A
Arkansan
Guest
Understanding the difference between an action and an omission is fundamental to any non-consequentialist ethical system.
- Status
A
Arkansan
Guest
Obviously, “forgetting” is metaphorical. God cannot cease to be aware of anything.
You’re missing the point. Lying is intrinsically evil, so if directly asked “have you at any time in your life committed an act of adultery, whether or not the sin has been absolved?”, it would be sinful to directly deny it, regardless of the other person having a right to the truth. One could refuse to answer or otherwise equivocate, but lying is malum in se, always forbidden.
You’re missing the point. Lying is intrinsically evil, so if directly asked “have you at any time in your life committed an act of adultery, whether or not the sin has been absolved?”, it would be sinful to directly deny it, regardless of the other person having a right to the truth. One could refuse to answer or otherwise equivocate, but lying is malum in se, always forbidden.
R
Rozellelily
Guest
Isn’t this a bit like splitting hairs though?
Does this count in situations like adultery too?
Ie:are you suggesting that if the innocent spouse asked the one that had cheated directly “have you been unfaithful” and they had but said “no” that this would be wrong but if they were never asked so they just kept it secret and were deceitful about it that this would be ok by the Catholic Church?
Would many women here (or men for that fact) be happy to be married to such a “shady character”?
Does this count in situations like adultery too?
Ie:are you suggesting that if the innocent spouse asked the one that had cheated directly “have you been unfaithful” and they had but said “no” that this would be wrong but if they were never asked so they just kept it secret and were deceitful about it that this would be ok by the Catholic Church?
Would many women here (or men for that fact) be happy to be married to such a “shady character”?
A
Arkansan
Guest
As a general rule, no one is bound to betray his/her own good name. The cases in moral theology where that can be obligatory are very few.
If the adulterer or adulteress had repented and ceased to commit adultery, informing the other spouse would probably do more harm than good. If the innocent spouse remained unaware then they could live a happy married life together, but if the innocent spouse was informed then they would always be suspicious and could never again fully trust their spouse.
If the adulterer or adulteress had repented and ceased to commit adultery, informing the other spouse would probably do more harm than good. If the innocent spouse remained unaware then they could live a happy married life together, but if the innocent spouse was informed then they would always be suspicious and could never again fully trust their spouse.
Last edited:
A
adgloriam
Guest
Nothing is impossible to the Lord!!! It is not metaphorical!! It is church teaching (straight biblical), God himself instituted the sacrament of reconciliation for this purpose. God says it several times, repeatedly and explicitly in Isaiah, God can forget if He so wishes for He defines Himself in this way and the one thing God cannot do is deny Himself.
A
Arkansan
Guest
I’m going to request a source for the claim that the Church (or any theologian for that matter) teaches that God is literally unaware of people’s past sins (or anything else).
R
Rozellelily
Guest
I don’t quite see it this way.
If they were unaware,then the trust would be built on a false premise/faulty ground.
Th reality is maybe the cheating spouse is not deserving of that trust (at least not at the present time with their current mindset) and the spouse deserves the truth so at least they know the truth of who they are married to (their character,whether they are honest or not etc).
It’s not healthy to a marriage for someone to be perpetually suspicious but neither is deceit.
For trust to be built on a good foundation,it must be built on the foundation of honesty.
Personally if this happened to me,I would be much more hurt and affected if I found they not only were unfaithful but also lied about it .
I would rather be afforded the truth (even if painful) and given the opportunity to make my own future decisions based off this relevation rather than to live a seemingly happy life that was really just built on “sand” (deception).
I think an honest man is a man of character.
If they were unaware,then the trust would be built on a false premise/faulty ground.
Th reality is maybe the cheating spouse is not deserving of that trust (at least not at the present time with their current mindset) and the spouse deserves the truth so at least they know the truth of who they are married to (their character,whether they are honest or not etc).
It’s not healthy to a marriage for someone to be perpetually suspicious but neither is deceit.
For trust to be built on a good foundation,it must be built on the foundation of honesty.
Personally if this happened to me,I would be much more hurt and affected if I found they not only were unfaithful but also lied about it .
I would rather be afforded the truth (even if painful) and given the opportunity to make my own future decisions based off this relevation rather than to live a seemingly happy life that was really just built on “sand” (deception).
I think an honest man is a man of character.
Last edited:
A
Arkansan
Guest
Let’s consider this from another angle, why is detraction sinful? It is, by definition, concerned with true information, so why is it morally wrong?
A
adgloriam
Guest
forget ← search the bible for this word (then explain what exactly forgetting means in this context)
A
adgloriam
Guest
There is also such a thing as “invincible ignorance” as some have to live with it…
R
Rozellelily
Guest
I can’t state that it’s necessarily sinful but I think it’s at least wrong because a person should own up to any major faults that directly affect another person so seriously.
