Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => General Discussion => Topic started by: InfiniteFaith on April 08, 2014, 12:18:21 AM
-
As you may know, there are some people who claim they have overcome ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ feelings and end up pursuing marriage. If you found out about someone being an ex-ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ then how should they be treated? And yes, I mean someone who has committed sodomy, but repented for it later. Would you focus any special attention towards the individual? Would you be tempted to despise them or treat them indifferently or even prevent them from marrying someone at your Church? Should their past sins follow them around the rest of their lives through rumors etc.?
What about a murderer who later repents?
-
To quote Pope Francis, "Who am I to judge?"
If a sodomite abandons the gαy lifestyle and confesses it to a priest, then we should have no problem with it. God's mercy is not restricted to heterosɛҳuąƖs. We should help guide them on the path of life, not shove them aside.
-
I do not think that I could not secretly help but to detest him.
Anything beyond that ? I don't know unless they tried to marry a member of my family, then I think I would have an issue.
Like I posted in another thread about a coworker who is a registered sex offender- I suspected long before I confirmed it he was a pervert and I have never been able to overcome my animosity towards him.
-
I would tread exceedingly lightly. sɛҳuąƖ perversion is so acceptable in society that they may fall back into it without any real warning like a drug addict relapses. And it would be very unfair to any potential spouses to not be well informed of their perspective spouse's past. There's nothing like a nasty surprise to invalidate your marriage a child or two later. And hey, if they're really repentant and confident in their faith in Christ, then what's a few rumors? I'm sure there are plenty of rumors flying around about a lot of us who come to the Faith after a sinful life. It's not really the sin of the person with the past, but the sin of the gossips.
-
As you may know, there are some people who claim they have overcome ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ feelings and end up pursuing marriage. If you found out about someone being an ex-ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ then how should they be treated?
This person should be treated with respect. Here you only say s/he has overcome sɛҳuąƖ feelings and feelings in themself are not sinful, unless they are nurtured and pandered to.
And yes, I mean someone who has committed sodomy, but repented for it later.
Ah! but here you say the person was involved in sodomy, but has repented. Again the person is deserving of respect. If he has confessed his sin and repented and sincerely intends never to sin again, he is forgiven. His slate is wiped clean. We are Catholics here and Catholics believe in the grace of a good confession. If that person resolves to enter into the life of grace which the Church offers there is every reason to believe in the possibility of his remaining chaste.
Would you focus any special attention towards the individual?
I would treat him the same as I treat any other person. After all, every person I have ever met is a sinner, and so am I.
Would you be tempted to despise them or treat them indifferently or even prevent them from marrying someone at your Church? Should their past sins follow them around the rest of their lives through rumors etc.?
I personally would not, but I can understand if there are some young men who would find the presence of such a person disturbing, but I think that says something about the person with that reaction. It may be a matter of embarrassment or feeling threatened, but I would think that a mature person would be able to cope in that situation. We have to be Christ-like in our approach to others and think to ourselves "How would Jesus act in these circuмstances?" The more we grow in love (charity) the more we are able to deal with all sorts of people in a proper manner. As for preventing their marriage, that is not your role as a layman. It is the role of the priest who has been asked to marry the couple to deal with this. Certainly they should not be tormented by the spreading of rumours.
What about a murderer who later repents?
Ditto for the murderer.
-
I would tread exceedingly lightly. sɛҳuąƖ perversion is so acceptable in society that they may fall back into it without any real warning like a drug addict relapses. And it would be very unfair to any potential spouses to not be well informed of their perspective spouse's past. There's nothing like a nasty surprise to invalidate your marriage a child or two later. And hey, if they're really repentant and confident in their faith in Christ, then what's a few rumors? I'm sure there are plenty of rumors flying around about a lot of us who come to the Faith after a sinful life. It's not really the sin of the person with the past, but the sin of the gossips.
You say that it would be unfair for a potential spouse to not be warned of a person's sinful past. How could you warn them without committing the sin of detraction? Detraction would occur if the sinner had repented of the sin. So you are saying that if you knew someone who committed sodomy, and that person repented, that you would tell every girl at your Church about that person's sin of sodomy to "warn" them to never commit to a relationship with that person?
