L
larkin31
Guest
By “marital union” I was attempting a euphemism for “sex between married partners”.
I don’t otherwise understand what you are asking here.
- Status
I don’t otherwise understand what you are asking here.
E
eucharisteo
Guest
And that priest will be held accountable for teaching you falsely. This is a common problem within the Church, but the world as a whole. Sin is always a personal choice.
Also, contracepting is not as serious a sin, though it is mortal, in comparison to murdering a child. If you are agnostic then you don’t believe necessarily that any life is sacred and that if murder is only interpreted by the law.
L
larkin31
Guest
I guess that he was following his conscience, which is not a matter to dismiss too easily. I was surprised and impressed by what he said. He was a great priest with a vibrant congregation. He was also very scholarly, having written a few books. He died of cancer some years ago.
E
eucharisteo
Guest
I’m not asking anything but dragging you out of the closet to admit what you seem to be saying
Meaning betwee a man and a man, a woman and a woman, a man and a woman or any combination of multiple partners. Is this true?
L
larkin31
Guest
I JUST told you EXACTLY what I meant. I don’t get you at all here.
What? No. I JUST TOLD YOU exactly what I was referring to.
E
eucharisteo
Guest
Some years ago my conscience told me it was okay to kill anyone that pulled the world down to the cesspool it has become. That does not mean it is okay to take their life. A slight exaggeration you might think? No. I really believed it and the only thing preventing me from doing such things was the fact it was illegal and I just wasn’t sure I was right. I have the makings of a social path… in fact, we all do. Once you dismiss God from the equation we can easily, in spite of natural law, justify killing anyone that prevents me from succeeding because I have a right to support my family or myself or to achieve happiness. If I don’t like my aging wife, kill her. If a baby gets in my way of a fun life style, give “it” away or kill “it”. My mom and dad were horrible to me. I actually prayed that God would take their lives, and it seemed to happen just that way. My qualifier was that if he couldn’t convert them in this life to at least remove them from this world if they refused to accept him.
Now I realize more clearly how wrong this was. I was buying into your world Larkin. At least that is my perception of agnostics and especially atheists.
My point really is that there is far more in this than you and many others seem to be admitting or recognizing. Many Catholics, in fact, most, do not form their conscience to the teachings of the Church. A theology which contradicts the teaching of the Catholic Church, and there are many, is no theology at all, it’s really a distortion of the truth if not an out right lie. The Church has been plagued by heresies from the very inception of the Church. The Apostles were sinful men and the only one that seemed to be there all along was John, the disciple whom Jesus loved. This scripture seems to be the basis of why homosexuals say homosexuality is not wrong, yet they clearly ignore the passages that have Jesus saying homosexuality is gravely sinful.
E
eucharisteo
Guest
This should be a perfect example of why the Catholic Church goes out of its way to DEFINE TERMS. Vocabulary is important and so is the way we use language. I’m not trying to be difficult but really trying to show you something people would be more aware of or at least understanding. But when we use terms like purgatory, trinity, Mother of God, Holy Orders, Consecration, sacrament, etc. we make up the term to fit the definition that already seems to exist within he text of the scriptures and what has been passed down to us through oral tradition or sacred traditions more specifically.
We see a tall building… so what do we call it? High rise, skyscraper, etc.
Just a little point here.
As far as the priest is concerned, he is required particularly as a clergy to form his conscience according to the teachings of the Church. If his conscience is different on such a matter clearly defined by the majesterium then he is absolutely wrong. He could be excommunicated for teaching such heresy. He, not your spouse, at that particular point is responsible for that teaching. He may have been referring to you, and not your spouse. He knows he can’t make you do anything you’re not supposed to do. So he had to tell you the best he could. This is a reason the Church requires us to obtain a dispensation for marrying someone who is not Catholic.
L
larkin31
Guest
No, “we” don’t. I would be careful if I were you. Seek help.
