I don’t even understand your position here. The question was about the Church outlawing the stated practices and Separation of Church and State is absolutely central to that. If we lived in a theocracy, I’d guess the Church would indeed outlaw them. YMMV.This type of response has no rational argument, but only plays on emotions. The use of words like bigoted, and antiquated are examples of this.
If you want to make a statement about the seperation of Church and state, then that should be your argument, rather than emotional statements declaring the Catholic position bigotted.I don’t even understand your position here. The question was about the Church outlawing the stated practices and Separation of Church and State is absolutely central to that. If we lived in a theocracy, I’d guess the Church would indeed outlaw them. YMMV.
Hmmm… I wanted to make both statements as they aren’t even close to equivalent in my view, but you don’t think there’s any case to be made that the Church (and Bible) is intolerant of and/or prejudiced against homosexuality?If you want to make a statement about the seperation of Church and state, then that should be your argument, rather than emotional statements declaring the Catholic position bigotted.
The short, and not very nice answer to your question about why it is not criminalized is that such a law would require the people who actually write and vote on the laws to agree to make it illegal. And I think it’s quite common knowledge that chastity is a virtue that is hard to come by among high-level politicians.Tonight, I was reading a post that talked about how the Catholic Church wants abortion to be outlawed, and how things like murder are outlawed. But why not adultery? I know it has to do with privacy and such, but why not outlaw it if it is as wrong. A sin is a sin no matter what, and if I remember what I was taught in Catholic School, Adultery is a grave sin, just like abortion. I also wonder about Homosexuality. Why didn’t we keep it criminalized, and why didn’t the church campaign to keep it that way?
the short answer NO the church has no problem with the person suffering Same Sex Attraction. It does have problem with the acts that come from people who “revel” in the disordered acts that come from such an orientation. These acts are destructive to society at large and do great harm to the people who participate in them. Just the HIV rate among homosexual men alone should be enough to get the practice of sodomy outlawed (transmission rate of close to 100%). In 2010 the center for disease control in the US found ~49000 NEW cases of HIV that year ~4500 among hetero men ~8500 among hetero women and ~29000 among MSM (men who have sex with men) According to the CDC in the same year SSA men made up 4% of the population. Lets say all of those 4% were men (HA) just to give you the benefit of the doubt (underreporting bias is always possible) that is still 29000 cases in just 4% of the male population and 4500 in 96% of the male population. I am a health care professional (pharmacist) I studied this last year. Really is enough alone to get known homosexuals banned from blood donation. its not bigoted its a public health care issue. I mean statistically homosexual men are very promiscuous (even more then average heterosexual men if the studies are to be believed) this is the main reason given for the dramatic increase in the HIV rate.Hmmm… I wanted to make both statements as they aren’t even close to equivalent in my view, but you don’t think there’s any case to be made that the Church (and Bible) is intolerant of and/or prejudiced against homosexuality?
Actually a woman in New York State was charged with adultery within the past three years.Tonight, I was reading a post that talked about how the Catholic Church wants abortion to be outlawed, and how things like murder are outlawed. But why not adultery? I know it has to do with privacy and such, but why not outlaw it if it is as wrong. A sin is a sin no matter what, and if I remember what I was taught in Catholic School, Adultery is a grave sin, just like abortion. I also wonder about Homosexuality. Why didn’t we keep it criminalized, and why didn’t the church campaign to keep it that way?
The legal element for permitting the judicial action was in link with the civil law or the penal law??? Civil action or penal action??? Who is the asker in the law suit:** The husband, or the State, or the husband and the State???** If it is a penal action, it is a christian way in link with **the puritan view and the puritanist doctrine: It is not the catholic way. **Actually a woman in New York State was charged with adultery within the past three years.
I’m afraid each of the points you have made here is quite incorrect, and what you have claimed as Catholic teaching is in fact the opposite of it.The legal element for permitting the judicial action was in link with the civil law or the penal law??? Civil action or penal action??? Who is the asker in the law suit:** The husband, or the State, or the husband and the State???** If it is a penal action, it is a christian way in link with **the puritan view and the puritanist doctrine: It is not the catholic way. **
Indeed, in the holy bible, Jesus refused the capital punishment by lapidation for the adultery. **His message is clear, no penal law for adultery, for the private sexuality and for the immoral acts without direct and external effects on the society. It is not the business of the State, not his role and his function. **
There is a distinction between the temporal power and the spiritual power (Caesar and God). The Old testament is finished on some parts. Now, it is the new law. And, ** the view like the muslim religion who is not capable to see that there are two spheres is wrong, unfair and not catholic.** **The debate is very difficult and thus probably impossible , if you do not accept this principle of two spheres. **The “chariarization” of State in the christian way is wrong. It is not moral for the governement to act like that: It is not catholic. **This method is morally wrong. It is against the human nature, against the human intelligence, against the human rights wanted by the creation.
