious exclusive relationship for their own good and moral well-being, especially given the moral deterioration of Western society where moral restraint has all but been discarded.

God bless and I trust that I have clarified my meaning, dear friend.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[edwest2]

This emotional development Portrait writes about is very important. In criminal matters, a person below a certain age may not be treated as an adult who committed the same crime. This does not excuse the crime but it does point to the fact that someone recognizes that as we grow, we go through a mental and emotional development process that has not changed over the years.

What has been lost over the last 40 years, is parents being told falsehoods and acting on them. That your child needs to be your friend and that they need more “freedom.” Not so. That has been proven now. Parents do not parent in too many cases. They no longer raise their kids as the generation before them. The general public, especially adult males, knew not to say certain things around women and children in the past.

I hope others take Portrait’s words to heart. Children need parents who teach them right from wrong. And that doing wrong has consequences. For a time, that was opposed by a certain anti-family group that said spanking your child is wrong. I, and all my friends were spanked as children. We were taught to honor our mothers and fathers. We needed and had good adult role models. We also had the continuity of generations past, grandfathers and grandmothers, and uncles and aunts.

There are still Catholic families and neighborhoods like that. There are Catholics who have taken the necessary step of removing their children from a school system that has become corrupted and homeschooling them. I think this will result in a new generation of young Catholics that will not fully understand what their parents are doing until they fully mature. It will become clear to them that there is a choice and a way to live fully Catholic lives that exclude the excesses, the immorality and the damaging lifestyle choices that were fed to the last generation under the word Freedom. Yes, they actively sought, and still seek, to destroy what they call the “traditional” family. That is false as well. It’s like saying I’m a “modern” Catholic. No. You are either doing as Christ told us to do or you are not.

In matters of human sexuality, the last generation was gradually led into slavery to their flesh and the desires of the world. Living as Christ told us will lead to real freedom, not the FALSE FREEDOM being preached to us daily.

The time has come, my fellow Catholics, for a real conversion of our hearts. The world has precious little to give - especially the “entertainment” so-called media. Abandon the poison and the darkness from your eyes. Work to please God, work to be a better friend, neighbor, brother, son and member of a community of believers. If we only live to satisfy our flesh, we will die.

Dating is necessary. Its proper meaning must be spread, so that, at the proper time, a young man and a young woman will be ready to enter into marriage. A marriage that is fully consistent with God’s plan. Yes, there will be good times and bad, times of hardship, but also times of laughter and joy - and love - real love that is always there.

Love for God, love for others and love, and respect, for yourself. These are things that build communities that are worthy of being called civil and good. They are a benefit to all.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Portrait]

This emotional development Portrait writes about is very important. In criminal matters, a person below a certain age may not be treated as an adult who committed the same crime. This does not excuse the crime but it does point to the fact that someone recognizes that as we grow, we go through a mental and emotional development process that has not changed over the years.

What has been lost over the last 40 years, is parents being told falsehoods and acting on them. That your child needs to be your friend and that they need more “freedom.” Not so. That has been proven now. Parents do not parent in too many cases. They no longer raise their kids as the generation before them. The general public, especially adult males, knew not to say certain things around women and children in the past.

I hope others take Portrait’s words to heart. Children need parents who teach them right from wrong. And that doing wrong has consequences. For a time, that was opposed by a certain anti-family group that said spanking your child is wrong. I, and all my friends were spanked as children. We were taught to honor our mothers and fathers. We needed and had good adult role models. We also had the continuity of generations past, grandfathers and grandmothers, and uncles and aunts.

There are still Catholic families and neighborhoods like that. There are Catholics who have taken the necessary step of removing their children from a school system that has become corrupted and homeschooling them. I think this will result in a new generation of young Catholics that will not fully understand what their parents are doing until they fully mature. It will become clear to them that there is a choice and a way to live fully Catholic lives that exclude the excesses, the immorality and the damaging lifestyle choices that were fed to the last generation under the word Freedom. Yes, they actively sought, and still seek, to destroy what they call the “traditional” family. That is false as well. It’s like saying I’m a “modern” Catholic. No. You are either doing as Christ told us to do or you are not.

In matters of human sexuality, the last generation was gradually led into slavery to their flesh and the desires of the world. Living as Christ told us will lead to real freedom, not the FALSE FREEDOM being preached to us daily.

