A psychologist has come out with an unscientific survey purporting to find that atheists have the best sex lives. He asked atheists who were formerly religious if their sex lives had improved, and most answered in the affirmative.
I find that all a bit hard to believe, and my own personal experience points in the opposite direction. Not necessarily that my sex life is better since becoming a Christian, but that I am sexually satisfied with less variety. I am allowed to have sex with one person, and in all flavors of vanilla, and that is… enough. Contrast that to someone living the Nihilist’s Dream, who might eventually tire of asphyxiating, sodomizing, cheating, engaging in orgies, etc. and decide (click that link at your own risk!)
If it weren’t for my anti-social, anti-marriage, and generally anti-human disposition, I’d hook up with the traditionalists so I might be able to have a normal sex life again.
That is, in a nutshell, what I have: a normal sex life. What most humans were satisfied with for most of human existence. What I am satisfied with. I suppose it is incredibly dull of me. Why have normal sex when you can ingest toxic substances or mutilate yourself for the same kick? Just as dull as the fact that I am satisfied with eating home-cooked food, reading good books, hanging out with my friends and family, and attending church.
It has been said that pornography is making men less likely to rape, but there is clearly a dark-side to the exposure. As Naomi Wolf informs us:
Since then, a great deal of data on the brain’s reward system has accumulated to explain this rewiring more concretely. We now know that porn delivers rewards to the male brain in the form of a short-term dopamine boost, which, for an hour or two afterwards, lifts men’s mood and makes them feel good in general. The neural circuitry is identical to that for other addictive triggers, such as gambling or cocaine.
The addictive potential is also identical: just as gamblers and cocaine users can become compulsive, needing to gamble or snort more and more to get the same dopamine boost, so can men consuming pornography become hooked. As with these other reward triggers, after the dopamine burst wears off, the consumer feels a letdown – irritable, anxious, and longing for the next fix. (There is some new evidence, uncovered by Jim Pfaus at Concordia University in Canada, that desensitization may be affecting women consumers of pornography as well.)
This dopamine effect explains why pornography tends to become more and more extreme over time: ordinary sexual images eventually lose their power, leading consumers to need images that break other taboos in other kinds of ways, in order to feel as good. Moreover, some men (and women) have a “dopamine hole” – their brains’ reward systems are less efficient – making them more likely to become addicted to more extreme porn more easily.
What others are essentially doing, with their lustful excesses, is desensitizing themselves, so that normal sex is less satisfying for them. Traditionalists avoid this fate by following the maxim of “all things in moderation”, and keeping the pleasure of the simple things.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
Agree, of course. From a man’s perspective, a traditional wife is good. She is likely to want to simply please her man. With a little imagination, she can suit all your moods.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
“What others are essentially doing, with their lustful excesses, is desensitizing themselves, so that normal sex is less satisfying for them. Traditionalists avoid this fate by following the maxim of “all things in moderation”, and keeping the pleasure of the simple things.”
So traditionalists are hobbits?
Clarence
July 9, 2011
Somehow I never thought hobbits had good sex lives.
Anyway, since traditionalists believe that sex is only for marriage (or at LEAST a long term relationship) they tend to have more experience with “relationship” sex. And in a good relationship that is important.
However, this is balanced out by the fact that even rational ones tend to have categories of sexual acts that aren’t really allowed between partners in a Christian manner. So there’s a narrowing of the field of allowed expressions of sexuality.
And some atheists have great marriages and great marital sex.
So, in the aggregate for relationships it’s probably a wash.
And if one is in the “non relationship” status, it’s atheists hands down, since the trad concept of sex during dating is simple : don’t! Plus they tend to include a lot of things as “sex” that many other people who are focused on PIV or oral/anal stuff don’t.
terri
July 9, 2011
It’s really quite simple: Practice makes perfect. When your entire sex life is spent with the same partner, the more you learn how to please that person, and they how to please you.
This makes for better, more satisfying sex. I’d say much better than having to adapt to a new partner every few months or even every year or so.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
Clarence, there is nothing I have wanted to do with a woman that I haven’t done with my wife. And I have a good imagination. Morality is not that limiting.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
David Collard:
Well, bully for you.
I can assure you that for some ..unfortunate… people “morality” is very limiting.
And honestly, even with the internet, internet porn, and the fact I openly explored porn and BDSM and things of that nature and read books such as “The Joy of Sex” and The Sensuous Man when younger, I am STILL learning of sexual tips and practices even today. It’s amazing just how many dozens if not hundreds of positions exist for PIV sex not to mention tons of clitioral stiumalation techniques, etc. Then there’s the whole communication and health aspects of it. It’s amazing how much time and effort humans and the other members of the animal Kingdom spend on this.
Whoever God is, God must be very horny
David Collard
July 9, 2011
Clarence, I know what you mean. I am fascinated by sex as a subject. Maybe it is being a biologist, or maybe I am just a dirty little devil. But, yes, I am still learning new things from the Internet. If I can adapt them to my moral system, I do. My wife is pretty amenable, and I am the one who sets the limits.
I don’t think my wife and I have a BDSM relationship but it is not completely vanilla. My wife has a submissive streak and I am not burdened with what DA calls a penalty brake. In any case, I tend to choreograph the bedroom activities.
I have never felt limited by only having one woman. I suppose that makes me a square. But you might be surprised by what I have tried over the years.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
The basic Catholic rules, as I remember them, are (1) act must be loving and giving to the partner and (2) male orgasm can only occur inside the woman’s vagina, in order for the act to be morally licit. That would mean that oral sex as foreplay is fine for Catholics as long as it doesn’t result in a male orgasm outside of the vagina. Anal sex is less clear, as it is very close to biblical prohibitions on “sodomy”. I have seen Catholic resources go either way with respect to anal sex (as foreplay, of course), but the bulk of what I have seen is against it. As far as I am aware, there are no moral restrictions on oral sex performed on females leading to a female’s orgasm, as the female orgasm is not, in and of itself, inherently procreative in nature as the male orgasm is. However, the moral status of sexual activity that does not culminate in a male orgasm inside a vagina at some point is at least questionable, as it is sexual activity that may be unitive but lacks the procreative element.
terri
July 9, 2011
Brendan, as usual, is correct. As a protestant, I will add that we are traditionally taught that (except for sodomy, which is considered sinful) as long as you’re married to your partner, whatever floats your boat is acceptable.
The protestant view is not that sex is procreative above all else. It is unitive first. Otherwise, what would be the point of infertile couples having sex? Or couples where the woman is past the point of childbearing capability?
That said, sex sans the procreative element as the norm is viewed by most protestants as damaging to society. There’s a reason why the quiverfull lifestyle is most prevalent among Protestants. I know more than a few Catholic families with fewer children than we have.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
The Catholic view is that sex is unitive and at least potentially procreative. I don’t think it has to be “giving” and I can’t see an objective test for that.
Oral stimulation of the man is OK, provided there is no ejaculation. But I would say that any kind of deep throating and anal sex are out, even if the act is completed in the vagina, because these amount to treating the wrong orifice as if it were the normal one.
Those are the guidelines I adhere to anyway. (Oral stimulation of the woman is OK, but I don’t do that act.)
Brendan
July 9, 2011
I know more than a few Catholic families with fewer children than we have.
Oh, of course. Catholics, for the most part, don’t follow the Catholic rules. Most Catholics have sex before marriage, most live with and have sex with their spouse before marriage, most Catholics use artificial birth control, and, in the US at least, Catholics get divorced at a rate that matches that (even exceeds slightly) of the general population. The Catholic teachings on sexuality are ignored by the vast majority of Catholics, even Mass-attending ones who would call themselves “practicing Catholics”. In effect, these people are more loyal to their American identity than to their Catholic identity (which is why the Catholic bishops in the US are constantly harping about “Catholic identity”).
Svar
July 9, 2011
That is true, Brendan. I used to look down upon Catholics because I thought that they were liberals. Now I realize that’s just the vast majority of American Catholics. America’s also where all the “naughty Catholic school-girl” stereotypes were born.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
Ahh yes…Catholic College Schoolgirls…
Droooooooooooolsssssss…so kinky..so hinky…. so up for anything
Svar
July 9, 2011
Hahah, I was talking about the highschool ones. Haven’t heard anything about the college aged Catholic girls.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Just consider Madonna and Lady Gaga — both raised as Catholics, and both became sexual libertinism icons of their respective generations.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
Yes, up until around 1998 to 2000 or so Madonna could have made me her “boy toy” any time.
I will say though that while she has ego to launch a rocket, Madonna had real talent. Lady Gaga seems a nicer person, but is nowhere near as talented except possibly at the “fashion” game.
Svar
July 9, 2011
I know a Catholic woman who lets her daughter go to parties and drink, but hides it from the father. Just another mother trying to be her daughter’s best friend and ruining her in the process(and disrespecting/disobeying her husband). Ahhh… If only I wasn’t Christian… She’d be easy pickings.
Lady Gaga is a disgusting IRL troll. I remember Pravda English talking about how the West uses such subversive figures as a way to destroy the Russian family. Pravda is wrong. The West uses such subversive figures to destroy the Western family. Good stuff.
terri
July 9, 2011
I know a Catholic woman who lets her daughter go to parties and drink, but hides it from the father.
My daughters have a schoolmate (Muslim) whose mothers helps her hide all the things she engages in that her father has explicitly said he disapproves of.
What is with these women?
Brendan
July 9, 2011
My daughters have a schoolmate (Muslim) whose mothers helps her hide all the things she engages in that her father has explicitly said he disapproves of.
What is with these women?
I think it’s because they don’t agree with the culture they are living in (Catholic or Muslim), but want to remain visibly in that culture, at least superficially, for extended family relations/face reasons. So they stay where they are, superficially, but ignore and subvert, in substance.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
Brendan:
It would be one thing if it was something harmless or a “one time” cover-up type of thing for a sleepover or something like that. Teens make mistakes and mothers and fathers can let one slide from time to time. But actively subverting your spouse and approving repeat behavior that disses your religion or culture is disgusting.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
I know contra examples. There was an Indian woman who used to work for our company. She and her husband had immigrated to the US in the late 1980s and later had two daughters who were entering early teens. Both of them, quite horrified by the peer group tween/teen American culture for girls, decided it would be best for the family to move back to India — and so they did. 20+ years of history in the US basically foregone in order to shield their daughters from US “grrl” culture. Now, they want their daughters to be educated and successful — that isn’t the issue. The issue was sex and boys.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
“In effect, these people are more loyal to their American identity than to their Catholic identity (which is why the Catholic bishops in the US are constantly harping about “Catholic identity”).”
And that is why religion is considered a threat to “national identity” everywhere. You have people identifying as a ___________ (fill in the blank with religion of choice), then how do you unite people as Americans or Swedes or Indians or Iranians or what have you?
It has the potential to create much divisiveness and conflict, and it does.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
Crystal Meth:
Yes, and no: at least Catholicism and Christianity in general have scripture to the effect that barring absolute horrors and oppressions one is to obey Caesar, pay taxes, that sort of thing. Many religions don’t . Still, in general it could be argued that when the majority of the people go secular or when religions clash, it’s a destabilizing influence. If everyone in the US was a Mormon on Traditionalist Catholic the US would have a very strong cultural solidarity about many things.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 9, 2011
Not necessarily that my sex life is better since becoming a Christian, but that I am sexually satisfied with less variety. I am allowed to have sex with one person, and in all flavors of vanilla, and that is… enough. Contrast that to someone living the Nihilist’s Dream, who might eventually tire of asphyxiating, sodomizing, cheating, engaging in orgies, etc. and decide (click that link at your own risk!)
I watched pornography during my depression (a consequence of the depression, not a cause nor one of the main causes) and I have disturbing (thankfully fading) memories. Pornography is immoral and signifies uncleanness (which leads to death). I don’t want anything to do with “non-vanilla” sex (as BDSM say) nor follow the tenants of a liberal lifestyle. I’m chaste and still a virgin and when I greet the husband God has sent for me I will be with him for the rest of my life. It also helps that my parents have been together for 25-27 years and that neither talk about sex. Sure they talked about chastity, virginity, courtship and whatnot but never their sex life. The earliest memory I have about sex is when I was 7 years old (?) and was looking for my mother and father. I entered their bedroom and opened one of the closets. I searched, searched and searched and found a hidden biological/reproductive sex book. It show things like reproduction, pregnancy, sexual diseases/infections, father/mother/children and things like that.
And that is why religion is considered a threat to “national identity” everywhere.
You’re making up things Crystal Meth. Religion is generally not considered a ‘threat’ to national identity worldwide unless it’s an alien religion, heretical or incompatible.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 9, 2011
That said, sex sans the procreative element as the norm is viewed by most protestants as damaging to society. There’s a reason why the quiverfull lifestyle is most prevalent among Protestants. I know more than a few Catholic families with fewer children than we have.
I wonder what the Eastern Orthodox (Russian) Church stance is on this. Any ideas? Different from both Protestant and Catholic right?
alcestiseshtemoa
July 9, 2011
For example India is 80-85% Hindu. Islam is considered a threat there because it’s alien and not as tied to national identity as Hinduism.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Alcest
Sex is nothing to be ashamed of, it’s a natural behavior and a normal act, like any other act. I don’t understand why people make it seem so dirty and “immoral”. People should definitely talk about it, not keep it a secret and pretend that no one does it.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Info on Christian Orthodox marriage/sex
http:// orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/orthodoxchristianmarriage.aspx
Svar
July 9, 2011
@ MWM
Dear schtupit troll, religion is considered apart of national identity in most countries, especially in the past before secularism. The religion that was traditionally apart of the American Identity was Protestantism.
Religion is only divisive when there is more than one religion in a country like with Serbia and it’s Albanian Muslims. The Islamic religion of the Albanians aggravated the ethnic tension between them and the Serbs.
Religion has the potential of ameliorating ethnic tensions which is a good thing in any racially and ethnically diverse country.
Nice try, troll. We’re still not going to convert to your religion.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 9, 2011
Sex is nothing to be ashamed of, it’s a natural behavior and a normal act, like any other act. I don’t understand why people make it seem so dirty and “immoral”. People should definitely talk about it, not keep it a secret and pretend that no one does it.
I liked that my parents never talked about their sex life. I only saw the reproductive sex book (basic info) and learned things such as chastity, virginity and courtship.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Chels, I don’t think any one here sees sex as dirty or immoral. However, I agree with Alcest on this one. I really, really would not like it if my parents were to talk about what they do. I consider myself very lucky that I’ve never walked in on them.
Chels
July 9, 2011
It might have been weird to talk to my parents about it, but the sex ed at school was definitely useful. It’s important to know more than chastity, virginity, courtship etc..
terri
July 9, 2011
My kids did not find sex ed useful. They found it uncomfortable. We had an extensive sex ed session right here at home before they encountered it at school. They said they liked their dad’s (and my) presentation better.
This lady pretty much nails my thoughts on school sex ed.
We didn’t discuss our sex life with them. And while our talks centered on chastity, we also discussed reasons for abstinence beyond religious morality, even though honoring God is reason enough to keep oneself for your future husband or wife. Husband even showed them pictures of some STD’s.They are also fully aware of the difficulties that come with having a blended family. We don’t sugarcoat things in this house.
Svar
July 9, 2011
I learned more from porn than I ever did in sex-ed, Chels. I’m not saying that like it’s a good thing, but it’s true.
What else should some one know besides chastity, virginity, and courtship? Technique?
Chels
July 9, 2011
Sexual anatomy, sexual reproduction, sexual intercourse, reproductive health, emotional relations, reproductive rights and responsibilities, abstinence, contraception, and other aspects of human sexual behavior.
Basically kids should know enough about sex to know how babies are made, and that the stork doesn’t bring them.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Terri, but a lot of parents don’t talk about sex with their kids, and someone should talk to them about it.
Svar
July 9, 2011
You don’t necessarily need a special sex-ed class for that, Chels. I learned that stuff in my Biology class and my Anatomy and Physiology class.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Info on Christian Orthodox marriage/sex
http:// orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/orthodoxchristianmarriage.aspx
It’s not a bad article, although Fr. Alexey’s characterizations there are a bit out of date in terms of the Catholic teaching. I do think he sums up well the Eastern Orthodox perspective on these issues.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
I wonder what the Eastern Orthodox (Russian) Church stance is on this. Any ideas? Different from both Protestant and Catholic right?
The Eastern Orthodox Church (Russian and otherwise) position is pretty well summed up in the article by Fr. Alexey Young, and is very close in practice to Catholicism, while approaching it in a somewhat different manner. There are, of course, many Eastern Orthodox who disobey this teaching as many Catholics do — the impact of secular sexual mores is regrettably everywhere discernable.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
“For example India is 80-85% Hindu. Islam is considered a threat there because it’s alien and not as tied to national identity as Hinduism.”
Not just Islam, they have the Naxalite(Maoist)-Christian-Evangelist-nexus in the Northeast states to worry about too.
I’ll note that the Orthodox Malabar Christians of the deep South pose no threat (that I know of at least) because they have been there 2,000 years and have merged with the larger surrounding Hindu cultural ethos. There is no separate political agenda, which cannot be said for the Communist-Christian missionary nexus of the Northeast which seeks to destabalize the national ethos.
Its nothing short of foreign imperialism.
From what I’m reading it appears that sex-ed in public schools is controversial in some areas because of introducing topics that would be considered “deviant” and just downright unhealthy to most people like “fisting”. Google “fistgate”
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
Oral stimulation of the man is OK, provided there is no ejaculation.
I always thought “BJ’s don’t count if the guy doesn’t finish” was just a Catholic Schoolgirl urban legend.
…there’s actually some truth behind that?
Svar
July 9, 2011
Yes, equate Christianity with Communism, troll. As if what goes in India has any bearing the West, a traditionally Christian region.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
Butternut Buttermilk:
I’d answer your question, but Catholic sexual mores are one thing I am totally unqualified for. Hopefully Branden or David or Alte or Chris or Paige will be wandering along soon.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
Butternut Buttermilk:
I’d answer your question, but Catholic sexual mores are one thing I am totally unqualified for. Hopefully Branden or David or Alte or Chris or Paige will be wandering along soon.
If we’re gonna debunk Catholic Schoolgirl “it doesn’t count” myths, where does the Church doctrine stand on “hand” usage?
…because apparently it doesn’t count if you’re just using your hands. & he doesn’t finish.
Keoni Galt
July 9, 2011
Terri, but a lot of parents don’t talk about sex with their kids, and someone should talk to them about it.
Serious question Chels, are you a practicing Christian?
I ask because ever since you’ve come here, you basically repeat all of the standard, liberal, secular mainstream arguments that have been used to gradually remove Christian influence and morality from society.
What’s your point for doing so? Do you look at the current landscape of our society, and see all the out of wedlock child births and social dysfunction from widespread promiscuity and rampant divorce…and see it as a good thing?
Because these things have been exacerbated exponentially with the erosion of Christian moral standards, many by the very same arguments you employ on almost every single topic posted here.