That to me sounds wrong. Marriage is a sacrament that is intended to prevent sɛҳuąƖ immorality. If you attempt to discourage someone from marrying a certain repentant sinner then you would be setting up the repentent sinner for sɛҳuąƖ immorality. Kinda like holding someone down and never letting them get back up. It might actually cause them to fall.
-
Like a heterosɛҳuąƖ.
-
I would tread exceedingly lightly. sɛҳuąƖ perversion is so acceptable in society that they may fall back into it without any real warning like a drug addict relapses. And it would be very unfair to any potential spouses to not be well informed of their perspective spouse's past. There's nothing like a nasty surprise to invalidate your marriage a child or two later. And hey, if they're really repentant and confident in their faith in Christ, then what's a few rumors? I'm sure there are plenty of rumors flying around about a lot of us who come to the Faith after a sinful life. It's not really the sin of the person with the past, but the sin of the gossips.
You say that it would be unfair for a potential spouse to not be warned of a person's sinful past. How could you warn them without committing the sin of detraction? Detraction would occur if the sinner had repented of the sin. So you are saying that if you knew someone who committed sodomy, and that person repented, that you would tell every girl at your Church about that person's sin of sodomy to "warn" them to never commit to a relationship with that person?
That to me sounds wrong. Marriage is a sacrament that is intended to prevent sɛҳuąƖ immorality. If you attempt to discourage someone from marrying a certain repentant sinner then you would be setting up the repentent sinner for sɛҳuąƖ immorality. Kinda like holding someone down and never letting them get back up. It might actually cause them to fall.
I said potential spouse. I didn't say every lady in church. If they don't know what their spouse's struggles are, how are they going to help them get to heaven?
It is a disservice not to inform someone about something that might invalidate their marriage, especially if you strongly suspect that they don't know. Hopefully, the person would inform their spouse about their past but that doesn't always happen.
That was the lovely surprise I got after two years of marriage. If someone had told me in advance what I may have to deal with instead of stuffing it down and hiding it, things would have gone much differently. If even one person had said that this particular sin was one he had struggled with in the past, I could have at least had the opportunity to mull it over and reconsider my abilities to deal with it. Heck, if one person had even asked me if I knew about it, that would've been a blessing! But everyone was trying to be all forgiving and not get involved with "dredging up his past" so when i discovered it, I was completely gobsmacked!
So, due to the desire of others not to detract my ex-husband, I now have a broken family, a strained relationship with my oldest child, a strained relationship with my husband and unnecessary hardship for my younger children who hardly see their sister because of years of custody battles. All of which could have been avoided by anyone willing to just make sure that I knew before we got married.
-
Mama ChaCha has, it seems, the right response to the opening question and she has the experience to back it up.
We need to remember that detraction is "the unjust damaging of another's good name by the revelation of some fault or crime of which that other is really guilty or at any rate is seriously believed to be guilty by the defamer." (Catholic Encyclopedia--Emphasis added.) It would not be a sin of detraction to inform a potential client of a Financial Analyst that the man has been convicted of embezzlement. Nor, would I think it would be a sin of detraction to inform a potential spouse of a "reformed" sodomite that the man has an unsavory sɛҳuąƖ past and the lady may wish to discuss it with the gentleman.
If you knew a man had once molested a child but had repented and not done it for many years, would you not let the couple who is going to let him babysit their young children that, just perhaps, this isn't a good idea?
In this time, especially, any "formed" sodomite is going to feel intense pressure to return to that life. Just a few years ago it still would have been an object of shame but today it is something that society celebrates. A young lady may still enter into a relationship with the man, but she needs to do so with her eyes open.
Frankly, I truly do not understand how people can truly change how they really feel (in a purely emotional sense) when they happen to see a beautiful person. Can the senses truly change or must a person suppress them? Those men who truly see in other men what normal men see in women are truly disordered both psychologically and spiritually. Once upon a time such a man could truly do penance his whole life. I don't know if such a man can truly resist the temptations that will inundate him from every direction today.
-
In this time, especially, any "formed" sodomite is going to feel intense pressure to return to that life. Just a few years ago it still would have been an object of shame but today it is something that society celebrates. A young lady may still enter into a relationship with the man, but she needs to do so with her eyes open.
My fingers aren't what they used to be: That should be "former".
-
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
"Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.
And such some of you were; but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of our God."
