Why all fornication is not the same

[DaveBj]

It’s pretty basic.
The wages of sin is death.

Mortal sin separates you from God forever.
Period.
If you die unrepentant in Mortal sin you will go to hell. In hell I guess people can argue about who’s sin was better…

^This.

The writer of Hebrews talks about Moses as preferring to “suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season.” Fornication, whether in the company of prostitutes, bar pickups, or a committed partner that one is planning to marry can be fun. However, when the final accounts are being tallied up, the operative question is, “Was it worth what’s facing you now?”

 

[MilesVitae]

It’s pretty basic.
The wages of sin is death.

Mortal sin separates you from God forever.
Period.
If you die unrepentant in Mortal sin you will go to hell. In hell I guess people can argue about who’s sin was better…

and

DaveBj:

I don’t pretend to see things as God sees them, but since you asked my opinion, yes, I see them as equally evil.

Dave and Moore, obviously, you are correct in your point that any and all unrepentant mortal sin will have hell as its consequence. But, this does not mean, however, that all mortal sins are equally grave or evil (after all, a sin is not grave because it sends us to hell - it sends us to hell because it is grave). For instance, the Catechism says (1858), “Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man; ‘Do not kill, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not defraud, honor your father and your mother.’ The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.” (my emphasis)

 

[twoangels]

Clearly, there are numerous passages in Paul’s letters where fornication is condemned. But let’s take a closer look. The word “fornication” derives from the Latin word “fornix” which means “arch”. In ancient Rome, prostitutes practiced their trade under archways of certain buildings. We know that Paul’s strongest condemnation is in his letters to the Corinthians, being that Corinth was a party city at the time (being a port city, soldiers and traders looked for action). Therefore, it would seem that the premarital sex that Paul was addressing was of a very casual sort (prostitution, orgies). Also at the time, marriage tended to be arranged, and people didn’t really date like we do today.

This is true. Fornication as practiced in ancient times tended to involve prostitution or what we call “one night stands.”

Especially in Jewish culture, married couples were protected from the sin of fornication because they exchanged matrimonial consent a year prior to moving into together. (Unless they were previously married, in which case, it would be about 3 weeks) They were expected to abstain from sex until the day the bride moved in with her husband. If they did consummate their marriage early, this would not be sin since they already exchanged matrimonial consent. It would be held as imprudent and be taboo, but it wouldn’t be what we do today. Overall they were guarded by such sins by “courting/dating” after they were exchanged consent. If they wished to seperate, they divorced each other. There was an understanding that consummating the marriage changed something.

This helps to illuminate Christ’s statement that “If you divorce and marry another (except in the case of sexual immorality), you commit adultery.” He’s not talking about annullments and marriage tribunals.

I think we can understand this in some arguments progressive Christians give in defense of premarital sex. I’ve seen it said that according to the old testament, sex is what marries you. As such, they argue that even before the wedding day, once the couple has engaged in sex, they’re already husband and wife. The wedding is just a formality. But Christ specifically mentions sexual immorality. Having sex with a prostitute does not make her your wife. The same is true with any form of sexual relations that occur prior to matrimonial consent. They lack the consent and thus allow you to go your seperate ways even if you’ve been sexually engaged (however sinfully).

Thus we call sex consummating the marriage and it is at the consummation that the couple completes their act of marrying each other and makes it fully indisoluble, though they were married previously.

The manner in which we date today is thus the problem. The immorality lies in that while we’re more committed to each other than to a prostitute, we’re less committed than marriage. Thus we get around the indisolubility factor. We permit the hardness of our hearts and wait and wait and wait to marry till we’re assured of our happiness or our biological clock starts ticking and our relatives are all like “Why aren’t you married yet? Are you going to wait till your 40?”

Fornication is always wrong, but I’m just pointing out that there are different levels. Disagree? Do you equate a person bar hopping looking to get laid on a weekend to a person who makes love to his fiancee a month before the wedding? By definition, they’re both fornication, but the former seems to be the kind that Paul was addressing. And let’s face it, the former is much more sinful.

I would say that the former is more objectively diliberately sinning. The engaged couple giving into their passions a month before their wedding are suffering the consequences of the fact that our culture’s dating culture is a near occassion of sin mostly for the sake of pursuing the experience of falling in love (which classically was held as a form of lust tempting married couples to adultery by promising them something that form of “love” does not fulfill).

I think the other part of it is that in intent, couples who do validly marry, express their intent at the proposal. It is canon law that restricts us from validly exchanging this consent till our wedding day. Its also a product of the wedding industry. We like big weddings. But even aside from arranged marriages, there was a day where you could approach your priest and get married that very same day. Now the Church uses the engagement period as a time to make up for our poor dating practices and shotty catechetical formation in regards to our theology on Christian marriage.