For example: you repeated the standard meme that because most Christians don’t make it a practice of graphically discussing sex in public forum or even amongst a group of friends, that they view it as “dirty, something never talked about.” That’s the secularist viewpoint regarding Christian chastity. But the teachings of most Christian denominations that I’m aware of, teach that sex is SACRED and highly private, and something only shared between a married couple. That doesn’t mean prudery or “dirty” or an unhealthy view of sex. Just a highly private and sacred one.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
“I always thought “BJ’s don’t count if the guy doesn’t finish” was just a Catholic Schoolgirl urban legend.”
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you serious?!
My theory is that some people are naturally (genetically) more chaste and self-controlled than others. And no matter how much you try to condition them with religion or whatever, their true nature will surface.
My theories on which peoples are the most naturally chaste and the most naturally un-chaste are not egalitarian or pc and would probably offend so I won’t express them here.
Svar
July 9, 2011
BF, do you really not know the answer to either? This is like that transvestite question. Heh, you say that you’re a trad-Catholic.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Keoni Kalt
I really don’t know how to answer that question. My father’s side of my family is very Christian, and I grew up going to church every Sunday, we celebrated all the Christian holidays, we fasted and so I’m familiar with Biblical teachings. They’re also very conservative.
However, my mother’s side of the family is completely different–I wouldn’t describe them as Christian, and they were very liberal.
I don’t want to be as conservative as my father’s family and not as liberal as my mothers. So I guess I would call myself a Christian with liberal tendencies? I know that I can’t be a cafeteria Christian, but perhaps that’s what I am.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Of course all sexuality outside of marriage is morally illicit per Catholic teaching. BJs, hand jobs, all the way — all of it is illicit. David was referring to what is permitted in marriages.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Also that about sex being dirty and immoral is how my father’s family views it.
Svar
July 9, 2011
@ Chels
Catholic?
Chels
July 9, 2011
No, we go to an Orthodox church, which is very smilar to Catholicism though.
Alte
July 9, 2011
My experience is that Catholics speak more openly about sex. It can get sort of technical with us, so we’ve got some ‘splainen to do. Lots of talk about monitoring fertility, “dos and don’ts”, regular abstinence, etc. Also, we have to confess a lot of sexual stuff to our priests, so we get used to talking about it unabashedly. And there’s something about the Catholic temperament… I heard we have lower average IQs and more frequent sex (related?).
Catholics do think sex is sacred, but probably less so that it’s something “highly private”. It’s a sacrament, so a lot of it is almost ritualized and standardized amongst couples. And you quickly find out that everyone’s doing about the same thing, really. Doesn’t mean I bring it up in public (except on here, of course), but that it doesn’t phase me at all when someone else does. I’m used to discussing it openly.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
EO?
Svar
July 9, 2011
Ahh… The Orthodox Church… I didn’t think you were Christian, Chels. I thought you were a secularist. It’s interesting how Catholic and Orthodox Christians tend to pick and choose, while Prots will just abandon their religion. This brings up two questions on my part:
You say that your familiar with Biblical teachings and yet you still wonder why women can’t be priests?
and,
Why would a conservative man like your dad marry such a liberal woman, Chels?
Chels
July 9, 2011
1. I know why women can’t be priests, I was mostly messing with that.
2. Stupid, young and in love
terri
July 9, 2011
Of course all sexuality outside of marriage is morally illicit per Catholic teaching.
This is standard Biblical teaching: Catholic, Protestant, EO, whatever. All devout Christians view sexual activity outside of marriage illicit.
I feel like the token Protestant here, LOL, much as Morticia described herself as the “token white girl.”
Alte
July 9, 2011
Something I’ve noticed is that (non-Lutheran) Prots seem more excited by sex-scandals. Catholics seem to be more laid-back about that sort of thing. I’m not sure why that is. It’s not that we don’t care, but that we don’t seem to get off on it like everyone else does. I’m always bewildered by that. I guess maybe it’s because they don’t talk about sex as much in general, and the scandal gives them an excuse to gossip about what “everybody else is doing”.
Pure speculation based upon anecdotal evidence. YMMV.
Svar
July 9, 2011
“I know why women can’t be priests, I was mostly messing with that.”
You were just teasing us? I took you seriously.
“Stupid, young and in love”
Ahhh, that explains it.
Alte
July 9, 2011
Terry,
You’re meant to be Prot-bait.
It’ll change over time, now that the blog’s focus has shifted a bit. It’s also cause Deuce is baby-busy right now. What about Chris, Keoni, Will, and some others?
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Yes, it’s true that orthodox Christian teaching (Catholic/EO/Prot) is against extra-marital sexuality on a moral basis. “Liberal” Christianity is not, which is where it gets problematic from the perspective of secular liberals saying “well, I know person X and she is a Christian and she goes to church every Sunday but she’s been having sex with all sorts of guys and says her church is okay with it, so your own bigoted ideas about this must not be because you are Christian, but because you’re an anachronistic bigot.”
That’s the trouble with liberal Christianity, really.
Alte
July 9, 2011
Of course she was teasing us, Svar. Everyone knows why women can’t be priests — even the liberals. They just don’t care.
terri
July 9, 2011
I guess maybe it’s because they don’t talk about sex as much in general,
Yes, Alte, I have noticed that whenever I broach the subject of sex on my blog, there is a visceral negative reaction on the part of many of the regular readers. It always takes me by surprise because I try to be very tactful and discreet.
Chels
July 9, 2011
I know the Biblical teachings very well, but I do find myself questioning them from time to time (I know I’m supposed to follow without questioning God).
Chels
July 9, 2011
Brendan, that’s exactly it. I know that I do non-Christian things, so I tend to keep my religious views to myself.
terri
July 9, 2011
it’s true that orthodox Christian teaching (Catholic/EO/Prot) is against extra-marital sexuality on a moral basis. “Liberal” Christianity is not,
Any “Christianity” that condones behavior that is clearly sinful is, IMO, not Christianity. I think the Bible backs me up on that so it’s not just my opinion.
Alte
July 9, 2011
Maybe we’re less fazed because our rules are more strict, so most of us have broken one or another at some point. So we have more empathy with someone else who’s broken one, even if it’s a different one.
My general impression is that Catholicism is “harder”, and it’s rarer to feel like a “good Catholic” than a “good Protestant”. I feel like a pretty awful Catholic, really. Catholic guilt. He he.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Any “Christianity” that condones behavior that is clearly sinful is, IMO, not Christianity. I think the Bible backs me up on that so it’s not just my opinion.
Again, I agree. But in the eyes of the “general public”, it’s a harder sell.
In some ways, it’s easier for me, personally, because EOs are so off the radar screen that most of the time when I tell someone I’m Orthodox, the response is “Wow! I had no idea you were Jewish!”, and they leave it at that.
terri
July 9, 2011
I don’t feel like a good Christian either. In fact, the only people I know who do feel that they good Christians are people that get on my nerves.
Feeling inadequate is far from a Catholic thing. Any Christian who reads their Bible and takes it seriously can find areas that need improvement. That’s why we pray, and that’s why we needed a Savior to begin with.
We’re hopeless sinners. We’re all tempted to be prideful, unloving, or unforgiving. And yes, unchaste. Looking good on the outside does not a good Christian make, necessarily.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Brendan, have you ever told a liberal to grow a pair whenever they whine about your alleged bigotry? Liberal Christians…. why do they even bother? Either be a Christian and follow the Word down the letter or be a hedonistic nihilist and have a good time. Sinning while claiming to be Christian is far worse than sinning as a non-Christian. Do these idiots think that Christ is going to forgive unrepentant sinning?
I really hate people who half-ass it. That’s why I respect Roissy alot more than Liberal Christians or Christo-feminists: He does all that he can to be the best hedonistic nihilist. Also, he has the common decency to not bring his filth into the Church.
Svar
July 9, 2011
“Of course she was teasing us, Svar. Everyone knows why women can’t be priests — even the liberals. They just don’t care.”
Really, Alte? I thought she was serious because she got pissed when I said that I’d rather burn in hell on my own terms instead of on the terms of an apostate church that has female priests. Then she accused me of being a “sexist” haha.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Really Svar, I know why women can be priests, but sometimes I do question it. (along with other parts of the Bible).
I really wish I could follow the Bible blindly without questioning it.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Chels, I’m attracted to old paganism. I like the manliness of the gods and how if you’re a man, you can drink, party, and screw around all you want and you can still hang out with the gods for eternity. However, I know that paganism is not true. I’ve learned that Christianity is the Truth and I’ve realize that hedonism, as appealing as it is, isn’t good for me in the long run. Once I’ve realized this, I’ve learned that it’s best to trust in the Word, even if I don’t like it.
For instance, I personally think that practically there is no difference between deflowering a girl and then marrying her or marrying her and then deflowering her. However the Book says otherwise and I think it’s best to listen to it.
I have more examples, but I think that one is enough.
Chels
July 9, 2011
“deflowering”? ahaha
To be honest, that’s what I find most hard to follow, what the Bible says about sex and relationships.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
Of course all sexuality outside of marriage is morally illicit per Catholic teaching.
So even making out is a sin?
“As long as it’s not sex it doesn’t count” is completely wrong?
…wow, I guess I got a whole list of sins to confess to tomorrow.
“*insert Act of Contrition* I’m sorry, Father, for I have sinned…& to be fair, I didn’t know these things were sins…”
CSPB
July 9, 2011
BF, Catholic morality is not merely set of rules. It is both complicated and simple. I think the answer is comimple (or is it simplicated).
Of course the Bishops and priests do not explain it and parents do not explain it so virtually everyone misunderstands it.
If priests rarely tell people they need to go to confession on a periodic basis, how would they ever broach the subject of sexuality. They would be thought of as a pervert and child abuser to mention much about where babies come from while in the presence of children. And then there is the ultimate sin (liberal definition) of causing others to feel bad. We can’t have that.
terri
July 9, 2011
I personally think that practically there is no difference between deflowering a girl and then marrying her or marrying her and then deflowering her. However the Book says otherwise and I think it’s best to listen to it.
Yes, Svar, listen to the Book. Suppose you deflower her and then don’t marry her? What about the next guy she dates? Surely you can see the problem…
To be honest, that’s what I find most hard to follow, what the Bible says about sex and relationships.
When we remove our own selfish desires from the equation, the Bible’s teachings on sex and marriage make perfect sense. As any parent of a teen, even an atheist parent, will tell you.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Chels, what’s so funny about the word “deflowering”?
Yep, the sex and relationships part. I’ve learned that it’s best to follow the Bible’s mandates and suggestions on this matter mainly because even though I may not like it, it’ll be better for me and make me happier in the long run. Banging hot sluts has it’s immediate appeal but it’ll screw me over greatly in the long run. Pair-bonding and marriage are better for my soul and my heart than fucking around.
A Lady
July 9, 2011
Why do people who don’t question other ideologies make so much noise over and over again about ‘blindly following the Bible without questioning it?’
Chels
July 9, 2011
I was talking more along the lines of sex after marriage, contraception, family size, abortion, etc…
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
BF, Catholic morality is not merely set of rules. It is both complicated and simple. I think the answer is comimple (or is it simplicated).
Of course the Bishops and priests do not explain it and parents do not explain it so virtually everyone misunderstands it.
If priests rarely tell people they need to go to confession on a periodic basis, how would they ever broach the subject of sexuality. They would be thought of as a pervert and child abuser to mention much about where babies come from while in the presence of children. And then there is the ultimate sin (liberal definition) of causing others to feel bad. We can’t have that.
…I’m a bright educated Catholic girl and I’m completely confused!
Can someone here write an article about this? “What is considered inappropriate pre-marital sexuality?”
I always thought as long as you’re a virgin everything else is fine. All I ever was told was “wait until you’re married” – by wait I assumed they meant “sex-sex”.
I’m all for waiting until marriage, but I want to know just how steamy making out with my boyfriend can get. That is, if I can even make out with him. I don’t understand why it would be forbidden. It’s just kissing, it’s not sex…
Chels
July 9, 2011
Oh, but I do question other ideologies, like feminism.
Chels
July 9, 2011
BF, I don’t know what you understand through sex-sex, but anal/oral forms are still sex, and it’s still not appropriate to get naked with your bf and screw around, even if it doesn’t involve penetration (e.g handjobs).
I’m not entirely sure about kissing.
Svar
July 9, 2011
@ Chels and Schneeflocke
Kissing and making out is ok.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Chels, abortion is flat-out immoral.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Kissing is fine, making out by most definitions is fine (although definitions get important … to some people “making out” is everything that happens before penetrative sex, in which case that is *not* ok). The “borderline” is, as Chels says, getting naked, touching flesh that would otherwise be clothed, certainly non-penetrative forms of genital contact with hands or mouths or what have you.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
Kissing and making out is ok.
But doesn’t that fall under the “pre-marital sexual indiscretions” umbrella?
Also, what if you’re making out…err…topless? Is that a sin? Is being naked considered “sexual”?
I really want these questions cleared up; I don’t want to become a hellbound sinner!
Morticia
July 9, 2011
Don’t hold back on account of our feelings, CM. We don’t hold back on account of yours.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
Kissing is fine, making out by most definitions is fine (although definitions get important … to some people “making out” is everything that happens before penetrative sex, in which case that is *not* ok). The “borderline” is, as Chels says, getting naked, touching flesh that would otherwise be clothed, certainly non-penetrative forms of genital contact with hands or mouths or what have you.
*I should have refreshed the page before I posted*
Wait, why is being naked considered “sexual”?
Are these sins “lesser” than pre-marital sex? Are they just as bad as pre-marital sex?
pb
July 9, 2011
BF: “I don’t understand why it would be forbidden. ”
Seeking to get or give “venereal pleasure” outside the context of “the marital embrace” is wrong, because venereal pleasure is licit within that context only.
A Lady
July 9, 2011
Chels, I didn’t refer to you specifically because the line you used is generic polemic that always comes up in discussions such as this one.
Chels
July 9, 2011
I guess if you were to evalute sins, sex would at the top, and being naked would be below.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
Depends who you ask. The old pre-VII Catholicism put “lustful kissing” in the not-before-marriage category. I haven’t seen any Priests but the most traditionalist and conservative defend that now though.
A Lady
July 9, 2011
It’s more just me being irritated with the secular notion that Christians are too stupid to have a theology of the body, or that Christians can have the science down and come to different conclusions.
Alte
July 9, 2011
I always wondered about French-kissing. I mean… he can’t put his hand on my breast, but he can stick his tongue in my mouth? The latter seems more sexual to me because of the penetration.
Every guy I dated wanted to do that on the first date, but it grossed me out. Way too intimate for that. They stick their tongues down everybody’s throat. Gross out.
A Lady
July 9, 2011
I think there is certainly some merit to the mostly-Protestant view that kissing/making out before marriage is not to be pursued because it can lead to a legalistic view of sexual desire before marriage.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
I think lustful kissing is just too much of a temptation. Don’t bake a cake if you aint’ gonna eat it.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
This thread is rather sad in a way.
It went from bragging about how trads have it so great within marriage as concerning sex despite what those big ol mean atheists say , to some people telling a young Christian girl to be very careful how she kisses her boyfriend- and I don’t mean merely avoiding French Kissing- which yes, is totally gross if done by two strangers who don’t know each other’s disease history or even mouthwashing habits.
A Lady
July 9, 2011
Clarence, lust is lust. If it’s not leading to marriage, young people shouldn’t be crafting opportunities to justify lust. And even with engaged couples, they should remain chaste and flee temptation.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
So, I’m going to reiterate my main point: Overall, Trads have it worst. This is somewhat balanced out by much less chance of catching STD’s or unplanned pregnancies PROVIDED they are not the kind of Trads that freak out over sexual education.
pb
July 9, 2011
Yeah, in the old manuals “french kissing” would be called “deep kissing” and prohibited…
Clarence
July 9, 2011
A Lady:
I understand where you are coming from, but to me, lust, per-se isn’t a sin, though excessive lust can be troublesome for ones life. Indeed if it weren’t for lust many people never would have been born. God bless lust, I say
Chels
July 9, 2011
Clarence
You don’t have to be married for that, you just have to be in a committed relationship.
Chels
July 9, 2011
What can Christians do before marrying someone? (besides little pecks)
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
I already mentioned how Italian sportscars make me tingle.
Is that a sin too?
@Clarence:
Yeah, this thread is really sad. For my boyfriend. No more making out topless with him! I gotta be a good ‘lil Catholic girl…
Chels
July 9, 2011
To take Clarence’s point further–I don’t understand why a couple that loves each other, that are committed to each can’t be intimate until they’re married. It all seems simplistic and doesn’t make sense.
Chels
July 9, 2011
No, BF, it’s sad for both of you. I’m sure you both desire each other, and all these rules of “proper sexual conduct” seem so trivial.
Chels
July 9, 2011
BF, how old are you and how old is your bf?
pb
July 9, 2011
“God bless lust, I say”
Lust is blessed, but in marriage.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
There is a difference between deliberate acts done to incite lust and just experiencing it through no fault of your own. I was in the line for confession once and the guy in front of me was making me tingly. Sometimes it just happens.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
BF, I misbehaved with my wife before we married, and she was only a technical virgin when we went to the altar. So, my own record was patchy. But I think you should keep your clothes on. Men don’t admire breasts like an art lover admiring a canvas. They see a woman’s breasts, they want to have sex with her. Whether he says it or not, you are provoking him without a natural outlet. if you are serious about remaining a virgin, you are on the wrong track.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
I never knew women “tingled” until I read these blogs.
CSPB
July 9, 2011
BF, intentions matter. Arousal is not a sin, but lust is. So the rules are clear in some areas and unclear in others. If “making out” (which is arousing)causes you to lust (want to use the other for sexual pleasure) then it is sinful. Also boundaries are hard to respect once all those hormones are surging. As to topless, well historically the female breasts was not as sexualized as they are these days.
BF, you are wanting a legalistic answer about being on 2nd base. That is how the Pharisees viewed the Law.
pb
July 9, 2011
haha me neither
pb
July 9, 2011
That was in response to David Collard’s last…
Alte
July 9, 2011
I think it’s different for each person, so it’s hard to develop hard-and-fast rules, really. I’m actually rather anti-physical, as far as arousal goes. It’s mostly masculine behavior or intelligence that turns me on. I’m more visual than most women too, I suppose. So… I’m fighting lust from the other side of the room and French-kissing turns me off. LOL No easy answers. But you can tell. If what you’re doing or thinking makes you want to lie back and spread your legs, it’s probably best avoided until you’re married.
I also have an incredibly vivid and active imagination, so that’s a big problem for me.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
Clarence- courtships have always been about finding a spouse and being able to decide with a *clear* head. Lust fogs reason.
Secondly- Lust is always suppose to be open to the possibility of conception. If you are lusting it up before marriage you aren’t open to life.
One of the thign that annoys me about the Catholic Church is there 6 months pre-counseling. Often it takes more like a year between scheduling and whatnot. When people are so filled with passion that they NEED to get married it should be more like a weekend-retreat…not 6 months of drawn-out counseling.
CSPB
July 9, 2011
In the English language, the meaning of the word LUST has evolved and been watered down. Most people think of good lust and bad lust. No lusting is a sin, ALWAYS.