Yes,God may forgive the person after they have been to confession but at the same time this is an action that greatly affects someone else -he or she may want to be married to an honest and faithful person.
Yes,God may forgive the person after they have been to confession but at the same time this is an action that greatly affects someone else -he or she may want to be married to an honest and faithful person.
A
adgloriam
Guest
God has forgiven him…
Jo 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
From that day forth, he/she should be honest and faithful. And you are right, sincerity is to be expected and desired and build (and you don’t build it in a day).
R
Rozellelily
Guest
Sorry,did you mean immature regarding the person who cheated or regarding the person who remains suspicious for a long time after finding out about an infidelity?
If you mean regarding a person who cheated,then that’s why I believe people of similar maturity level should get married (and often do but not always).
A male that’s immature and likely to cheat at the first temptation at a party,should marry a girl who is similarly immature (easily impressed or affected by a guys looks etc) and then they can grow together.
Whereas if a person is more mature and honest,then they should look for the same.
If you mean regarding a person who cheated,then that’s why I believe people of similar maturity level should get married (and often do but not always).
A male that’s immature and likely to cheat at the first temptation at a party,should marry a girl who is similarly immature (easily impressed or affected by a guys looks etc) and then they can grow together.
Whereas if a person is more mature and honest,then they should look for the same.
B
BornInMarch
Guest
I think the ones on that thread were just wrong.Then,I see a different thread about infidelity in marriage and I am amazed to see many Catholics advising the poster that she should not tell her husband that she has cheated on him.
Not everyone on this forum is a bastion of faith; most of us have misconceptions about what the church teaches and what God requests of us.
R
Rozellelily
Guest
God may have forgiven him but has there been an internal change in the person or are they still at the same mind frame or (im)maturity level that caused them to be unfaithful in the first place?
It’s very possible that they could cheat again if there has been no internal change (even if they convince or “delude” themselves that they will never again cheat).
It’s seen over and over from politicians or just even on shows like Dr Phil where the person not just cheats once but does it again.
As long as they are still excessively impressed by external looks or sexiness etc then it’s possible to happen again.
Or if they are immature and blame the infidelity on external factors like they were not getting emotional connection in their marriage,claiming it was husband/or wife’s fault for always working too late etc than same goes.
The “internal motivator” needs to change/be removed usually for the person to change.
God may forgive and remove the objective guilt/sin but I believe something needs to change the inner person-whether spiritual or psychological.
In my view it would be foolish to trust a person again who had been unfaithful once unless there was some “evidence” of an internal change or maturing.
Sometimes the only way a person receives this internal “character growth” is through a loss-ie:the innocent husband or wife leaving them.
For some people character growth only comes about through pain.(and therefore self reflection etc).
Religious spouses who stay with their unfaithful spouse can seem inspirational,amazing and long suffering on the surface,and maybe they are but I don’t know if this is really always necessarily the case.
A person teaches people how to treat them and once a partner knows you have “accepted” infidelity this can lower the bar and they might do it again because they know the person will forgive them and stay with them.
It’s very possible that they could cheat again if there has been no internal change (even if they convince or “delude” themselves that they will never again cheat).
It’s seen over and over from politicians or just even on shows like Dr Phil where the person not just cheats once but does it again.
As long as they are still excessively impressed by external looks or sexiness etc then it’s possible to happen again.
Or if they are immature and blame the infidelity on external factors like they were not getting emotional connection in their marriage,claiming it was husband/or wife’s fault for always working too late etc than same goes.
The “internal motivator” needs to change/be removed usually for the person to change.
God may forgive and remove the objective guilt/sin but I believe something needs to change the inner person-whether spiritual or psychological.
In my view it would be foolish to trust a person again who had been unfaithful once unless there was some “evidence” of an internal change or maturing.
Sometimes the only way a person receives this internal “character growth” is through a loss-ie:the innocent husband or wife leaving them.
For some people character growth only comes about through pain.(and therefore self reflection etc).
Religious spouses who stay with their unfaithful spouse can seem inspirational,amazing and long suffering on the surface,and maybe they are but I don’t know if this is really always necessarily the case.
A person teaches people how to treat them and once a partner knows you have “accepted” infidelity this can lower the bar and they might do it again because they know the person will forgive them and stay with them.
Last edited:
R
Rozellelily
Guest
I’m sorry to hear that
R
Reuben_J
Guest
@Rozellelily. You are confusing the issue. Lying and adultery are sins. Period.
You have given situations which you seem to want to justify them. They are two different things altogether, which do not make them not sins. In other word, they do not change the facts that they are sins.
You are saying they must do certain things, like telling a spouse of infidelity, to not lying.
