You are right; I do not know your marriage.
However, I am a bit older than you; my guess is that I am at least twice as old and possibly approaching three times as old, and as such have a different perspective on things if for no other reason than that I have far more experience - or if you wish, far more data.
That includes 12 years of being a divorce attorney, and being a “people watcher”. And while each individual is unique, the Old Testament comment about there being nothing new under the sun has far more validity than you wish to give credit.
It wasn’t me; it was a secular scholar from a non-Catholic university who did a survey of those who shacked up together; within 5 years 90% had broken up. The divorce rate statistics need no retelling, and interestingly, those who engage in sexual relations before marriage, and particularly those who conceive a child out of wedlock are at far higher risk than those who don’t.
None of that means you are guaranteed to divorce. However, it is clear from your writing that you are far more a relativist when it comes to truth than an absolutist, and relativism is a slippery slope leading in only one direction - down. Your marriage may be great right now - according to your accounting; last I checked it meant you have a spouse, and you both have to not only be on the same page, but stay on the same page. I never had a divorce client in 12 years who did not admit to having had a great marriage - at one point. and each and every one of them found themselves on different pages than their spouse at some point; different enough that they were parting company.
And having the same faith and actually believing what your church teaches (which you have already said you don’t) is no guarantee against divorce. It is just that when you are not on the same page spiritually with a solid foundation (the “I believe” part), you enter that much more into the area of relativism, that much more into the area of different values or shifting values.
So you want to be a professor of religion. You missed my point; if you want to be a pick-and-choose member of whatever church, Catholic included, and you have decided you have far more wisdom than a whole lot of people who came before you. You say things cannot be proved. Perhaps that depends on what you call proof. John Henry Cardinal Newman comes to mind immediately, and there are many others; if you wnat a more recent person, Scott hahn will do for starters, and Kimberly a close second. The Catholic Church, built on the history of the people of the Old Testament has another 2000 years of thinking on what we call Sacred Scripture. And it is interesting that the whole thing hangs together intellectually; something that no one else can say or does say. You want to be the professional skeptic? Be my guest. There are numerous people, far more brilliant than you and I combined, who were skeptics, pursued the issue (as you appear to be disintested in doing) and came to the conclusion that there is far more proof in the teachings of the Catholic Church than you wish to concede. And I have met very, very few truly intellectual people who do not have a sub rosa issue that fuels their skepticism. All too much of what gets passed off as intellectual skepticism is nothing more than “I”. “I want to do…” I want to behave" “I want my freedom…” except that freedom is not freedom from, it is freedom to, and freedom from is simply license, not freedom.
What was my point? You are mistaking a personal goal for what I mean by a clear sense of direction; and that direction is Christ. I would point you to the Synoptics story of the Rich Young Man, but I won’t waste your time or mine. It goes back to the conundrum of not being fully human until one has emptied oneself completely. You are young and full of yourself. That is not particularly unusual in someone young. But as the saying goes: too soon old and too late smart.
Why am I here? Because I choose to follow Christ, and would hope that in some small way I could encourage others on that same path. Because I am not yet too old to learn something. And because I have had others thank me for my comments and tell me that I have helped them.
By the way, I am a bit pointed at times. I am not mad at you at all. Bemused is closer to what I feel. You are welcome to blow off what I say; that does not impact me. I wish you well. I strongly disagree with your analysis of religion, of how you intend to raise your child, and what I see as your relativism. Why do I even enter the fracas? Part of wisdom is the understanding not only that I have made mistakes, but what those mistakes and wrong chocies fully entailed, and the wisdom to choose differently the next time a similar opportunity arises. And part of wisdom is the desire to impart it in others, so the road they travel is smoother.
