Words are being put in my mouth. I said no such thing. [right][snapback]839004[/snapback][/right]

one vocation is not "more" holy than another vocation.

For me, there's not one particle of truth to the assertion that God somehow prizes or values consecrated life above married life.

who are we (even Popes) to say that one vocation is higher than another

I am saying that vocations are equal

Canon X. If any one saith, that ... it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be united in matrimony; let him be anathema.

Out of one side of your mouth, you apologize and then the other you call me a non-Catholic and and anti-Catholic.
You seem to be conflicted and your tone is angry. Perhaps you should see a spiritual advisor or other counselor.
[right][snapback]839018[/snapback][/right]

Job had a little to say about whether or not we can know the mind of God.

If God had said the words that "Canon X" said, then it might have some bearing.

I don't know whether your career path leads more to theologian or politician.

There must be something else I can find to do now, so I will talk to you later.
[right][snapback]839040[/snapback][/right]

The issue we were discussing was the issue of if God sees one person higher or superior than another because of vocation.

Hmm I think you and L_D are talking about two different matters. The discussion is not whether God sees an individual as higher because of his vocation (as one of my religious friends says, He seems particularly drawn to calling the weakest and most unworthy!  ), but whether the vocation of itself is higher. To that, the Church has always said a vocation to celibacy is a higher calling for the reasons already given. Again, it is not a measure of personal holiness.
[right][snapback]839291[/snapback][/right]

lol. I just know I've read through pages of threads and completely missed the point before, so I thought it couldn't hurt to restate the point once more. Maybe that's just me though
[right][snapback]839309[/snapback][/right]

why why why?!?! marriage can never be brought up without SOMEONE pointing out that they have a higher calling and then someone else getting all offended. yes we have the lower calling. yes we have the less noble vocation. YES we do the dirty work of raising the stinkers that get the higher vocations. SO WHAT?!?!? it is OUR calling and we should embrace it! we should embrace our lowly positions on the earth and raise saints! how else do you get the priests and brothers and sisters? we're not useless, we're called to a lesser state. we too are holy (or can try to be holy) and though some may not recognize it, we are equals in the Father's eyes.
hurumph... this is my least favorite discussion...
[right][snapback]839629[/snapback][/right]

why why why?!?! marriage can never be brought up without SOMEONE pointing out that they have a higher calling and then someone else getting all offended. yes we have the lower calling. yes we have the less noble vocation. YES we do the dirty work of raising the stinkers that get the higher vocations. SO WHAT?!?!? it is OUR calling and we should embrace it! we should embrace our lowly positions on the earth and raise saints! how else do you get the priests and brothers and sisters? we're not useless, we're called to a lesser state. we too are holy (or can try to be holy) and though some may not recognize it, we are equals in the Father's eyes.
hurumph... this is my least favorite discussion...
[right][snapback]839629[/snapback][/right]

But one would err to denigrate marriage. As Chrysostom says:
"Whoever denigrates marriage also diminishes the glory of virginity. Whoever praises it makes virginity more admirable and resplendent. What appears good only in comparison with evil would not be particularly good. It is something better than what is admitted to be good that is the most excellent good."

It is not devaluing marriage, it is rather seeing it in the proper perspective. It is not necessary or even proper to devalue marriage to appreciate the objective superiority of consecrated life.

JP2 sums it up well: "The superiority of continence to matrimony in the authentic Tradition of the Church never means disparagement of marriage or belittlement of its essential value."

It's not a contest of which vocation is better, it is rather an affirmation of the value in renouncing the good of marriage and family for the sake of the kingdom.

The two states must be understood in their complimentarity, not in opposition to one another.

but i dont see that happening here. i see it constantly going back to who is more superior or rather, who has the superior vocation.
[right][snapback]839964[/snapback][/right]

Two of my bestfriends got engaged last night!!!! I am so excited for them. My fiance was laughing at me because I was already talking about our kids growing up together!!!
[right][snapback]842428[/snapback][/right]

Two of my bestfriends got engaged last night!!!! I am so excited for them. My fiance was laughing at me because I was already talking about our kids growing up together!!!
[right][snapback]842428[/snapback][/right]

Many thanks Hugs, a little prayer never hurt anyone!

We should be deciding around the end of march or early April.  Will keep you posted.

God bless.
[right][snapback]845401[/snapback][/right]

My prayers for you! I was adopted as a baby. My parents couldn't have any kids. Our local newspaper does features on kids needing homes and it just breaks my heart. I want to bring every one of the in my house...so I pray that generous people who are willing to be Christ and love them will come into their lives. I know adopting older kids isn't easy and I think that only couples who are rooted in Christ could really do it.