I am sorry for your pain. But your point of view is not common and makes no recognition of the other matters of reason and conscience that temper human behavior. I can’t even dream infidelity, for example. You should be careful not to generalize too much from your own situation and psyche. I wish you peace, of course, and I do not begrudge you at all for finding it in religion.
L
larkin31
Guest
I dunno. I thought it was very wise advice, and my wife was sitting in the same set of chairs. It was part of one of our counseling sessions.
To excommunicate a priest over that kind of remark would be just nuts. Further evidence, in my mind, of religious extremism put to ill use.
L
Lapey
Guest
Check out Fr. Larry Richard’s talk entitled “The Truth” to see where the opinion you have been given stands.
With charity I tell you that being a servant of God means total surrender, to every part of your life, even the bedroom!
E
eucharisteo
Guest
The only reason others do not seem to condone this line of thinking is because their minds have been tainted with the gospel. It is Christianity that has changed the world towards civility. Ancient Rome had its pluses but obvious contained a lot of other things we would not condone.No, “we” don’t. I would be careful if I were you. Seek help.
I am sorry for your pain. But your point of view is not common and makes no recognition of the other matters of reason and conscience that temper human behavior. I can’t even dream infidelity, for example. You should be careful not to generalize too much from your own situation and psyche. I wish you peace, of course, and I do not begrudge you at all for finding it in religion.
I don’t need help really because I get it from God daily. Prove God to be false to me and I see no point in living with the pain I’ve lived with in this life. At least on sibling came to this view and the other considered it twice as he cut his wrist twice, leaving it to fate. He’s alive but lives a pointless meaningless life now. I try to get him to see the light, look away from the way mom raised him. But he doesn’t have the tools in place to see it. My guess is that neither do you.
You assume way to much in my opinion. I am not a social path but am trying to convey reality as it is, not as you want it to be. The truth is that many societies adopt norms to follow, but in those norms they also kill innocent children. Chinese leave baby girls, like the Roman’s leave unwanted children, for dead. Forced abortions, killing small children, etc. Not too long ago there were and still are countries with genocide being practiced as the norm. What you call common is equivalent to that of common sense. A section chief of mine in the 80’s used to say “common sense ain’t common at all”.
BTW: the only reason I didn’t turn into a sociopath in my opinion is my undying faith in the God of the bible. I not only choose Him, but He chose me and keeps me in His arms and has shown me things no one else can claim. Miracles. I should have died many years ago more than three times that can only be explain by miracles to me and others who witnessed.
L
larkin31
Guest
As I said, peace to you. But most of society is a long way from sociopathic behavior. That was my point. I have no major issues with good Christians; I am married to one and grew up with them and teach them and am employed by them. They make my world.
A
anns82
Guest
I did see that you are an agnostic very early in our conversation - I usually find this to be a good thing because I tend to think agnostics look towards rational arguments to support their world view.
You asked why sex is sacred, you asked for a Biblical reference. Then you dismiss it for no rational reason - or at least you do not provide the rational to your reason.
If you are do not care about the answer - don’t bother asking the question.
L
larkin31
Guest
When did you cite a Biblical passage? When did I miss that?
Are you REALLY interested in an explanation for why I thing “sacred” sex is a neurotic idea?
K
Kaninchen
Guest
No, I glazed-over early on.
E
eucharisteo
Guest
ann, I see larkin asking questions and making arguments for the sake of trying to understand us or his spouse. I see him the same way, At least an agnostic can have a discussion and may even more reasonable than an atheist, who can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. Yet we all have to make a decision about that.
From my education as a geographer, I believe I see things from a unique perspective on the subject. I not only study the history of events but also the cultural, political, religious aspects. I also know that there are many who kill pointlessly because they believe in a one child policy and will not allow freedom of thought, much less religion. These murders continue in our own western society. Just in the U.S. alone there are over 4,000 abortions per day, enough to beg the issue of premarital sex, freedom to porn with anything that moves. There are far more perverts today it seems than ever recorded throughout history. Porn is the number one killer of marriages today, possibly next to finances. More and more children are growing up without even the tools to think about the possibility of the existence of God unless they happen to pursue it like me.
