Posted on 04/08/2002 5:52:41 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
Why can't people see the big picture? Christian sexuality is simple...if you're not married, man and woman, in the eyes of God, and/or you can't get pregnant doing it, its wrong. That's Natural Law in a nutshell re sex. That's what God made it for.
Here's a little illustration. If you eat something just for the pleasure of the taste and the texture, then vomit it up, that is called an eating disorder, namely bulimia. It is a disorder because the reason God gave us food is twofold, 1) for our pleasure, and more importantly 2) for the nourishment of our bodies.
If you partake of sex, then vomit forth the natural consequences of that act, it is a disorder, like sexual bulimia. Yes, God made it for pleasure. Equally important, God made it for babies.
The Creation of God serves ONE primary purpose:
the creation of the body and eternal soul of men. Man's last end is God. It was God's first and foremost desire in Creating the universe that men should live forever with Him in Heaven.
And what is scripture's first commandment? It ain't in the Decalogue. It comes much earlier, and it says, "Be Fruitful and Multiply."
If that's what Creation was for, the populating of Heaven with Eternal Souls of men, why can't Christians comprehend what a rebellion and revolt non-procreative sex is?
What do all the sexual sins in the Old Testament have in common?
They are all non-procreative, and/or outside of a covenantal man-woman relationship. They are all a fundamental violation of Natural Law, a violation of the reason God gave us our sexuality, i.e., for the creation of Eternal Souls to populate Heaven.
Only Catholicism still sees this foundational Truth, this family covenantal model. We are here to get THERE, to Heaven. And to bring as many there as possible.
And until 1930, all of Christianity understood this, all of Christianity embraced this, and all of Christianity taught this, universally (see below), protestant, orthodox, Catholic, as well as orthodox judaism and islam.
But if you start teaching that one form of non-procreative sex is OK, while others are not, you introduce schizophrenia into Christian sexual morality.
If you accept one, you no longer have any grounds to condemn the rest.
And no one can contest the relationship between the acceptance of contraception by Christians in this once Christian country, and the legalization of abortion (see below).
Today, equal numbers of RCC and NC Christians contracept.
But there is one vital distinction.
Scripture says that in the end there will be a general falling away, so it should surprise no one that there is gross sin in all churches.
But Christ promised one Church, His Church, would not teach error, and that the gates would not prevail.
Absolute Orthodoxy in moral theology can only come from Absolute Orthodoxy in Salvific Theology. Heterodoxy in Moral Theology will always, eventually, arise from Heterodoxy in Salvific Theology.
If Catholics will reclaim the traditional teaching of Christianity on contraception, a teaching their Church has NEVER apostacized on, and evangelize the culture regarding WHY the Church still teaches it, then we have at our disposal the single greatest evangelization tool in the history of the war between Christian sects. Why? Because Catholicism has never fallen into heterodoxy on moral theology issues. ALL other Christian churches now have.
It is so easy to prove from history that Christianity always uninanimously taught contraception to be inherently evil (see below, Appendix 2). Then it is such a short step to understand that heterodoxy in moral theology completely undermines the validity of the sola scriptura/personal interpretation of scripture manntra that hatched that heterodoxy. This is the foregone conclusion when men reject the authority Christ gave His Church, and replces it with the doctrines of men.
This is the number one reason given why over a thousand protestant ministers have become Catholic over the last ten years. When you examine the culture of death, and the roots of abortion, and the inability to effectively fight the homosexual juggernaut, you realize very quickly there is only one Church that will both bring folks closest to Christ and cure the ills of the culture.
I'm not willing to avoid the contraception issue because its unpopular, taboo, or for fear of offending both Catholic and protestant alike, when this is the single greatest evangelization/apologetics tool ever handed to us on a silver platter by the Holy Spirit.
Plus the obvious...folks who live in sodomitic sin glass houses, where the same type of sin is not only tolerated but taught to be acceptable, better stop to think before they criticize the sodomitic sin in our Catholic ranks, especially when we are the only ones condemning both on the world stage.
Yes, there are sodomites in the Catholic priesthood, and bishops hid them and protected them. They violate the very foundations of sexual morality that the Church STILL TEACHES today.
But the remainder of Christianity has embraced the sodomitic sin of contraception, teaches it as acceptable, and refuses to turn back.
In the end, many on both sides have sinned, are sinning, and will sin. But only one Church perseveres in Truth, both in Salvation Theology and Moral Theology.
No, but I've never been in the unique position of ministering to Catholics in preparation for their marriage.
