An important decision

Catholic Living
66

You still have not answered my questions. Have you read the Song of Songs? What are your thoughts? Do you believe it is not inspired? Do you believe it is only allegory? Do you agree with the USCCB’s Introduction that it “it presents an inspired portrayal of ideal human love, a resounding affirmation of the goodness of human sęxuality that is applicable to the sacredness and the depth of Marital union” and “mutual desire” between Husband and His Bride?

I believe I had asked you other questions too, but we will start with these.

71

I must admit that when my wife and I had sex and it resulted in the conception of each of our three daughters the sex was motivated, to some degree, by what Soul calls “lust”. I would call it desire. “lust” has an arbitrarily negative connotation. I am unable to imagine sex without desire.

72

It makes me feel uncomfortable, because your speech is lewd. I do not speak to my wife in the manor that you describe. I am attracted to my Wife though, and that is not a sin.

This changes everything! Ha-ha! : ) Majority of registered offenders are male. So, the creep-factor goes down a notch ; ) How many cats do you have? Just curious.

Are you discerning a Religious vocation? (Not a joke, but a serous question.) I have a cousin who is becoming a Religious Sister. The Order she is doing a test-run with is quite strict, in that if she chooses to join, she may not see her Family (which I think is quite sad and I would consider an Order that is not cloistered).

I’ve inspired my oldest Daughter to discern if is called to the Religious Life. She would have to give up her collectables, which she is not ready to give up yet. She is friends with a boy who does not go to Church. He is a nice young man. He would like to date her, but she is not ready to date yet. So Pray for her discernment and for Josh’s conversion.

75

Correct.

Is your cat broken?

36 is an awesome age! 36 was one of the best years.

So that you are not attracted to him (“lusting”). And because you said that the Marital act is only for procreating. You are treating your husband like an object (or a baby factory part). Essentially you are doing the opposite of what you accuse someone who is intimate with their spouse during infertile times of dong (only in the in a different way).

Thank you : )

76

Obviously there are some here who have a strange and peculiar issue with normal healthy sex.

78

Define Healthy. Care to answer Soul’s personal questions (some valid, some not valid).

I predict if you get broken or contracept that you and your Wife will not be Married in 15 years. How long have you been Married thus far? Is this your first Marriage?

79

This conversation has gotten really wierd. Your prediction about my marriage is assinine. You don’t know what you’re talking about. Soul’s personal questions are meaningless nonsense.

“define healthy” …look it up in the dictionary.

80

It did not say in the dictionary anything about getting broken as being healthy. In fact, I would argue that breaking a healthy part of the body is the opposite of healthy.

I also looked up the word “asinine” and it describes one who breaks a healthy body part ; )

82

Man up. Tell me that it is a good idea to sterilize myself. This is the opposite of manning up : )

84

Oh here we go again with Maria Valtorta ; )

Sorry, I do not believe that God was talking to her. I believe she believed God was talking to her. I believe you believe God was talking to her. I believe Joseph Smith believed he was a Prophet too, but I do not believe he was a prophet.

I caution you on elevating the writings of this Maria Valtorta above Sacred Scripture.

I get that you feel a connection to her, because she, like you, was unMarried and had no children. I believe this might have influenced her ideas on this topic. I’d also like to know about her relationship with her father. I’m getting the sense that there might have been some issues there.

86

Mormons believe that Jesus Christ appeared to Joseph Smith during his “First Vision” and other Heavenly beings in later visions. Why should we believe Maria Valtrorta and not Joseph Smith? Both claim to have had visions. Or should we believe both? I believe in private revelation, but I get a little nervous when individuals are trying to push private revelation as public revelation.

I view you as I do my LDS friends. If this belief in the visions and or prophesy of individuals in recent history moves you to a deeper relationship with the real Jesus, then I view this as a good.