So, that's my pitch for today 

God bless you for thinking about it!
[right][snapback]845441[/snapback][/right]

here is a question for all married people:

kids? if so, how long before you had your first? was everything charted from the beginning? does anyone not use NFP?

most families i know now use NFP for one reason or another. i think it's a very good thing -- a real blessing.
[right][snapback]844484[/snapback][/right]

You know people always say that girls fall for guys that remind them (consciously or subconsciously) of their father. In the same respect the story goes that guys fall for girls who remind them (consciously or subconsciously) of their mother. I am curious to know if this has proven true with anyone here.

Some thoughts....
If I am a girl and I marry a man who is like my father, why then would my mother not like him? Would that mean that my father would not necessarily get along with him since we tend to like people who are different than ourselves? After all, we tend to hate most in others what is wrong in ourselves.

If I am a guy and I marry a woman who is like my mother, why then would my father not like her? Would that mean that my mother would not necessarily get along with her since we tend to like people who are different than ourselves? After all, we tend to hate most in others what is wrong in ourselves.

Is the respect and admiration that one feels for a certain type of person conclusive about the type of person they will marry? For instance, I have a strange admiration for Bruce Willis. There is something about his presence that commands my respect and it comforts me. I feel very warm and secure when I watch him. In the same respect I feel very secure and comfortable when I am around my choir director, Michael (whom you will notice I mention on a regular basis). That type of man soothes me and yet my father is nothing like those men. My father is so far from that type of man it's ridiculous. My father and Michael get along wonderfully because they compliment each other so well. Is it odd that I should feel more comforted by Michael's presence than my own fathers? Has anyone else had this experience?

Can we really say that people will fall in love with people who remind them of their source of life? Is it really fair to judge a situation like that? Another question: does this scenario only manifest itself in people who have had healthy relationships (to a degree) with their parents? Or does a strained relationship, in some circumstances, cause a man or woman to long more for a person to fill a certain void? Is the spouse a replacement in the sense that they are presenting on a daily basis an attitude or personality that comforts the individual? Is this unhealthy?

This seems like a very controversial (and confusing) statement.
[right][snapback]847024[/snapback][/right]

here's a question... maybe off topic? yeah maybe a little but i'll ask anyway. is it generally so that a girl befriends people whom she could never see herself with? i am not saying that it would be odd that one should befriend even those whom she could not see herself marrying - it just seems odd that i tend to socialize with people whom i could never see marrying and generally find them to be better comany. that was a really horrible off topic question/remark.
[right][snapback]847045[/snapback][/right]

The reasons why people are attracted to certain people and not others are quite complex, but in general I'd say if someone is attracted to people that they normally would not want to be friends with they may not have healthy desires. The typical example would be bad-boy syndrome for women. A woman might be friends with lots of great guys that she gets a long with and who are good to her and good for her, but she doesn't "feel" attracted to them for mysterious reasons, this same person might be attracted to "bad boys" who she can't really have a deep or healthy friendship with, or with men who are simply bad for her in one way or another (maybe a pattern of being attracted to guys who never commit, who betray her, etc.). Typically these relationship patterns indicate unresolved issues with men in the past, in many cases the father or some father figure, or any number of other possible issues.. I can't stand pop-psychologizing so I'll lay off, but its an interesting subject for personal reflection.
[right][snapback]847062[/snapback][/right]

Very true.

I would venture a guess that women of this type see men who are "bad boys" and think that's what a man is supposed to be like, based on their past examples of men. Makes me wonder, then, if women of that type see the nice guys almost as girlfriends, since they don't seem to fit their "man schema"...
[right][snapback]847072[/snapback][/right]

im going to be honest.. you're scaring me.

heres something not a lot of people know: if i had to choose one family from any movie or tv show that i would most like to be a part of (in the mother/wife role), it would be lynette and her family on desperate housewives. maybe thats a bad sign though. hahaha. okay... back to the original post.
[right][snapback]847075[/snapback][/right]

would the attraction to "bad boys" be the same as attraction to men they could never have? and would an attraction to either of these be similar to subconsciously destroying a relationship or consciously stirring up trouble in order to feel adequate? could those two behaviors be associated with the same past history or existing mental health?
[right][snapback]847078[/snapback][/right]

Yeah.. interesting.. and certainly the reasons can be many. For example, it seems plausible that a woman who had an over-bearing or verbally abusive father might have a pattern of abusive relationships with "bad boys" as a kind of transference. Or maybe some women go for guys that they think they can fix as a way of resolving something subconsciously.. There must be a study of the matter some place.. That'd be interesting.. I wanna see one for guys too. I've met guys who seem to like being whipped, or who go for ladies who are emotionally abusive and manipulative.. It'd be interesting..
[right][snapback]847083[/snapback][/right]

My fiance and I have talked about adopting one or two children. I think it is wonderful and hope we get to in the future!
[right][snapback]846003[/snapback][/right]

this was all I could think of when I see the word "Marriage"



btw, my dad is adopted as well as my 4 younger cousins. We are so very blessed to have them in our family!
[right][snapback]845566[/snapback][/right]