Why simple fornication cant be a mortal sin

[someperson555]

ive been thinking about this for a long time now. i think i figured it out. if we deny that sex is intrinsically evil, then we cannot say that it is always a mortal sin. just think about it, if we need a license to engage in sex (marriage) then that would mean that sex is intrinsically evil.
now a good honest philosopher will try to get to the root of the problem. first we must ask, why is it that the church discourages fornication? the answer is simple, because it can easily lead to selfishness which can easily lead to pride which destroys charity.

HOWEVER, if a person can have sex in a temperant responsible fashion, then it shouldnt be a mortal sin.
ive been studying the buddhist concept of ‘the third way’, and i think it makes more sense than the christian teaching. dont get me wrong, im a christian catholic through and through, but i think the buddhist third way is compatible with a christian lifestyle.
in the bible jesus was mostly silent about sexual morality. i think this was because we cant be too legalistic about these things. he even warned us against being legalistic. which is why i came to the conclusion that simple fornication in a relationship between good friends may not always be a mortal sin.
and please understand, i make my argument in the most respectful way, i do not want to offend anyone, i am honestly just searching for the truth. so i would appreciate anyone’s discourse on this matter.

 

[FaithBuild18]

ive been thinking about this for a long time now. i think i figured it out. if we deny that sex is intrinsically evil, then we cannot say that it is always a mortal sin. just think about it, if we need a license to engage in sex (marriage) then that would mean that sex is intrinsically evil.
now a good honest philosopher will try to get to the root of the problem. first we must ask, why is it that the church discourages fornication? the answer is simple, because it can easily lead to selfishness which can easily lead to pride which destroys charity.

HOWEVER, if a person can have sex in a temperant responsible fashion, then it shouldnt be a mortal sin.
ive been studying the buddhist concept of ‘the third way’, and i think it makes more sense than the christian teaching. dont get me wrong, im a christian catholic through and through, but i think the buddhist third way is compatible with a christian lifestyle.
in the bible jesus was mostly silent about sexual morality. i think this was because we cant be too legalistic about these things. he even warned us against being legalistic. which is why i came to the conclusion that simple fornication in a relationship between good friends may not always be a mortal sin.
and please understand, i make my argument in the most respectful way, i do not want to offend anyone, i am honestly just searching for the truth. so i would appreciate anyone’s discourse on this matter.

That is not why the Church discourages fornication. The Church discourages fornication because it is not procreative in nature. It is merely for pleasure. One cannot separate the procreative and unitary aspect of intercourse from the physical act itself without being in sin.

Furthermore, I do not know how old you are, but I can say with a certain degree of confidence that human beings cannot have sex in a “temperate, responsible fashion.” Especially if they are not married. By virtue of being unwed and engaging in intercourse, they are already highly irresponsible and ill-tempered.

EDIT: The “third way” is not compatible with the Christian lifestyle if it relegates that which is evil, harmful, or sinful, as merely innocuous. On many social issues, the third way is little more than moral relativism. As Catholics, we are called to stand up for faith and morality with an absolute stalwart defence. If the world is going to hate us, and call us extremists for upholding that which has been upheld for 2000 years, may the Lord have mercy on us all.

 

[TimothyH]

in the bible jesus was mostly silent about sexual morality. i think this was because we cant be too legalistic about these things. he even warned us against being legalistic.

Jesus was not silent about sexual morality. It simply isn’t true that he was silent.

*Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and the one who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery. (Luke 16:18)

For you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. (John 4:18)*

Jesus’ first miracle was at a wedding. His first miracle was not at a location where a boyfriend and girlfriend were living together practicing responsible sex, but at a wedding.

Jesus confirms that adultery is a sin.

Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle. They said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. … Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She replied, “No one, sir.” Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on do not sin any more.” (John 8:3-4,10-11)

Jesus speaks about sexual purity.

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (Matthew 5:8)

And he speaks about lust.

You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28)

The Gospels are saturated with Jesus’ teaching about marriage, divorce, adultury, sexual purity and lust.