Lusting is different than arousal. A person can be aroused without lusting (in the context of marriage, but it can happen in dating too). Often lust does accompany arousal, which is why most Christians insist that arousal is ALWAYS bad before marriage and it is fine to lust after your spouse. Sloppy language leads to confusion.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Damn, a guy can’t even get to second base? This is a lot harder than I thought it was.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
Alte, yes, the visual thing and the vivid imagination are masculine traits. BF, that relates to my point. You may think you are just being intimate and close, but he will be getting desperate to penetrate you somehow.
CSPB
July 9, 2011
Svar, If you get to 2nd, make sure there is rain on the horizon so the Game gets called on account of rain before you make it to 3rd base or score a run.
Svar
July 9, 2011
“To take Clarence’s point further–I don’t understand why a couple that loves each other, that are committed to each can’t be intimate until they’re married. It all seems simplistic and doesn’t make sense.”
I somewhat think that too, but remember what Terri said: “Yes, Svar, listen to the Book. Suppose you deflower her and then don’t marry her? What about the next guy she dates? Surely you can see the problem…”
It’s like what Dalrock says all the time: There is no commitment without marraige. Marriage is the only true form of commitment. Your BF could leave you and break up with you whenever he wants, including right after the first time you have sex and be justified in doing so.
The no-sex-before-marriage rule in the Bible is probably out there to help out women more than men.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
LOL…I was basically going to say what CSPB did. It is probably more difficult to go to second base and not take it to home than it is to just not go up to bat.
Svar
July 9, 2011
@ CSPB and Morticia
I knew it. I’m going to have to get married early. Gay.
Chels
July 9, 2011
That doesn’t really change anything though because after marriage, you have a whole other list of rules.
Chris
July 9, 2011
Herr Doktor Svar barked:
Dear schtupit troll, religion is considered apart of national identity in most countries, especially in the past before secularism. The religion that was traditionally apart of the American Identity was Protestantism.
Religion is only divisive when there is more than one religion in a country like with Serbia and it’s Albanian Muslims. The Islamic religion of the Albanians aggravated the ethnic tension between them and the Serbs.
Nyet. Comrade. The true religion of America is secularism, as in the rest of the west. With a religious sugar coating, yes, but… for example zer troll whimpered.
Not just Islam, they have the Naxalite(Maoist)-Christian-Evangelist-nexus in the Northeast states to worry about too.
I’ll note that the Orthodox Malabar Christians of the deep South pose no threat (that I know of at least) because they have been there 2,000 years and have merged with the larger surrounding Hindu cultural ethos. There is no separate political agenda, which cannot be said for the Communist-Christian missionary nexus of the Northeast which seeks to destabalize the national ethos.
Its nothing short of foreign imperialism.
Well comrades, we need to re educate the owner of a glass pipe. Christianity was originally a Jewish then Jewish / Greek cult. It then became a Roman / Greek national religion, although the farmers ( pagani clung to the old gods for a long time. Then it invaded North Europe, and Northern Europeans (thanks to Luther) rediscovered Romans and missionary activity.
And although all good comrades deny that socialism is a secular perversion of the enlightenment idea of the dignity of all humans, which follows the priesthood of all believers (Calvin) and the equality of all men before God(Luther, Calvin, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas…). It ain’t imperialism
I live in the commonwealth — the old British Empire. The last, and most effective imperalists: e.g. deliberately pushing opium (grown in Afghanistan) into China to make a profit. And they generally resisted the missionaries going in because they actually cared about the natives.
Massive Fail, Comrade. Go read some real history, not the kindergarten books they have at your college.
Svar
July 9, 2011
“That doesn’t really change anything though because after marriage, you have a whole other list of rules.”
Are you referring to my recent comment?
Chels
July 9, 2011
Yup
Clarence
July 9, 2011
ButterFly Flower:
Make sure your boyfriend sees this thread so he’ll know you still desire him.
CSPB: Kindly define “lust” and differentiate it from “arousal”.
CSPB
July 9, 2011
Good plan Svar. The good ones are taken off the shelf early. And they can be quite eager for the same reasons as you. It is better to marry than to burn.
Become Catholic, Get married (civil and religious are intertwined). Get divorced to remove the civil marriage. Then you will still be religiously married according to the teachings of the Catholic Church. Then have kids. The only thing keeping the two of you together is then your vows and all most of the divorce incentives are removed.
This sounds absurd, but I have thought about this a lot and it seems the only way to be married and keep the state out of it. I am not sure this is workable or that any priest would endorse this plan.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
To take Clarence’s point further–I don’t understand why a couple that loves each other, that are committed to each can’t be intimate until they’re married. It all seems simplistic and doesn’t make sense.
It isn’t simplistic, it’s rather that marriage matters. It is a status changer. Before you are married, sex is not licit — sex is licit between married couples only. It is based on the Bible and 2,000 years of unbroken Tradition, in Judaism and Christianity alike.
The problem arises because our contemporary culture quasi-equates “committed relationship” with “being married”, with the only distinction being “legalities, formalities and papers”. That may be true for the secular culture, but it isn’t true for God and the Church. Marriage changes your status in the eyes of God forever. You are not “kind of married” if you are shacked up in a non-marital relationship. That’s fornication in the eyes of the Church.
One of the thign that annoys me about the Catholic Church is there 6 months pre-counseling. Often it takes more like a year between scheduling and whatnot. When people are so filled with passion that they NEED to get married it should be more like a weekend-retreat…not 6 months of drawn-out counseling.
This is by design to slow you down. The idea is to give the couple time to seriously evaluate compatibilities, rather than rushing to get married quickly. In practice, it probably isn’t long enough to achieve that goal, but the goal makes sense.
Svar
July 9, 2011
“Nyet. Comrade. The true religion of America is secularism, as in the rest of the west. With a religious sugar coating, yes, but… for example zer troll whimpered.”
Maybe in America, but not in the rest of the West. Europe was a bastion of Christianity before American “values” as well as Cultural Bolshevism crept in. As for Canada, Australia, and NZ well those regions were loyal to the Crown and not secualar. Now if you’re talking about the Modern West…. that’s a different story.
“It then became a Roman / Greek national religion, although the farmers ( pagani clung to the old gods for a long time.”
Yep. Paganus is Latin for “country-dweller”.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
That doesn’t really change anything though because after marriage, you have a whole other list of rules.
It’s not legalistic rules as much as it is living to do God’s will. There are right and wrong answers here, unfortunately for us — it isn’t just “going with it”. In that sense it’s good that the Church provides us with guidance. But there are always right and wrong moral answers for everything we do. We can choose to view that as a “morass of rules” (which our secular libertine culture would tend to encourage us to do), or we can choose to view it as a set of life-giving choices.
The interesting thing is that secular people behave the same way in many matters that do not pertain to sex. For example, many educated seculars follow extremely legalistic “food rules” about what they eat. You can view those as oppressive rules, or as life-giving choices (and mostly they are peddled as the latter when people try to proselytize their own food rules, which is common in our culture — food rules are a kind of nouveau secular religion in an orthoprax sense, really). Of course, these rules are chosen and not given (although the proponents of them would also claim they are “given by nature”), but the idea of rules vs. choices applies nonetheless.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Well, Chels, are you talking about the rules about sex or the rules about commitment(i.e. stuff like divorce)?
The sex stuff doesn’t bother me. I’ve never had any particular urge to screw a girl up the ass or deep-throat her(both, especially the latter gross me out). Plus, blow-jobs are okay as long as you ejaculate in her vagina. That’s doable.
As for divorce, well, divorce laws and family court wasn’t always this messed up. Divorce was taken seriously.
Chels
July 9, 2011
I’m mainly talking about no birth control allowed.
Svar
July 9, 2011
CSPB, that sounds like a decent plan, however, I doubt it would be okay because the Church looks down upon divorce except in certain cases. Also, many states have laws where cohabiting couples will become legally married after a period of time. Then there’s the problem of getting the girl to agree with the whole deal.
Does the Church do simple Covenant marriages?
Svar
July 9, 2011
Chels, I find the birth control rule to be troublesome as well.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
The best way to protect one’s chastity before marriage is to not indulge in thoughts, visual stimuli or conversations about sex.
No porn, no sexting or sex chat or even reading sexy material, and no talking about it in any form other than the necessary and clinical.
If you’re going to do chastity, go all the way and do it right.
Don’t half-ass this thing.
Half-assing results in nothing but sexual frustration.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
CM is right.
Even as a married woman I have had to be chaste…like when my husband traveled or when we were practicing NFP. Especially during nursing when cycles are wonky and you get many false starts. You basically have to keep as far away from temptation as possible.
I actually read an article today about how our self-control is a type of energy that we only have limited stores of. So if we use self-control in one activity we won’t have as much for the next activity. So..for example…you shouldn’t give up your crack addiction at the same time you give up carbohydrates.
The only other options is to avoid the temptation or to pray for the grace to not be tempted. Expecting to be able to have limitless self-control is a recipe for disaster.
Clarence
July 9, 2011
From a secular point of view all this stuff is idiotic.
Sexual compatibility is important in a marriage. And the Catholic Church with its Priest Scandals and declining Priesthood (in part due to the requirement of chastity) is really in no position to talk. I”m not sure the Holy See knows its back from its front when it comes to sex. It’s enough to make me almost sympathize with the American “cafeteria Catholics”. But then, there’s no real reason for them to stay in the Church anyway.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Clarence, agree 10000%
Morticia
July 9, 2011
I don’t know that I buy the whole “sexual compabitility” thing. Cant’ you get a good idea of what a person is like in bed by how they act outside of the bedroom?
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
From a secular point of view all this stuff is idiotic.
Sexual compatibility is important in a marriage. And the Catholic Church with its Priest Scandals and declining Priesthood (in part due to the requirement of chastity) is really in no position to talk. I”m not sure the Holy See knows its back from its front when it comes to sex. It’s enough to make me almost sympathize with the American “cafeteria Catholics”. But then, there’s no real reason for them to stay in the Church anyway.”
WORD.
Morticia, “I actually read an article today about how our self-control is a type of energy that we only have limited stores of. So if we use self-control in one activity we won’t have as much for the next activity. So..for example…you shouldn’t give up your crack addiction at the same time you give up carbohydrates.”
That’s why a balanced approach to life is healthy. Catholic priests are notorious drinkers (of alcohol) for a reason.
The completely celibate life from childhood til death is something that very few people can authentically pull off in a healthy and balanced way.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Morticia, definitely NOT (e.g. my friend was going out with this guy and she found out that he was too big for her, so they broke up)
David Collard
July 9, 2011
If you badly want to get married, you are probably sexually compatible. You may not be in other ways.
Arguably, it was relaxing the rules and letting homosexuals into the priesthood that led to the sex scandals.
CSPB
July 9, 2011
My definitions, based on my understanding:
Arousal is physical and also includes longing for the other. Physical attraction is the means by which a man and women find each other. So this is normal and natural and can’t be sinful. Often we have no control over arousal, but we can incite or inflame arousal in ourselves or in another. Arousal itself is amoral. It is the other aspects that accompany arousal that brings us to the realm of lust and makes determines morality.
Lust is an intention “to use” for selfish pleasure. Usually it refers to the physical. Lust can happen in marriage too. Of course we could lust after new car, our neighbor’s boat or wife. It is a desire to possess something that does not belong to us. The Theology of the Body by Pope John Paul II makes a distinction between a subject of love and an object of desire. Objectifying a woman is a bad thing and many preach against it. We have discussed this before and with consideration of Game knowledge, some amount of objectification of women seems to be desired by women.
My definition is by no means official but it fits my worldview, understanding of Game and my understanding of Catholic theology.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
A recent study showed that homosexuality and pedophilia are not linked. If I can find the study I will link it.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
“I don’t know that I buy the whole “sexual compabitility” thing. Cant’ you get a good idea of what a person is like in bed by how they act outside of the bedroom?”
If normal vanilla sex is all that is known to a society, then yes.
However in today’s West all sorts of physically and mentally unhealthy forms of sex are fast becoming the norm, with porn so easily and freely available, kids are being exposed to things that the normal human brain cannot compute and its becoming “normalized”.
Some very young woman who claimed to be a voice for the neglected mainstream and traditional enjoys “facials” and said, “most women get them”. She sees herself as a voice for “conservative youth” and “facials” are normative for her. I had to look it up and NO it’s not normal and healthy.
Roissy talks about enjoying anal sex openly, unafraid that society will no longer link an obsessive desire for such with latent and repressed homosexuality, as was usually thought to be the case up until recently (even though it still is the case).
You don’t even wanna know what “brown sports” are.
So, in today’s world “sexual compatibility” becomes increasingly important.
Imagine being married to someone that could only get off if you did something totally disgusting.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Clarence, keep in mind that this is our Faith. Also, about the whole “sexual compatibility” thing, c’mon now. Most people don’t get married with loads of experience, skills, and techniques.
The Church gets all of it’s rules and such from the Bible. The priests change, the leadership changes, the rules get bent by midguided popes like Pope John XXII, the priests start to bang altar boys, but the Bible stays the same.
I do agree with you about “cafeteria Catholics”. People who half-ass it don’t get the benefits of either end. Half-assing is for cowards.
Chels, since when were you a secularist?
Chris
July 9, 2011
Morticia, our gay friends get caught up, like our straight friends, with the definition of a child as under 18. Not puberty. It’s not uncommon for a fairly young person to desire a person in their late teens — peak of beauty. My readings of the sex scandals is that it was gay priests seducing teenage boys.
Pedophilia is being aroused by the pre-pubertal. Different thing. Most Gay men I know are disgusted by the suggestion that they would be aroused by a child. A strapping member of the football team… is arousing — the same way as a cheerleader would be for a straight man.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Chels, that’s an exception. Exceptions don’t make the rule. Also, if they found that out during the wedding night, they could easily get an annulment.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
“A recent study showed that homosexuality and pedophilia are not linked. If I can find the study I will link it.”
People who do not express their sexuality in healthy ways for a very long period of time can be at risk for bottled up frustrations that release themselves in covert and unhealthy ways.
There’s a reason why nature works as it does. Go against it, and you might find yourself indulging in unnatural acts.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
John XXIII wrote that homosexuals should not enter the priesthood. He was ignored and we can see where that went.
John Paul II was silly about lust in married sex. A man needs strong desire to get an erection. That pope had tendencies to feminism and angelism.
Sodomising a woman is not homosexual because the man is having sex with a woman.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
Most of the priestly sex scandals involved homosexuals having sex with young men including teens.
Svar
July 9, 2011
“John Paul II was silly about lust in married sex. A man needs strong desire to get an erection. That pope had tendencies to feminism and angelism”
That’s who I meant.
“Sodomising a woman is not homosexual because the man is having sex with a woman.”
Exactly.
The thing is, most secularists give “sexual compatibility” more importance than it really has. Just like the troll and her whole “technique is better than game” schpiel.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
Svar, the Church relies on Tradition as well as scripture.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
The secular point of view is irrelevant, as the secular are not “in Christ”.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
“Sodomising a woman is not homosexual because the man is having sex with a woman.”
Its generally coveted by men who have already tried anal sex with other males during their youth, got used to it, and now want it from women.
Its something that men who get out of prison also desire from their women.
The ties that bind, they bind so well.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Svar, I never actually bothered to check myself into a box, I had these beliefs for as long as I remember. If I would really have to define myself–cafeteria Christian or Christian with some liberal as well as conservative beliefs.
Chels
July 9, 2011
However, like I said before, although I do know the Bible, I don’t want to classify myself as a Christian because I feel like I’m giving real Christians a bad name.
Svar
July 9, 2011
“The secular point of view is irrelevant, as the secular are not “in Christ”.”
Exactly, Brendan. Secularists expect us to care about their viewpoints because………. ?
Chels
July 9, 2011
But then I pray, go to church, celebrate Christian holidays, etc…
CSPB
July 9, 2011
Svar, you said the Church frowns on divorce, yes, this is true in the secular sense, but divorce does not exist in a sacramental way. So The Church’s position is anti-divorce becasue it destroys families and is misunderstood as ending a marriage when it does no such thing. Hence the need for the annulment. The declaration of nullity is a determination that the union of souls did not occur due to a defect in the union, because of form, wrongful intentions or mental incapacity.
So the civil divorce plan to maintain the sacrametnal marriage would not be contrary to any of this, but would still be frowned upon because it would give the “appearance of scandal” and supposedly trivialize a legitimate marriage, although the institution of marriage can hardly be damaged any more than it already has been.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Also, without sex, you’re having a platonic relationship, like between friends. Sex definitely helps you to bond to that person.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
CM, I enjoy anal sex with a woman and I have no interest in men.
I don’t do it any more for moral reasons.
Svar
July 9, 2011
Chels, I don’t see you as a bad Christian, but as a Christian whose struggling with your faith. We all struggle with faith every now and then. I struggle with it all the time(that’s part of why I spend alot of time at sites like this). The thing is, Chels, the rules are the rules, but we all make mistakes and we all give into temptation(I’ve done it way many times), however, we need to own up to those mistakes and errors in judgement and repent. If we change the definition of what right and what is wrong just to suit our desires, we’ll never be able to truly repent for our sins.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
Actually much deviant sex that is currently being normalized for heterosexuals in our society has come from the 1970s gay club culture.
Facials? A gay thing.
BDSM? Totally a gay thing.
Anal sex? But of course, another gay thing.
Svar
July 9, 2011
“Also, without sex, you’re having a platonic relationship, like between friends. Sex definitely helps you to bond to that person.”
Not really. There are always sexual and romantic undertones that is nothing like friendship.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
A blunt sexual discussion could probably cover the basis as well as “experimentation”. I dated a guy who hid from me for 4 months the fact that he masturbated no less than 3x a day. I was pretty annoyed that he hid a sex-addiction for so long. Then more stuff came to light, that he preferred bondage. It would have been nice if he had just TOLD me this stuff.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
Bondage. One of the few things that doesn’t tempt me.
A Lady
July 9, 2011
Chels, you are a Moral Therapeutic Deist. Google it. It explains quite a bit for many who call themselves Christian but bristle at following Christ.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
The idea is that a person is “called” to their vocation..and if they are called then they will have the supernatural grace to do it well.
When it comes to sexual problems developing isn’t there some warning signs, or does it just happen spontaneously? Like…do you start getting more wet dreams and then have a harder time not masturbating etc… Because it would seem to me that a priest who is confessing regularly would give off some warning bells to his confessor, and the confessor could request he be transferred into a situation where there are less temptations. And if he ends up having to leave the priesthood then so be it.
I don’t think changing the nature of the priesthood to accommodate “natural urges” makes any sense. Priesthood is a supernatural calling that provides supernatural grace. If a priest is falling into sin then chances are he was ignoring the “small” sins and let them progress til they became big sins.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
Yes, a priest, like all of us, needs Grace to avoid and overcome temptation. There are sexual temptations in all states and stages of life.
Chels
July 9, 2011
A Lady, that was interesting to read, but it doesn’t describe me that well.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Morticia
Catholic churches should allow priests to marry, and not insist on a celibate lifestyle. Other branches of Christianity allow priests to have their own family, and it’s much better for everybody involved.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
I also have an incredibly vivid and active imagination, so that’s a big problem for me.
