Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Anσnymσus Posts Allowed => Topic started by: Änσnymσus on July 14, 2025, 05:09:03 AM
-
There was a post a while ago showing that women commonly married in their teens in the past, with 90% of girls who married married by 19 in Europe before the protestant revolt, and that number increasing to 20-25 by the year 2000, and from there again to 25-35. But what about men?
Pre-Christian Europe (500 BC–AD 300)
Mean: 20–35 (Roman elite ~25–40, Greek ~25–35, commoners ~20–30).
12–40 Breakdown:12–16: 0.5% each (2.5%, rare).
17–20: 5% each (20%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 5% each (25%).
31–40: 0.3% each (3%).
Early Christian Europe (AD 300–1000)
Mean: 20–30 (elite ~25–40, commoners ~20–30).
12–40 Breakdown:12–16: 0.5% each (2.5%).
17–20: 5% each (20%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 5% each (25%).
31–40: 0.3% each (3%).
Medieval Europe (1000–1500)
Mean: Nobles 20–30, commoners 20–25 (~22–27).
12–40 Breakdown:12–16: 1% each (5%, young nobles).
17–18: 5% each (10%).
19–20: 8% each (16%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 4% each (20%).
31–40: 0.2% each (2%).
Early Modern Europe (1500–1800)
Mean: 25–35 (~27–30, Western Europe; ~22–27 Southern Europe).
12–40 Breakdown:12–16: 0.5% each (2.5%).
17–20: 3% each (12%).
21–25: 8% each (40%).
26–30: 8% each (40%).
31–40: 0.6% each (6%).
Modern Era (1800–1900)
Mean: 25–30 (~25–28).
12–40 Breakdown:12–17: <0.5% each (<3%).
18–20: 3% each (9%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 6% each (30%).
31–40: 0.8% each (8%).
Contemporary Era (1900–2025)
Mean: 25–30 (1900–1950, ~25–28), 30–35 (2000–2025, ~32, Eurostat 2023).
12–40 Breakdown:1900–1950:12–17: <0.5% each (<3%).
18–20: 3% each (9%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 6% each (30%).
31–40: 0.8% each (8%).
2000–2025:12–20: <0.5% each (<3%).
21–25: 3% each (15%).
26–30: 8% each (40%).
31–35: 10% each (50%).
36–40: 2% each (10%).
Now for graphs to make it easier to read
(https://i.imgur.com/jdumy8S.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/Io3s6JO.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/V66wkJb.png)
1. Pre-1500 (500 BC–1500)
Saints: Peak at 21–25 (30%), reflecting noblemen (e.g., Malcolm III ~25–40).
Europeans: Peak at 21–25 (~50%), common for nobles and commoners.
Note: Saints align with European norms, but 12–16 is slightly higher due to rare political marriages.
2. Early Modern (1500–1800)
Saints: Still peak at 21–25 (30%), reflecting pre-1500 bias.
Europeans: Shift to 21–30 (~80%), as WEMP delayed marriages.
Note: Saints’ early ages (12–20) are outdated; European men marry later.
3. Modern (1800–1900)
Saints: Anachronistic, stuck at 21–25 (30%) due to pre-1800 data.
Europeans: Peak at 21–25 (50%), with 26–30 rising (30%).
Note: Saints’ data misaligns with rising ages.
4. Contemporary (1900–2025)
Saints: Irrelevant, reflecting pre-1900 norms (21–25 peak).
Europeans: 1900–1950 peaks at 21–25 (50%); 2000–2025 at 31–35 (50%).
Note: Saints’ early ages (12–20) are obsolete; European men shift to 26–35.
Key Observations
Pre-1500:Saints: ~60% at 21–30 (30% 21–25, 25% 26–30), aligning with European men (20–30, ~75%). Early marriages (12–16, 5%) are rare but match young nobles (e.g., Bolesław V).
Europeans: Peak at 21–25 (50%), with nobles often older (25–40).