Sexual morality is one of the major themes of the entire Bible, from the first book of the Bible where Adam and Eve are “Naked and without shame” to the last book of the Bible where an army of white robed virgin’s marches with Jesus.

There is no way anyone who has read Scripture even a little bit can say that Jesus was silent, or “mostly silent” about sexual morality. It simply isn’t true.

-Tim-

 

[someperson555]

That is not why the Church discourages fornication. The Church discourages fornication because it is not procreative in nature. It is merely for pleasure. One cannot separate the procreative and unitary aspect of intercourse from the physical act itself without being in sin.

Furthermore, I do not know how old you are, but I can say with a certain degree of confidence that human beings cannot have sex in a “temperate, responsible fashion.” Especially if they are not married. By virtue of being unwed and engaging in intercourse, they are already highly irresponsible and ill-tempered.

EDIT: The “third way” is not compatible with the Christian lifestyle if it relegates that which is evil, harmful, or sinful, as merely innocuous. On many social issues, the third way is little more than moral relativism. As Catholics, we are called to stand up for faith and morality with an absolute stalwart defence. If the world is going to hate us, and call us extremists for upholding that which has been upheld for 2000 years, may the Lord have mercy on us all.

thats not true, since NFP is having sex just for pleasure. and furthermore, a thing can not be a sin just because its done for pleasure. since pleasure in itself is not evil. there must be a reason behind why the church disapproves of seeking pleasure for itself.
if God would forbid fornication soley because he doesnt want us to feel pleasure, then he is just a bully. but obviously fornication is cautioned against for different reasons. its because it can easily lead to selfishness, but my point is if a person can remain unselfish then he can still experience the pleasure without the sin.
and i assure you, the third way is by no means “moral relativism”. it simply rejects the two extremes which are the extreme permissivism and extreme puritanism. and it is correct in doing so. the bible uses terms like “sexual immorality” which can be interpreted in many diferent ways.

 

[Corki]

ive been thinking about this for a long time now. i think i figured it out. if we deny that sex is intrinsically evil, then we cannot say that it is always a mortal sin. just think about it, if we need a license to engage in sex (marriage) then that would mean that sex is intrinsically evil.

I got stuck on this first premise, which is false. Needed a license has nothing to do with whether something is evil or good. You need a license to practice medicine, practicing medicine isn’t intrinsically evil. You need a license to drive a car, driving isn’t intrinsically evil. You need a license to cut hair professionally, being a barber isn’t evil.

If this is the basis for your theory, the rest of your argument will fail.

 

[McDale721]

Before you get too settled in this erroneus thinking, take the time to better educate yourself about Catholic teaching regarding sex. Sex is holy and sacred and should be treated in amanner that is holy and sacred.

If you were hungry for a snack, you wouldn’t pop open the Tabernacle and eat the Eucharist like potato chips. Similarly, we don’t misuse sex to satisfy a physical desire.

 

[Newsy]

One problem with fornication is that we want pleasure without responsibility. If we want what is best for the other person, then marriage is not too much to offer them. If we want what feels good, right now, then we are using the other person. I think you need to do a little more research on fornication before you go any further. Remember, Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount, if we look at a woman with lust, we have already sinned. That is a lot less than fornication.

Please don’t take offense to this but, if you are a “Catholic through and through”, you should do a little more homework on what the Church teaches and why.

As always, the truth doesn’t need to be justified, if you need to justify something, it’s probably not the truth.

 

[FaithBuild18]

thats not true, since NFP is having sex just for pleasure. and furthermore, a thing can not be a sin just because its done for pleasure. since pleasure in itself is not evil. there must be a reason behind why the church disapproves of seeking pleasure for itself.
if God would forbid fornication soley because he doesnt want us to feel pleasure, then he is just a bully. but obviously fornication is cautioned against for different reasons. its because it can easily lead to selfishness, but my point is if a person can remain unselfish then he can still experience the pleasure without the sin.
and i assure you, the third way is by no means “moral relativism”. it simply rejects the two extremes which are the extreme permissivism and extreme puritanism. and it is correct in doing so. the bible uses terms like “sexual immorality” which can be interpreted in many diferent ways.

