How important is Chemistry in finding future husband?

[Elena321]

Some people say chemistry is not important but then couldn’t anyone become anyone husband (or wife) providing they are nice,kind,caring,reasonable,responsible and similar quality?
This is good for friendship material but will a marriage last this way?

Some people think Christian should only consider other Christian but this is unrealistic in this “modern world” because not many unmarried go to Church.

Some people find partner based off similar interests but to me same interests is not important as long as the others interests are not extreme or intolerable.

 

[TK421]

Some people think Christian should only consider other Christian but this is unrealistic in this “modern world” because not many unmarried go to Church.

100: 100 is an equivalent ratio to 10: 10. A larger number of disinterested young people have to compete with a larger number of disinterested young people. The smaller number of interested young people compete with the smaller number of interested young people.

The advice to only date other orthodox Catholics is not in place as a burden but as an enabler of freedom & peace.

 

[Giggly_Giraffe]

Papa Benedict wrote:

"This is due first and foremost to the fact that man is a being made up of body and soul. Man is truly himself when his body and soul are intimately united; the challenge of eros can be said to be truly overcome when this unification is achieved. Should he aspire to be pure spirit and to reject the flesh as pertaining to his animal nature alone, then spirit and body would both lose their dignity. On the other hand, should he deny the spirit and consider matter, the body, as the only reality, he would likewise lose his greatness. The epicure Gassendi used to offer Descartes the humorous greeting: “O Soul!” And Descartes would reply: “O Flesh!”.[3] Yet it is neither the spirit alone nor the body alone that loves: it is man, the person, a unified creature composed of body and soul, who loves. Only when both dimensions are truly united, does man attain his full stature. Only thus is love —eros—able to mature and attain its authentic grandeur.

Nowadays Christianity of the past is often criticized as having been opposed to the body; and it is quite true that tendencies of this sort have always existed. Yet the contemporary way of exalting the body is deceptive. Eros, reduced to pure “sex”, has become a commodity, a mere “thing” to be bought and sold, or rather, man himself becomes a commodity. This is hardly man’s great “yes” to the body. On the contrary, he now considers his body and his sexuality as the purely material part of himself, to be used and exploited at will. Nor does he see it as an arena for the exercise of his freedom, but as a mere object that he attempts, as he pleases, to make both enjoyable and harmless. Here we are actually dealing with a debasement of the human body: no longer is it integrated into our overall existential freedom; no longer is it a vital expression of our whole being, but it is more or less relegated to the purely biological sphere. The apparent exaltation of the body can quickly turn into a hatred of bodiliness. Christian faith, on the other hand, has always considered man a unity in duality, a reality in which spirit and matter compenetrate, and in which each is brought to a new nobility. True, eros tends to rise “in ecstasy” towards the Divine, to lead us beyond ourselves; yet for this very reason it calls for a path of ascent, renunciation, purification and healing.

1. Concretely, what does this path of ascent and purification entail? How might love be experienced so that it can fully realize its human and divine promise? Here we can find a first, important indication in the Song of Songs, an Old Testament book well known to the mystics. According to the interpretation generally held today, the poems contained in this book were originally love-songs, perhaps intended for a Jewish wedding feast and meant to exalt conjugal love. In this context it is highly instructive to note that in the course of the book two different Hebrew words are used to indicate “love”. First there is the word dodim, a plural form suggesting a love that is still insecure, indeterminate and searching. This comes to be replaced by the word ahabà, which the Greek version of the Old Testament translates with the similar-sounding agape, which, as we have seen, becomes the typical expression for the biblical notion of love. By contrast with an indeterminate, “searching” love, this word expresses the experience of a love which involves a real discovery of the other, moving beyond the selfish character that prevailed earlier. Love now becomes concern and care for the other. No longer is it self-seeking, a sinking in the intoxication of happiness; instead it seeks the good of the beloved: it becomes renunciation and it is ready, and even willing, for sacrifice."

The whole encyclical : w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20051225_deus-caritas-est.html

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Some people say chemistry is not important but then couldn’t anyone become anyone husband (or wife) providing they are nice,kind,caring,reasonable,responsible and similar quality?
This is good for friendship material but will a marriage last this way?

Some people think Christian should only consider other Christian but this is unrealistic in this “modern world” because not many unmarried go to Church.

Some people find partner based off similar interests but to me same interests is not important as long as the others interests are not extreme or intolerable.

No, it’s not important. What happens when the chemistry fades, as it inevitably does? The couple have nothing left if they do not have shared values, shared respect, and shared interests.

There are a lot of unmarried people in my parish who go to Mass each Sunday and Holy Day.

 

[eva77]

Its important but not as important as a whole lot of other things. You can have really great chemistry with someone who could make a ****** spouse (talking from experience) and then you find yourself making up excuses just to make the person “the one”. trust me, all that fire gets cold and you are stuck with the worst case ever. While you shouldn’t expect to find 100% of all you wrote down as a perfect spouse when you were a child, 80% is really good. Make sure the 20% isn’t worse than all the 80 though, chemistry is in the mind, if you want to have fire, you will.

…and pray!!!

 

[Xantippe]

Some people say chemistry is not important but then couldn’t anyone become anyone husband (or wife) providing they are nice,kind,caring,reasonable,responsible and similar quality?
This is good for friendship material but will a marriage last this way?

Some people think Christian should only consider other Christian but this is unrealistic in this “modern world” because not many unmarried go to Church.

Some people find partner based off similar interests but to me same interests is not important as long as the others interests are not extreme or intolerable.

It’s all important. You can probably fudge a bit on interests, but if your sweetie is crazy about taxidermy, vegarianism or motorcycle racing, it is going to affect your life going forward–you’ll have to live with those things.

 

[Stephen_says]

I think there should be enough Chemistry to get you through the early phase of the relationship at least.

You see, Chemistry has the effect of making you want to be around the other person a lot, and that is what is needed when you’re getting to know someone. If there isn’t that Chemical reward, then we’re likely to get bored quickly, and dating becomes a chore.

Chemistry cannot be sought at the expense of other personality traits, though, because it does fade eventually, but by that time, hopefully, you would have discerned if this person is worth cultivating a relationship with.

 

[Xantippe]

I think there should be enough Chemistry to get you through the early phase of the relationship at least.

You see, Chemistry has the effect of making you want to be around the other person a lot, and that is what is needed when you’re getting to know someone. If there isn’t that Chemical reward, then we’re likely to get bored quickly, and dating becomes a chore.

Chemistry cannot be sought at the expense of other personality traits, though, because it does fade eventually, but by that time, hopefully, you would have discerned if this person is worth cultivating a relationship with.

Right about chemistry keeping you around. If it’s non-stop work, it’s not the right person.

 

[pianistclare]

I think there should be enough Chemistry to get you through the early phase of the relationship at least.

You see, Chemistry has the effect of making you want to be around the other person a lot, and that is what is needed when you’re getting to know someone. If there isn’t that Chemical reward, then we’re likely to get bored quickly, and dating becomes a chore.

Chemistry cannot be sought at the expense of other personality traits, though, because it does fade eventually, but by that time, hopefully, you would have discerned if this person is worth cultivating a relationship with.

Yup. You can’t discount this.

 

[eva77]

I think there should be enough Chemistry to get you through the early phase of the relationship at least.

You see, Chemistry has the effect of making you want to be around the other person a lot, and that is what is needed when you’re getting to know someone. If there isn’t that Chemical reward, then we’re likely to get bored quickly, and dating becomes a chore.

Chemistry cannot be sought at the expense of other personality traits, though, because it does fade eventually, but by that time, hopefully, you would have discerned if this person is worth cultivating a relationship with.

I believe the OP is talking about making Marriage last, sustaining the union. You are right, there should be enough for starters, but not solely required or even needed to start.

"Chemistry is great but eventually your relationship moves out of the laboratory’’ #quote

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I think there should be enough Chemistry to get you through the early phase of the relationship at least.

You see, Chemistry has the effect of making you want to be around the other person a lot, and that is what is needed when you’re getting to know someone. If there isn’t that Chemical reward, then we’re likely to get bored quickly, and dating becomes a chore.

Chemistry cannot be sought at the expense of other personality traits, though, because it does fade eventually, but by that time, hopefully, you would have discerned if this person is worth cultivating a relationship with.

