Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion related to learning about the faith (Catechetics), defense of the Faith (Apologetics), the Liturgy and canon law, motivated by a desire to grow closer to Christ or to bring someone else closer.

Saint Augustine of Hippo is considered on of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time and the Doctor of the Church.
Learn More: Saint Augustine

Mar 8th 2013 new

(Quote) Sheila-371804 said: (author's comments preceded by ">")
(Quote) Sheila-371804 said:

(author's comments preceded by ">")

--hide--

> It seems to me if you want to avoid any feelings of lust, and temptation, theoretically you should ideally refrain from listening to suggestive love songs

Absolutely. This isn't to say that listening to suggestive songs is necessarily a grave sin, but they can stir up feelings that, through a chain of events, eventually leads to a gravely sinful situation. The real question we need to ask ourselves is does listening to such songs bring us closer to God?

> with lyrics such as, for example, like the one's you posted on my recent thread ("Baby it's cold outside Favorite Cuddling Song " )

Every single on of us is a sinner and I suspect most of us sin far more frequently than we realize. The fact than a person doesn't always live up to an objective moral standard does not change the fact that the standard exists. The purpose of topics such as this is to discuss moral principles and to help people understand them so they can, if they choose, correct their faults -- not to publicly flog people for their sins.

> It seems possible to me that such lyrics might lead to feelings of lust and desire whereby it's very nature risk's the possibility of awakening the dreaded libido, and subjecting an unfortunate soul to the shame and damnation of a Mortal sin

True enough.

> therefore what is one to do censor every possible sensory stimuli we are exposed to on a daily basis.

Your conclusion doesn't follow from the premise above.

The moral requirement is to avoid willfully placing oneself in the near occasion of sin unless there is a proportionate necessity for doing so. For example:

(a) To intentionally look at pornography is immoral.

(b) If one starts looking at a porn magazine not realizing what it is, there is no sin unless they continue looking once the nature of the material is known to them.

(c) It is morally licit for a police office on the vice squad to look at porn if they do so as a required part of their job responsibility (the proportionate necessity). If, however, a person finds that this exposure leads them to other sins (e.g., masturbation), they would be morally required to attempt to transfer to another job that does not lead them to sin.

In the case of passionate kissing:

(a) It can be reasonably anticipated that such kissing will result in sexual feelings.

(b) Such feelings are not morally licit for a person to to intentionally evoke with someone other than their spouse.

(c) There is normally no necessity for a person to engage in such kissing other than with their spouse.

As we all know, sometimes these feelings can occur unexpectedly. Such temptations are not sinful as long as we make the effort to remove ourselves from the source, if possible.

> I also take issue with mere mortals having no control over bodily function's, if that were an accurate statement we would all be wearing diapers ! absurd !

Where was it suggested that we do not have control over bodily functions?

> Everyone has free will

I'm not sure what the point is? Free will is not free license -- there are many things we can do that we shouldn't.

> and can differentiate between right and wrong,

Not always. Not only are there many who have not received proper moral formation who have been incorrectly directed by those in a position of moral authority.

> if that were not so, we would all be Neanderthal's with car keys, and a Blackberry !

In many cases, we are.

> Finally, I have heard countless theories, and viewpoints from my fellow Catholic Match peers, on the interpretation of the Bible's content,

Bernard's source was a recorded homily of a Catholic priest - their was no interpretation on Bernard's part.

> and while some have enlightened me immeasurably, other appeared to be unduly, harsh, punitive, and excessively judgemental !

This could be due to fault on the part of the speaker or the listener.

> That is precisely why when I have a question regarding the Bible I seek the advice of my own ordained Parish Catholic Priest,

Unfortunately, there are many Catholic priests who give very bad advice on moral issues, as several others have documented in this topic.

> not some over zealous pious CM member attempting to impose his/her opinion on me !

Moral teachings of the Church are not personal opinions. For example, in this topic we have a priest citing very well established Catholic doctrine.

