Ladies Forum Guidelines & Introduction thread

EntWife

Robin
Woman
I hate to disappoint the other ladies here, but ... I don't enjoy cooking. It's a basic life skill and a necessary chore.

I do enjoy my children's reactions though. The best so far was when my youngest son looked at what I'd put on his plate and started cheering, "Yay! Mommy's green beans! Yay! I love Mommy's green beans!" He went on and on. He was so excited! He even kept thanking me.

It's good to know that I finally figured out how to cook green beans in a way that the kids like. The way cooking and nutrition experts tell you to do it didn't work for them.
 

LeoniusD

Pelican
Gnostic or New Age
Those women who marry young or what passes for young are blessed.

I personally have met enough women in my life and have some in my family who either regretted marrying young or those who rather regretted not getting married. Guess which group is the more miserable?

It's the latter one - usually those women have done 'everything right'. Partying in their 20s and only attempting to find Mr. Right past 33 - I saw them in tears as they were not able to conceive even as they tried to do it with random guys. Childless and 40 is a terrible thing for most women to go through.

As for the women who regret having married young. It's mostly based in the head and the natural instincts women have which tells them to look for the best man - satisfying their highly sexually attractive (aka best hot genes) and best provider material. Those men are so rare that you would have to be insane attempting it or we would have to return as a society to primitive caveman times of the chief having most women while the other men are shuffling around listless. The better system one of stable marriages under diviine guidance.

I talked onced with a woman who got married aged 20 and had her kids in her early 20s. The marriage was not super-happy, but the husband was a good provider and good father, so she stayed married until the children were grown up. Then she divorced and found a more fitting match and is very happy again. I told her that this model is by far better than anything feminists are coaxing the women into. Getting children young is best and if the husband is no psychopath, then the better. While divorce is not optimal, at least it gives you still later in life time to find a new partner.

And obviously those women are far happier than the childless 40+ ones who would not even visit their friends with children, because it is too painful for them.

Society is sick by design - don't let their voices get to you. Their Satanic counseling is all wrong. And even the basic female hypergamic instincts - they are nothing but base animal instincts that serve some role of course, but they should be infused with higher meaning as well since we are above the animal consciousness as sentient beings at least on this level.
 

DelMarMisty

Woodpecker
Woman
Orthodox
Those women who marry young or what passes for young are blessed.

I personally have met enough women in my life and have some in my family who either regretted marrying young or those who rather regretted not getting married. Guess which group is the more miserable?

It's the latter one - usually those women have done 'everything right'. Partying in their 20s and only attempting to find Mr. Right past 33 - I saw them in tears as they were not able to conceive even as they tried to do it with random guys. Childless and 40 is a terrible thing for most women to go through.

As for the women who regret having married young. It's mostly based in the head and the natural instincts women have which tells them to look for the best man - satisfying their highly sexually attractive (aka best hot genes) and best provider material. Those men are so rare that you would have to be insane attempting it or we would have to return as a society to primitive caveman times of the chief having most women while the other men are shuffling around listless. The better system one of stable marriages under diviine guidance.

I talked onced with a woman who got married aged 20 and had her kids in her early 20s. The marriage was not super-happy, but the husband was a good provider and good father, so she stayed married until the children were grown up. Then she divorced and found a more fitting match and is very happy again. I told her that this model is by far better than anything feminists are coaxing the women into. Getting children young is best and if the husband is no psychopath, then the better. While divorce is not optimal, at least it gives you still later in life time to find a new partner.

And obviously those women are far happier than the childless 40+ ones who would not even visit their friends with children, because it is too painful for them.

Society is sick by design - don't let their voices get to you. Their Satanic counseling is all wrong. And even the basic female hypergamic instincts - they are nothing but base animal instincts that serve some role of course, but they should be infused with higher meaning as well since we are above the animal consciousness as sentient beings at least on this level.
Well said. The thing is when you're in that hot stage, you think you'll be hot forever. As I was explaining to my mum "I married too young, I could have done this and be this, I ruined my life" she just couldn't understand what I was talking about. At the time, (25 - which is not even that young) society makes you think your invincible, you'll never age, kids are boring etc. I kid you not, not sure if you are a believer or not, as these feelings intensified so did the odd chatter in my mind. That 'satanic counselling' as you mention starts to not only impact you externally through society, but your mind is poisoned, your thoughts are not your own. So the thought of being 40, single and childless was not even something I used to think about. You just "don't need a man" because you have money and status etc etc and it will be like this forever. People will just revel in my presence. Ah the delusion!
 

