Thank you Fr. Casey for answering my question regarding asexuality. In addition to being a very helpful and informative answer it was also the first time anyone has suggested that my orientation is a gift, which helped me see it in a better light and genuinely made my day. :)
I would honestly like to be like you sometimes, someone harder to tempt by this world, at least when it comes to lust. If I had that gift I probably would have pursued a Church career or become a missionary. Rejoice in what God has given to you, and God bless you!
No, the obvious answer is to resist being made into a eunuch. I have a better question: “If you banned banned, but you do it hatefully instead of banned, then is that murder?”
Thank you for the clarification on the birth control! I’m on the pill due to anemia, and “friends” calling me a sinner have been hurtful. After my doctor recommended it, I talked to a priest and he gave me the go ahead. When the time comes that abstinence is no longer a valid form of birth control for me, I will have to revisit the issue- but that day is certainly still a while off.
@@Constantina.Valenti To be fair, that is why I put it in quotes. My true friends (both Catholic and not) either don't know, don't care, or asked, "Did you talk with a priest?" and let it go afterwards.
im a Catholic on birth control as well for medical reasons. I have PCOS and don't ovulate which increases my cancer risk. I know birth control can as well but its only temporary for me and me not getting my cycle is higher chance of cancer then birth control.. I want 1 more child I take medication to ovulate so once im done with having kids ill be getting either a hysterectomy or an ablation
i used to take birth control to regulate my hormones (but can't now because they all give me dangerous side effects) because being on my period for 4+ weeks is really bad. i'm glad he answered that, too, because i was curious i'm sorry some people have been so close minded towards this. i'm glad you have friends who actually care
What year is this? Am I in a time warp! Have we learned anything over the last 60 years. My God take the wheel of this bus, cause this is a rough road!
@@ScottA2345 there is indeed black and white in the world that God made. What I said also isn't complicated, yet it's not quite what you said I said either. God bless
2:42 I don't think the way you approached this question was appropriate. If a person is suffering verbal, physical, sexual and/or psychological abuse inside marriage, it _is_ a good thing to divorce. I hope your intention was not to put the blame on the person who chooses to divorce, but it sounded like so. You cannot put your family's wellbeing below your marriage, that's negligence. Divorce is tough for children, but seeing their parent suffer through the avoidable is worse and can put them at risk.
I’m sorry you heard what I said in that way, but it’s not what I said. It may be the *right* thing, it may be the *appropriate* thing, but divorce is never a good thing. It is an admission of failure and something that will hurt children and bring scandal, and so should be avoided as much as possible, but there are times it cannot be avoided. There’s a difference between saying something is “a good,” as in it reflects God and brings life, and something is necessary but unfortunate.
@@BreakingInTheHabit oh divorce is no big deal. I am confident you have family and friends, Father Casey, whom have divorced on amicable terms and perhaps found another more enriching marriage. If perchance you left your Vocation - which is akin to marriage - there maybe some disappointments, and you'd just move on and reinvent your life life. Far worse to remain with the Coth or in a marriage that is not enriching, causes pain and misery to yourself and children. God is quite OK with such. Trust me on that
@@russellmiles2861you don't understand Catholic morality. Just because divorce can bring good, doesn't mean the act itself is morraly right. Jesus said "What God unites, let no man separate. That's why the Church doesn't allow divorce and those who see marriage as something they can try and see how it is shouldn't get married, especially in the Catholic Church.
@@kaktustustus1244 I understand you perspective; but as I am sure you are well aware in practice the Roman Catholic church has a don't ask don't tell way of things. Oh sure, a few parish priest refuse to baptise baby whose parents aren't married and such. But in my experience there is always a near by parish where the priest is more open and caring. The same with remarriage. So sure: cannon law says many things - but when it comes to laws and ethnics folk choose right conduct
@@russellmiles2861the Church doesn't have the authority to change the definition of marriage. It can give annulments, that is to say that the marriage wasn't valid to begin with, but that's not the same thing as a divorce. A divorce treats marriage like a contract. Marriage is not that, it's a covenant, it cannot be broken. So if your marriage is valid and you divorce then remarry, you would be committing adultery.
