Frustrated and Unwed

[valient_Lucy]

Wow, tabsie, you read my mind! I’m 25, but I’ll be 26 on Tuesday, and as I contemplate another year of being single, it’s horribly depressing. I know what you mean, it seems impossible to meet anyone. I’m reminded of Bridget Jones’ Diary, where she contemplates dying alone in her apartment, and her forgotten corpse is eaten by wild dogs.

I don’t have any advice, except that we should all keep busy and make lots of friends, so that when we do die alone, there will be someone to claim our half-eaten bodies.

 

[flyingfish]

Oh, it’s perfectly possible, yes, I admit it, but keep something in mind - if a guy is unwed but not a virgin, that means he’s had sex with previous partners, and that means that he is accustomed to sex outside of marriage, as my one boyfriend was - he used to have sex regularly with women he was seeing and with casual encounters, and he didn’t like us dating because when we were, he had to be celibate. He dumped me several times so he could go find someone to sleep with, and then got back together with me when he was tired of the non-relationships he had. I finally gave him up when he pulled a very bad stunt on a married friend of mine.

I’m not looking for perfection. I’m looking for someone who isn’t going to say, “Oh, that’s okay, you and I can cyber or have phone sex instead of doing it,” and then dump me when he finds out that I can’t do that.

Many people who today are faithful Catholics weren’t in the past. Someone may not be a virgin but have recommitted to Catholic beliefs and resolves not to have sex before marriage.

This is the case for many, and I would even say most, faithful Catholics. If you look at premarital sex statistics, most people have it. Later in life those same people may come to regret their pasts and live differently.

Even if a man doesn’t think there is anything wrong with premarital sex, it doesn’t mean he will pressure you into it once he knows you disagree.

You should be less strict if you want to find a husband, or you will be looking until your life runs out.

 

[flyingfish]

There’s a big difference between a woman who finds herself in a marriage in which the husband insists on using condoms (because of her conversion, his lapsed religion, or other changed factors) and a woman who seeks such a husband because her standards have changed. Contraceptive sex is gravely disordered.** Why would a woman who desires a long, lasting, and loving marriage (not to speak of intimacy or children) even consider a marriage partner who is already willing to abandon Catholic sexual morality?
**
I do agree that you ought to not rule out all non-virgins, though. People make mistakes, people change, and even if they never made mistakes, you’d be missing out on widowers.

Because that woman might desire to have a family and children, and the state of our culture is such that most men (or women) will not have sex without artificial contraception. It is possible that some can be convinced that NFP is an effective method, but many would be skeptical. For most of us the choice isn’t between a husband who will use NFP and one who will use condoms, but between one who will use condoms and none at all.

Most people, including most Catholics, use artificial contraceptions and have happy marriages with children.

 

[OLHope]

I second the catholic match website…, they have questions on there that directly answer the premarital relations, and contraceptive issues…, It is disappointing to see that about 50/50% of men are for it…, but this narrows it down a lot.

There are no guarantees…, but at least these things help label people as they are…, however you read into it. Neither CM or AMS can guarantee quality as much as anyone else, but it narrows it down to people of your same faith mostly. What kind of Catholic they are is entirely up for observation.

I was on cm for only a short time, it wasn’t my style as I have a great big city full of wonderful young adult catholics…, but for people who are really searching, there is nothing out there except these faith based sites. AMS I hear only makes you pay a one time fee…, so I assume you get to check back and see how the cyber world changes as much as you like. Same thing with the others…, I only have a few single friends left, and they all use all kinds of dating sites…, one used that eharmony and things were going well until they saw the home in which he lived and saw he had schwashtica’s all over his bedroom…, she hightailed it to CM found a nice copper and they make sure they hit mass once a week…, she finally brought someone home to the family…, we all knew what that meant!

Keep praying, and know we pray for you, too!

 

[tabsie3210]

Many people who today are faithful Catholics weren’t in the past. Someone may not be a virgin but have recommitted to Catholic beliefs and resolves not to have sex before marriage.

