I am sorry to state that I do not fit in with your general comment here…the only man I am physically attracted to is my husband…have you really looked at the men out there…fat and bald…UGH really that does not turn me on…so thank you but I will pass on all of those other men
This has to be qualified with “close”. Having close opposite-sex friends is a foolish thing to do. One thing that you can find in the Catechism is ‘Near occasion of sin’ - We are humans and will naturally be attracted to the opposite sex. It’s sinful to put ourselves in situations could possibly lead us to sin. And it’s foolish to believe that we could never be tempted in that situation. Like I said in a previous post Satan leads us to believe things are copacetic. He gets us to accept the little things to draw us into the sins in which we loose are souls. Am I saying that everyone who has close friends of the opposite-sex is going to end up being unfaithful to their spouses? No. But merely making that a possibly is a sin in and of itself.
You don’t have to be physically attracted to someone to become unfaithful to your spouse. If you are emotionally attracted to someone other than your spouse then you are being unfaithful.I am sorry to state that I do not fit in with your general comment here…the only man I am physically attracted to is my husband…have you really looked at the men out there…fat and bald…UGH really that does not turn me on…so thank you but I will pass on all of those other men
Nope never heard that phrase.
As the scripture posted above tells us, we should not put each other down for not having the same temptatins (my paraphrase). What is a near occasion of sin for one person may be a joy for another. Wine as wonderful to me, to an alcoholic - it is a near occasion of sin.
No. I think you and maybe others here are missing the point. I am saying CLOSE friends of the opposite-sex are wrong because they could tempt us to bring that friendship past just being close.
I agree that developing a new relationship during the early years of a marriage can be dangerous and potentially unwise. As a marriage sponsor couple at our parish, we discuss with the couples that one of their first “tasks” as a married couple is to develop friendships with couples and that past relationships that don’t include both spouses have to clearly become secondary. However, it is unnatural to deny a philia love relationship that existed prior to the relationship between the spouses. Additionally, it is fully appropriate for philia friendships to develop later in the marriage that are no threat to the marriage. In fact, the healthier the marriage the more likely such relationships are to develop. While we all have proclivities to sin in different ways, not every person’s “cross” is sexual in nature.
Well now you did
.
I have many men in my life that I condsider “close personal friends” I am in no way attracted to them…what part of this is hard for you to understand? Not everyone as other posters have written are attracted to their close friends.
then read all of what I posted please
Nothing is hard for me to understand and of course none of the others have said they are attracted to their friends. That would destroy their argument. Also, you are attracted to them in such a way they you like their friendship. So there is attraction there. Enough attraction for you to consider them “close”. You know, most cheating starts out with people who are “just friends”. And both of them usually believe it will never go beyond friendship but somtimes it does. That’s the ‘seed’ Satan plants and it’s what he tempts us with. That is why it’s wrong to have close opposite-sex friends. Am I saying you’ll eventually cheat with one of you close male friends? Absolutely not.
Even the most holiest of men have been tripped up. Go back to the OT and read about all the prophets that Satan was able to draw into sin. So having strong faith is not a reason to justify an action. If that was the case, people of strong faith could watch all the filth on TV and in the movies because they know it’s wrong but their faith would not allow it to affect them. In reality those that do justify in that way have all ready been affected. They have become accepting of evil.
I agree with it. I have never been against opposite-sex friends. I don’t agree with having CLOSE opposite-sex friends. That closeness is reserved for a person’s spouse. Exclusively and in totality.
Me too. :yup:
Thank you! I was wondering where all the other posters with the same viewpoints have went. It seemed like only the people in disagreement where still here
Thank you also!
I am in total agreement with you. I am busy at work so I can’t really post to much but I’ve been checking the posts every now and then.Thank you! I was wondering where all the other posters with the same viewpoints have went. It seemed like only the people in disagreement where still here
I could take that argument and extend it to why have any friends besides your spouse.
You seem to keep melding all Love together as one and denying that love can encompass different types. You also seem to believe that any love I have for another is love denied my wife. When you think of God’s love for us which is infinite and us being made in His image, our love isn’t finite but can overflow as His love is overflowing. While my storge, philia, and agape love is greatest for my wife (eros love is exclusively hers), the greater I EXPERIENCE and FEEL God’s love the greater my ability to have philia, storge and even agape love for others without diminishing at all my loves for my wife.
You also seem to assert that everyone has the same proclivity to succumb to sexual sin. This is not true. One’s temptation to sin maybe sexual but anothers can just as easily be one or more of the other seven deadly sins.