I have the same problem. Even if my boyfriend is standing around doing nothing particularly sexy, I start to think “Wow, he’s really cute. I should pin him against the wall right now!”
You may think you are just being intimate and close, but he will be getting desperate to penetrate you somehow.
Of course my boyfriend wants to penetrate me; however he’s Christian so he holds back. We’ve discussed sex, he wants to wait until marriage; no exceptions.
Although I’m quite the naughty b!tch; I’m always blue ball-ing him [I beleive that is the correct term?]
Stupid teenage hormones! I can’t help making out with my boyfriend. If we’re alone together in a room I’m gonna take my top off and pin him down with kisses. It just happens, I tell you!
Morticia
July 9, 2011
Chels-
Jesus Christ was celibate. Priests are called to mimic His example. Even St Paul said that not getting married was better than being married. There is no question that the Bible supports a celibate priesthood.
The fact that not all men are cut out for it just means not all men should/can be priests.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
Morticia, its different for everyone, although there may be patterns.
Chels
July 9, 2011
Morticia, only in Catholicism are priests to be celibate.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
Good answer, Morticia.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
many who call themselves Christian but bristle at following Christ.
It’s really about being repentant and acknowledging our sins. The typical faithful Christian posture (at least in the apostolic churches) is one of constant knowledge and awareness of one’s sinfulness coupled with a firm faith in God’s willingness and power to forgive — so you approach God in confession (or Eucharist for minor sins) with the knowledge of your sinfulness and with an attitude of repentance, asking for forgiveness. That is the fundamental Christian disposition.
It is subverted when we rebel and do not consider our acts “wrong” or “sinful”, because then we are putting our own judgment before God’s, and, as a result, have no repentant attitude, for we have nothing to repent of. Instead of recognizing our own sin in humility and asking for forgiveness, we deny our acts were sinful, which leads us away from repentance, and away from asking forgiveness. It perpetuates an alienation from God.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Priests can’t get married in the Orthodox Church. It’s that married men can be ordained. This is also the case in the Eastern Catholic Churches that are in communion with Rome, by the way, lest Roman Catholics claim that celibacy must be a universal norm for priests (as it isn’t in the Catholic Church itself).
David Collard
July 9, 2011
BF, teasing him like that sounds unkind.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
Also- only a small fraction of priests actually want an end to celibacy. The great majority support priestly celibacy. Even a few of the married priests argue in defense of celibacy because of the logistical problems that having a family causes a priest.
And in the Orthodox Church where priests can be married there are still many many priests who are voluntarily celibate.
The reason there is a priest shortage is because Catholics have smaller families and orthodoxy among Catholics is dwindling.
Generally it is better for a priest to have come from a large family because 1. they won’t be the sole person responsible for taking care of their parents in old age. 2. the priesthood can be very lonely and it is good to have a large family for support.
Morticia
July 9, 2011
BF- stop being alone in a room with him.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
Morticia, I’m sure there’s several books written by ex priests, ex nuns and ex monks from a wide variety of traditions, including Catholic, that talk about the problems faced in the celibate experience. Come to think of it there are probably several blogs out there about this now.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Morticia, I’m sure there’s several books written by ex priests, ex nuns and ex monks from a wide variety of traditions, including Catholic, that talk about the problems faced in the celibate experience. Come to think of it there are probably several blogs out there about this now.
There’s nothing at all wrong with celibacy for the sake of God. Paul speaks of this highly in his writings. Morticia is also correct that there are quite a few celibate priests in the Orthodox Church (yet not so common among parish priests). Christians are to be in the world but not of the world. Reducing the standards to the “needs of the world” is not Christian in the least, and can have no relevance for Christians.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
BF- stop being alone in a room with him.
If I’m not alone in a room with him, then I’d be sexting him. In this modern digital age, teenage hormones have no bounds!
…I think I’ve asked this before, but since we’re on this topic – is sexting a sin? I mean, it’s not real sex.
A Lady
July 9, 2011
I can’t believe you are asking that. Of course it’s sinful behavior. Stimulating lust through speech is sinful.
Why are you so legalistic?
David Collard
July 9, 2011
BF, you are asking for trouble.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
…I think I’ve asked this before, but since we’re on this topic – is sexting a sin? I mean, it’s not real sex.
Ask Rep. Weiner.
As for Catholic teaching, it depends on what you are doing. Sending pornographic pictures of yourself would be sinful because it is not something to be shared outside marriage. Sexy text conversation is dicey, because it would lead to the “near occasion of sin”, but is less troubling than naked images of oneself.
A Lady
July 9, 2011
(Calvinist) Protestants pretty much are on board with Matthew 5: 27-30 as the standard, so sexting would be sinful.
terri
July 9, 2011
That doesn’t really change anything though because after marriage, you have a whole other list of rules.
I’m not Catholic. Besides “no sodomy”, there are no rules so long as you are married. Besides, why do people have no problem with restrictions in other areas of life? When it comes to sex, suddenly it’s all just “too much.”
Brendan
July 9, 2011
I’m not Catholic. Besides “no sodomy”, there are no rules so long as you are married.
Yes, Terry, but she’s Orthodox, and has pretty much the same rules as Catholics do about sex, even if we don’t spell it out in chapter and verse.
terri
July 9, 2011
If you’re going to do chastity, go all the way and do it right.
Don’t half-ass this thing.
Somebody grab Satan a parka! Hell just froze over, because I actually agree with Crystal Meth on something. She sounded more Biblical than the Christians on this thread with that comment.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
As for Catholic teaching, it depends on what you are doing. Sending pornographic pictures of yourself would be sinful because it is not something to be shared outside marriage. Sexy text conversation is dicey, because it would lead to the “near occasion of sin”, but is less troubling than naked images of oneself.
So sexting is basically okay as long as long as I’m not naked?
Anyway, Rep. Weiner’s sin was infidelity, not sexting. If he had been unmarried and sent those photos to his girlfriend, technically it wouldn’t have been a sin. He wasn’t naked, he had his boxers on.
Joy
July 9, 2011
Terri, I’m Protestant, too, so you’re not alone there. My mother was open with me about sex when I was growing up. I could ask her anything and know I’d get an answer. She always told me that sex was beautiful but meant for marriage only.
terri
July 9, 2011
BF, Listen carefully. Inciting lust and sexual expressions with someone NOT your husband is a sin.
If you don’t marry this guy, how will your future husband feel about the fact that some other guys was mauling his wife’s breasts? That some one else sees you the way only he is supposed to see you?
This really isn’t rocket science. There’s a reason why marriage vows implore us to “keep yourself only unto him so long as you both shall live.”
It used to be assumed that your spouse was the only person you’d ever be with, and certainly if you’ve never been previously married. Truth is unchanged by time and cultural attitudes. Young people have always had raging hormones. However, when there was shame attached to just “doing what comes naturally”, somehow they managed to wait. Well, a good number of them did, anyway.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
So sexting is basically okay as long as long as I’m not naked?
Anyway, Rep. Weiner’s sin was infidelity, not sexting. If he had been unmarried and sent those photos to his girlfriend, technically it wouldn’t have been a sin. He wasn’t naked, he had his boxers on.
That’s where you’re misunderstanding.
If it’s adultery/cheating/infidelity for a married person, it’s a sin for a Catholic unmarried person, too.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
In the context of sexting, I mean.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
If you don’t marry this guy, how will your future husband feel about the fact that some other guys was mauling his wife’s breasts? That some one else sees you the way only he is supposed to see you?
I plan on marrying my boyfriend. In a year or so. *giggles* I can’t wait to have wedding photos to show off!
Alternatively, I can call up my travel agent and have her book a flight to Vegas, like, right now. Bet I can be at the Luxor by 5 am. My boyfriend and I can be married before breakfast!
Getting married on the whim because you’re young and horny..now that’s a solid foundation for a long, happy marriage!
Brendan
July 9, 2011
But not married in the Catholic Church.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
If it’s adultery/cheating/infidelity for a married person, it’s a sin for a Catholic unmarried person, too.
Are you alluding to that “you’re married to God until you’re married to your future spouse” belief? i.e. so if you engage in pre-marital naughties, you’re cheating on God.
…wait, isn’t that technically an LDS doctrine?
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Are you alluding to that “you’re married to God until you’re married to your future spouse” belief? i.e. so if you engage in pre-marital naughties, you’re cheating on God.
…wait, isn’t that technically an LDS doctrine?
Not alluding to anything of the kind. Catholic doctrine is clear: sex outside of marriage is illicit. If you are married and what you are doing is “cheating” and immoral in a sexual sense, than that also applies to the unmarried. Not because you are “cheating on God”, but because you are engaging in sexual activity outside of marriage. If you are unmarried, this same kind of sexual activity is occurring outside of marriage, and is therefore illicit. No Mormon doctrine involved.
As others have pointed out, you’re being rather legalistic here, which I suspect is convenient for you given how you seem to wish to behave. I wonder how your Catholic education took place, and how your conscience was formed, really. When I was raised as a Catholic 30 years ago, this was like 101 stuff.
Svar
July 9, 2011
BF, you’d rather get married in Vegas than in a Catholic Church? What’s your definition of tradition again, schneeflocke?
Svar
July 9, 2011
This stuff is very simple, BF. You’ve been a Christian, what your whole life? And me, I’ve been one for about a year or so(not really, still not baptized). I find it hard to believe that you don’t know these rules. I can see why people suspect you of trolling.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
But not married in the Catholic Church.
He’s not Catholic, so we cannot get married in the Catholic Church. He’s Angelican [?] or some denomination of that.
Besides, I’m pretty sure my Church charges about 2,000 dollars for marriages. And probably another thousand more to convert my boyfriend. My Birkin bag is cheaper than a traditional Catholic wedding.
David Alexander
July 9, 2011
My Birkin bag is cheaper than a traditional Catholic wedding.
Damn, you have fine tastes. Oh if I wasn’t some pathetic sub-human unemployable male.
FWIW, a Catholic wedding lasts forever. A bag may barely survive one season.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
He’s not Catholic, so we cannot get married in the Catholic Church. He’s Angelican [?] or some denomination of that.
Besides, I’m pretty sure my Church charges about 2,000 dollars for marriages. And probably another thousand more to convert my boyfriend. My Birkin bag is cheaper than a traditional Catholic wedding.
Oh you can get married to anyone in the Catholic Church (especially anyone baptized of any sort of Christian denomination) as long as you are Catholic and they agree to raise the children Catholic.
However, if you marry outside the Church, you are not considered married by the Church, and are considered to be engaging in ongoing fornication. A “civil marriage” doesn’t “count” for the Church. Just so you know.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
As others have pointed out, you’re being rather legalistic here, which I suspect is convenient for you given how you seem to wish to behave. I wonder how your Catholic education took place, and how your conscience was formed, really. When I was raised as a Catholic 30 years ago, this was like 101 stuff.
I don’t know how it was 30 years ago, but they didn’t really talk about sex. They just told us “don’t you dare have it”. By “it” I assume they meant normal sex/anal sex.
Ask any modern-day Catholic schoolgirl; most of them have the same beleifs as me. That is, if they even care about chastity.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
I don’t know how it was 30 years ago, but they didn’t really talk about sex. They just told us “don’t you dare have it”. By “it” I assume they meant normal sex/anal sex.
Ask any modern-day Catholic schoolgirl; most of them have the same beleifs as me. That is, if they even care about chastity.
Yes but is there any excuse for that? Your generation is very adept at Googling and Wiki-ing every other factoid out there. The Catholic Church’s teachings on these things are not hidden — they are easily findable by a quick google search. But there must be interest to do that, which seems lacking — because it clearly isn’t aptitude at finding information that is lacking.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
However, if you marry outside the Church, you are not considered married by the Church, and are considered to be engaging in ongoing fornication. A “civil marriage” doesn’t “count” for the Church. Just so you know.
I asked my Mom, and she said she thinks my boyfriend and I can just pay a fee or waiver to officiate it in the Catholic Church.
Wait, so if the marriage isn’t official in the Catholic Church, but it’s official in the Angelican Church, am I sinning if I were to sleep with my boyfriend [I guess husband in said scenario]?
Eh, it sounds easier [and fiscally more responsible] to just be an Angelican.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
I asked my Mom, and she said she thinks my boyfriend and I can just pay a fee or waiver to officiate it in the Catholic Church.
Better buy off the priest for that one. The priests I know would not marry someone who pulled a Vegas — it’s basically baptizing fornication. But maybe some priests and some dioceses would put up with it. Hard to tell these days.
Wait, so if the marriage isn’t official in the Catholic Church, but it’s official in the Angelican Church, am I sinning if I were to sleep with my boyfriend [I guess husband in said scenario]?
Eh, it sounds easier [and fiscally more responsible] to just be an Angelican.
Are you an Anglican or a Catholic? Anglicans have almost no moral rules any longer, so it’s certainly “easier” to be an Anglican. The Anglicans aren’t the Church however.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
Yes but is there any excuse for that? Your generation is very adept at Googling and Wiki-ing every other factoid out there. The Catholic Church’s teachings on these things are not hidden — they are easily findable by a quick google search. But there must be interest to do that, which seems lacking — because it clearly isn’t aptitude at finding information that is lacking.
Uh….ignorance is bliss?
“Oh my, we didn’t know!” *shocked look*
Also, the Church’s doctrine varies on “sexting/second base/etc.”
I mean, every situation is different.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
Uh….ignorance is bliss?
“Oh my, we didn’t know!” *shocked look*
Also, the Church’s doctrine varies on “sexting/second base/etc.”
I mean, every situation is different.
Sin is objective in character, not subjective.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 9, 2011
In some ways, it’s easier for me, personally, because EOs are so off the radar screen that most of the time when I tell someone I’m Orthodox, the response is “Wow! I had no idea you were Jewish!”, and they leave it at that.
LOL Brendan. Maybe I should convert to Orthodoxy instead of Catholicism. There are a lot of Russian (Eastern) Orthodox right? My mother is Russian and all. When I told somebody I wanted to wear a sort of hairscarf they blink and think “Muslim?” and I told them no that Jewish and Christian women wore veils way before Muslims. Even Hindu women had veils before Muslims.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
“Besides, I’m pretty sure my Church charges about 2,000 dollars for marriages. And probably another thousand more to convert my boyfriend. My Birkin bag is cheaper than a traditional Catholic wedding.”
Blame it on the liberals, feminists and socialists. They’ve driven Church expenses sky high.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 9, 2011
The reason there is a priest shortage is because Catholics have smaller families and orthodoxy among Catholics is dwindling.
Problem is that to Chels or Crystal Meth the problem is not liberal Christians and cafeteria Catholics but the Orthodox and traditional conservative types. *Sighs*
alcestiseshtemoa
July 9, 2011
However in today’s West all sorts of physically and mentally unhealthy forms of sex are fast becoming the norm, with porn so easily and freely available, kids are being exposed to things that the normal human brain cannot compute and its becoming “normalized”.
Agreed.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
Better buy off the priest for that one. The priests I know would not marry someone who pulled a Vegas — it’s basically baptizing fornication. But maybe some priests and some dioceses would put up with it. Hard to tell these days.
Well, it’s not really a sin if the Church approves of it.
However I think it’s a sin they charge a few thousands dollars to officiate weddings in the Catholic Church. It kinda feels like Scientology “buy your way into God’s good graces!”
Sin is objective in character, not subjective.
I don’t want to be a sinner; I just want to be able to kinda fool around with my boyfriend without pissing of Jesus or burning in hell or whatever really devout folks spend all their time worrying about.
The weird thing is, I feel like Catholics in general are pretty flippant when it comes to sinning because we know we can always go confess to our sins. Like, I’ll just confess if I lose control and do something sinful with my boyfriend.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
CM, that last comment made no sense.
BF, I think you will need a dispensation to get married in an Anglican church. That was my experience some years ago in Australia. If you don’t get one, your marriage will be illicit in the eyes of the Catholic Church and you would need to get it regularised later. It is better if you can get your boyfriend to convert and marry in a Catholic Church.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 9, 2011
I don’t want to be a sinner; I just want to be able to kinda fool around with my boyfriend without pissing of Jesus or burning in hell or whatever really devout folks spend all their time worrying about.
You can’t serve two masters. Saying that one doesn’t want to be a sinner and yet engage in sin is kind of contradictory. Wait until the wedding day. Learn self-control. The flesh may say yes but God says no.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
However I think it’s a sin they charge a few thousands dollars to officiate weddings in the Catholic Church. It kinda feels like Scientology “buy your way into God’s good graces!”
I have never heard of such a thing. I was charged nothing. We provided donations voluntarily, but it wasn’t anything close to 1000s of Dollars. There are no sacramental fees, other than for actual costs, which are minimal.
I feel like Catholics in general are pretty flippant when it comes to sinning because we know we can always go confess to our sins. Like, I’ll just confess if I lose control and do something sinful with my boyfriend.
Which is very dicey, because if you happen to get run over by a bus, without confession, you are in a bad place. Plus, even more importantly, you can’t make a good confession without repentance. If you approach confession as an opportunity to simply “refill the forgiveness tank” or “hit the delete button”, full well knowing you’re going right back to do the same thing again, there is no repentance, and no forgiveness. Repentance is a requirement for forgiveness — although it seems mechanical, it isn’t in spiritual terms.
David Collard
July 9, 2011
In the end, I dropped the girl and kept the religion.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
BF, I think you will need a dispensation to get married in an Anglican church. That was my experience some years ago in Australia. If you don’t get one, your marriage will be illicit in the eyes of the Catholic Church and you would need to get it regularised later. It is better if you can get your boyfriend to convert and marry in a Catholic Church.
*Googles*
So basically I have to pay the Catholic Church for the privilege to get married outside of the Catholic Church? If I don’t do so, than I’m a hellbound sinner in the eyes of the Catholic Church?
How is that not some form of extortion?
I’ll pay the fee, but I don’t like the logic behind that…
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
I have never heard of such a thing. I was charged nothing. We provided donations voluntarily, but it wasn’t anything close to 1000s of Dollars. There are no sacramental fees, other than for actual costs, which are minimal.
From what I understand, the NY Dioceses milks the wealthier parishes to help pay for the poorer parishes. Our 2,000 dollar weddings might provide money for churches upstate or something.
Brendan
July 9, 2011
That’s not something I am familiar with. We donated a few hundred to the church, here in DC, where a lot of richie riches live, but nothing like thousands of dollars. Makes no sense to me.
Crystal Meth
July 9, 2011
“The weird thing is, I feel like Catholics in general are pretty flippant when it comes to sinning because we know we can always go confess to our sins.”
I’ve noticed this too.
I mean, what’s the big deal about having sex before marriage if all you need to do is go confess it and you’ll be forgiven?
Are Catholics of the opinion that all the “married” people in the world are not really married because they are not Catholics married in the Catholic church?
Svar
July 9, 2011
@ Schneeflocke
I like how think that your beliefs and the beliefs of your school girl friends are actually going to change Church stances or what’s written in the Word.
Butterfly Flower
July 9, 2011
That’s not something I am familiar with. We donated a few hundred to the church, here in DC, where a lot of richie riches live, but nothing like thousands of dollars. Makes no sense to me.
The NY diocese is in a lot of financial trouble. They recently closed a bunch of Catholic Schools here in NYC because they couldn’t afford to keep them open.