This is the case for many, and I would even say most, faithful Catholics. If you look at premarital sex statistics, most people have it. Later in life those same people may come to regret their pasts and live differently.

Even if a man doesn’t think there is anything wrong with premarital sex, it doesn’t mean he will pressure you into it once he knows you disagree.

You should be less strict if you want to find a husband, or you will be looking until your life runs out.

I personally don’t mind if a man is a sinner because all human beings are sinners. I’m not trying to be strict - I’m trying to avoid being pressured or dumped again.

I’ve had a grand total of five boyfriends over my thirty-two years of life. BF #1 moved out of state but we only dated while I was in high school and was too young to think about marrying anyway. He never pushed me for anything I didn’t want.

BF #2 got me alone and came on hot and heavy without me expecting it, and he got upset when I started getting scared (I was 19 and wasn’t anticipating anything more than a simple date) and dumped me that night.

BF #3 neglected to tell me about his three children or the fact that his girlfriend (by whom he had two of them) had dumped him flat and he was looking for a full-time babysitter while he and his girlfriend still had something on the side.

BF #4 found out I was Catholic on our second date and asked me if I believed “all that stuff.” I told him yes, and he dumped me for a girl who gave him a blow job on their first date and then bragged about it to me.

BF #5 dated me on and off from the time I was about 21 until I was 28, and, as I said, he would leave whenever his hormones started rising up and I refused to put out. The last time we broke up was for good when my friend Mike came home and found my ex trying to strip Mike’s wife, while said wife was pleading for him not to do this because her kids were in the house. Mike beat up on him, I approved (I don’t mind sinners - obviously, I am one), and I haven’t heard from him since.

In each case these were “normal” guys who said they regretted the stupid stuff they did in their pasts and were very hopeful for the future, and then they turned around and went right back to doing what they said they regretted. Last I heard, BF #4 was on his fifth girlfriend since me and was very frustrated that he could find great sex but nobody who took him seriously and wanted an LTR with him.

I’ve tried being “less strict.” I’m not seeing how your suggestion would be an improvement over what I’ve been through before. If I’m missing something, let me know, but if there are plenty of guys out there who are willing to date without pushing into a physical relationship, I wish one of them would flag me down. I don’t date casually very much because I don’t want to be a fling, and I don’t have any idea how to meet someone who won’t dump me when he finds out he’s not getting laid.

 

[Rascalking]

In all seriousness, 32 is not too old to find a husband and get married. I’m a 29…turning 30 this month, and I’m a single guy.

Let the romance come into your life and never forget to pray!

As to the past questions, heck I have a terrible past. But if someone can’t accept that I’ve changed, been sober, and been celibate, (which, I find this funny-God has forgiven me, why can’t strangers) than I say sorry to them. They’re missing out on a great guy!

 

[nodito]

For most of us the choice isn’t between a husband who will use NFP and one who will use condoms, but between one who will use condoms and none at all.

See, I would put “insists on contraceptive use” on par with “believes marriage isn’t permanent” or “wants to have multiple wives.” It’s incompatible with what marriage is meant to be: permanent, exclusive, and life-giving.

My impression is that you view contraceptive use as an unfortunate realty that ought to be tolerated in order to achieve some higher good such as happiness or companionship. But I think entering marriage with someone who insists on using a condom is like agreeing to marry someone who you know will cheat on you.

Moreover, the fact that a Catholic woman can, under certain circumstances, agree to have intercourse with a husband who insists on using a condom does not translate into unbridled permission to freely put oneself in that situation. If it can be reasonably assumed that conjugal sex will be contraceptive, I would think the obligation would be to avoid choosing that partner for marriage.

 

[flyingfish]

See, I would put “insists on contraceptive use” on par with “believes marriage isn’t permanent” or “wants to have multiple wives.” It’s incompatible with what marriage is meant to be: permanent, exclusive, and life-giving.

My impression is that you view contraceptive use as an unfortunate realty that ought to be tolerated in order to achieve some higher good such as happiness or companionship. But I think entering marriage with someone who insists on using a condom is like agreeing to marry someone who you know will cheat on you.