LeoniusD

Pelican
Gnostic or New Age
Yeah - it's a delusion. It poisons your mind. Even the supposedly less radical feminism of the 1960s was already a poison. It makes many women antagonistic towrds all men - I heard it even from those who went through the de-feminization while in a relationships. One woman said that she suddenly realized that all those times she felt angry with her boyfriend was because of the feminist programming. Her anger was propaganda created!

And nevermind those poor sods who fall now deep for the SJW-feminist ways:

test-subjects-before-and-after-sjw-indoctrination-33833802.png


The ugliness can be seen outwardly as well. The scale is really progressive as many of the first feminists were married with children, but were somehow unhappy because of all this oppression. I remember one of the most famous ones being unsatisfied despite being married to a good-looking, masculine, highly successful lawyers. She even wrote poems cursing his large male endowment and masculine ego. Any sane woman would have struck the lottery with such a guy, but she wanted more and wrote books so that countless women would not even get close to what she had in her personal life. The other group of leading feminists are lesbians and that is even more insane. That is akin to men taking relationship and marriage advice from gay men in the party scene or on Grindr.

And yes - when young you don't consider all those things despite the fact that women used to be more mature gender being designed to think about those very things much sooner. It took decades of brainwashing to wipe it all clean - countless movies and plenty of academia driven reconditioning. Remember of the old Jane Austen novels where most teenage women were just wondering who they would marry. Their interest was centered on finding the best possible man, not run around sampling men and then settling down past the prime while being oblivious about gender-specific attraction patterns. (Female attraction is much stronger impacted by youth than male attraction - for obvious biological reasons that will never be eradicated) Even the current bestsellers like Fifty Shades show ultimately a young woman being attracted to a strong dominant man. And it's clearly monogamously oriented and thus a conventional male-female relationship despite all the additional fluff. In a Jane Austen novel that man would just be a gruff regional lord who was strangely attracted to girl of more humble origins. This stuff is fundamental to us humans and our relationships.
 

DelMarMisty

Woodpecker
Woman
Orthodox
Yeah - it's a delusion. It poisons your mind. Even the supposedly less radical feminism of the 1960s was already a poison. It makes many women antagonistic towrds all men - I heard it even from those who went through the de-feminization while in a relationships. One woman said that she suddenly realized that all those times she felt angry with her boyfriend was because of the feminist programming. Her anger was propaganda created!

And nevermind those poor sods who fall now deep for the SJW-feminist ways:

test-subjects-before-and-after-sjw-indoctrination-33833802.png


The ugliness can be seen outwardly as well. The scale is really progressive as many of the first feminists were married with children, but were somehow unhappy because of all this oppression. I remember one of the most famous ones being unsatisfied despite being married to a good-looking, masculine, highly successful lawyers. She even wrote poems cursing his large male endowment and masculine ego. Any sane woman would have struck the lottery with such a guy, but she wanted more and wrote books so that countless women would not even get close to what she had in her personal life. The other group of leading feminists are lesbians and that is even more insane. That is akin to men taking relationship and marriage advice from gay men in the party scene or on Grindr.

And yes - when young you don't consider all those things despite the fact that women used to be more mature gender being designed to think about those very things much sooner. It took decades of brainwashing to wipe it all clean - countless movies and plenty of academia driven reconditioning. Remember of the old Jane Austen novels where most teenage women were just wondering who they would marry. Their interest was centered on finding the best possible man, not run around sampling men and then settling down past the prime while being oblivious about gender-specific attraction patterns. (Female attraction is much stronger impacted by youth than male attraction - for obvious biological reasons that will never be eradicated) Even the current bestsellers like Fifty Shades show ultimately a young woman being attracted to a strong dominant man. And it's clearly monogamously oriented and thus a conventional male-female relationship despite all the additional fluff. In a Jane Austen novel that man would just be a gruff regional lord who was strangely attracted to girl of more humble origins. This stuff is fundamental to us humans and our relationships.
The antagonism, oh yes. That is so so true. It is literal programming. Shocking. I can't believe my husband didn't actually leave me during my indoctrination. I already had a pre-conceived idea of who he was based on feminist ideas. This poison was the worst because I spent so much time at universities, academic groups and took on research jobs etc then I would come home and spend so much time arguing about how my husband was entrapping, analysing every word he said. Dealing with this type of female means that she is constantly testing you, manipulating you, seeing how far she can push your manhood. This is what I did. It is sick. Because as much as your natural instinct is to like masculinity and enjoy these attributes in men, your feminist indoctrination makes you despise it and want to break it and ruin in. Women are manipulated easier, because of the female attraction as you said. It's another level now though, even from 5 years ago. Your comment about the outward appearance. My husband now, when we talk, and as we heal, tells me that I literally appeared dark and ugly because of these beliefs. The natural femininity disappears and is replaced by masculine dark energy which they try to instil in you. Universities, are the absolute worst. The amount of soulless, masculine women, who otherwise would have been appealing and beautiful is astounding. Exactly, like the photo you shared above basically.
 