Matthew 21:31
"Which of the two did the father' s will? They say to him: The first. Jesus saith to them: Amen I say to you, that the publicans and the harlots shall go into the kingdom of God before you."
-
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
"Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.
And such some of you were; but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of our God."
I have wondered about the term "effeminate" vs the next term "liers with mankind". Does effeminate mean ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ? Does "liers with mankind" also mean ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ? Do they mean different things, or was it just repetitive to bring home the seriousness of the sin?
-
Effiminate means abhorannce of undertaking hardship ( according to St Aquinas)
Homo = sodomite who commits a sin crying out to heaven for vengance.
As it is a sin crying to heaven for vengance, the church as the instrument of God ought to be the device through which the wraith of God is shown to the sodomites. Hence the burning at the stake.
Having met sodomites, I can tell you they will never repent, unless they totally destroy their personality and build it again from scratch, but even then a part of the homo tendancies will remain, it is in their memory, and hence is in the intellect, and hence can be desired again.
-
I understand "effeminate" as referring to sissified habits and/or mannerisms, and "liers with mankind" as referring to ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ acts.
Btw--I think IF failed to state the requisite disclaimer that he is asking these questions "for a friend of a friend's twice removed 7th cousin..." :smoke-pot:
-
Mama ChaCha has, it seems, the right response to the opening question and she has the experience to back it up.
We need to remember that detraction is "the unjust damaging of another's good name by the revelation of some fault or crime of which that other is really guilty or at any rate is seriously believed to be guilty by the defamer." (Catholic Encyclopedia--Emphasis added.) It would not be a sin of detraction to inform a potential client of a Financial Analyst that the man has been convicted of embezzlement. Nor, would I think it would be a sin of detraction to inform a potential spouse of a "reformed" sodomite that the man has an unsavory sɛҳuąƖ past and the lady may wish to discuss it with the gentleman.
If you knew a man had once molested a child but had repented and not done it for many years, would you not let the couple who is going to let him babysit their young children that, just perhaps, this isn't a good idea?
In this time, especially, any ["former"] sodomite is going to feel intense pressure to return to that life. Just a few years ago it still would have been an object of shame but today it is something that society celebrates. A young lady may still enter into a relationship with the man, but she needs to do so with her eyes open.
Frankly, I truly do not understand how people can truly change how they really feel (in a purely emotional sense) when they happen to see a beautiful person. Can the senses truly change or must a person suppress them? Those men who truly see in other men what normal men see in women are truly disordered both psychologically and spiritually. Once upon a time such a man could truly do penance his whole life. I don't know if such a man can truly resist the temptations that will inundate him from every direction today.
This is a very good post from TKGS.
In our current society the growing acceptance of Sodomites places a wholly large burden upon the shoulders of those who would otherwise be recovering from the unnatural vice, the sin against nature, one of the four sins that cry to heaven for vengeance, and the most repulsive of all the vices man can have.
The sin of Sodom is in a class by itself, because its natural bent is to consume both body and soul of man. Even the devils are revolted by this sin, and they abandon man to this vice because it is so revolting in the spiritual reality that it is, even too much for devils to endure being witnesses.
In the real world, someone who is ever once convicted of theft or larceny or embezzlement can never in the future get a job as a security guard or get a license to practice locksmithing, or get security clearance in government buildings. Even a conviction of child abuse (not necessarily sɛҳuąƖ but corporal punishment, i.e. hitting) is sufficient to ban a person (usually men!) from government clearance. Such a mark on one's record is permanent and cannot be removed by any means.
So the secular world takes a breach of behavior like that very seriously.
Why would the same not apply to one who was at one time consumed with unnatural vice, the sin of Sodom?
It seems to me that the only answer is, that the devil has managed to achieve in our fallen world an inversion of common sense, and this is the way he is accomplishing it: Make the sin against nature not so much a thing of revulsion (even though it is for devils themselves!) but turn it around and make anyone who recognizes this abiding truth as the real villain in the whole scenario. Who could have thought it would ever be possible to achieve that?
Furthermore, those who have a great weakness to be consumed with NATURAL lust (toward the opposite sex) have a lot of trouble being okay with the mere thought of Sodomites. This seems to me to be the case because they are aware that the same vice to which they are so vulnerable is not really so distant from the one they despise, and so, they just don't want to think about it. It seems to me they tend to recognize in it themselves, and that thought is too hard to accept.
