MissyP89 Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 She's thought it through. She's an adult, and can accept the consequences of her decisions. As she has said in the past, it's better for her to not marry than to marry someone she isn't happy with. Again, the Karl Keating quote above. She's likely going to miss out on everyone now, perfect or not. The irony is that her friends, due to demanding that she not limit her choices, have left her in a terrible state, unwilling to marry at all. And there's no fewer choices than zero. -AK I don't know. I like to believe that healing is possible for anyone at any time, no matter what the situation or how long the wounds have been there. God's grace is wonderful. And good priests and surrounding herself with people who DO support her helps so much. I would hope that someday soon she is able to find healing and peace. Many people have been betrayed and deeply wounded by supposed "friends." It takes time, but there is hope after that. Continue to support her. As to the rest of this conversation, her choice -- and its consequences -- are hers and I wish her well. Stay around for a while after this discussion, if you can, and try to get a better feel for the way we interact and how our discussions progress.
PhuturePriest Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) I'm late to the party, but I like talking, so I'll give a proper response for the fun of it! Would my wife preferably be a virgin? Of course. In a preferred world, everyone would be a virgin before getting married. But that's not always the case. I would love my wife no matter what she had done in her past, and hopefully she would feel the same way as I am not a virgin. Virginity is preferred, but if you really can't marry someone because they made mistakes, you have no place getting married, and you should set yourself for the same standards, because I guarantee you have made mistakes, too. Is my virginity something that is rightfully meant to belong to my future wife? Heck yes it is. But I'm not Doctor Who and I can't get into a Tardus and go back in time, so that train has left the station. We are all broken. We have all made mistakes. You don't love someone because they are perfect; you love someone in spite of their imperfection. If you are looking for a perfect spouse, you had better be praying you are called to the Priesthood or religious life, because that's the only way you will get one. If you truly love someone, virginity should not be on the list of your top priorities. Chastity should be. Edited January 30, 2013 by FuturePriest387
Augusta Posted January 30, 2013 Author Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) if you really can't marry someone because they made mistakes, you have no place getting married Is your comment as judgmental as it sounds, or have you mistyped? -AK P.S. In case you didn't know, my friend was on the receiving end of comments just like the one you have written above, and it is has left her emotionally scarred (she's in therapy). If people just minded their own business... ETA: P.P.S. I recommend reading over the whole thread first. It would have likely saved you the time of typing a comment. Edited January 30, 2013 by Augusta
iheartjp2 Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 I got into a spirited debate with a friend on facebook after sharing a piece written by Rachel Held Evans (not Catholic but an awesome Christian commentator). Just thought I'd add my two cents from the discussion: ...[W]hile chastity is to be valued, virginity is not since it only tells you that they've had sex, not what type of person they are. Maybe someone who IS a virgin wouldn't be had opportunity presented itself. Maybe someone who IS a virgin would cheat on their spouse after they got married if the opportunity presented itself. Instead of focusing on what someone has or hasn't done, why not focus on what type of person they are. Isn't that what matters more from both an ideological AND practical standpoint? It strikes me as illogical to hold virginity so high. Virginity shouldn't be praised in itself and CERTAINLY lack thereof should not be despised because virginity until marriage is a component of chastity, which is a component of the Church's teaching on sexuality which is a component of the entirety of Church teaching, which includes mercy, forgiveness, and people changing through grace. To chip off a piece of a beautiful statue, no matter how beautiful, and then praise that one chip, even for the sake of the statue, would be nonsense. Virginity might be convenient for not having memories linger, if any at all, it might be preferable to having someone who's had other sexual partners (which strikes me as insecure), but it isn't all that it's cracked up to be by the Faithful Conservative Catholic[TM] crowd. (Thanks to Mark Shea for the [TM] phrase). What strikes me as so disgusting is that the whole concept fuels the double standard between men and women concerning virginity today and has fueled it throughout history. A man could just as easily lie and say he's a virgin. There are even some men who aren't virgins who have some warped view of what virginity is (ie. oral or anal? that's not sex!). :lies: A woman, though, bears physical proof of her virginity unless she gets her hymen restored. Believe it or not, it's a surgical procedure that's growing in popularity because of this whole fiasco, and it's sick.