The Church once adopted a very strict line when it came to marriage. When my grandparents married, my grandfather was a Catholic and my grandmother was Church of England. She did not wish to become a Catholic. It would, I think, have been possible for my grandfather to have applied to his Parish Priest to obtain a dispensation to marry a non Catholic, however, at the time, it was in the middle of the Depression and the fees, even if modest, would not have been affordable. As it was, finding the five shillings for the Registrar for a civil marriage was probably a great hardship at the time. However, as a result, the Parish Priest considered that my grandfather was “living in sin” and he was required to sit at the back of the Church and never receive Holy Communion. When my mother was asked what name she wanted at her Confirmation, she asked for St. Margaret Mary but the Nun said that she could not have any Saint other than St. Mary Magdalene - the nuns took the view that, while my other might be legitimate according to the Law of England, she was not really legitimate as far as they were concerned because her parents were not properly married in Church. Yet, despite the technical irregularities, my grandmother permitted my mother to be brought up as a Catholic, even taking an extra job to earn the fees for a private convent school for her. My mother says that she never heard her parents argue and that her home was filled with love. Of course, the Parish Priest was quite wrong in his behaviour. Knowing that my grandparents were not able to afford the cost of a formal Dispensation, he should have made Church funds available to permit them to obtain one and to marry in Church. In my view, by taking the view that, since they could not afford a Dispensation, the only alternative, as far as the Church was concerned, was for them to “live in sin” he was acting contrary to his duties as a Pastor. However, in those days, that was, very much the way of things.
The church has come a long way from such foolishness! Such is the case with many issues but that was the time they lived in. I’m glad we are growing and I’m sorry your grandparents went through that I assume Gods love shined through regardless the way how you make it seem so good for them!
Would have liked a follow-up on the divorce question regarding the fact that the divorce does not actually end a marriage in the eyes of the Chruch. Divorce in this case would only be in the eyes of the state as a practical measure to secure financial or physical well-being; both parties would not be free to re-marry since their original union is still valid before God.
Correct, but the Catholic Church does provide a method for determining if that marriage was a valid one. If they find it to be an invalid marriage, it can be annulled as if it never was and the divorced person would be free to remarry.
@@m_d1905 this might just have been a semantic choice on your part, but if a marriage is invalid, it isn't "annuled as IF it never was" valid, but it is recognized to simply have never been valid in the first place :)
I believe the Priest's explanation is confusing. There is no divorce for Catholics. Only, in rare cases, a separation might be possible but not to remarry with a different person.
@@luiscarvalho5651 Divorce is ultimately a secular thing. An annulment of a prior marriage may allow a Catholic to remarry. I had a Catholic coworker who's late husband had a prior marriage thatcwas annulled by the church so he and my coworker could marry in the church. They went through a cannon lawyer. You are not wrong though.
Thank you Fr. Casey for all your hard work. I have appreciated all your videos over the years and always look forward to hearing more compassionate insightful views of our shared faith! Keep up the great work!
Fr Casey I like your content and I've been following you for years but with all humility I'd like to make a little correction regarding the question about divorce, as you rightly stated in some extreme cases divorce is allowed by the Catholic Church, but you failed to mention that is not allowed to contract another marriage or start another sexual relationship with another person, unless you get an annullment of your marriage, otherwise you commit the sin of adultery . People might get confused and think that divorce AND remarriage is ok to do. God bless you and the Virgin Mary protect you. Greetings from Italy
We need to progress beyond some ridiculous stuff that has made RC's feel guilt, those days are well and truly gone. Don't care about any rules or laws made by people on this earth, live a good Christian life, all will be well in the next life.
@br.m it brings me such amusement to see how angry Protestants get over Jesus' mother. Probably the first thing he'll ask you about if you ever meet him is what's with the disrespect to the mother of God
I think you may be causing some confusion on the divorce topic. Divorce does not exist for Catholics, but a civil divorce may be necessary on some rare cases. This never allows for remarriage though.
Divorce is a legal word, rarely is it appropriately used in Catholic authority, but there are cases (rare). The Church Generally has free to marry (single), presumed married (outside wedding), sacramentally married presumed valid and licit. Annulled sacramental marriages are a striking of the Church records thus a return to free to marry(single). The only legal interplay is the Church requires a full commitment so no intentional mixed states as Church married but legally singles or legally married but church single. Clear as mud.
Every time I hear some argument against gay relationships, I remember the heartbreaking time when a friend I had known for eight years called me up to tell me he was gay. He was so incredibly afraid that this would make him lose my friendship. It sounds very nice to say you accept that people are gay. But if you don't accept the implications of that, you do not really accept people being gay. You have explained logically what your criteria for having a physical relationship are, but you have not explained why these criteria are the morally correct ones.