So, I skimmed her autobiography and here are some things that relate to her relationship with her father and I think the issue was more with her mother:

  • Maria loved her father very much, was deeply grieved by his absence at her First Holy Communion. She blames her mother for him not being there.
  • Her father developed some health issues and retired from active Military. As is common of Military Families, they moved around quite a bit.
  • She describes her father as patient, sweet, loving, forgiving offenses, and who endured sorrows caused by others who misjudged him (as I have done ; ) I am curious by what these misjudgments were. How did others perceive him I wonder? Did they view him as a push-over? Someone who was weak, because his wife would sting him with words and try to control him.
  • When her father died, Maria took it very hard (as I did the death of my own father). It pained her that she was not able to be there in his final moments.
  • After his death, her mother became even more callous.
  • She described her mother as extremely severe, despotic, ill-tempered, religiously indifferent, selfish, and jealously possessive.
  • Her mother treated he more like a servant, expecting her to care for her. Her mom was a bit of a hypochondriac who often believe she had illnesses (something that often happens when you lose someone close to you).
  • Her mother would cut off her relationships with friends out of control or jealousy.
  • But, she loved her Mom, “with a love that not even her harshness had been able to tire or diminish.”

So, it sounds like her mom was crazy. Her Dad actually sounds like a pretty good dude.

89

I agree. There are at least five possibilities that these kind of things can fall under:

  1. Of God for private revelation
  2. Of God for public revelation
  3. Of Demonic Deception
  4. Mental Illness/Delusion
  5. Of Human Deception

I believe Joseph Smith falls in the number 5 category. Anyone who has multiple Wives is doing so out of ego, selfishness, or self-entitlement.

I believe Maria Valtorta may fall under the number 4 category or number 1 category (if I’m being charitable). But, only God knows for sure.

God can reveal things to benefit us personally, through signs, visions, dreams, circumstances, opportunities, through the reading of His Word, and through the positive influence of other people, etc.

Private revelation is meant for the one receiving it, to grow in Faith, Hope, and Love. It does not mean that it is intended to dictate or even speak to everyone.

We had a man in our Men’s Bible Group who claimed to have heard God tell him the words of a poem over a series of days, weeks, and months. It is a beautiful poem/Prayer. But, he believed God wanted him to share the Prayer to every Catholic Christian. I believe the Prayer was meant specifically for him. And if others are edified by it, then great. He went through a series of health issues and I believe it was this Prayer that helped him rely on God to get through it. I do not believe that God wanted us to recite from the Poem at every Bible Study and to reflect upon it’s words morning, day, and night. This gentleman was a manager at a Nuclear Power Plant prior to retiring. He is a very intelligent man, who liked to be in control. I do believe this Prayer humbled him during a time when he needed to trust God. However, when it came to sharing the poem with others, it may have been more about control or ego for him. A sort of responsibility put upon himself than from God. When you use words like “dictate,” I hear the word “control,” rather than invitation.

90

David. You started this discussion ; ) Enjoy the ride.

91

Multiple wives: last year one of the Scriptures at Mass mentioned that somebody—I think it was Solomon—had 500 wives. I figure that even if some of those women were sisters, he had hundreds of mothers in law. Was that wise? :wink: I wouldn’t want 500 wives. One good one (which I have) is plenty for me. :slight_smile:

1 Like
93

I am skeptical of many of these as well. So, it is nothing personal.

But, haven’t you argued that Maria was told things that are not in the Deposit of Faith? And this is why you think we should read it, believe it, and apply it to our lives?

For one, getting back to the topic of this thread, you believe that the Marital act is only for procreating, separating the unitive aspect. I know I sound like a broken record here, but you have a disordered view of this gift. And you posted where Maria said something very similar to your disordered view. And I think her view has a lot to do with the relationship between her mother and her father. Or a misunderstanding of why Mary (and Joseph) protected her perpetual virginity. It wasn’t because they did not want to have more children and therefore implying that the Marital act is only for procreating. That is the wrong way of looking at it. It has more to do with the fact that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant. And just as the Ark of the Old Covenant was a sacred place and touching the Ark was forbidden, so is true of Mary.

I feel like you have made a religion out of this lady. I’m glad that her writings have inspired you to grow in your Christian Faith.

96

And The Early Church Fathers (successors to the Apostles) disagree with you. You view a lot of truth to be nonsense. The question is, why do you believe such things to be nonsense? Is it for personal reasons? Do you believe certain things to justify your own actions?

I have a Protestant co-worker who believes that Mary and Joseph were intimate after the birth of Jesus, because her Husband has told her that he could not go through life not “getting any.” Do you agree with her Husband and with her reasoning?

