Moral Beginnings

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Thank you very much for sharing Scripture with me! It is a very helpful passage.

Please consider the following points:
First, I have not shared my understanding of the purpose of life. And according to my understanding of the purpose of life, it is impossible for me to determine/judge the righteousness of any other person’s actions. I do my best to try to love as God loves, while knowing that I am the worst and most undeserving person of heaven, which means I know all others are far greater people than me.
Second, what is your intention of asking the question, “Where is the morality in various lifestyles?” Are you seeking to understand how to determine morality within yourself or others?

Thank you for the discussion! It is very interesting!

If you know yourself then you know the righteousness of Truth. Because you are the Body of Christ. Christ is the life within the Body, the Truth. The Life, the Body, the Truth and Christ are all one. The Word Christ speaks is the Spirit and Life of the Body. If you receive the Word of God, whom is Christ then you receive all of this; and know the righteousness of it all. You become a Child of the Light–the Light is the Truth also. As a Child you grow into the Body and the righteousness. So if you know yourself and you know the righteousness that is inside your body then you understand other people. You can see whether they act in Truth.

First hold yourself up to the Light then you will see everything in the Light. You grow into it. The light shines upon everything, when you find it within yourself. Don’t try to love. Become. Drink from the mouth of God. Let him become you and you become him.

I already know the morality in things because I see the light within me. I just try to make other people see the goodness that I see within things. Don’t get me wrong, I am a conflicted and divided person; however I choose the good within me over the evil that exists within me.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Thank you. For all that we go through on a daily basis, she is still the best thing that ever happened to me this side of heaven.
My main reason for sharing with you is so that perhaps, in future you will consider that another person’s circumstances are quite different from what you think they are. Perhaps you will be less likely to make assumptions about another person and the validity of the the answers they give.

I think perhaps some clarification is in order. You seem to be equating looking at someone and noting that they are attractive is the same thing as desiring that person. I do not accept that these two things are equal. What I said is that I can and do look at other women and find them attractive. There is a subtle but distinct difference between attractive, and attraction
I can look at a friend’s wife and note that she is pretty, is slim and fit, dresses well, has a nice smile, good personality etc. and be happy for my friend to have been blessed by God with such a wife without desiring her to be mine instead of his. The same holds true for a perfect stranger.

What you say here might be true, but it simply does not equate to Lust as defined by the Church.

Again - I disagree. In order for something to be lust, there needs to be a “Disordered desire”. The Church says that it is, “morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes”.
Since I do not look at women in this way - as sexual objects that I wish to have carnal knowledge of - I have not lusted.
If you can show me in Catholic Church teaching where simply looking at a woman and noting that she is pretty constitutes lust…I’ll be happy to acknowledge it, apologize to you and work to overcome the inappropriate behavior.

Perhaps.
Or possibly you are expanding the definition of lust inappropriately - to the point where simply looking at a woman and noting that she IS a woman would constitute lust.

Please do consider carefully the definition provided by the Catholic Church in the Catechism. I honestly think that you are being too hard on yourself in this and consequently being too hard on others.

Peace
James

I don’t mean to attack you in any way. I’m just trying to make you see something in yourself.

So try this: Try not finding any attraction within any woman (except your wife, of course) and see if it is possible. Take notice of your thoughts. Think to yourself, honestly, if you find a woman attractive.

You see, Jesus has no concupiscence within him because he was born without sin. So when Jesus looks upon a woman, he looks in a way that we cannot understand (without judgment).

I’m just saying that it is from your concupiscence that you find a woman attractive or pretty in the way that you do, whatever way you say you do. You see you look upon a woman in judgment, which is part of concupiscence and what you see is the image that you find attractive. Jesus looks upon a woman and doesn’t see that attractiveness because of his sinlessness.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Does a person have to be perfected before they are allowed to share the teaching of the Church?
Certainly there are people who express a “holier than thou” attitude. There are also people who reject sound teaching because they find the teacher to be imperfect in their person or they find the manner in which the truth is delivered to be unpalatable. Both of these errors stem from pride which, like lust, is a sin.

