Morality -- According To Me

[southern california guy]

I have to pose the question, [b]"Could the Catholic church save many of the Catholic marriages -- that end in divorce and annulment -- with counseling?"[/b]

[Norseman82]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1287943496' post='2182083']
I have to pose the question, [b]"Could the Catholic church save many of the Catholic marriages -- that end in divorce and annulment -- with counseling?"[/b]
[/quote]

I would not doubt that could true in many cases.

However, that is a more a question of enforcement and practice rather than doctrine.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1287943752' post='2182084']
I would not doubt that could true in many cases.

However, that is a more a question of enforcement and practice rather than doctrine.
[/quote]

So a marriage that never really existed can be saved? In another thread Catherine wrote:

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1287438168' post='2180507']
An annulment simply recognizes that a true sacramental marriage did not take place. Most of the ones I saw were granted because the parties weren't mature enough to know what they were really getting into. It had nothing to do with their ages. [b]There are probably loads of people who could qualify for annulments, but they never divorce. At some point in their relationship, they figured it out, grew up, got better catechized, etc., and made their marriages into strong ones. [/b] The tribunal only looks at the moment of the marriage, not what comes later. If it is a good marriage at the start, but falls apart later, no annulment.
[/quote]

So at some point did those marriages that were made stronger become "valid"? Shouldn't the Catholic church be working towards strengthening the marriages of their members rather than putting time energy and money into patting them on the back, reassuring them that their marriage was never "valid" and telling them that they can marry again?

[southern california guy]

I could have also listed abortion as something that I'm opposed to.

One of the reasons that I decided not to join the Mormons had to do with their position on abortion. Their CHURCH HANDBOOK OF INSTRUCTIONS (A guide for each member who serves as Bishop) says "Abortion is forbidden except for cases of rape, incest, or danger to health". The loophole is that "health" can include "mental health". So are they really opposed to abortion? Different members will give you different opinions.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1287941442' post='2182064']
Catholic Annulments are contrary to what Jesus taught about divorce and remarriage. The "divorce" that the pharisees referred to was a Jewish divorce. It was done so that the person could remarry. That is exactly why an annulment is done. There was no talk by Jesus of whether or not the marriage was "valid". The validity argument is merely a loophole devised by the Catholic church. There's nothing moral about it. The Catholic church is supporting divorce through this argument. The Catholic church is helping to end the marriage rather than save it, and the children are paying the price. The Catholic church is supporting adultery. [b]Why doesn't the Catholic church believe in marriage counseling?????
[/b]

What percentage of the Catholic marriages that ended in an annulment could have been saved by counseling? It seems that counseling and support would be a better function of the church.
[/quote]

The Church does support counseling. The problem is that most people don't seek it, or refuse it when it is offered.

This is an enormous issue for me. That's why I'm in school right now. I plan to start a program of counseling/mediation for those seeking annulments. I seem to have said this more times lately than I would have believed possible, but the Pope is right. We are granting too many annulments. Everyone assumes that means the annulment process is at fault. That's not where the main problem is. The problem is on the marriage side.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1287945088' post='2182092']
The problem is on the marriage side.
[/quote]

Would you please expand on that?

Edited October 24, 2010 by Norseman82

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1287941442' post='2182064']
Catholic Annulments are contrary to what Jesus taught about divorce and remarriage. The "divorce" that the pharisees referred to was a Jewish divorce. It was done so that the person could remarry. That is exactly why an annulment is done. There was no talk by Jesus of whether or not the marriage was "valid". The validity argument is merely a loophole devised by the Catholic church. There's nothing moral about it. The Catholic church is supporting divorce through this argument. The Catholic church is helping to end the marriage rather than save it, and the children are paying the price. The Catholic church is supporting adultery. [b]Why doesn't the Catholic church believe in marriage counseling?????[/b]

What percentage of the Catholic marriages that ended in an annulment could have been saved by counseling? It seems that counseling and support would be a better function of the church.
[/quote]

Southern,

Annulments are not contrary to what Jesus said about [i]true marriages.[/i] Jesus was talking about true marriages.