Let me go a step further, Do you believe in the Virgin Birth? Or is this also nonsense? Do you believe, rather, that Mary and Joseph “hooked up” prior to being Married and made everything up?

Why do you believe what you believe? I can show you other places in Sacred Scripture where the term “brother” and “sister” are used and it does not mean biological brother and sister.

In Geneses 13:8 Abraham refers to his nephew Lot as his “brother,” though Lot is actually his brother’s son.

The word “brother” was also used to describe Jacob and Laban who were Uncle and Nephew.

The Hebrew word for brother (אח, ach) can refer to any close male relative of the same generation, such as cousins, nephews, or even members of the same culture. And we often see it to mean relative or kinsman in Sacred Scripture.

Same goes for the word “sister.” It can mean close female relative, like a half-sister, aunt, or sister-in-law. And like brother can also mean a fellow believer or spiritual kin.

The book of Proverbs uses the word “my sister” to describe Wisdom.

Origen and Epiphanius (successors to the Apostles in the 4th Century) believed these “brothers” and “sister” of Jesus were St. Joseph’s children from a previous Marriage.

St. Jerome, who lived in the late fourth century and translated the Bible into Latin, believed that the “brothers” and “sister” of Jesus were cousins (belonging to Mary and Clopas).

If you would like to read more about this, I invite you to check out “Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church” by Richard Bauckham (it is a bit pricey, because it is an academic book).

98

Of course she did ; ) No, but thank you for your references to the Early Church Fathers. To me, weather the brothers and sister were cousins or step-siblings is not as important as Mary’s perpetual Virginity.

For if she was not a virgin when Jesus was conceived then it is all a lie. And if she and St. Joseph were intimate after the birth of Christ, then she is not the Ark of the New Covenant, or is, and thus had been defiled, which even good Jews under the old Covenant knew better than to enter the Ark of the Old Covenant!

I’m still interested to hear David’s answers to my questions to get a better understanding of where he is coming from and why he believes what he believes.

100

The Bible states that Jesus had brothers. It does not say “cousins”. It does not say “step-brothers”. It does not say “half-brothers”. The bible says they were his brothers.
Mark 6;3 “isn’t this Mary’s son (Jesus) and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon?”
Your argument isn’t with me. Your argument is with the Bible.
Matthew 13; 55-56 ""Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary, and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas? Are not all his sisters with us here?"

102

Words have more than one meaning. This is true in modern day and it was true in Biblical times. In recent years, the word “drip” is used to describe someone’s fashionable clothing. But, could you imagine someone in Biblical times reading the lyrics to a hip-hop song from a few years back and read the word “drip”? And someone might argue that the text did not mean liquid falling, but that it could have meant something that you wear. And then imagine someone like yourself who says, no, the text says “drip” and that means that is what it means.

There are other places in Scripture that you might not take it literal and we do. For instance, Catholic Christians (and really the Early Church) takes Jesus at His word, when He say, “This is my body… This is my blood…” But, to many Protestants, they add the words “symbolic of” or pull a President Clinton and say, “Well, it depends on what your definition is “is” is.” What did the Early Church teach about this? They believed in the Eucharist.

Then there are other place in Scripture where Jesus describes himself as a door. And Protestant and Catholic Christians do not believe Jesus is a literal door with hinges and such. And neither did the Early Church Fathers believe (the successors to the Apostilles) believe Jesus was a literal door.

So, for me it comes down to, do I believe what modern Protestants believe about the Word of God? Which modern Protestants’ interpretation do I believe? Do I read the text and make up for myself what it means? Or do I look to those who lived closest to the time of Christ and whom were taught by the Apostles and by the successors of the Apostles believed? Though it is true that not all Early Church Fathers all interpret Scripture the same, however, when it comes to the things that they definitively taught in common, this is important.

I believe in the living Word of God, meaning that the Holy Spirit can and does speak to us when we read The Holy Bible, and I also believe that not everyone’s interpretation of the Bible is always the correct interpretation.

Also, the Church teaches that there are multiple ways in which we interpret Sacred Scripture. You can look these up in the Catechism or read Dr. Scott Hahn’s book titled, “Scripture Matters.”

104

So for me it comes down to do I believe what the church teaches or do I believe the Bible.