I don’t actively discourage unmarried adults from passionate kissing, you make it sound like I run down the street trying to break people up. I told my brother what I thought of him living with his girlfriend, not just some random person.
So, because I disagree with you, I lack common sense? That’s nice.
I was speaking to LJN21, but, since you’ve invited my opinion, yes.
There isn’t a “need” for it, but thats beside the point. A dating couple regardless if they are 16 or 75 are more than likely going to express their love in that manner. Your welcome to the opinion that kissing only belongs in marriage period, but would you really get on to an engaged couple at 25 for a peck or even moderate kissing? (Did you not ever kiss anyone until you were married?)
Excuse me for getting into your conversation. Considering it was a dig at me, I feel I had the right to mention it.
It wasn’t intended as a dig. I thought LJN21 has taken a realistic approach and said that and only that.Excuse me for getting into your conversation. Considering it was a dig at me, I feel I had the right to mention it.
As far as common sense is concerned, you are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine
You are right that virtues are far more important then rules!! That’s what we are teaching, not just a list of things you can’t do. We don’t have the it’s my house, my rules here, because when you do as soon as the kids leave they are going to try everything. But, if you teach them that God wants them to wait for these things, teach and live your faith, they will be able to follow not only our rules, but Gods as well. Because when it comes down to it, the rules we do have in our home, we didn’t make up, but God did. Honor you mother and father- not doing that if you are making out in their basement or car!!
Well here’s the short answer right here. Can we please have
If something is “objectively grave,” it would presumably ALWAYS be “objectively grave,” regardless of the marital state, although individual culpability could vary. If something is “objectively grave matter,” wouldn’t it be objectively wrong for everyone, always, regardless whether married or not? Plus, does the pope answer dubia himself? Don’t think I’ve ever seen that.Fornication is objectively grave because, by definition, it occurs outside the bounds of a valid marriage. But intercourse isn’t objectively grave because it can take place within a valid marriage. Or have I missed something?
Well, let’s just see what it says first. I’m sure the objectivity
except … where is it?
You presumably follow your own guidelines, which are presumably identical to your suggestions and general opinions, such as you expressed. Detailed commentary of your parenting is indeed not my business, however, that was not a comment on your parenting in practice, but on the guidelines and suggestions you expressed in your post - which can’t be immune to criticism on the grounds of privacy and associated kindness. I’m sorry if I caused any unpleasant feelings, but my point is strictly that leaving children too much privacy or not talking to them about what they are doing, would be a bad idea. Leaving grey areas similarly so. This is even though I don’t agree with the idea of passionate kissing being objectively grave matter unless I’m shown a papal reply. Generally, children need privacy and they don’t need a snooping parent, but looking the other way is not the right answer if a parent sees his child doing something wrong. If a parent sees passionate kissing on the same level as say, groping, then that parent should intervene. I appreciate your points and while I also appreciated the freedom I had when I was a teenager myself, some 10 years ago, I don’t think it’s good for every child.
Yes, it’s always like that when we start talking about moral theology, philosophy, the abstracts and the absolutes. We then have semantical problems, communicational problems and other such. Heated debate is also likely to ignite. For one, I suppose whatever I said on tracts of screen space here could be summarised in two words: “intent matters” and the rest is just commentary.
Obsessing is bad and ungluing is not wise. If anything, parenting needs a calm and level-headed approach. But this mostly means the manner, not the substance. A parent needs to respect the privacy of his child in the way he brings up certain questions, but this doesn’t mean that certain questions are immune from parenting. Strictly speaking, if one sees somebody committing what one believes to be grave matter, one should make an attempt at fraternal correction. Therefore parents should all the much more bring up those questions with their children. Perhaps it would not be proper to interrupt the children (at least not by barging in, although coming up with something discreet could be a good idea), but it would be proper to bring it up afterwards. In private. See, I’m not of the view that children need to be cloistered and umbrella-ed from temptations. They need to face more of them alone as they grow up. However, if one believe something to be grave matter, turning a blind eye to it is a wrong answer, I believe.
That works in contexts of charity but not in contexts of erotic love (agape vs eros distinction here). Lord Jesus told us that whatever we did to the smallest people, we did to Him - that is why we didn’t visit Him, didn’t care for Him, didn’t feed Him etc (sorry if this looks like preaching). Therefore it’s not odd to apply the same to people we care for romantically. Even friendly relationships. However, the girl you are taking to dance is not your Mother and Lady and Queen and is certainly not the Queen of Heaven and Earth. Any more than the guy is your Saviour. And you don’t have a marriage or engagement or a “dating relationship” with Him. The rule needs some sensible modifications in those areas, really - even though we do indeed need to keep in mind that the principle about harming people does not contain a dating exception. So, all in all, that advise is not without sense. It’s good. It just needs a lot of explanation.
Yup, same.
Yeah, I would tend to agree. Still, people change much during college or university years and probably the same in some kinds of jobs that teach a lot of new things or new approaches. This may even redefine the person. I don’t think many law students are the same before and after, same for philosophy and probably the humanities, possibly sciences in so far as studying them affects one’s attitudes and approach to problems in life. If someone wants to study at university, it might be a good idea to put off dating until after graduation or close to it. However, this is not a parental decision. Parents have less and less business interfering as the offspring grows up. Much less when the offspring is adult - especially when living outside, supporting himself or herself etc. I’m generally shocked when I read about parents imposing curfews on adult children. What you can and what you can’t do on a date belongs in the same category. However, if one considers something grave matter, one’s children should know that. For example, if I have an uncertain position, I believe my hypothetical children should know that dad doesn’t call it objectively grave matter but has reservations about it being taken too far.
Umm… Kissing, yeah. Passionately kissing? Possibly. But if one saw his children doing something one considers objectively grave matter, I believe the healthy relationship concerns need to bow down to healthy morality concerns - while a mortal sin requires knowledge and consent, we are supposed to bring people out of ignorance rather than being comforted that they don’t know what they are doing, therefore they are not culpable (at least not mortally). Note that I don’t say passionate kissing is grave matter. I say if one believes that, one should treat it like that.
I did not say this. You did.
I did not say this. You did.
I did not say this. You did.
I did not say this. You did.
I did not say that “kissing” my wife is an occasion of sin.
Huh? My response, which you quoted, was in reply to chevalier, not you. I never stated you said any of those things which you now accuse me of attributing to you – unless you ARE chevalier under a different screen name.
Whoops! No, I’m not chevalier. I’d like to meet him though. I’ll let chevalier defend himself. I’m all apologies.
… The question is what we do with it and how we handle it. A lot of us here (Including this correspondent) have the history of not handling it appropriately, and sexual sin has caused the fall of more Catholics than any other sin. and, I can tell you the damage caused by sexual sin can be incredible. :sad_yes:
… I think that will help you to know how much is “enough” and to be able to deal with temporary prohibitions against some activities in order to preserve chastity… Remember, if this is the woman you’re called to marry, you want to be able to make a gift of yourself to her. and, If not, you don’t want to blow your chastity, or hers, because you trusted your self-control when you could have set a limit.