Looking for Patron Saint

  • Thread starter Thread starter tkdnick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tkdnick

Guest
I asked this question a while ago, but it was lost in the attack on the forums, so now I’ve lost my list.

I’m looking for a patron saint(s) for chastity and purity and/or against lustfulness and impurity.

Anyone have any help for me?
 
Ste. Marie Goretti not only resisted the attentions of the man who raped her, but after her death he was converted and completely changed, by her intercession.
 
tkdnick said:
I asked this question a while ago, but it was lost in the attack on the forums, so now I’ve lost my list.

I’m looking for a patron saint(s) for chastity and purity and/or against lustfulness and impurity.

Anyone have any help for me?
Click to expand...
One idea you may want to consider is Saint Philomena. You can pray her chaplat daily. And you can wear her cord. That is what I do, wear her red and white cord. But as is the case with all cords, cinctures, and scapulars, you are expected to maintain chastity according to your status in life (married or single), St. Philomena is an excellent Saint to invoke for this. :gopray:

(As always, just my humble opinion, which has neither been endorsed nor opposed by my three cats.) :rolleyes:
 
Hey Nick, long time no see! Why not go straight to the top?

How about St. Joseph and the Blessed Mother? What better examples of purity and chastity–and within marriage–can you find?

My son (the 12-year-old black belt) favors Saint Michael after discussing purity in his Confirmation book–“It’s can be a battle sometimes, Mom, so it’s best to have a warrior on your side!” Not that he’s dealing with these issues yet… if he meets a girl in the sparring ring, his main concern is how to win the match… but he has been known to drop his defense, ever so slightly, if she happens to be cute!

BlueRose
 
RC1960 said:
Check out this website’s very extensive database
catholic.org/saints/

Also review catholicculture.org where each day the traditional feast day of a Saint(s) is/are cited.

and, of course, vatican.va just enter the word “Saints” into the search. Many recent Canonizations can be found here.
Click to expand...
St Thomas Aquinas actually isn’t a bad one - his brothers put a prostitute in his bed in an effort to make him forget his plans for religious life, but he chased her out of his room.

Or perhaps St Augustine, who led a wild life well into his (40s I think?) but reformed and became a great saint and servant of God.

But why not go to the top? Our Lady herself, the ever-virgin, or St Joseph, often invoked as ‘guardian of virgins’ because of his loving but brotherly relationship with Our Lady. I’m sure they’d love to help in such a cause.
 
I think St. Thomas More (a formidable, yet cuddly saint) is a great one to invoke for married chastity.

By the way, we only like to THINK we pick our patron saints…the reality is that they pick us.
 
If Mary, the Mother of God were to ever appear to me, after saying a Hail Mary or two I would just HAVE to ask a question … who in the Middle Ages long before NASA or the concept that the Earth was round came up with the idea that Mary and Joseph never had a healthy God-centered marriage? I just can’t imagine that Mary and Joseph just sat around their whole lives without making good use of the very union and bond between a God-centered love between a man and a woman.

Many of my friends, most of them divorced now believe fully in the idea of “maritial chastity,” because the second the wedding rings went on, the sex stopped. All joking aside, YES I realize that there is a part of Liturgy usually said during the Feast of the Assumption stating that the Father in heaven would not “let the cane touch her,” but honestly, does this not DIRECTLY contradict the greater Catholic teaching that marriage is for kids? (Literally). How ridiculous it is to me that in a world where Catholic couples have only one or two children by choice we frown upon anyone who says that the more (children) the merrier? Since Mideval times, we have been tought that sex - even between married couples is impure … dirty … sinful … unholy.

Yes, the Holy Spirit produced the Immaculate Conception even as Joseph was only betrothed to Mary, never having had sexual relations with her, as no man had ever touched her. Thus, the prophesy of Isaiah was fulfilled that the Messiah would be born of a Virgin. But in that same Bible, in Matthew 13:54-58 - or in Mark 6:1-6, in Luke 8:19-21 - or in John 2:12 (all 4 Gospels) strongly suggest that Jesus was a half-brother to several boys and girls born to Joseph and Mary. Don’t call ME the heretic - ***I *** didn’t write the Sacred Scripture. So put away the idea that “virginity” means “purity” unless you can answer how a rape victim - and not the assailant - is the unsightly one before God following the loss of her virginity and chastity.

