Orthodate
Open Orthodate

Relationships

Orthodox dating standards: which deal-breakers are real and which are only preferences

Sort your list for an Orthodox spouse into non-negotiables, shared-life essentials and preferences, and see when standards become a wall.

By Orthodate Editorial21 minute read

Almost every serious Orthodox single carries a list. It may be written down, or it may live in the back of the mind as a set of quick verdicts that fire within the first five minutes of meeting someone: wrong jurisdiction, not serious enough, too serious, does not chant, too old, too short, no beard. Some of the items are wisdom, earned by watching other people’s marriages and by knowing what one can and cannot live with. Others are fear in disguise, a way of ruling out anyone who could actually reject you or change you. The difficulty is that from the inside they feel identical. This guide offers a way of sorting a list into four tiers, tests for deciding which tier an item belongs in, an honest look at the Orthodox-specific filters people apply too rigidly, and the opposite warning for those whose standards are too low. It ends with an exercise that takes about an hour.

At a glance

Key takeaways

  • Sort every item on your list into four tiers, namely conscience and safety, shared-life essentials, compatibility preferences and personal taste, and only the first two should be allowed to end a relationship on their own.
  • Orthodox-specific filters, such as jurisdiction, calendar, cradle versus convert and level of strictness, are real differences but rarely deal-breakers, and the questions that matter are about practice, honesty and willingness to grow rather than labels.
  • Standards can fail in both directions, so check regularly whether your list has become a wall that keeps everyone out or has shrunk to a point where you are overlooking behaviour that should concern you.

1. Why we keep lists, and why they go wrong

A list is a reasonable response to a real problem. Choosing a spouse is among the most consequential decisions a person makes, the number of people one can know well is small, and nobody has time to discover every incompatibility by living with it. A list lets you rule out the obvious mismatches early, and it protects you from the pull of an attraction that is stronger than your judgment. Seen that way, an unwillingness to have any standards is not a virtue. It is a lack of preparation.

The trouble starts when the list does a job it was not designed for. A list is a tool for screening out serious problems. It is not a specification for a person, and it cannot predict who will actually be good to live with. People are bundles of traits that do not come apart neatly, and the person who ticks every box on paper may be a worse husband or wife than someone who fails three of them and does something no list thought to ask for, such as noticing when you are tired.

Lists also tend to change under pressure. After a painful ending, a list often grows by a few items that name exactly what went wrong last time, which is understandable and useful when it records a genuine lesson, and unhelpful when it turns a single bad relationship into a general rule about a type of person. After a long time alone, a list can quietly harden into a reason why nobody has come forward. Both movements feel like wisdom while they are happening.

The Gospel offers a useful corrective in a verse about King David’s election. When Samuel looks at Jesse’s eldest son and assumes he must be the one, the Lord answers that man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart (1 Samuel 16:7). It is not an argument against attraction, and it does not make the outward irrelevant. It is a reminder that the things we reach for first are not always the things that matter most, and that a list that is nearly all outward is a poor guide to a marriage.

2. The four tiers

Taking each item on your list and placing it in one of four tiers is the most useful single thing you can do with it. The tiers are defined by what happens if the standard is not met.

  • Tier one is conscience and safety. These are things you cannot live with without damaging your faith, your integrity or your well-being. They include honesty, absence of abuse or coercion, freedom from an active addiction that is not being treated, fidelity, a real commitment to the Church, and being free to marry. Violating a tier-one standard ends the relationship, and it should not be negotiable by affection.
  • Tier two is shared-life essentials. These are the big structural questions on which two people have to agree because they cannot both have their own way: whether and when to have children, where to live, how seriously to take the sacraments and the fasts, how to handle money, how involved each family will be, which parish to attend. A difference here is not a moral failing, but an unresolved difference is a reason not to marry, and an early conversation is the way to find out.
  • Tier three is compatibility preferences. These make life easier or harder but do not decide whether a marriage can work: jurisdiction, ethnic background, first language, education, career, taste in music, how sociable each is, how tidy. Differences can be bridged, and many of the happiest marriages bridge several of them.
  • Tier four is personal taste. Height, build, hair, accent, whether they like the same films. Attraction matters, and it should not be dismissed, but these items are never reasons for a verdict on someone’s character, and they carry less weight than people expect once a relationship has begun.

3. Tier one: what truly cannot be bargained

Most people’s real tier-one list is shorter than they think, and it deserves to be written plainly, because it is the part you will have to hold to when you are in love. For many Orthodox Christians it includes the following.

  • Honesty, including about the past. A person who lies about small things will lie about large ones, and a marriage without trust has nothing to stand on. This includes honesty about earlier marriages, children, debts, health and the status of any previous relationship.
  • No abuse of any kind. Physical, sexual, verbal, financial or spiritual abuse is not a flaw to be worked on in a marriage. It is a reason to leave the relationship, and the guide on abusive relationships explains how to do so safely.
  • A real commitment to faith that matches yours in direction. This does not require identical practice, but it does require that the person wants what you want a marriage to be for, which, for an Orthodox Christian, is the shared pursuit of salvation. A partner who is hostile, contemptuous or indifferent to your faith is a tier-one problem.
  • Intention to marry. Someone who is willing to date for years with no intention of marrying is not a candidate. The guide on dating with intention gives the questions to ask.
  • Freedom to marry in the Church. This is a canonical matter. A person who is already married, or who has an earlier marriage that the Church has not dealt with, is not free, and no amount of affection changes it. The guides on impediments and on divorce and remarriage explain the position and the process.
  • Respect for your boundaries. If a person pushes against what you have said you will not do, and the pressure continues after you have been clear, that is a tier-one problem however charming they are.
  • Untreated addiction or untreated serious illness. This is not a statement about the person’s worth. It is a recognition that a marriage cannot carry the weight of an illness that the person is not addressing, and that you are not their treatment.

4. Tier two: the questions two people have to settle

Tier-two items are where most real marriages are won or lost, and they are the ones people tend to avoid discussing because they feel premature. They are not premature once a relationship is serious, and raising them early is a form of kindness.

Children come first. Whether to have them, roughly how many and how a couple will handle infertility or a disagreement about timing are questions on which a mismatch cannot be compromised, since there is no half-measure. The guides on family planning and on infertility give the Church’s position and the conversation to have.

Practice of the faith follows closely. Weekly Liturgy or not, confession as a regular discipline or as a rare event, how the fasts are kept, how the home is arranged for prayer, which parish and which priest. The Orthodox expectation is that the couple will go to communion together, and a marriage in which one person is a believer and the other treats the faith as background noise is under strain from the start. It does not need identical habits, but it does need an honest conversation about what each expects of an ordinary week.

Then comes money, which is a source of conflict in many marriages. The questions are about habits, not totals: how each person handles debt, whether either is supporting family members, who will earn and who will care for children, and how much giving to the Church and to others each expects. The guide to money questions gives a list.

Place and family complete the set. Where you will live, whether either of you will move for the other, how close to each family, how involved they will be and what is expected at feasts and name days. In many Orthodox families, especially those with a recent immigrant history, the extended family is a large part of the picture, and it is wise to meet them early and to see how the person is with them.

The distinction between tiers one and two is that a tier-two difference may be resolved by honest talk, patience and compromise, and a tier-one violation may not. If a conversation about a tier-two topic reveals a difference that neither will move on, such as one person who wants five children and another who wants none, that is not a failure. It is information, and a respectful ending is better than a marriage built on hoping the other will change.

5. The Orthodox filters people over-apply

Orthodox singles have a set of filters that are particular to the tradition and that deserve their own examination, since they are the ones most often presented as principles.

