Posted on 06/18/2014 12:16:25 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
They sure are, Karl. But I’m getting the feeling Mrs. Don-o knows the author personally. At least you elude to it, right Mrs. Don-o? What a nice way to roll that Trojan Horse right in.
Time to shake the dust off our sandals and go to the next town.
Say what? Being tempted is not temptation? In what world does that make sense?
>>And he told Mr. Pitchfork to get lost.<<
That’s exactly what the writer of this article is doing. She is saying she is tempted but isn’t going to act on that temptation.
I didn't say she did. I simply pointed out that Paul understood the struggle between the spirit and the flesh.
Jesus said if a man lusted after a woman in his heart he has already committed adultery.
He dose not say any of the things you are saying.
That would go for beasts or human.
Well, it wouldn’t hurt for us to say a prayer for her tonight. Only old eagle eyes knows what’s going on with this, for sure.
Well, here’s the thing. I agree that, if you’re a Christian, you should stop thinking of yourself as “gay”, even if you have those lustful thoughts. You should be putting that old self behind you.
However, you can’t do that if you are not a Christian to begin with. You alone don’t have the power to stop sinning and pursuing that sinful lifestyle, you must have Christ’s help to do it. So, I can’t tell someone they aren’t a Christian simply because they’re still calling themselves “gay” and haven’t been perfected by Christ yet. Not when they are outwardly showing signs of trying to follow Christ, by being celibate and such. If they are sincere, I’m sure God will get around to helping them over their problem, on His schedule, not mine.
CynicalBear, that’s one of the things I love about Paul. He doesn’t pretend he’s doing his life on skates, “fast, smooth and easy.” He shows there’s still struggle, and falling, too. But we trust in Christ Our Lord; in our weakness, we discover His strength.
No, in fact she said she "doesn't" do it.
I say, "Good on ya, Eve." But I don't think she's saying it pridefully, for my applause, or for anyone's applause: I doubt most of the readers of "The Atlantic" would think she's cool for being celibate. More likely she'll run into people who think celibacy is the one, singular, choice you could make that's a real perversion.
Last time I checked --- yup --- it's still a sin.
“YOU DIDN’T READ THE ARTICLE!”
Of course not, silly. This is Free Republic.
Nobody reads the articles, they just read the headline and then spew their opinion based on their own preconceived notion of what the article might actually say.
Been that way for a long time now.
Amen and Amen!
So the main reason I'm planning on celibacy for the foreseeable future is just that I'm Catholic and lesbian and them's the rules, bud.Eve Tushnet writes similarly to Melinda Selmys, a married "gay" woman who is still same-sex attracted. And both women come across as confused (and weak in their faith) in my opinion. I would rather that Eve said something like "I'm Catholic and regretfully lesbian, and I'm using all of the Church's Sacraments to do my best to turn my intrinsic disorder around. And while I'm working on this, I will remain chaste." And then have her go into all the ways the Church can help her. As her article currently reads, it seems to me she's accepted that some people (including herself) are just gay, and there's no way to turn that around. If I'm correct in "reading" her that way, isn't that showing disrespect for the Eucharist, handed to her by the Church she so loves? For He is able to heal all wounds......if you're willing to put in the time.
There's such a thing as sinning in our thoughts and in our words, in what we do and in what we fail to do. So it is possible to sin without acting outwardly.
The difference between "interior sin" and "temptation," though, is that a temptation is a forbidden thought which you did not invite, which you do not willingly entertain, and which you try to slide right back out of your mind.
ON the other hand, an "interior sin" would be latching onto that thought, savoring it, playing with it a little bit, dwelling on it, ACTING on it in your heart.
A person who intentionally keeps bad thoughts simmering away in their mental crockpot --- whether those thoughts are of forbidden lust, or anger, or resentment, or envy, or a desire for revenge, or SIMPLE CARBOHYDRATES (heh) ranything of that sort --- their heart is already corrupt. They want it, even if they never get "the perfect opportunity" to act on it.
Take a bad thought by the seat of its pants and evict it, and you're doing the right thing. Let it be a tenant, and you're doomed.
Or, as a wise old priest once told me, "A bird may come and perch on your head, but you don't let it make a nest in your hair!"
I’ve read a good deal of Eve Tushnet. She has more courage and honor than most people I know. And she’s taking the message of chastity to a hostile secular liberal audience at “The Atlantic” -— but not, evidently, as hostile as the one here.
When Jesus speaks of lust in the heart, he is speaking of deliberately entertained erotic fantasies. He is not speaking of unbidden thoughts which assail you, and which you firmly push aside. That is called “resisting temptation.”
Cletus D. Yokel
Bing-go!!
An unwanted urge is completely different than an idea that one ‘toys’ with.
A man who sees a woman and feels an instinctive surge of lust for is not guilty. If he feeds that lust with fantasy, he’s crossed the line.
You get me.
So, Gentlemen, let us agree on this, then: let's pray for Eve Tushnet and all who are similarly situated. Let's pray for each other as well.
I will willfully pray for anyone who’s resisting temptation because I do every day. We all have weaknesses.
Great thread, Honey. Of course, I only read YOUR posts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.