Its not a perfect system. Fornication is a grave offense and should be treated as such. A couple should strive to do all they can to wait for their wedding day (and people do succeed. Its not entirely impossible), but there should be an expectation that sin will rear its head. Its good to thus go to confession more requirely while dating and engaged simply because the practices can be occassions of sin.

 

[twoangels]

And therefore, both grave sins against the sixth commandment. Something that is objectively grave matter is not mitigated by intentions or being “in love”.

The commandments are summarized by “Loving the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength” and “Loving your neighbor as yourself.”

JP II tells us that the opposite of love is to use. Thus the gravity of sexual immorality is dependant on how much we objectify others.

All sexual sins are grave offenses because sex has a procreative and unitive meaning that is defiled through any situation that is less than marriage. But even though it crosses the line into “grave offense” does not mean that there is not a spectrum of gravity where some acts are graver than others while both remaining still grave.

 

[CarmenCatherine]

it’s just using the person. And that is wrong. “use you then throw you out when i’m bored or interested in someone else” is disgustingly wicked. And th majority of the world isn’t right. The majority make up the average and the average is rotten. Yuck ew and yuck some more. It’s disrespectufl, degraded, and carnal. and we aren’t meant to be only for the world. And when i dabbled in Buddism, we also were taught to transcend the world. Think you’re fine with not having enough self-respect to be above treating others without highest value, love and worth and sacrifice? such yuck practices, but easy, and the weak, again, make up the majority.

Contraception is a sin because it tries to take away/control God and His Power and His Will. Further more even in marriage it is a sin because of that; but also because even though CONSCIOUSLY you think you’re fine and dandy, on a soul level, you know that you have used and been used for CARNALITY. Because if it isn’t for children, and you don’t want children that year, you shouldn’t be having sex. And that’s entirely possible because you don’t want to be a slave to anything. Anything that you have to alleviate by indulging in is sickly pathetic.

By the way, can always pick a fornicator out. They are such slaves to their sin, it may as well be tattooed on them all over. It poisons the soul and then infects all other parts of your life and existance.

Fornication is a sickening corruption that is commonplace. Even in the new age religion it is said when you “do it” with another you are sharing all that is good and bad about yourself and visa versa. It means the filth in their soul enters your soul. An interesting theory on behalf of new age, it at least says that one should pick wisely ones mates.

But for the most part
we are not animals we are human. We have been given much.
I think that you are here arguing only to try and win over your conscience by saying eveyone else is wrong. Because you know and are confronted by the Catholic teaching and forbiddance on this disgusting and common practice that will COST YOUR SOUL. So you’re a fornicator who wants to rid yourself of the guilt that you’d rather hide from.

God is there telling you that you are worth more and should honour others more than to use them. If you want the milk, Marry.
The Bible also says that. If you can’t help yourself, Marry, because that assists the sinful part. Of lust, carnality and slavery to ones sensuality.

Mind you the Bible said fornicators WILL NOT INHERIT HEAVEN.

It’s not things of this world that you should be concerned with, they lead to hell. If you attach too much to things that will ROT IN THE GRAVE you run the risk of staying here; as in, you won’t get to heaven with things that aren’t of heaven.

And i pray that God corrects the weak willed and yuck within His Church, throwing out teachings taht are too tough with them.
It is a religion, not a club and you’re deciding between soft drink or beer.
It’s a religion and you must respect and adhere. Too many Catholics are ‘label Catholics’ they seem to think it’s a status icon saying ‘i’m moral’ or ‘i’m cool’ ‘big huge family’
It’s not a fashion accessory.

ALso the Bible says to be crucified to the world.

And that you won’t want to continue to sin.
Sin is rancid and all sin leads to death.

Trying to con your conscious and buying that won’t be an excuse you can offer on your judgement.

You know it’s a mortal sin. And that isn’t ignorance. That is pathetic weakness in you.

BTW that’s not judgement/condemnation of you as a human. i don’t know you from a grease trap. But i can and do judge DEEDS and ACTIONS and ATTITUDES as right or HELL SERIOUS WRONG>

Fornication is a sin, it’s carnality, it’s corruption of the beauty and love contained within the sacred act done By love with love for love within the confines and duty of marriage.
“Submit yourselves to your wives/husbands.”