For example, what are the two ends of marriage? Unity of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring. Say one party does not want children, but lies to his spouse about wanting children. He says the words "to accept Children from God lovingly," but never really intends to follow through on them. If a priest says the words of consecration without the intent to change the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, what happens? Nothing. The consecration doesn't happen. Same deal if he uses raisin bread instead of bread made of wheat and water. If you say an act of contrition, and a priest says the words of absolution in the confessional, but you have every intention of committing the same sins as soon as you leave? You weren't forgiven. If someone says the words of baptism, but uses Coca Cola instead of water? There was no baptism. There was no sacrament. Does that better clarify what an annulment is? It an official acknowledgment that the sacrament was not, in fact, conferred.

If there was no marriage, the marriage could not be saved. Counseling could lead to those people truly making their vows with the intention of adhering to them, but it could not "save" a non-existent marriage, any more than counseling could make you retroactively sorry for your sins and have a firm purpose of never sinning again, and thus retroactively make your visit to the confessional a sacramental confession.

Is the annulment process abused? All the time. Is it being [i]treated [/i]as though it were a "Catholic divorce?" Absolutely. And it is a scandal. I'm right there with you on that. But it does have a legitimate purpose.

~Sternhauser

Edited October 24, 2010 by Sternhauser

[MithLuin]

What makes you think that Catholics don't go to marriage counseling? I know many Catholic couples who have sought out counseling when their marriage was on the rocks.

In my own family, my uncle pleaded with my aunt to get counseling with him, but she wasn't interested (and was having an affair, so wanted to move in with her boyfriend anyway). Another aunt and uncle went through an extremely difficult 7 years while my uncle was dying of cancer (lymphoma that got into his brain). The brain tumor made him very unstable, and not the man he was. At various times over those 7 years, one or the other of them wanted a divorce...but they did get help to get through some of that. When he died, they were married.

It seems that you are suggesting that the Catholic Church does not recognize the value of marriage. To the contrary, the Church takes Jesus' words [i]very[/i] seriously.

[quote]Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?"

And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, `FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH'? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."

They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?"

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry."

But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

[i]Matthew 19: 3-12[/i][/quote]

The ALL CAPS parts are references to the Old Testament.

I think that it is important to understand what Jesus is saying. He is saying that marriage is indissoluble and that in marriage, the husband and wife become one flesh - their union is formed by God, who joins them together. When my parents got engaged, they had some issues with the 'I' vs 'we' aspect of marriage. During the rather rocky first year of marriage, they ironed them out, so that 'us' became their secret password. They learned that you had to do things together and grow together, and they have a very happy and loving marriage (33+ years).

But even Jesus, in his very explicit rejection of divorce, allows a reason for a husband and wife to separate - this translation says 'immorality' while others have 'adultery'. So even the words of Jesus in the Bible make it clear that [i]in some cases[/i] the marriage does [i]not[/i] last....and it is lawful to go your separate ways.

Annulments are recognition of this. A church that never allowed for any exceptions to the rule would be more strict than the word of God, which is likely being unduly harsh. I think it important that we recognize that there is a place for an annulment.

Now, does that mean annulments can't be abused? That people can't [i]treat[/i] them like a divorce? No, of course not. But if you don't like them, then...don't get one. Don't marry someone who has gotten one. I think that is a very easy solution for those who are uncomfortable with the idea of Catholic annulments. Almost all Christians agree that a widow [i]may[/i] remarry. There is no reason she can't. But...she doesn't have to. Just because someone is free to marry doesn't mean they have to. So, likewise...those who are separated from their spouses may live as an unmarried widow/widower if they wish, and if they never remarry, they have hardly committed adultery. If you don't want to allow for divorce or annulment or any second marriage...don't get one.


And [b]SCG[/b], you must be one of the few people in the world today who thinks the Catholic Church doesn't take a strict enough stance on the dangers of a homosexual lifestyle! All human beings have dignity, but sin is sin, and the Church doesn't white wash that. In case you are unaware of the Church's teaching on this topic....

[quote='The Catechism of the Catholic Church']Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,* [b]tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."[/b] They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. [b]Under no circumstances can they be approved.[/b]

The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

* Cf. Gen 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10

[i]The Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 2357-2359[/i][/quote]

And from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith,
[quote]At the present time there are those who, basing themselves on observations in the psychological order, have begun to judge indulgently, and even to excuse completely, homosexual relations between certain people. This they do in opposition to the constant teaching of the Magisterium and to the moral sense of the Christian people.

