Making Out

[southern california guy]

If you like it, it's wrong.

Ever.

There must be NO human intimacy or companionship. You must stoically go through life as a loner -- which is very pleasing to God. You must deprive yourself of intimacy and companionship with the opposite sex, because that is one of the best things that life has to offer.

[Lilllabettt]

This is a popular view but not the theological view.  Check out the moral theology manuals and read up on venereal pleasure and formal element of virginity.  Masturbation, french kissing, and other actions lead to venereal pleasure. 

 

ABC I have read about the theology behind the pov you are proposing.  I understand it but simply disagree.

 

I do not think virginity is lost by willful experience of venereal pleasure, even if it does result in a loss of sanctifying grace. I think virginity is lost by willful experience of body/soul union with another person. That to me is the definition of sex. The experience of pleasure accompanying that union is entirely tangential. A virgin is someone who forsakes this union with created persons in favor of union with the divine persons. The key experience is willed intimacy - not willed pleasure.

 

I do not think a person can give their virginity to their hand, or a pillow or a porn magazine. I believe it must be offered to and received by another person.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Lilllabettt

[NotreDame]

SC Guy, et al....

 

I get the joking and I do find it amusing, but I want to point out that remaining chaste (ie. abstaining from the venereal pleasure, or whatever, that ABC mentions) is not Manichean at all, ie. it's not really black and white, not really avoiding all earthly pleasures.

 

For instance, we would all probably admit that sex isn't like alcohol or food.  Alcohol and food are good in moderation, but go overboard (especially with alcohol) and you'll regret it and wish you hadn't.  (For the record, deep-down I never trust anyone who doesn't drink unless they are honest about why - and "I don't like the way it taste" doesn't count as honest.)

 

Sex, however, isn't about moderation, it's more about situation, sort of a binary "1" or "0".  Having sex even once, briefly in the wrong situation can have major negative consequences and regrets (financial, physical, emotional, spiritual.)  So if you define ahead of time when is appropriate and when is innappropriate, you avoid the latter, altogether; you can't just say "I'm going to just have one glass of sex tonight, then cut me off."  It's not denying pleasure, it's choosing happiness & peace.  

[Selah]

"I'm going to just have one glass of sex tonight, then cut me off."

 

 

I know you were trying to be serious, and I am so sorry, but I lol'd so hard I scared the cat.

[NotreDame]

I know you were trying to be serious, and I am so sorry, but I lol'd so hard I scared the cat.

Good.  I've gotten a kick out of these posts as well.  Just wanted to make the point that being chaste doesn't mean being a prude, it means choosing long-term happiness. 

[Slappo]

No matter the legal issues Josh Harris is having, it doesn't mean what he said in the book is suddenly wrong. I'm not saying that he's right, but it just annoys me when people are like "Oh, this guy is in legal trouble/did this, therefore his book is no longer valid." If having legal issues invalidates what you say, I suppose we shouldn't listen to that Jesus guy.

Just so you know, depending on the circumstances, we really aren't encouraged to continue to read or endorse books/materials by those caught up in scandal. Fr. John Corapi is a good example. I have some of his materials from before the scandal broke out, but I won't watch them anymore, and certainly won't sell them to someone else. It would actually be possibly sinful for me to sell/distribute his materials as it could exacerbate the scandal.

[PhuturePriest]

Just so you know, depending on the circumstances, we really aren't encouraged to continue to read or endorse books/materials by those caught up in scandal. Fr. John Corapi is a good example. I have some of his materials from before the scandal broke out, but I won't watch them anymore, and certainly won't sell them to someone else. It would actually be possibly sinful for me to sell/distribute his materials as it could exacerbate the scandal.

 

I was told by priests that watching Father Corapi's works is fine, because what happened didn't invalidate anything right he said.

 

Besides, last I heard he was in a monastery somewhere. That might not be true, but I think I heard it on EWTN.

[NotreDame]

Just so you know, depending on the circumstances, we really aren't encouraged to continue to read or endorse books/materials by those caught up in scandal. Fr. John Corapi is a good example. I have some of his materials from before the scandal broke out, but I won't watch them anymore, and certainly won't sell them to someone else. It would actually be possibly sinful for me to sell/distribute his materials as it could exacerbate the scandal.

 

At the same time, stupid books are stupid even if the person writing them is a saint.  Objective truth transcends man, it doesn't depend on him.  We can't cede our reason to people we admire.  alelluia.
 

[Slappo]

I was told by priests that watching Father Corapi's works is fine, because what happened didn't invalidate anything right he said.

Well it is correct that anything true that Fr. Corapi said is still true, it calls into question his entire line of apologetics and you have to ask yourself "is this true?" instead of relying on his position of authority to teach as a shepherd. The real questions you have to ask is if the materials are still edifying and can you sift truth from lies?