NFP is in no way shape or form having sex just for pleasure. It is only valid because it still consists of an openness to life. Others here can and probably will expound on it, and if not you can search the forums for many many posts on it.

God calls us to very, very high standards. Christians and Catholics are called to be some of the toughest sons of guns on Earth. Indeed the world will call our good Lord a bully, and indeed they will call us bullies, but Jesus said that this will happen, and blessed those of us that endure such ridicule.

 

[someperson555]

Jesus was not silent about sexual morality.

Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and the one who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery. (Luke 16:18)

For you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. (John 4:18)

Jesus’ first miracle was at a wedding. His first miracle was not at a location where a boyfriend and girlfriend were living together practicing responsible sex, but at a wedding.

Jesus confirms that adultery is a sin.

Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle. They said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. … Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She replied, “No one, sir.” Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on do not sin any more.” (John 8:3-4,10-11)

Jesus speaks about sexual purity.

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (Matthew 5:8)

And he speaks about lust.

You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28)

The Gospels are saturated with Jesus’ teaching about marriage, divorce, adultury, sexual purity and lust.

Sexual promiscuity, sexual morality is one of the major themes of the entire Bible, from the first book of the Bible where Adam and Eve are “Naked and without shame” to the last book of the Bible where an army of white robed virgin’s marches with God.

There is no way anyone who has read Scripture even a little bit can say that Jesus was silent, or “mostly silent” about sexual morality. It simply isn’t true.

-Tim-

jesus also said in matthew:
“if anyone puts away his wife saving for the cause of fornication, commits adultery”. this implies that he did permit divorce.
and its very interesting if you study the exact wording of that quote about lust. jesus says that if you look at a woman with lust you have commited adultery. now isnt that interesting that he used the word mojnea (adultery) and not pornea (fornication). so he never said that two single people cannot have sexual fantasies about eachother, by the way he used the word "heart’ and the heart usually signifies the “will”, this is different from mere fantasies.
jesus himself was quite vague about the whole thing. and possible for good reason. dont you think if it was that important he would have explicitly forbade it?

 

[LoyalViews]

Jesus was not silent about sexual morality. It simply isn’t true that he was silent.

Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and the one who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery. (Luke 16:18)

For you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband. (John 4:18)

Jesus’ first miracle was at a wedding. His first miracle was not at a location where a boyfriend and girlfriend were living together practicing responsible sex, but at a wedding.

Jesus confirms that adultery is a sin.

Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle. They said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. … Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She replied, “No one, sir.” Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on do not sin any more.” (John 8:3-4,10-11)

Jesus speaks about sexual purity.

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (Matthew 5:8)

And he speaks about lust.

You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28)

The Gospels are saturated with Jesus’ teaching about marriage, divorce, adultury, sexual purity and lust.

Sexual morality is one of the major themes of the entire Bible, from the first book of the Bible where Adam and Eve are “Naked and without shame” to the last book of the Bible where an army of white robed virgin’s marches with Jesus.

There is no way anyone who has read Scripture even a little bit can say that Jesus was silent, or “mostly silent” about sexual morality. It simply isn’t true.

-Tim-

Yes! Excellent answer!

You know, OP, I most say that we do not need a licence to have sex. Marriage is not a licence, but a holy and willingly-entered sacrament. You cannot deny the fact that sex is sacred, and created by God for man+woman, married couples alone.

Having relations outside of marriage is sort of like saying to God “Yes, I know it’s for marriage, but I don’t want to listen to you because I’m going on my own will here. Not Yours”.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

Don’t take this the wrong way, but be careful of cafeteria Catholicism. This sounds like a case where the OP doesn’t particular like the Church’s teaching on fornication, and is trying to justify why said teaching is wrong. I find the Gospels to clearly state the beliefs that Jesus held on fornication.