A distinction is drawn, and it seems with some reason, between homosexuals whose tendency comes from a false education, from a lack of normal sexual development, from habit, from bad example, or from other similar causes, and is transitory or at least not incurable; and homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable.

In regard to this second category of subjects, some people conclude that their tendency is so natural that it justifies in their case homosexual relations within a sincere communion of life and love analogous to marriage, in so far as such homosexuals feel incapable of enduring a solitary life.

In the pastoral field, these homosexuals must certainly be treated with understanding and sustained in the hope of overcoming their personal difficulties and their inability to fit into society. Their culpability will be judged with prudence. [b]But no pastoral method can be employed which would give moral justification to these acts on the grounds that they would be consonant with the condition of such people. For according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality.[/b] In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God.* This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that [b]homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of.[/b]

* Rom 1:24-27 "That is why God left them to their filthy enjoyments and the practices with which they dishonor their own bodies since they have given up Divine truth for a lie and have worshipped and served creatures instead of the Creator, Who is blessed forever. Amen! That is why God has abandoned them to degrading passions; why their women have turned from natural intercourse to unnatural practices and why their menfolk have given up natural intercourse to be consumed with passion for each other, men doing shameless things with men and getting an appropriate reward for their perversion" See also what St. Paul says of "masculorum concubitores" in I Cor 6:10; I Tim 1:10.

[i]Persona Humana, 1975[/i]
[/quote]

So, do you agree with these moral precepts, as taught by the Catholic Church?

[Norseman82]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1287947032' post='2182104']
And [b]SCG[/b], you must be one of the few people in the world today who thinks the Catholic Church doesn't take a strict enough stance on the dangers of a homosexual lifestyle! All human beings have dignity, but sin is sin, and the Church doesn't white wash that. [/quote]

Remember, he lives in California. The Catholics he meets there may not be the most orthodox, if I recall some of his initial posts correctly when he first joined here.

Edited October 24, 2010 by Norseman82

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1287945732' post='2182095']
Would you please expand on that?
[/quote]
When we say that too many annulments are being granted, we imply that many of the annulments are in error. I don't believe that. I believe that so many annulments are being granted simply because too many weddings are being done where no real marriage is occurring. This is due to poor catechism, poor marriage preparation, pressure on priests to marry those they have doubts about, and a culture that teaches young people that marriage isn't forever. If you don't accept that a marriage is forever, then you can't make a valid marriage bond.

[Jaime]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1287948217' post='2182115']
When we say that too many annulments are being granted, we imply that many of the annulments are in error. I don't believe that. I believe that so many annulments are being granted simply because too many weddings are being done where no real marriage is occurring. This is due to poor catechism, poor marriage preparation, pressure on priests to marry those they have doubts about, and a culture that teaches young people that marriage isn't forever. If you don't accept that a marriage is forever, then you can't make a valid marriage bond.
[/quote]

You are one of the most awesomest people ever

[CatherineM]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1287951639' post='2182131']
You are one of the most awesomest people ever
[/quote]
SShhhhh. My husband's in the room.

[MithLuin]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1287947228' post='2182107']
Remember, he lives in California. The Catholics he meets there may not be the most orthodox, if I recall some of his initial posts correctly when he first joined here.
[/quote]

True, true. He mentioned Washington state too. I know there are places where many of the parishioners (and even the priests) are a bit 'out there' when it comes to what the Church actually teaches. So, if you've met people who call themselves Catholic, but then are in major disagreement with the Church, I can see how you would be a bit jaded about the Church practicing what she preaches.

Still, to then come here and post a bunch of things that are actually perfectly in line with Catholic doctrine and say 'I disagree with the Church' is a bit silly, since we can turn around and say, 'Tough. The Church agrees with you (for the most part).'

[havok579257]

i believe everything the catholic church teaches. i am a catholic.

anyone who does not believe and agree with everything the catholic church teaches is not a catholic, its that simple.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1287972323' post='2182209']
i believe everything the catholic church teaches. i am a catholic.
[/quote]
Ditto (and bears repeating). If I find something that makes me think I'm in disagreement, I ask questions and research to understand the position of the Church, and I choose to follow it regardless of understanding.