.
-
I do not think that I could not secretly help but to detest him.
Anything beyond that ? I don't know unless they tried to marry a member of my family, then I think I would have an issue.
Like I posted in another thread about a coworker who is a registered sex offender- I suspected long before I confirmed it he was a pervert and I have never been able to overcome my animosity towards him.
If you cannot but secretly detest repentant sinners, I would say the problem lies with you, not them. Have you even read the New Testament?
-
.
On the purely natural level, I was witness yesterday to a story that touches on this business of "reporting" someone's misdeed(s). A man asked a deputy Sheriff for ideas on what he can do with his problem. He had lent his car to a friend with a wife and child, who were homeless so they would have shelter, and the 'friend' took off in the car, never to return. It has been several weeks now, and the registered owner has received parking tickets from diverse places. His 'friend' no longer answers his calls. But he doesn't want to report his car as stolen, because then the couple would be apprehended and Child Protective Services would take their child away.
His 'friend' actually warned him about this, saying, "You don't want to report this because they'll take away my child." The deputy Sheriff told the man that his "friend" doesn't care about him, so why should he care about his "friend?" Also, since the registered owner admits to giving his 'friend' permission to drive the car, the owner of the car is responsible for any parking tickets because those are not given to the driver of the car but to the owner of the car. A new report of the car having been stolen two months ago will not change the responsibility of the owner for the parking tickets that are dated BEFORE the car was reported stolen. He will still have maybe $2,000 in parking tickets on HIS record, since he owns the car. He could end up going to jail for refusing to pay these tickets, even though he claims he was not driving or parking the car.
I told the man, "There's no reward in being mister nice guy." He agreed.
If you cannot but secretly detest repentant sinners, I would say the problem lies with you, not them. Have you even read the New Testament?
As for forgiving someone, if this man were to get his car back and somehow got the tickets taken care of, and his 'friend' were to apologize for all the trouble he caused him, do you, Sigismund, think the car owner should let his friend borrow something else in the future, like some money, or a motorcycle or a boat? After all, he said he was sorry; isn't that enough?
.
-
How should ex-ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs be treated?
Pope Francis said, "who am I to judge?"
-
I do not think that I could not secretly help but to detest him.
Anything beyond that ? I don't know unless they tried to marry a member of my family, then I think I would have an issue.
Like I posted in another thread about a coworker who is a registered sex offender- I suspected long before I confirmed it he was a pervert and I have never been able to overcome my animosity towards him.
He who said, "Thou shalt not fornicate." also said, "Thou shalt not judge."
-
I cannot believe the lack of charity of a couple of posters. Jesus modeled for us, to hate the sin but love the sinner. And the hypothetical is about a repentant sinner. We are all repentant sinners.
As stupid as the "Who am I to judge" statement is, remember that F. was talking about an unrepentant sinner.
We have friends, a married couple, and he is a former ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. The first time my dh and I went out to dinner with them, I mentioned his former life to my dh and asked if he was cool with that. He said "As long as I don't feel a hand on my knee under the table." lol
This man is just like any other man. They now have a child and have moved to another state. Charity.
-
.
On the purely natural level, I was witness yesterday to a story that touches on this business of "reporting" someone's misdeed(s). A man asked a deputy Sheriff for ideas on what he can do with his problem. He had lent his car to a friend with a wife and child, who were homeless so they would have shelter, and the 'friend' took off in the car, never to return. It has been several weeks now, and the registered owner has received parking tickets from diverse places. His 'friend' no longer answers his calls. But he doesn't want to report his car as stolen, because then the couple would be apprehended and Child Protective Services would take their child away.
His 'friend' actually warned him about this, saying, "You don't want to report this because they'll take away my child." The deputy Sheriff told the man that his "friend" doesn't care about him, so why should he care about his "friend?" Also, since the registered owner admits to giving his 'friend' permission to drive the car, the owner of the car is responsible for any parking tickets because those are not given to the driver of the car but to the owner of the car. A new report of the car having been stolen two months ago will not change the responsibility of the owner for the parking tickets that are dated BEFORE the car was reported stolen. He will still have maybe $2,000 in parking tickets on HIS record, since he owns the car. He could end up going to jail for refusing to pay these tickets, even though he claims he was not driving or parking the car.
