No forgiveness for first time adultry?

[StarMapp]

In scripture we have Jesus making the statement in regards to divorce… “lewd conduct excepted”

But then when asked by his apostles how often we should forgive someone, he says, 70 X 7, or words to that effect(I didn’t research the exact quote), but my question is how do we reconcile these two statements? We do know that the use of this numerical example means many many times. It is not clear if this is optional or a directive.

Can it mean, 1/we have an exception to the 70X7 2/forgiveness does not necessarily follow through with no temporal consequences as it applies to unfaithfulness. 3/no temporal consequences unless # of adultery episodes arrive at 70 X 7 + 1 4/ lewd conduct is disordered,degenerate sex or something else, thus divorce is a possibility?/given on first case.

Thanks.

 

[petra22]

Isn’t any sin forgiven if you are sorry and try to never sin again? You know, first you must know it is a serious sin, go ahead and do it anyway… you can repent and be forgiven. There are steps that can be taken in the church if you are talking about re-marriage, but it takes time and sometimes doesn’t get amended like you think it should. One of the worst parts is causing someone else to commit adultery by your actions. That is a heavy weight to carry around with you for possibly lots of years…

 

[jcrichton]

Hi, Star!

Have you considered what adultery is?

It is a transgression (sin) against self: the person who commits the sin sins against him/herself as the vow made is violated.

It is a transgression against the spouse: the adulterer has betrayed his/her vows and has sold out the spouse as he/she has given him/herself to another in a lustful exchange (even if just in thought–Jesus is quite clear about it).

It is a transgression against Love: this makes it a transgression against God, Who happens to be the Third, and most important, element in the Sacrament of Matrimony. Love God Above all and your neighbor as yourself has been trampled down, spat upon, and ridiculed… all because of the selfish need to satisfy a desire to possess another person (the forbidden fruit).

But this transgression does not end there… it can destroy a family (children will suffer through both the act and the imitation of the faulty parental teachings); yet, if there are no children in the Marriage, there’s still the destruction of the Faithful:

12:26 If one part is hurt, all parts are hurt with it. If one part is given special honour, all parts enjoy it. (1 Corinthians)

…finally, we have the destruction of the non-Believers:

2:11 I urge you, my dear people, while you are visitors and pilgrims to keep yourselves free from the selfish passions that attack the soul. 2:12 Always behave honourably among pagans so that they can see your good works for themselves and, when the day of reckoning comes, give thanks to God for the things which now make them denounce you as criminals. (1 St. Peter)

The grievance is higher because of this understanding:

6:16 As you know, a man who goes with a prostitute is one body with her, since the two, as it is said, become one flesh. 6:17 But anyone who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with him. 6:18 Keep away from fornication. All the other sins are committed outside the body; but to fornicate is to sin against your own body. 6:19 Your body, you know, is the temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you since you received him from God. You are not your own property; (1 Corinthians)

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Hi, Petra!

The problem is that man continues to rely on the “can be forgiven” so he does not need to exercise self-control.

The Church, as Moses, almost even enable sinners as she goes out of her way to “understand” and show “charity.”

It has been said that kindness is taken by the wicked as a weakness to be exploited.

Did Christ or the Apostles Teach “excused through sensibilities?”:

5:19 When self-indulgence is at work the results are obvious: fornication, gross indecency and sexual irresponsibility; 5:20 idolatry and sorcery; feuds and wrangling, jealousy, bad temper and quarrels; disagreements, factions, 5:21 envy; drunkenness, orgies and similar things. I warn you now, as I warned you before: those who behave like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. 5:22 What the Spirit brings is very different: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, trustfulness, 5:23 gentleness and self-control. There can be no law against things like that, of course. 5:24 You cannot belong to Christ Jesus unless you crucify all self-indulgent passions and desires. 5:25 Since the Spirit is our life, let us be directed by the Spirit. 5:26 We must stop being conceited, provocative and envious. (Galatians)

It is quite convenient to rely on “the flesh is weak;” ‘so, don’t worry, God forgives you.’

The Christian’s first resolve should be to Abide in Christ–not to use the Sacrament of Reconciliation as an enabler (automatic excuse to sin).

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Gorgias]

In scripture we have Jesus making the statement in regards to divorce… “lewd conduct excepted”

Right – in that passage, which Catholic Bibles tend to translate “except for unlawful marriage”, the Catholic Church understands that Jesus isn’t making an exception for adultery, but rather is talking about something else altogether. (Protestant denominations have tended to interpret it as ‘adultery’, and therefore, had tended to allow adultery as the one allowable reason for divorce.)

