Most priests know far more about marriage than most married people do


Is that supposed to be good advice or bad advice?

If he means that every kiss needs to be passionate and mind-blowing and involve swelling violins, I have to say that that isn’t very realistic.

I don’t want my husband to mortify himself for me–but I do want him to do his best for our family. If he does what our family needs, I’m going to be happy, even if he doesn’t have to mortify himself to do so.

I feel like you have a lot more emphasis on inputs (mortification) than outputs. I personally prefer results rather than effort.


I understand that you’ve adopted me as your online nemesis. I understand that you hunt for my posts to comment in response. I understand that your expectation is to disagree with me. I’m sorry to disappoint you.

Please re-read my posts in this thread before you take me out of context (again) to make me mean something different from what I’ve actually written (again). I’m literally defending the Roman Catholic Church’s historically-varied disciplines on married/unmarried priests and very much defending the USCCB’s Pre Cana curriculum. Not one of the theological points I’ve made in this thread is incongruent with the RCC.

P.S.- While it is likely that St. Paul remained unmarried his entire life, this is actually an open question. Christian historians and theologians, even on this very forum, have acknowledged this. He cannot be claimed as a prooftext either way, as he himself cites that other Apostles took wives.


What is up with the snark-bordering-on-anger infused into nearly all of your posts here? From a rational perspective, it seems others have highlighted legitimate ways in which priests understand marriage better or don’t – and (again, from a rational perspective) it seems that both can co-exist. Why does it seemingly destroy your worldview if this is so?


It’s obvious, but for the summer school folks, let me spell it out.

“Put love into the little things. Keep things stirring. It’s your job. Don’t think it’s hers. Esto vir. Lift up the happy cross of a marriage and carry it with the joy of one who knows he is a son of God.”


This isn’t a knitting bee.


Do you think you could manage to write a response without an insult in it?

It really undermines all of your stuff about virtue and self-denial when there’s so much putting down of others wrapped up with it.


Do you now understand what the priest meant or not? Or do you want me to come up with yet another interpretation of it, or do you want to recast it into some other negative light as before?


Also seems it isn’t a rational, genuine dialogue…


You are so right. Priests mostly see the bad stuff. I knew a counselor who was a presenter for part of an Appelachian Cultural Studies Class I took one summer to meet a sociology requirement.

He said that through his practice in a small rural town in Appelachian he had come to the conclusion that Appelachian Culture was a “culture of violence and incest.” I quickly spoke up and asked him how many healthy families visit his clinic and how they compare to the other families he is friends with there.

He seemed caught off guard and admitted he had made no friends in the 12 years he had been in practice. So all he had to go on was his clinical experience. He blamed that on the “xenophobia of southerners” who saw him only as an outsider.

I suggested that maybe they were picking up on his pre-judgement of them. He clearly did not like my comment and did not respond.

As the lecture continued, he applied the phrase “culture of incest and violence” again but to all southerners this time. I again spoke up and asked him where he was originally from. He said " Chicago, that’s why I have no accent." The classroom, full of southerners, laughed.

I couldn’t help myself, but I responded, “Well, there’s certainly no violence or incest in Chicago, is there?” He said, well, I guess you’ve got me there. I’m fairly sure that the professor of the class who had invited this presenter wanted to strangle me at this point.


“No routine kisses” strikes me as being sweet but unrealistic advice.


Well put away the needles and start from the top of this thread.


It’s beautiful advice.
Simple, direct. Perfect for men. "Get on it. You own it. Esto vir (that’s Latin for “be a man”)."
It provides a “perfect test” in the middle of a kiss…give her more of yourself, put love into.

Nothing unrealistic about it.

But you’re not a man, so you wouldn’t understand the simplicity, beauty, directness, inexhaustibility of it, would you (by your own rules)?

secret stuff. Impenetrable.



That’s cute. And virtually meaningless. I’ve read every post and those marred by sarcasm and, at times, blatant ugliness have done nothing to advance the conversation. You’ve shared some of your experiences here. I suggest you gain another by taking a writing course and learning about audience awareness. No one requires you to be sickeningly sweet. Basic civility would be a big help, though. It’s really not that difficult and you’d win far more converts to your way of thinking than by showering folks with a barrage of insults.




My hubby of 20+ years disagrees. Guess he somehow missed the men-only memo.


Maybe at 25 he’ll agree…or 33.


Very well said. I think the rudeness is meant to keep us away from the real source of all the anger expressed here. It is plentiful.


Most of us were raised in a family. Priests have no monopoly or inside track on that.

As for priests hearing about marriage foibles in confession, people talk to one another, confide in one another.

I’m sure my pastor knows things about Mr. and Mrs. So-and-So’s marriage that I don’t know, but I’m also sure I know some things about his parishioners he would be shocked to learn.

To really know something intimately, I think you have to experience it. I can explain to someone how to sing, but unless and until they try it themselves, they won’t really know what it’s like.

I don’t think priests know about marriage in general, but yes, they do know facts about spouses that might be known by no one else.


You missed the point. Go read the other assertions provided.


Yes, but in a very different way. A priestly marriage can’t really be compared to one between a man and a woman.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit