An “off topic” comment here, but it does relate to the above. Reading though a member’s prior posts is a way of trying to get a better understanding of that person’s perspective on some matters. If it were not acceptable, CAF would render it impossible. You will find that many long-time members do go back and look through the posting history of those they are interacting with on various topics.
consider that the state offers many opportunities for redemption, if the transgressor is willing to own the offense. this is obvious from the fact that licensing agencies will more often suspend rather than revoke a license; immigration law and criminal justice are well known for allowing second chances. bankruptcy discharging all or most debt is also a second chance. this is also true in the court of public opinion for public scandals. obviously, the Church regards that sin as forgiven and forgiven in the true sense of the word if the woman is living a chaste life.
It’s not the opinions, it’s whether they are charitable or not. Someone could have said that he should go hang himself - that would be their opinion - would it charitable, helpful, or enlightening? No.
We can’t equate a desire to marry a virgin with “[losing] sight of what actually constitutes chastity.” That’s unfair and unfounded. Yes, some people do that. But just because the OP says he wants one quality, doesn’t mean he’s ignoring all others - it’s just the one he’s asking about. Again, forgiveness is not his to give, and temporal consequences do remain. Those two things are fundamentally important to this discussion.
Firstly, I don’t know where people got the age of 17 from, since he doesn’t say that. It concerns me that such facts are constructed and then treated as true since it suggests a “loose and fast” approach to truth with is not helpful in this discussion.
That’s for you, 57thDimension. That’s how we are saying that his girlfriend was 17 or 18 when she made this mistake. It’s now 7 years later and she has paid the price for her mistakes, and been absolved. She even told him the truth when she probably knew it would not benefit her in the slightest.
on the contrary, I think disclosing that factoid might have been the best thing she could have done.
You’re right, none of it is a guarantee. I have noticed though that people who have had premarital sex are much more likely to criticize people like the OP than people who saved themselves for marriage. That’s why I said that their views can be altered (I stated it as an absolute, which is incorrect of me). The concerns are still there, of course. I think the OP’s girlfriend does have a past that is probably more manageable/understandable than most pasts - I don’t think even I would would have a horrible time of it (even given my own prior views) - of course, I can’t say for sure.
Well, it seemed odd - I wasn’t saying it was wrong, per se. Beyond that, CAF does limit the number of posts a person can go back to (1500 if I recall correctly).
Why is it wrong? Is it “personal opinion” wrong or is “Church teaching” wrong?
Very easily, with a little simple maths. I’ve just retained the pertinent parts of the OP here:
25-7=18 and as there are 12 months in a year, you could easily suppose that the young woman was only 17 when the behaviour occurred.
Everyone is saying “17” when it’s not necessarily the case. 25-7 is 18, which makes me wonder why everyone took the lowest number. Why would people do that?
What do you mean by this comment?
don’t misrepresent my position.
you got burned there and the more you harp on it the worse you look. just accept your mistake and move on.
Do you disagree that it is God’s plan for people to enter in marriage as a virgin, without having had sex before?
I believe I used the number 17 because many, if not most, high school seniors are 17. They may be 18 when they graduate, but they usually begin their senior year at 17. Perhaps an early post in the thread using the example of her being 17 started most of us on that path, but why does it matter anyway? She was in high school at the time and it was 7 years ago..
As I said, I believe she is trustworthy, unless there are concerning issues concerning integrity he’s not said anything about.
I did no such thing. I asked a question in order for you clarify your position - you are still invited to do so.
How was he holding it over her head? He was bothered by it - why project more on to his intentions than is actually there? Do you believe there is anything a person can do that should bother a potential spouse?
This is not a fair statement in my mind. Are saying that just because the OP is bother by his girlfriend’s past that he’s unable to forgive his eventual spouse in marriage? Again, the OP is not called to forgive his girlfriend for anything - that’s not his place. Please understand that. Do you see the difference?
Considering your post was more recent than her transgression, I would hope it is “OK”.
How’s that? Unless he actually said “17” than my statements are indeed true. I made no mistake in that regard.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to do - are you trying to draw comparisons between the two things?
the checklist is obvious, if unintended, because he presented it as a checklist instead of just saying, “ready to get married”. go ahead, look at the OP again. I’ll wait.
Sebastian, bishops would be the last people to say that virginity doesn’t matter, but they still ordain men to the priesthood who are not virgins but who have maintained chastity for only seven years. Give it up!