Indeed. All of us being sinners are deserving of love and understanding. But what does that mean?
How do we best “love and understand” another person.
We cannot accept the sin of prostitution…we cannot accept the sin of homosexual acts. To do so is to go against the teaching of Christ and His Church. To do so is not Love for it does not seek the highest good for the other person.
So tell me please - - I am truly interested…How do you suggest we love and understand such people and still be loyal to Christ?

I don’t understand this. Who is being “allowed” to live a life of sin?

Peace
James

You cannot love and understand a human being (unless they sin just a little)? A homosexual and prostitute are sinners, you and I are sinners. Can you say that one sin is more clean than another? That there is a place for you and I but no place for homosexuals and prostitutes? I tell you the truth unless you love and understand people such as these you are not loyal to Christ.

A heterosexual is being allowed to live a life of sin. A heterosexual begins his life because of Concupiscence (the lust of the flesh). A heterosexual’s lust is not pure where a homosexual’s lust is impure, they’re both equally impure. Should a heterosexual’s life be treated as “allowed” when a homosexual’s life is treated as forbidden, when both are based on sin?

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Well, I would say all lust IS sin. However, heterosexual lust is redeemed through marriage and procreation (cf. Augustine). That is why all humans (except Jesus) are “conceived in sin.”

That is a contradictory statement you spoke. If all humans are “conceived in sin” then how is lust redeemed in marriage? Shouldn’t the marriage sanctify the lust and therefore those born through marriage are conceived without sin?

Lust is lust. And there is no sexual procreation without it.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Umm maybe according to you, but not according to the Catholic Church. I refer you to the Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 2357:

“…Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared tat “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.”

No, I would rather have the homosexuals stop having a homosexual relationship and heed the call to chastity as the Catholic Church teaches. Once again I refer you to the Catechism to the Catholic Church paragraph 2359. Homosexuals cannot have a valid marriage in the eyes of the Church so it doesn’t matter if they are monogamous or not, by their acts they are committing a grave sin and living a lie. Also it is not a natural human condition to want to be gay and that has never been definitively proven. Your assuming on that part and it does go against nature. No homosexual couple could ever have a child if it wasn’t for the use or science or adoption. There is no complementarity between two homosexual persons. And as far as what the Church teaches about marriage read paragraphs 1603-1605 of the Catechism. Also because of Original Sin we will always have murderers, rapists, and thieves but that doesn’t mean we should accept their sinful behaviors and make them legal. The fact is is that homosexual acts are gravely sinful and just like other sinful acts the person should work towards holiness not his own sinful desires because they want an excuse to sin.

Monogamy should be celebrated between married heterosexual couples. What I think you fail to grasp is what the Church teaches about homosexual acts. I never said that homosexuals are evil people or that they can’t do anything wrong. On the contrary they can be holy people if the follow what the Church teaches. What I’m saying is that homosexual acts are gravely wrong just like pornography or masturbation is. For example, I would tell my friend that he was performing a grave sin and needed to stop if he told me he was masturbating to a homemade pornographic film of his wife. Now just because he’s only masturbating to his wife, and in a sense being monogamous, doesn’t make it moral. It’s still sinful! Now for you to mis-understand my reply and call me ignorant just shows me how much your not seeing what other posters and myself are saying. I hope you will read the parts of the Catechism I told you about and/or look on catholic.com to see what the Church teaches about homosexuality.

Yea, but it also says in the Catechism the part where homosexuals aren’t to be persecuted. Explain that for me if you will. And then measure it to all that you have argued. Then we’ll see if your argument holds the ground you think it does.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Heterosexuals who aren’t married are expected to remain chaste because no sexual activity can take place outside of a consecrated union of a man and woman without it being sinful. Sex in God’s plan was to be between a woman and a man in a loving relationship, a consecrated union, and the purpose was procreative and unitive. Anyone who has any kind of sexual activity outside of what God ordained deviates from God’s plan/will = sins. Nobody gets a free pass. I’ll let God be the judge for the person’s culpability for his sins as God alone can make that judgement as he knows everyone through and through/perfectly.