I feel like the Church is always hitting my family up for money. As a financially responsible individual, I always wonder where the money goes. My parish should be doing pretty well for itself; why does it always beg for money?
David Collard
July 10, 2011
BF, there was no money required for the dispensation. Just the bishop’s permission. My then fiancee knew that if I couldn’t get the dispensation, I would have an illicit marriage. This did not make me like her more and was one of the things that split us up.
No, CM, Catholics believe that other Christians are legitimately married. It is good to go to confession after sinning, but it is better not to sin in the first place.
Svar
July 10, 2011
BF, are you really this stupid or are you trolling? Your lack of consistency is amazing. One moment you’re leading an inquisition against me for something I allegedly said and the next moment you’re attacking the Church. Kind of like how you play the good girl in the beginning and then admitted to lezzing around behind your boyfriend’s back. It’s ridiculous.
novaseeker
July 10, 2011
Are Catholics of the opinion that all the “married” people in the world are not really married because they are not Catholics married in the Catholic church?
Not of the opinion. It just is so that the Catholic Church does not recognize “marriages” that take place outside the Church as marriages for purposes of the Church. If you aren’t Carholic you wouldn’t care ad it has no impact on you.
Svar
July 10, 2011
@ MWM
I like your new tactics, troll. Very interesting. You have heeded my advice; I’m just waiting to see where you are going with this.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Confession only heals part of the consequences of sin- Gods demands for justice. The other part- the effects on the soul are still there.
So for example- if you are addicted to crack and you go to confession you benefit from God’s mercy but you will leave the confessional just as addicted as when you went in. In order to remove the effects of your crack use- your addiction- you have to go through the hard work of detox.
Well, for a sin one has an effect on the soul- such as a diminished conscience- the only way to erase those effects is through spiritual disciplines and abstaining from the sin. At the point where the sin actually repulses you that is when you have erased the effects of sin on the soul.
This is why someone could go to purgatory even if they die immediately after a confession. While God has forgiven them their sin, and therefore they are spared hell, they are not yet pure enough to enter Gods Holy light… they have to work off the effects of the sin on their soul.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
[...] and the next moment you’re attacking the Church.
I’m not attacking the Church in general. I feel like my grievances against my dioceses are legitimate.
Brendan’s DC church doesn’t charge thousands of dollars for weddings. Why does mine? It’s a bit unsettling.
Kind of like how you play the good girl in the beginning and then admitted to lezzing around behind your boyfriend’s back. It’s ridiculous.
Not behind his back, clearly in front of him. He’s kinda into that.
CAB
July 10, 2011
BF: Part of the problem is your whole approach to the issue. You’re asking “How much can I get away with?” rather than “What is the right way to approach this relationship?” It’s quite common for young people to do this, just wanting to know where the line is to get as close to it as possible, but that sort of attitude shows that their hearts are not in the right place. I would also suggest that you need to knock off the exaggerated, flippant references to God’s anger and Hell, because you seem to be doing so to avoid taking sin seriously.
And if you honestly had no idea that being topless wasn’t okay… I’m quite surprised, to say the least.
Svar
July 10, 2011
@ BF
So doing it in front of him makes it all better, ja? Does it make it less of sin? Heh, only a total beta would allow his girl to lez around. Ahhh, it always brings die Dokter much joy to watch die furry little rationalization hamster spin aut ov kontrol!!
David Collard
July 10, 2011
Svar, I suspect she was just playing at girl-on-girl. It is fashionable and many Hollywood airheads have led the way. Girls think it turns men on, although it does nothing for me. The girls on this Onion parody do it:
http://www.theonion.com/video/vh1-reality-show-bus-crashes-in-california-causing,14390/
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
@Svar:
We’ve been over this before. My boyfriend isn’t a beta. I wouldn’t mind if he was, but he isn’t. He’s not passive, he doesn’t idolize me, he isn’t clingy, he isn’t whiny, he isn’t shy, he clearly tells me things, he’s direct and masculine. He’s quiet and aloof, but he certainly isn’t a beta.
I think your understanding of alphas and betas is wrong. All alphas don’t go around philandering and having sex with random women.
Wolfe Holland
July 10, 2011
A woman’s body was created for love. Hours of lovemaking. My wife and I can go for 10 hours straight exploring each others bodies. Finding out what new areas or new patterns create new feelings for us. It never gets old. We’ve been married 12 years and every night is like our first. The bond that sex creates, especially when a man knows what makes a woman tick, is the deepest bond two humans can experience. A woman’s private parts are highly sensitive and there is no limit to the heights she can experience provided the man knows what he’s doing. You come to know what your doing through years of being with a woman you love and communicating with her about it. There’s no greater pleasure in life for me than hearing my wife’s sighs and screams of ecstasy at the ends of my fingers or tongue. Truly a gift I love to keep on giving. My previous comment was kind of bold and borderline vile and got moderated so this is my revised version.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
BF: Part of the problem is your whole approach to the issue. You’re asking “How much can I get away with?” rather than “What is the right way to approach this relationship?” It’s quite common for young people to do this, just wanting to know where the line is to get as close to it as possible, but that sort of attitude shows that their hearts are not in the right place. I would also suggest that you need to knock off the exaggerated, flippant references to God’s anger and Hell, because you seem to be doing so to avoid taking sin seriously.
But I love my boyfriend, this isn’t some “trying to justify slutting around” thing. We both wanna marry each other.
I think I should just marry him as soon as possible. To lessen the accumulation of sins.
The only problem is, for some reason I feel like marrying my boyfriend right now would be foolish. I love my boyfriend and I want to spend the rest of my life with him, but I’m young and marriage isn’t really encouraged for women my age.
How will I know I won’t somehow mess everything up?
pb
July 10, 2011
“‘Are Catholics of the opinion that all the “married” people in the world are not really married because they are not Catholics married in the Catholic church?’
“Not of the opinion. It just is so that the Catholic Church does not recognize “marriages” that take place outside the Church as marriages for purposes of the Church. If you aren’t Carholic you wouldn’t care ad it has no impact on you.”
It depends on what you mean by “really” married — sacramental marriages or natural marriages — it depends on the two people involved, whether they are both Catholic, both Christian, etc. The Church recognizes that there are valid natural marriages.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
In the Church culpability matters. Those with “invincible ignorance” are shown more mercy. If you have the benefit of a Catholic upbringing and the sacramental grace of Baptism/Confirmation then you can’t point to the savages and say “but they…!”
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Damn, you have fine tastes.
Kinda off-topic, but a few months ago I went on a quest for these Alexander McQueen spring 2011 heels [err, wedges?]:
http://educatedpony.wordpress.com/2010/12/24/the-dress/alexander-mcqueen-butterfly-shoes/
There was no waiting list – they just weren’t available to the general public.
How dare the late Alexander McQueen deem me unworthy of rocking those wedges! [wait, if he died in 2009, how is he still designing shoes? *blinks*]
If I ever somehow score a pair of those shoes, I would so make them my wedding shoes.
…so I guess you guys won’t have to be worried about me getting married in Vegas on whim. I’d first need time to prepare my bridal ensemble.
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
Kinda off-topic, but a few months ago I went on a quest for these Alexander McQueen spring 2011 heels
Not sexually attractive, but very pretty from a haute couture sense. They’re certainly better looking than the gladiator sandals that have become part of the “uniform” of every under 35 woman.
If I ever somehow score a pair of those shoes, I would so make them my wedding shoes.
If you’re complaining about the cost of a Catholic wedding in the Archdiocese of New York, you’re probably going to complain about the cost of those shoes. Admittedly, it would certainly contrast very well with the wedding dress…
I’d first need time to prepare my bridal ensemble.
Of course. That’s the main reason, screw marrying in a Church.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
So I Googled the Catholic Church marriage process….
It can take well over 6 months!
My boyfriend and I would have to take classes, get interviewed – work our way through a whole bunch of bureaucratic procedures. It’s daunting and discouraging.
I’m not one for pomp and circumstance. I don’t want a big wedding in a Church. I’d feel more comfortable just eloping.
I want my marriage to be a personal decision between my boyfriend and I. We’re faithful individuals so we’ll consult our religion but I don’t feel all that comfortable with the Church itself deciding whether or not we’re ready for marriage.
If I realize that if I marry my boyfriend our marriage would be a permanent situation. I would not cheat on him, I would not leave him. I don’t need to go to classes for a priest to tell me these things.
Besides, obviously these marriage “preparedness” procedures aren’t working. It sounds like a waste of time – precious time I could be spending physically pleasing a new husband.
If you’re complaining about the cost of a Catholic wedding in the Archdiocese of New York, you’re probably going to complain about the cost of those shoes. Admittedly, it would certainly contrast very well with the wedding dress…
I complain about the Archdiocese of New York because I’ve noticed it’s very money focused. Anyway, those shoes would so be worth it…
Brendan
July 10, 2011
It’s done that way to impress upon people the importance of the decision, as well as to give the priest the time to counsel people about what it means to be married and Catholic. In all, it’s a good process, and is usually fruitful for most people who go through it. Eloping isn’t an option for Catholics — again, as a Catholic, you’d be considered to be fornicating if you simply eloped and “married” outside the Church.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Eloping isn’t an option for Catholics — again, as a Catholic, you’d be considered to be fornicating if you simply eloped and “married” outside the Church.
Perhaps I’ll just forgo the whole process in a region where the Archdioceses’ power is slightly more lax. Preferably a region where cruise ships port, like Acapulco or the Virgin Islands.
I mean, as long as I’m married by an ordained priest in a Catholic Church, it counts? *giggles*
No, seriously, I would so do that. Whenever I decide to elope I’ll just have my travel agent arrange a cruise instead of a Vegas flight.
I guess I’m not that much of a Traditional Catholic.
Clarence
July 10, 2011
Going off to visit mom & Grandmom.
You Christians behave!
Brendan
July 10, 2011
It may be hard finding a Catholic priest who would perform a “drive by wedding”.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“I guess I’m not that much of a Traditional Catholic”
Never thought you were, schneeflocke.
Oh und btw, your BF = herbtastic Uber-beta
Alte
July 10, 2011
Imagine being married to someone that could only get off if you did something totally disgusting.
This is a real issue now, unfortunately. You never know what bizarre habits they have. Most marriages are split between “no or little vanilla sex” and “lots of unnatural or weird stuff”. There are very few couples who have regular vanilla sex, so it’s difficult to find someone compatible.
And… let’s just say… vaginas have gone completely out of style. Too boring. That was my main point of the article, to point out that even feminists are starting to notice that men’s sexual behavior is getting less criminally-violent but more bizarre. It’s getting rarer for a man to be able to “get off” with normal sex, and women are moving in the same direction. Desensitization and sexual dysfunction on a civilizational scale.
It’s frightening. Without normal sex, marriage as a wide-spread institution is completely doomed. Sodomy (which includes both anal and oral sex) was forbidden for a reason: it strongly correlates with civilizational collapse. No society in which men prefer sodomy to normal sex is going to survive. Won’t happen. People say, “Oh we’re just having fun, this is about choice, we’re doing it lovingly, yadda, yadda, yadda.” No, this heralds the End Times.
That reminds me of this survey that was done in Germany a few years back. They gave children real strawberry yogurt and fake (artificial flavoring) strawberry yogurt. The majority of the children thought the real one was the fake one, and that the fake one tasted much better. The substitute is preferred over the real thing.
Alte
July 10, 2011
I think women are increasingly desensitized too, by the way. They require more and more elaborate, ritualized sex in order to enjoy themselves. If you suggest “just having sex” they throw a fit. No, he has to spend 30 minutes doing The Program or she just can’t stand it.
Sex is being increasingly worshiped like a god. I actually balk at a lot of the “sacred” talk because of that. I don’t think we Christians should be trying to keep pace with the idolization of secularists. Let’s not make more out of it than it is. Sex is commonplace, and it is only sacred when it happens in chastity. That doesn’t mean that we have to make a huge deal out of it.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
And… let’s just say… vaginas have gone completely out of style. Too boring. That was my main point of the article, to point out that even feminists are starting to notice that men’s sexual behavior is getting less criminally-violent but more bizarre. It’s getting rarer for a man to be able to “get off” with normal sex, and women are moving in the same direction. Desensitization and sexual dysfunction on a civilizational scale.
Excellent point. Its is getting more bizarre and it’s frightening. I mean with BDSM influence, the LGBT influence, the casual sex, sterility, pornography and so much more it’s becoming a huge storm but hey most liberals don’t mind and think we are the crazy and regressive ones.
That reminds me of this survey that was done in Germany a few years back. They gave children real strawberry yogurt and fake (artificial flavoring) strawberry yogurt. The majority of the children thought the real one was the fake one, and that the fake one tasted much better. The substitute is preferred over the real thing.
It isn’t just what is true and what is false but how evil has become good and good has become evil. There is a recent horror book (or a movie?) from a 50 year-old liberal chick whom made a comment similar to this one: Housewifes are brutal and so evil. How disturbing.
Alte
July 10, 2011
I think a lot of girls also don’t realize that, the more they move away from a principled stance based upon chastity, the less leverage they have in any sexual disagreement. If you know you aren’t supposed to be having vaginal sex, but you do… and then you know you aren’t supposed to be having oral sex, but you do… and then you know you aren’t supposed to be having anal sex, but you do…. and then he suggest you have a threesome with another woman… what do you say? “That’s not right?” Nothing that you did was right, and it didn’t stop you before. This is now just a question of personal preference, and a battle of wills. All he has to do is suggest that he’ll break up with you, and you’ll get weak. After all, you’ve done all this stuff with him, so now you’re going to be reluctant to start over with someone new.
If you are both chaste, then there’s a safe-zone where you can feel completely comfortable, and you don’t have to constantly be on guard for whatever comes up next. There’s no constant progression into deviance.
To be honest, if I were a girl entering the dating zone now, I would probably become a nun, and just skip the whole thing. The horror of the whole SMP is a bit overwhelming. I considered becoming a nun before marrying, and researched it a bit, and it can be a very pleasant and meaningful vocation. Much better than living in fear.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
My first couple of relationships things started to get scary for me real early. I was new to the whole sexuality thing and some of these guys I had dated had been viewing porn since they were 12. They expect me to act like a porn star and they could really care less if I enjoy it or not. When I got with a 25 year old virgin who didn’t look at porn it was quite nice… no more fights about what I should or should not be willing to do to help a guy get off.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Yeah- I worry about my kids entering the current SMP. I plan on getting them betrothed to a nice homeschooled boy.
Alte
July 10, 2011
Yeah, my husband doesn’t watch porn and it’s an incredible relief to me. I know he’s not going to show up with a whip and some gerbils for our “intimate time”. LOL. Gosh, you really don’t know what they’re going to come at you with, nowadays.
My first was a virgin, but he watched a lot of porn, so the sex declined rather rapidly. I liked it really well at first, but after a while I grew wary of him. Same with my second. He had himself under control for about a year, but then all the perversion started hanging out and he started pressuring me to do weird stuff with him. Some of it was like weirdly-weird. Asked me once to try having sex on LSD. WTF? That’s when I started getting turned off. The worst is when they try to pretend like engaging in degenerate acts is proof of your love. Sick.
But really, those guys were tame in comparison to the modern norm. Yuck. I really like sex and I don’t need to freakify it to enjoy myself. Since when am I the weird one? It’s truly an upside-down world.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
The thing is we have an entire generation (and perhaps two, now) who have grown up with internet porn being available 24/7. Basically everyone under 25 fits into this category, certainly, and a good number of people under 30 as well. What this means is that porn has shaped, and continues to shape, sexual expectations of men and, by reflection, women as well. Sex is becoming pornified, in the sense that “regular sex” has become passe. By the time these people are 20, many have viewed so much porn, that a good number have already “graduated” to more “exotic” tastes, and this also gets reflected in their sexual “needs”. Kathy posted over at Dalrock earlier about a young woman she knows whose ex-boyfriend could orgasm only when he was viewing her sitting naked in a chair and smoking — he couldn’t orgasm with her during sex, it just didn’t “do it” for him. And that’s a fairly “tame” kind of niche-ification of sexuality. There are far more brutal, bizarre and, in some cases, offensive niches that people find themselves crawling into as porn desensitizes them to regular sex.
The good news is that, from what I have read, this can be reversed by laying off the porn. And certainly a good number of men have learned that and put it into practice. But I think among the younger set, porn is like wallpaper – it’s just a part of the scenery, and is as “normal” as checking e-mail. I think this is another key reason why quite a few younger people prefer hooking up to relationships — it mimics porn, where sex is generally detached from a relationship.
There are, of course, quite a few guys my age and older who are also problematic users of porn, but the difference is that we didn’t grow up with porn on the internet 24/7 from day one. It corrupts everyone, but the young are more fundamentally corrupted by it because for many it’s the main exposure to sex they have had growing up, and there is no “uncorrupted view of sex” underneath the porn. Sad, really.
Alte
July 10, 2011
In Germany last year, they conducted a survey of the youth and found that girls were more sexually experimental than before, but a larger number were completely disinterested in sex. That was how I was. I wanted normal sex or none. No interest in all of this weird crap. But even a lot of the “nice Christian boys” are watching this crap, and they really are corrupted.
A female friend of mine whose husband only wanted anal or oral sex. And he never came inside of her. For years, it was like that, until they divorced. Apparently, he found a woman who could fake more enthusiasm for a facial. She was completely traumatized by the whole thing. She’s remarried now to someone normal, and has a healthy sex life. But geez.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
That definitely sounds like grounds for an annulment. A guy not being able to orgasm during P-in-V isn’t that practically different than total impotence.
Alte
July 10, 2011
Yeah, it’s just another form of sterility. She wasn’t Catholic (Prot), so they divorced and both remarried. His new wife is childless (predictably), whilst his ex-wife has had another two kids (predictably) with her new, virile husband.
Why are we not allowed to acknowledge the truth? No, sorry. I’m not a prude. It’s just that you’re perverted. Your disinterest or distaste in a normal human functionality is a sign of sexual dysfunction.
Crystal Meth
July 10, 2011
“It depends on what you mean by “really” married — sacramental marriages or natural marriages — it depends on the two people involved, whether they are both Catholic, both Christian, etc. The Church recognizes that there are valid natural marriages.”
What is a “a natural marriage”?
“To be honest, if I were a girl entering the dating zone now, I would probably become a nun, and just skip the whole thing. The horror of the whole SMP is a bit overwhelming. I considered becoming a nun before marrying, and researched it a bit, and it can be a very pleasant and meaningful vocation. Much better than living in fear.”
Totally agree. High quality guys are rare. That being said, I don’t think most guys expect disgusting sex acts from their partners. I reckon most guys are just happy enough to finally get laid.
Alte
July 10, 2011
They’re all happy with that at first.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
On natural marriage-
A valid marriage is one that is legitimate but not sacramental- it doesn’t confer the supernatural graces that a sacramental marriage does. But it is distinctly different between no marriage at all because vows have been made and it is consummate.