Moreover, the fact that a Catholic woman can, under certain circumstances, agree to have intercourse with a husband who insists on using a condom does not translate into unbridled permission to freely put oneself in that situation.** If it can be reasonably assumed that conjugal sex will be contraceptive, I would think the obligation would be to avoid choosing that partner for marriage**.

Then you would be similarly obligated not to marry anyone where it can be reasonably assumed that the person will sin. As far as I know the Church has never said that there is a moral obligation not to marry someone we know will engage in sinful behavior after the marriage.

If your partner chooses to use contraceptives during sex (or say get a vasectomy and have sex after), it is his sin not yours.

It might be considered unwise to marry someone you know will sin, but not immoral. And furthermore, it is impossible to marry someone you can reasonably assume will never sin. As far as I know, only Jesus and Mary are supposed to have met this requirement.

Personally I think too much emphasis is placed on sexual sins like birth control. Would you ever say you are morally obligated to never marry someone you know will be gluttonous with respect to food after the marriage? Or someone who will be greedy with donations to be poor? Or someone who will illegally download movies?

You might say those sins aren’t serious, but would you be morally obligated to never marry someone who you know will become a murderer? I don’t think so. It might be very silly of you to do this of course, but hardly immoral.

 

[havana1]

My church offers a singles group, but it’s for people over 40, and I’m only 32.

Yeah, that seems to be the norm at so many Catholic parishes: “singles” groups that are actually baby-boomer or seniors groups. (Like I’m really going to have a lot in common with a retiree with grown kids older than me.)

Speaking as a fellow invisible Catholic single who feels your pain, here is what I suggest:

1.) IGNORE their age restrictions. I’m serious. Clearly explain to whoever’s doing the group that you are going to their group, anyway. Let them know in no uncertain terms that you will avail yourself of their social events. There’s a difference between being rude and being assertive: I’m so sick of seeing “minimum-age” Catholic singles events that I blatantly disregard the age guidelines. I encourage others to do the same.

2.) VENT, VENT, VENT here and wherever you need so that your fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, and parish priests and deacons and everyone from the bishop on down to the janitor in the diocesan’s offices knows that single Catholics are here and we’re not going anywhere…! Vent away. Please. The more Catholic singles (particularly over 25, over 30, over whatever age someone arbitrarily decided to cut us off at) who speak up and vent, the more our nation’s Catholic parishes will start to acknowledge that we exist. It’s not “bad” or sinful to vent your grievance on the matter, particularly when it’s justified.

I will pray for you. Please remember you’re not alone with how you feel.

 

[nodito]

Then you would be similarly obligated not to marry anyone where it can be reasonably assumed that the person will sin. As far as I know the Church has never said that there is a moral obligation not to marry someone we know will engage in sinful behavior after the marriage.

If your partner chooses to use contraceptives during sex (or say get a vasectomy and have sex after), it is his sin not yours.

It might be considered unwise to marry someone you know will sin, but not immoral. And furthermore, it is impossible to marry someone you can reasonably assume will never sin. As far as I know, only Jesus and Mary are supposed to have met this requirement.

Personally I think too much emphasis is placed on sexual sins like birth control. Would you ever say you are morally obligated to never marry someone you know will be gluttonous with respect to food after the marriage? Or someone who will be greedy with donations to be poor? Or someone who will illegally download movies?

You might say those sins aren’t serious, but would you be morally obligated to never marry someone who you know will become a murderer? I don’t think so. It might be very silly of you to do this of course, but hardly immoral.

Of course you don’t have to enter marriage with the expectation that your partner will never sin. But we’re talking about a very specific and very grave sin that affects marriage in an particularly significant way, since marriage is about having sexual intimacy and raising children. A great deal of emphasis is rightly placed on sexual sins, at least within the context of a discussion like this one, because sex is more central to the vocation of marriage than is listening to music or eating dinner.

