I would appreciate it if you would stick to analyzing the topic and stop making personal comments.

So now you say it isn't the suffering (since homosexuality definitely is associated with family suffering). Its that a promise was broken. Is that right?

So now you say it isn't the suffering (since homosexuality definitely is associated with family suffering). Its that a promise was broken. Is that right? — frank

It's the combination of things. The suffering, the breaking of the marriage vows, the disrespect of the other person implied, etc. And adultery harms the family worse than homosexuality. Homosexuality doesn't affect trust for example.

It's the combination of things. The suffering, the breaking of the marriage vows, the disrespect of the other person implied, etc. And adultery harms the family worse than homosexuality. Homosexuality doesn't affect trust for example. — Agustino

Homosexuality causes deep grief in some cases. Mothers become sad that they will never have grandchildren. So no, the suffering isn't the issue at all.

It's simply the broken promise. As Cicerionianus said, this could be a civil issue, but not criminal.

Save sinners from what? From the consequences of sin so that they can keep sinning?! — Agustino

I thought you were knowledgeable about Christianity but it is now clear you don't know what you're talking about. Timothy 1:1 15, 1:2 3, John 12: 47, Galatian 4: 3-7. etc. etc.

This does not preclude judgment on the final day. But Jesus did not come to earth to judge but to save sinners. This is so blatantly clear and repeated throughout the Bible and expressed and imparted again and again by the Catholic Church that denying it really only demonstrate the personal grudge you hold against sinners and the bias of your personal views when interpreting the Bible. The Dei Verbum tells you when interpreting SCripture you have to investigate what meaning the writers intended and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words. You are instead using scripture to fit a pre-conceived result. This makes you a sinner yourself because Jesus commands you to forgive the sinner, even if he sins 77 times (Matthew 18:22). And you should heed it as we conclude in Matthew 18: “This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.”

It's not true that forgiveness is preferred over divorce in this case. God hates adultery more than He hates divorce - that is why adultery is listed amongst the 10 Commandments, which say nothing about divorce at all. — Agustino

Yes it is.

Can. 1155 The innocent spouse laudably can readmit the other spouse to conjugal life; in this case the innocent spouse renounces the right to separate. — Canon Law

Moreover, the 10 commandments are old testament. It doesn't apply in the way the new testament does. The apostolic writings take pre-eminence. And while adultery is prohibited and is condemnable to death in the old testament, the new testament does not and preaches forgiveness as the better option.

I read it. But I also read the Church Fathers such as Augustine or Aquinas (and other theologians such as C.S. Lewis), and I find their position providing much better arguments. All through human history justice was rendered by force, and in no other way. God Himself, will come in full force in Revelation to render justice. Christians aren't commanded not to judge, but rather to judge rightly - — Agustino

Appeal to authority. I don't see an argument here.

I really don't understand this modern antipathy to force. It is certainly not Christian, and it is precisely one of the main reasons why injustice and sin are permitted to spread. Governing men takes a strong hand. Without a strong hand you cannot keep evil at bay. And Machiavelli was right - in government it is better to be feared, than to be loved.

I noticed this from business dealings. People respond to threats much better than they respond to kindness. Trying to be kind in business is the way to ruin. Instead, one has to be ruthless - this isn't the same as abusive, one must be just, but that justice has to be enforced by the threat of a big stick. — Agustino

Wonderful. You just equated using force with judging, which are quite obviously different things. Also, your personal experience is besides the point. You might want to reread St Augustine on the use of force. The Sermon on the Mount has a rather clear passage on judging others as well. Try reading that again too.

So then it isn't punishment to stop the possibility of unlawful behaviour by putting adulterers in jail, no? — Agustino

No. And what kind of messed up reasoning are you going through to see the equivalence there? The equivalent would be stopping the adulterers in the act or barring access to the place they'd plan to have sex.

That passage is precisely about the fact that Christians can judge for themselves, and should not take their internal problems to be judged by the unrighteous.

This doesn't conflict what I said in any way. You're also mightily missing my point. "Washed, sanctified and justified".

