CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

Is the person you're courting concidered a girlfriend/boyfriend?

just a random question that popped in my head.

What's courting really mean in this day and age? Is it Jane Austen romance or some porn flick. You can call it dating and go all the way, you can call it courting and go all the way. In my mind the only difference is that you should consider the special someone as a potential marriage partner. Doesn't matter what word you use. Words blur into one. But the truth remains.

To end it all I think you would call them a girlfriend/boyfriend. But not having a girlfriend I've not a clue.

I myself think it's quite silly to get hung up on terms. (Which is not to say that you should have the "we don't like titles excuse like my friends did to avoid defining the relationship.)

Uh... just to clear it up. I believe in sex only within the confines of a loving marriage.

Ryupower wrote:Is the person you're courting concidered a girlfriend/boyfriend?

just a random question that popped in my head.

Hmm, a question I've wondered about myself. I'd say that if both parties agree, it's probably best to use the boyfriend/girlfriend terminology around casual acquaintances or people unlikely to be familiar with the nuances of the courtship system so as to save time and confusion.

Courting is an outdated version of dating. The basic idea is that you actually intended on most likely marrying the person you were courting and things were a bit more formal.

so I guess that's a....yeah?

XD

Courting? Wow... is that... 1920's sounding! I would generally saaay "flirting, pursuing, dating...." If courting if synonymous with those than I would call him/her a would-be gf/bf. Unless they like you back....then probably would call them gf/bf.

Uh... unless courting involves wearing a petty coat while holding a little umbrella and talking to some British gentleman over a cup of Earl Grey. Thennn... I'd call him/her "My lord, my lady, sir, or madam."

I wouldn't put too much stock in the words "dating" or "courting", since what really matters is the methods used.

Some people date just for the fun, never intending to get married. Courtship at least has the connotation of commitment and seriousness. There's a purpose, not just to be sociable.

Some people here are clearly unfamiliar with the Christian "courtship" movement. (Not that there's anything wrong with that...) Case in point: Sometimes it's less trouble to just use the boyfriend/girlfriend terminology than go through the bother of trying to explain.

Thank you RedMage.

Courtship has more of a Victorian romance ring to it I think, where as dating is more casual and friendly.

Ooops, didn't see Redmage's post. Nope, I had no clue it was a Christian thing. Sounds like something fundamentalists would be into. Very proper and such...

Courting, correct me if I'm wrong, is a form of dating used in the medieval era. It more or less involved exactly what we do in our version of dating but with more manners and grace (gah what I wouldn't give to have that back). You would spend time with the other person, participate in the activities the other likes and of course share a bedchamber. So if you want the condensed version: preparing for a marriage not planned out for you at birth.

They shared a bedchamber? I was quite unfamiliar with that part.

Yeah, I'm not so sure you've got that part right.

Courting is much more serious than dating.It means that there is a serious commitment between the two parties.When a boy courts a girl he has to have her
father's permission to do so.
It's also a lot more formal in many ways.For example when you court a girl you bring her flowers and take her to really expensice restruants.When you date a girl
you take her to MacDonald's and maybe give her a daisy.
courting is what my grandpa did.

yukinon wrote:They shared a bedchamber? I was quite unfamiliar with that part.

Yeah, didn't you see the Patriot? Hehe

Since the question Ryu asked was thoroughly answered (yes, they are boyfriend and girlfriend) I'll instead discuss the term and why it was a big fad (probably still is among many Christians.)

There's a book called "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" by Joshua Harris, son of Greg Harris who leads a church in Northern Oregen, to which a friend of mine used to go, and may once again because she started "courting" someone there (who is now her fiancé), but I digress... In any case, the book decried the dating scene. The idea is that casual dating seperates your heart into different pieces and has some of the same damaging effects as premarital sex, and if you take part it in, you can end up with less than your full self to give to your future mate... Or, so I gathered anyhow from the little of it I read. Of course, the fact that courting someone, that is planning for marriage with someone, who then ends up changing their minds is a LOT more damaging than not ending up with someone you went on a fun date with...

Really, the message in the book was not that extreme, but its followers exaggerated it to the point of absurdity, condemning "dating" as sinful and praising "courting" as biblical. What they fail to realize is that there's no "courting" in the Bible, either... The most common form of marriage preperation was the man essentially proposing to the Dad, with the girl having only the first meeting to base her answer on... It was a form of arranged marriage. The idea that courting is biblical is absurd.

I've discussed this very topic many times before, as I've been condemned for my beliefs on it by friends, despite me never really being part of the dating scene. It has calmed down a lot since then, because enough time has passed that it has proven to be mostly a fad. Not that I'm against courting... It's a great way to get to know someone, though incomplete... Since one of the requirements for it be that you are always under the watchfull eye of one of the parents, it really is a tragedy for those who... Can't do that for one reason or another, and it doesn't really allow for the most intimate (not sex, mind you, even just intimate conversation) time to get to know some things you wouldn't see around the person's parents or yours... The question is asked a lot "Well, what would you do alone that you couldn't do in front of their parents." And the answer is "A lot." Part of forming a relationship is forming that slightest bit of privacy... Granted, while no such thing happened in biblical relationships, they ALSO were not allowed to get to know one another... In other words, don't condemn one unless you're going to condemn both, and you'd be hardpressed to find an American who would decry both Dating and Courting (I say American, because I know and Indian Christian who preaches the benefits of arranged marriage)

Bob, I would QFT your post but I don't feel like quoting it. XD So uh...RFT (read for truth).

