Idea of sexual "soul-ties" and Catholic theology?

[spangler1982]

Just wondering how compatible these ideas are with true Catholic theology. I think I’ve heard Dr. James Dobson promote this concept on one of his past radio shows: b4prayer.org/index10.html

"A soul tie is the knitting together of two souls that can either bring tremendous blessings in a Godly relationship or tremendous destruction when made with the wrong persons.

A soul tie in the Bible can be described not only by the word knit, but also by the word cleave, which means to bring close together, follow close after, be attached to someone, or adhere to one another as with glue."

 

[Trishie]

This is Catholic teaching regarding the sixth Commandment, including sexual sin.

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

“Eros” and “Agape” – difference and unity
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20051225_deus-caritas-est_en.html

auremcordis.com/publications/human_sexuality_&_marriage.pdf

“Soul ties” isn’t the way the Church views sexual sin.
The person cannot blame others for the habit and propensity to sin.
One’s sexual sin is a personal responsibility

Scripture:
Jesus said, “Have you not read that from the beginning, the creator made them male and female and this is why a man must leave father and mother, and cling to his wife, and the two become one body? They are no longer two, therefore, but one body. So, then, what God has united, man must not divide.” [Matthew 19:4-6] Malachi 2:15 Has not [the LORD] made them one? In flesh and spirit they are his. And why one? Because he was seeking godly offspring.
Note that Scripture only speaks of marriage.
And within marriage, a person’s sin is their own and cannot be blamed on the spouse as the result of a “soul tie”.

God bless you.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Just wondering how compatible these ideas are with true Catholic theology. I think I’ve heard Dr. James Dobson promote this concept on one of his past radio shows: b4prayer.org/index10.html

"A soul tie is the knitting together of two souls that can either bring tremendous blessings in a Godly relationship or tremendous destruction when made with the wrong persons.

A soul tie in the Bible can be described not only by the word knit, but also by the word cleave, which means to bring close together, follow close after, be attached to someone, or adhere to one another as with glue."

Dr. Dobson has stumbled upon something, but he just doesn’t get it.

Did you notice how every bad soul tie was sexual and every good one was spiritual? How about the only example where we knew the sexes involved two guys?

Augustine “Well said one of his friend, “Thou half of my soul”; for I felt that my soul and his soul were “one soul in two bodies”: and therefore was my life a horror to me, because I would not live halved. And therefore perchance I feared to die, lest he whom I had much loved should die wholly.”

Newman in regards to Ambrose St. John “I have ever thought no bereavement was equal to that of a husband’s or a wife’s, but I feel it difficult to believe that any can be greater, or any one’s sorrow greater, than mine.”

Apparently only two people of the same sex can be joined in spirit…

 

[jdobbins]

It appears that the good Dr. Dobson has tried to offer a misguided interpretation of what actually occurs in a sacramental marriage, where the two become united as one spiritual being (the two shall become one flesh) and the “glue” holding them together is Christ. Since Dobson does not operate from a dogmatic or sacramentally based faith system, he does not understand these bodily operations founded on a sacrament. We can also tie it to the wonderful teaching of John Paul II on the Theology of the Body. In a true sacramentally based relationship, a man and woman strive to reach, to the extent possible, the state of original innocence enjoyed by Adam and Eve before the Fall. They do this by a complete giving of self, one to the other. Not 50-50 but 100-100. They discover that love is always sacrificial, never selfish. It is also creative, and in the natural order their love results in new life. So, their relationship is sexual in expression, spiritual in nature, sharing in the nature of Christ who is Love itself, and creative in its effects.
Dobson’s “soul-ties” can, conceptually, be seen as a purely natural relationship that, because it is natural, can become blessed or not, and takes no recognition of the state to which Christ called us in His discourse in Matthew regarding divorce, and how divorce was never God’s intent, for God’s intent is seen “in the beginning it was not so.”

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

It appears that the good Dr. Dobson has tried to offer a misguided interpretation of what actually occurs in a sacramental marriage, where the two become united as one spiritual being (the two shall become one flesh) and the “glue” holding them together is Christ. Since Dobson does not operate from a dogmatic or sacramentally based faith system, he does not understand these bodily operations founded on a sacrament. We can also tie it to the wonderful teaching of John Paul II on the Theology of the Body. In a true sacramentally based relationship, a man and woman strive to reach, to the extent possible, the state of original innocence enjoyed by Adam and Eve before the Fall. They do this by a complete giving of self, one to the other. Not 50-50 but 100-100. They discover that love is always sacrificial, never selfish. It is also creative, and in the natural order their love results in new life. So, their relationship is sexual in expression, spiritual in nature, sharing in the nature of Christ who is Love itself, and creative in its effects.
Dobson’s “soul-ties” can, conceptually, be seen as a purely natural relationship that, because it is natural, can become blessed or not, and takes no recognition of the state to which Christ called us in His discourse in Matthew regarding divorce, and how divorce was never God’s intent, for God’s intent is seen “in the beginning it was not so.”

Judging by what you’ve written you never read Deus Caritas Est which is an actual encyclical.

Have you not heard of spiritual friendship? Have you neither read St. Anselm nor St. Aelred? How about St. John of the Cross?