EtienneGilson said:
Allow me to take a thread of thought and evaluate it. You seem to be implying that if not all, at least this young man’s actions are based on laziness, selfishness
, immorality, lust etc.
Based on OP presentation, my conjecture was primarily one of selfish/self-seeking motives. I have no basis to attribute other basis for his immoral choice.
Why do you hold that some people cannot clearly disagree with the Church in all honesty?
I never made this assertion. Of course some folks can honestly disagree in all sincerity with the Church.
Is it necessay that because this person actual doesn’t agree with Catholicism they are one of the above mentioned things?
He easily fits the profile that as I mentioned is unfortunately common place amongst young adult cohabitating couples – i.e., putting his culturally influenced self-preference above God’s laws.
Do you really hold that no one is capable of legitimately disagreeing with the Church? Catholic teaching, theology and history are against you on that.
To legitimatley disagree is one thing. To engage an opposing sinful choice while disagreeing with the Church on a matter of sexual morality sounds more like 1) logging a protest, 2) open defiance, 3) sorting out one’s personal beliefs while indulging the senses of carnal pleasure, or 4) as I have simply stated before – “I want my cake and eat it too …and I want it now”. Note: These are not an exhaustion of options or combinations there of.
Let us not forget, there is at work in premarital sexual relations a hallmark feature that one cannot ignore – the pleasure factor, or pleasure principle if you will; which IMO seriously throws into question the pure motive of seeking to sincerely disagree with Church teachings free from the self-serving/gratifying motivation of enjoying the sexual pleasure independent of committed marital love.
You have misinterpreted or misunderstood my comments. This new view of marriage, more as a contract than a covenant and based on a non-sacramental view of marriage is the cause of many of those problems in society; but the cause is deeper than just a new view of marriage: it is a new philosophy of life. I do not think that this new philosophy
if particularly healthy, let alone good or accurate; but I recognize that many of its proponents and followers have arrived to those conclusions after serious reflection and it is not simply a case of someone knowing something is wrong but doing it anyways.
Fair enough observation and interpretation. I do take difference that this “new philosophy” is all that new. It simply dresses up differently in the current generational trend under a new name. Current name: Relativism, the “me” generation post sexual-revolution. The higher motive of “serious reflection” melts away when confronted with the with the core value of the phenomenon of seeking sexual pleasure outside committed marital love, whether in a cohabitating or “committed” relationship, i.e., hedonism, plain and simple.
To claim that someone cannot in good conscience legitimately come to conclusions that Catholicism is not correct is laughable.
Again, I never claimed this. I limited myself to the son as know by the OP presentation and those many of similiar profile.
Of course I believe that there is something wrong with their reasoning but to claim that it is based on laziness and immorality is a gross simplification at best.
I never offered “laziness and immorality” as the basis for this person choosing a grossly sinful behavior.
Or are you of the opinion that Anthony Kenny and many other brilliant men have left the priesthood for selfish reasons?
I am not familiar with the above person so I cannot comment. I can comment though that “brilliant” people often are more susceptible to a greater array of sophistication of self-deception when it comes to intellectually rationalizing sin.