Post-1500 Divergence:
1500–1800: Saints’ 21–25 (30%) and 26–30 (25%) lag behind European shift to 26–30 (~40%), as WEMP delayed marriages for economic independence (mean ~27–30).
1800–1900: Saints’ 21–25 (30%) is closer to European 21–25 (~50%), but 12–20 (25%) is anachronistic vs. <12% European.
2000–2025: Saints’ data (pre-1900) is irrelevant; European men peak at 31–35 (~50%) vs. saints’ 15% at 31–40, driven by education and economic pressures.
Why Men’s Ages Rose:
Post-1500: Western European Marriage Pattern required men to establish households, delaying marriage to 25–30. Apprenticeships and land acquisition pushed ages up.
Post-2000: Education (e.g., university to ~25), career demands, housing costs, and cohabitation (40% of EU couples, 2020) shifted marriages to 31–35.
Canonization Bias: Few married male saints (mostly celibate men canonized), skewing data toward elite husbands (e.g., Malcolm III ~25–40).
Early marriages (12–16) are overrepresented vs. European norms post-1500.
Sources and Limitations
Saints’ Data: Estimated from prior lists (e.g., Joseph, Malcolm III), Roman Martyrology, and norms. Limited male saints (~50) make percentages speculative.
European Data: From demographic studies (Hajnal, Eurostat), parish records, and web sources (e.g.,). Year-by-year estimates are interpolated.
Limitations: Saints’ male data is sparse; ages are inferred. European data varies by region/class, with less granularity pre-1800.
-
There was a post a while ago showing that women commonly married in their teens in the past, with 90% of girls who married married by 19 in Europe before the protestant revolt, and that number increasing to 20-25 by the year 2000, and from there again to 25-35. But what about men?
Pre-Christian Europe (500 BC–AD 300)
Mean: 20–35 (Roman elite ~25–40, Greek ~25–35, commoners ~20–30).
12–40 Breakdown:12–16: 0.5% each (2.5%, rare).
17–20: 5% each (20%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 5% each (25%).
31–40: 0.3% each (3%).
Early Christian Europe (AD 300–1000)
Mean: 20–30 (elite ~25–40, commoners ~20–30).
12–40 Breakdown:12–16: 0.5% each (2.5%).
17–20: 5% each (20%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 5% each (25%).
31–40: 0.3% each (3%).
Medieval Europe (1000–1500)
Mean: Nobles 20–30, commoners 20–25 (~22–27).
12–40 Breakdown:12–16: 1% each (5%, young nobles).
17–18: 5% each (10%).
19–20: 8% each (16%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 4% each (20%).
31–40: 0.2% each (2%).
Early Modern Europe (1500–1800)
Mean: 25–35 (~27–30, Western Europe; ~22–27 Southern Europe).
12–40 Breakdown:12–16: 0.5% each (2.5%).
17–20: 3% each (12%).
21–25: 8% each (40%).
26–30: 8% each (40%).
31–40: 0.6% each (6%).
Modern Era (1800–1900)
Mean: 25–30 (~25–28).
12–40 Breakdown:12–17: <0.5% each (<3%).
18–20: 3% each (9%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 6% each (30%).
31–40: 0.8% each (8%).
Contemporary Era (1900–2025)
Mean: 25–30 (1900–1950, ~25–28), 30–35 (2000–2025, ~32, Eurostat 2023).
12–40 Breakdown:1900–1950:12–17: <0.5% each (<3%).
18–20: 3% each (9%).
21–25: 10% each (50%).
26–30: 6% each (30%).
31–40: 0.8% each (8%).
2000–2025:12–20: <0.5% each (<3%).
21–25: 3% each (15%).
26–30: 8% each (40%).
31–35: 10% each (50%).
36–40: 2% each (10%).
Now for graphs to make it easier to read
(https://i.imgur.com/jdumy8S.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/Io3s6JO.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/V66wkJb.png)
1. Pre-1500 (500 BC–1500)
Saints: Peak at 21–25 (30%), reflecting noblemen (e.g., Malcolm III ~25–40).