**
The government has no power to enter in the bedroom, only God, or sometimes, the penal law if rape, if sexual violence, if pedophila (non consenting sex). By principle, **it is not the business of the country. **
Sorry, but for the catholic Church, there is a difference between the fact of refusing of recognizing the divorce with the extra-patrimonial rights and their effects, via the civil law of State: I mean to give the official agreement of State for a new “marriage” (in catholicism, an false marriage) that thus legalizes the other marriage civilly, and promotes, also, the adultery in the catholic acception (1)I’m afraid each of the points you have made here is quite incorrect, and what you have claimed as Catholic teaching is in fact the opposite of it.
The Church has been at the forefront of making certain for example, divorce is illegal, as well as adultery a crime – and it has been, through most of Christian history, in the lands of Christendom.
Since Christendom no longer exists, and Protestantism, and secular agnosticism now prevails, and the number of adulterers is in fact so huge a portion of society rather than a small minority, laws like these become less possible.
But when they are possible, they help keep marriage the sacred state of life it truly is.
‘That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man’s eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man’s supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State.’
Pope St. Pius X, ‘Vehementor Nos’
The police arrested a woman in 2010 in Batavia NY and charged her with adultery. Please google it.The legal element for permitting the judicial action was in link with the civil law or the penal law??? Civil action or penal action??? Who is the asker in the law suit:** The husband, or the State, or the husband and the State???** If it is a penal action, it is a christian way in link with **the puritan view and the puritanist doctrine: It is not the catholic way. **
Indeed, in the holy bible, Jesus refused the capital punishment by lapidation for the adultery. **His message is clear, no penal law for adultery, for the private sexuality and for the immoral acts without direct and external effects on the society. It is not the business of the State, not his role and his function. **
There is a distinction between the temporal power and the spiritual power (Caesar and God). The Old testament is finished on some parts. Now, it is the new law. And, ** the view like the muslim religion who is not capable to see that there are two spheres is wrong, unfair and not catholic.** **The debate is very difficult and thus probably impossible , if you do not accept this principle of two spheres. **The “chariarization” of State in the christian way is wrong. It is not moral for the governement to act like that: It is not catholic. **This method is morally wrong. It is against the human nature, against the human intelligence, against the human rights wanted by the creation.
**
The government has no power to enter in the bedroom, only God, or sometimes, the penal law if rape, if sexual violence, if pedophila (non consenting sex). By principle, **it is not the business of the country. **
As catholic lay person, do you believe that:I’m afraid each of the points you have made here is quite incorrect, and what you have claimed as Catholic teaching is in fact the opposite of it.
The Church has been at the forefront of making certain for example, divorce is illegal, as well as adultery a crime – and it has been, through most of Christian history, in the lands of Christendom.
Since Christendom no longer exists, and Protestantism, and secular agnosticism now prevails, and the number of adulterers is in fact so huge a portion of society rather than a small minority, laws like these become less possible.
But when they are possible, they help keep marriage the sacred state of life it truly is.
‘That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man’s eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man’s supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State.’
Pope St. Pius X, ‘Vehementor Nos’
There is no Catholic teaching that would prohibit making adultery illegal depending on how the law is written. Private acts do not exempt from the law.As catholic lay person, do you believe that:
The catholic church via her doctrine teaches, supports, wants, requires,… that the legislative power of State votes some penal laws about the acts of adultery in the private bedroom, in a private place??? YES OR NO
The catholic church via her doctrine teaches, supports, wants, requires,… that the executive power of State publishes some penal laws about the acts of adultery in the private bedroom, in a private place??? YES OR NO
The catholic church via her doctrine teaches, supports, wants, requires,… that the judicial power of State (judicial authority) punishes in function of these penal laws the acts of adultery in the private bedroom, in a private place??? YES OR NO
for information:The police arrested a woman in 2010 in Batavia NY and charged her with adultery. Please google it.
