masturbation
#51

A former pastor of the parish I attend told me that in his opinion masturbation is not a sin,  it's a way of being in touch with our bodies.
Reply
#52
(04-07-2011, 10:35 PM)richness of tradition Wrote: A former pastor of the parish I attend told me that in his opinion masturbation is not a sin,  it's a way of being in touch with our bodies.

He probably thought you were an altar boy.
Reply
#53
I was told by a priest that looking at pornography and masturbating isn't a mortal sin. I'm not going to go to that priest for confession again.
Reply
#54
(04-07-2011, 10:35 PM)richness of tradition Wrote: A former pastor of the parish I attend told me that in his opinion masturbation is not a sin,  it's a way of being in touch with our bodies.

Well if he's counseling people with his opinion on moral issues then he needs to be kicked out of the seal so he can start a cult.  He should be teaching the teachings of the catholic church, not the opinions of himself. 
More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
Reply
#55
(04-07-2011, 10:45 PM)NorthernTrad Wrote:
(04-07-2011, 10:35 PM)richness of tradition Wrote: A former pastor of the parish I attend told me that in his opinion masturbation is not a sin,  it's a way of being in touch with our bodies.

He probably thought you were an altar boy.

True.
Reply
#56
(04-07-2011, 09:31 PM)UnamSanctam Wrote: This thread is like a bad penny.

Yes, but so is the fault it talks about, unfortunately.
Reply
#57
(04-07-2011, 10:56 PM)MichaelNZ Wrote: I was told by a priest that looking at pornography and masturbating isn't a mortal sin. I'm not going to go to that priest for confession again.

I would say that's a prudent move on your part.
Reply
#58
I agree that IMPEFESS gave a good explanation, especially the loan analogy. Anyway, here's what St. Peter Damian says about this vice in the Book of Gomorrah (I've seen non-Catholic Christians try to justify it as like blowing your nose, but see below to see what happens after that kind of vain reasoning):

Quote:For he who despises the councils of the holy fathers which should be revered, who rejects the precepts of the apostles and of apostolic men, who does not fear to set aside the edicts of canonical sanction, who takes lightly the command of divine authority itself, must be admonished at least to place before his eyes the day of his calling. He should not doubt the severity of the judgment against him will be in proportion to the gravity of his sin. As the angel says in reference to Babylon, "In proportion to her boasting and sensuality, repay her in torment and grief!" He must be warned to consider that as long as he continues to be afflicted by the sickness of this vice, even if he is seen to do something good, he still does not merit a reward. Nor is any act of religion, any mortification, any perfection of life which is defiled by such stains of foul impurity worthwhile before the eyes of the heavenly judge.

However, the testimony of Venerable Bede will be adduced to prove that this is true. He says, "He who gives alms but does not abandon the fault does not redeem his soul, which he does not restrain from vices." This is confimed by the deeds of a hermit who served with many virtues in the company of a certain collegue. The following thought was suggested to the hermit by the devil: whenever he was aroused by lust, he should release semen by rubbing his genitals, just as he blows mucus from his nose. For this he was handed over to the demons at death while his friend was looking on. Then the same friend, not knowing his guilt but recalling his exercise of the virtues, almost despaired saying, "O, who can be saved? How has he perished?" An angel standing nearby said to him, "Don't be disturbed; for although he did many things, nonetheless he soiled everything through this vice which the Apostle calls impurity."
Reply
#59
(04-08-2011, 01:57 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote:
Quote:For he who despises the councils of the holy fathers which should be revered, who rejects the precepts of the apostles and of apostolic men, who does not fear to set aside the edicts of canonical sanction, who takes lightly the command of divine authority itself, must be admonished at least to place before his eyes the day of his calling. He should not doubt the severity of the judgment against him will be in proportion to the gravity of his sin. As the angel says in reference to Babylon, "In proportion to her boasting and sensuality, repay her in torment and grief!" He must be warned to consider that as long as he continues to be afflicted by the sickness of this vice, even if he is seen to do something good, he still does not merit a reward. Nor is any act of religion, any mortification, any perfection of life which is defiled by such stains of foul impurity worthwhile before the eyes of the heavenly judge.

However, the testimony of Venerable Bede will be adduced to prove that this is true. He says, "He who gives alms but does not abandon the fault does not redeem his soul, which he does not restrain from vices." This is confirmed by the deeds of a hermit who served with many virtues in the company of a certain college. The following thought was suggested to the hermit by the devil: whenever he was aroused by lust, he should release semen by rubbing his genitals, just as he blows mucus from his nose. For this he was handed over to the demons at death while his friend was looking on. Then the same friend, not knowing his guilt but recalling his exercise of the virtues, almost despaired saying, "O, who can be saved? How has he perished?" An angel standing nearby said to him, "Don't be disturbed; for although he did many things, nonetheless he soiled everything through this vice which the Apostle calls impurity."

This is an incredible read. Thank you!
Reply
#60
(04-08-2011, 03:22 PM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(04-08-2011, 01:57 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote:
Quote:For he who despises the councils of the holy fathers which should be revered, who rejects the precepts of the apostles and of apostolic men, who does not fear to set aside the edicts of canonical sanction, who takes lightly the command of divine authority itself, must be admonished at least to place before his eyes the day of his calling. He should not doubt the severity of the judgment against him will be in proportion to the gravity of his sin. As the angel says in reference to Babylon, "In proportion to her boasting and sensuality, repay her in torment and grief!" He must be warned to consider that as long as he continues to be afflicted by the sickness of this vice, even if he is seen to do something good, he still does not merit a reward. Nor is any act of religion, any mortification, any perfection of life which is defiled by such stains of foul impurity worthwhile before the eyes of the heavenly judge.

However, the testimony of Venerable Bede will be adduced to prove that this is true. He says, "He who gives alms but does not abandon the fault does not redeem his soul, which he does not restrain from vices." This is confirmed by the deeds of a hermit who served with many virtues in the company of a certain college. The following thought was suggested to the hermit by the devil: whenever he was aroused by lust, he should release semen by rubbing his genitals, just as he blows mucus from his nose. For this he was handed over to the demons at death while his friend was looking on. Then the same friend, not knowing his guilt but recalling his exercise of the virtues, almost despaired saying, "O, who can be saved? How has he perished?" An angel standing nearby said to him, "Don't be disturbed; for although he did many things, nonetheless he soiled everything through this vice which the Apostle calls impurity."

This is an incredible read. Thank you!

I second that.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)