Last edited:

Rob Banks

Pelican
I talked onced with a woman who got married aged 20 and had her kids in her early 20s. The marriage was not super-happy, but the husband was a good provider and good father, so she stayed married until the children were grown up. Then she divorced and found a more fitting match and is very happy again. I told her that this model is by far better than anything feminists are coaxing the women into. Getting children young is best and if the husband is no psychopath, then the better. While divorce is not optimal, at least it gives you still later in life time to find a new partner.
This can't be right.

Marriage is until death, not "until the children grow up" (and then when children are grown, you are free to find new and exciting sex partners).

I recommend the book Primal Loss (links to entire book, available for free), by blogger Leila Miller. She anonymously interviews many adult children of divorce and broken homes. Some were young children when their parents divorced, but some were in their 20s and 30s. They were all affected very deeply.

In fact, I recommend Leila Miller's blogs (here and here). She is Catholic and very pro-traditional-marriage and anti-divorce.

@LeoniusD, you make it seem like marriage and child-rearing are just a chore; a means to an end. That it is acceptable for a woman to not love her husband but to stay with him only for the sake of the children (until the children are grown and she is "free").

If a woman and man marry young, have children together, are married for 20+ years, and yet still love each other so little that they end up divorcing and seeking new sexual experiences, I can guarantee you there is something very wrong spiritually in that relationship. And it 100% affected those children. You can't chalk it up to "they were just incompatible" or some other modernist BS explanation.

Typically, when a man and woman marry (especially if they are young and sexually inexperienced) and proceed to share intimate life experiences (including children), they will automatically grow to love each other to the point where they are an extention of one another. As the Bible teaches, "the two become one flesh." And by this, I truly mean they join together and cease to be two separare individuals.

To claim they are incompatible is nonsense. How can you be incompatible with a part of your own self?

If you're willing to rip apart what God joined together (and sacrifice your adult children's well-being) for the prospect of new and exciting sex, then there is something very, very wrong.
 
Last edited:

DelMarMisty

Woodpecker
Woman
Orthodox
This can't be right.

Marriage is until death, not "until the children grow up" (and then when children are grown, you are free to find new and exciting sex partners).

I recommend the book Primal Loss (links to entire book, available for free), by blogger Leila Miller. She anonymously interviews many adult children of divorce and broken homes. Some were young children when their parents divorced, but some were in their 20s and 30s. They were all affecte very deeply.

In fact, I recommend Leila Miller's blogs (here and here). She is Catholic and very pro-traditional-marriage and anti-divorce.

@LeoniusD, you make it seem like marriage and child-rearing are just a chore; a means to an end. That it is acceptable for a woman to not love her husband but to stay with him only for the sake of the children (until the children are grown and she is "free").

If a woman and man marry young, have children together, are married for 20+ years, and yet still love each other so little that they end up divorcing and seeking new sexual experiences, I can guarantee you there is/was something very wrong spiritually in that relationship. And it 100% affected those children. You can't chalk it up to "they were just incompatible" or some other modernist BS explanation.

Typically, when a man and woman marry (especially if they are young and sexually inexperienced) and proceed to share intimate life experiences (including children), they will automatically grow to love each other to the point where they are an extention of one another. As the Bible teaches, "the two become one flesh."

If you're willing to give that up (and sacrifice your adult children's well-being) for the prospect of new and exciting sex, then there is something very, very wrong.
Absolutely. This is also, sadly, another deception and the reason why so many marriages fail. Marriage is intended to be until death, and this is the way it should be viewed. The Bible calls divorce a great calamity, absolutely disastrous. Now, I couldn't image the pain of having children and sharing your life with someone everyday and then cutting the tie off because you seek compatibility or better sex.I read somewhere that divorce is like trying to erase history, it can never be done despite people thinking they can 'start fresh' much like when you have sex with multiple people, you can never erase that. God can forgive, but as long as you are in the flesh, those human connections linger both in soul and spirit.
 