 

[FaithBuild18]

jesus also said in matthew:
“if anyone puts away his wife saving for the cause of fornication, commits adultery”. this implies that he did permit divorce.
and its very interesting if you study the exact wording of that quote about lust. jesus says that if you look at a woman with lust you have commited adultery. now isnt that interesting that he used the word mojnea (adultery) and not pornea (fornication). so he never said that two single people cannot have sexual fantasies about eachother, by the way he used the word "heart’ and the heart usually signifies the “will”, this is different from mere fantasies.
jesus himself was quite vague about the whole thing. and possible for good reason. dont you think if it was that important he would have explicitly forbade it?

You have misunderstood Matthew 5:32 in its entirety. Jesus infact said that adultery is so terribly evil that it is THE ONLY circumstance in which a man is permitted to divorce his wife. He is not saying “divorce your wife so that you can fornicate with other women,” he is saying “if your wife has committed adultery, then you’re allowed to divorce her.” It is a total and complete condemnation of adultery. It is so dreadfully wicked, twisted, and distorted, that only when a spouse has committed adultery can you divorce yourself from her. This only strengthens the other posts about Jesus’ priority of marriage. Matthew 5:32 speaks of marital unfaithfulness being the lone cause that justifies divorce.

Sexual fantasies are indeed lusting. Thus they are sinful.

 

[FaithBuild18]

Don’t take this the wrong way, but be careful of cafeteria Catholicism. This sounds like a case where the OP doesn’t particular like the Church’s teaching on fornication, and is trying to justify why said teaching is wrong. I find the Gospels to clearly state the beliefs that Jesus held on fornication.

I’m guessing, based on the arguments and the language, that he/she is somewhat young. I tried to do the same thing when I was younger: I wanted to justify my lusts and insatiable compulsions.

 

[someperson555]

Before you get too settled in this erroneus thinking, take the time to better educate yourself about Catholic teaching regarding sex. Sex is holy and sacred and should be treated in amanner that is holy and sacred.

If you were hungry for a snack, you wouldn’t pop open the Tabernacle and eat the Eucharist like potato chips. Similarly, we don’t misuse sex to satisfy a physical desire.

excuse me,
but what do you know about how much i have studied my own faith? i know exactly what catholicism says about sex. i have read humanae vitae. i have read through various biblical passages.
the catholic teaching on sex is that it should be restricted as far as possible. that it should be only within the confines of marriage and even there be as chaste as possible.
so i am well aware of the catholic stance. if sex is holy and sacred then why cant the pope get married, since wouldnt this be a bonus to his holiness?
look, the catholic church is probably well meaning in its laws, but ultimately its an unhealthy repressive approach. and it led to the sexual revolution which is no good either.
the third way makes sense, it even says in the bible to practice moderation in all things…
if you want to believe that sex just for pleasure is a sin, then dont practice NFP. you can rationalise it all you want, but NFP is just sex for pleasure.
by the way sex can be open to procreation between two unmarried persons too.

 

[Newbie2]

ive been thinking about this for a long time now. i think i figured it out. if we deny that sex is intrinsically evil, then we cannot say that it is always a mortal sin. just think about it, if we need a license to engage in sex (marriage) then that would mean that sex is intrinsically evil.
now a good honest philosopher will try to get to the root of the problem. first we must ask, why is it that the church discourages fornication? the answer is simple, because it can easily lead to selfishness which can easily lead to pride which destroys charity.

HOWEVER, if a person can have sex in a temperant responsible fashion, then it shouldnt be a mortal sin.
ive been studying the buddhist concept of ‘the third way’, and i think it makes more sense than the christian teaching. dont get me wrong, im a christian catholic through and through, but i think the buddhist third way is compatible with a christian lifestyle.
in the bible jesus was mostly silent about sexual morality. i think this was because we cant be too legalistic about these things. he even warned us against being legalistic. which is why i came to the conclusion that simple fornication in a relationship between good friends may not always be a mortal sin.
and please understand, i make my argument in the most respectful way, i do not want to offend anyone, i am honestly just searching for the truth. so i would appreciate anyone’s discourse on this matter.

