Ignorant questions that bother me

[Argh]

Couple questions that are currently bothering me after looking around here and placing a call to a very knowledgable family friend. My religious educaiton in church was a joke, so I mostly ask him.

1. Ok, so one time I “slept with” my girl friend, but only literally, in the same bed. NOTHING happened. We both were wearing sweat pants and t-shirts. Rob, the family friend, said that could be considered like a mockery of marriage and thus a sin. He didnt actually say “mockery”, but I forget. He said he wasnt sure and that it would most likely depend on who I talk to. I was very surprised by this. It certainly wasnt my intent then though.
2. What if your spouse doesnt want children, at all. None, period. So then, no sex, ever? Oh ****…
3. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=38525

I think I understand. It’s the intent that matters. But is sexual intercourse then the only acceptable form of sexual stimulation then?

1. Now St. Paul, the saint who was the missionary to Greece and Rome in case there’s multiple St. Pauls, was the one who got rid of Kosher rules of eating and what not. But if I’m not mistaken, he was in the minority about this issue at this time. (St.?) James, the leader (Patriarch ?) of Christians in Jerusalem a the time along with others insisted Christians must adhere to Jewish law. Now, how did St. Paul ever win out in this argument? Is it just because he moved to Rome with St. Peter?
2. I personally believe that homosexuality is a defect or mental condition (and in some cases a sick fashion) and actually being homosexual isnt morally wrong, but acting on it is. Should homosexuals be able to marry in a court? As an American, I believe that it’s not a right gauranteed by the constitution or the state but it should be legal is up to the people. As a Catholic, of course I belive marriage is a religious act. Anyways, how should I defend myself against being called a bigot when it comes to homosexuality?

I guess that’s A LOT for now. I’ll ask more when I get my hands back on some literature.

 

[Argh]

Sorry about the censored “****”. I actually wrote c___, which, now that I think about it, should be censored.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Argh:

Couple questions that are currently bothering me after looking around here and placing a call to a very knowledgable family friend. My religious educaiton in church was a joke, so I mostly ask him.

1. Ok, so one time I “slept with” my girl friend, but only literally, in the same bed. NOTHING happened. .

That’s something you should ask your confessor – from what you said, there was neither intent to commit sin nor sinful action.

Argh:

1. What if your spouse doesnt want children, at all. None, period. So then, no sex, ever?

Such a marriage is not valid, and is a candidate for annulment.

Argh:

1. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=38525

I think I understand. It’s the intent that matters. But is sexual intercourse then the only acceptable form of sexual stimulation then?

Again, this is a question for your confessor. But you are right, it’s intent that matters. If the intent is to avoid conception, that could be considered sinful. If the intent is to contribute to a deep and meaningful marriage, probably not.

Argh:

1. Now St. Paul, the saint who was the missionary to Greece and Rome in case there’s multiple St. Pauls, was the one who got rid of Kosher rules of eating and what not. But if I’m not mistaken, he was in the minority about this issue at this time. (St.?) James, the leader (Patriarch ?) of Christians in Jerusalem a the time along with others insisted Christians must adhere to Jewish law. Now, how did St. Paul ever win out in this argument? Is it just because he moved to Rome with St. Peter?

You’ve got it wrong – Peter had a vision and later ate with the family of the Centurion, Cornelius. That effectively ended the dietary laws. The issue with Paul was primarily the Circumcision of gentile converts. At the Council of Jerusalem, Peter stood with Paul, and the council’s decision was to place minimal requirments on the gentiles – no circumcision, no dietary laws. They were to not eat meat from animals sacrificed in pagan temples, or “with blood in it” and to refrain from unlawful marriages.

Argh:

1. I personally believe that homosexuality is a defect or mental condition (and in some cases a sick fashion) and actually being homosexual isnt morally wrong, but acting on it is. Should homosexuals be able to marry in a court? As an American, I believe that it’s not a right gauranteed by the constitution or the state but it should be legal is up to the people. As a Catholic, of course I belive marriage is a religious act. Anyways, how should I defend myself against being called a bigot when it comes to homosexuality?

Let them call you want they like. Homosexuality is a burden, not a sin. Homosexual ACTS are sinful.

 

[Katholikos]

1. Ok, so one time I “slept with” my girl friend, but only literally, in the same bed. NOTHING happened. We both were wearing sweat pants and t-shirts. Rob, the family friend, said that could be considered like a mockery of marriage and thus a sin. He didnt actually say “mockery”, but I forget. He said he wasnt sure and that it would most likely depend on who I talk to. I was very surprised by this. It certainly wasnt my intent then though.

As has been suggested, you should bring this to your confessor. Just a reminder, though, that we are to avoid sin and the “near occasions of sin” (situations which could lead us into committing sin), which this could possibly be.

Jay

 

[1ke]

Hey ARGH… I only have time for #1 right now, but can come back to the others later today.

There are several reasons this could be sinful.

First, you and your girlfriend are trying to remain chaste, and this puts you in a position to do more than you intended, and tempts you. It is called a “near occasion of sin”. So, you shouldn’t do this because it might lead to actual sin in the heat of the moment.

Secondly, it gives a poor witness to other people-- this is called giving scandal. Others will, rightly or wrongly, make assumptions based on the appearance of the situation. It could lead others to sin. For example, if you had a younger brother, sister, cousin, etc, who looked at you and said… “well, if he’s doing it, it must be OK” and followed the example. And, while you might say that’s their problem for “assuming”-- remember, we are called to be a light to others, and to lead them to Christ by our actions. Our actions cannot be contrary to the Gospel principles or we can lead people astray. It’s a responsibility we have as Christians.

I’ll be back online later and see if I can take a stab at the others.