Jessie

Sparrow
Woman
Protestant
This can't be right.

Marriage is until death, not "until the children grow up" (and then when children are grown, you are free to find new and exciting sex partners).

I recommend the book Primal Loss (links to entire book, available for free), by blogger Leila Miller. She anonymously interviews many adult children of divorce and broken homes. Some were young children when their parents divorced, but some were in their 20s and 30s. They were all affected very deeply.

In fact, I recommend Leila Miller's blogs (here and here). She is Catholic and very pro-traditional-marriage and anti-divorce.

@LeoniusD, you make it seem like marriage and child-rearing are just a chore; a means to an end. That it is acceptable for a woman to not love her husband but to stay with him only for the sake of the children (until the children are grown and she is "free").

If a woman and man marry young, have children together, are married for 20+ years, and yet still love each other so little that they end up divorcing and seeking new sexual experiences, I can guarantee you there is something very wrong spiritually in that relationship. And it 100% affected those children. You can't chalk it up to "they were just incompatible" or some other modernist BS explanation.

Typically, when a man and woman marry (especially if they are young and sexually inexperienced) and proceed to share intimate life experiences (including children), they will automatically grow to love each other to the point where they are an extention of one another. As the Bible teaches, "the two become one flesh." And by this, I truly mean they join together and cease to be two separare individuals.

To claim they are incompatible is nonsense. How can you be incompatible with a part of your own self?

If you're willing to rip apart what God joined together (and sacrifice your adult children's well-being) for the prospect of new and exciting sex, then there is something very, very wrong.

I agree. God hates divorce. He is not honored in any way when a couple divorces, and the point of our lives is to glorify and honor Him. If there is no infidelity, the marriage should be worked on so that it reflects the picture of Christ and the church. That brings Him glory.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
...when you have sex with multiple people, you can never erase that. God can forgive, but as long as you are in the flesh, those human connections linger both in soul and spirit.
I understand you can't erase the spiritual wounds when it comes to divorce. There is no "fresh start" because you're actively living in unrepentant sin. But when it comes to past sexual partners, do you not think there is a way to be forgive so that it doesn't linger in your spirit for the rest of your life? Is there not a way to renounce and reject all past sexual partners in a way that God will heal you and make you whole again?

No need to share personal experiences or anything like that. I am asking more in a theological/philosophical sense.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
I agree. God hates divorce. He is not honored in any way when a couple divorces, and the point of our lives is to glorify and honor Him. If there is no infidelity, the marriage should be worked on so that it reflects the picture of Christ and the church. That brings Him glory.
What if there is infidelity, though?
 

DelMarMisty

Woodpecker
Woman
Orthodox
The Bible suggest that yes, Christ can renew us, Psalm 51:7-15 comes to mind. I am a little bit stuck with this one, because we carry our memories and sin in our mind too, so how are we ever suppose to be completely free from them? I always think back to my ancestors, who lived pretty holy and pure lives. Can someone who has sinned heavily and fornicated ever be renewed in the same way as someone who hasn't? They haven't walked the same path, or experienced the same sins. Perhaps, God can heal and eradicate the memories and make someone whole again, but there would need to be deep repentance and a miracle from God, no? Hence why sexual immorality in the Bible is constantly mentioned, because it is grievous to our human state. In Christ, however, there are no impossibilities. If it is His will, He can.
 

bucky

Ostrich
Other Christian
What if there is infidelity, though?
I have no idea if this is the official Catholic position, but my wife's priest told us that even if there's infidelity, the marriage should stand. He wanted at least one of us to agree to that before approving us to marry in the church. She did, I didn't, so we were good to go.

For what it's worth, it wasn't that I have the remotest intention of being unfaithful or think she would, it was that I put up with a cheating wife in my previous marriage and if it were to happen I don't think I could handle it again.

A few married people in our church community have talked about infidelity in their marriages, and they're still married and attend church together. I'm not sure how much that has to do with being Catholic vs. being Latino, as all these couples happen to be. In my wife's country and other Latin American countries it seems like the men normally cheat on their wives sooner or later, but the couple also usually stays together.
 
Last edited:

Rob Banks

Pelican
The Bible suggest that yes, Christ can renew us, Psalm 51:7-15 comes to mind. I am a little bit stuck with this one, because we carry our memories and sin in our mind too, so how are we ever suppose to be completely free from them? I always think back to my ancestors, who lived pretty holy and pure lives. Can someone who has sinned heavily and fornicated ever be renewed in the same way as someone who hasn't? They haven't walked the same path, or experienced the same sins. Perhaps, God can heal and eradicate the memories and make someone whole again, but there would need to be deep repentance and a miracle from God, no? Hence why sexual immorality in the Bible is constantly mentioned, because it is grievous to our human state. In Christ, however, there are no impossibilities. If it is His will, He can.
I'm not convinced that the memory of the experiences is what causes it to affect us spiritually. If one somehow got amnesia and could no longer remember their past sexual degeneracy, I'd be willing to bet it would still affect them spiritually.

Other than that, I pretty much agree.

My priest introduced me to a prayer known as the "Renunciation and Affirmation prayer." It goes like this:

In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, as a redeemed child of God, I here and now repent, renounce, revoke, and cancel out all sin, ground, and occult involvement ever lost or given knowingly or unknowingly to demon powers by myself, my spouse, our parents, ancestors, friends, associates, and any sexual partners of the past. I do it now by claiming complete forgiveness and cleansing in the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. I also renounce, revoke, and cancel out the devil and all his works; including all spiritistic heredity bondage.

I now claim and take back all the ground lost or given to evil spirits by myself, my spouse, our parents, ancestors, descendants, friends, associates, and any sexual partners of the past. In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ I now command these evil spirits to depart and go to the pit of hell now, and never return. I also dedicate ourselves completely, spirit, soul, body, mind, will, and emotions to our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.


This prayer is applicable for renouncing all forms of sin and evil spirits, but notice how it specifically says to renounce the sins/evil spirits allowed into your live via any sexual partners of the past.
 

Jessie

Sparrow
Woman
Protestant
What if there is infidelity, though?
If the spouse is truly repentant, it is good to work through it. If the spouse is unrepentant and an unbeliever and wants to leave, let him/her go. 1 Cor 7:15. Of course this is a simple answer, and the scriptures have more to say on the issue. Bit the important thing is to read the scriptures and do what they say.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
I have no idea if this is the official Catholic position, but my wife's priest told us that even if there's infidelity, the marriage should stand. He wanted at least one of us to agree to that before approving us to marry in the church. She did, I didn't, so we were good to go.

For what it's worth, it wasn't that I have the remotest intention of being unfaithful or think she would, it was that I put up with a cheating wife in my previous marriage and if it were to happen I don't think I could handle it again.

A few married people in our church community have talked about infidelity in their marriages, and they're still married and attend church together. I'm not sure how much that has to do with being Catholic vs. being Latino, as all these couples happen to be. In my wife's country and other Latin American countries it seems like the men normally cheat on their wives sooner or later, but the couple also usually stays together.
I am also confused as to what is the official Church teaching on this.

I have been told many different things by different people regarding this topic. One priest I've spoken to has said that divorce is always bad, no matter the circumstances, and that one should always forgive. A Catholic female blogger I read claims that physical separation is OK in cases of infidelity or abuse, but that reconciliation must happen when the cause for separation has ceased.

There are blogs and YouTube channels out there of people (mainly women, but men also) who have been separated and/or divorced for years but still consider themselves married to their spouse and are committed to remaining faithful and not ever remarrying. It is sad, but I also believe what these people are doing is admirable and holy.

But another priest I spoke to told me that divorce is not always bad, and that while it is sad, some marriages are so broken that divorce is the only option.

So yeah, it is somewhat confusing to find what the actual Church teaching is regarding this topic. Something tells me that the latter priest is wrong and that the Medieval Church would disagree with him, but I can't know for sure.
 

DelMarMisty

Woodpecker
Woman
Orthodox
I'm not convinced that the memory of the experiences is what causes it to affect us spiritually. If one somehow got amnesia and could no longer remember their past sexual degeneracy, I'd be willing to bet it would still affect them spiritually.

Other than that, I pretty much agree.

My priest introduced me to a prayer known as the "Renunciation and Affirmation prayer." It goes like this:

In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, as a redeemed child of God, I here and now repent, renounce, revoke, and cancel out all sin, ground, and occult involvement ever lost or given knowingly or unknowingly to demon powers by myself, my spouse, our parents, ancestors, friends, associates, and any sexual partners of the past. I do it now by claiming complete forgiveness and cleansing in the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. I also renounce, revoke, and cancel out the devil and all his works; including all spiritistic heredity bondage.

