Most priests know far more about marriage than most married people do

  • Thread starter Thread starter Edward_H
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You are so right. Priests mostly see the bad stuff. I knew a counselor who was a presenter for part of an Appelachian Cultural Studies Class I took one summer to meet a sociology requirement.

He said that through his practice in a small rural town in Appelachian he had come to the conclusion that Appelachian Culture was a “culture of violence and incest.” I quickly spoke up and asked him how many healthy families visit his clinic and how they compare to the other families he is friends with there.

He seemed caught off guard and admitted he had made no friends in the 12 years he had been in practice. So all he had to go on was his clinical experience. He blamed that on the “xenophobia of southerners” who saw him only as an outsider.

I suggested that maybe they were picking up on his pre-judgement of them. He clearly did not like my comment and did not respond.

As the lecture continued, he applied the phrase “culture of incest and violence” again but to all southerners this time. I again spoke up and asked him where he was originally from. He said " Chicago, that’s why I have no accent." The classroom, full of southerners, laughed.

I couldn’t help myself, but I responded, “Well, there’s certainly no violence or incest in Chicago, is there?” He said, well, I guess you’ve got me there. I’m fairly sure that the professor of the class who had invited this presenter wanted to strangle me at this point.
 
Last edited:
Edward_H said:
Do you now understand what the priest meant or not? Or do you want me to come up with yet another interpretation of it, or recast it into some other negative light as before?
Click to expand...
“No routine kisses” strikes me as being sweet but unrealistic advice.
 
It’s beautiful advice.
Simple, direct. Perfect for men. “Get on it. You own it. Esto vir (that’s Latin for “be a man”).”
It provides a “perfect test” in the middle of a kiss…give her more of yourself, put love into.

Nothing unrealistic about it.

But you’re not a man, so you wouldn’t understand the simplicity, beauty, directness, inexhaustibility of it, would you (by your own rules)?

secret stuff. Impenetrable.

lol
 
Last edited:
Edward_H said:
Well put away the needles and start from the top of this thread.
Click to expand...
That’s cute. And virtually meaningless. I’ve read every post and those marred by sarcasm and, at times, blatant ugliness have done nothing to advance the conversation. You’ve shared some of your experiences here. I suggest you gain another by taking a writing course and learning about audience awareness. No one requires you to be sickeningly sweet. Basic civility would be a big help, though. It’s really not that difficult and you’d win far more converts to your way of thinking than by showering folks with a barrage of insults.
 
Edward_H said:
It’s beautiful advice.
Simple, direct. Perfect for men. “Get on it. You own it. Esto vir (that’s Latin for “be a man”).”
It provides a “perfect test” in the middle of a kiss…give her more of yourself, put love into.

Nothing unrealistic about it.

But you’re not a man, so you wouldn’t understand the simplicity, beauty, directness, inexhaustibility of it, would you (by your own rules)?

secret stuff. Impenetrable.

lol
Click to expand...
My hubby of 20+ years disagrees. Guess he somehow missed the men-only memo.
 
Very well said. I think the rudeness is meant to keep us away from the real source of all the anger expressed here. It is plentiful.
 
Edward_H said:
But most priests know a lot about marriage. They were raised as part of a family, and so they understand the effects of family life on marriage, and marriage on a family.
Click to expand...
Most of us were raised in a family. Priests have no monopoly or inside track on that.

As for priests hearing about marriage foibles in confession, people talk to one another, confide in one another.

I’m sure my pastor knows things about Mr. and Mrs. So-and-So’s marriage that I don’t know, but I’m also sure I know some things about his parishioners he would be shocked to learn.

To really know something intimately, I think you have to experience it. I can explain to someone how to sing, but unless and until they try it themselves, they won’t really know what it’s like.

I don’t think priests know about marriage in general, but yes, they do know facts about spouses that might be known by no one else.
 
Last edited:
I just remembered that my husband will be doing the sex and marriage session for our parish RCIA class soon. He’s done it for them at least once before and it relates to one of his academic specialties.

Father is a very sensible, orthodox and intelligent person, an experienced priest, and presumably could do the session himself just as well, but he’s not doing it. Presumably he knows what he’s doing.
 
Last edited:
Why not?

Both involve details of love, study, a life of sacrifice, testing of every virtues.

We need to be more precise in our assertions.
 
Edward_H said:
We need to be more precise in our assertions.
Click to expand...
I gave a reason why not - no immediate experience of what it’s like to live intimately with someone.

I was precise enough. Children don’t know what “hot” is until they get burned. Experience is invaluable.
 
Last edited:
ConstantLearner said:
I gave a reason why not - no immediate experience of what it’s like to live intimately with someone.

I was precise enough. Children don’t know what “hot” is until they get burned. Experience is invaluable.
Click to expand...
Right.

I don’t think that disembodied knowledge of virtues is helpful if couples don’t know how to deal with disagreements with each other, cope with mouthy teenagers, handle money together, deal with extended family problems, etc.

It’s not just a question of virtue, but of knowing how to do things and what to do, and a lot of these issues are unique to marriage–you don’t need that level of cooperation in almost any other relationship.
 
What does “no immediate experience” mean.

Experience in what, in self denial, in being second, in taking humiliation in stride, in doing favors for others? In making dinner for another, inregulsting and tempering one’s passions?

Name with precision what “experiences” you suggest a priest had no direct experience with.

Tks.
 
Last edited:
Edward_H said:
Experience in what, in self denial, in being second, in taking humiliation in stride, in doing favors for others? In making dinner for another, inregulsting and tempering one’s passions?
Click to expand...
I hope ConstantLearner will also answer, but it is quite different to be living jointly with another person, to share finances, to be legally responsible for many of the other person’s choices, to be physically intimate with each other, to sleep in the same bed, to share a home that you perhaps own together, to conceive and raise children together, to treat the other person’s relatives and friends as your own relatives and friends, to have a domestic foreign policy regarding relatives and neighbors, etc, and to do so for decades. Given longevity, it’s a remarkable relationship. My grandparents, for example, are about to celebrate their 72nd wedding anniversary.

Marriage is a unique human relationship.
 
Last edited:
Edward_H said:
What does “no immediate experience” mean.
Click to expand...
I honestly think you know what “no immediate experience” means. A priest has no immediate experience of living day-to-day with a woman to whom he owes his first obligation, and a woman who is, unlike the Church, changing. One who has needs and moods and desires. One who probably wants to have children and expand the family. One with whom the husband, if he is a good husband, will talk things over with and reach mutually agreeable decisions. One with whom he will face crises and come through them a better and stronger person. One with whom he shares a physical relationship unlike any other he shares with anyone else.

I could go on and on.

No Roman Catholic priest should have an intimate experience of a woman like that. If he does, he is not a good priest. I, myself, believe most priests are very good priests.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top