T
tuopaolo
Guest
Thinking about doing something lawful is never a sin. It would only be a sin if merely thinking about it would cause you to commit some other act which is a sin.
I understand the traditional Church treaching to be that the primary purpose of marriage is the begetting and education of children – which for Christians involves educating them in the faith. A secondary purpose is the mutual help accorded each other. Since Vatican II it’s been popular to mention both purposes without naming one as primary, but doing that doesn’t contradict the traditional teaching since not naming one as primary doesn’t mean that one is saying that both are equally primary – it could just mean that one just chooses not to stress that fact.
But it is a misunderstanding to suppose that to acknowledge that the primary purpose of marriage – as taught by the traditional Church in papal encyclicals – is the begetting and education of children, means that the secondary purpose is unimportant. Prayer is a secondary cause of God’s blessings with God’s own activity being the primary cause – that does not mean that prayer is unimportant!
Finally, it is a slight misunderstanding to suppose that to acknowledge that the primary purpose is begetting and education of children that this means that the primary constitution of romantic friendships between men and women is ordered toward the begetting and education of children to the exclusion of any other primary constitution – for there is a distinction between a romantic friendship between a man and woman and how that is oriented in its primary being, primary constitution and the particular reasons why God instituted marriage – the constitution of man as male and female logically precedes the institution of marriage.
That marriage was instituted for the begetting and education of children is evident in the Gospels where Jesus tells us due to the fact that in the world to come man just like the angels will no longer die that marriage is not necessary in the world of the ressurection (there are parallel passages which omit some of these details). Here Jesus clearly links marriage and thus the reason for its institution – it’s purpose – with the fact that men will no longer die – the only plausible explanation to explain the linkage is that marriage was instituted precisely in order to propagate the human race – i.e. for the begetting and education of children. But this does not mean that the primary orientation, primary being of male-female relationships is ordered to that end since, as we are told, the special friendships in this life, including the romantic ones, including those with our spouses, will persist in the next life, though in a different way and expression. So the core of the special friendship – a core not to do with begetting and education of children – remains even though there is no marriage. So a distinction must be made between marriage as an institution and the core of romantic friendship which overlaps it.
I understand the traditional Church treaching to be that the primary purpose of marriage is the begetting and education of children – which for Christians involves educating them in the faith. A secondary purpose is the mutual help accorded each other. Since Vatican II it’s been popular to mention both purposes without naming one as primary, but doing that doesn’t contradict the traditional teaching since not naming one as primary doesn’t mean that one is saying that both are equally primary – it could just mean that one just chooses not to stress that fact.
But it is a misunderstanding to suppose that to acknowledge that the primary purpose of marriage – as taught by the traditional Church in papal encyclicals – is the begetting and education of children, means that the secondary purpose is unimportant. Prayer is a secondary cause of God’s blessings with God’s own activity being the primary cause – that does not mean that prayer is unimportant!
Finally, it is a slight misunderstanding to suppose that to acknowledge that the primary purpose is begetting and education of children that this means that the primary constitution of romantic friendships between men and women is ordered toward the begetting and education of children to the exclusion of any other primary constitution – for there is a distinction between a romantic friendship between a man and woman and how that is oriented in its primary being, primary constitution and the particular reasons why God instituted marriage – the constitution of man as male and female logically precedes the institution of marriage.
That marriage was instituted for the begetting and education of children is evident in the Gospels where Jesus tells us due to the fact that in the world to come man just like the angels will no longer die that marriage is not necessary in the world of the ressurection (there are parallel passages which omit some of these details). Here Jesus clearly links marriage and thus the reason for its institution – it’s purpose – with the fact that men will no longer die – the only plausible explanation to explain the linkage is that marriage was instituted precisely in order to propagate the human race – i.e. for the begetting and education of children. But this does not mean that the primary orientation, primary being of male-female relationships is ordered to that end since, as we are told, the special friendships in this life, including the romantic ones, including those with our spouses, will persist in the next life, though in a different way and expression. So the core of the special friendship – a core not to do with begetting and education of children – remains even though there is no marriage. So a distinction must be made between marriage as an institution and the core of romantic friendship which overlaps it.