 

Anyways, Fr. Corapi is a whole nother topic. The point is, just because scandal happens after the fact, doesn't mean the material published before the fact is still legit because it was published beforehand. Scandal often represents an underlying problem. I haven't read about the sexual abuse scandal with Mr. Harris' church, so my scenario has nothing to do with that. Take into consideration someone who is revealed to be a pedophile. Typically they don't just wake up one morning and say "im gonna rape kids!" It's a deep seated tendancy/inclination/disorder that would impact more than just their actions to little children, and it would be present before the crimes were actually committed.

[PhuturePriest]

Well it is correct that anything true that Fr. Corapi said is still true, it calls into question his entire line of apologetics and you have to ask yourself "is this true?" instead of relying on his position of authority to teach as a shepherd. The real questions you have to ask is if the materials are still edifying and can you sift truth from lies?

 

Anyways, Fr. Corapi is a whole nother topic. The point is, just because scandal happens after the fact, doesn't mean the material published before the fact is still legit because it was published beforehand. Scandal often represents an underlying problem. I haven't read about the sexual abuse scandal with Mr. Harris' church, so my scenario has nothing to do with that. Take into consideration someone who is revealed to be a pedophile. Typically they don't just wake up one morning and say "im gonna rape kids!" It's a deep seated tendancy/inclination/disorder that would impact more than just their actions to little children, and it would be present before the crimes were actually committed.

 

I honestly don't see how him being weak and falling into greed and lust affects his theology. He was revered far and wide for being a good and solid Catholic. His being weak doesn't change the fact that he never said anything contrary to Church teaching and that he helped a lot of people come back to the faith.

[NotreDame]

Well it is correct that anything true that Fr. Corapi said is still true, it calls into question his entire line of apologetics and you have to ask yourself "is this true?" instead of relying on his position of authority to teach as a shepherd. The real questions you have to ask is if the materials are still edifying and can you sift truth from lies?

Isn't it the imprimatur and Nihil Obstat, rather than position, that certify the consistency with Church teaching?  It's not clear to me that solely being a priest gives one any authority to write books and be believed on that basis.

[Nihil Obstat]

Isn't it the imprimatur and Nihil Obstat, rather than position, that certify the consistency with Church teaching?  It's not clear to me that solely being a priest gives one any authority to write books and be believed on that basis.

Many crummy books, damaging to faith and morals, have received both stamps in the past.

[southern california guy]

I totally agree with you guys. I get frustrated because sometimes it seems that there is very little discussion of anything of substance. The "Christian" and Catholic talks I have heard about "sex" and dating seem to focus too much on masterbation. I thought that video the guy did on Youtube was pretty good -- and I don't know that he mentioned masterbation even once.

I've heard what you need to say to get out of a marriage -- to get an annulment -- but I have heard little discussion about what it takes to make a good marriage. And on "Raising small children" forum some people are discussing NFP(natural family planning). I confess I only vaguely know what it is and I don't really know how it is done. I have never heard it discussed in detail.

[Slappo]

Isn't it the imprimatur and Nihil Obstat, rather than position, that certify the consistency with Church teaching?  It's not clear to me that solely being a priest gives one any authority to write books and be believed on that basis.

The Nihil Obstat and Impramatur are kind of handed out like candy nowadays. Along with that, they are more directed towards doctrine and dogma.

 

What about Fr. Corapi's feel good stories about being injured in the army and whatnot? Are those true? The theologians reviewing his work before stamping it with a nihil obstat and impramatur weren't looking at that kind of stuff. What about his conversion story where he talks about how a priest told him to just poor out the precious blood and he says God told him that's not a priest? Did God actually give him some inkling or voice in his head, or does he say that to emphasize and score feel good points with conservative Catholics?

[Slappo]

I honestly don't see how him being weak and falling into greed and lust affects his theology. He was revered far and wide for being a good and solid Catholic. His being weak doesn't change the fact that he never said anything contrary to Church teaching and that he helped a lot of people come back to the faith.

A lot of what he talks about isn't theology. It's about how to live your life as a Catholic. It's stories about him and what brought him to the faith, or parts of his faith journey. It's advice on how to pray. None of that is sealed with some imprimatur or nihil obstat that says "yes he is right that is how you should pray", or "yes that actually happened to him and was the cause of his conversion".

 

You don't have to say something contrary to Church teaching to tell lies, be deceptive, or lead someone astray.

 

I don't discount the fact that his talked helped a lot of people, but at the same time, knowing that while he was giving those talks, he was living an entirely different life, those talks are no longer edifying for me and many others. Listening to Fr. Corapi tell me lust is bad knowing that while he was saying that he was sleeping around as a priest... just not quite the same.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Slappo