> I joined CM to have an enjoyable experience in a non judgemental relaxing and supportive atmosphere,

Our faith MANDATES that we be judgmental of objective morality; what is prohibited is judging the state of others' souls. The difference being saying 'x' is a grave sin and saying that person A is going to hell because they did 'x'.

I will also point out that there are many who joined Catholic Match to be in an environment that is supportive of their faith, not to be ridiculed for expressing and supporting the Faith by those attempting to justify moral relativism and secular cultural norms.


Mar 8th 2013 new

Thank you Jerry, for reinforcing all my initial beliefs in my original post. Your opinions in my mind are essentially irrelevant and non existent, therefore when you feel the urge to pontificate to some other CM member, I suggest you chose one who will listen.

Mar 8th 2013 new

Mission accomplished , message received ! moving forward, enough said.

Mar 8th 2013 new

Jerry, do you now have all CM members communication devices wire tapped and under surveillance, It is none of your business what I listen too, or any discussions I have with my Parish Priest ! Your intrusiveness into someone else's life not to mention, sense of entitlement to one's privacy is truly disturbing !

Mar 8th 2013 new

(Quote) Sheila-371804 said: (Quote) Jerry-74383 said: (Quote) Sheila-371804 said:...
(Quote) Sheila-371804 said:

Quote:
Jerry-74383 said:

Quote:
Sheila-371804 said:

Thank you Emily, I'm grateful you understood my point. A MORTAL SIN for kissing or holding hands with your significant other. It is incomprehensible to me, and contrary to what I was taught by our Parish Priest.


The fact you don't understand it doesn't make it wrong. Have you listened to the sermons and made an effort to understand them rather than looking for ways to ridicule the message? If you think you can discredit them, why not do so with facts rather than appeals to emotion?

What exactly did you parish priest say? And what is the basis in moral theology supporting his opinion?


Jerry, do you now have all CM members communication devices wire tapped and under surveillance, It is none of your business what I listen too, or any discussions I have with my Parish Priest ! Your intrusiveness into someone else's life not to mention, sense of entitlement to one's privacy is truly disturbing !

--hide--

Frankly, I find your response rather disingenuous. I think it's clear from the context that I was inquiring about his explanation of the objective moral nature of the acts; your personal conduct was not mentioned in either your first response nor mine, so I am baffled at why you suddenly introduced in in your response to me.

We have been discussing the objective moral nature of certain acts (intimate kissing; you were the one who introduced hand holding, apparently in an attempt to discredit the arguments against intimate kissing). The homily Bernard provided cited well-defined moral doctrine of the Church (the decree by Pope Alexander VII is in Denzinger's The Sources of Catholic Dogma at 1140). You were the one who attempted to use a statement by your parish priest as a source of moral authority to refute this point; I certainly think it is fair to ask what he said rather than relying on your assessment that he disagrees.

You are an intelligent adult; it didn't even occur to me at the time that you would not be able to separate the objective aspects of hi statement (those that pertain to the nature of the act itself) from the subjective contact (those aspects that pertain to you personally).

You are free to live your life in whatever manner you choose. This doesn't mean there won't eventually be consequences, but that's a personal matter for you to deal with.

If you wish to ignore the moral discussions on CM, feel free to do so. However, if you make public statements in the forums that are contrary to the teaching of the Church on matters of morality or theology, you have to expect they will be challenged. If you are not willing or able to back up personal opinions, it might be best to keep them personal.

Mar 8th 2013 new

(Quote) Jacqueline-556574 said: Kissing is a mortal sin? I am inclined to think that NOT kissing is...
(Quote) Jacqueline-556574 said:

Kissing is a mortal sin?

I am inclined to think that NOT kissing is a sin in Catholic dating.

--hide--

What Church teaching supports this assertion?

Mar 8th 2013 new

(Quote) Lisa-54615 said: CCC can't possibly list each and every sin out there and classify each as mortal/venia...
(Quote) Lisa-54615 said:

CCC can't possibly list each and every sin out there and classify each as mortal/venial. My understanding is that all sexual sins/sins of the flesh are by default grave matter (and mortal sins when the other requirements for mortal sins are met). So this is why passionate kissing is a mortal sin - it falls under the sexual sins category.

