DameAgnes Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 [url="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat/2012/07/dating-the-discerning-man.html"]Found at New Advent[/url] [url="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat/2012/07/dating-the-discerning-man.html"]http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat/2012/07/dating-the-discerning-man.html[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i<3franciscans Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Great article!! I just met a couple last week and both of them had entered religious and left before they had met each other. They were the cutest couple ever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filius_angelorum Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Well, I think she is right for the wrong reasons, but here I am speaking as a guy, and not a girl. I think the blog she links to in this post is vulgar. Yes, stay away from boys who are either (a) in an on-again, off-again stage of discerning for the priesthood or (b) have just exited the seminary or religious house in the last year or so. Why? Firstly, because feeling that one suddenly has a freedom which one did not think that one had leads to INCREDIBLE temptations such as, among the more mild, the tendency to irreligious attitudes and...well...you can imagine. Second, because that person almost always had a REASON for discerning the celibate lifestyle, even if it turned out not to be the case. He needs time to figure out what those reasons were before he can effectively enter into a relationship with someone. So, ladies, leave 'em alone! Stay away! Avoid them like the plague! Cooties! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 The Crescat is not a vulgar blog. edit: are you talking about the Crescat or Seraphic Singles? Neither are "vulgar" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filius_angelorum Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I was referring to the post from Seraphic Singles, which I thought was a BIT vulgar. I didn't say anything about the blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) [quote name='filius_angelorum' timestamp='1343768546' post='2460821']I was referring to the post from Seraphic Singles, which I thought was a BIT vulgar. I didn't say anything about the blog.[/quote] it's fine if you made a mistake, but you did in fact say the blog was vulgar: [quote name='filius_angelorum' timestamp='1343766199' post='2460791'] I think the blog she links to in this post is vulgar.[/quote] anyway, why do you think that particular post is vulgar? edit: I've read the post in question twice now, and I don't see how it's vulgar. No bad language, no "sexy" language or innuendos. please loop me in. Edited July 31, 2012 by Lil Red Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filius_angelorum Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Oops...I was typing and thinking too quickly. I did mean that the blog [b]post[/b] was a BIT vulgar, because it seems to me that it is possible to make the point she was trying to make without directly referencing the various things that dating couples...immorally, I might add...do together. I did not mean to suggest that the post was immoral, or that the blog as a whole was bad. I also didn't mean to take over the thread, for which I apologize to its original creator, who is raising a very important issue. I suppose that I simply do not know an appropriate word to replace "vulgar" with....perhaps, 'common', 'overly popular', 'unbecoming'? Again, you are the administrator, but might I suggest that we have hijacked a very interesting thread and turned it into something it is not? Send me a private message with your suggestions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 i think we are on topic. it would help if you would give an example of what you are saying. (p.s. i am one of three admins, but the boss around the phorums is dUSt. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnlySunshine Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 [quote name='filius_angelorum' timestamp='1343766199' post='2460791'] Well, I think she is right for the wrong reasons, but here I am speaking as a guy, and not a girl. I think the blog she links to in this post is vulgar. Yes, stay away from boys who are either (a) in an on-again, off-again stage of discerning for the priesthood or (b) have just exited the seminary or religious house in the last year or so. Why? Firstly, because feeling that one suddenly has a freedom which one did not think that one had leads to INCREDIBLE temptations such as, among the more mild, the tendency to irreligious attitudes and...well...you can imagine. Second, because that person almost always had a REASON for discerning the celibate lifestyle, even if it turned out not to be the case. He needs time to figure out what those reasons were before he can effectively enter into a relationship with someone. So, ladies, leave 'em alone! Stay away! Avoid them like the plague! Cooties! [/quote] I agree, the post was vulgar. The only person anyone needs to answer to is the Lord. Discernment is a time of trial and error. What if the man or woman just heard or paid attention to the call and was wanting to be obedient to our Lord? Is he or she someone to be rejected because they might have a