Augusta Posted January 30, 2013 Author Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) It strikes me as illogical to hold virginity so high. I think the Church does. You can take it up with them. it might be preferable to having someone who's had other sexual partners (which strikes me as insecure) Does this not strike you as callous? Anyhow, you've repeated many things that have already been addressed. -AK Edited January 30, 2013 by Augusta
iheartjp2 Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 I think the Church does. You can take it up with them. -AK False. The Church teaches explicitly that all are called to live chastely in accord with his or her state in life. Yes, virginity until marriage is implied. It logically follows that failure to maintain such is sinful. Virginity until marriage for the sake of meeting another individual's arbitrary standard for spousehood is not explicitly promoted by the Church.
iheartjp2 Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) Does this not strike you as callous? Anyhow, you've repeated many things that have already been addressed. -AK Callous? What are we talking about, not wanting to marry someone just because they've had sex with someone else, or thinking that said person is a bit insecure? As for the former, yes, the latter, no. To your second comment: your point is...what? I'm not the only one who's repeated things like this. Maybe we're all saying the same things because we all have a point. Ever think of that? Edited January 30, 2013 by iheartjp2
MissScripture Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Is your comment as judgmental as it sounds, or have you mistyped? -AK P.S. In case you didn't know, my friend was on the receiving end of comments just like the one you have written above, and it is has left her emotionally scarred (she's in therapy). If people just minded their own business... ETA: P.P.S. I recommend reading over the whole thread first. It would have likely saved you the time of typing a comment. If you didn't want people to comment on it, you probably shouldn't have asked the question in the first place.
Gabriela Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Congratulations, Augusta. You have a whopping 25 posts, started this thread less than 12 hours ago, and it has already gone "hot". I have been here over a year, have almost 500 posts, and I have yet to start a thread that's gone "hot". You have a real gift for the controversial. Welcome to PM!
PhuturePriest Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Is your comment as judgmental as it sounds, or have you mistyped? -AK P.S. In case you didn't know, my friend was on the receiving end of comments just like the one you have written above, and it is has left her emotionally scarred (she's in therapy). If people just minded their own business... ETA: P.P.S. I recommend reading over the whole thread first. It would have likely saved you the time of typing a comment. I'm not judging. I'm making a general statement. A statement just like "If you are looking into the Priesthood because you want to be financially secure for the rest of your life, you have no place in pursuing the Priesthood." If you're doing it for the wrong reasons, you're doing it for the wrong reasons. You can call it being judgmental if you want, but my intellectual senses are sensing that you are far too sensitive to have made a thread about this and receive answers which you do not particularly agree with. I say this because I used to be exactly the same. If you aren't ready for opinions opposite of yours, don't bother making a thread. You can call that judgmental as well if you like.
iheartjp2 Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 The title of this thread is "What Gives?" Well, I think you pretty much found out and you still want to badger us about the answers. It's. your. preference. You want someone who's a virgin. Not everyone else does. So what? Go find your virgin and be happy. If all you wanted to do was know 'what gives', we've all made ourselves pretty clear. It seems like you wanted to do more than that since you've taken every opportunity to shoot us down instead of carefully and seriously take our thoughts into consideration and respond accordingly. You shouldn't need anyone to validate your views, which you feel are under attack, but it seems that you do, so since I've said my bit, I'll be leaving this conversation. I won't feed your need to defend yourself from a persecution that doesn't exist any longer.