A person who is a non-Catholic but in a valid marriage would not be guilty of fornication, while a non-Catholic who was in no marriage at all would be fornicating.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Rules are different for Catholics because to reject their Catholic faith is to reject their Confirmation vows. They made a vow to be Catholic so now they are held to Catholic standards. This is why it is considered by some to be a sin to attend a wedding of a Catholic getting married outside the Church but it isn’t a sin to go to the wedding of two protestants marrying.
Racer X
July 10, 2011
“Vaginas have gone completely out of style. Too boring…No society in which men prefer sodomy to normal sex is going to survive.”
Although it is certainly true that a society that prefers sodomy to normal sex is going to have major problems, I don’t think the vagina has gone out of style. First of all, it simply feels better than anything else. The penis was made for the vagina, and no amount of oral or anal sex can change that. While porn has been influencing sexual practices, traditional copulation is still what most men want. As I said, it just feels the best, period. And that is not even to mention all the other psychological and emotional factors that go into intercourse as oppose to other types of sex. There are a lot of messed up people out there because of porn, but I still think most enjoy the traditional methods of good old fashioned shagging.
Svar
July 10, 2011
Yeah, I remember when I was younger. Porn used to frighten me(I’ve always liked nude pictures of pretty girls though). Eventually, however, I got used to it. I still find things like BDSM, deep-throating, and the other more extreme things to be disgusting and I’ve avoid those scenes. Never really a big fan of facials, either.
It’s a good thing I never got sucked into porn like the way most people do.
Alte
July 10, 2011
Our priest actually did a homily on the dangers of pornography and unchastity recently. Pretty brave of him. But he’s counseling couples, so he sees this problem in his work. Divorce is ravaging the Church, and pornography and sexual deviancy is contributing to it.
From Time:
That was eight years ago.
I don’t know if I would consider erotic art necessarily pornographic, though. It would depend on the quality of it.
Alte
July 10, 2011
As I said, it just feels the best, period.
Racer, you’re showing your age.
Crystal Meth
July 10, 2011
Some instructional videos of the “tantra” variety which could officially be labled as porn are beneficial for couples to watch. The only problem with those is that the guys are sometimes not that great looking or well endowed.
There are no “sex tips” to pick up from mainstream or extreme porn, unlike some people claim because that type of porn is nothing more than a masterbatory aid. There’s nothing in it for anyone to learn and expand from.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
My first was a virgin, but he watched a lot of porn, so the sex declined rather rapidly. I liked it really well at first, but after a while I grew wary of him. Same with my second. He had himself under control for about a year, but then all the perversion started hanging out and he started pressuring me to do weird stuff with him. Some of it was like weirdly-weird. Asked me once to try having sex on LSD. WTF? That’s when I started getting turned off. The worst is when they try to pretend like engaging in degenerate acts is proof of your love. Sick.
My boyfriend doesn’t watch porn. Nor does he have any strange sexual perversions. He’s not even into costumed role-play or lingerie! He likes me topless, though. That’s basically all it takes to start him up…
Anyway, so I’m gonna have to ask about that dispensation-thing. Anglican marriages sound a whole lot simpler. & Vegas compatible.
CAB
July 10, 2011
Yeah, with as much as I struggle on-and-off with porn, I have to think that it’s only by the grace of God that I’m still repulsed by pretty much everything that isn’t vanilla. Perhaps believing that porn is wrong and fighting against the temptation (and thus not watching it regularly) makes it harder to get “bored” with vanilla sex in porn, thus helping keep one from getting sucked into perversion, as well. Probably helps that I didn’t discover it till my late teens, too, rather than the poor kids who have been watching it before they hit puberty.
I wouldn’t be surprised if porn is a significant factor in a lot of divorces, but it also seems like an easy enough thing for a wife who wants to divorce anyway to throw in there to make her husband look bad, regardless of how true it is. (Of course, few people would take a husband pointing at chick flicks and romance novels seriously, but that’s its own issue.)
Alte
July 10, 2011
I don’t know, CAB. It’s been such a problem in my own life, and in those of my friends, that I’m inclined to believe that deviant porn and excessive porn use can cause marital difficulties. (Also, some of manga is absolutely vile.) It’s also just very difficult now to have a normal sexual relationship because everyone enters with preconceived notions of what is expected, and what not. It’s no longer something people “discover together”, but something they’re taught online, and then they go to the bedroom and perform a reenactment — complete with fake orgasms.
I suspect that young men are worse about this than older ones (another reason why I avoided young men) because they crave novelty over intimacy. They view sex as just another extreme sport.
Yes, women’s porn has a similar effect, but that’s a topic for another day.
Deserves its own thread.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Given that porn was the sole reason I broke up with 2 boyfriends it doesn’t seem like such a stretch that it might be a cause of divorces too. Thankfully I didn’t marry a man with that problem. When you can’t make someone sexually happy they end up resenting you.
Alte
July 10, 2011
I also resented it. It’s completely insulting.
It’s like, “Baby, I love you and I want to marry you, and all, but your vagina bores me. How about I use something else, and see if it’s more interesting?” Can you imagine if women said the same? “Baby, I love you and I want to marry you, and all, but your penis bores me. How about I use something else, and see if it’s more interesting?” Men would be apoplectic! But we’re supposed to just grin and say, “Oh yeah, that’s fine.”
No, that’s not fine. I’m sure there are enough men out there who would be satisfied with what I’m offering that I don’t have to hang around here and have you denigrate me and treat me like a prostitute. Next!
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
RacerX I just went to your website and while you seem like a nice individual too much immodesty in the content )=
There are no “sex tips” to pick up from mainstream or extreme porn, unlike some people claim because that type of porn is nothing more than a masterbatory aid. There’s nothing in it for anyone to learn and expand from.
There is. A person looks and tries to copy it in their own bedroom with another man or woman. Sure there is nothing saying or written that commands “Do this” (even though some places are like that) but in general it influences.
Yes, women’s porn has a similar effect, but that’s a topic for another day. Deserves its own thread.
Romance novels and erotic writing eh?
Svar
July 10, 2011
Yep, CAB. It’s strange. Most people get more and more perverted through porn use but for some reason not us. Must be the Grace of God.
CAB
July 10, 2011
Right, I wasn’t doubting that it is a major factor in many divorces, or doesn’t cause major marital difficulties — it definitely is/does. The marital problems that even a little bit of porn exposure can cause are frightening; at times, I fear those more than the consequences to my soul. I’m just saying that, given how many divorces today are simply the husband losing his “alpha” qualities and the wife deciding she’s bored, it’s likely sometimes that the wife has already made her mind up, and the porn wasn’t a major factor, but it’s something else she can throw in there.
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
No society in which men prefer sodomy to normal sex is going to survive.
I think you’ll have to explain this as I don’t see how sodomy between a married couple would cause society to collapse. I don’t see how it’s any less unitive than vaginal sex.
They require more and more elaborate, ritualized sex in order to enjoy themselves.
I’d argue that’s more of a proxy for beta males having sex with the wives that don’t find them attractive anymore.
hey most liberals don’t mind and think we are the crazy and regressive ones
From a secular and liberal perspective, it’s the argument that we’re all perverts and we’re simply not going to hide our fetishes and “perversions” anymore. Besides, if anything, it seems like the complaints about porn seem to coming from “ugly” feminists, low ranking women, and the religious.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
If I do have a sudden Vegas wedding, would this be too tacky to get married in:
http://www.teranicouture.com/product_details.php?style=P106&id=Nzk3&mid=Nw==
I already own it so I can grab it out of the closet and shove it in a suitcase, but I think it’s a bit too loud.
I actually have a white ballgown around somewhere but I’m not entirely sure if it will fit in a suitcase.
Random Factoid: in the South, butterflies are considered good luck for weddings. Some brides have their attendants release butterflies instead of throw rice [they're, like, kept in these envelopes things that you open up]
Wait, if the Catholic Church doesn’t consider Vegas weddings real weddings, can’t I just get married twice? Like, once in Vegas, and then officially in the Church?
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
I also resented it. It’s completely insulting.
Tell me about it. We are starting to have transgender and pedophilia lovers out there too. Sooner or later bestiality will come to surface.
Alte
July 10, 2011
CAB,
My anecdotes say that often those are the divorces where the man is alpha (yes, those do exist!). So alpha that he treats his wife like a piece of garbage, and she eventually decides he’s gone too far and looks for an exit. Like with my friend, he was very alpha, but became crueler over time. Too much is enough, and at some point she just couldn’t take it anymore.
It was the same with my ex. He started out with that ideal “alpha/beta mix” and became more, not less, alpha over time. Then he was just domineering, rather than dominant. I do know the difference, contrary to what some of my readers think. My husband truly loves me, which is why he cares about me, rather than just treating me as a cum receptacle.
Alte
July 10, 2011
BF,
After a civil service you have an invalid marriage, not a nonexistent marriage.
I’d argue that’s more of a proxy for beta males having sex with the wives that don’t find them attractive anymore.
Same difference. In either case, it’s a relationship dysfunction rather than a sexual need.
Svar
July 10, 2011
DA, you wouldn’t see why sodomy is less unitive than normative sex. No surprise there. On top of that even if it were as unitive, it’s still sodomy.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
I think you’ll have to explain this as I don’t see how sodomy between a married couple would cause society to collapse. I don’t see how it’s any less unitive than vaginal sex.
It’s “unitive”? You think a place where feces comes out is on the same level as a vagina where life is formed? It’s a perversion. It’s unnatural and immoral. If a man said this to me I would avoid him ASAP. It’s insulting. Men whom love BDSM, other weird stuff and transgenders are disturbing on so many levels but who cares since in this society good is evil and evil is good.
From a secular and liberal perspective, it’s the argument that we’re all perverts and we’re simply not going to hide our fetishes and “perversions” anymore.
How touching.
Besides, if anything, it seems like the complaints about porn seem to coming from “ugly” feminists, low ranking women, and the religious.
Except for feminists what’s the problem with it?
Svar
July 10, 2011
BF, quit attention-whoring. Just get married or don’t. If you don’t happen to care about your faith and want to get married in Vegas, that’s up to you. It’s apparent that you’re going to do whatever you want anyway and you just want to find some way to feed your rationalization hamster.
Svar
July 10, 2011
I don’t think there is any need to ban porn, Alcest. Porn usage has lowered rape rates. It’s the lesser of the two evils. However, that doesn’t mean Christians should use it; just the rest.
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
On top of that even if it were as unitive, it’s still sodomy.
As I’ve told others, I’ve generally suspected that sodomy was something that the Israelites rejected in order to differentiate themselves from the other civilizations around them, and nothing more. If one has oral or anal sex within the context of a marriage it does not magically spread disease so I’m left without realistic excuse to say that it’s a problem.
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
in the sense that “regular sex” has become passe
The problem is that regular sex looks so tame and boring compared to porn sex. I tend to watch a lot of “average” porn in that it may have anal, oral, and vaginal sex in various positions, but very little choking or other extreme BDSM style tastes as that’s just a massive turn off. The porn stars tend to look much better than one’s wife or girlfriend on average, and even arguably the males are somewhat better looking and more endowed too. The sex is faster and more vigorous, and given comments that I’ve seen from the trad men and women here, sans the anal and oral, their sex isn’t that much different from what I see in porn, and anything less comes across as wimpy and betaish to the women.
he couldn’t orgasm with her during sex, it just didn’t “do it” for him
FWIW, I’ll note that I can not orgasm during P-in-V sex either, and this was a problem that I had before I started masturbating and viewing porn, so I’m a bit hesitant to say that it’s a problem induced by years of viewing porn. Mind you, you’re talking to somebody that said a ride on a high speed train and drive at a car’s full maximum speed on the autobahn was *better* than sex.
I think this is another key reason why quite a few younger people prefer hooking up to relationships — it mimics porn, where sex is generally detached from a relationship.
To a certain extent it makes sense, as relationships are difficult and require what some would argue is a bit of a time sink, so it’s easier to have somebody as a designated sex partner in order to get off and release sexual tension, and then return to whatever real world things need to get done.
A female friend of mine whose husband only wanted anal or oral sex.
On the oral part, I don’t blame him as it provides far better stimulation for less work, but as for anal sex, other than it providing an “alternative” to vagina sex.
Alte
July 10, 2011
Alcestis,
That’s what your problem is. Most people no longer equate the vagina with reproduction. It’s “just another hole”. Well then… why should it be anything special? Holes are holes, and women come with numerous holes. Pick whichever one you want. It’s all good cause it’s all the same.
Get it now?
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
In Germany last year, they conducted a survey of the youth and found that girls were more sexually experimental than before, but a larger number were completely disinterested in sex.
I fit somewhat into the latter group and I think this is quite a good description of Millennial sexual habits (under 30) which I am a part of. We either veer into chastity, virginity or just plain asexuality in some cases or sexual liberalism. Some people would love “moderation” but sorry folks that isn’t how it worked out. I remember most girls in my early teenage years either swimming or diving into the sexual market place or staying out of it.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
Alcestis,
That’s what your problem is. Most people no longer equate the vagina with reproduction. It’s “just another hole”. Well then… why should it be anything special? Holes are holes, and women come with numerous holes. Pick whichever one you want. It’s all good cause it’s all the same.
Get it now?
Yes. What a sad state of affairs )=
Svar
July 10, 2011
“As I’ve told others, I’ve generally suspected that sodomy was something that the Israelites rejected in order to differentiate themselves from the other civilizations around them, and nothing more.”
Yeah, great theory, I’m sure that really holds up. Grade-A rationalization. There are moral as well as practical reasons as to why sodomy wasn’t practiced but that’s lost on someone like you. Keep clinging to your lame theory.
“If one has oral or anal sex within the context of a marriage it does not magically spread disease so I’m left without realistic excuse to say that it’s a problem.”
That’s fine if you’re secularist. There are realistic excuses and Alte has outlined them, but whatever. You just can’t understand.
Also, oral sex in terms of blowjobs is okay, while deep-throating isn’t. Just wanted to clear that up.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“To a certain extent it makes sense, as relationships are difficult and require what some would argue is a bit of a time sink, so it’s easier to have somebody as a designated sex partner in order to get off and release sexual tension, and then return to whatever real world things need to get done.”
Do you think that’s going to convince us? Try again.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
As I’ve told others, I’ve generally suspected that sodomy was something that the Israelites rejected in order to differentiate themselves from the other civilizations around them, and nothing more.
They did it because of God (Yahweh) though differing from other civilizations was another reason.
If one has oral or anal sex within the context of a marriage it does not magically spread disease so I’m left without realistic excuse to say that it’s a problem.
It spreads the disease toward themselves. Auto-disease.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
It impacts women, increasingly, as well, particularly among the younger set of women, where porn viewing has dramatically increased compared to previous generations. This is also setting expectations of their own behavior (e.g., the comment above about a conservative young woman saying that everyone does “facials” these days) as well as male physical standards (much more defined musculature, and a growing emphasis on penis size and artificially (i.e., viagra) enhanced erections) and performance standards (the guys who work in porn are “bled” an orgasm or two before they “perform” on film so that they can last quite a long time, and their erections stay there due to drugging, which is now ubiquitous in porn). It’s skewing things for men and women alike, in terms of expectations, among the young who have grown up in a world of internet porn.
Wait, if the Catholic Church doesn’t consider Vegas weddings real weddings, can’t I just get married twice? Like, once in Vegas, and then officially in the Church?
It will be harder than if you asked for a dispensation up front (and since a dispensation upfront takes time to work its way through the diocesan bureaucracy, it kind of kills the quickie in Vegas idea, even if that would be dispensed), but I expect that if you confessed the sin of marrying outside the Church without a dispensation, you could be subsequently married in the Church. It’s definitely something you’d need to check with a priest in your diocese about, however. The discretion to grant or not to grant dispensations and that kind of thing is left to the local Bishop, and, as I understand it, both the Archbishop of NY and the Bishop of Brooklyn are pretty conservative.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Why would someone be able to come from *watching* p-in-v but not from *doing* p-in-v?
Alte
July 10, 2011
Yes, it hurts men too. I suppose if I spent more time with girly-porn, I’d find my husband less attractive. I don’t really have anyone to compare him to, other than men I see at Church, or the occasional movie. And I watch movies so rarely that the men seem a bit fantastical.
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
If I do have a sudden Vegas wedding, would this be too tacky to get married in
In Vegas, no. Anywhere else, yes.
Save the ballgown for the Aruban wedding.
if the Catholic Church doesn’t consider Vegas weddings real weddings, can’t I just get married twice?
I’ve been told by two couples that pre-Cana is useless and a waste of time, but I’d rather you go through the 6 month penalty brake than you go to Vegas, elope, and then eventually realize that you don’t love him anymore. You’re just trying to get married quickly so you can have sex and wear a dress in front of your friends, and I’m hesitant to support them even from my liberal Catholic perch.
My husband truly loves me, which is why he cares about me, rather than just treating me as a cum receptacle.
But that’s why we get married, to have a cum receptacle that’s Church approved!
Alte
July 10, 2011
Morticia,
Voyeurism fetish. Perhaps from viewing other people having sex all the time.
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
Most people no longer equate the vagina with reproduction. It’s “just another hole”.
Despite your blunt attittude, I agree with that assessment. For the purposes of having sex with somebody without the intent to get her pregnant, the holes are essentially tools, just as how a penis, hands, and a tongue are tool for the female’s orgasm.
Except for feminists what’s the problem with it?
There’s a part of me that suspect that’s women complaining and whining about being rejected by men who they had presumed would always be there for them.
Alte
July 10, 2011
If that’s your theory, David, how do you explain that Paige and I rejected alphas for the same reason? Maybe we just don’t like being mistreated? Maybe we place a high value on sex and want to protect it?
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
BF, quit attention-whoring. Just get married or don’t. If you don’t happen to care about your faith and want to get married in Vegas, that’s up to you. It’s apparent that you’re going to do whatever you want anyway and you just want to find some way to feed your rationalization hamster.
I’m not attention whoring or feeding a rationalization hamster.
I honestly planned to get married in Vegas/elope with my boyfriend in the near future. We both aren’t interested in big weddings.
He’s a Christian, eloping is considered okay within his denomination. I didn’t realize eloping wasn’t compatible with Catholicism. & just because I disagree with the “no-eloping” rule, it doesn’t mean I don’t care about my faith.
FYI, Svar, this blog is called “Traditional Christianity ” – I don’t appreciate your condescending attitude towards Christians. Just because my boyfriend is an Anglican, it doesn’t mean he’s a godless heathen. He still believes and practices Jesus’ teachings.
In Romans 12:3, Paul wrote “God has dealt to every man the measure of faith” – we all have the same measure of faith. You can’t accept Jesus’ teachings more than someone else. You either accept the word of God or you don’t. There isn’t some sliding scale of Christianity. A heathen behaves like a heathen, a Christian behaves like a Christian. Continuously misbehaving Christians are Christians in name only; at least until they ask God for forgiveness and begin to pursue a path of moral righteousness.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
And I watch movies so rarely that the men seem a bit fantastical.
I’ve restricted my book, film and music intake for two reasons:
#1 – Liberal messages and behaviour (e.g. cries of racism, adultery, casual sex, cussing, militant atheism)
#2 – Low/No quality as in zero plot, bad effects, inadequate execution, horrible acting and the like (e.g. Transformers 2)
Other than that I digest only good quality neutral entertainment (e.g. Master and Commander and other secular products) or good entertainment with conservative messages (if it ain’t good I avoid it too).