In John 4:18, Jesus makes known to the woman that she has had five husbands and that "he whom (she) now (has) is not your husband. Pretty clear statement about living with a person with whom you are not married, the sex being assumed.

That is not why the Church discourages fornication. The Church discourages fornication because it is not procreative in naturel.

Nope. There are plenty of hookups that end up with the end of procreation.

The notion that Catholic Sacramental marriage is simply a contract or a “license” is where the OP is mistaken. It is much more than that.

That if something is not intrinsically evil = it is not always a mortal sin is a false premise.

The reason the Church prohibits (not discourages!) sex outside of marriage is not because it can lead to selfishness, pride and destroy charity. Sex within marriage can easily lead there as well, if not approached correctly.

There are numerous resources on Marriage, Chastity and Fornication available, but methinks the best and easiest place to start is the CCC.

 

[someperson555]

I got stuck on this first premise, which is false. Needed a license has nothing to do with whether something is evil or good. You need a license to practice medicine, practicing medicine isn’t intrinsically evil. You need a license to drive a car, driving isn’t intrinsically evil. You need a license to cut hair professionally, being a barber isn’t evil.

If this is the basis for your theory, the rest of your argument will fail.

cutting hair without a license is not a sin, driving a car without a license is not a sin.
if we need a license to have sex, then we must conclude that sex is unnatural, it was not a part of God’s original plan, therefore the gnostics are right, sex is evil.

 

[underacloud]

first we must ask, why is it that the church discourages fornication? the answer is simple, because it can easily lead to selfishness which can easily lead to pride which destroys charity.

Way off track here. I think you’d better gain a deeper understanding of the Church’s position before drawing conclusions that fornication is somoehow OK on occasion.

Please read the entirety of the following link:

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm

As for what the Church actually says regarding fofnication, here:

“2353 Fornication is carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. It is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children. Moreover, it is a grave scandal when there is corruption of the young.”

This needs to be understood within the context of the entire section I have linked to, but essentially fornication is wrong as it not the appropriate context for sex. Sex belongs in marriage, where it strenghtens a bond between people who have committed to each other for life, and it provides for the generation and care of children. Fornication is contrary to both of these purposes of sex.

 

[FaithBuild18]

Nope. There are plenty of hookups that end up with the end of procreation.

That’s not why the two “adults” hooked up. They hooked up for either fornicative or adulterous, not procreative purposes.

 

[someperson555]

In John 4:18, Jesus makes known to the woman that she has had five husbands and that "he whom (she) now (has) is not your husband. Pretty clear statement about living with a person with whom you are not married, the sex being assumed.

Nope. There are plenty of hookups that end up with the end of procreation.

The notion that Catholic Sacramental marriage is simply a contract or a “license” is where the OP is mistaken. It is much more than that.

That if something is not intrinsically evil = it is not always a mortal sin is a false premise.

The reason the Church prohibits (not discourages!) sex outside of marriage is not because it can lead to selfishness, pride and destroy charity. Sex within marriage can easily lead there as well, if not approached correctly.

There are numerous resources on Marriage, Chastity and Fornication available, but methinks the best and easiest place to start is the CCC.

so then why is fornication a sin?
if its not because of selfishness, then why?
again, im not trying to be disrespectful in the least, im just honestly asking.

 

[FaithBuild18]

so then why is fornication a sin?
if its not because of selfishness, then why?
again, im not trying to be disrespectful in the least, im just honestly asking.

Why are you willing to accept that selfishness is a sin?

I’m not saying that selfishness is not a sin, I’m just wondering why you refuse to admit one concept as sinful yet do not refrain from admitting that another is.

EDIT: To directly provide an answer, as posted above by another user:

“2353 Fornication is carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. It is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children. Moreover, it is a grave scandal when there is corruption of the young.”