C
Cojuanco
Guest
But there is the seal of confession, such that the Bishop would not be able to act on such a report.
- Status
C
CAROLOFTHEBELLS
Guest
The OP clarified that it was not said during her confession, but during conversation.
T
TheWarriorMonk
Guest
Maybe you want to explain why, rather than making assertive statements with no basis. It most certainly does not fit the definition of pornography, because the couple themselves cannot be third parties, nor can it be adultery because there is no third party.
My statement is based on the interpretations of Catholics more informed than I. It has also been discussed on the forum ad naseum.
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
All I can say is that whoever is telling you this is simply wrong. Each spouse is to treat the other with the dignity they deserve as human beings and as a child of God. Not everything goes in spite of what some marriage counselors may be saying. My advice to you is to always keep the dignity of your wife in mind and your own dignity as well. Nothing justifies acting like a wild beast. I’ve heard well known philosophers and moral theologians make similar statments to the one you made above. I ignore them as highly confused or as charletans, highly educated baboons…
Linus2nd
M
MadeAFace
Guest
Thank you Stephanie, I actually do attend the latin mass every sunday and I love our priests who participate in the ancient liturgy. I can tell they are good solid catholics. Unfortunately I have to go through all these hoops (RCIA, sitting through Novus Ordo mass, having to participate in several ceremonies in front of the whole congregation, etc) it is very tough for me especially because one of my biggest reasons for leaving protestantism was because of modernism. Now I feel like I have to attend these services that feel very much like the churches I left. I should have confessed to one of the priests who do the latin mass but our directors recommended confessing to this particular priest for the first time because he is very good at walking us all through it. I had always thought he was a good priest too. I’m hoping that he just didn’t know any better when he made that statement.
U
underacloud
Guest
Going through RCIA and sitting through novus ordo mass are “hoops”?
Hmmmmmmmmmm.
Hmmmmmmmmmm.
M
MadeAFace
Guest
Ok let me rephrase that. I prefer the traditional mass to the ordinary form. The traditional mass is what drew me to the church. I have enjoyed the RCIA for the most part and respect the authority of the chuch.
U
underacloud
Guest
Fair enough, thanks for clarifying.
Anyway, I think you know yourself that this priest simply gave you bad advice. Unfortunately, that happens. It’s important that you find a confessor you can trust, so try confessing to one of the other priests you mention.
And stay away from porn, in whatever form and on whatever justification. As I said before, I think your reasons for thinking that porn is wrong are absolutely spot on.
T
TheWarriorMonk
Guest
I would advise against calling others charlatans or highly educated baboons for based on baseless personal opinions. It not only makes the person doing the name calling a fool, but chases people from the faith.
FWIW, I brought this point up in the first place because I am giving benefit of the doubt to the priest. Many people misinterpret what people tell them.
P
phillylawyer
Guest
As you (and many others have confirmed), the catechism clearly states that displaying real or simulated sexual to third parties violates the sanctity of the marriage bed. This means that a married couple watching another couple have sex is immoral. The immorality is violating the sexual intimacy of another couple by displaying to to a third party. Whether the viewing third party is a single man, a group of frat guys, or a married couple, it still violates the sexual intimacy of the viewed couple. The relationship of the viewing individuals is irrelevant to this.
However, if a couple filmed themselves having sex and then watched a video of themselves having sex as foreplay for the next time, that would not be displaying sexual acts to a third party. Therefore, the Catholic Church does not teach that that is inherently immoral.
Now, as others have stated, I would not be comfortable having videos laying around of my wife and I having sex. I would be worried kids would see it, or it would somehow get out. Also, I would not personally feel comfortable with it (it would seem awkward) watching back our previous marital intimacy. However, assuming both parties are comfortable with it (and one is not pushed into), there is no church teaching that says it is immoral. It, like most things in this life, is up to the prudence of the couple, provided they genuinely respect and listen to each other.
Cheers!
E
EasterJoy
Guest
If the priest truly says this, and the OP is *entirely certain *that this is not a misunderstanding because the priest has repeated this teaching himself in front of a group, then I have to agree. The concern ought to be brought directly to the vicar of clergy for the diocese. Do not pass go, do not collect $200, but let the bishop know in writing. Maybe this priest has a misguided desire to be “easy” on people (which is bad enough), but maybe it is worse yet. If it is worse, it could be very much worse, and very harmful.
I say this because this priest’s bishop would have to be concerned upon learning about this teaching that the priest might be looking at porn himself or giving himself a permissive reading of moral law with regards to chastity. It is not unusual to find, in retrospect, that the priests who fall into these serious offenses themselves were also teaching others that offenses against chastity are not so serious as all of that. The internet is so ubiquitous, sexual license is so rampant, these temptations can be a danger for priests, as it is for other men. There is no one the devil would like to lure into the falsehood of these crimes than our priests. The persons that a priest might engage in unchaste behavior with could unfortunately also be people who come to him in an attitude of trust, vulnerable because they look up to him and feel gratitude for his pastoral care or great affection for him personally, because they are young, in difficult marriages, struggling with sexual temptations themselves, or the like. Heaven forbid that this is happening, but if there are any red flags, the vicar of clergy needs to know. On behalf of those who might be at risk, he ought to be told. What he does with the information is up to him, but send him a note. I don’t mean to press him with “what are you going to do about this?” but just to say, “I thought you would want to be aware of this.”