No - cite me the passage where this is the case. It is only when there is repentance that forgiveness is possible. "Forgiving" someone who persists in their crime is not "righteous" but a sign of great moral weakness and a soft heart - it is immoral. — Agustino

Matthew again. I already mentioned it above.

EDIT: I forgot. All this of course only if you believe in fairy tales.

stop making personal comments. — frank

Whether you like it or not doesn't make it false. You are siding with the abuser, and you are protecting the abuser. That is a grave moral offence, and it should be noted. It is much like telling me that "ahh he's a murderer? No worries, we should just forgive him". Where the hell is your sense of justice and morality?

Homosexuality causes deep grief in some cases. Mothers become sad that they will never have grandchildren. So no, the suffering isn't the issue at all. — frank

Nope, this is just wrong. Mothers don't have a contract with their children that the children will have grandchildren. I have no clue what you're talking about now.

I have no clue what you're talking about now. — Agustino

Adultery does no more harm than homosexuality does. Therefore harm can't be the problem.

It's just a broken promise. That's all.

Adultery does no more harm than homosexuality does. Therefore harm can't be the problem.

It's just a broken promise. That's all. — frank

Socially yes. But it's also a sin. Which is preferably forgiven by the spouse where the Catholic Church is concerned.

All this if you believe in fairy tales.

I thought you were knowledgeable about Christianity but it is now clear you don't know what you're talking about. Timothy 1:1 15, 1:2 3, John 12: 47, Galatian 4: 3-7. etc. etc.

This does not preclude judgment on the final day. But Jesus did not come to earth to judge but to save sinners. This is so blatantly clear and repeated throughout the Bible and expressed and imparted again and again by the Catholic Church that denying it really only demonstrate the personal grudge you hold against sinners and the bias of your personal views when interpreting the Bible. The Dei Verbum tells you when interpreting SCripture you have to investigate what meaning the writers intended and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words. You are instead using scripture to fit a pre-conceived result. This makes you a sinner yourself because Jesus commands you to forgive the sinner, even if he sins 77 times (Matthew 18:22). And you should heed it as we conclude in Matthew 18: “This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.” — Benkei

Where is the answer to my question? You have failed to answer my question and the rest is an empty red herring.

Save sinners from what? — Agustino

And while adultery is prohibited and is condemnable to death in the old testament, the new testament does not and preaches forgiveness as the better option. — Benkei

This is false. Jesus clearly stated that adultery is grounds for divorce - in fact, the only such grounds.

Appeal to authority. I don't see an argument here. — Benkei

And yours is what? Don't you see how ridiculous you are? You give me an article, I cite several sources, and mine is "appeal to authority", and what is yours? Appeal to a weaker authority, obviously.

Yes it is. — Benkei

To begin with, I am not a Catholic. Nowhere does the Bible state that divorce is not morally right in the case of adultery.

Which is preferably forgiven by the spouse where the Catholic Church is concerned. — Benkei

The Catholic Church prefers adultery to be forgiven by the spouse?

Adultery does no more harm than homosexuality does. Therefore harm can't be the problem.

It's just a broken promise. That's all. — frank

Nope. Breaking a promise is also a harm. And we're not talking about a perceived harm here, but a real harm. A perceived harm is when you don't act in accordance to my desires. A real harm is when I have a RIGHT that you break by acting in a certain manner.

The parents of homosexuals don't have a RIGHT to demand that their children have children, or marry a woman, etc. They have a desire in that regard.

But a spouse has a RIGHT to demand that you remain loyal and faithful to them.

Where is the answer to my question? You have failed to answer my question and the rest is an empty red herring. — Agustino

You can read yourself can't you?

This is false. Jesus clearly stated that adultery is grounds for divorce - in fact, the only such grounds. — Agustino

Grounds for divorce does not mean it is the best course of action.

And yours is what? Don't you see how ridiculous you are? You give me an article, I cite several sources, and mine is "appeal to authority", and what is yours? Appeal to a weaker authority, obviously. — Agustino

My arguments can be found in the link, which is a short article. You didn't provide sources but names of authors. I have no intention of reading Confessions and the Summa Theologiae. So unless you're going to give me the exact places where I can find their arguments, you only appealed to authority.