CCC is a great resource to learn about our faith, but it's not the only resource out there. If that were true, there would be no need for papal encyclicals and other such works that teach us about the various aspects of our faith. So if you truly want to understand this topic, you may want to read other materials, with an open mind. Theology of the Body is a great place to start. For a super-easy fun to read book based on TOB principles, try Good News About Sex and Marriage by Christopher West. That little book changed my life. I wish I read it before I got married, not after.

--hide--




Ahhh...and back to the issue.

Here is what I was taught, and firmly hold to be true. A venial sin, even a near occasion of sin CAN be a mortal sin if it leads to mortal sin. And I believe this is where everything begins to become different for each individual. I can listen to Cole Porter, some of his songs are in the 1930's ways slightly suggestive. It does not even CAUSE me to think about intimacy with my boyfriend. However, when I watch a really suggestive movie together....it could bring my defenses down. But what we must remember is what Christ teaches about what "love" is....because that is the difference between virtue and sin. Sin is a separation from the love of God, or simply from "love". Loving someone isn't just a feeling but a genuine will for the good, both spiritually and physically of the other person. If we are careless about how we kiss we can put at risk the other persons, or our chastity at risk. And when that becomes true, our kisses lack love, they are selfish. We are enjoying them but we aren't thinking that the other person might become aroused. I remember being told very young by my mother that men become much more easily aroused than women, and I must always be careful not to forget that. Sadly, I didn't believe her and until recent years didn't figure it out. But now I do not consider it kind to really "make-out" at the expense of the guy. Simply because me becoming aroused would occur much later. So when we stop caring about leading the other person into sin seems to be where the sin begins. And I think that is probably a little different for each person. I can tell after dating awhile when a guy is becoming too excited. I can stop, and this is good. But it's a lie to ourselves if we can say that we can kiss as much as we want without getting aroused....I think if that were true we probably shouldn't be dating that person. Anyway, I think the goal is to think of sin not so much as "you did something wrong"...but as a "separation from love"...or simply..."not loving". Because when I think of it that way, it becomes much easier for me to figure out what a sin is. Is what I'm doing going to end up bad for myself or for the other person? I usually try to put the responsibility on myself, because I can't tell when the other persons responsibility is going to kick in.

Mar 8th 2013 new

(Quote) Monica-730858 said: Audiosancto is a fantastic site. I've listened to countless homilies on there. If y...
(Quote) Monica-730858 said:

Audiosancto is a fantastic site. I've listened to countless homilies on there. If you like this particular priest, you can find a lot of his homilies in 2003. Other sites I've found very helpful are fisheaters.com and churchmilitant.tv. If you pay $10/month to churchmilitant.tv you can watch all kinds of great stuff. It's well worth the $. You learn everything you should have been taught in Catechetics and/or RCIA for converts but weren't. It made me sad to realize how much I wasn't taught in my RCIA class, they were even so bold as to say that there's probably no one in hell. Lord have mercy!!

--hide--

To this list I add www.sensustraditionis.org (note the Penanceware terms at the top of the page as well as the restrictions on reposting links directly to the audio content)

Mar 8th 2013 new

(Quote) Monica-730858 said: Funny that you mention Lincoln, I have a phone interview with a company there today! I'm 5 h...
(Quote) Monica-730858 said:

Funny that you mention Lincoln, I have a phone interview with a company there today! I'm 5 hours away right now but I've been there a couple of times. Beautiful parish, not to mention the seminary!

--hide--

If you get to the parish church, please tell Fr. McCambridge I said hello (he was our associate padtor several years ago).

Mar 8th 2013 new

(Quote) Tom-112790 said: Lincoln is the french kissing capitol of the usa
(Quote) Tom-112790 said:

Lincoln is the french kissing capitol of the usa
--hide--

Care to explain?

 

Posts 71 - 80 of 163