The time has come, my fellow Catholics, for a real conversion of our hearts. The world has precious little to give - especially the “entertainment” so-called media. Abandon the poison and the darkness from your eyes. Work to please God, work to be a better friend, neighbor, brother, son and member of a community of believers. If we only live to satisfy our flesh, we will die.

Dating is necessary. Its proper meaning must be spread, so that, at the proper time, a young man and a young woman will be ready to enter into marriage. A marriage that is fully consistent with God’s plan. Yes, there will be good times and bad, times of hardship, but also times of laughter and joy - and love - real love that is always there.

Love for God, love for others and love, and respect, for yourself. These are things that build communities that are worthy of being called civil and good. They are a benefit to all.

Peace,
Ed

Dear Ed,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Hear, hear and a very hearty Amen to all of your above remarks, dear brother.

Briefly, what you say respecting physical chastisement is bang on target, Ed. The misguided child development ‘experts’ have a great deal to answer for. Parents who really want the best for their children and who want them to be able to distinguish right from wrong, will not hesitate to use physical punishment when that is called for.

Children, particularly those aged between 2 and 6 do not tend to rationally assent to what their parents say is good for them. Smacking does, therefore, have a key role in teaching them to obey their parents. Needless to say, it is not the only way of teaching discipline to children, but it is, nonetheless, an important and indispensable method of child correction. However, that is not the topic presently under review and so I must desist from discussing it any further.

God bless my dear brother and hope all is well.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[YoungIreland]

This emotional development Portrait writes about is very important. In criminal matters, a person below a certain age may not be treated as an adult who committed the same crime. This does not excuse the crime but it does point to the fact that someone recognizes that as we grow, we go through a mental and emotional development process that has not changed over the years.

What has been lost over the last 40 years, is parents being told falsehoods and acting on them. That your child needs to be your friend and that they need more “freedom.” Not so. That has been proven now. Parents do not parent in too many cases. They no longer raise their kids as the generation before them. The general public, especially adult males, knew not to say certain things around women and children in the past.

I hope others take Portrait’s words to heart. Children need parents who teach them right from wrong. And that doing wrong has consequences. For a time, that was opposed by a certain anti-family group that said spanking your child is wrong. I, and all my friends were spanked as children. We were taught to honor our mothers and fathers. We needed and had good adult role models. We also had the continuity of generations past, grandfathers and grandmothers, and uncles and aunts.

There are still Catholic families and neighborhoods like that. There are Catholics who have taken the necessary step of removing their children from a school system that has become corrupted and homeschooling them. I think this will result in a new generation of young Catholics that will not fully understand what their parents are doing until they fully mature. It will become clear to them that there is a choice and a way to live fully Catholic lives that exclude the excesses, the immorality and the damaging lifestyle choices that were fed to the last generation under the word Freedom. Yes, they actively sought, and still seek, to destroy what they call the “traditional” family. That is false as well. It’s like saying I’m a “modern” Catholic. No. You are either doing as Christ told us to do or you are not.

In matters of human sexuality, the last generation was gradually led into slavery to their flesh and the desires of the world. Living as Christ told us will lead to real freedom, not the FALSE FREEDOM being preached to us daily.

The time has come, my fellow Catholics, for a real conversion of our hearts. The world has precious little to give - especially the “entertainment” so-called media. Abandon the poison and the darkness from your eyes. Work to please God, work to be a better friend, neighbor, brother, son and member of a community of believers. If we only live to satisfy our flesh, we will die.

Dating is necessary. Its proper meaning must be spread, so that, at the proper time, a young man and a young woman will be ready to enter into marriage. A marriage that is fully consistent with God’s plan. Yes, there will be good times and bad, times of hardship, but also times of laughter and joy - and love - real love that is always there.

Love for God, love for others and love, and respect, for yourself. These are things that build communities that are worthy of being called civil and good. They are a benefit to all.

Peace,
Ed

Dear Ed,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Hear, hear and a very hearty Amen to all of your above remarks, dear brother.

Briefly, what you say respecting physical chastisement is bang on target, Ed. The misguided child development ‘experts’ have a great deal to answer for. Parents who really want the best for their children and who want them to be able to distinguish right from wrong, will not hesitate to use physical punishment when that is called for.

Children, particularly those aged between 2 and 6 do not tend to rationally assent to what their parents say is good for them. Smacking does, therefore, have a key role in teaching them to obey their parents. Needless to say, it is not the only way of teaching discipline to children, but it is, nonetheless, an important and indispensable method of child correction. However, that is not the topic presently under review and so I must desist from discussing it any further.