And you’re probably the hypocrite that had premarital sex, right? shhhhh…that’s between you and God.

 

[JerryZ]

Yes, and there is morality in a homosexual couple living a monogamous life.

And yet the grievous sin remains none the less for the sin grossly outweights the morality of a “monogamous life”.
This is pretty explicit:

Romans
1:24 Wherefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts unto uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves:
1:25 for that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions: for their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature:
1:27 and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due.
1:28 And even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting;

And this is the definition of “Marriage” in the words of Jesus:

Matthew
19:4 And he answered and said, Have ye not read, that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female,
19:5 and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh?
19:6 So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

It is quite hard to justify any deviation here and it is not stated only in these 2 places.

 

[Robertanthony]

And you’re probably the hypocrite that had premarital sex, right? shhhhh…that’s between you and God.

My personal conduct isn’t too relevant here, is it? How does the fact that I either responded perfectly or not to the plan that God has for sex (man and woman union blesssed by God, sex has to be open to life) change the reality that we’re all called by God to be chaste if we are outside of a committed, male-female, consecrated union open to life? You look around seeking reasons to be offended and indignant. You alone are responsible for how you respond to the standard that God has set for sex, my sexual conduct, or anybody else’s sexual conduct won’t even be mentioned on your day of judgement. If you don’t get it, I’ll assume you intend on being obtuse. If all fails, read the bolded part out long for as many times as it’s required before it sinks in. Thank you. God bless.

 

[JRKH]

I don’t mean to attack you in any way. I’m just trying to make you see something in yourself.

Yes you do attack. This is not the best way to make one see something within themselves. In fact I would suggest that such attacks are more likely to make one see something in you that is quite unchristian rather than to see something in themselves.

So try this: Try not finding any attraction within any woman (except your wife, of course) and see if it is possible. Take notice of your thoughts. Think to yourself, honestly, if you find a woman attractive.

Actually I have already done this. It was an essential part of coming to terms with my past sins. That is how I know that I can say with considerable confidence that I do not lust in my heart.

I’m just saying that it is from your concupiscence that you find a woman attractive or pretty in the way that you do, whatever way you say you do You see you look upon a woman in judgment, which is part of concupiscence and what you see is the image that you find attractive.

And yet, even allowing for some truth in what you say here, that what we find attractive is inherently tied to various natural desires, as well as social conditioning no doubt, this still does not necessarily translate into the sin of “Lust”.
Jesus Himself confirms this in the very verse where he addresses this issue. The statement is,
“But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart”.
Note that he doesn’t say "if you look upon a woman you commit adultery, but if you look lustfully. Meaning that it IS possible to look upon a woman without it being lust.
He would not tell us this if we were unable to comply.
the question then becomes - what constitutes lust…and Christ himself, through the Church tells us what that is…the definition of which I provided earlier and which you seem to have ignored…I wonder why?

So - As I said - I have already done as you suggested and it is by this very standard that I was able to answer you earlier question by saying, No - I do not lust in my heart.

You cannot love and understand a human being (unless they sin just a little)? A homosexual and prostitute are sinners, you and I are sinners. Can you say that one sin is more clean than another? That there is a place for you and I but no place for homosexuals and prostitutes? I tell you the truth unless you love and understand people such as these you are not loyal to Christ.

This is what I don’t understand…Where do you get this idea that we advocate allowing one sin and condemning another? I have not seen this in ANY post yet you keep putting it out there as though we are…Show me the posts where anyone says that heterosexual sin is OK…

A heterosexual is being allowed to live a life of sin.

This statement is false on the face of it.

A heterosexual begins his life because of Concupiscence (the lust of the flesh).

