Why all fornication is not the same

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheAdvocate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TheAdvocate

Guest
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.
 
As I understand it, mortal sins are not judged on a sliding scale (picture a light controlled by a dimmer). One mortal sin, whatever it is, completely shuts a person off from sanctifying grace (picture a light controlled by an on-off switch).
 
If a fornicator cant wait one month for his wedding to have sex then how patient, understanding, and loving is he?
 
DaveBj said:
As I understand it, mortal sins are not judged on a sliding scale (picture a light controlled by a dimmer). One mortal sin, whatever it is, completely shuts a person off from sanctifying grace (picture a light controlled by an on-off switch).
Click to expand...
So, just for the record from you: therefore one is just as evil as the other? (I’m not talking about the consequence here, which is separation from God; I’m asking whether they are both equally evil.)
 
Yes they are both wrong. One is not more justifiable a sin is a sin and it is disobeying God.
 
TheAdvocate said:
… 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.
Click to expand...
I hate it when people talk about “committed relationships” when what they mean is “uncommitted relationships”. Marriage is a committed relationship. “Going steady”, or even being engaged are not committed relationships. In a committed relationship you are, well… committed, meaning there is no going back, no exit, no changing your mind.

A committed relationship, i.e., marriage, is the only relationship that justifies the kind of mutual self-giving that is inherent in sexual intercourse.

Words have meaning. We will get nowhere if we pretend they don’t by saying “… but you know what I mean.” No, I don’t know what you mean except by the words you use. It is hard enough to communicate without using words to mean the exact opposite than their definition, and hope that others will figure it out by the context.

St. Paul meant what he said. Fornication is a grave sin. It does no one any good to pretend there are meaningful differences between various shades of fornication. It’s not always true that going to a prostitute is worse than having sex with your fiancé. In the former case, it may be the simple result of a moment of weakness, quickly repented of and forgiven. In the latter, it may be a deliberate, sustained, and determined rejection of God’s love and authority over us.

I hold that the second example is far, far, worse than the first.
 
TechMan said:
I hold that the second example is far, far, worse than the first.
Click to expand...
I agree. In the second example, you’re sinning against someone you claim to love and that you are supposed to respect and protect.
 
TheAdvocate said:
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.
Click to expand...
It’s like saying murder and homicide are different. Yes, there are differences but they still involve killing someone.

I highly doubt that fornication did not exist in the way we experience it today. Did Greeks practice arranged marriages? I know Jews did, but I don’t think Greeks did. And the Samaritan woman by the well was living with a man not her husband. So certainly “committed” relationships existed back then in some form.
 
TheAdvocate said:
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.
Click to expand...
Sounds like rationalization to me.
 
Matthew 5:27-28 (Douay-Rheims 1899)
27 You have heard that it was said to them of old: Thou shalt not commit adultery.
28 But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart.

No ring, No vows. They’re the same.
 
Familiaris Consortio (see here), starting at paragraph 79, identifies (and distinguishes between) the following categories of fornication:
  • a) Trial Marriages
  • b) De Facto Free Unions
  • c) Catholics in Civil Marriages
  • e) Divorced Persons Who Have Remarried
 
TheAdvocate said:
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.
Click to expand...
To truely love someone you must do what is BEST for them. Is it loving to seduce your fiance’, so that she commits a mortal sin! What if she died suddenly? You would have her go to hell for all eternity so that you can have an orgasm? That’s not love! That’s USING! Saying it’s ok to have sex if you love each other, is BROKEN THINKING! It’s a lie. Putting sex first before God is idolatry.

The engagement period is when you still have time to determine if you are compatable. It’s time to talk, get to know each other, share your dreams, and willingness to compromise. It’s time to develope the skill of chastity which is NECESSARY to life long love! ** If you can’t keep it zipped you are not husband material!**
 
Just_Lurking said:
Familiaris Consortio (see here), starting at paragraph 79, identifies (and distinguishes between) the following categories of fornication:
  • a) Trial Marriages
  • b) De Facto Free Unions
  • c) Catholics in Civil Marriages
  • e) Divorced Persons Who Have Remarried
Click to expand...
They are not distinguished as being less sinful than other forms of fornication.
 
TheAdvocate said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
TheAdvocate said:
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.
Click to expand...
totally disagree. don’t split hairs here, sex outside of marriage either before marriage (fornication) or during marriage to another (adultery)is sin. sin is sin is sin is sin. Premarital sex is sinful whether if it is a one night stand or with someone you plan to marry. And if it is with someone you are plannig to marry, you should realize that premarital sex has been shown to be sometimes one of the biggest hinderances to proper bonding in a lasting marriage. That is why those that live together more likely will end up divorces. Faithfulness in marriage is proven before marriage. If you have strength to wait before marriage, you will have strength during marriage to resist temptation when you finally are marriage. It is always amazing how the mind can come up with justification for sin. If this is what you have been doing, you need to go to confession and stop this activity now.
 
TheAdvocate said:
So, just for the record from you: therefore one is just as evil as the other? (I’m not talking about the consequence here, which is separation from God; I’m asking whether they are both equally evil.)
Click to expand...
I don’t pretend to see things as God sees them, but since you asked my opinion, yes, I see them as equally evil.
 
The devil is happy with either one.
The sacrament of Reconciliation is required for both circumstances before one can receive the Eucharist.

Discussion whether one sin is worse than the other is not useful in the pursuit of holiness, rather it helps to weaken our determination to love God regardless of the difficulty. “It’s not so bad” and “don’t be so hard on yourself” and “there are worse sins you can do” are the kind of phrases the devil would whisper in your ear. The saints who were martyred did not engage such a habit because it weakens resolve to do better and to be honest with ourselves and our weaknesses.

A woman in my life some time back who was anti-Catholic had a way of complimenting herself by saying she was a good person. She liked to compare herself with the murderers in jail but never against a soul like Mother Teresa of Calcuta. This is my point, to compare yourself with the saints and see how far up the mountain you still have to travel, and not to the tax collector where the man in the gospel said, “I’m glad I’m not like this man!”
 
TheAdvocate said:
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.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that a sensible person can’t equate a bar hopping-one-night-stand-seeker to someone who is in a relationship. Clearly there is a difference between a one-night-stand and two people who have been togther, exclusively for some time. But they’re both sinful in the eyes of the Church. I agree that the former is much more sinful than the latter, but both are sinful in the eyes of the Church and are forbidden.
 
TheAdvocate said:
So, just for the record from you: therefore one is just as evil as the other? (I’m not talking about the consequence here, which is separation from God; I’m asking whether they are both equally evil.)
Click to expand...
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…🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top