Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: America and courting 18-year-old virgins  (Read 62935 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Telesphorus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12713
  • Reputation: +28/-13
  • Gender: Male
America and courting 18-year-old virgins
« Reply #555 on: March 27, 2011, 09:21:24 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Looks like someone wants to downrate every post I make about this.  But they can't argue with points I've laid out.  They can only try to peck away.

    Offline Clodovicus

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 91
    • Reputation: +26/-0
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #556 on: March 27, 2011, 09:59:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matthew
    Marriage is so much more than just the honeymoon.

    What else can I say?

    Discord amongst families must be avoided as much as is possible, as it is a cause of great evils. It's up there with divorce on what it does to the children.

    Do you think this Mr. Puerto Rican would be a good father-in-law if you managed to court/marry his daughter while he boils with rage? Do you really think that would be a good thing?

    Yes, a good thing for a period of 1-2 weeks after the marriage. Yes, honeymoons are nice. But after that, it would be absolutely awful.

    It's as if you're just looking forward to the licit pleasure of the honeymoon, and don't care much what happens after that.

    Not saying you are literally, but I really can't see that you've given married life after the honeymoon much thought.

    Do you know that women are very strongly attached to family? That they would severely resent a husband who costs her her family? That the husband can't be a replacement for her family? That women need a social network even more than men do? Etc.

    Matthew


    This is a very long thread.
    Matthew makes good point above. If Tele was successful in acquiring a working relationship with miss virgin, and successful again in securing a marriage with her, he is now married into her family. Of course that means that he will have to deal with Mr. Puerto Rican on a regular basis for his duration. Tele will have to celebrate holidays with Mr Rico and see him at church every Sunday. If there's bad blood between the two, it won't make for a good situation.  :dwarf:
    The problem though, is that in current times, I don't believe that it would be an easy thing to find a family that would be entirely agreeable.
    Therefore, those courting from outside of the Church, like the NO or elsewhere, a conversion would need to occur, and while she may convert, it's not likely that the rest of the family will jump on board, so, again, more family discord in the manner of religion and values.  
    While church is probably the best place to locate a potential spouse, as the likelihood of finding a devoted woman here, as opposed to elsewhere in the world, would be much greater, demand is probably higher than the supply and again, the family may not always be half-way agreeable, such as Mr Puerto Rican; and all this before an operable relationship can occur.
    So, hanging out with any man's very young daughter (who is, if I understand correctly, homeschooled and therefore very sheltered and not very experienced with regards to dealing with many people in the manner that Tele is interested in) without his permission, or knowledge, if applicable, is going to be a sticky situation. Try looking at it from his point of view, Maybe they don't know you that well, or perhaps they're simply not prepared for a daughter to be out in the world courting a man, as in his mind, he's probably still getting used to the fact that she's over 16, sees her as a teenager, and therefore is probably not ready for that kind of adjustment (probably does not see his daughter as an adult yet). So he probably thinks it awkward (to say the least) that a man your age would be soliciting a romantic relationship with someone who he still thinks of as a child (even if there were no objections to your person). His objection would probably not be as great if Tele were ten years younger, as it would seem much more "normal", although he would still probably not be prepared for her engagement. Mr. Rico will probably need another 18-24 months to adjust to the fact that his daughter is indeed now an adult and has the faculties to make her own decisions (as he may be very used to making them for her).
    This is America in the 21st century, and american family values are reality, and they will be part of this process as long as that's the case (unless Tele has a time-machine). Not that I defend them, but merely that, from my observations, that seems to be the way it is.
    Although, it would be more appropriate if Mr. Rico would take you aside and explain himself man to man, rather than seeking your ejection from the congregation, as this is rather extreme, even in such a case.


    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +28/-13
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #557 on: March 27, 2011, 01:06:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Try looking at it from his point of view


    I understand it his point of view perfectly.

    He would throw me in jail if he could.  He's not ashamed to behave unscrupulously to get his way.  He thinks it's sick for a man my age to like a girl his daughter's age.  It's all about gratifying his twisted pride.

    None of those "points of view" have any legitimacy.