God bless my dear brother and hope all is well.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

Edwest and Portrait both make interesting points. Edwest is absolutely correct about the present generation and the need for discipline, however I am not sure that spanking is an effective way of bringing this about ( I personally oppose it, but think that banning mild versions goes too far). This is because children below the Age of Reason are incapable of understanding right and wrong, that is as far as I will go as it is not the subject of this thread. Regarding dating, I believe that a lot depends on individual circumstances. If at any age, a person is mentally strong enough to maintain a chaste relationship, they should be allowed to do so, but not before then. The parents and child should have an open discussion about what age they are ready, but the final decision should always rest with the parents until 18. Any thoughts?

 

[Richard320]

I need advice. How have people here dealt with dating, particularly with those who don’t have strong values concerning sexual morality? It seems that a lot of people here generally only date strong Christians who have such values. Is this the case? While I would love to date a fellow Catholic, frankly, I think I’m going to need to lower my standards a bit as that pool has essentially become non-existent where I live. But I just feel like that’s going to be a disaster…

I would really like to hear success stories about this.

Lower Standards? No.
Minimize the number of “musts” - yes.

I spent a few years on a large Catholic dating site (when it wasn’t so large). I was rejected for many reasons: too short for her if she wears heels (I’m 5’7"), I smoke, I live more than 30 miles away. Less important stuff.

As it worked out, neither my wife and I were on each others’ match lists because we limited ourselves to 150 miles. We lived 350 miles away. But we met at an event and hit it off.

 

[edwest2]

Dear Portrait,

You continue to bring sound judgement into focus and I thank you for your kind words.

Parents should be the guides, not the child. Society is damaged when this rule is not followed. There is no getting around it. A baby crawls first, then starts to walk, falls a few times, cries, but goes back to walking. As the baby grows it passes through various stages on his way to adulthood. There is no excuse for leaving the tried and true methods.

A man named Dr. Spock wrote a book about child-rearing and popularized the idea that spanking is bad in the 1960s. I recall my mother mentioning this to me. She didn’t agree with it and neither did any of the other moms I knew growing up.

It’s time to stop playing games that are started by strangers regarding human beings at any age. Might as well give a six month old an electric guitar and a microphone.

As Catholics, we see the carnage of the last 40 years around us and what is the fruit of the lies? Divorce, abortion, fornication, adultery and immoral TV and movies. After abandoning God’s ways, there was only one other way to go – down. Want it to get better? then do it God’s way.

We are told to discipline our children (no, not beat them) but discipline, as God sometimes disciplines grown men. All generations are born devoid of knowledge. We must teach our children how to dress, how to behave and how to be adults in a pagan culture. The Church did it in the past and we can do it again now. Today.

No more debates or opinions. I am tired of experts telling me what to do. Many have strayed and been influenced by an almost anything goes culture as well.

When the sapling is young, and it begins to grow a little crooked, it is not hard to correct. By the time it is a tree, more drastic measures have to be employed. We can’t be lukewarm Catholics, young or old, and we can’t be lukewarm parents either, swayed by any looney idea you can think of.

Without the gadgets, we are the same human beings of 2,000 years ago. It’s time to forget about those that hate the normal family. It’s time to shut off the immorality switch. Marriage is not a “well, if things don’t work out, we’ll just get divorced” proposition. Or abortion? “Hey. What’s the big deal?” Married two or three times? “Hey. What’s the big deal?” I could go on.

My point is: You know what to do, do it.

Yes, it’s hard, but so is four years of college or decades at the same job. So, whatever you’ve done, God is waiting for you, the Church is waiting for you. All you have to do is be willing. Willing to do the right thing.

Peace,
Ed

 

[SuperLuigi]

I need advice. How have people here dealt with dating, particularly with those who don’t have strong values concerning sexual morality? It seems that a lot of people here generally only date strong Christians who have such values. Is this the case? While I would love to date a fellow Catholic, frankly, I think I’m going to need to lower my standards a bit as that pool has essentially become non-existent where I live. But I just feel like that’s going to be a disaster…

I would really like to hear success stories about this.

Are we talking about dating men or women here?

 

[chevalier]

Stand firm on that. Real love and real commitment need to happen first. Marriage was, and still is, a wonderful thing for a lot of Catholics. Right now, the constant 24/7 lies about sex is number one is putting the cart before the horse

To get things back to their proper order, we need friendship, compatibility and fidelity.

Peace,
Ed

Thank you. In the past, I allowed some of my limits to be pushed, was too weak and afraid to put a stop to it, while I’d stay away from the more serious stuff. Having been a sinful young male, I did come up with my own illicit initiative too from time to time before I stopped but it’s not like I’d trust myself to survive a whole lot of constant exposure to temptation from somebody attracted and willing, as I already have proven myself of being able to compromise a little when given opportunity. Thus, it’s better to stick with someone who has the same values. Both would need to fall at the same time, which is a bit harder to achieve. Both would reassure and inspire each other. It should be easier.

Also, the general way of being and acting of someone who is further removed from the typical oversexed mainstream reduces the tension and thus also the temptation simply because there’s less innuendo. The atmosphere is different, the language is different. Subjects are different.

Besides, at some point one’s gotta think about the children and a man owes some to his too, not only a woman. There needs to be agreement about how to bring them up and the ability to entrust them to someone to be their mother. Now this is not to say that a non-Catholic lady couldn’t be trusted in this regard, absolutely not, but we’re talking Catholic upbringing here and that’s not going to mesh well with a good number of secular people.

Besides, it’s really easier to get along if you share the same foundations, I think. I don’t really know, so far I’ve only found out about the opposite.

 

[Baelor]

What we need to remember, dear friend, is that owing to their age and the awakening of sexual desire, often very intense, young people are particularly susceptable to concupiscence.

But not inexorably drawn to concupiscence.

Thus, it makes jolly good sense to avoid any inducements to sexual sin and this can best be done by not becoming to ‘serious’ with one friend.

To the extent that is appropriate for each child – some children may be able to handle emotionally and mentally a more serious relationship than others. As noted, the age of marriage in canon law is younger than state laws.

At the tender age of 14, and even 16, a young person is still in a state of emotional development and therefore it is, I think, strongly advisable and prudent for them to defer exclusive company-keeping, at least until they are 18 years of age.

That number has no basis in any Church understanding or Church teaching, and the Church explicitly rejects 18 as an age of reason vis-a-vis marriage. I would be careful of assigning too much weight to your opinions.

There are Catholics who have taken the necessary step of removing their children from a school system that has become corrupted and homeschooling them.

That step is unnecessary. Not every school district or every school in the nation is the same, and therefore there may not be the same moral compulsion to offer students an education at home. Furthermore, unless you have some national statistics, I will appeal to my anecdotal experience when I say that Catholic homeschoolers are no better-adjusted, moral, or intellectually able than their peers.

 

[chevalier]

Dear chevalier,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou for your response.

It seems, dear friend, that I have failed to make myself clear and for that I apologise. It appears that you thought that I was confounding a romantic relationship with a regular friendship, which is not the case. The point I was seeking to make was that a young person should have a wide circle of regular, non-romantic friendships with both sexes and leave the more exclusive sort of courtship until they are more emotionally developed. Moreover, cultivating ordinary multiple friendships provides a much wider choice for a prospective marriage partner at a later time. Rest assured, I was not suggesting for one moment that a young person enter into “multiple-romances”, which would surely present a very real inducement to sin, especially in the age in which our lot is cast.

At the tender age of 14, and even 16, a young person is still in a state of emotional development and therefore it is, I think, strongly advisable and prudent for them to defer exclusive company-keeping, at least until they are 18 years of age. Moreover, it must be remembered that we now live and move and have our being amidst a very licentious and promisicuous culture, which can be perilous to a vulnerable youth (even one who professes Christ’s religion), yet in a state of mental and emotional maturation. Therefore, an obligation is surely laid upon parents to protect their precious children and insist that they put off entering into a serious exclusive relationship for their own good and moral well-being, especially given the moral deterioration of Western society where moral restraint has all but been discarded.

God bless and I trust that I have clarified my meaning, dear friend.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

Thank you, Portrait, and for the good wishes as well! I hope you had a good Sunday. I totally agree with the thought about keeping a wide circle of friends. I think it’s necessary even for older people, basically at any point in life, partly also to have some kind of reference to compare and make out between love and friendship or romantic attraction and friendly/intellectual attraction in other people’s behaviour. But in one’s own reactions too. It’s easy to misjudge when there’s only one significant person of the opposite sex in one’s life. I’m glad your understand my point of view about non-exclusive dating.