Cradle or convert. Some singles want a spouse raised in the Church, on the theory that they will share a deep instinctive familiarity. Others prefer a convert, on the theory that they will have chosen the faith with their eyes open. Neither generalisation survives meeting actual people. Many cradle Orthodox Christians have inherited a culture without ever making the faith their own, and many converts have worked their way into more of the tradition than people who grew up in it. What you want to know is not the route but the present state: how this person prays, what they read, what they do on an ordinary Wednesday, and whether they are growing.

Jurisdiction. Whether someone belongs to the Orthodox Church in America, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, the Antiochian Archdiocese, the Serbian, Russian, Romanian or another body is a real difference in culture, language, customs and sometimes calendar. It is not a canonical barrier. The Orthodox churches are in communion with one another, and members of one can receive communion, be married and be godparents in another. Where couples find it hard is practical: which parish to attend, which language, which customs for feasts. Those are tier-three questions, to be handled by agreement.

Calendar. Julian and revised Julian calendars put Christmas on different days, and a couple from each will face the question of which to follow at home. It is a practical matter that can be settled by deciding which parish you will attend and following its calendar. Pascha is a different case, because it is calculated in the same way by almost all Orthodox churches and so does not divide couples. The guide on the old and new calendars explains the difference.

Ethnic and cultural background. Many Orthodox families hope their children will marry within the community, which is understandable and not unreasonable, particularly for families who have sacrificed to preserve a language and a culture. The question for the person choosing is whether the preference is theirs, whether it can bear weight, and what it costs. A marriage across cultures requires patience and curiosity, and it can also be very rich. The guide on bilingual couples and the one on family and cultural expectations both deal with it.

Strictness. People who fast carefully often want a spouse who fasts at the same level, and people who find fasting difficult often want someone gentle about it. The question is not whether two people keep identical rules, which almost never happens, but whether they respect each other’s practice, are honest about what they can manage, and consult their priest when they differ. Contempt for the other’s level, in either direction, is the thing to look out for.

Church roles. Some singles want a spouse who chants, sings or serves. These are good and worthy things, and they are also gifts, not obligations. A person who prays faithfully and gives generously but cannot carry a tune is not a lesser candidate.

6. Five tests for any item on your list

When you are unsure which tier an item belongs in, these questions help.

  • What does this protect? Name the actual thing. If you cannot, the item is probably a preference.
  • Would it still matter in ten years? A person’s height, their accent and their taste in films rarely do. Their honesty, their faith and the way they handle disagreement always do.
  • Is it about who they are or about what they do? Character, such as honesty, humility and generosity, is deep and slow to change. Habits and circumstances, such as a job, a city, a hobby or a haircut, are shallow and can change.
  • Is it changeable, and are they willing? A bad habit that a person recognises and is working on is a very different case from one that they deny. The question is not whether someone is perfect, but whether they are honest and moving in the right direction.
  • Whose standard is it? Check whether it comes from your conscience, from fear or from someone else’s opinion. A parent’s ideal, a friend’s marriage or an image on social media is not your own, and a standard borrowed from them often collapses when you meet a real person.

7. When the list has become a wall

A list that has grown into a wall has recognisable features, and it helps to be honest about whether any of them apply.

You have rejected several people in a row for different, small reasons. A single rejection for a good reason is information. Five in a row for five different small reasons is a pattern, and the pattern is usually about the person doing the rejecting.

The list contradicts itself. You want someone adventurous and also settled, a leader and also deeply humble, a theologian and also relaxed, very devout and also not at all judgmental. Many of these combinations exist, but not often, and not in the same person all the time. A list that nobody could satisfy is not a list. It is a description of an imaginary person.

You compare people to an ideal you have never met. Some people compare every candidate with a saint, an elder or a figure from a film. Saints are given to us for imitation and prayer, not as a standard against which to measure a potential spouse, and a person who is compared with one will lose every time.

The first reason you give for ruling someone out is something you could not have known in the first meeting. A man who is “too intense” after one coffee, or a woman who is “not serious enough” because of how she dressed for a picnic, has been judged on very little evidence.