You are conflating two things here that are not equal and this is part of the problem in communicating. You are speaking of concupiscence and lust as if they are equal…yet this idea is not backed up by the Catechism:
"…an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence, or metaphorically, “the tinder for sin” (fomes peccati); since concupiscence "is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent…1246
Lust on the other hand, is a disordered desire. Since sex for procreation is not a disordered desire, then people do not (necessarily) begin their life in “the lust of the flesh”.

A heterosexual’s lust is not pure where a homosexual’s lust is impure, they’re both equally impure.

Agreed. Lust being a “disordered desire”, as defined by Christ in His Church, it is obvious that both are impure…We are in agreement here…Why do you keep arguing as though we are not?

Should a heterosexual’s life be treated as “allowed” when a homosexual’s life is treated as forbidden, when both are based on sin?

You are creating a false comparison here.
Lust, as defined by the Church, is a sin. It does not matter if it is heterosexual or homosexual…Lust, that is a disordered desire is sinful.
Homosexual acts are disordered.
Sex outside of marriage is disordered
Sex with multiple partners is disordered
Sex not open to life is disordered
All are sins…There is no distinction made. One is not “allowed” and the other condemned. They are both condemned.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

If you know yourself then you know the righteousness of Truth. Because you are the Body of Christ. Christ is the life within the Body, the Truth. The Life, the Body, the Truth and Christ are all one. The Word Christ speaks is the Spirit and Life of the Body. If you receive the Word of God, whom is Christ then you receive all of this; and know the righteousness of it all. You become a Child of the Light–the Light is the Truth also. As a Child you grow into the Body and the righteousness. So if you know yourself and you know the righteousness that is inside your body then you understand other people. You can see whether they act in Truth.

First hold yourself up to the Light then you will see everything in the Light. You grow into it. The light shines upon everything, when you find it within yourself. Don’t try to love. Become. Drink from the mouth of God. Let him become you and you become him.

I already know the morality in things because I see the light within me. I just try to make other people see the goodness that I see within things. Don’t get me wrong, I am a conflicted and divided person; however I choose the good within me over the evil that exists within me.

And so - you see the truth of things and want others to see the truth as well…Yet you say above, “Do not try to Love”…Which in itself is a condemnation of your supposed vision of truth. The Holy Scriptures speak consistently clearly and unequivocally of the centrality of Love.
Love is the basis of the Law and the Prophets (Mt 22:36-40)
Love is why Jesus came into the world (John 3:16)
Love is how the world knows that we are His disciples (John 13:34-35)
If we have not Love we are nothing (1 Cor 13:1-13)
Love is the very essence of God Himself (1 John 4:7-8)

Scripture tells us to “test the spirits”…The spirit that prompted you to write “Don’t try to love”, is not a Spirit from God and I pray that you come to recognize this.

Peace
James

 

[themonk86]

Yea, but it also says in the Catechism the part where homosexuals aren’t to be persecuted. Explain that for me if you will. And then measure it to all that you have argued. Then we’ll see if your argument holds the ground you think it does.

Yes you are right, homosexuals aren’t supposed to be persecuted, and by that I mean they are not to be abused or made fun of in any way! Every human person is made in the image and likeness of God and therefore deserves to be treated with equal respect by everyone. But if you think that because I feel the sexual acts they commit, regardless if they are monogamous or not, are grave, and that I oppose homosexual marriage are some way of persecuting them then I would say your wrong. You see homosexual acts and homosexual marriage go against the natural law. Also the Church teaches that all unmarried people, regardless of their vocation are called to chastity. The Church also teaches that marriage can only be between one man and one woman. So in all of my posts here, what I have spoken out against is homosexual ACTS. The fact is is that homosexual acts, pornography, masturbation, fornication, and adultery all violate the 6th commandment. So under no circumstances can any of these sin be done, and then because you introduce some sort of morality to them it makes them morally acceptable. That has been my whole argument.