To begin with, I am not a Catholic. Nowhere does the Bible state that divorce is not morally right in the case of adultery. — Agustino

I never stated this wasn't the case. I said you can divorce but the Church prefers the innocent spouse to forgive the adulterer. You're getting way to emotional.

I'm happy for you that you're not a Catholic as you'd most certainly burn in hell if you were.

Nope. Breaking a promise is also a harm. And we're not talking about a perceived harm here, but a real harm. A perceived harm is when you don't act in accordance to my desires. A real harm is when I have a RIGHT that you break by acting in a certain manner. — Agustino

Having a cheating mate hurts like hell. If it becomes apparent that she's happier with the other guy, love demands forgiveness. People who are vengeful never really loved in the first place.

My arguments can be found in the link, which is a short article. You didn't provide sources but names of authors. I have no intention of reading Confessions and the Summa Theologiae. So unless you're going to give me the exact places where I can find their arguments, you only appealed to authority. — Benkei

I did. You just didn't read them. For example:

Does loving your enemy mean not punishing him? No, for loving myself does not mean that I ought not to subject myself to punishment -- even to death. If you had committed a murder, the right Christian thing to do would be to give yourself up to the police and be hanged. — Mere Christianity

The Catholic Church prefers adultery to be forgiven by the spouse? — frank

Yes. Canon law tells you you may stop conjugal life as the innocent spouse. You may do this up to 6 months and you can petition the Church for a divorce within that time. If you don't then after 6 months you should move back in and forgive the adulterer. It is laudable in any case to forgive even before that time limit.

I'm happy for you that you're not a Catholic as you'd most certainly burn in hell if you were. — Benkei

Ah, that's good then, I have a great passport for Heaven - don't be jealous!

It's all fairy tales, mate. Sorry.

People who are vengeful never really loved in the first place. — frank

This is wrong. Vengeance in the case of injustice is the right thing. "I am a vengeful God"

Love doesn't demand forgiveness in the case of willful sinning. That is a complete misinterpretation of Christianity. If you love someone, you want them to be holy, to be close to God. And so, you cannot "forgive them" or allow them to persist in sin. Such a thing is to love yourself more than you love your beloved.

Yes. Canon law tells you you may stop conjugal life as the innocent spouse. You may do this up to 6 months and you can petition the Church for a divorce within that time. If you don't then after 6 months you should move back in and forgive the adulterer. It is laudable in any case to forgive even before that time limit. — Benkei

I didn't realize that. So the Church would really like to stay out of it. Wise.

First time you quote that to me. Give me the Confessions and Summa. Lewis is a fucking amateur.

Love doesn't demand forgiveness in the case of willful sinning. That is a complete misinterpretation of Christianity. If you love someone, you want them to be holy, to be close to God. And so, you cannot "forgive them" or allow them to persist in sin. Such a thing is to love yourself more than you love your beloved — Agustino

So you announced that you're clueless about Christianity. Now you demonstrate that you don't know what love is.

Makes sense. Christianity is all about love.

So you announced that you're clueless about Christianity. Now you demonstrate that you don't know what love is.

Makes sense. Christianity is all about love. — frank

No, you demonstrate you have no clue what love is. Love isn't allowing the other to do what they want. If you want to inject drugs in your veins, it is not loving for me to allow you to do that and to "forgive" you.

Love is guiding the other towards God. You should read, for example Kierkegaard's Works of Love. If you permit your beloved to rest in sin, you are not loving. So stop deceiving yourself, out of your own weakness.

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3040.htm

Lewis is a fucking amateur. — Benkei

That is quite false, Lewis is one of the best in the last 100 years.

I feel sorry for you. There's nothing greater in life than to truly and deeply love someone.

I feel sorry for you. There's nothing greater in life than to truly and deeply love someone. — frank

Yes, that is true. But, as I said, to truly and deeply love someone is to care for their OBJECTIVE well-being. It is not to let them do whatever they want. That's a perversion of love, it is inauthentic love. In truth, as Kierkegaard makes clear, that is self-love masquerading as real love.

It is not to let them do whatever they want. — Agustino

Yeesh. :vomit:

That is the worst deception, to think you love someone, while in truth you only love yourself.