So why was Mary “given to” the care of John, and not the named brothers and unnamed sisters? It is because those siblings were tending the Carpenter’s shop a long ways away in Nazareth in Galilee when no one in Jerusalem in Judea was there but for John to take care of her.
 
JohnS72 said:
If Mary, the Mother of God were to ever appear to me, after saying a Hail Mary or two I would just HAVE to ask a question … who in the Middle Ages long before NASA or the concept that the Earth was round came up with the idea that Mary and Joseph never had a healthy God-centered marriage? I just can’t imagine that Mary and Joseph just sat around their whole lives without making good use of the very union and bond between a God-centered love between a man and a woman.

Many of my friends, most of them divorced now believe fully in the idea of “maritial chastity,” because the second the wedding rings went on, the sex stopped. All joking aside, YES I realize that there is a part of Liturgy usually said during the Feast of the Assumption stating that the Father in heaven would not “let the cane touch her,” but honestly, does this not DIRECTLY contradict the greater Catholic teaching that marriage is for kids? (Literally). How ridiculous it is to me that in a world where Catholic couples have only one or two children by choice we frown upon anyone who says that the more (children) the merrier? Since Mideval times, we have been tought that sex - even between married couples is impure … dirty … sinful … unholy.

Yes, the Holy Spirit produced the Immaculate Conception even as Joseph was only betrothed to Mary, never having had sexual relations with her, as no man had ever touched her. Thus, the prophesy of Isaiah was fulfilled that the Messiah would be born of a Virgin. But in that same Bible, in Matthew 13:54-58 - or in Mark 6:1-6, in Luke 8:19-21 - or in John 2:12 (all 4 Gospels) strongly suggest that Jesus was a half-brother to several boys and girls born to Joseph and Mary. Don’t call ME the heretic - ***I *** didn’t write the Sacred Scripture. So put away the idea that “virginity” means “purity” unless you can answer how a rape victim - and not the assailant - is the unsightly one before God following the loss of her virginity and chastity.

So why was Mary “given to” the care of John, and not the named brothers and unnamed sisters? It is because those siblings were tending the Carpenter’s shop a long ways away in Nazareth in Galilee when no one in Jerusalem in Judea was there but for John to take care of her.
Click to expand...
Are you serious? Would YOU contemplate having marital relations with a woman so holy that she has borne GOD HIMSELF INCARNATE within her body for nine months? Whose own womb, whose own body, has literally become the holiest and most sacred of shrines, temples or tabernacles?

And even if you would dare what makes you think GOD would LET you dare -when he struck dead the man who touched the Ark of the Covenant in the Old Testament?

Mary and Joseph’s marriage was indeed Christ centred - but centred on loving the physical child Christ and raising HIM, not on having marital relations or further children with each other.
 
Well.

A few observations:

– I sense a misunderstanding of “marital chastity.” It doesn’t mean celibacy. It does mean being faithful to your spouse, and to God’s will regarding sexual relations.

– The Holy Family wasn’t just any family. It was God Incarnate, the woman who had the duty to care for Him during His childhood, and the man whose responsibility was to provide for and protect them both. People charged with an extraordinary task cannot be expected to dwell in ordinary circumstances.

– So the second the wedding rings come on, the sex stops? The sex shouldn’t have been going on before the wedding rings came on!

– Whatever individuals may have thought or taught, the Church doesn’t teach – nor ever has taught, as far as I know – that sex is dirty, sinful and unholy in itself. It can’t be, because God invented it. Sex is only dirty, sinful and unholy when used in a manner contrary to God’s purpose, which an awful lot of people are doing these days (and don’t like to be reminded that what they’re doing is wrong). Nor does the Church impute sinfulness to somebody who has been raped.

As for your last paragraph, since you make the assertion, you bear the burden of proving it. So prove it.

That’s as much of your post as I could make sense out of.
 