The Catholic Church believes that Jesus meant “if the marriage was never valid in the first place”. In other words, all marriage is “until death do you part”, unless the marriage was invalid from the beginning. (That’s why annulments are possible – they investigate whether there was a reason that would have prevented the marriage in the first place.)

So, this passage isn’t about forgiving adultery, but rather, is about whether Jesus allows divorce.

But then when asked by his apostles how often we should forgive someone, he says, 70 X 7, or words to that effect(I didn’t research the exact quote), but my question is how do we reconcile these two statements?

I think we ‘reconcile’ them by realizing that Jesus is talking about two different subjects. On the subject of adultery, then, we really should proceed from the perspective that sinners should be forgiven, whenever possible.

However, we also need to be respectful of the ‘innocent’ spouse in a marriage marred by adultery. If a person cheats – and continues to cheat, either with the same person or a string of persons – are they really repenting of their sin? Or are they just getting caught “seventy times seven” times?

Can it mean, 1/we have an exception to the 70X7

No, I don’t think so.

2/forgiveness does not necessarily follow through with no temporal consequences as it applies to unfaithfulness.

Hmm… not sure precisely what you mean, but I think the answer is “no”. All sins have temporal consequences, and unfaithfulness is no exception.

3/no temporal consequences unless # of adultery episodes arrive at 70 X 7 + 1

No, not true.

4/ lewd conduct is disordered,degenerate sex or something else, thus divorce is a possibility?/given on first case.

No. The practical interpretation of the Church is “unlawful marriage”.

Thanks.

You’re welcome!

 

[superblue]

Since most of what Jesus said is in a Parable form, or analogy form , it leaves the reader or humanity with a few ways to interpret what is being said and what is not. now every church militant here will say only a certified theologian or clergy or religious, can explicitly interpret scripture and thusly tell society what it does or doesn’t mean ; but then you have the arm chair heros who will tell you what they think and then both contradict each other. You have plenty of good God given common sense, from what you asked, which makes more sense to you , and then you have to factor in what is the context of the question for you. Since Jesus didn’t specify the answer becomes both optional and a directive based on the person and the context of the situation.

Forgive, but then we have what ever you bind on earth is bound in heaven, and what you loose on earth is loosed in heaven ( paraphrasing ) , and then you have forgiveness with strings attached that lead to penance and " purgatory ".

Then what if in your same question, one spouses actions causes the other to be unfaithful, who forgives who first , ( rhetorical question, it doesn’t matter. none of this does. )

alrighty snowflakes and CMs have fun flagging this.

Love , Peace and afro grease.

 

[Gorgias]

Forgive,

Absolutely!

but then we have what ever you bind on earth is bound in heaven, and what you loose on earth is loosed in heaven

Why would Jesus’ grant of authority to Peter be relevant in this context?

and then you have forgiveness with strings attached that lead to penance and " purgatory ".

Forgiveness doesn’t have strings attached! What is forgiven, is forgiven forever! However, it’s necessary to attempt to undo the damage done by the sin (i.e., penance). Moreover, we ourselves are, in certain ways, damaged by the sins we commit, and therefore, that damage is “undone” prior to entry into heaven, where we will be perfect (i.e., purgation).

Easy peasy. (But not ‘strings attached’!)

 

[StarMapp]

One of the worst parts is causing someone else to commit adultery by your actions.

Agree. Compounding is what we see as the effects. Concupiscience the instigator sets the ball rolling. Catholics are now influenced by the beliefs of other christian sects in regards to the permissibility of re-marriage. Marriage for them is simply a personal contract, along with the in-vogue nuptial agreement, which is making acceptance into the minds of the Catholic as a reasonable option. This is why we urgently need a reversal to tradition in the doctrine of the Family, a war within as well as without. This is why I ask. My own belief is that first offense needs forgiveness, also in keeping with Mat 18(I think) as regards in settlement between 2 parties first stage.

 

[StarMapp]

JC:

I like your explaination thanks.

 

[Vico]

how do we reconcile these two statements?

Matthew 18:21-22

21 Then came Peter unto him and said: Lord, how often shall my brother offend against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
22 Jesus saith to him: I say not to thee, till seven times; but till seventy times seven times.

Matthew 6:14-15

14 For if you will forgive men their offences, your heavenly Father will forgive you also your offences. 15 But if you will not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive you your offences.

 

[jcrichton]

Right – in that passage, which Catholic Bibles tend to translate “except for unlawful marriage”, the Catholic Church understands that Jesus isn’t making an exception for adultery, but rather is talking about something else altogether. (Protestant denominations have tended to interpret it as ‘adultery’, and therefore, had tended to allow adultery as the one allowable reason for divorce.)

The Catholic Church believes that Jesus meant “if the marriage was never valid in the first place”. In other words, all marriage is “until death do you part”, unless the marriage was invalid from the beginning. (That’s why annulments are possible – they investigate whether there was a reason that would have prevented the marriage in the first place.)

So, this passage isn’t about forgiving adultery, but rather, is about whether Jesus allows divorce.

Hi, Gorgias!

This is the correct distinction.

The Catholic Church does not err in making it since it would be almost a caricature of Christ’s Word to suggest/believe that the Sacrament of Marriage is dissoluble by the act of betrayal (adultery).

If this were to be the understanding, all that “Christians” have to do once they’ve “outgrown” their spouses is commit adultery with a prostitute or an acquaintance, ect. and move on to the “real soulmate (betray and repeat as often as necessary till you get to the “right” man/woman).”

Of course, once Luther stated that he could commit adultery 1000 times per day with no loss of Salvation… hey, divorce and remarriage is just 1000 times better–and no sweat, just do it!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Hi, Blue!

Wow, this is much like the all religions lead to God and universalism, isn’t it?

Jesus did not leave things up for grabs!

Jesus did not institute a billion authoritative Church body.

The binding and loosening is Given to Peter and the Eleven plus One.

Yes, the number 7 x 70 is about completion or infinity.

No, two wrongs don’t make it right.

No, adultery (betrayal) is not ok.

No, adultery is not just against one spouse or the other–the Sacrament of Marriage is: man and woman & what God Brought together let no man set asunder!

God is the most important part of the Christian equation… be it the Sacrament of Marriage, Confession, Priesthood, Eucharist, Confirmation, Extreme Unction, or Baptism.

Remove God from this equation and you have St. Matthew’s 5:

5:46 For if you love those who love you, what right have you to claim any credit? Even the tax collectors do as much, do they not? 5:47 And if you save your greetings for your brothers, are you doing anything exceptional? Even the pagans do as much, do they not? 5:48 You must therefore be perfect just as your heavenly Father is perfect.

…and yes, ignorance is bliss and Jesus warned that most enter through that gate and run down that road!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Hi, Star!

The problem is the “betrayal” part of this sin/offense.

In the past females were given no voice what so ever. They had to remain faithful to their husband out of boundaries set by society. In the feminist movement women gained a voice.

Yet, instead of recurring to God, the movement empowered women to be as ill-fated as man: ‘do you, please yourself, satisfy all your desires…’

Non-Catholic Christians ate it all up (“Catholics” have wavered but some are loyally following the teachings of the world): ‘contraception, fornication, adultery, divorce and remarriage, abortion, (some) homosexuality…’–soon euthanasia and gender fluidity will be the next "Christian merciful and charitable thing to do.’

Everything is swept under the “understanding” and “sensibilities” carpets.

Forgiveness… are we Commanded to forgive? Yes.

How many times? No limit!

Here’s the problem, “Christians” are composing a special formula that allows unrighteousness to trump righteousness and they are claiming Christ as the source of their authority (all sins, past, present, and future, are forgiven–no matter what!).

“Christians” want to follow the world: no personal responsibilities or self-control, no commitments or obligations, nothing to achieve or strive for beyond personal satisfaction–forget God’s “suggestion” that we Be Holy!

Do you recall any of your childhood experiences? Especially any where you knew or felt that you were wronged by your parents, peers, teachers?

If there was a betrayal, we cannot help but still feel it deep inside of us… ‘why? how could he/she/they have done that to me?’

Now put adultery in that same context. Do you see how hurtful that betrayal is?

So yes, there can be forgiveness for the act of betrayal, but we cannot compel the victim to automatically extend him/herself out of the “Christian” Obligation which the perpetrator violated.

Forgiving that betrayal (adultery) takes time, intervention (preferably Priest or Catholic professional), and it requires a regaining of trust and a determination and commitment to remain Faithful and Loyal to the Sacrament!

Maran atha!

Angel