[HopefulBride]

[quote name='MissScripture' timestamp='1287938294' post='2182052']
I sincerely don't mean this as any sort of attack, but just as a sincere question:

You have commented in the past that you've looked into other denominations/religions (various forms of protestants, mormons, etc), but how much time have you spent learning what the Church TRULY teaches and not just what some priests did that you didn't like (like Dignity Masses)? I mean, some of this stuff, after you say you'll never hear this in a Church, are things that I HAVE heard in Church, and some of it seems like a misunderstanding of what the Church ACTUALLY teaches that you're against, not the actual Church teaching.

Like I said, I'm not trying to attack you, but I think it may do you well to look further into what the Church teaches instead of rejecting some things out of hand.
[/quote]

MS, I agree with your line of questioning and SoCal not an attack on you but I do wonder if you TRULY understand what it means to be Catholic. I ask that because it seems to me that what you are interpreting as Catholic living and Catholic teaching is in fact not.

May the Holy Spirit guide you to the truth.

Edited October 25, 2010 by HopefulBride

[Lil Red]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1287941442' post='2182064'] [b]Why doesn't the Catholic church believe in marriage counseling?????[/b][/quote]
it does.

[Ed Normile]

The church has marriage counseling, it also demands pre-cana classes before marriage. I liken it to the person who gets all the way through school and still is ignorant of much they should have learned. People are not perfect, that said the church is made up of people from the hiearchy to the pew setters, and God knows us all. I know one thing though, you are not supposed to as a catholic, particpate in any other religious meeting as in a church, it implies a communion with that faith we do not share. This in effect lessens your belief in the primacy of the Catholic Church. SoCalGuy, you seem to have some issues with the church, thats between you and God but I promise I will pray for your fully joining in the Communion of the Saints.

ed

[Socrates]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1287880900' post='2181934']
I don't agree with everything the Catholic church teaches. I doubt few Catholics do. The way I look at it morality has more to do with marriage kids and families than almost anything else. I doubt few people would be offended by the commandment "Thou shall not kill" -- because none of us will ever do that. The sorts of things that we might do are: Have sex out of marriage, get a girl pregnant outside of marriage, break our marriage vows -- after having kids, and cheat on our wives. As I see it the real problem is how these sins affect the kids who are created by them.

So here is my version of morality (You'll never hear this in church -- ever.) Preachy but direct -- and this is a religious forum right?

1. [b] Homosexuality is a potentially destructive perversion[/b]. And it is condemned in the bible by the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. We must never condone it in any fashion. The Catholic church has a huge problem with homosexuality. The Vatican needs to take a stand against homosexuality -- absolutely no homosexual priests, and absolutely no "Dignity" Masses.

2. [b]Premarital sex is wrong[/b]. Birth control isn't perfect and getting pregnant outside of a secure marriage is a BIG DEAL. It's a HUGE extra responsibility for the woman and the child always suffers as a result. If the birth control works sex is viewed with less reverence and less intimacy is involved. I believe that people who engage in premarital sex are more likely to have affairs after marriage -- and less likely to stay married.

3. [b]Divorce is very destructive[/b]. We need to be careful about who we marry. The kids pay the highest price. A marriage is important because it provides security for the kids. This is what is unique about a heterosexual union -- kids result, and families are formed. When you divorce you put your kids in the same position as if you'd never married and separated. Kids are better served by parents who never marry -- and never separate, than parents who marry and divorce.

4. [b]Catholic Annulment is exactly the same as a divorce[/b]. The vows are broken, the parents separate, and the kids are in EXACTLY the same position as any kids whose parents have divorced. The man and woman are NOT the same as people who've never married. They are not virgins, they have slept and lived together as husband and wife, they have had kids, and they have broken the marriage vows and commitment to one another -- that they took at the Catholic marriage. Anybody who thinks that an annulment is EXACTLY the same as never being married is an idiot. It's only the same from the perspective of the Catholic church, and in terms of being able to marry within the Catholic church. The divorcee's who got an annulment are much more likely to get divorced when the marry for the second, third, fourth, fifth.. time.