I did, however, recently inform one of my best friend's that he was putting his eternal soul in peril by willfully seeing another woman while he was separated from his wife and the woman he was seeing was separated from her husband. In fact, the only reason I didn't punch him in the face to wake him up was because he was in Pennsylvania, and I'm in Hawaii. I had asked him to be a godfather to my daughter, and told him that unless he immediately broke off all contact with the woman, I wouldn't let him be my daughter's godfather after all. He called me the next day to tell me that he'd gone to confession and cleanly broke off all contact with the woman. I'm glad that I "slammed" him with mortal sin.
Let me ask you: Do you think it's good to withold the truth of the gravity of their situations?
With all due respect, I do know what RC's believe about Mary, I been conversing with them for 9 months here on FR. You believe that Mary stayed a virgin her whole life, right? This violates the very command that Brian quoted above from God: "Be fruitful and multiply". Along with the command to not deprive your spouse of sexual intercourse. Our bodies belong to our spouses, not ourselves. My belief is that what the Bible clearly shows, after the birth of Jesus the family carried on as any righteous Jewish household at the time and Joseph and Mary had many other children, including James the author of the Bilical book.
But you guys are never guilty of being anti-Catholic, you're just bringing Christ to us poor deceived Romanists. Sure.
I wonder if you've read "Jerome versus Helvidius", a debate on this very subject?
And you believed him? If he'd see another woman while separated from his wife, why do you assume he'd tell you the truth about breaking with her?
I would have asked him if he had decided that it was over between he and his wife. If he said yes, then I would have talked to him about making it final and stop betraying vows he had made.
If he said no, then I would have told him he was driving a wedge between he and his wife if they ever DID get back together. He would KNOW he cheated on his wife, and it would hang over them like a cloud.
I find that sins are also things that violate human nature, and that a discussion of what wrong behavior does to self-respect, to people you've vowed your life to, to your own self-image as an honest or dishonest person is more effective than talking about the peril to one's soul.
Terror works with children. I don't use it on adults.
And you believed him? If he'd see another woman while separated from his wife, why do you assume he'd tell you the truth about breaking with her?
I would have asked him if he had decided that it was over between he and his wife. If he said yes, then I would have talked to him about making it final and stop betraying vows he had made.
If he said no, then I would have told him he was driving a wedge between he and his wife if they ever DID get back together. He would KNOW he cheated on his wife, and it would hang over them like a cloud.
I find that sins are also things that violate human nature, and that a discussion of what wrong behavior does to self-respect, to people you've vowed your life to, to your own self-image as an honest or dishonest person is more effective than talking about the peril to one's soul.
Terror works with children. I don't use it on adults.
Please supply me with your definition of gospel, which obviously includes contraception in it. I must have missed that one in the Bible when the gospel is discussed.
Yes he does.
Your 'Christian' hate and lies are offensive.
Hmmmmm I thought you said with all due respect, how do the above go together? Could it be hes not the one full of hate and lies?
BigMack
You know ... I'm really happy you tried to sound the note on the heart of darkness that lies at the root of population control and the Culture of Death.
EVERY soul that's snuffed out in utero and doesn't get the opportunity to choose God's will is a WIN for Death.
EVERY life prevented is a WIN for Death.
(Or so Death thinks ... pragmatic sort that he is and so utterly consumed with the Business of beating the cloock he's no time to contemplate the implications of Many Worlds Theory or other clear and present challenges rendering doomed from the start his brash wager to form an "Is and Ever Shall Be" Perfect Man stripped of all bothersome triune constructions ... like Father-Mother-Child, for starters.)
You are comparing the illumining with all due objectivity the basic truths of Christian teaching regarding the very real consequences (for this life and the next) of one's actions on the soul to the Terror that is the hallmark of the diabolical?
I think I'm beginning to understand you better.
... If the sacraments are, as you say, "real,"
And it's possible I can some room for their reluctance to give your opinions the weight of authority that would come with being a Deacon.
His wife had already filed for divorce. Their marriage is effectively over, in the legal sense at least. And yes, I believed him. He was telling me the truth.
I would have asked him if he had decided that it was over between he and his wife. If he said yes, then I would have talked to him about making it final and stop betraying vows he had made.
As I mentioned, his wife filed for divorce. He has cut off all contact with the other woman and stopped betraying his vows in that manner.
Let me ask you: Do you think it's good to withold the truth of the gravity of their situations?
So you do think it's a good idea to withold the truth of the gravity of their situations?
I can't believe you said that.
Catholics believe the Protestants do not accurately understand Catholic teachings and beliefs, and so the Catholics believe the Protestants frequently debate "straw-man" arguments; The Protestants believe that the Catholics mis-interpret Scripture or ignore Scripture completely with respect to certain beliefs and teachings.
2)Name one insult I've given you.
You want to scare children into doing what's right by threatening them with hell, it'll usually work.
I don't do it, but my mother used to, and it worked with us.
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.