Europeans: Peak at 21–25 (~50%), common for nobles and commoners.
Note: Saints align with European norms, but 12–16 is slightly higher due to rare political marriages.
2. Early Modern (1500–1800)
Saints: Still peak at 21–25 (30%), reflecting pre-1500 bias.
Europeans: Shift to 21–30 (~80%), as WEMP delayed marriages.
Note: Saints’ early ages (12–20) are outdated; European men marry later.
3. Modern (1800–1900)
Saints: Anachronistic, stuck at 21–25 (30%) due to pre-1800 data.
Europeans: Peak at 21–25 (50%), with 26–30 rising (30%).
Note: Saints’ data misaligns with rising ages.
4. Contemporary (1900–2025)
Saints: Irrelevant, reflecting pre-1900 norms (21–25 peak).
Europeans: 1900–1950 peaks at 21–25 (50%); 2000–2025 at 31–35 (50%).
Note: Saints’ early ages (12–20) are obsolete; European men shift to 26–35.
You can see a shift of men getting married from 17-30 to 21-30 to 26-35.
So teenage girls married guys who were several years older to 10-15 years older. Since most girls were married by 19 and most guys by 30. After the protestants took over with Jєωιѕн/masonry the men were still getting married BY 30 but the women started getting married later BY 25. Now it's mostly BY 35 for both, though most get married in the 25-35 age range. So age gaps have gotten smaller and people are getting married later.
-
No source is given for the data presented, an important consideration when evaluating the veracity of the data.
Even more intriguing is wondering how this topic even remotely meets the criteria for using the Anonymous Forum:
For first-hand chapel reports, ωнιѕтlєвlσωιng, sensitive/personal questions, and any other legitimate occasion for αnσnymıty. Abuse of this subforum (using αnσnymıty as a cloak for malice, to prevent downvotes, etc.) will be met with disciplinary action, including exposure of your screen name or being вαnned.
-
No source is given for the data presented, an important consideration when evaluating the veracity of the data.
Even more intriguing is wondering how this topic even remotely meets the criteria for using the Anonymous Forum:
My guess is, deep down, OP knows how hopelessly autistic a post this is and doesn't want his future wife to ever find it and attribute it to him.
-
The men were probably the same average age today as they were at any point in history, maybe a tad younger.
Women were DEFINITELY younger getting married/having children.
-
My guess is, deep down, OP knows how hopelessly autistic a post this is and doesn't want his future wife to ever find it and attribute it to him.
I am not the OP, but even I can see that people like you only want it de anonimized so you can make personal attacks.
Ad hominem attacks are the resort of the weak in mind.
-
I am not the OP, but even I can see that people like you only want it de anonimized so you can make personal attacks.
Ad hominem attacks are the resort of the weak in mind.
and you don't know what time it is. everyone else knows we have a 40 yo single man on a steady diet of sugar running loose around here bragging about taking up the best years of a young woman's life without marrying her and dropping bait whenever he gets the chance. The OP isn't a sincere attempt to address genuine problems that face men who are looking to marry.
-
and you don't know what time it is. everyone else knows we have a 40 yo single man on a steady diet of sugar running loose around here bragging about taking up the best years of a young woman's life without marrying her and dropping bait whenever he gets the chance. The OP isn't a sincere attempt to address genuine problems that face men who are looking to marry.
I make a point about how we should make things personal... and you just keep digging that hole by making things personal.
Even if that were true, it still brings up important issues to be discussed. This is a discussion forum after all.
-
*should not
-
Why's this thread in the anonymous category?
-
and you don't know what time it is. everyone else knows we have a 40 yo single man on a steady diet of sugar running loose around here bragging about taking up the best years of a young woman's life without marrying her and dropping bait whenever he gets the chance. The OP isn't a sincere attempt to address genuine problems that face men who are looking to marry.
Amen brother. Please Matthew, stop the abuse of Anyonymous.
-
Why's this thread in the anonymous category?
Maybe the OP doesn't want to be shamed by the women and weak men?