5. [b]Affairs are obviously very wrong[/b]. Affairs can result in divorce -- which can hurt the kids, the husband, the wife. It's the sort of thing that jeopardizes the marriage. If there is a problem with intimacy, or attention, a husband and a wife should be able to discuss the problem. Hey if you can't be open with your husband or wife than who can you be open with??

6. [b]Married people should view themselves a "WE" rather than "ME"[/b]. I know I've never been married, but I've had friends who complained to me about how they did so much in the marriage -- or at home and how their wife/husband did so little. They were totally thinking in self-centered selfish terms. My friends in good marriages never even seemed to think about themselves as "ME" or "I". Doesn't the bible say that in a marriage the two people cleave and become one?
[/quote]
You've proven that you yourself have little clue what the Church actually teaches on sexual morality and marriage.

The Church in fact agrees with you on all but #4. I'd agree that annulments are probably handed out to leniently these days, but that does not mean there is not a place for them. For instance when one partner enters into the marriage deceived by the other who had no intention of actually fulfilling the marriage vows.

Your idea that the Church is okay with homosexual acts (or premarital sex, for that matter) is completely bogus. The Church has always clearly taught in all the catechisms and other teachings that homosexual activity, fornication, and adultery are all mortal sins.
That's where you need to go if you want to actually know where the Church stands on these issues.

From the CCC:
[b]"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."

"Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved."[/b]


Here's a letter to the bishops written by the current Pope when he was prefect of the CDF:
[url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html"]CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS[/url]

[quote]Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.

Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option.[b] It is not.[/b][/quote]

Sure, you can find dissident fruitcake priests, and self-proclaimed "Catholic" groups (particularly on the Left Coast) who oppose the Church's moral dogmas on these issues, but Cardinal Ratzinger makes clear in his letter that they are in fact opposed to the truth taught by the Church.
[quote]Nevertheless, increasing numbers of people today, even within the Church, are bringing enormous pressure to bear on the Church to accept the homosexual condition as though it were not disordered and to condone homosexual activity. Those within the Church who argue in this fashion often have close ties with those with similar views outside it. These latter groups are guided by a vision opposed to the truth about the human person, which is fully disclosed in the mystery of Christ. They reflect, even if not entirely consciously, a materialistic ideology which denies the transcendent nature of the human person as well as the supernatural vocation of every individual.

The Church's ministers must ensure that homosexual persons in their care will not be misled by this point of view, so profoundly opposed to the teaching of the Church. But the risk is great and there are many who seek to create confusion regarding the Church's position, and then to use that confusion to their own advantage.[/quote]




[quote]Anyway that's about it for me. I couldn't care less if somebody goes to Mass, Confession, or views the Host literally as the body of Christ. Those aren't even moral issues to me. I couldn't care less about a persons declaration of faith -- like you see among the Protestants. I think that you can easily see what a person believes by how they live. And I'm not afraid to "judge" -- form an opinion -- based upon what I see (That's not the same as damning someone to hell).

Heck I have never even been confirmed, and I miss Mass all the time, and I can't remember the last time I went to confession. Yeah, I'll probably go to Mass tomorrow, but I like the Catholic church here in Escondido. Or I might try a service at a Protestant church -- like the Nazarene (My little sister is a Nazarene).

Anyway that's morality according to me (Richard). What do you guys hold as important? What are the important moral beliefs that define you?[/quote]
That statement there shows very serious problems, and that you are not Catholic in any meaningful sense.

Christ's presence in the Eucharist and His actions in the other sacraments are essential to Catholic belief, not peripherals. Christ tells us solemnly if we don't eat His Body and drink His Blood, we have not life in us.

If Christ and His saving actions are not important to you, what is the point of being Catholic, or being Christian at all?
Faith in Christ needs to come first. You have things completely backwards with regards to the Faith.

It seems you view the main purpose of Christian religion as getting people to keep their pantaloons on. But if that's all there is to it, and theology is totally unimportant, what's the point?

If Christian theology is bogus, why bother with preaching sexual morality in the first place? (I'm not in anyway trying to downgrade the importance of sexual morality, but saying you need to put it in proper perspective.)