I've said it before and I'm saying it again, Christian dating is no different from courting. I sometimes bash courting, but I have nothing against it in and of itself, it's just dating with a Christian outlook. I just fail to see the purpose in calling it by a different name. It's like calling a horse a cow...you can call it a cow all you want, but in the end it's still a horse no matter how many times you call it a cow.

I just don't like it when people somehow say that courting is better than dating or something, because it isn't. They're exactly the same, or at least, they SHOULD be for Christians (and if they aren't, something is wrong).

Anyway, that's my piece. And to answer the question, yes, calling them a girlfriend/boyfriend is perfectly fine.

Since Bobtheduck mentioned I Kissed Dating Goodbye, I would also recommend the sequel, Boy Meets Girl.

Actually, as one living in America, I fully endorse the idea of arranged marriages.

The worst time to shop for food is when you're hungry, right? So why not put that same logic to work in an area with much longer-reaching implications? Your parents should know you pretty well by now, so if they're doing their job, they can find other parents who know what they're doing and make a sensible match. Of course, these days, people believe only in finding "love" between their legs and in "he acts like the guys in the movies". Hint - that's not love. It's good to be physically attracted to a mate, but you have to step back and leave room for clearheaded analysis before getting emotionally involved.

This, of course, is most rationally done by someone who cares deeply for the person to be matched - e.g. the parents. Other cultures have employed third-party matchmakers with varying degrees of success, but I believe that, with proper societal adjustment, quality matchmaking can best be done by the parents.

I feel so sorry for people who don't understand sarcasm. (lol)

Kaligraphic wrote:Actually, as one living in America, I fully endorse the idea of arranged marriages.

The worst time to shop for food is when you're hungry, right? So why not put that same logic to work in an area with much longer-reaching implications? (1) Your parents should know you pretty well by now, so if they're doing their job, they can find (2)other parents who know what they're doing and make a sensible match. Of course, these days, people believe only in finding "love" between their legs. Hint - that's not love. It's good to be physically attracted to a mate, but you have to step back and leave room for (3)clearheaded analysis before getting emotionally involved.

I've got three points to make, and, well, they're all sort of related, almost like they were actually one point, but they're three parts of one point.

1. They should know... Should is the key. In most cases, however, they don't. Once people start the separation process, the chances of that become very slim. Parents aren't the best judges of character or even personality when it comes to their children... Some parents refuse to acknowledge some serious problems with their children (like mine) and others only see how they failed.

2. For that matter, the chances even the parents who know their children will know the children of other parents, and be able to trust another parent's "levelheaded" judgment is slim to none... Once again, the Halo or horns thing.

3. Shouldn't that analysis come from those who are going to have to spend the rest of their lives with that person? More often than not, Arranged marriages are done as a matter of convenience... "His or her family has something ours doesn't." That's the way it was, for the most part, in Bible times. What does the speech go like? "My father owns a lot of land and buildings, with cattle and servants and gold..." The only possible virtue for the children the parents are looking out for is that of FINANCIAL SECURITY, and with the guys choosing, it was almost universally LOOKS that were the deciding factor. Why did Jacob marry Rachel? For her Looks, because she had a better body than Leah. Don't believe me? Read Genesis again. Why did he marry Leah? Because he was tricked by her dad, who looking out for their financial security. It would be even moreso today. I've watched many a parent make a bad choice for their children, especially in the area of relationships.

I'm sorry, I think that love marriages are a big improvement in our modern age. Getting to know the person before you marry them is a very very good thing. The only thing missing is people seem to have lost the commitment factor. The idea of Falling in love is, unfortunately, coupled with the idea of falling out of love. As long as you don't go into it thinking that, and know that it means forever regardless of days and weeks and maybe years in which you don't feel it, then you avoid the pitfalls of the love marriages. There is no back door, it's till death do you part.

W4J wrote:I feel so sorry for people who don't understand sarcasm. (lol)

Um... You or Kaligraphic? If Kaligraphic was being sarcastic, he put a bit too much effort into making it believable. A general rule in sarcasm is make it short. Unless it's obvious satire, then... Well... Make it obvious.

Jacob made his own choice, and Laban pulled the old switcheroo. It is established when they leave that Laban is hardly a model father for his time, and Isaac was not there to advise Jacob. Jacob and Rachel would have been a love marriage, and Rachel got Jacob into trouble when she stole her father's household idols as they were leaving. Love marriage produces trouble.

Same thing with Samson and Delilah - Samson chooses his own bride and she betrays him. Even as many parents these days have been taught by society to back away from their children, and the separation of generations established in Western society, the level of parent's knowledge of their children has diminished greatly. Still, I'm sure that you have also seen many people make many bad decisions for themselves as well.