I think an attraction is usually there in the beginning, but there are some people who love and adore each other who say when they met, they couldn’t stand each other. I think chemistry is more for dating, but the love that gets one through a long (hopefully) marriage and family life is more of a slow-burning ember and is based on shared values and interests. For example, I could be wildly attracted to Gabriel Aubry, for instance, but if he isn’t kind, charitable, shares my Catholic faith, loves the violin and classical music (at least part of the time), likes to be outdoors, shuns the spotlight, then I couldn’t be in a long-term relationship with him, let alone marriage. LOL Gabriel Aubry and I are already doomed!

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I believe the OP is talking about making Marriage last, sustaining the union. You are right, there should be enough for starters, but not solely required or even needed to start.

"Chemistry is great but eventually your relationship moves out of the laboratory’’ #quote

I agree! Chemistry can’t last long-term.

 

[pianistclare]

I agree! Chemistry can’t last long-term.

Tell that to the millions of happily married people who still find their spouse exciting and interesting.
To think that people settle in to “meh” really is presenting marriage in a pretty unfavorable light. That’s an unfounded assumption.
Chemistry certainly CAN last for the duration of a marriage, and quite often does.

 

[Xantippe]

Tell that to the millions of happily married people who still find their spouse exciting and interesting.
To think that people settle in to “meh” really is presenting marriage in a pretty unfavorable light. That’s an unfounded assumption.
Chemistry certainly CAN last fro the duration of a marriage, and quite often does.

Right.

If it’s something synthetic, no it won’t last, but if it’s intrinsic to the particular personalities, I think it can.

 

[EasterJoy]

I don’t know. I’d say Mathematics is extremely important, too, and you don’t want to downplay Language Arts. As a chemistry teacher, though, it is refreshing to hear that people consider that Chemistry is a subject worth paying attention to.

Chemistry is great but eventually your relationship moves out of the laboratory.

Oh, but don’t ever let the laboratory move out of your relationship!

“If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the precipitate”

 

[pensmama87]

Right.

If it’s something synthetic, no it won’t last, but if it’s intrinsic to the particular personalities, I think it can.

Admittedly, I have not been married long, but I have heard too that even with regard to “chemistry,” you get out of it what you put in. EJ can correct me on the scientific accuracy, of course, but it seems to me that if both spouses make that a priority, no reason for it to fizzle.

Or maybe it would be accurate to say that novelty is far from the only ingredient.

 

[Xantippe]

Admittedly, I have not been married long, but I have heard too that even with regard to “chemistry,” you get out of it what you put in. EJ can correct me on the scientific accuracy, of course, but it seems to me that if both spouses make that a priority, no reason for it to fizzle.

Or maybe it would be accurate to say that novelty is far from the only ingredient.

Right. But novelty is definitely one of the synthetic look-alikes.

 

[EasterJoy]

Admittedly, I have not been married long, but I have heard too that even with regard to “chemistry,” you get out of it what you put in. EJ can correct me on the scientific accuracy, of course, but it seems to me that if both spouses make that a priority, no reason for it to fizzle.

Or maybe it would be accurate to say that novelty is far from the only ingredient.

I’d say the goal is a state of dynamic equilibrium, and yet you want slow crystallization in order to exclude impurities that can get trapped in your final product if you cool the mother liquor too quickly.

On the other hand, I’m a chemistry major married to a chemistry major. We’re a little “different.”
Your mileage may vary.

 

[Xantippe]

I’d say the goal is a state of dynamic equilibrium, and yet you want slow crystallization in order to exclude impurities that can get trapped in your final product if you cool the mother liquor too quickly.

On the other hand, I’m a chemistry major married to a chemistry major. We’re a little “different.”
Your mileage may vary.

EJ,

This is definitely your day!

 

[jmjZelie]

I’d say the goal is a state of dynamic equilibrium, and yet you want slow crystallization in order to exclude impurities that can get trapped in your final product if you cool the mother liquor too quickly.

On the other hand, I’m a chemistry major married to a chemistry major. We’re a little “different.”
Your mileage may vary.

That is me and my husband as well. We were high school sweethearts who became chem lab partners at university.