I told the man, "There's no reward in being mister nice guy." He agreed.
If you cannot but secretly detest repentant sinners, I would say the problem lies with you, not them. Have you even read the New Testament?
As for forgiving someone, if this man were to get his car back and somehow got the tickets taken care of, and his 'friend' were to apologize for all the trouble he caused him, do you, Sigismund, think the car owner should let his friend borrow something else in the future, like some money, or a motorcycle or a boat? After all, he said he was sorry; isn't that enough?
.
I am sorry Neil, but you have lost me. What does this have to do with treating a repentant sinner decently?
-
I cannot believe the lack of charity of a couple of posters. Jesus modeled for us, to hate the sin but love the sinner. And the hypothetical is about a repentant sinner. We are all repentant sinners.
As stupid as the "Who am I to judge" statement is, remember that F. was talking about an unrepentant sinner.
We have friends, a married couple, and he is a former ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. The first time my dh and I went out to dinner with them, I mentioned his former life to my dh and asked if he was cool with that. He said "As long as I don't feel a hand on my knee under the table." lol
This man is just like any other man. They now have a child and have moved to another state. Charity.
When Pope Francis said "Who am I to judge?" that was in the context of the person of goodwill who had come into the church. A person of goodwill may very well be a sinner but he/she is not unrepentant. All of us have sinned in some way or another and all of us are in need of repentance. That is why Pope Francis said, "Who am I to judge?" It is really a call for the sinner to come into the Church. It is really a call to conversion.
-
I cannot believe the lack of charity of a couple of posters. Jesus modeled for us, to hate the sin but love the sinner. And the hypothetical is about a repentant sinner. We are all repentant sinners.
As stupid as the "Who am I to judge" statement is, remember that F. was talking about an unrepentant sinner.
We have friends, a married couple, and he is a former ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. The first time my dh and I went out to dinner with them, I mentioned his former life to my dh and asked if he was cool with that. He said "As long as I don't feel a hand on my knee under the table." lol
This man is just like any other man. They now have a child and have moved to another state. Charity.
When Pope Francis said "Who am I to judge?" that was in the context of the person of goodwill who had come into the church. A person of goodwill may very well be a sinner but he/she is not unrepentant. All of us have sinned in some way or another and all of us are in need of repentance. That is why Pope Francis said, "Who am I to judge?" It is really a call for the sinner to come into the Church. It is really a call to conversion.
Qoute Francis on what you just explained- oh wait, you can't because you are just posting what you hope he meant and not at all what he really meant.
If francis meant what you just posted he would say so, afterall, he cannot keep his mouth shut.
-
I'm just curious is there anyone here on cathinfo who is an ex-ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ or struggles with this, who is willing to discuss it?
-
I'm just curious is there anyone here on cathinfo who is an ex-ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ or struggles with this, who is willing to discuss it?
Won't happen bro, that person would last about 3.3 seconds in this forum once they post such a confession.
-
How should ex-ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs be treated?
Jesus said, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." How would you like to be treated?
-
I'm just curious is there anyone here on cathinfo who is an ex-ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ or struggles with this, who is willing to discuss it?
Won't happen bro, that person would last about 3.3 seconds in this forum once they post such a confession.
If someone were to do this, actually acknowledge sin and the repentance of it and state clearly that he believes what the Church believes, and then be treated as you suggest, I would shake the cyber dust off my feet and follow him out. Your self-righteousness is really astonishing.
-
I would tread exceedingly lightly. sɛҳuąƖ perversion is so acceptable in society that they may fall back into it without any real warning like a drug addict relapses. And it would be very unfair to any potential spouses to not be well informed of their perspective spouse's past. There's nothing like a nasty surprise to invalidate your marriage a child or two later. And hey, if they're really repentant and confident in their faith in Christ, then what's a few rumors? I'm sure there are plenty of rumors flying around about a lot of us who come to the Faith after a sinful life. It's not really the sin of the person with the past, but the sin of the gossips.
You say that it would be unfair for a potential spouse to not be warned of a person's sinful past. How could you warn them without committing the sin of detraction? Detraction would occur if the sinner had repented of the sin. So you are saying that if you knew someone who committed sodomy, and that person repented, that you would tell every girl at your Church about that person's sin of sodomy to "warn" them to never commit to a relationship with that person?