Morticia
July 10, 2011
I am definitely a little wary of the “too much alpha is better than not enough” maxim…I understand why men say it -because they have been burned by being too beta…but because I have been on the other side of the “too much alpha” I can’t help but imagine all kinds of unpleasant things.
Sometimes my husband gets too alpha and i have to be like “hey…my self-esteem is in the toilet and I am about to hurl myself off a cliff…could we chill with the macho-ism for a bit?”
Sometimes too much is just plain old too much.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
There’s a part of me that suspect that’s women complaining and whining about being rejected by men who they had presumed would always be there for them.
Are you implying that every woman here whom has criticized pornography secretly desires the men present there? Yuck. Couldn’t be farther from the truth.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Another question:
If I marry my boyfriend outside of the Catholic Church [ex. married by an Anglican minster] remain faithful to him and not participate or promote un-Christian ideals – how exactly am I being a sinner?
I feel like the Church is behaving like a cell-phone company when you try to switch service providers. Even if your plan is up, they still make the process complicated and try to charge you penalties or extra fees. “Well, you won’t be able to keep your number…”
Why does it feel like I being penalized for falling in love with a Christian…?
Svar
July 10, 2011
Yep, of course, Morticia. It’s best to calibrate it to her needs. However, if she wants way too much alpha or beta than you can naturally provide, move on.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
If I marry my boyfriend outside of the Catholic Church [ex. married by an Anglican minster] remain faithful to him and not participate or promote un-Christian ideals – how exactly am I being a sinner?
Because for Catholics it is a sin to get married outside the Catholic Church without a prior episcopal dispensation to do so — it violates canon law, which is binding on you as a Catholic. It isn’t about “brand switching”. It’s that Catholics are expected to receive sacraments in the Catholic Church, and marriage between two baptized is sacramental in character. But in any case, you need to talk to a priest. See: http://www.usccb.org/laity/marriage/marriagefaqs.shtml
Svar
July 10, 2011
“FYI, Svar, this blog is called “Traditional Christianity ” – I don’t appreciate your condescending attitude towards Christians. Just because my boyfriend is an Anglican, it doesn’t mean he’s a godless heathen. He still believes and practices Jesus’ teachings.”
LOL, schweethart. Whut condescending attitudes aar jou talking about? Seriously did any one teach you reading comprehension? It’s a basic skill.
“& just because I disagree with the “no-eloping” rule, it doesn’t mean I don’t care about my faith.”
Uh huh. Jou keep telling that to yourself, Schneeflocke.
“In Romans 12:3, Paul wrote “God has dealt to every man the measure of faith” – we all have the same measure of faith. You can’t accept Jesus’ teachings more than someone else. You either accept the word of God or you don’t. There isn’t some sliding scale of Christianity. A heathen behaves like a heathen, a Christian behaves like a Christian. Continuously misbehaving Christians are Christians in name only; at least until they ask God for forgiveness and begin to pursue a path of moral righteousness.”
Ahahahaha, Schneeflocke jou aar kiilling me with all die wunderbar lulz!!! Ist die gurlie who tries to rationalize lezzing around und likes to insult die Kirch, lechturing me about Christianity? I like how jou write this, right after jou right: “& just because I disagree with the “no-eloping” rule, it doesn’t mean I don’t care about my faith.”
“I feel like the Church is behaving like a cell-phone company when you try to switch service providers. Even if your plan is up, they still make the process complicated and try to charge you penalties or extra fees. “Well, you won’t be able to keep your number…””
Ja, ja insult die Kirch some more. It’ll make jou look better en your little spat wiv me.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
I don’t think there is any need to ban porn, Alcest. Porn usage has lowered rape rates.
Really? With so many girls crying rape and both men and women indulging in sexual dysfunction I wouldn’t have noticed. Personally I’m neutral on banning porn (undecided but leaning towards censoring) but I support a certain level of restrictions as a whole.
Svar
July 10, 2011
@ Brendan
“It isn’t about “brand switching”.”
I find it very hard to believe that she’s being serious about this. Hey, Alte, Morticia, is it against Church teachings if I were to say…… rob a bank and then punch a sweet elderly lady in the face only to finish it off with tossing a bag of kittens off a bridge?
Chels
July 10, 2011
Butterfly Flower
Stop asking for approval for your own life choices. The only people that should matter are you and your boyfriend–it’s between you guys (and God) how you live your life, and you don’t need approval/permission from anyone else.
Chels
July 10, 2011
Alcest
It’s not the result of porn women falsely crying rape and sexual dysfunction. In order to solve a problem, you need to get to its roots, and I would bet anything porn isn’t it.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Chels is White Knighting BF from the cruel Christians.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“Personally I’m neutral on banning porn (undecided but leaning towards censoring) but I support a certain level of restrictions as a whole.”
I could agree with that. There was a study that porn has lowered rape rates that Roissy had on his site as a way to disprove the feminist notions that rape is about power or that porn causes rape. Of course that says nothing about “rape” rates.
David Collard
July 10, 2011
Svar, a blowjob in the sense of reaching ejaculation in the woman’s mouth is not licit.
Wolfe Holland sounds like MWM/CM.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
When you are a confirmed Catholic it is like being married to the Church…you’ve said you were Catholic now you are “in the books”…if you don’t follow the rules then you are liar.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Wolfe Holland is a troll from Free Jinger. They go by the name Wolfie.
Chels
July 10, 2011
Ahahaha Morticia, I just felt bad, it reads to me like she’s seeking approval for her life, which is just sad imho.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“Stop asking for approval for your own life choices. The only people that should matter are you and your boyfriend–it’s between you guys (and God) how you live your life, and you don’t need approval/permission from anyone else.”
Exactly, it’s obvious that she’s just going to do what she’s going to do anyway and doesn’t really care about what either the Kirch or Gott has to say. However, I doubt you really want her consult Gott(by say, reading His Book or listening to his priests), you just want her to do whatever she wants.
While you want to protect her feeeewwwings, I just want her to stop attention-whoring. It’s so wunderbar!! We agree but fur differing reasons, ja?
David Collard
July 10, 2011
OK, that explains why what “Wolfe Holland” wrote sounded so silly and fake.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“Svar, a blowjob in the sense of reaching ejaculation in the woman’s mouth is not licit.”
Yes, I didn’t mean it in that sense.
Chels
July 10, 2011
However, I doubt you really want her consult Gott(by say, reading His Book or listening to his priests), you just want her to do whatever she wants.
For all I care, she can consult God or do whatever she wants, but she needs to make her own decisions and live with them, and they must be hers and her boyfriend’s.
While you want to protect her feeeewwwings, I just want her to stop attention-whoring.
I read her as being very shy, and it just sounds like she needs a confidence boost.
Svar
July 10, 2011
Heh, is Wolfe a man or a woman pretending to be a man? Maybe “he’s” dan the little puss who’s trolled at TC and Throne and Altar.
The only thing more funny than a hysterical liberal female troll is a hysterical liberal “male” troll.
Svar
July 10, 2011
So the Free Jinger whores have caught on to Traditional Christianity, huh? This’ll be fun.
CAB
July 10, 2011
BF: Great, now look what you’ve done. Herr Doktor Svar is back.
David Collard
July 10, 2011
I suspect Wolfe Holland is a woman. Like MWM, her goal is to sow confusion and poor morale. Sneaky and creepy.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Because for Catholics it is a sin to get married outside the Catholic Church without a prior episcopal dispensation to do so — it violates canon law, which is binding on you as a Catholic. It isn’t about “brand switching”. It’s that Catholics are expected to receive sacraments in the Catholic Church, and marriage between two baptized is sacramental in character. But in any case, you need to talk to a priest. See: http://www.usccb.org/laity/marriage/marriagefaqs.shtml
Can’t I just convert to Anglicism? Wouldn’t that render the “sin” void? I mean, I’ll mostly likely start attending Anglican services after we get married. [Wait, is attending non-Catholic mass services a sin? 'cause I've done that before]
& if I talk to one of my church’s priests about getting married, I doubt they’d be very supportive or even allow me to apply for a dispensation. They’d try to sell me the whole “big wedding in a Church” ceremony or attempt to convince me to convert my boyfriend to Catholicism.
Yeah, my parish kinda sucks.
*Googles*
So apparently most Catholic converts to Protestantism just stop going to Catholic masses. Technically they’re sinning in the eyes of the Catholic Church, but since they no longer followers of the Catholic Church, it doesn’t matter.
I could formally defect from the Catholic Church [apparently there's a form for that], but then I’d have to receive all my sacraments all over again in the Anglican church.
Chels
July 10, 2011
BF
If you’re really Catholic, if you want to repent, go to the priest and ask for forgiveness, you don’t have to change religions.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Yes…but in the eyes of God you should probably have a better reason than “OMG…my parish is so annoying!”
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Stop asking for approval for your own life choices. The only people that should matter are you and your boyfriend–it’s between you guys (and God) how you live your life, and you don’t need approval/permission from anyone else.
I just don’t want to accidentally commit some-kind of irredeemable sin. The Catholic Church is full of rules, ceremonies, and strict procedures. Catholics have to be careful not to accidentally commit some-sort of blasphemy.
I’m not the best Catholic around, but I know I’m a faithful Christian.
Chels
July 10, 2011
BF, then I suggest you read the Bible (as long as it is, it will answer all your questions).
Svar
July 10, 2011
BF, eider get married or don’t. It’s jour lief und jou have shown dat jou don’t respect die Kirch. As a secularist jou can do whuteve jou want!!! Die wunderbar freedom, ja?
I doubt jour even going to get married soon, Schneeflocke. Jou just want die wunderbar attention. Typikal maedchen.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“Yes…but in the eyes of God you should probably have a better reason than “OMG…my parish is so annoying!””
Oh, ja! Mein parish too!! It won’t let me fuuk all die haut sluuts!!! Ah, mein lief was sooo much better bak when I would follow die ways der Wotan!! He’d let me drink und partie und bang all die sluuts I wanted. Maybe I should become a pagan? But…. but… I don’t want to sin en die eyes ov die Kirch!! Nein! Nein!
Brendan
July 10, 2011
Can’t I just convert to Anglicism? Wouldn’t that render the “sin” void? I mean, I’ll mostly likely start attending Anglican services after we get married. [Wait, is attending non-Catholic mass services a sin? 'cause I've done that before]
& if I talk to one of my church’s priests about getting married, I doubt they’d be very supportive or even allow me to apply for a dispensation. They’d try to sell me the whole “big wedding in a Church” ceremony or attempt to convince me to convert my boyfriend to Catholicism.
Yeah, my parish kinda sucks.
*Googles*
So apparently most Catholic converts to Protestantism just stop going to Catholic masses. Technically they’re sinning in the eyes of the Catholic Church, but since they no longer followers of the Catholic Church, it doesn’t matter.
I could formally defect from the Catholic Church [apparently there's a form for that], but then I’d have to receive all my sacraments all over again in the Anglican church.
Okay, lots of errors here. Good gracious, where is catechesis these days?
First …
Can’t I just convert to Anglicism? Wouldn’t that render the “sin” void?
It’s exchanging one sin for another. Leaving the Catholic Church in that sense is a sin in the eyes of the Catholic Church. You may not care, but it’s still a sin in the eyes of the *Catholic* Church.
I mean, I’ll mostly likely start attending Anglican services after we get married. [Wait, is attending non-Catholic mass services a sin? 'cause I've done that before]
Attending non-Catholic services is not a sin, but Catholics are under an obligation to attend a Catholic Mass/Divine Liturgy every Sunday. Non-Catholic services don’t “count” for purposes of this obligation. So you can attend an Episcopalian Eucharist, but you’d also need to attend a Catholic liturgy that Sunday to fulfill your Mass obligation. Also, Catholics are forbidden from receiving communion in non-Catholic churches, regardless of whether such non-Catholic churches will admit them to communion.
So apparently most Catholic converts to Protestantism just stop going to Catholic masses. Technically they’re sinning in the eyes of the Catholic Church, but since they no longer followers of the Catholic Church, it doesn’t matter.
Of course, why would they if they converted to another Church? That means leaving the Catholic Church, which would generally also mean not attending Mass any longer. Whether it “doesn’t matter” or not depends on your own conscience. From the perspective of the Catholic Church it very much *does* matter, because you are considered a wayward Catholic at that point (applies to me as well as an Eastern Orthodox who was received by Orthodoxy 11 years ago next month). The Catholic Church doesn’t “let you off the hook” simply because you have converted to a non-Catholic church.
I could formally defect from the Catholic Church [apparently there's a form for that], but then I’d have to receive all my sacraments all over again in the Anglican church
Doubtful that the Episcopalians would require that.
What I get from you in all of these posts is that you are putting your relationship with your boyfriend above that of your relationship with God in the Church. There may be, at times, compelling reasons to be received by another Christian communion or Church, but getting married is generally not one of them, not least of which when you are your age. This is a bad set of life choices you’re staring at, really, when it could be easily sidestepped with a little patience. Marrying a non-Catholic in the Catholic Church is a non-issue (requires permission, but fairly routinely given). I get the sense that you would rather not do this due to impatience and perhaps some (in the long term) trivial cost savings (although the costs you cited seemed very odd to me) — those are clearly not compelling spiritual reasons to leave the Catholic Church. You should consider that seriously, not flippantly. And certainly not for a reason of short-term convenience.
Chels
July 10, 2011
Also, BF, your concern should be on what God says, not on what the individual churches say.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
Also, BF, your concern should be on what God says, not on what the individual churches say.
This is the old “spiritual but not religious” saw. It’s fine if you don’t care about your standing in the Church, I guess.
Chels
July 10, 2011
What I was trying to say is if you’re serious about following the word of God, then read the Bible and do what it’s in it. I doubt God has a line for Protestants, one for Catholics, one for Anglicans when deciding who goes in heaven and who doesn’t. As well, how can one trust the Church when you look at how they’re constantly reinterpreting the Bible? (e.g. Anglican church)
Svar
July 10, 2011
Haha, I know right, Brendan? As if the Book is not what God has said or the Church is not His representation on Earth. It pisses me off when people try to justify sin with stupid arguments like that. If you’re going to sin don’t try to rationalize it. I’ve said it many times, obviously BF doesn’t really care what the Church says on this matter, she just wants to feeeeeeel better about what she’s about to do.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 10, 2011
Is it an error from my computer or is Svar speaking German? I’m seeing right now one of Svar’s post with a couple of German words.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
What I was trying to say is if you’re serious about following the word of God, then read the Bible and do what it’s in it. I doubt God has a line for Protestants, one for Catholics, one for Anglicans when deciding who goes in heaven and who doesn’t. As well, how can one trust the Church when you look at how they’re constantly reinterpreting the Bible? (e.g. Anglican church)
This means that, in effect, you are a Protestant, even if your affiliation may be otherwise. Catholics and Orthodox see the Bible as a book “of the Church”, not as a standalone authority that exists “independent” of the Church. That’s one of the main differences between the apostolic Churches, on the one hand, and the Protestant communities, on the other.
Chels
July 10, 2011
The Orthodox church doesn’t have a central authority figure, as Catholics do, to tell us what to do.
Even my very religious father doesn’t trust the Church because of its corruption and because how they’re readjusting what God said to fit modern society, even though it says otherwise in the Bible.
Svar
July 10, 2011
Chels, that presumes that the Anglican Church was ever a real Church to begin with. It was created by an old fatass named Henry who wanted to feeeeel better about his serial monogamy and didn’t like how the RCC said no. It hurt his feeeeewings!!
Oscar Wilde said something about how respectable and sensible people join the Anglican Church and how religious people join the Catholic Church. Figures.
Svar
July 10, 2011
@ Chels
I agree with you on the Church readjusting it’s message.
@ Alcest
Ja, it ist a little Deutsch und a little English.
Chels
July 10, 2011
Brendan, on the Orthodox Church
The Orthodox Church claims to trace its development back through the Byzantine or Roman empire, to the earliest church established by St. Paul and the Apostles. It practices what it understands to be the original ancient traditions, believing in growth without change.”
Morticia
July 10, 2011
The point of religion is discerning to the best of ones ability which has the biggest piece of truth pie. The more ones life is guided by religious truth the more ones soul benefits.
So just randomly picking among religions according to convenience is showing disregard for truth.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
Brendan, on the Orthodox Church
The Orthodox Church claims to trace its development back through the Byzantine or Roman empire, to the earliest church established by St. Paul and the Apostles. It practices what it understands to be the original ancient traditions, believing in growth without change.”
Yes, I am Eastern Orthodox myself.
Orthodoxy does not teach that Orthodox should follow the Bible and not the Church. The Bible is read through the mind of the Church, including the Fathers of the patristic era, the councils, and the totality of Holy Tradition. Metropolitan Kallistos describes this quite well, I think, here: http://orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/ware_howto.aspx
Chels
July 10, 2011
Right, but the Church is made of individuals, who differ on their interpretation of the bible. My father is suspicious of priests in general because they’re all different and they all vary, there’s a lack of consistency.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
I can’t speak for the Orthodox but Catholics have certain “non-negotiables”.
Crystal Meth
July 10, 2011
The not having sex before marriage was a New Testament developement, right?
Brendan
July 10, 2011
Oh priests? Well, yes, they can go off the rail. But the Bible is to be read with the mind of the Church, not our own minds. Individual priests can, and do, get it wrong, and even Bishops can, which requires fraternal correction from time to time. I think Kallistos+ says it best:
We read the Bible personally, but not as isolated individuals. We read as the members of a family, the family of the Orthodox Catholic Church. When reading Scripture, we say not “I” but “We.” We read in communion with all the other members of the Body of Christ, in all parts of the world and in all generations of time. The decisive test and criterion for our understanding of what the Scripture means is the mind of the Church. The Bible is the book of the Church.
When priests or Bishops are not doing that themselves, there is a need for correction. But that’s different from picking up the Bible and reading it “to see what I think it means myself”. That leads to errors, and may be exactly what some of the errant priests are doing.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
I can’t speak for the Orthodox but Catholics have certain “non-negotiables”.
Same here. The best way to think of it, however, is that in Orthodoxy each diocesan Bishop is like a mini-Pope, subject to correction by the Holy Synod (the council of the Bishops).
David Collard
July 10, 2011
CM, more confusion from you.
Chels
July 10, 2011
Then we agree Brendan.
Svar
July 10, 2011
@ David
Yeah, and it’s obvious. On top of that have you noticed how her avatar changes every so often.
@ MWM
Screw auf, schtupit troll. Ahhh, but nice try. I give jou props.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
Very good, Chels.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Multiple personalities can be hard to keep track of.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
What I get from you in all of these posts is that you are putting your relationship with your boyfriend above that of your relationship with God in the Church. There may be, at times, compelling reasons to be received by another Christian communion or Church, but getting married is generally not one of them, not least of which when you are your age. This is a bad set of life choices you’re staring at, really, when it could be easily sidestepped with a little patience.
I’m not putting his relationship above God. I just want to elope.