The trouble with your approach is that there are millions of other people out there with their own "morality according to me," which more often than not is perfectly okay with fornication, homosexuality, or whatever perverse sexual practice you can think of.
If the objective truth of the Christian Faith is irrelevant, by what authority should anyone follow "morality according to Richard" instead of "morality according to someone else"?

Without a firm objective basis for morality, it too easily becomes subjective. People just do whatever they like.

[southern california guy]

I apologize for only replying to this post at this time, but I will make an effort to reply to the other posts later this week.

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1288030945' post='2182406']
You've proven that you yourself have little clue what the Church actually teaches on sexual morality and marriage.

The Church in fact agrees with you on all but #4. I'd agree that annulments are probably handed out to leniently these days, but that does not mean there is not a place for them. For instance when one partner enters into the marriage deceived by the other who had no intention of actually fulfilling the marriage vows.

Your idea that the Church is okay with homosexual acts (or premarital sex, for that matter) is completely bogus. The Church has always clearly taught in all the catechisms and other teachings that homosexual activity, fornication, and adultery are all mortal sins.
That's where you need to go if you want to actually know where the Church stands on these issues.
[/quote]

I guess I didn't write that as clearly as I could have. I wasn't trying to say that my views disagree with the old Baltimore Catechism I was saying that I have certain moral beliefs -- that you will never hear preached from the pulpit. Have you ever heard any of this preached from the pulpit? I haven't. Even my view on annulments doesn't vary much from the original Catholic Catechism. Very few were granted, and for only a few extreme situations. That's not the case anymore. Now something like 93 percent of the annulments applied for are granted. When I said that I didn't agree with everything the Catholic church teaches I meant that I don't agree with everything that I have heard Catholic priests preach in Mass (Now I can't really criticize the Catholic church here in Escondido. I admit that we have very good priests here at Saint Mary's.) And it's not just California that has a problem, the whole West Coast tends to have "liberal" Catholics.

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1287880900' post='2181934']
Anyway that's about it for me. I couldn't care less if somebody goes to Mass, Confession, or views the Host literally as the body of Christ. Those aren't even moral issues to me. I couldn't care less about a persons declaration of faith -- like you see among the Protestants. I think that you can easily see what a person believes by how they live. And I'm not afraid to "judge" -- form an opinion -- based upon what I see (That's not the same as damning someone to hell).

Heck I have never even been confirmed, and I miss Mass all the time, and I can't remember the last time I went to confession. Yeah, I'll probably go to Mass tomorrow, but I like the Catholic church here in Escondido. Or I might try a service at a Protestant church -- like the Nazarene (My little sister is a Nazarene).

Anyway that's morality according to me (Richard). What do you guys hold as important? What are the important moral beliefs that define you?
[/quote]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1288030945' post='2182406']
That statement there shows very serious problems, and that you are not Catholic in any meaningful sense.

Christ's presence in the Eucharist and His actions in the other sacraments are essential to Catholic belief, not peripherals. Christ tells us solemnly if we don't eat His Body and drink His Blood, we have not life in us.

If Christ and His saving actions are not important to you, what is the point of being Catholic, or being Christian at all?
Faith in Christ needs to come first. You have things completely backwards with regards to the Faith.

It seems you view the main purpose of Christian religion as getting people to keep their pantaloons on. But if that's all there is to it, and theology is totally unimportant, what's the point?

If Christian theology is bogus, why bother with preaching sexual morality in the first place? (I'm not in anyway trying to downgrade the importance of sexual morality, but saying you need to put it in proper perspective.)


The trouble with your approach is that there are millions of other people out there with their own "morality according to me," which more often than not is perfectly okay with fornication, homosexuality, or whatever perverse sexual practice you can think of.
If the objective truth of the Christian Faith is irrelevant, by what authority should anyone follow "morality according to Richard" instead of "morality according to someone else"?

Without a firm objective basis for morality, it too easily becomes subjective. People just do whatever they like.
[/quote]

You're right. I'm not really a Catholic. I wouldn't recommend that anybody base their morality on the brilliant things that I say. If I had to make a recommendation -- and this is coming from a lost Catholic -- I would recommend that they base their morality on the old Baltimore Catechism. Of course that would mean putting more emphasis on attending Mass and more reverence for the Mass -- which I admit to lacking.

Edited October 26, 2010 by southern california guy