Exactly. A heterosexual, married couple cannot fulfil one of the categories if one or both of them is infertile. So that doesn’t seem like a good reason for me to
7:22, I also wanna add that a person must be aware at that moment that the thought itself is sinful. To add a personal example, there were situations in the past in where I genuinely thought something wasn’t sinful or that it was a mere occasion if sin, so I didn’t think match of it. However, in the middle of that situation I gained an understanding of the gravity of the situation and moved on, learning to avoid anything I consider an unnecessary near occasion of sin
Under secular morality the well being of two consenting adults of the same sexuality and/or gender decing to marry or enter a relationship is not violated. A far more accepting and civilised society in which to live.
Father Casey speaks his loving truth plainly, yet eloquently and with sincere compassion. I appreciate that very much, even though I left the Catholic Church many years ago and have been a practicing Unitarian - Universalist for over 20 years. People of good character and civility can always agree to disagree, as I do with many of the church teachings.
Thank you for your video, fr. Casey. I have a question: as far as we know some aspects of the catholic doctrine have changed throughout history, and that's because the living Spirit of God guides the Church. I remember a video in which you recalled how, for example, the doctrine of religious freedom has changed from a "radical no" to a "yes" after Vatican Council II. So my question is: "do you consider possible a change in catholic doctrine about sexuality?" Of course moral doctrine cannot change because of our desires or lusts, but maybe it definitely can after a better understanding of some phenomena, even with a more objective and non-ideological scientifical studies. Let's also think about death penality and the concept of "just war", that only recently have been officially declared immoral "in any case". Thank you for your ministry in God's sheepfold. Giovanni
Also, for more than a thousand years usary - the taking of interest on a loan - was considered a grave sin against human nature. By the year 1500, theologians living in a time of rapid economic expansion found a way to justify a five percent interest rate (the so-called German contract.) The Lateran Council III (1179) decreed that persons who accepted interest on loans could receive neither the sacraments nor Christian burial.
How do you explain King David loving the much younger Jonathan (more than the love of any woman) and made a Covenant with him? Were they bisexual? Many powerful 'straight' men in those days had a wife, but also a younger boy on side. I Samuel 20:16-17
I found many Evangelical pastors have their own interpretation of the deep relationship between David & Jonathan in the bible, and according to them, the relationship was not a sexual/carnal one, but deeply platonic. I believe it's because they cannot accept it was sexual because David was much favoured in God's eyes & also because Evangelicals are pointedly anti homosexual. ****Reading between the subtle biblical lines, my conclusion is it was a sexual/carnal relationship.
0:10 Women and Men are biologically different so they have something different to offer each other and can bring a human in this life natually with no 3rd party getting involved
My guess is that the unintended consequence, perhaps even intended, of such pernickety legalising in canons, clauses and subclauses of normal sexual behaviour is a culture of snooping, moralising, gossiping and condemnation (note ‘friends’ calling someone a sinner in a comment below). This would only lead to a world where we all live, as once was said of Ireland, in the 'valley of squinting windows’.
Does God only see a couple as married when they are married by law? Or could a couple marry by a priest never file any paperwork and legally not be married but still be married in the eyes of God?
Love thy neighbour, whoever without sin casts the first stone, God loves us all including sinners and understands the struggle people go through he does not hold it against us
@TT-zl7ir A wife can divorce her husband at any time - and take his house and money and children. If he objects, he goes to prison. Jesus would not have recognized such an arrangement to be marriage.
Hello Fr.! Could you answer a question on burning sage? I like to burn sage cause I like the way it smells honestly and it is relaxing to have an incense at home that isn’t as overpowering as the one in church. Is this considered anti catholic? Please and thank you!
No, if you’re using it as a perfume or incense just for the smell it is completely acceptable. The only way it would be unacceptable is if you intentionally use it as a way to signify anything non Catholic
Yeah, when people get upset about Fr. Casey not being progressive enough on The Issues, I'm like, he's a Catholic priest. This is his educational vlog, not his personal diary. I'm not sure what they're expecting from a representative of the Church.
I wonder if they’ll be another counsel on this because even being a married couple right and doing everything correct but the biggest elephant in the room is maybe they can’t afford children and I always feel like this is constantly ignored. It’s one of the most important parts of reproduction, and there seems to be no solution so I wonder if the church will change its ruling and contraception for married couples eventually down the line
Concerning the asexual Catholic: Maybe you should look at the church’s tradition and teachings: Joseph and Mary were married and Mary remained a virgin despite that. They would have to be asexual, but hetero-romantic. That’s called a Josephite marriage.