I say this because this priest’s bishop would have to be concerned upon learning about this teaching that the priest might be looking at porn himself or giving himself a permissive reading of moral law with regards to chastity. It is not unusual to find, in retrospect, that the priests who fall into these serious offenses themselves were also teaching others that offenses against chastity are not so serious as all of that. The internet is so ubiquitous, sexual license is so rampant, these temptations can be a danger for priests, as it is for other men. There is no one the devil would like to lure into the falsehood of these crimes than our priests. The persons that a priest might engage in unchaste behavior with could unfortunately also be people who come to him in an attitude of trust, vulnerable because they look up to him and feel gratitude for his pastoral care or great affection for him personally, because they are young, in difficult marriages, struggling with sexual temptations themselves, or the like. Heaven forbid that this is happening, but if there are any red flags, the vicar of clergy needs to know. On behalf of those who might be at risk, he ought to be told. What he does with the information is up to him, but send him a note. I don’t mean to press him with “what are you going to do about this?” but just to say, “I thought you would want to be aware of this.”
P
phillylawyer
Guest
Before doing this, I would strongly recommend that you talk to the priest again and make sure you understand him. I would mention to him the passage in the catechism and see what his response is. I say this because you don’t want to “go above this head” unless you are absolutely sure you understood what he said, and you have had a chance to talk to him directly.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
, because the priest’s remarks are so absurd that there must be more to it.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Yes, you need to be entirely certain that you are hearing him correctly. Still, if you raise the question and he does not go out of his way to be clear to everyone in the class that he meant nothing like what you thought, this is a concern.
I am also not talking about “going above his head” in the sense of calling down outside intervention, and that is a very important point! We are not talking about starting a witch hunt or getting this priest into trouble! No, I am talking about keeping the vicar of clergy in the loop when things like this come up, because he cannot see a bad pattern of thought being shown in public by one of his priests if people are afraid to bring concerns to him. This is only a puzzle piece, and in the big picture, it might not be anything remotely like what I am talking about!! With no feedback for the bishop, though, it may become a picture that he never puts together until avoidable harm is done. This is for the sake of erring on the side of safety, not trying to get the wheels moving when judgment ought to be reserved. It would be good to be clear about this, if the note is sent, most absolutely!
E
EasterJoy
Guest
I think my perception is tinted because of a priest I had often heard go out of his way to say that priests take vows of celibacy, not vows of chastity. He, too, made “absurd” remarks with regards to what is chaste behavior, which is to say he was lenient about the boundaries. It turns out he did have some serious problems with regards to chastity himself, and did some great harm to vulnerable people who ought to have been able to trust him. The harm he did is public knowledge now, as it appears in files released by the Archdiocese of Portland.
Most of the time, I would guess that these comments of absurd “leniency” are nothing or are merely a misunderstanding, but some of the time they are something the bishop wishes he had heard about. When that is the case, the bishop is the least of those who have reason to wish that the pattern had been seen before it was. Our bishops put our priests in positions of enormous trust, and they have to be vigilant that this trust is not violated. We have to be careful that our bishops can be both vigilant and prudent, being both protective of their flocks and yet always fair with their brother priests and supportive of them, too.
This case is probably nothing like that. I am making my point not because of its high likelihood, but because of the grave situation if this is a “worst case.” I am suggesting calm and prudent steps to take that rather unlikely but serious possibility in mind.
C
Cojuanco
Guest
Well, what the priest said is true. But he made a promise of chastity nonetheless IIRC, which it would also be a sin to break.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Let us just say that the way he said that and the way he made other comments was a red flag, in retrospect. It was the “when you see a yellow light, hit the gas” mentality that made one scratch the head, because that is by no means the norm in our archdiocese. A priest who is just as accepting and warm when he is around unchaste people as with chaste people, that is a great thing. A priest who is accepting of impure habits, not so much. A priest who is eccentric or imaginative rather than “conforming”, no problem. A priest who picks and chooses when it comes to orthodoxy, not so much.
If your priest has a “hit the gas, it doesn’t matter if the light is a little red when you exit the intersection” mentality is waving a red flag. Mention this to his supervisor, that is all I am saying. You don’t need to be hysterical, but mention it.
M
mikekle
Guest
I remember the priest at the catholic school I went to, would come into our class and talk to us, answer questions about once a week, and someone asked him about masturbation once and he did say it was an acceptable thing for boys of a certain age to engage in. He said he would rather a young person do this versus engage in real sexual behavior, so I can understand that, especially since his audience was a classroom of 11-12 yr olds.
However this was back in the mid 1980s, this was an older priest (late 60s-ish)
L
LongingSoul
Guest
That makes me wonder how many of his young audience took that as a green light to abandon the natural tugs of their conscience.
I do understand how hard it is to give the best answer at any given time though. I remember when my daughter came home around that age one day and said her friends said there is no such thing as hell. That Catholics made that up. In trying to teach my daughter of the reality of hell, she began to feel quite terrified and I had to launch quite quickly into the lovingness and mercy of God etc etc.
- Status