In the holy bible, Jesus refused the capital punishment by lapidation for the adultery. His message is clear,** no penal law for adultery, for the private sexuality and for the immoral acts without direct and external effects on the society. It is not the business of the State, not his role and his function.There is no Catholic teaching that would prohibit making adultery illegal depending on how the law is written. Private acts do not exempt from the law.
You have been given a well sourced proof that your argument is in error. I can see why you would think this given you are (probably) an American living in a post Christian world. Please give a well sourced proof that your argument is true. Something other than your assertion preferably the teaching of a Pope or Saint. Someone with authority to teach.The legal element for permitting the judicial action was in link with the civil law or the penal law??? Civil action or penal action??? Who is the asker in the law suit:** The husband, or the State, or the husband and the State???** If it is a penal action, it is a christian way in link with **the puritan view and the puritanist doctrine: It is not the catholic way. **
Indeed, in the holy bible, Jesus refused the capital punishment by lapidation for the adultery. **His message is clear, no penal law for adultery, for the private sexuality and for the immoral acts without direct and external effects on the society. It is not the business of the State, not his role and his function. **
There is a distinction between the temporal power and the spiritual power (Caesar and God). The Old testament is finished on some parts. Now, it is the new law. And, ** the view like the muslim religion who is not capable to see that there are two spheres is wrong, unfair and not catholic.** **The debate is very difficult and thus probably impossible , if you do not accept this principle of two spheres. **The “chariarization” of State in the christian way is wrong. It is not moral for the governement to act like that: It is not catholic. **This method is morally wrong. It is against the human nature, against the human intelligence, against the human rights wanted by the creation.
**
The government has no power to enter in the bedroom, only God, or sometimes, the penal law if rape, if sexual violence, if pedophila (non consenting sex). By principle, **it is not the business of the country. **
Firstly, **I am french man who lives is France. I am catholic lay person, **but I am not:You have been given a well sourced proof that your argument is in error. I can see why you would think this given you are (probably) an American living in a post Christian world. Please give a well sourced proof that your argument is true. Something other than your assertion preferably the teaching of a Pope or Saint. Someone with authority to teach.
thank you.
The fact that Jesus did not allow the women to DIE for adultery only confirms his message of repentance. Still she faced severe penalty in her community (assuming she continued to live in a largely Jewish population of her pears which is likely, I will grant you that I can’t Prove that.In the holy bible, Jesus refused the capital punishment by lapidation for the adultery. His message is clear,** no penal law for adultery, for the private sexuality and for the immoral acts without direct and external effects on the society. It is not the business of the State, not his role and his function.
**
Read the Holy Bible
okay you are a French men living in a Post Christian world. I stand corrected and I apologise for even insinuating that you might have been a silly American.Firstly, **I am french man who lives is France. I am catholic lay person, **but I am not:
a puritan person, a puritanist person, a protestant person, a victorian person, a victorianist person, a mormonist person, a catharist person, a jansenism person, a moralist person, a rigorist person, a scrupulous person, an externalist person, a judgmentalist person, a pharisaist person, a pharisian person, an christian orthodox person, a fundamentalist christian, a fundamentalist catholic, a orthodox jewish, a muslim person;
And
I am not a prudish person, I am not a primary anti-personalist person, I am not a primary anti-phenomenologist person, I am not a clanist person, I am not a communist person, I am not a socialist person, i am not a totalitarian person, I am not a totalitarist person.
The “chariarization of State in the pseudo-christian way” **is morally wrong. **It is very not catholic. The method is morally wrong. It is against the human nature, against the human intelligence, against the human rights wanted by the creation.
Thus, I am Catholic, not more not less: Faith and Reason, Reason and Faith: both of them.
The law is on the books and was used. This same situation can happen with others laws.for information:
abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/woman-charged-adultery-challenge-york-law/story?id=10857437
In this case, it seems that the penal law action was not link with the adultery, per se, but the fact of having sex on the picnic table. The local justice seems to use the penal law about the adultery for punishing an other act** (sexual act may be in public, outside and outdoor).** This manner of doing by the local police for giving a punishement is a diversion of power, a bad using of the legal element of penal law.
The police has to use, only, the good legal element; Otherwise, it is unfair, not morally loyal and equitable. This manner is not catholic, it is against the natural moral order of rights of State.
That is not true it all. That is your private misinterpretation.In the holy bible, Jesus refused the capital punishment by lapidation for the adultery. His message is clear,** no penal law for adultery, for the private sexuality and for the immoral acts without direct and external effects on the society. It is not the business of the State, not his role and his function.
**
Read the Holy Bible