     I've noticed some of the people at this parish have a tendency towards wanting to manipulate and impose on others - they even boast about how they are "choleric" - there's quite a perverse streak of self-righteousness and going around harping on the "pride" of others - while at the bottom of it all it's all about their place in the pecking order.




    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8212
    • Reputation: +7174/-12
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #558 on: March 27, 2011, 04:08:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I really think it's time that Tele dropped this subject. There are many other girls out there. It's time to just scratch one single 18 year old girl off the list. That leaves a lot more girls who are also Traditional Catholic.
    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.

    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +28/-13
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #559 on: March 27, 2011, 07:15:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    I really think it's time that Tele dropped this subject. There are many other girls out there. It's time to just scratch one single 18 year old girl off the list. That leaves a lot more girls who are also Traditional Catholic.


    I was kicked out of church unjustly.  I'm not going to drop this. (maybe I will drop it here on this forum - when people stop responding ).  I want an apology from these people.

    And the SSPX is in dire need of being straightened out.


    Offline gladius_veritatis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 8168
    • Reputation: +2544/-1122
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #560 on: March 27, 2011, 07:33:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I just have to say:

    Matthew, getting your wife to vote for all your posts is pretty low, man...

     :laugh2:
    "Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is all man."

    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8212
    • Reputation: +7174/-12
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #561 on: March 27, 2011, 08:36:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Telesphorus
    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    I really think it's time that Tele dropped this subject. There are many other girls out there. It's time to just scratch one single 18 year old girl off the list. That leaves a lot more girls who are also Traditional Catholic.


    I was kicked out of church unjustly.  I'm not going to drop this. (maybe I will drop it here on this forum - when people stop responding ).  I want an apology from these people.

    And the SSPX is in dire need of being straightened out.


    Yeah, I meant on this forum. It's a rather old subject.
    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.

    Offline MaterDominici

    • Mod
    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 5663
    • Reputation: +4416/-107
    • Gender: Female
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #562 on: March 27, 2011, 10:22:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Telesphorus
    Quote from: MaterDominici
    Quote from: Telesphorus
    Historically the Church very often granted dispensations of the banns and even secret marriages to young people who wished to marry against the wishes of their parents.  When parents attempted to disinherit young people who married against their wishes these attempts were often overturned.


    Tele, when and where was this common?
    I understand the exact opposite has also been true... priests extremely reluctant to wed a couple without parental consent and laws that automatically exclude such a couple from receiving their inheritance.
    I'd imagine historically it's gone both ways.


    Did you look at the book link I posted?

    To Love Honor and Obey in Colonial Mexico



    Thanks, I probably skimmed past it before.


    Offline MaterDominici

    • Mod
    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 5663
    • Reputation: +4416/-107
    • Gender: Female
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #563 on: March 27, 2011, 10:25:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: gladius_veritatis
    I just have to say:

    Matthew, getting your wife to vote for all your posts is pretty low, man...

     :laugh2:


    You'd think he'd return the favor!  :rolleyes:
    (and he took my "smirk" smilie away too, so Mr. Rolleyes will have to do)

    Offline Caminus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3027
    • Reputation: +3/-0
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #564 on: March 27, 2011, 11:53:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Telesphorus
    Quote from: Caminus

    Take this for instance.  You extract one sentence from an encyclical that makes a general statement without any explanation or examples to show forth his meaning.  What precisely did he mean by this?  Do you know?  Or are you just using this vague, undefined statement to suit your own purposes?  The fact of the matter is that you simply don't know what precisely he meant by this statement.  But you do not fear to contort it to your liking and use it to trample on other people.  You demand respect for your reputation but you do not bat an eye at dragging others' through the mud.  



    Historically the Church very often granted dispensations of the banns and even secret marriages to young people who wished to marry against the wishes of their parents.  When parents attempted to disinherit young people who married against their wishes these attempts were often overturned.



    Translation: Yes, I don't really know what specifically Leo XIII meant by the proposition, but it seems useful for my personal situation.  This is simply evasion.  Even if I grant you the above, it's still no explanation of Leo XIII's words in concrete terms and 'often' implies the converse as well.  How do you know that your particular circuмstance would have been defended or advocated by the Church if sometimes local authorities did not approve of such actions?  Historical references are very tricky in that when one attempts to cite an example, the circuмstances must also be considered.  Thus, if there is a substantial difference in circuмstances, the conclusion or adaption doesn't necessarily follow.