-
You can see a shift of men getting married from 17-30 to 21-30 to 26-35.
So teenage girls married guys who were several years older to 10-15 years older. Since most girls were married by 19 and most guys by 30. After the protestants took over with Jєωιѕн/masonry the men were still getting married BY 30 but the women started getting married later BY 25. Now it's mostly BY 35 for both, though most get married in the 25-35 age range. So age gaps have gotten smaller and people are getting married later.
Do you think there is a correlation between the expectations of young men going down (ie longer schooling and less focused on learning a trade starting at age 14) and the marrying age going up?
In current society we keep young men dependent until they are in their 20s. Is this hurting young men?
-
Maybe the OP doesn't want to be shamed by the women and weak men?
Shouldn't we just be brave and simple and not worry about what others do?
-
No source is given for the data presented, an important consideration when evaluating the veracity of the data.
Even more intriguing is wondering how this topic even remotely meets the criteria for using the Anonymous Forum:
No source was given for the women's post either...
Do you think there is a correlation between the expectations of young men going down (ie longer schooling and less focused on learning a trade starting at age 14) and the marrying age going up?
In current society we keep young men dependent until they are in their 20s. Is this hurting young men?
Yes it's hurting them, most men peak in physical attraction in their late teens and 20s. Both men and women are more satisfied if they find their spouse attractive. Earlier marriage also reduces risk of sin due to having an outlet for lustful temptations.
Look at Jen's most recent post. those farm boys could get married young because their parents set them up well. Also a lot of men have to deal with losing their hair as they age making them less attractive. Delaying marriage both men and women is something the enemy has done because he knows how weak and vain people are.
I recently watched an old video where 2 women needed help in an airport with heavy luggage. The attractive woman had people helping her within 10 seconds everytime. The unattractive women had to wait minutes before help arrived. They did another test with a tall and short man wearing the same clothes. When asked people assumed the tall man had a very high paying job while the short guy was always considered to having a low income.
People do not realise they judge based off appearances.
It's similar to how everyone who was in favour of lockdowns and mandatory vaccines are the type to call others nαzιs. Yet these same people are the ones who would go along with whatever hitler and stalin and other leaders did. They do not understand what they do.
-
hitler and stalin and other leaders did. They do not understand what they do.
You mean the the US and the communists. lol
-
It's literally just jews and the feminist goys pushing for age gap hysteria, the recent epistien and diddy stuff is only making it worse.
(https://i.imgur.com/i1EHGmx.png)
-
Why's this thread in the anonymous category?
So that people can discuss the question with freedom.
-
Amen brother. Please Matthew, stop the abuse of Anyonymous.
It was a woman talking there. Clearly.
-
Maybe the OP doesn't want to be shamed by the women and weak men?
Lol. You are literally proving why it is right to put this in the anonymous section.
You just CANT resist making things personal.
-
Do you think there is a correlation between the expectations of young men going down (ie longer schooling and less focused on learning a trade starting at age 14) and the marrying age going up?
In current society we keep young men dependent until they are in their 20s. Is this hurting young men?
Consider the achievements of great men
Octavian (20), Alexander the Great (18), Hannibal Barca (26), and Napoleon (24)
Modern society is holding back men by a wide margin. It's not normal to have to wait to be 30+ to have a wife, family and home...
-
I see lots of grifters online saying men peak in their 30/40s, this is pure bull crap. Here is a great post from someone
35 year old men are biologically inferior to their 25 year old selves in every conceivable way; slower witted, more injury prone, worse metabolism, probably balding, definitely wrinkling. No more manosphere copium. Life does not "begin at 30" for men and we do not "peak at 40."
Women's prime years range from late teens to early 20s, men's from early to mid 20s (due to slightly slower development). I cant stand this infantilizing manosphere advice; soyciety has people frittering away the most important years of their lives.
If your life "began" at 35-40 then you REALLY fucked up somewhere along the line.