That to me sounds wrong. Marriage is a sacrament that is intended to prevent sɛҳuąƖ immorality. If you attempt to discourage someone from marrying a certain repentant sinner then you would be setting up the repentent sinner for sɛҳuąƖ immorality. Kinda like holding someone down and never letting them get back up. It might actually cause them to fall.
I said potential spouse. I didn't say every lady in church. If they don't know what their spouse's struggles are, how are they going to help them get to heaven?
It is a disservice not to inform someone about something that might invalidate their marriage, especially if you strongly suspect that they don't know. Hopefully, the person would inform their spouse about their past but that doesn't always happen.
That was the lovely surprise I got after two years of marriage. If someone had told me in advance what I may have to deal with instead of stuffing it down and hiding it, things would have gone much differently. If even one person had said that this particular sin was one he had struggled with in the past, I could have at least had the opportunity to mull it over and reconsider my abilities to deal with it. Heck, if one person had even asked me if I knew about it, that would've been a blessing! But everyone was trying to be all forgiving and not get involved with "dredging up his past" so when i discovered it, I was completely gobsmacked!
So, due to the desire of others not to detract my ex-husband, I now have a broken family, a strained relationship with my oldest child, a strained relationship with my husband and unnecessary hardship for my younger children who hardly see their sister because of years of custody battles. All of which could have been avoided by anyone willing to just make sure that I knew before we got married.
I would think that it should be up to the 2 individuals who are going to get married to reveal to each other what their struggles are. Not other parties or individuals.
It is not a disservice to mind your own business. It is not up to you to go around revealing people's sins to other people. You may think you are doing right by doing so. But if you commit detraction then I can not see how something good would come out of that. I would be willing to bet that more evils would spring out of detraction.
Yes your situation is bad. Yes your current situation may have been prevented if someone would have committed detraction, and told you about your ex-husband's sins. However, you may have married someone else and that situation could have been worse. We have to trust that everything happens for a reason. In the long run, you may be better off with the cards that have been dealt to you.
Maybe God has another man lined up for you in the near future. Maybe he is the one that God wants for you.
-
I met a lady, whose job was to meet with Perverts in the jails and such. She told me, once a pervert, always a pervert. She said, in her job, she has had many letters given to her from these perverts, that they had seen the "light of God" and blah, blah, blah therefore please let me out of jail, let me go back to my job that I had and let someone watch over me with the kids and such.
As a Catholic, we know that IF, one goes to confession and is sorrowful, sins are forgiven, BUT, in my opinion, I would be very careful around someone like this, for yes, they could go back, just like an alcoholic. And the Catholic Church had a group of the Sacred Heart for those with addictions. To be a member, you had to follow the rules, and those rules were to receive the sacraments as often as possible and etc.
I too, would not see to marriage for this person, and blood tests are an absolute! I would think that taking care of ones self would be enough cross to bear. How about those who are bisɛҳuąƖ? In my sister's case, the marriage was invalid, for he lied, kept a secret. Now my sister with 2 sons, has genital herpes.
Some sins, I think are harder to deal with.
-
I met a lady, whose job was to meet with Perverts in the jails and such. She told me, once a pervert, always a pervert. She said, in her job, she has had many letters given to her from these perverts, that they had seen the "light of God" and blah, blah, blah therefore please let me out of jail, let me go back to my job that I had and let someone watch over me with the kids and such.
As a Catholic, we know that IF, one goes to confession and is sorrowful, sins are forgiven, BUT, in my opinion, I would be very careful around someone like this, for yes, they could go back, just like an alcoholic. And the Catholic Church had a group of the Sacred Heart for those with addictions. To be a member, you had to follow the rules, and those rules were to receive the sacraments as often as possible and etc.
I too, would not see to marriage for this person, and blood tests are an absolute! I would think that taking care of ones self would be enough cross to bear. How about those who are bisɛҳuąƖ? In my sister's case, the marriage was invalid, for he lied, kept a secret. Now my sister with 2 sons, has genital herpes.
Some sins, I think are harder to deal with.
With God you can change. Probably most people don't though.
That is a difficult situation that your sister has had to deal with. Perhaps she should try natural supplements. I know of some natural supplements that claim to cure AIDS and other diseases. Can't say they work for sure though.