In the case of adultery, the example given is the advice of marriage counselors on how to deal with it. They are not the Church but technical advice in dealing with real life situation. Similarly the example of ISIS and being their prisoners.
It is possible to being wise and without sinning. Ultimately we as Christians are called to be righteous.
You have given situations which you seem to want to justify them. They are two different things altogether, which do not make them not sins. In other word, they do not change the facts that they are sins.
You are saying they must do certain things, like telling a spouse of infidelity, to not lying.
In the case of adultery, the example given is the advice of marriage counselors on how to deal with it. They are not the Church but technical advice in dealing with real life situation. Similarly the example of ISIS and being their prisoners.
It is possible to being wise and without sinning. Ultimately we as Christians are called to be righteous.
A
adgloriam
Guest
I like the arguments and I see the underlying “main concern”. The thread has drifted from it’s original theme, and answering your last reply would broaden even more the scope. Remember, those are specific personal characteristics with which you paint a picture, again every case would have it’s own analyses.
All the characters together, as you portray them, share the fact that they are not practicing catholic, don’t have a prayer life, don’t know the doctrine on indissoluble marriage, and so forth…
Hence: the problem of the described characters is lack of faith and lack of conversion…So, we have identified the root of the problem.
All the characters together, as you portray them, share the fact that they are not practicing catholic, don’t have a prayer life, don’t know the doctrine on indissoluble marriage, and so forth…
Hence: the problem of the described characters is lack of faith and lack of conversion…So, we have identified the root of the problem.
Last edited:
A
Arkansan
Guest
“I answer that, God knows all things whatsoever that in any way are. . . the present glance of God extends over all time, and to all things which exist in any time” - Summa Theologica I.XIV.IX
…
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04757a.htm
I’m not sure how you’re subdividing detraction.
…
The fact that ignorance (whatever its subjective character) cannot always be prudently dispelled does not in any way detract from the Church’s teaching that direct lying is intrinsically evil.
@Rozellelily As it is, what the person would want cannot be known without informing them, so a presumption should be made based on what the comparative benefits and harms are that will follow from each possible decision (informing the innocent spouse or not). If they are not informed, the negative effect will be that they are left believing a harmless error (it is harmless since it concerns a one-time event in the past which the guilty spouse seriously intends* never to repeat) that they already believe. If they are informed, the negative effect will be that they will, at a minimum, be devastated, and may also leave the guilty spouse, which will involve great harm to both the guilty spouse as well as any children. Moreover, the loss of the guilty spouse’s good name (even if only with respect to the other spouse) will make it harder to resist temptation in the future.
*Of course, the guilty spouse has a grave obligation, as we all do, to avoid voluntary proximate occasions of mortal sin.
…
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04757a.htm
I’m not sure how you’re subdividing detraction.
…
The fact that ignorance (whatever its subjective character) cannot always be prudently dispelled does not in any way detract from the Church’s teaching that direct lying is intrinsically evil.
@Rozellelily As it is, what the person would want cannot be known without informing them, so a presumption should be made based on what the comparative benefits and harms are that will follow from each possible decision (informing the innocent spouse or not). If they are not informed, the negative effect will be that they are left believing a harmless error (it is harmless since it concerns a one-time event in the past which the guilty spouse seriously intends* never to repeat) that they already believe. If they are informed, the negative effect will be that they will, at a minimum, be devastated, and may also leave the guilty spouse, which will involve great harm to both the guilty spouse as well as any children. Moreover, the loss of the guilty spouse’s good name (even if only with respect to the other spouse) will make it harder to resist temptation in the future.
*Of course, the guilty spouse has a grave obligation, as we all do, to avoid voluntary proximate occasions of mortal sin.
Last edited:
R
Rozellelily
Guest
I have nothing against Psychologists or counsellors but realistically I don’t think they can always be relied upon regarding definitive advise for what’s the moral/right thing to do.
It’s true that many psychologists may advise people it’s ok to remain deceptive to their wife/husband about infidelities but these are often the same Psychologists that also sometimes think things like prostitution/visiting brothels is ok in certain instances.
They also generally don’t believe in sin/or believe infidelity comes from sin but rather from childhood malfunction and pain.
This may be true in some instances but in many other cases it’s just due to temptation.
Psychologists can be good,but have their limits.
A healthy relationship is a friendship which is built on trust,honesty,loyalty and respect.
It’s true that many psychologists may advise people it’s ok to remain deceptive to their wife/husband about infidelities but these are often the same Psychologists that also sometimes think things like prostitution/visiting brothels is ok in certain instances.
They also generally don’t believe in sin/or believe infidelity comes from sin but rather from childhood malfunction and pain.
This may be true in some instances but in many other cases it’s just due to temptation.
Psychologists can be good,but have their limits.
A healthy relationship is a friendship which is built on trust,honesty,loyalty and respect.
- Status