I now claim and take back all the ground lost or given to evil spirits by myself, my spouse, our parents, ancestors, descendants, friends, associates, and any sexual partners of the past. In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ I now command these evil spirits to depart and go to the pit of hell now, and never return. I also dedicate ourselves completely, spirit, soul, body, mind, will, and emotions to our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.


This prayer is applicable for renouncing all forms of sin and evil spirits, but notice how it specifically says to renounce the sins/evil spirits allowed into your live via any sexual partners of the past.
Yes, of course. Our memories are one way we reexperience our sins, but our sins impact us in every way. Our minds are connected to our hearts and our souls, so we have to watch what we think not just what we do.

That seems like a really powerful prayer. As an Orthodox Christian I've never heard prayers that use the term revoke, can we revoke using the name of Christ?
 

DelMarMisty

Woodpecker
Woman
Orthodox
I am also confused as to what is the official Church teaching on this.

I have been told many different things by different people regarding this topic. One priest I've spoken to has said that divorce is always bad, no matter the circumstances, and that one should always forgive. A Catholic female blogger I read claims that physical separation is OK in cases of infidelity or abuse, but that reconciliation must happen when the cause for separation has ceased.

There are blogs and YouTube channels out there of people (mainly women, but men also) who have been separated and/or divorced for years but still consider themselves married to their spouse and are committed to remaining faithful and not ever remarrying. It is sad, but I also believe what these people are doing is admirable and holy.

But another priest I spoke to told me that divorce is not always bad, and that while it is sad, some marriages are so broken that divorce is the only option.

So yeah, it is somewhat confusing to find what the actual Church teaching is regarding this topic. Something tells me that the latter priest is wrong and that the Medieval Church would disagree with him, but I can't know for sure.
There are many differing thoughts on this. I see people mentioning that the Orthodox Church is more forgiving on divorce and allows it more readily. No sure how true this is. Jesus abhors divorce. We must do everything we can to avoid it.
 

bucky

Ostrich
Other Christian
I am also confused as to what is the official Church teaching on this.

I have been told many different things by different people regarding this topic. One priest I've spoken to has said that divorce is always bad, no matter the circumstances, and that one should always forgive. A Catholic female blogger I read claims that physical separation is OK in cases of infidelity or abuse, but that reconciliation must happen when the cause for separation has ceased.

There are blogs and YouTube channels out there of people (mainly women, but men also) who have been separated and/or divorced for years but still consider themselves married to their spouse and are committed to remaining faithful and not ever remarrying. It is sad, but I also believe what these people are doing is admirable and holy.

But another priest I spoke to told me that divorce is not always bad, and that while it is sad, some marriages are so broken that divorce is the only option.

So yeah, it is somewhat confusing to find what the actual Church teaching is regarding this topic. Something tells me that the latter priest is wrong and that the Medieval Church would disagree with him, but I can't know for sure.
My best guess would be that the latter priest you described is a liberal who's allowed modernist doctrine to creep into his world view, but I'm not even Catholic and not even remotely an expert so that's just that, a guess. Maybe someone like Anonymous Bousch, who seems to know the actual doctrine well, could tell us.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
↑ Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Catholic Church now allows the divorced and remarried to receive communion. I believe this was Pope Francis's doing.

I remember there was a lot of talk about this around the start of his papacy in 2013. The idea was that many divorced and remarried people were offended and where therefore leaving the Church, and so the Church should show "mercy" by accommodating there people and "meeting them where they're at."

So, basically, the same ideology that affirms homosexuality or whatever.

Accepting and encouraging someone's sin is not love. It is actually a very mean thing to do.
 

redbeard

Hummingbird
Catholic
Gold Member
I understand you can't erase the spiritual wounds when it comes to divorce. There is no "fresh start" because you're actively living in unrepentant sin. But when it comes to past sexual partners, do you not think there is a way to be forgive so that it doesn't linger in your spirit for the rest of your life? Is there not a way to renounce and reject all past sexual partners in a way that God will heal you and make you whole again?

No need to share personal experiences or anything like that. I am asking more in a theological/philosophical sense.
Absolution grants God's forgiveness, but temporal punishment remains with us.


1472 To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the "eternal punishment" of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain.

1473 The forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains. While patiently bearing sufferings and trials of all kinds and, when the day comes, serenely facing death, the Christian must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace. He should strive by works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, to put off completely the "old man" and to put on the "new man."
 
Top