And please don’t misunderstand my point. I’m not claiming that a spouse who succumbs, in a moment or phase of weakness, to the temptation to use contraception is someone more sinful than someone who lies, steals, or murders. We’re talking about a deliberate choice to marry someone who has told you ahead of time that he does not see marriage the same way you do. He sees sex as a way of expressing love and giving pleasure, but not necessarily of bringing forth new life. And this, to me, is comparable to a potential spouse saying that he believes that husbands should be able to have sex with multiple women. That sex need not be exclusive or limited only to his wife. I think this should automatically disqualify him as a marriage partner.

And yes, I would think you would be obligated to avoid marrying someone who you know will become a murderer. You’d be placing your own life and the lives of your children at family at great peril, and it would be a quite serious obligation of yours to avoid this.

 

[flyingfish]

He sees sex as a way of expressing love and giving pleasure, but not necessarily of bringing forth new life. And this, to me, is comparable to a potential spouse saying that he believes that husbands should be able to have sex with multiple women. That it need not be exclusive or limited to only a man’s wife. I think this should automatically disqualify him as a marriage partner.

I think you’re going too far. The Catholic Church recognizes that sex has a unitive purpose (the love and pleasure thing) as well as a procreative one. The Church allows couples to use NFP to limit the number of children they have, in some cases couples may never have children but still have sex “as a way of expressing love and giving pleasure.”

There is not some fundamental difference in intent between condoms and NFP, it’s a difference in method.

And I think comparing someone who uses condoms to someone who cheats on his wife is also a bit excessive. My own parents used artificial contraception, many couples I know today use artificial contraception, and their marriages are nothing like those where there are affairs.

And yes, I would think you would be obligated to avoid marrying someone who you know will become a murderer. You’d be placing your own life and the lives of your children at family at great peril, and it would be a quite serious obligation of yours to avoid this.

What if you knew for a fact that your spouse would murder the lady down the street, but never harm you or your children. Would you still be morally obligated not to marry him? (You might marry him right after you turn him in to the authorities too)

 

[nodito]

I think you’re going too far. The Catholic Church recognizes that sex has a unitive purpose (the love and pleasure thing) as well as a procreative one. The Church allows couples to use NFP to limit the number of children they have, in some cases couples may never have children but still have sex “as a way of expressing love and giving pleasure.”

There is not some fundamental difference in intent between condoms and NFP, it’s a difference in method.

And I think comparing someone who uses condoms to someone who cheats on his wife is also a bit excessive. My own parents used artificial contraception, many couples I know today use artificial contraception, and their marriages are nothing like those where there are affairs.

What if you knew for a fact that your spouse would murder the lady down the street, but never harm you or your children. Would you still be morally obligated not to marry him? (You might marry him right after you turn him in to the authorities too)

NFP isn’t simply a different method, it’s a radically different approach to sexual intimacy. But either way, I didn’t mean to compare someone who uses condoms to someone who cheats on his wife. I’m comparing the mentality that says “condoms are okay” with the one that says “sex with multiple partners is okay.” Affairs ruin marriages in large part because they destroy trust. What if, before marriage, the man confides in his fiance that he plans on having sex with multiple women after they’re married? She can even join him if she likes. Is it still cheating or considered “an affair” if she agrees to it ahead of time? What if multiple sexual partners was simply a condition of marriage that a woman was asked to accept ahead of time in order to achieve companionship and children? What if this arrangement was very common and most married couples agreed to it?

As for your hypothetical, I searched and search but unfortunately there’s nothing in the catechism about marrying someone who plans on murdering your elderly neighbor. Of course, common sense tells us to avoid the marriage. Imprudent yes, but I think it might be immoral, too. If the person plans on commiting such a serious crime, then he will likely go to prison (you might even have an obligation to turn him in). This deprives your children of a stable family environment. It subjects them to the stigma and suffering that comes from having a parent in jail and they miss out on being raised by two parents who love and live with each other. Yes, I would say you have an obligation to avoid this marriage.