In the Bible days, financial security was a big thing. People needed to eat, and if you let your daughter marry a man who couldn't provide, she might end up having to become a prostitute in order to survive. Such things happened - which is why parents looked for someone who could put food on the table.

Suppose that you were embarking on an entirely new venture, which would affect the rest of your life, and for which you had no frame of reference. If this was any other venture than marriage, you'd want the assistance of a veteran, right? So why not simply apply this logic to relationships? One of the things that divides so many marriages is money - parents in the old days realized this, and wished to avoid those particular issues. That doesn't mean that this was their only criterion, nor does it mean that their choices were always perfect, but for the most part, the West's idea of arranged marriages is derived from movies and not reality. The wicked parents who cared nothing for their child and who would engage their only daughter to a tyrant purely for their own financial gain were far less common in reality than Hollywood portrays.

I'm not saying that such a system would invariably produce perfect matches without strife (there are always more issues than you'd expect), I'm just saying that, done right, a system of arranged marriages will on average produce a better result and a happier match than simply setting someone out in the world to find their own mate.

You start that revolution, Kali. I'll be married to a woman I chose by that time, so it won't affect me.

Honestly, though, marriage is something entirely impossible to be a "veteran" at because every marriage is different and advice can only carry so far. What worked in one person's marriage will likely not work in another, and the knowledge you gain after 20 years isn't enough to account for those differences, to say the least. My parents have been married 50 years, and while I will seek their advice, I don't trust their judgment to be making decisions so important for me. Not a chance.

Making the parents decide just replaces one problem ("in your pants") with another problem ("in your pocketbook") and the first problem isn't universal in the first place. No, rather than years of experience using their accumulated wisdom to make a right choice, it would be years of people tired of the problems they have instead making all new problems for their children. You put too much stock in parents, not realizing that they're still not entirely wise, and there's someone who knows you a lot better than they do... Yourself. I sure as heck know myself a lot better than my parents do. My mom still gets food she should know I dont' like, she still imagines relationships where there couldn't be, she still doesn't really know my tastes or how I'll respond to things... And you want me to trust her with choosing my wife? I don't think so... No, if she knows ME so little, imagine how much LESS she'll know the parents of my future wife, or how much less she'll know my FUTURE WIFE...

If I dared use the word "courtship" around my parents they'd order me to dump the guy immedietly {sp?}. Same if any guy asked my dad's permission to date or marry me. My parents, especially Mom, would write him off as some antiquated fossil who expects me to stay at home all day and have kids. To them, the only valid kind of relationship for leading to marriage is what we normally think of as the "daiting scene." That I refuse to date/court unless I already think the man is someone I could marry strikes them as childish/immature. That said...I believe pretty much the exact opposite as them on this issue. In Catholicism, marriage is a Sacrament, so it is something to be apporached cautiously and reverently, not wrecklessly.

Janet's Opinion In A Nutshell: I like the ideals of what is sometimes referred to as "courting." As far as how well it works....I'm single 22 years and counting.

May come back to this post when I'm more lucid....

My Dad and I have similar conflicts in our 'dating' opinions, though I think he's come to respect my views. It helps that my boy and I have been demonstrating them for the past year or so.

JesusFreak84 wrote:If I dared use the word "courtship" around my parents they'd order me to dump the guy immedietly {sp?}. Same if any guy asked my dad's permission to date or marry me. My parents, especially Mom, would write him off as some antiquated fossil who expects me to stay at home all day and have kids. To them, the only valid kind of relationship for leading to marriage is what we normally think of as the "daiting scene." That I refuse to date/court unless I already think the man is someone I could marry strikes them as childish/immature. That said...I believe pretty much the exact opposite as them on this issue. In Catholicism, marriage is a Sacrament, so it is something to be apporached cautiously and reverently, not wrecklessly.

I find that sad your parents would react that way to a boy asking their permission. I would never enter a relationship without asking the parents. I'm glad your views are the opposite though. Why do they think it's so bad to ask permission? besides what you just said.

Why do they think it's so bad to ask permission? besides what you just said.

Dad's reasoning, I have no idea. The "immature/childish" accusations are directly quoted from spats we've had over it. Mom.....very "liberal," on those things, if that term works. She's one of those parents who would teach us her own opinion as to what we should do even if Scripture specifically says otherwise. (Technically we're Catholic, and she would even go so far as to be outright defiant of the Magesterium. For non-Catholics...suffice to say it's enormously hypocritical to send your kids to CCD (religious ed.) and then to talk like that about the teaching authority as soon as we're out of that classroom. Since marriage is, as I said, a Sacrament for us, naturally it's something the Vatican addresses, and I'm apparently out of my mind for agreeing with them.) She so has it in her head that those things are bad that she doesn't believe they could possibly lead to any kind of marriage where the wife is anything but a domestic slave. Guess that happens when you come of age in the 1970's. -_- End result is my parents are both dead set that I'll never marry.

Sorry for the long-winded response. I also apologize for de-railing the thread and/or turning into my own personal soapbox/gripebox.