One more thought, now back to the Opening Poster:

I did for a dozen-odd months have a romantic relationship once with a good friend of mine who was like that good fairy in my life prior to that point. She was actually an agnostic, a fallen away Catholic, I think some time after confirmation, but there had been issues with understanding some aspects of the faith before. At any rate, while we actually diverged on the objective (im)morality of premarital sex, she had a similar view to the Catholic one but I make no pretence to know what was actually going on in her head and heart. I believe she was purer than I was. Mind you that in her case the binding force of a precept to fall back on was out of the question barring maybe her own conscience and perhaps the influence of Our Lady for whom she still had some respect and love that showed on one specific occasion.

There was an occasion when I was asked to engage in simply sex without obligations by a stranger, possibly because I seemed like a nice guy who wouldn’t be rude or abusive or maybe I’m just flattering myself. I don’t know why but I used a courteous way of declining instead of a mini-sermon about morals. The young lady actually expressed her respect for my denial, in a genuine and friendly way. I remember her standing on the doorstep and shouting some positive things as I finally made my way out of the gathering.

 

[Snowball7]

I only have one thing to say and I believe it is important.
This is coming from someone whom made this mistake himself (I).
I see people saying, “don’t compromise on your morals”, which is
absolutely true.
Yet, in order for that to BE true, sometimes, we will need to compromise
on other matters, such as perceived compatibility, likes and dislikes,
financial differences, geographical distances, and perhaps the most
difficult, “attractiveness”, and “chemistry”.
If you’re a fuss-budget over looks, or money, you’ll find many who have those,
but may not have your Christian morals. Or, that person may not be Catholic.
Or, that person may be Catholic, be compatible, but you may not find him/her
as physically attractive as others.
Is it not more important to your soul, to marry the mate God has provided, than
to hold out for lust of the eye ?
How many of our men chase the wrong type of woman ?
How many of our women hold out into their latter 30’s, demanding
fantasy-inspired traits in their man ?
Just about everyone has to “settle” over something.
Our morals never have to be among that list, if we open up a willingness
to “see as God sees”.

 

[chevalier]

True but that’s difficult. Personally, a couple of times I was rather strongly taken with girls not rated as particularly attractive by my friends as a boy and young man, but I don’t think I’d be able to get over a lack of attraction, or rather being turned off by certain things. Basically, my tolerance level varies from thing to thing, it isn’t uniform across the board, there are things where I just can’t see a relationship happening. I know there are people who either don’t see it this way or are capable of getting over it, but I’m somewhat skeptical of the image of a normal person giving up on the idea of being attracted to his or her wife or husband to be and nothing bad coming out of it. It’s easy to pick wrong while convincing oneself that one’s acting from a high moral ground… or simply caving in to a (possibly self-inflicted) guilt trip.

This said, our responses are to some extent shaped by our choices. A long-standing arbitrary aesthetical choice can become our second nature with time, for instance. On the other hand, such preconceptions (e.g. going back to associations formed in childhood) can also be challenged much like sorting out personality issues: rationalise, eliminate/change.

But I’m still skeptical about the idea of giving up on subjective attractiveness. (As good as it is to challenge one’s own subconscious habits and tastes.)

 

[Colorad007]

Your job in this life is to love and pursue God as passionately as you can. Keep in mind that, “We know that in everything God works for good[a] with those who love him,** who are called according to his purpose” (Rom. 8:28). What you’re talking about takes a whole lot of trust that God has not abandoned you in this world. If you’re loving God with all you’ve got, if won’t matter if you marry or never marry, because you’ll have lived a life that is filled with real Christian joy and hope. Of course it’s easier said than done, but that’s the kind of life you’re called to.**

 

[billcu1]

I wouldnt lower my standards.

Dating (with the ultimate goal of marrying) a person who I have lowered the standards for and who does not live a Catholic lifestyle while I am trying to, is a recipe for failure.

If I never meet that special devout Catholic woman, its always a possibility that God has called me to the single life.

I understand your situation. Well Paul said “It is good for a man not to touch a woman”. He must’ve been called to the celibate life. You don’t have to find a catholic per se. But I would look for a christian anyway. That’s my understanding.

 

[RedSparklyShoes]

I didn’t lower my standards at all. I prayed for a Godly man with a strong faith who would love me as Christ loved the church. It just happened that he came along 10 years later than I planned it to happen. In fact, the very week that I said to God that I was happy being single (even though I’d felt a call to marriage and children my whole life), my now husband phoned me asking if I wanted to go to dinner and the rest is history.