 

[flyingfish]

What if, before marriage, the man confides in his fiance that he plans on having sex with multiple women after they’re married? She can even join him if she likes. Is it still cheating or considered “an affair” if she agrees to it ahead of time? What if multiple sexual partners was simply a condition of marriage that a woman was asked to accept ahead of time in order to achieve companionship and children? What if this arrangement was very common and most married couples agreed to it?

It would still be wrong of him to do this even if she agrees, because it would still be adultery. But, I don’t think it would be immoral for the woman to marry him while knowing he intends to cheat.

Of course there might be issues about whether such a marriage would be valid from the get go. And similarly marriages where a partner does not intend to be open to life are invalid from teh beginning too.

But I always viewed it as the decision not to have children at all, if you intend to have children but also intend to use condoms to space them you are still open to life I would think.

 

[Delta_Lima]

Hello Tabitha, came across your post today, and I’d like to let you know that I have felt the same frustrations that you have in a search for a person to grow in the Faith together with, a person who would be more interested in living in HOLY matrimony according to God’s design, and who would be interested getting to know each other in light of such a possibility, with the resolution of making the sacramental commitment before God before even considering to indulge in the gifts of intimacy He bestows ONLY upon spouses.

I tried the silly O.K. Cupid site and Plentyoffish. Almost everyone out there is grossly immoral.

If it’s not too forward, I’d like you to know that I registered on this site specifically to answer your post. If you would be so kind as to PM me, perhaps we could get to know a little bit more about each other and the journey each has taken toward God?

I’m younger than you by a couple years, so if that bothers you I’ll know if I don’t hear from you! It’s up to you, of course. David

So long for now!

 

[Norseman82]

Tabsie,

First of all, ignore flyingfish. There are indeed men who are still virgins (I know many people on this site act like they’ve never met one in their lives) in your age group (and beyond) and they feel the same frustration. I know someone posted earlier about a site called virgin2virgin.com, so if you ar ea virgin and feel you are most compatible with another virgin (after all, you have earned it!), then I will back you up against anyone who gives you grief over it.

Another resource I would suggest is the National Catholic Singles Conference. They hold two or more a year, one normally in the Chicago area and another elsewhere (they just had one in Miami and are holding another in February in San Antonio, TX). Their website is nationalcatholicsingles.com . I had moderate success with that avenue this year (until she decided to spend a year in a religious community/formation program, but that is another post).

Also, if you know of any singles or young adult groups in your area that are known to be “by the book”, that may increase your chances of weeding out the CINOs. If there is a traditional Latin Mass offered in your area, thee may be men there in your age range I don’t know where you live, butif you are in the Chicago area, check out the St. Mary of the Angels Young adult group (whichis affiilaited with an Opus Dei-run parish) or St. John Cantius (the “mother parish” of teh traditional Latin Mass in the Midwest) .

 

[tabsie3210]

Thanks to everyone who’s let me vent and who has responded to my complaint. It’s nice to have people to back you up when you’re feeling frustrated and lonely.

One of the big things I’ve noticed is that most people talk about the whole NFP vs. Condoms thing, saying that I should lower my standards somewhat to make it more likely I’d find a boyfriend.

I notice that while they’re talking about these things in the context of a marriage, nobody has mentioned the real reason that I’m more concerned about meeting a guy who believes in NFP instead of condom use, and who would, by preference, be a virgin - that I don’t want sex outside of marriage and have been pushed for it before!

I’m sorry, but I’d love to hear someone like flyingfish explain how accepting a guy who might want to use condoms in marriage keeps him from pushing me to have sex before we’re married.

See, as I stated before, of the guys I’ve dated, only one never pushed me, and the others dumped me because I wouldn’t put out. Apparently waiting for marriage was a bad thing to them.

BF #5 was the worst, because I was truely in love with him and proposed marriage more than once, much to his hemming and hawing. He would dump me any time he wanted to have sex so he could go find someone else to sleep with until he got tired of that (I was a terribly dumb girl, so maybe that’s why God blessed me with not marrying when I was younger - to save me from an idiot like that).