    From the little that has been indicated of your actions thus far, it seems at very least you publicly accused the parents and the girl of lying and the priest of being uncatholic because he didn't accept your proof-texts.  I would say that if that is the case, the priest was justified in separating a trouble maker.  Secondly, why would you complain about being ejected from a congregation full of liars headed by uncatholic priests?  It seems to me that you should be glad to be freed from such deception, not eternally complaining about the injustice of it all.      

    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +28/-13
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #565 on: March 28, 2011, 05:28:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Caminus

    Take this for instance.  You extract one sentence from an encyclical that makes a general statement without any explanation or examples to show forth his meaning.  What precisely did he mean by this?  Do you know?  Or are you just using this vague, undefined statement to suit your own purposes?  The fact of the matter is that you simply don't know what precisely he meant by this statement.  But you do not fear to contort it to your liking and use it to trample on other people.  You demand respect for your reputation but you do not bat an eye at dragging others' through the mud.  


    I don't need to know precisely what he meant - the reason to cite it is to show that the Popes have authoritatively taught that the father's authority is limited and that rightful freedom to marry exists.  The details are confirmed in other sources - because there are many other sources by which to judge what Catholic teaching is on this point.  It is the teaching of a pre-conciliar Pope, at any rate, that shows that the authority of fathers regarding freedom to marry is limited.  And it doesn't mean it's limited once a girl has a career and a place of her own!  Certainly in Pope Leo's or St. Thomas's day it wasn't expected for a woman to move away from home before she decides who she may marry.

    These people attacked me - I'm defending myself against them.  They deserve to be exposed.  They wouldn't hesitate to have me locked up if they could - they are morally dangerous bullies.

    Quote
    Translation: Yes, I don't really know what specifically Leo XIII meant by the proposition, but it seems useful for my personal situation.  This is simply evasion.  Even if I grant you the above, it's still no explanation of Leo XIII's words in concrete terms and 'often' implies the converse as well.  How do you know that your particular circuмstance would have been defended or advocated by the Church if sometimes local authorities did not approve of such actions?  Historical references are very tricky in that when one attempts to cite an example, the circuмstances must also be considered.  Thus, if there is a substantial difference in circuмstances, the conclusion or adaption doesn't necessarily follow.


    There's nothing vague about it Caminus, either you accept the freedom to marry if you don't.  You're asking what was the practical application of what Leo XIII stated there.  And I've shown historical evidence as to what it was.  And don't pretend that was the only quote.  There's Canon Law.  There's St. Thomas Aquinas, there's civil law.  And you you only quote Pope Leo's Encyclical.  Either the SSPX accepts Catholic teaching on this point or they don't - if they don't they have a serious problem.    

     The SSPX doesn't teach freedom to marry.  Nearly every SSPX parishioner I've spoken to believes the opposite - the "under the parents' roof" line is a mantra.  The father of the girl I foolishly confided in told me that I shouldn't have told his daughter, a young woman of 22 a "secret" because she's "under his roof."  (I didn't even know she lived at home) That's ridiculous.  It shows the extent to which the SSPX is leading people into error.  The fact that the Church was forced by anti-clerical civil authorities to stop marrying children against their parents will should mean something to any real Catholic.    

    Quote
    From the little that has been indicated of your actions thus far, it seems at very least you publicly accused the parents and the girl of lying


    When they lied to my face in a private meeting, yes, I accused them of lying.  I'm not going to let people lie to my face.  A priest who sanctions that sort of behavior is a rotten priest.

    Quote
    and the priest of being uncatholic because he didn't accept your proof-texts.  


    They aren't "proof texts" Caminus - they're Catholic teachings.   If a priest won't teach St. Thomas or Leo XIII from the pulpit because he wants children to believe they must have parental permission to marry then he wants people to be deceived.  If he threatens to kick someone out of church if he attempts to contact a girl past 18 without the parents consent then he obviously doesn't believe in freedom to marry or that he is bound by Canon Law.

