I wouldn't be, but you would have to tell me you were watching it. I think the view would change if your wife woke up quietly and caught you at it. If it didn't matter, you would watch when she was awake. Perhaps a better analogy would be if you had a bunch of pornographers over for lunch, would they be upset? Probably not. Again I don't think the dietary restriction and porn are equivalent. At the risk of mind-reading, I'd guess you don't either. As for the Catholic church waiting so long to formalize IC, as big on Tradition as Catholics are, was there no Tradition from the Apostolic times that mirrored that pronouncement? Was Marian veneration not practiced in the Church during the period covered by or subsequent to Acts?
Paul wrote about eating and judging others in their eating. To avoid inconsequential issues if someone of weaker faith might stumble. Peter received a vision about eating, that applied as well to him meeting with people that weren't 'approved'. I think the dietary restriction issue and circumcision 'crisis' were to avoid upsetting the Judaizers. Which makes them an example of bad doctrine.
The "myth" is that the Gospel spread in, so to speak, strands. So if you found the right one, you could follow it like a "clue" in the very old sense, back to find your way out of the maze.
Sometime I think the gospel was more like a thistle or one of those plants which sort of explodes to spread its seed. Behind the obvious in Acts and a lot of Pauline stuff is the Church sort of struggling at once to find its own feet and also, um (no word is good) "normalize" what was being said about Jesus and what He meant, in the Eastern Mediterranean. JUST my guess.
So when Paul show up at Corinth or Athens, there probably were already some folks who were saying, "Wasn't that guy last week, you know the guy from the boat, saying something about somebody who was raised from the dead?"
And somebody else says, "Here's another weird oriental cult, but in this one, you're free from the Law! Wow! C'm'ere, baby! Let's parTAY!"
And, to be fair, some other guys were going off and trying to starve themselves to death.
So, the image I have is that of a few guys trying to keep it together and get the REAL Gospel out where rumors and corruptions ran ahead.
And surely, just as some of the modern cults seem to be able to exact weird disciplines from their adherents, the Judaizers would be saying, "Hey! It only hurts a minute!"
So, in other words, too many issue of "faith and practice" spring up. And, in my fantasy, if they are not settled sooner or later they come to the attention of Jerusalem or of Paul. And they don't necessarily have an easy time of it getting the real deal laid down.
I will need to spend some more time trying to dope out what abstaining from things strangled might have meant to the Council in Jerusalem. But thanks for the chain yank.
I think pornography is vicious. Really. It took me a LONG time to reach this opinion, but there is some good sociological work (however, mostly anecdotal) to support the conjecture that it is cruel to the women involved and destructive of marriages and of intimacy and commitment.
I'm sure you have nothing to do all day but follow the recommendations of a papist, but Mary Eberstadt (Hoover Institute) has published some very compelling stuff, in First Things and elsewhere. Worth a look, IMHO.
I really am not all that familiar with the devlopment of Marian Tradition. I don't think we hear all that much until maybe the 4th century one way or another.
But again, while Mary looms large in popular piety and in the image of Catholics, she's not quite as important in the overall scheme of things.
There is a certain scent of Providence that only recently have councils and popes dealt with her. Other issues were more pressing. She looms large here because she is controversial. And I think she may look largecin the popular culture and the view of Catholics for the same reason.
But as I have said, in the daily devotions of a devout Catholic, she really gets pronouncedly second billing. As a rule she is mentioned maybe twice in the Mass. She shows up rarely in the daily office, except for the Marian "antiphon" (hymn) at the end of the day. And the Rosary, while literally about her, is not so much experientially. At most it is about her sort of reacting to Jesus, but with the exception of the last two Mysteries, as I mysself pray it, it is WAY more about Jesus. And even the assumption and the coronation (the last two mysteries) are about what Jesus does for those who follow Him.
Running out of gas here ...