If a guy is going to use NFP, he’s more likely to be willing to forego premarital sexual relations than a guy who thinks condom use is okay. And if a guy has had sex regularly with the people he’s dated, he’s not going to be likely to take seriously the whole, “I don’t wanna until we’re married” bit. He might say that he won’t push me, but that hasn’t held up according to my experience.

And yet, the argument on this thread has been about whether or not it’s okay for me to marry a guy who wants to use a condom. Guys, think about this for a minute - if I’m going to marry a guy that wants to use a condom while married, what is the likelihood that he won’t want to “practice” before we’re married, since, after all, that’s what condoms are for - to prevent pregnancy?

Not very good.

So, why is everyone focusing on this non-existant husband of mine? The thing is, if I find a guy who’s willing to respect me outside of marriage, then it’s likely we’ll have mutual respect for each other inside of marriage.

And there is where I have trouble. Most of the guys I know wnat sex whenever they date someone, because it’s “okay” to sleep together according to modern secular belief.

Personally, I know I’m a sinner and mess, but I don’t want to go to hell for something as petty and silly as sexual immorality. I’m alive right now, but I’m not getting out of this life alive, and I don’t want to muck up my chances on the other side by forgetting that this is just a stop-over on the way to eternity. I’d rather die alone on the streets and go to heaven than die in a warm bed with lots of people around and go to hell.

And didn’t Our Lady tell the kids at Fatima that most people go to hell for sexual sins these days? Yeesh.

I want to find a husband. If I’m going to do that, then I want the BOYFRIEND he’ll be before he’s my husband to respect me and not want to use me as a living blow-up doll just because he wants to get his rocks off and thinks he’s entitled. And hence the problem I’ve had with boyfriends.

 

[royal_archer]

Thanks to everyone who’s let me vent and who has responded to my complaint. It’s nice to have people to back you up when you’re feeling frustrated and lonely.
I want to find a husband. If I’m going to do that, then I want the BOYFRIEND he’ll be before he’s my husband to respect me and not want to use me as a living blow-up doll just because he wants to get his rocks off and thinks he’s entitled. And hence the problem I’ve had with boyfriends.

Here’s the bad news, most men close to your age fall into one of three groups, 1: the jerks you have been running into who have been jumping from one illicit relation to another or have been getting dumped for years. 2: those who hold the values you hold, value traditional marriage and are now married, and 3: Those who have had interest other than chasing women I have a friend who was single into his late thirties because he was interested in many charitable activities and other hobbies and was just never exposed to enough women to find that right person.

A man who is not “on the prowl” is probably not looking in those dating sites. You may want to consider getting involved in activities that men are getting involved with especially those activities that can become all consuming hobbies such as hunting, volunteer fire fighting, computers, etc.

 

[Eucharisted]

so you’d think there would have been a lot more Catholic males from here, but my area’s a little short. There you go.

I don’t feel like I have a calling for Holy Orders

What?

If you’re a woman, you cannot receive Holy Orders. Only men can become priests.

If you’re a man, you cannot enter a gay marriage. Marriage is for a man and a woman.

Perhaps you are called to the religious life?

 

[tabsie3210]

What?

If you’re a woman, you cannot receive Holy Orders. Only men can become priests.

If you’re a man, you cannot enter a gay marriage. Marriage is for a man and a woman.

Perhaps you are called to the religious life?

Blahhhhh! bangs HER head on the keyboard

I meant I don’t feel called to a life of service as a nun, not Holy Orders. That was a glitch, pure and simple, and I’m sorry for the confusion. I didn’t even realize what I’d written until you pointed it out just now.

I’m going to go hide under a rock and be embarassed all night now.

 

[ack]

Blahhhhh! bangs HER head on the keyboard

I meant I don’t feel called to a life of service as a nun, not Holy Orders. That was a glitch, pure and simple, and I’m sorry for the confusion. I didn’t even realize what I’d written until you pointed it out just now.

I’m going to go hide under a rock and be embarassed all night now.

Don’t be embarrassed…I understood what you meant, the first time you wrote it…