Eloping happened in the Bible. Rebekah eloped with Isaac. She didn’t personally know him; she just knew he was a faithful Yahweh believer and vice versa.
& I’m not sure why eloping at my age would automatically be a bad life choice. I don’t believe in divorce, I realize marriage is a permanent thing.
Paige, you got married young [19?] – was your Church supportive? Did you completely trust yourself and feel confident about the decision? I trust myself and I don’t have any doubts; I don’t feel like it would somehow be a mistake.
Hm, although maybe I should wait until I’m 21. Then I can legally drink and gamble in Vegas!
David Collard
July 10, 2011
Yes, MWM/CM is trolling. Sowing doubt and confusion. She is quite intelligent for a feminist. But she is clearly playing a spoiling role for reasons of her own.
Crystal Meth
July 10, 2011
Morticia, whats the history on it. You always hear how in old testament days if people had sex, they were considered “married” or automatically coupled, or how if a virgin got raped her rapist was made to marry her. So what does it say in the old testament?
You appear to be the resident Biblical scholar, so I’m curious.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
My husband and I got married because we were in the military and going to different stations. The idea was to get a civil marriage so we could stay together and then eventually get married in the Church. In hindsight I would have waited to get married in the Church even if it meant enduring a long-distance relationship for awhile.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Haha, I know right, Brendan? As if the Book is not what God has said or the Church is not His representation on Earth. It pisses me off when people try to justify sin with stupid arguments like that. If you’re going to sin don’t try to rationalize it. I’ve said it many times, obviously BF doesn’t really care what the Church says on this matter, she just wants to feeeeeeel better about what she’s about to do.
Svar, it’s only a sin in the Catholic Church. I’d only be considered a bad Catholic. Not a bad Christian.
I’m not trying to rationalize bad behavior.
& just because I don’t agree with the Church, it doesn’t render my Christian faith void.
Unlike you, I didn’t decide to become a Catholic – I was raised a Catholic, I didn’t have a choice. I was baptized before I could talk, I made my confirmation when I still playing with Barbie dolls. I didn’t realize I wouldn’t be able to get married outside of the Catholic Church.
Svar, you’re being condescending and rude. You’re insulting any of the Christians here who may have eloped.
Besides, you’re acting like I’m throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
If I become Anglican, it doesn’t mean I no longer beleive in Jesus. I still beleive in Jesus, I just don’t follow the Catholic Church.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
CM- I don’t know the answer to that.
Crystal Meth
July 10, 2011
” I didn’t decide to become a Catholic – I was raised a Catholic, I didn’t have a choice. I was baptized before I could talk, I made my confirmation when I still playing with Barbie dolls. I didn’t realize I wouldn’t be able to get married outside of the Catholic Church.”
I understand parents wanting to raise their kids in their faith. However, once you grow up and are able to learn about other faiths, or no faith at all, then you are in a position to make a well-informed, rational, adult decision.
If you want to be a Christian, fine. Stick to the bible. Does the bible say its a “sin” to get married outside of the Catholic Church?
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Chels, that presumes that the Anglican Church was ever a real Church to begin with. It was created by an old fatass named Henry who wanted to feeeeel better about his serial monogamy and didn’t like how the RCC said no. It hurt his feeeeewings!!
Oscar Wilde said something about how respectable and sensible people join the Anglican Church and how religious people join the Catholic Church. Figures.
Svar, you have the nerve to accuse me of trolling when you post vile, awful, childish things like this?! *annoyed*
Anglican’s aren’t heathens. It isn’t some “anything goes” Church. It follows many of the same rules as the Catholic Church. [fyi, the Catholic Church approves annulments - for a Church that doesn't officially approve of divorce, isn't that procedure a lot more common these days?]
My boyfriend is a virgin waiting until marriage. He’s just as traditional as any of the male posters here. He’s pro life, he does missionary volunteer work with his Church, he’s a Republican.
Unless there’s some-kind of traditional Catholic virgin dating service I was never told about – I think my boyfriend is as traditional as I can get.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
If you want to be a Christian, fine. Stick to the bible.
That’s a protestant perspective, not a Catholic one.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
Unless there’s some-kind of traditional Catholic virgin dating service I was never told about – I think my boyfriend is as traditional as I can get.
Not the issue. You can marry him in the Catholic Church.
Chels
July 10, 2011
BF, what do you think about the whole submission thing?
T. Chan
July 10, 2011
BF: If your bf is traditional Anglican Christian, what are his objections to the RCC? Maybe he’d consider converting to the Catholic Church via the Anglcan Ordinariate once it is established here in the US.
Alte
July 10, 2011
Is it an error from my computer or is Svar speaking German? I’m seeing right now one of Svar’s post with a couple of German words.
ROFL. It’s Herr Doktor Svar who appears to therapize the trolls and cafeteria Christians.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“Svar, you have the nerve to accuse me of trolling when you post vile, awful, childish things like this?! *annoyed*”
Why, yes I do. Why? Because jou aar obviously trying to get some attention, heh.
“Anglican’s aren’t heathens. It isn’t some “anything goes” Church. It follows many of the same rules as the Catholic Church. [fyi, the Catholic Church approves annulments - for a Church that doesn't officially approve of divorce, isn't that procedure a lot more common these days?]”
No, they are not heathens, heathens atleast have the honor to not lie about their lack of faith.
“My boyfriend is a virgin waiting until marriage. He’s just as traditional as any of the male posters here. He’s pro life, he does missionary volunteer work with his Church, he’s a Republican.”
AHAHAHAAH, en die volkische Deutsch kommunitie en die former Soviet Republik der Armenia, we have saying: It is too laugh!!! A New-York Republican…. yaaaa, whatever.
Svar
July 10, 2011
God, we have Episcopalians here in Texas. What a bunch of jokes. The Southern Baptists, Baptists, and Lutherans you find here take religion and having a pair quite seriously. Not true for the Episcopalians.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“I understand parents wanting to raise their kids in their faith. However, once you grow up and are able to learn about other faiths, or no faith at all, then you are in a position to make a well-informed, rational, adult decision.
If you want to be a Christian, fine. Stick to the bible. Does the bible say its a “sin” to get married outside of the Catholic Church?”
Guud stuff, troll. A fem-harlot using the Bible to enkorage anti-Kirch sentiment….. Ahhh die schweet, schweet irony…. Eet tickles my nostrils!!!
Svar
July 10, 2011
Don’t jou just luv et when anti-Christian trolls used die Word der Gott fur der own purposes?
Svar
July 10, 2011
“Unlike you, I didn’t decide to become a Catholic – I was raised a Catholic, I didn’t have a choice. I was baptized before I could talk, I made my confirmation when I still playing with Barbie dolls. I didn’t realize I wouldn’t be able to get married outside of the Catholic Church.”
Ja, ja, kitten. Whatever maeks jou feeeeeeeeel better.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
Before you leave the Church do some research so you know what you are leaving. Sounds like your religious education was poor.
Read the Catechism, some encyclicals, and some scriptural apologetics.
Brendan
July 10, 2011
via the Anglcan Ordinariate once it is established here in the US.
Already happening: http://ordinariateportal.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/archdiocese-of-washington-episcopal-parish-community-in-maryland-to-join-catholic-church/
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
BF, what do you think about the whole submission thing?
Emotionally? I can go along with it. Physically? I might struggle. Especially since I’d be tied down
It is too laugh!!! A New-York Republican…. yaaaa, whatever.
New York Republicans exist. They’re rare because most of them end up moving out to the suburbs or more-tax friendly state.
ROFL. It’s Herr Doktor Svar who appears to therapize the trolls and cafeteria Christians.
My boyfriend isn’t a Cafeteria Christian; that’s why I’m angry at Svar for accusing my boyfriend of being a godless heathen.
Svar isn’t acting very Christian. He’s just being obnoxious.
Svar
July 10, 2011
By the way, Walnut or Herbie(it was one of you two), if you’re reading this, a tip of the hat for the “Yes, Prime Minister” video.
Chels
July 10, 2011
BF
If you would stop caring about what strangers think, then you wouldn’t be so angry
Svar
July 10, 2011
“My boyfriend isn’t a Cafeteria Christian; that’s why I’m angry at Svar for accusing my boyfriend of being a godless heathen.”
Die Dokter takes offense to dat statement!! How dare jou insult die Dokter’s beloved ancestors!!! My heathen ancestors believed en many gotts!! Unlike, say die Episcopalian who believes in nein gotts.
“Svar isn’t acting very Christian. He’s just being obnoxious.”
Ja, ja. I’m die one spitting on die Kirch und talking about how great it ist to be bi. Guud stuff, girlie.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“If you would stop caring about what strangers think, then you wouldn’t be so angry
”
hehe, said by a frauen who had a piss-fest over whut I said about die wimmins.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
If you would stop caring about what strangers think, then you wouldn’t be so angry
I’m just annoyed Svar isn’t willing to engage in adult conversation. Or even think like an adult. He’s generalizing way too much.
Just because Svar doesn’t agree with the Anglican Church, it doesn’t make my boyfriend a Cafeteria Christian.
Also, I sense a lot of Christian-Catholic animosity.
What do the Catholics here consider a Traditional Christian?
Apparently my boyfriend isn’t one. How dare he be a traditional devout bible-following virgin Anglican .
PS:
Am I the only Catholic here that didn’t [err, isn't] engage in pre-marital sex?
Chels
July 10, 2011
You’ve got to admit those were pretty sexist/untrue.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“New York Republicans exist. They’re rare because most of them end up moving out to the suburbs or more-tax friendly state.”
Uh huh, liek Rudy Guliani, ja? Real conservative, dat mensch.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Uh huh, liek Rudy Guliani, ja? Real conservative, dat mensch.
I wasn’t talking about politicians. I was alluding to the well educated NYers who don’t like having their hard-earned paychecks cut in half via taxes to help fund ineffective and wasteful socialist programs.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“I’m just annoyed Svar isn’t willing to engage in adult conversation. Or even think like an adult. He’s generalizing way too much”
Nein, jour just mad because jour boyfriend ist a herb: http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/07/08/visualizing-herb/
Gott bless die poor, poor Episcopalians!! Die heathens virility und guud-luk wiv die laties, und die Christians true Faith(und bak en die days before Boundless, virility und manliness as well). But what did he give die poor, poor Episcopalians? Well, dey do have money. But no sak.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“I was alluding to the well educated NYers who don’t like having their hard-earned paychecks cut in half via taxes to help fund ineffective and wasteful socialist programs.”
Hehe, die mind of a maedchen everyone!!! As if fiskal konservatism ist die same as social konservatism.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“You’ve got to admit those were pretty sexist/untrue.”
Die Roemisch der Olden Days had a sprechen: Veritas Aculeus. Oh soo true, et ist!!
terri
July 10, 2011
FYI, Svar, this blog is called “Traditional Christianity
True. We can discuss the topic from all sectarian perspectives, but we aren’t assuming that the Catholic (or Protestant or Orthodox) perspective is the only valid perspective.
If BF is a Catholic in name only, it doesn’t mean she isn’t a Christian. However, I will say that true Christians are seeking the way OUT OF sin, not attempting to see how close they can skirt to the line without breaking some kind of rule. Sin begins in the heart.
As for the sex: I am very thankful to be married to a man quite satisfied with vanilla. With some toppings thrown in once in awhile for variety,
.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Svar, can you please stop flaming me? It’s annoying, I want to have an adult discussion. [Why isn't anyone saying anything to him? Do guys all agree with him?]
…Chels is right, I shouldn’t be bothered. I know I’m not a heathen, if anyone here has the audacity to accuse me or my boyfriend of being heathens then they’re extraordinarily misguided. [I beleive the ancient Semitic term for those types of individuals would be "kalbu"]
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
I am very thankful to be married to a man quite satisfied with vanilla. With some toppings thrown in once in awhile for variety
Eww. A married woman that’s content with her sex life.
CAB
July 10, 2011
BF: I think some of us are just a little bit skeptical about a “devout Christian” boyfriend who’s committed to waiting until married for sex, but makes out with his girlfriend topless and gets off on watching her kiss other girls. And Anglicans and Episcopalians both are notoriously lukewarm about their faiths — there are obviously exceptions, and your boyfriend may be one (even if his relationship with you is less than chaste), but the average member of those denominations is not what I would call devout.
Svar
July 10, 2011
Ahhh, BF, why would I insult die legacie ov mein heathen ancestors by calling jou und jour herb, heathens? I hav too much respekt fur mein wunderbar blut, than dat!!
Oh die poor, poor schneeflocke ist wundering why no one ist white-knighting fur her hahahhahaha. Maybe it ist cause we’re seeing whut Kathy und Grerp saw, ja? Die Dokter has seen through jour akt.
Svar
July 10, 2011
Exactly, CAB. Anyone with a knowledge of history realizes on what bullshit grounds the Episcopalian/Anglican Church was built upon. Also, most Christians are going to be skeptical of a girl who has claimed to be devout several times but then admits to partaking in lesbian activities, being unchaste with her boyfriend, and then on top of all that, insulting her Church. Also, her willingness to change denominations just for convenience’s sake is quite telling.
You aren’t fooling anyone Schneeflocke.
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
I think some of us are just a little bit skeptical about a “devout Christian” boyfriend who’s committed to waiting until married for sex, but makes out with his girlfriend topless and gets off on watching her kiss other girls. And Anglicans and Episcopalians both are notoriously lukewarm about their faiths — there are obviously exceptions, and your boyfriend may be one (even if his relationship with you is less than chaste), but the average member of those denominations is not what I would call devout.
Well, I…um…tend to be the one that initiates our naughty indiscretions. I kiss first, I take off my top.
He’s chaste and devout. I just try really hard to ruin it.
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
If that’s your theory, David, how do you explain that Paige and I rejected alphas for the same reason?
But didn’t you both end up marrying other alphas? You just merely dumped bad alphas for good alphas. You didn’t lower yourselves to marry beta males or even lower ranking males. The real problem comes for women who can’t get alphas, and thus start freaking out when their beta backup options aren’t there willing to do anything to have sex with them.
Maybe we place a high value on sex and want to protect it?
In contrast, I don’t see why there should be such a high value on sex. I’d rather put a high value on the emotional benefits derived from being a committed long-term relationship like marriage, but the trads don’t believe in the secular “marriage as eternal best friends” concept.
Yeah, my parish kinda sucks.
So go find a new parish. There are plenty of other perfectly viable parishes out there, and some may not even charge $2K for your wedding!
Butterfly Flower
July 10, 2011
Svar, you aren’t even baptized. What gives you the right to determine what denominations of Christians are heathens? Technically, you’re a heathen.
Svar, this blog is called “Traditional Christianity” – please stop flaming non-Catholics. It’s rude.
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
Somehow, there’s a part of me that wants BF to stop digging the hole lest Svar savage her fully…
Svar
July 10, 2011
“Svar, you aren’t even baptized. What gives you the right to determine what denominations of Christians are heathens? Technically, you’re a heathen.”
Ja, so? Die schtandards fur me aar alot lower than die ones fur jou schweethart. Also, dat doesn’t make jou look better when a barbarik heathen knows more about jour religion than jou.
“Svar, this blog is called “Traditional Christianity” – please stop flaming non-Catholics. It’s rude.”
Oh, I’m not flaming non-Catholics, schneeflocke. Nice try, trying to get die krowd behind jou, ja? I respekt die Orthodox Christians(en fakt before I settled on Catholicism, I wanted to be Orthodox) und die Protestants(remember when I praised die Baptist, Southern Baptists, und die Lutherans? No jou didn’t because jour memorie ist selektive). However, I am just pointing aut whut everyone knows und thinks about die Anglicans/Episcopalians. Ef jou had some knowledge ov history jou would know why I’m saying whut I’m saying.
Et ist all guud, go ahead und join die Anglican Church; die rest ov die aktual Christians will stay in die real Churches. Water seeks it’s own level, ja?
Chels
July 10, 2011
BF
I’m sorry, but I agree with Svar here–it’s a complete no-no engaging in lesbian activities (are you gay or straight? are you bi? if you’re a lesbian, it’s not fair to your bf to lead him on) and purposefully turning on your boyfriend is just mean to him.
Chels
July 10, 2011
The rationalization hamster is running at full blown speed, unfortunately.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“Somehow, there’s a part of me that wants BF to stop digging the hole lest Svar savage her fully…”
Nein, nein, mein patient!! Give en to die wunderbar schadenfraude!! Jou know jou love dis.
CSPB
July 10, 2011
BF, I will chime in on your behalf. Svar IS rude. Jesus was often rude. Svar is no Jesus though.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“The rationalization hamster is running at full blown speed, unfortunately.”
Chels, I liek jou just because jou said dat.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“BF, I will chime in on your behalf. Svar IS rude. Jesus was often rude. Svar is no Jesus though.”
Exactly, Christ was no kitten. The thing is I acknowledge that I’m just a mere human and that I make mistakes. However, unlike SchneefIocke, I admit to my mistakes instead of trying to bend the rules to make myself feel better for being a sinner. It’s a simple concept really.
David Alexander
July 10, 2011
Nein, nein, mein patient!! Give en to die wunderbar schadenfraude!! Jou know jou love dis.
Actually, I don’t.
David Collard
July 10, 2011
I think we are being a bit hard on BF. Most of us did some silly things when we were young.
BF, just make sure this man is really the one. Marriage is for the rest of your life. Also, don’t leave the Church on a whim.
It is quite possible he is not a herb. I was pretty chaste as a young man and I had opportunities.
Svar
July 10, 2011
“Actually, I don’t.”
Hmmm, seems like dis subjekt need more therapie. Et ist trying to hide it’s true feelings from die Dokter!!
CSPB
July 10, 2011
Svar, Get your butt into a Catholic Church. Choose the parish wisely. You can’t go wrong if you choose a Catholic Anglican Use parish. All the former Episcopalians converts to Catholicism kept the high church ritual and don’t have much time for squishy cafeteria Catholicism. The number of highly intelligent people I met there and the level of teaching was astounding. Houston has Our Lady of Wallsingham. In my opinion this is one of the best 3 or 4 parishes in the entire city.
You NEED to be among people that know their faith, otherwise that annoying Doktor personae shows up.
Chels
July 10, 2011
Oh, and another thing—if your boyfriend is turned on by you making out with other girls and doesn’t try to actually stop it, I’d reconsider the whole relationship, how much he cares about you, and if he’s not just using you.
I know that mine throws up even at the thought of homosexuality, and would probably lock me in a room and never talk to me again if I were to display “lesbian tendencies.
Svar
July 10, 2011
David, you made mistakes right? But did you ever try to rationalize them away? I’ve made loads of mistakes as a young man as well, but you don’t see me trying to rationalize them away either.
David Collard
July 10, 2011
Yes, Svar, but you won’t de-hamsterise her the way you are going. She needs to talk in real life to a trusted priest or older Catholic man or, better, woman.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
This thread should probably close soon. It has become a thread that never ends and there are 3 new posts up getting barely any attention.
Morticia
July 10, 2011
I’m going to close it and if the Terri or Alte over-rule me they can come back and open it. This has pretty much devolved into a BF vs Doktar Svar battle.
Comments are closed
Alte
July 10, 2011
Thanks. They were getting really ridiculous again.