vocation to the priesthood or religious life? This is why so many Catholics are afraid to discern. They are afraid they will upset their families or friends or the person they are dating. Jesus said Himself: [u][i]Do not be afraid![/i][/u] Dating is about discerning marriage. It's not about hugs or kisses. It's about discerning the person you could spend the rest of your life with. The way she talks about it on the blog post makes it sound like if the man doesn't kiss you or hug you, he must be gay. What a load of garbage! I've been on dates before and have still not had my "first kiss" because I wasn't ready to take that step. I am not attracted to the same sex just because I won't kiss or hug a guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spem in alium Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) I read something recently which made the point that marriage is our natural vocation, and therefore it should be discerned first. So technically, people do date discerners quite successfully [quote name='MaterMisericordiae' timestamp='1343771411' post='2460846'] Dating is about discerning marriage. It's not about hugs or kisses. It's about discerning the person you could spend the rest of your life with. The way she talks about it on the blog post makes it sound like if the man doesn't kiss you or hug you, he must be gay. What a load of garbage! I've been on dates before and have still not had my "first kiss" because I wasn't ready to take that step. I am not attracted to the same sex just because I won't kiss or hug a guy. [/quote] I agree. I'm discerning religious life - probably not as well as I should be, but I am. At the same time, I'm also experiencing romantic feelings for a guy I know. To date, I've had very little experience with romance mostly by choice and have had a few people question my sexuality. It's just ridiculous. People should not be labelled as homosexual or considered inferior just because they haven't experienced or aren't ready for romance. Edited July 31, 2012 by Spem in alium Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatitude Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 In fairness, I don't think Seraphic was saying that. She wrote 'dating someone [b]for a while[/b]' (emphasis mine). If you love someone, it's natural to want some physical affection - and no, that doesn't mean you go leaping into bed with them or turn your house into some sink of iniquity. Her writing style is humorous and often a bit satirical, so I don't think she is literally saying that someone who won't touch you is automatically gay - just that something is a bit wrong with the relationship. I think people are reading personal insults into her post that aren't there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spem in alium Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 [quote name='beatitude' timestamp='1343774732' post='2460877'] In fairness, I don't think Seraphic was saying that. She wrote 'dating someone [b]for a while[/b]' (emphasis mine). If you love someone, it's natural to want some physical affection - and no, that doesn't mean you go leaping into bed with them or turn your house into some sink of iniquity. Her writing style is humorous and often a bit satirical, so I don't think she is literally saying that someone who won't touch you is automatically gay - just that something is a bit wrong with the relationship. I think people are reading personal insults into her post that aren't there. [/quote] Just read the Seraphic post for the first time. She makes some very good points - personally, I don't really see any sort of vulgarity or insult there, just opinion. And it was quite a humorous read. What resonated with me the most was this statement: "[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Utopia, 'Palatino Linotype', Palatino, serif][background=rgb(255, 255, 229)] I can only imagine how awful it must be for a son of a pious Catholic family to discover he is gay", [/background][/font][/color]and also her words on Confirmation. Food for thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 [quote name='beatitude' timestamp='1343774732' post='2460877'] In fairness, I don't think Seraphic was saying that. She wrote 'dating someone [b]for a while[/b]' (emphasis mine). If you love someone, it's natural to want some physical affection - and no, that doesn't mean you go leaping into bed with them or turn your house into some sink of iniquity. Her writing style is humorous and often a bit satirical, so I don't think she is literally saying that someone who won't touch you is automatically gay - just that something is a bit wrong with the relationship. I think people are reading personal insults into her post that aren't there. [/quote] yup yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InPersonaChriste Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I am always a tad disgusted at the mothers who throw their daughters at the seminarians over the course of the summer. Something that has always bugged me for their sake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FutureCarmeliteClaire Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I think it depends whether that person is ACTIVELY discerning the religious life, as apposed to just occasionally considered it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now