"u gots mo monay wen u 40, so u finna get mo bitchez..." What, you mean the desperate postwall roasties and younger gold diggers itching to divorce rape you? Yeah great stuff, that's way better than finding a wife who loves you for your soul while you're still young.
Everything is stacked against young White men; youth wasted in school, near-impossible to find good career, wife, buy home. Old White men brush this under the rug, dish out useless "advice" like "dont worry bro just grind like a goyslave for decade until your life REALLY begins."
Your life shouldn't "begin" at 35-40 years old when you're past your biological prime and shooting mutationally loaded sperm. Their lives didn't, their parents lives didn't, their grandparents lives didn't, but they expect yours to.
-
I see lots of grifters online saying men peak in their 30/40s, this is pure bull crap. Here is a great post from someone
Physical and material achievements are all that matters to you clearly.
So much for having wisdom, shaped by experience and using it to guide the rest of the family. So much for St. Joseph who gave us that example.
If you are a man, you are truly a disgusting one.
If you are a woman, you are a bitter one, and I pity the men in your life.
-
Consider the achievements of great men
Octavian (20), Alexander the Great (18), Hannibal Barca (26), and Napoleon (24)
Modern society is holding back men by a wide margin. It's not normal to have to wait to be 30+ to have a wife, family and home...
good point
-
Physical and material achievements are all that matters to you clearly.
So much for having wisdom, shaped by experience and using it to guide the rest of the family. So much for St. Joseph who gave us that example.
If you are a man, you are truly a disgusting one.
If you are a woman, you are a bitter one, and I pity the men in your life.
It's not all that matters, i never said such. You are clearly coping. The fact is both men and women are moved by physical attraction. I would also think that men in the past in their 20s were more wise and experienced than most men today regardless of their age. The modern world has people brain dead from the тαℓмυd vision and they do not let God guide them.
There is also the biological reality of having healthy children. Most ideal is the age range I mentioned
17-22 females
17-27 males
It's not the only thing that matters but it can't be ignored.
-
I can’t think of any couple, female 17-22, male, 17-27, who are ready without substantial financial backing from their parents or an ethnic/religious community to get married and start their family. The only ones I know of are Amish or Hasidic Jєωιѕн.
That’s just my personal experience.
At present, I know of three “traditional” Catholics who married young, had one to four babies, and two of the women and one of the men were abandoned, left to raise the child(ren) on their own or have had to move back home with parent(s). The grandparent(s) are raising and homeschooling while Mom or Dad is at work.
I’m supporting or refuting using average or median statistics as to when Catholics ought to marry. I’m just sharing my personal observations.
-
I can’t think of any couple, female 17-22, male, 17-27, who are ready without substantial financial backing from their parents or an ethnic/religious community to get married and start their family. The only ones I know of are Amish or Hasidic Jєωιѕн.
That’s just my personal experience.
At present, I know of three “traditional” Catholics who married young, had one to four babies, and two of the women and one of the men were abandoned, left to raise the child(ren) on their own or have had to move back home with parent(s). The grandparent(s) are raising and homeschooling while Mom or Dad is at work.
I’m supporting or refuting using average or median statistics as to when Catholics ought to marry. I’m just sharing my personal observations.
Thanks for your input. It's always been normal for parents to help out their children, it's just modern usury and money printing has really destroyed the economy.
As for your examples it's very sad to hear. The age mentioned in the thread is the ideal based off biology and history. Catholics ought to marry the right person later rather than the wrong person earlier. However the right person earlier is still the better option.
-
Yes, when such can be found! Today’s social conditions have all but eliminated the possibility for the majority of people, Catholics included.
-
It's not all that matters, i never said such. You are clearly coping. The fact is both men and women are moved by physical attraction. I would also think that men in the past in their 20s were more wise and experienced than most men today regardless of their age. The modern world has people brain dead from the тαℓмυd vision and they do not let God guide them.
There is also the biological reality of having healthy children. Most ideal is the age range I mentioned
17-22 females
17-27 males
It's not the only thing that matters but it can't be ignored.