How many milliions of people in just this century have been murdered by sociopathic decisions and the indifference of those that chose to participate in those decisions? Several Million in just the past half century.
E
eucharisteo
Guest
Boring you I see. This is very difficult to discuss in real depth because immediately people’s natural response is like yours. Either that or they get offended or defensive of their own beliefs. I set aside my comfort early on in this subject so that I could approach it from a neutral perspective the best I could. I also recognized in the topic that I had a gut reaction to these things as well and raked my feelings over the coals as well, something I usually do not delve in because its too difficult to truly empathize with feelings you can feel or views you can see. My feelings and thoughts needed to be reconciled somehow I thought. So I tried to look at these subjectively instead of with my feelings. I found something very contradictory in what I see practiced in the world.
About 4 years ago I listened to Scott Hahn’s conversion story and identified immediately with his discussions on these subjects, particularly contraception and covenant theology. Contraception was not typically accepted even among Protestants before Margret Sanger. The feminist movement was also a catalyst I believe for this lie we’ve accepted now as a society. You see relative theology taking hold over time and now people do not see the sociopathic beliefs being practiced among even Christians now. There is a societal pathological problem with allowing the killing of innocent children in the womb. Contraception led to abortion because the new contraception is now abortions because contraception inevitably will fail and does. Now women and men spend countless hours convincing themselves it is only a mass of flesh and not a human person within the woman’s body. But in some states where a murder of a pregnant woman takes place the courts are now beginning to bring these murderers for double homicide. Something ain’t right.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
More that it had nothing to do with what I’d asked.
Boring you I see.
Perhaps they just see it as orthogonal to their beliefs? Perhaps they consider that you’re trying to finish off an intellectual jigsaw puzzle by biting bits off pieces to make them fit?
A
anns82
Guest
It was in #131
Mt 19:3-8 - Jesus says that God made marriage in the beginning (in Genesis)
Genesis provides the meaning of Marriage (which includes the marital act of sex)
The Original Solitude in which Mankind was made in Gen 2 is distinctly different from the way animals are created, which is part of the the male/female union in sex is distinctly different. When God said “Let us make man in our image” in Gen 1:26 (part of the logic of the Trinity), He established that mankind is the truest image of God’s love when in relation to another. God made Adam and Eve in that marriage relationship. It is the only way love is a true icon of God because it takes two separate, yet united beings, who’s love has the profound blessing of create another being whom God infuses with a soul.
Why is human sex different from animal sex? Because in the beginning, humans were created in marriage. Does the bible say “God made the animals, then split them into two genders” - no - animals do not have love and marriage because they were not created in the Image of a trinitarian God.
Again, this is just a rough sketch, but I already explained it in #131 and do not feel like being too redundant. Plus you claim to know all this stuff… yet you missed the biblical references…
Just so you don’t miss it again, the bible references are Mt 19: 3-8, Gen 2: 1-25 and Gen 1:26
K
kozlosap
Guest
The Center of Disease Control and Prevention 2002 National Survey of Family Growth revealed that 97% of American Catholic women over age 18 have used a banned form of contraception, which is the same percentage as the general population. A 2005 nationwide poll of 2,242 U.S. adults by Harris Interactive showed that 90% of Catholics supported the use of birth control. Usage of modern contraceptive methods is also high in many predominantly Catholic countries: 67% of married women of child-bearing age in Spain, 69% in France, 60% in Mexico, and 70% in Brazil.
This passage was taken from an article written in one of the Stanford University journals 3 years ago. My question is that if this information is correct then how does the Church in a compassionate and logical manner go about changing the practices of their flock in western (non-third world) society?
This passage was taken from an article written in one of the Stanford University journals 3 years ago. My question is that if this information is correct then how does the Church in a compassionate and logical manner go about changing the practices of their flock in western (non-third world) society?
- Status