You feel relief when someone is ruled out. This is the most telling sign. If you are glad to find a reason not to continue, the reason is less likely to be a principle than a fear. It may be fear of being known, of being rejected, of changing your life or of losing a certain idea of yourself. That fear deserves a conversation with someone you trust, and possibly with a priest or counsellor, rather than another item on the list.

None of this means that you should lower your standards. It means you should check that they are doing their job. A good list stops you walking into harm. A wall stops you walking into anything.

8. The opposite error: a list so short that it protects nothing

It would be dishonest to write about picky people without writing about the others. Many people have the opposite problem. They are tired, they are lonely and they have been told for years that they are too fussy, and they have started to explain away behaviour that they would once have refused to tolerate. The tier-one list has quietly shrunk.

The usual signs are small. You find yourself saying that he did not mean it, that she is under a lot of stress, that everyone has a temper, that it is not so bad once you get to know her. You are keeping quiet about things that worry you because you do not want to lose the relationship. You are asking a friend whether you are being unreasonable, and the answer is no, and you are going ahead anyway.

The remedy is the same exercise in reverse. Write down the tier-one items again, in a calm moment, and ask honestly whether the person in front of you meets them. If a friend or a priest who knows you well says that something concerns them, listen. And remember that loneliness, though painful, is not the worst thing, and that a marriage to a person who is unkind, dishonest or unsafe is considerably harder. The guide on red flags and green flags lists what to look for.

9. Attraction, and how it fits in

Attraction matters. A marriage is a union of bodies as well as souls, and the Church’s teaching on marriage does not treat desire as an embarrassment. A person who feels no attraction at all after several meetings is allowed to say so, and it is kinder to say it sooner than later.

It is also worth knowing that attraction is not fixed. Many married people describe attraction that arrived slowly, after they had come to know a person’s humour, patience and kindness, and attraction that faded in people who looked right on paper but proved unkind. A first-meeting spark is useful information, but it is not a complete test. A reasonable approach is to give a person who is good in every other way a few more meetings before deciding, as long as you are not forcing yourself or misleading them.

It is just as important not to reduce a person to a set of physical requirements. A strict list of height, build, hair colour and style is a tier-four list, and it excludes the very large number of people who would be a good match in every way that counts. If you notice that the physical requirements are the longest part of your list, it is worth asking where they came from.

10. Setting preferences in an app without shrinking your world

Dating apps turn a list into a set of settings, which makes the question concrete. Every filter you apply makes the pool smaller, and the smaller the pool, the fewer people you see and the fewer chances you have of meeting someone who does not match the list on paper but would in person.

A sensible approach is to use hard filters for tier one and the most important of tier two, and to leave the rest to your own judgment. Faith commitment, intention to marry and a distance you can realistically travel are good candidates. Jurisdiction, height, profession and a long list of interests are not, because a filter cannot tell you anything about how a person will treat you, and it will silently remove people you would have liked.

On a platform such as Orthodate, the settings include things such as age, distance, what you are looking for and the level of faith practice. It is worth treating them as a starting point rather than a verdict, reviewing them after a few weeks and loosening any that are producing an empty daily batch. If you find that a setting has made the pool very small, ask whether it is a tier-one item. If it is not, loosen it.

Your profile does the same work from the other side. A profile that names a few deal-breakers plainly, such as a wish for marriage and for a person who prays and goes to church, helps the right people to find you and the wrong ones to move on, and does so without insulting anybody. A profile that lists twenty things you will not tolerate reads as a wall, and people can feel it.

11. Talking about standards without conducting an interview

Standards are discovered in conversation, and the way you ask matters. A list of questions fired at a person on a first date feels like an audition, and a person who answers with the expected words is not necessarily telling the truth. The better approach is to ask about stories and to notice how they are told.

Instead of asking whether someone wants children, ask about the family they grew up in, what they loved about it and what they would do differently. Instead of asking whether they take the faith seriously, ask what a normal Sunday looks like, who their confessor is, what they are reading, or what they did last Lent. Instead of asking about money, ask what their parents taught them about it. The answers tell you more than a yes or a no, and they open a conversation rather than closing one.