I can only speak for myself. I haven't had sex in 12-13 years (30 years old). I used to be a pornography addict, but have been clear of that for 5 years with maybe 1 or 2 hiccups. Though even after the hiccups, I have been able to recover and have been going strong for some time now.
Point is you can overcome the things that are holding you down no matter what it is. If we go around talking about how some people claim to have overcome some of the most abominable things...then turn around and make them out to be liars...then people are going to start to give up on wanting to overcome sinful things. They will think that people will label them their entire lives anyways. So why bother.
God forgives every sin. Maybe we should too. After all, we are supposed to strive to be like God.
-
I would tread exceedingly lightly. sɛҳuąƖ perversion is so acceptable in society that they may fall back into it without any real warning like a drug addict relapses. And it would be very unfair to any potential spouses to not be well informed of their perspective spouse's past. There's nothing like a nasty surprise to invalidate your marriage a child or two later. And hey, if they're really repentant and confident in their faith in Christ, then what's a few rumors? I'm sure there are plenty of rumors flying around about a lot of us who come to the Faith after a sinful life. It's not really the sin of the person with the past, but the sin of the gossips.
You say that it would be unfair for a potential spouse to not be warned of a person's sinful past. How could you warn them without committing the sin of detraction? Detraction would occur if the sinner had repented of the sin. So you are saying that if you knew someone who committed sodomy, and that person repented, that you would tell every girl at your Church about that person's sin of sodomy to "warn" them to never commit to a relationship with that person?
That to me sounds wrong. Marriage is a sacrament that is intended to prevent sɛҳuąƖ immorality. If you attempt to discourage someone from marrying a certain repentant sinner then you would be setting up the repentent sinner for sɛҳuąƖ immorality. Kinda like holding someone down and never letting them get back up. It might actually cause them to fall.
I said potential spouse. I didn't say every lady in church. If they don't know what their spouse's struggles are, how are they going to help them get to heaven?
It is a disservice not to inform someone about something that might invalidate their marriage, especially if you strongly suspect that they don't know. Hopefully, the person would inform their spouse about their past but that doesn't always happen.
That was the lovely surprise I got after two years of marriage. If someone had told me in advance what I may have to deal with instead of stuffing it down and hiding it, things would have gone much differently. If even one person had said that this particular sin was one he had struggled with in the past, I could have at least had the opportunity to mull it over and reconsider my abilities to deal with it. Heck, if one person had even asked me if I knew about it, that would've been a blessing! But everyone was trying to be all forgiving and not get involved with "dredging up his past" so when i discovered it, I was completely gobsmacked!
So, due to the desire of others not to detract my ex-husband, I now have a broken family, a strained relationship with my oldest child, a strained relationship with my husband and unnecessary hardship for my younger children who hardly see their sister because of years of custody battles. All of which could have been avoided by anyone willing to just make sure that I knew before we got married.
I would think that it should be up to the 2 individuals who are going to get married to reveal to each other what their struggles are. Not other parties or individuals.
It is not a disservice to mind your own business. It is not up to you to go around revealing people's sins to other people. You may think you are doing right by doing so. But if you commit detraction then I can not see how something good would come out of that. I would be willing to bet that more evils would spring out of detraction.
Yes your situation is bad. Yes your current situation may have been prevented if someone would have committed detraction, and told you about your ex-husband's sins. However, you may have married someone else and that situation could have been worse. We have to trust that everything happens for a reason. In the long run, you may be better off with the cards that have been dealt to you.
Maybe God has another man lined up for you in the near future. Maybe he is the one that God
wants for you.
The issue is that when help was sought, he was confirmed in his sin and it was perceived as my problem that I couldn't deal it. That would be my concern for anyone getting involved with another person with grave sin in their past, especially one that could nullify a marriage.
I am married and quite happily so and have wonderful children and a very happy life. I'm not bitter about the marriage. I went into it in good faith. I only wish someone had sat us down and made sure there was nothing hidden.
-
You know what, InfiniteFaith, you are correct.
I feel predisposed to defend my position in the situation because it was an unfortunate one.
however, you are correct that expecting someone else to call out the sins of another is unreasonable. The fault lies in him, not in me or others.
I apologize for being bull-headed and having unrealistic expectations in an awkward situation.
also I apologize to you for trying to force you to see things my way when my perspective was wrong.