LilyM said:
Are you serious? Would YOU contemplate having marital relations with a woman so holy that she has borne GOD HIMSELF INCARNATE within her body for nine months? Whose own womb, whose own body, has literally become the holiest and most sacred of shrines, temples or tabernacles?

And even if you would dare what makes you think GOD would LET you dare -when he struck dead the man who touched the Ark of the Covenant in the Old Testament?

Mary and Joseph’s marriage was indeed Christ centred - but centred on loving the physical child Christ and raising HIM, not on having marital relations or further children with each other.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am completely serious. The same could be said of the first Eve … the one named Eve … how could Adam ever touch THAT?

Mary was an ever-Virgin to all sin. That is a remarkable accomplishment that was only repeated one other time in all human history, and that was when the God of this Mother of God was born … when Jesus Christ, fully and simultaneously human and divine, was exposed to human temptation on the Judean Wilderness for 40 days and 40 nights. Many think Elijah is a 3rd person in heaven, but I strongly disagree, based on Matt 17:9. Many think that the good thief who died next to Jesus is also in heaven now … no one knows yet about that one. Someday, we will. I think his soul is in heaven, but his body is where Adam’s is … in the dust of the Earth awaiting the Resurrection.

Yet, Jesus never sinned. Ironically, there are two … ONLY two humans who are now living in heaven in eternal incorruptable bodies … one named Jesus, and the other named Mary. Mary is not God - she just has a very good connection to God, and thus every prayer to her for her intercession is worth its weight in gold. To this day, Jesus is probably getting an earful from Mom on how He treated her when she asked to see Him in Mark 3:31.

The value of Mary is not in the Immaculate Conception, but in her virginity to sin. She got married (after the Immaculate Conception) and unlike Jesus, she was living her adulthood in the married life. I appreciate everything anyone would say about Jesus being an only Child based on presumptions of how THEY would react if married to Mary, but ALL OF US should see Marriage as a chance to praise God through the married life of TOTAL love on all levels - including sex. The Pope’s Encyclical speaks of this in great detail. Most of all, the Scripture itself speaks of Jesus … in all 4 Gospels and in Acts of the Apostles.

In Mark: (to Jesus): “Your mother and your brothers and your sisters are outside asking for you.” Also in Mark: (about Jesus in his home-town) … "Is He not the carpenter - the son of Mary, and the brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters also with us? Matthew cites similar passages, as does Luke. In John the siblings are seen in the Wedding at Cana. In Acts - also by Luke, the siblings are seen in the first gatherings of a Church in Jerusalem around Mary, when the Apostles, in one accord with Mary the Mother of Jesus and his brothers prayed.

So as I said, I am serious. There is nothing wrong with saying Mary was a Virgin who married Joseph - a brave man for sticking with Mary the Mother of God who gave birth to a boy that wasn’t his - something that could have gotten Mary stoned under Mosaic Law - gave Mary many children as God’s gift to the world. It would be wrong to say that Mary was not a virgin when conceiving Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit, as even Isaiah had predicted this, as well as the birthplace in Jerusalem 600 years ahead of time. It would also not be wrong to say that Mary, who always said “yes” to God would also live the desired married life with her spouse, Joseph. I remember the stories of the outrage when Pope John XXIII, I think, demanded that “Joseph her spouse” be added to the First Eucharistic Prayer. The Catholic Church has long seen Joseph as some sort of a threat … some sort of an intruder … some sort of an evil mortal human not up to the standards of being her husband. In fact, he is my favorite Saint, and the Confirmation name I chose. Mere human who is attracted to good and holy and God-loving women. Sad thing is, Joseph probably had to spend a few hours in purgatory, but Mary never has, and never will. I bet she and her son can’t wait for the Resurrection when finally, she can see the man she loved on Earth while Jesus can see the Foster Dad He has missed very much - a Dad who gave Jesus several half-brothers and half-sisters … and the Bible tells me so. ALL THE SAME … I’m convinced that if I had to pick 3 people Jesus wants to see in heaven even before them, it would be his best friends - his social equals in life … a brother and sister team in Bethany - Lazarus and his sisters Mary and Martha. So beloved were they that when Jesus rose into heaven, He did so from Bethany.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top