I dont really believe you. Because you can claim all you want that its not all that matters, however your emphasis is so so strong that it begs the question of how sincere you are, and how much respect you actually have for a man who has lived a life. Even if single.
I think you confirm this suspicion of mine by hand waving away modern men past their twenties, even if traditional. Truth is, that a traditional single man who has stayed chaste and wise in this crazy world will earn far more reward for his efforts than a man in the past. Because the challenges are greater. So, as Christians, we should have even greater honor and respect for such a man as his reward and wisdom will be greater.
Instead, the prevailing idea now is a perverse one which seeks to elevate youth, and attempts to rope men into marrying young, where they are probably doing just fine. I suspect that this comes from a desire to seek men who are more easy to manipulate by the wife or mother in law, (or boomer father), rather than a man post 30s who is less likely to be moved by fear or manipulation.
But hey! Feel free to try to prove me wrong...
-
However the right person earlier is still the better option.
The right woman earlier. Not necessarily the right man. Many men need time. Especially in todays world.
The inverse is true for women.
The wise experience of good Catholics is that women tend to be ruined, the longer they are in the world. Usually after 25 is when they can tend to go a little "lu la", if they have not been bolted down by a man.
-
I can’t think of any couple, female 17-22, male, 17-27, who are ready without substantial financial backing from their parents or an ethnic/religious community to get married and start their family. The only ones I know of are Amish or Hasidic Jєωιѕн.
That’s just my personal experience.
At present, I know of three “traditional” Catholics who married young, had one to four babies, and two of the women and one of the men were abandoned, left to raise the child(ren) on their own or have had to move back home with parent(s). The grandparent(s) are raising and homeschooling while Mom or Dad is at work.
I’m supporting or refuting using average or median statistics as to when Catholics ought to marry. I’m just sharing my personal observations.
This is everywhere. Not just you.
I honestly think it is wreckless to try to encourage men to marry young. There is a tension of course with his coping with chastity.
The less family friendly our world becomes, the more we need to run to the Holy Family ideal, which is a young woman with an older man.
St. Joseph, pray for us!
-
This is everywhere. Not just you.
I honestly think it is wreckless to try to encourage men to marry young. There is a tension of course with his coping with chastity.
The less family friendly our world becomes, the more we need to run to the Holy Family ideal, which is a young woman with an older man.
St. Joseph, pray for us!
The only issue with that comparison is that Blessed Mary remained a Virgin and St Joseph did not have any more children. So his fertility was not an issue.
-
I dont really believe you. Because you can claim all you want that its not all that matters, however your emphasis is so so strong that it begs the question of how sincere you are, and how much respect you actually have for a man who has lived a life. Even if single.
I think you confirm this suspicion of mine by hand waving away modern men past their twenties, even if traditional. Truth is, that a traditional single man who has stayed chaste and wise in this crazy world will earn far more reward for his efforts than a man in the past. Because the challenges are greater. So, as Christians, we should have even greater honor and respect for such a man as his reward and wisdom will be greater.
Instead, the prevailing idea now is a perverse one which seeks to elevate youth, and attempts to rope men into marrying young, where they are probably doing just fine. I suspect that this comes from a desire to seek men who are more easy to manipulate by the wife or mother in law, (or boomer father), rather than a man post 30s who is less likely to be moved by fear or manipulation.
But hey! Feel free to try to prove me wrong...
The point of the thread was age men typically got married + their prime which was based on fertility and healthy offspring. There is no need to manipulate men into marriage. If anything the younger ladies might need it since they may not want to marry a man too much older than them. Do you think the ladies should not get married young? Or just then men? And do you consider young to be different for both of them?
-
The right woman earlier. Not necessarily the right man. Many men need time. Especially in todays world.
The inverse is true for women.
The wise experience of good Catholics is that women tend to be ruined, the longer they are in the world. Usually after 25 is when they can tend to go a little "lu la", if they have not been bolted down by a man.
