Weird dating question

[chevalier]

Oh, trust me, I see absolutely nothing wrong with someone encouraging their spouse/fiance/boyfriend/girlfriend to look at theCatholic faith more closely, or desiring their conversion, praying for them, challenging them to really examine their religious beliefs etc. My problem is with the idea of the conversion being one of the aims of the relationship itself. As in, I like you, so I’m gonna date you in the hopes that you become Catholic and we can get married. I’m sorry but thats just wrong.

I was thinking more along the lines of a female saint who sees something good in a pagan or actually her family arranges her marriage to him and she plays along, in order to attempt to convert him. Their getting married even prior to any supposed conversion.

Nothing like seduction + leverage. That’d be wrong.

It only setss you up to be disappointed if they don’t end up converting and is unfair on the person you are dating because they deserve to be in a relationship with someone who desires them as is, no ifs ands or buts, not with someone who likes them but is, as one of the very aims of their relationship, hoping to change them.

Things were seen differently in previous centuries, still are in the east, even among conservatives in the west. Plenty of people see marriage through the alliance of families perspective, getting a “mate” or “helpmate” etc., as opposed to fulfilling a romantic feeling. And they don’t have that theory of one and only soulmate they need to find, instead they believe it’s a choice. So from that perspective, it’s much easier to see “missionary dating” in a more positive light. Instead of gaining something for oneself, one gives himself or herself so that another has an example of faith and perhaps someone to provide instruction and support. Again, this especially where marriages are generally arranged (by people for themselves or by others for them). It would be a different thing to pretend a romantic attachment that didn’t exist! Or even any sort of attraction that did not exist.

I’m perfectly fine with someone trying to convert the person they are dating so long as they would have no problems dating this person even if they were never to convert. In such a case conversion is not a part of the reason they are dating, it is an aside because they wish the very best for this person. When it becomes one of the reasons for dating then the very meaning of what a relationship is has become subverted.

Well, I’m not particularly fond of the idea but I just don’t find to be so illegitimate, especially if we look back at all the saints having done it. I suppose some would never have married if they had had the knowledge that no conversion would take place eventually. I don’t think that’s wrong.

You can’t base a marriage (or a relationship, as relationships are the lead-ins to marriage) off of some future reality you hope to come to pass.

True, you can’t. If you’re only prepared to be in a relationship with a changed person, you shouldn’t date someone who may or may not change. This being different from undertaking a lifelong work to convert someone (by example and prayer, not by nagging or guilt trips or seductive means–and a real conversion, not a merely external one).

It has to be unconditional with respect to the person you see before you. I’m really not sure if I’m making the difference that I see clear… but I hope this helps.

Yes, I understand your position. I just have a different one on some points. Mostly because of all the early saints and then Roman and mediaeval princesses (e.g. Saint Cecilia, St. Clotilde, St. Jadwiga/Hedwig, Dobrava, Princess of Bohemia). One point to be noted, though, they generally started with the man already being in love with them or otherwise asking their hand in marriage. It was not a seduction with an ulterior motive.

 

[thewanderer]

I was thinking more along the lines of a female saint who sees something good in a pagan or actually her family arranges her marriage to him and she plays along, in order to attempt to convert him. Their getting married even prior to any supposed conversion.

Nothing like seduction + leverage. That’d be wrong.

See, the way I understand dating for the sake of converting is like seduction and leverage of some sort.

Things were seen differently in previous centuries, still are in the east, even among conservatives in the west. Plenty of people see marriage through the alliance of families perspective, getting a “mate” or “helpmate” etc., as opposed to fulfilling a romantic feeling. And they don’t have that theory of one and only soulmate they need to find, instead they believe it’s a choice. So from that perspective, it’s much easier to see “missionary dating” in a more positive light. Instead of gaining something for oneself, one gives himself or herself so that another has an example of faith and perhaps someone to provide instruction and support. Again, this especially where marriages are generally arranged (by people for themselves or by others for them). It would be a different thing to pretend a romantic attachment that didn’t exist! Or even any sort of attraction that did not exist.

I actually see nothing against arranged marriages so long as the couple to be married themselves are fully on board with it. If they are only marrying because of pressure from their parents it isn’t even a valid marriage in the eyes of the Church, so somehow I doubt that is what you are advocating. I hardly view dating as simply being for the fulfillment of some romantic urge within a person. I definately understand it as discernment for your calling in life, a calling to the complete gift of self to another.

Well, I’m not particularly fond of the idea but I just don’t find to be so illegitimate, especially if we look back at all the saints having done it. I suppose some would never have married if they had had the knowledge that no conversion would take place eventually. I don’t think that’s wrong.

I think you misunderstand what I take dating for the sake of converting to be

True, you can’t. If you’re only prepared to be in a relationship with a changed person, you shouldn’t date someone who may or may not change. This being different from undertaking a lifelong work to convert someone (by example and prayer, not by nagging or guilt trips or seductive means–and a real conversion, not a merely external one).

See, I have no problem with trying to convert someone you are dating as such, I have a problem when the end of dating them is to convert them. Even if it is only one of the ends of dating, it is completely misplaced.

Yes, I understand your position. I just have a different one on some points. Mostly because of all the early saints and then Roman and mediaeval princesses (e.g. Saint Cecilia, St. Clotilde, St. Jadwiga/Hedwig, Dobrava, Princess of Bohemia). One point to be noted, though, they generally started with the man already being in love with them or otherwise asking their hand in marriage. It was not a seduction with an ulterior motive.

I think you may not have fully understood my position as I have absolutely no problem with someone trying to convert someone they are dating so long as it is not one of the aims of their dating.