Read the Bible. Stop playing games with what your conscience knows to be true.
You’re a slave of the sin that has conquered you. And you’ll never con God. Never ever. Even if you succeed at buying your own self-denial lies

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Clearly, there are numerous passages in Paul’s letters where fornication is condemned. But let’s take a closer look. The word “fornication” derives from the Latin word “fornix” which means “arch”. In ancient Rome, prostitutes practiced their trade under archways of certain buildings. We know that Paul’s strongest condemnation is in his letters to the Corinthians, being that Corinth was a party city at the time (being a port city, soldiers and traders looked for action). Therefore, it would seem that the premarital sex that Paul was addressing was of a very casual sort (prostitution, orgies). Also at the time, marriage tended to be arranged, and people didn’t really date like we do today.

Therefore, the kind of sex that people commit today when in a committed relationship does not seem to be the exact kind that Paul was addressing in his letters. The situation where people delayed marriage until well into their late 20’s or 30’s just didn’t exist, or it if did, it was the exception, not the rule.

Fornication is always wrong, but I’m just pointing out that there are different levels. Disagree? Do you equate a person bar hopping looking to get laid on a weekend to a person who makes love to his fiancee a month before the wedding? By definition, they’re both fornication, but the former seems to be the kind that Paul was addressing. And let’s face it, the former is much more sinful.

Yes I believe you are theoretically correct. TwoAngels has provided some very deep insights.

Another approach is to understand that differences in “grave matter” (and typical circumstances involved) do seem, at least in general terms, to predict the degree of consent/knowledge involved in such personal sins…sometimes meaning they are not in fact mortal.

For example, masturbation is as intrinsically evil as murder or fornication (all involving serious matter) - yet actual personal acts of masturbation are far less likely to be mortal when compared to personal acts of murder.

I often find that contributors are not clear in their own mind what a “mortal sin” really is.

Murder, adultery, masturbation…as free-floating definitions cannot be called “mortal” sins.
A “mortal sin” cannot be seen - only the “matter” (the outward acts of humans) can be seen. In the above cases these “events” can be rightly said to always involve “serious matter.” However they can only be called “mortal sins” if it is known that the person involved gave full consent and had full knowledge that what they did was a serious offence against God or natural law.

Hence the connection between serious matter and mortal sin is not a 1:1 mapping.
In this sense I believe sins involving serious matter can predictably (not iron-clad though) be said to be more or less grave than others because freedom/knowledge is often known to be limited accordingly.

I believe this is what the two priests in their 80s, from their deep confessional experience, were probably opining when mentioned above.

I wouldn’t use this as an “escape clause” before engaging in any sin of serious matter of course!

 

[thewanderer]

If a fornicator cant wait one month for his wedding to have sex then how patient, understanding, and loving is he?

Exactly!!! If the marriage vows actually mean anything then not waiting is the fruit of being impatient and selfish. If the marriage vows are meaningless, then why the heck are they planning on getting married anyway.

 

[brb3]

I have had two conversations with two different parish priests where sexual immorality was the topic. One of them told me specifically that having sex a short time before a marriage was not a big deal. The other told that sexual sins in general were not that big of a deal.

I’m sure they both know what the church teaches about grave matter. I got the impression they were illustrating their personal perspectives. They are both in their 80’s so i suspect they have seen many forms of evil. For them, sexual sins were just not the kind of sin that they think is very evil. They are also both very sensible.

Personally, I think your assertion is sensible. I think someone who has fallen into serious fornication and is participating in prostitution and orgies has the greater sin than a couple that has sex a month before their wedding. I think that’s a very sensible observation but then I don’t feel as bound by the letter of law as other people. Many people will comb through the texts for the answer and if they don’t find that it is explicit about that differentiation then they won’t say that it is different.

You sound like you might see a difference. I see a difference. The priests I mentioned see a difference. Many people don’t see any difference. What do you make of that? That’s what I have been wondering.

Well, Christ disagreed with those two errant priests. Fornicators and adulterers must repent & confess …to have their mortal sins remitted.

 

[Bookcat]

Can there be mortal sins that are worse than others? Yes certainly.

Just as there can be ways of natural DEATH that are worse than others.

End result one must keep in mind though is

not love but death.

And even in a case where such via real ignorance etc it may the the case that in a certain case is not a “committed mortal sin” --it is still objectively grave (like the serious cancer that does not subjectively kill in a particular case) and very bad for those involved.

 

[Bookcat]

Can there be mortal sins that are worse than others? Yes certainly.

Just as there can be ways of biological DEATH that are worse than others.

End result one must keep in mind though is:

not love but death.

And even there may be in a particular case-- a particular person who has not subjectively “committed mortal sin” (God will judge)–it is still objectively grave (like the serious cancer that does not subjectively kill in a particular case) and very bad for those involved.