Augusta Posted January 30, 2013 Author Posted January 30, 2013 False. The Church teaches explicitly that all are called to live chastely in accord with his or her state in life. Yes, virginity until marriage is implied. It logically follows that failure to maintain such is sinful. Okay... I'm thinking of encyclicals like this one: http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12SACRA.HTM Virginity until marriage for the sake of meeting another individual's arbitrary standard for spousehood is not explicitly promoted by the Church. Why so dismissive? Do you think people really value virginity as an "arbitrary standard"? Your comment is unfeeling to say the least. Why is that? Please read over the whole thread. -AK
Augusta Posted January 30, 2013 Author Posted January 30, 2013 Callous? What are we talking about, not wanting to marry someone just because they've had sex with someone else, or thinking that said person is a bit insecure? As for the former, yes, the latter, no. "Not wanting to marry someone just because they've had sex with someone else" is not callous. "Thinking that said person is a bit insecure" is callous. You don't know people's reasons, yet you are more than willing to tell them. To your second comment: your point is...what? I'm not the only one who's repeated things like this. Maybe we're all saying the same things because we all have a point. Ever think of that? My point is to read the whole thread, or, if you have done that (and I'm guessing you haven't, given your posts), you would recognize that you've repeated a great deal of what myself and others have addressed and discussed. That's all. Please try to curb your sarcasm. I don't appreciate it. -AK Congratulations, Augusta. You have a whopping 25 posts, started this thread less than 12 hours ago, and it has already gone "hot". I have been here over a year, have almost 500 posts, and I have yet to start a thread that's gone "hot". You have a real gift for the controversial. Welcome to PM! Thanks? I'm not sure how to read your comment. Is it meant to be complimentary or is it meant to be mocking? The thread was not about me, nor was it intended to be controversial. It was about my friend who was emotionally abused for wanting to marry another virgin like herself. I came here to find out why people could do that, and how they could justify it. It seems the attitude, or should I say "sickness," is a lot more pervasive than I ever realized. -AK
PhuturePriest Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 "Not wanting to marry someone just because they've had sex with someone else" is not callous. "Thinking that said person is a bit insecure" is callous. You don't know people's reasons, yet you are more than willing to tell them. My point is to read the whole thread, or, if you have done that (and I'm guessing you haven't, given your posts), you would recognize that you've repeated a great deal of what myself and others have addressed and discussed. That's all. Please try to curb your sarcasm. I don't appreciate it. -AK Thanks? I'm not sure how to read your comment. Is it meant to be complimentary or is it meant to be mocking? The thread was not about me, nor was it intended to be controversial. It was about my friend who was emotionally abused for wanting to marry another virgin like herself. I came here to find out why people could do that, and how they could justify it. It seems the attitude, or should I say "sickness," is a lot more pervasive than I ever realized. -AK No one has said they want to marry someone that isn't a virgin. They have said they would marry a person that wasn't and that it isn't something that is a deal-breaker for them. My extreme sensitivity readers are going off the scales right now.
Augusta Posted January 30, 2013 Author Posted January 30, 2013 I'm not judging. I'm making a general statement. A statement just like "If you are looking into the Priesthood because you want to be financially secure for the rest of your life, you have no place in pursuing the Priesthood." If you're doing it for the wrong reasons, you're doing it for the wrong reasons. You are judging. You are stating, clearly, that someone is not fit for marriage because of a single quality they desire in their spouse. How do you know what someone's reasons are? Do you just assume they're bad? Who made you the arbiter of who gets married and who doesn't? You have set up a straw man by euphemising ("made mistakes"). That's not what's being discussed. Again, I won't repeat myself. Read over the thread. Please do not comment any further until you've done so, as you are commenting on things that were not even part of the discussion. You can call it being judgmental if you want, but my intellectual senses are sensing that you are far too sensitive to have made a thread about this and receive answers which you do not particularly agree with. I say this because I used to be exactly the same. If you aren't ready for opinions opposite of yours, don't bother making a thread. You can call that judgmental as well if you like. This thread was not about me, it was about my friend. Again, please read the whole thread. You're missing a lot of what went on. -AK No one has said they want to marry someone that isn't a virgin. They have said they would marry a person that wasn't and that it isn't something that is a deal-breaker for them. My extreme sensitivity readers are going off the scales right now. You're replying to the wrong thread. -AK