Tell the other person your own as well. A relationship in which one person is being examined and the other is concealing is not an exchange. If you want children soon, say so. If your faith is the centre of your life, say that in a sentence. The best use of a standard is as something you offer, not as something you demand.

And be willing to be surprised. Many people, asked at the end of a relationship what they would tell their earlier selves, say that the person they married was not what they had written down, and that they were glad. It is not an argument for dropping standards. It is an argument for holding them with open hands.

A one-hour exercise: sort, test and trim your list

Set aside an hour with a pen and a quiet room, and do this once, honestly. It is more useful if you pray first, and more useful still if you show the result to someone who knows you well.

  1. Step 1

    Write everything down

    List every quality you want in a spouse, including the ones you are embarrassed by. Do not edit. Most people reach twenty or thirty items, and the ones that surprise you are usually the most informative.

  2. Step 2

    Sort into four tiers

    Label each item as conscience and safety, shared-life essential, compatibility preference or personal taste. If you cannot decide, ask what the item protects. If it protects nothing you can name, move it down a tier.

  3. Step 3

    Apply the tests to the top two tiers

    For every item in tiers one and two, ask whether it would still matter in ten years, whether it is about character or habit, and whose standard it is. Cut or move anything that fails, and write a sentence for each that remains saying why it is there.

  4. Step 4

    Write the mirror list

    For each tier-one and tier-two item, write honestly how well you meet it yourself. A list that you could not meet is a list to be gentle about. It also shows you what you need to work on, which is often the more useful discovery.

  5. Step 5

    Show it to someone and set a review date

    Share the short list with a friend, a mentor or your priest, and ask whether anything surprises them. Then put a date in your diary three months ahead and look at it again. Lists should change as you learn, and the changes are worth noticing.

Common questions

What are reasonable deal-breakers for an Orthodox Christian?

The strongest are honesty, absence of abuse, a real commitment to the faith that matches the direction of your own, a serious intention to marry, freedom to marry in the Church and respect for your boundaries. Differences about children, money, location and church practice are not moral failings, but they must be settled before marriage, so raise them early and honestly.

Am I too picky?

You may be if you have turned down several people in a row for different small reasons, if your list contradicts itself, if you compare people with an ideal rather than with real people, or if you feel relief when someone is ruled out. Check whether each item is conscience, safety or shared-life essential. If it is not, it is a preference, and preferences should not end a relationship.

Does my spouse have to be from my jurisdiction?

No. The Orthodox churches are in communion, and members of one jurisdiction can marry, receive communion and be godparents in another. Jurisdiction affects language, customs and sometimes calendar, which are practical matters for a couple to settle, usually by deciding which parish they will attend. It is not a canonical barrier.

Should I only date cradle Orthodox Christians?

There is no good reason to limit yourself to them. Cradle Orthodox Christians vary enormously in how much of the faith they have made their own, and converts often bring a great deal of seriousness. What matters is how the person prays, worships and lives now, and whether they are growing, not how they came to the Church.

Is it wrong to want someone I am physically attracted to?

No. Attraction is a legitimate part of marriage. It is better to treat it as one input rather than the whole verdict, since it often grows with knowledge of a person’s character and can fade where the character is poor. If the physical requirements are the longest part of your list, ask where they came from.

What if I realise I have been too lenient?

Write down your tier-one items again in a calm moment and ask honestly whether the person you are seeing meets them. Speak to a priest or a trusted friend who knows you well, and take seriously any concern they raise. Loneliness is hard, but staying with someone who is dishonest, unkind or unsafe is harder, and you are allowed to leave.

How often should I review my standards?

About every three months while you are dating, and after any significant ending. The aim is to notice whether your list is growing for a good reason, such as a lesson learned, or a bad one, such as fear. Reviewing it with a friend or your priest makes the exercise more honest.

Sources and further reading

Pastoral practice can vary by diocese and jurisdiction. For questions about your circumstances, speak with the priest responsible for your pastoral care.