    Caminus, your strategy in debate is to always refuse to accept any reasoning.  It reminds me of what the modernists do.  If we were to take your criticisms seriously, no one could ever reach a conclusion, no one can ever advance, because you obstinately pretend that what your opponent says is somehow dubious.  It gets to be like debating whether or not we're actually brains in a vat somewhere.  We can never figure out what the Pope really intends, we can never actually point out that he contradicts Catholic doctrine because somehow we're unable to really know.  To defend a modernist you have to accept some of their premises at some point.

    Quote
    I would say that if that is the case, the priest was justified in separating a trouble maker.  


    No, the priest should humbly apologize and repentantly admit that the SSPX has failed to properly explain Catholic teachings because of a misguided desire to "protect" young women.

    Quote
    Secondly, why would you complain about being ejected from a congregation full of liars headed by uncatholic priests?  It seems to me that you should be glad to be freed from such deception, not eternally complaining about the injustice of it all.      


    There are many good people there.  They unjustly ejected me.  They need to be held accountable for that.


    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +28/-13
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #566 on: March 28, 2011, 05:52:59 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I was threatened with being kicked out on Palm Sunday 2010.  They day before I'd received quite a bit of encouragement from the girl.

    At that point the priest said that if I tried to contact her without the father's permission I would be kicked out - and that it was society "praxis."

    Any reasonable person can see that sending an innocent message to an 18 year old girl isn't hurting anyone.

    If she didn't want me to attempt to contact her at that point she could have spoken for herself.  At age 18, according to Canon Law, she has "all the rights of the faithful."

    If a suitor is banned by a priest from contacting an adult without the father's permission, there is only one conclusion to draw - the priest effectively insisting that there is not freedom to marry.

    It's not Catholic.


    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +28/-13
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #567 on: March 28, 2011, 07:43:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: MaterDominici
    Quote from: Telesphorus
    Quote from: MaterDominici
    Quote from: Telesphorus
    Historically the Church very often granted dispensations of the banns and even secret marriages to young people who wished to marry against the wishes of their parents.  When parents attempted to disinherit young people who married against their wishes these attempts were often overturned.


    Tele, when and where was this common?
    I understand the exact opposite has also been true... priests extremely reluctant to wed a couple without parental consent and laws that automatically exclude such a couple from receiving their inheritance.
    I'd imagine historically it's gone both ways.


    Did you look at the book link I posted?

    To Love Honor and Obey in Colonial Mexico



    Thanks, I probably skimmed past it before.


    Unfortunately most of the preview has been cut.  Previously nearly the entire book was available - in fact, it was available within the past couple days.

    Google has done worse than that.

    A certain article from Arthur Preuss's Journal entitled "Is Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ Responsible for the Great War" was simply expunged from the preview and the download.

    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8212
    • Reputation: +7174/-12
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #568 on: March 28, 2011, 02:13:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • IMO, 18 is too young to marry. Anywhere from 22-25 would be a good age to marry. There's nothing wrong with dating at 18, but marriage at 18 is too young. If I were you, I would just pray that God sends another girl into your life (old enough to marry). God clearly didn't will that you marry this girl.
    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.

    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +28/-13
    • Gender: Male
    America and courting 18-year-old virgins
    « Reply #569 on: March 28, 2011, 02:46:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    IMO, 18 is too young to marry.


    What is the basis for that opinion?

    Quote
    Anywhere from 22-25 would be a good age to marry. There's nothing wrong with dating at 18, but marriage at 18 is too young.


    How is it right to date if one is not intending marriage for four years?

    Quote
    If I were you, I would just pray that God sends another girl into your life (old enough to marry). God clearly didn't will that you marry this girl.


    SS - you don't have anything to say.  "18 is too young" - what possible basis is there for stating that?

    Why was it that the vast majority of the states set majority at 18 for women 100 years ago, while setting it at 21 for men?

    What could have accounted for the change in attitudes that sees marriage at 18 as somehow being wrong?

    There's only one answer SS - and it doesn't have to do with Catholic teachings or "maturity" - it has to do with feminist and liberal values.