Do you think trad raised get ruined by 25 if they are unmarried? Do you think that if they get married early they will regret it and "find themselves" with a divorce? It should be well known (not for secular people) that women aren't meant to have "experience" in many things, especially in regards to men. Even career experience is bad or all the other things that push them into feminism and independence from husband and God.
-
I dont really believe you. Because you can claim all you want that its not all that matters, however your emphasis is so so strong that it begs the question of how sincere you are, and how much respect you actually have for a man who has lived a life. Even if single.
I think you confirm this suspicion of mine by hand waving away modern men past their twenties, even if traditional. Truth is, that a traditional single man who has stayed chaste and wise in this crazy world will earn far more reward for his efforts than a man in the past. Because the challenges are greater. So, as Christians, we should have even greater honor and respect for such a man as his reward and wisdom will be greater.
Instead, the prevailing idea now is a perverse one which seeks to elevate youth, and attempts to rope men into marrying young, where they are probably doing just fine. I suspect that this comes from a desire to seek men who are more easy to manipulate by the wife or mother in law, (or boomer father), rather than a man post 30s who is less likely to be moved by fear or manipulation.
But hey! Feel free to try to prove me wrong...
You are trying to make bachelorhood into your 30’s look like some sort of virtue. It’s not.
If you have means to marry younger, you should.
-
You are trying to make bachelorhood into your 30’s look like some sort of virtue. It’s not.
If you have means to marry younger, you should.
And St. Paul says:
7 For I would that all men were even as myself (single). But every one hath his proper gift from God: one after this manner, and another after that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I.
The Holy Bible, Translated from the Latin Vulgate (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2009), 1 Corinthians 7:7–8.
-
And St. Paul says:
What is St. Paul’s meaning here? Does he mean to imply avoiding marriage until older, or avoiding marriage altogether? I have always thought the latter.
-
What is St. Paul’s meaning here? Does he mean to imply avoiding marriage until older, or avoiding marriage altogether? I have always thought the latter.
Remaining unmarried is more Christ-like (provided you live a rightly ordered, celibate, chaste life)
It is not better to wait until older for those who may not be able to refrain from sins against the sixth and ninth commandments.
1 Corinthians 7:9 But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to be burnt.
-
Remaining unmarried is more Christ-like (provided you live a rightly ordered, celibate, chaste life)
It is not better to wait until older for those who may not be able to refrain from sins against the sixth and ninth commandments.
Right, earthly/temporal prudence always takes a back seat to mortal sin. In this case, it's the best thing for your soul to get married early to avoid sin when you're not ready. (Not condoning getting married if not prudent to do so)
-
For a man, getting married in this century is high risk. He has to be absolutely sure his wife doesn’t turn into a nagging harpy. Gain a bunch of weight, denies him the marital embrace, etc. And that she’s not going to destroy him in the court system financially, mentally, and emotionally. Specifically, him never seeing his kids ever while he has to pay child support.
-
For a man, getting married in this century is high risk. He has to be absolutely sure his wife doesn’t turn into a nagging harpy. Gain a bunch of weight, denies him the marital embrace, etc. And that she’s not going to destroy him in the court system financially, mentally, and emotionally. Specifically, him never seeing his kids ever while he has to pay child support.
Since I AM a woman, I think in today’s world, a tradcat woman should know “what’s out there before seriously thinking of marriage.” In general, females are slightly less apt to cast themselves into concupiscence than men. Once you see the long term results of a worldly, immoral or amoral life, the desire for experimentation is a lot less. That’s what happened to me within a few months of starting college at age 17. No way did I want to become a 40 year old, dumpy, AFDC and government cheese block collecting, trailer trash sort of woman with a bunch of kids whose dads were all absent. That’s how most of the college age popular party girls looked after two decades, that or the urban version in the projects.
-
The simple task when figuring out if a woman is worthy of marriage means:
1: being the BEST, yes BEST guy out of the bunch (in more ways that one, sorry that's where we are at)
2: vet her on all the obvious motherly traits, and grade her kindness towards others. KINDNESS AND CHARITY ARE BIG ONES. You'll find out in 3 months if she's the selfish type or not.