Gabriela Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 "Not wanting to marry someone just because they've had sex with someone else" is not callous. "Thinking that said person is a bit insecure" is callous. You don't know people's reasons, yet you are more than willing to tell them. My point is to read the whole thread, or, if you have done that (and I'm guessing you haven't, given your posts), you would recognize that you've repeated a great deal of what myself and others have addressed and discussed. That's all. Please try to curb your sarcasm. I don't appreciate it. -AK Thanks? I'm not sure how to read your comment. Is it meant to be complimentary or is it meant to be mocking? The thread was not about me, nor was it intended to be controversial. It was about my friend who was emotionally abused for wanting to marry another virgin like herself. I came here to find out why people could do that, and how they could justify it. It seems the attitude, or should I say "sickness," is a lot more pervasive than I ever realized. -AK It wasn't meant to be mocking at all. It was a genuine compliment (tainted with just a bit of envy). ;-) I, for what it's worth (not much), understand your position. Here is something I posted in another virulent thread (http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/125383-how-important-is-virginity/) a few months back: "Obviously it's important to wait for marriage, but we don't all come from pious backgrounds, and even some of us who do stray for a time. That being said, I think it depends on a person's expectations. If it's really important for someone to marry a virgin, then by all means, let him/her insist upon a virgin. We are, after all, talking about the most intimate relationship one will have in life. I can understand where Keith Major is coming from. What I would find problematic is a non-virgin insisting upon a virgin. Although, even there, I could understand it. I'd just wonder very seriously about the person's reasons. So far, I think what I've said is obvious. What I really wanted to contribute is this: Having not lived a pious life for most of my life (if you know what I mean), I have learned first-hand the grave disadvantages of NOT waiting for marriage. Just this weekend I was talking to a (non-Catholic) friend who is satisfied with her boyfriend in every way, except for THAT way, because she can't stop comparing him in THAT way to her last boyfriend. When you commit to live your entire life with someone, such comparisons can be terribly problematic. They make it very hard to accept what one has been given in marriage, if it doesn't live up to previous experiences. So, remaining a virgin can, I think, prevent a great deal of dissatisfaction and disappointment in a marriage. I'm wondering if this will be controversial..." As it turned out, it was. And I guess it always will be. At least around here.
IcePrincessKRS Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 The thread was not about me, nor was it intended to be controversial. It was about my friend who was emotionally abused for wanting to marry another virgin like herself. I came here to find out why people could do that, and how they could justify it. It seems the attitude, or should I say "sickness," is a lot more pervasive than I ever realized. -AK So people who don't agree with you and your pal 100% have a "sickness"? Ok, then. I was pretty sure conversation was futile several pages ago, now I have proof. You aren't seeking genuine conversation, you want to be coddled and agreed with.
iheartjp2 Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) Just one last comment before I'm through. The encyclical on perpetual virginity has nothing to do with the discussion. What you're arguing over is the value of virginity that is given to another person through marriage. The encyclical discusses the gift of virginity to God and to society, which is a completely different concept since, duh, the virginity stays intact until death (and there is even discussion of a 'second virginity' after marriage ends with the death of a spouse and after reconciling one's sins, so if unspoiled virginity is good enough for God, why can't it be good enough for a mere human?). Even the discussion on marriage is strictly about the primacy of the state of perpetual virginity OVER marriage. Virginity given to a spouses in marriage in the sense in which Jason Evert speaks, however, is not what was being discussed. Edited January 30, 2013 by iheartjp2
Augusta Posted January 30, 2013 Author Posted January 30, 2013 The title of this thread is "What Gives?" Well, I think you pretty much found out and you still want to badger us about the answers. It's. your. preference. You want someone who's a virgin. Not everyone else does. So what? Go find your virgin and be happy. If all you wanted to do was know 'what gives', we've all made ourselves pretty clear. It seems like you wanted to do more than that since you've taken every opportunity to shoot us down instead of carefully and seriously take our thoughts into consideration and respond accordingly. You shouldn't need anyone to validate your views, which you feel are under attack, but it seems that you do, so since I've said my bit, I'll be leaving this conversation. I won't feed your need to defend yourself from a persecution that doesn't exist any longer. *sigh* You missed the point by a long shot. Please. I'm begging you. Read the thread. Please. Trust me. You'll probably want to delete your recent posts after. -AK
Recommended Posts