@@m_d1905 yes ik but living together isn't just about us, we represent our family, our Church, etc. even if we're patience to honour our purity its not wise, at least thats what i get taught.
@@matts-7566 That was strange to me too. As a Lutheran, I have heard my pastors speaking against cohabitation. Perhaps the Lutheran church is more in line with you and the Bible.. We consider it a violation.
Pew research found that 56% of those that left the Catholic Church are due to it's teachings on reproduction and gays. St Augustine's theology on gender roles and sexual ethics has profoundly influenced the church and is deeply problematic, scientifically, psychologically and socially. I am celibate and have been in chaste relationships, but it's very hurtful that this is the easiest way for me to remain Catholic, though I consider leaving often as most people I grew up have. That said, I have not spoken privately with even one priest who actually says they believe deeply committed, loving, secularly married, and sexually active gay couples are committing a sin despite the teachings and public lip service to it. I believe there will eventually be a schism or shift on this, but the countless souls harmed by it cannot be undone. The domino effect is staggering. I appreciate your videos and recognize there are no winning answers on some of these subjects as the pew surveys show. Good on you for explaining the teachings despite it all.
If there is a schism, so be it. They would not be Catholic as they are not in communion with Rome. Those churches will not be full of attendees either, the belief that people stopped attending church because of the teachings is completely false. Regardless of what pew research states. There are many progressive protestant churches, and they are in decline, with empty pews, just like all other sects of christianity. It would be foolish for the church to turn its back on those who actually attend church, in hopes of drawing in people that never planned on going to begin with. The fact a person stopped attending church because they think homosexual marriage is more important than the teachings and commandments of Christ, they never believed to begin with. Jesus literally said following him would be taking the narrow path, why would someone think being a follower of christ means you get to have everything you wanted? It means sacrifice. Just like he sacrificed his life. There's a reason Jesus said not all who say father will see the kingdom of heaven, there are many misguided individuals, places priority on the wrong things.
@@TT-zl7ir He's likely meaning the US and maybe also the EU. Internationally it's possible more leave Catholicism for Pentecostalism than secularism, Pentecostalism tends to be stricter on homosexuality. Catholics can at least talk to people about it and avoid heterosexuality. (I don't agree on the TLM issue. Internationally I think charismatic Catholics are growing more than TLM, which is not what I'd maybe want as I am probably closer to TLM than charismatics but I'm going on the evidence I've seen not my preferences.) Other problem with what he's saying is Augustine has very little influence in Eastern Orthodox, but they are if anything more united on this issue.
The kinks and paraphilias of 2 or 3% of the population are frankly irrelevant. It they can't control themselves they are no different to a kleptomaniac.
For some reason I feel like the church can stay out of the bedroom. I'm pretty sure jesus and god are more concerned about the person and their overall behaviour rather than specifics in the bedroom
If gay relationships can be loving but they do not produce children why are they not allowed to get married if it’s permissible for an infertile couple to get married? In both cases there is love and an inability to reproduce. This seems like a contradiction to me. Would anyone like to explain ?
I would say that the infertile couple might always get pregnant by a miracle, or they could adopt children, who then would have a mother and a father for their parents.
@@strawberrysmile2212 why can’t a gay couple adopt ? Or use a sperm donor or surrogate? Isn’t it better for a child to be adopted by two gay parents than have none at all?
@@109moster100 Because no reason. Some people don't like gay people for some psychological reason of their own that they probably don't even understand themselves, and then they seek out various justifications like religion to affirm their gut feeling. There's no point arguing against someone who says that an infertile couple can get pregnant by a miracle. That is by definition impossible and the belief is in the magical realm of fantasy literature. Just laugh at the broken logic of many human brains and move on. 😊
@@strawberrysmile2212 Yes, and the gay couple may get pregnant by miracle....the use of logic to justify Church teaching, and then the dismissing of logic the moment is goes against Church teaching is rich.
3:16 If I don't remember it wrong, the Catholic religion teacher I had said as long as it does not have abortion effect, it is not sinful. Is it really realistic to expect husband and wife to be abstain for decades for birth control after having 2-3 children? Is this channel a Roman Catholic channel or other Catholic channel?
Of course, anytime they talk about sexual ethics. They always bring this up first because it’s the buy-in statement. