Quitting the Dating Game (ABCs of Choosing a Good Wife by Stephen Wood)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cat_Herder
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cat_Herder said:
I am reading The ABCs of Choosing a Good Wife by Stephen Wood, published by Family Life Center and sold here at Catholic Answers. The book has been a wake-up call for me in many ways, but specifically in terms of what it says about dating.

Basically, Mr. Wood writes off dating completely as a loser’s game, a constant “pattern of bonding and breaking up” (p. 32).

I am very much eager to quit the dating game. However, I am not sure how to apply his advice, which seems to be written for teenagers and college-age adults. I am a busy postgraduate professional, as are my relationship prospects.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I bought the book “the ABC’s of choosing a good husband” when I was 19 or 20. I tried to live it out, but ultimately found it a bit impractical. Its the principals behind it that are important, but whether you call it dating or courtship, it really doesn’t matter. The big point is to not treat dating as if it were a less committed marriage-type relationship where you’re just seeing how long it lasts, breaking up and searching for the next person. Its important to look at their character.

But as for how you see each other and what situations you avoid to avoid near occassions of sin, that really isn’t something that there are straight forward rules for. That said, my husband and I spent a lot of time getting to know each other’s family. But a lot of that was that living three hours a part meant that we could only see each other on weekends and someone would have to spend the night at the other location on Saturday. We felt it was important to see each other as frequently as we could to discern marriage, but there was no way we could afford to hotel it and I could every easily see the hotel being a near occassion of sin as well. So we let our parents’ know that we were meeting each other (we originally met on Ave Maria Singles) and after the first meeting (where my brother and I drove down and had a motel room), our parents’ offered a sleeping space. So when he’d visit me, he’d sleep in my parent’s camper. When I visited him, I slept in his sister’s old. Eventually my mother in law started referring to his sister’s bedroom as my room.

We were courting in our late 20’s but I have to say that being around our parents was benefitial. It was definitely easier to be chaste when visiting him at his parents’ house as opposed to visiting him at his apartment. Usually we’d feel the tension between us at his apartment and knew that we had to get out and do something in public immediately. Honestly, constantly going out when you’re “dates” entail the entire weekend is exhausting. So it was nice hanging out at our parents’ places, playing board games with our families, socializing at the dinner table, sitting our parents’ living room and reading separate books. We also prayed the liturgy of the hours together which we still do in our marriage.

It a nice way to get to know a potential spouse and their family, and usually the two of us are invited to have dinner at his parents’ once a week. I moved to his location, so now my parents are 3 hours away and we can’t see my parents’ that often, but I love the great relationship I have with my in-laws.
 
Rascalking said:
How old were your kids when they did that? Did they live close to you? What did their dates have to say about it? Did they think it was odd? Did they come from a very religious background? Did they have jobs, friends, and a life outside from dating? Did they meet beforehand?

My father works full time,and even though he loves me dearly, he doesn’t have the time to “approve” of every woman I meet. My mother is retired, and even though she has the time to “approve” of the every woman I meet, she has better things to do.

Look, nothing against the way your kids did things. Do whatever you want, it’s a free country. However, the overwhelming majority of the dating world (yes, dating can be moral as well, it doesn’t have to be “courting”) would be a bit freaked out by some of the things the book suggests.
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on how important and how close of a relationship you have to your parents and extended family once you’re an adult. My brother-in-law and sister live in an apartment only a block away from my parents. My brother just under me owns a house about 10 minutes from my parents’ place. Even if they’re not hanging out at either house, I know my Dad was utilizing my brother in law for awhile to check on the dog while my parents’ are at work. Everyone knows each other’s work schedules, and if someone is having car problems, someone else from the family will step in and help arrange carpools.

Similarily, my husband and I have a similiar relationship with my in-laws. If we’re having car trouble, my husband’s parents’ are the first people we call. They’d be insulted if we didn’t call. We also frequently carpool to Mass and if either of us made a big meal, we’ll pass on leftovers to each other.
 
HumbledCatholic said:
The institution of marriage itself is open to the same critism–that it is frequently abused–that has been levelled against dating. Yet that has not led anyone here to reject that institution. In that case, we are perfectly happy to place the blame not on a flawed institution, but on individuals acting unjustly.
Click to expand...
Please show me where marriage is exposed to the same criticism as is directed against dating.
 
twoangels said:
I guess it depends on how important and how close of a relationship you have to your parents and extended family once you’re an adult. .
Click to expand...
I disagree with you. I’m very close to my father. Probably because I’m my own man and don’t need his approval on everything, in particular woman!
 
Please show me where marriage is exposed to the same criticism as is directed against dating.
Click to expand...
That depends what you mean by the same. I had meant it as the same line of criticism, namely, concluding that, because many people abuse the system, the fault for their abuse is inherent in the system.

Every plaint that Cat Herder made against dating can be made against marriage.

The Sacramental difference counts for this: at least we know the institution of marriage is not at fault.

The question is, can we see the parallel enough to scrap the easy panacaea of rulemaking and get to the heart of the problem, which is something between sin and scrupulosity?
 
HumbledCatholic said:
That depends what you mean by the same. I had meant it as the same line of criticism, namely, concluding that, because many people abuse the system, the fault for their abuse is inherent in the system.
Click to expand...
That’s a little vague, don’t you think?
Every plaint that Cat Herder made against dating can be made against marriage.
Click to expand...
What about mine?
The question is, can we see the parallel enough to scrap the easy panacaea of rulemaking and get to the heart of the problem, which is something between sin and scrupulosity?
Click to expand...
Nobody is making dating into a sin here, I think.
 
TedDC said:
Well, this kind of dating must be a sin 🙂
loveme.com/tour1/photos/best_tour_photos/spbDes2002mtv1-2-186.shtml
loveme.com/tour1/photos/best_tour_photos/spbDes2002mtv1-2-59.shtml
loveme.com/tour1/photos/best_tour_photos/spbnov2002mtv1-2-69.shtml
loveme.com/tour1/photos/best_tour_photos/spbDes2002mtv1-2-84.shtml

(Photos from a “romance tour” to Ukraine offered by a mail-order bride site.)
Click to expand...
That’s more a varation on sponsoring than normal dating.

Absent some specific reason such as one pertaining to occasion of sin, there’s nothing wrong with a man and a woman hanging out together, and even nothing wrong with a man and a woman hanging out together in a manner suggesting legitimate interest, as long as it’s chaste.

Where dating is broken as a concept is that it wants definitions too early, pressures towards a speedy and premature conclusion, implies romantic possibilities perhaps too early and too openly, is prone to putting forth the fun ahead of the actual purpose (interacting with another for itself is fine, as a person should at any rate be a purpose himself rather than a means to an end; on the other hand, the fun of the chase, the thrill and such like should not make one lose sight of the important things).

The above and the whole exclusivity problem that I won’t at this time venture into simply because I’m having more work than should be legally allowed. :o
 
What ever happened to common sense?
Truly only the immature or reckless or undisciplined or sinful need chaperons.

I am not sure what the author’s reasoning was for chaperoning but I think he is on the right track.

If God could see all things, and we through our faith are fully aware of this to the point He knows our thoughts and intentions then who then who truly believes is not chaperoned? Is it not the function of God’s son made flesh to be with us? Is it He whom we partake in the Eucharist? Humbly and gratefully say God is with us.

Then why do we insist on doing things on our own? If God has taken our parents or loved ones away from us then that gives us even more incentive to humbly accept the gift of Himself as our parent. Once you understand why we need the Lord as our chaperon then the more you will seek it out. Once we truly have, God will provide in all that He has planned.

God be with you,
John Anthony
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top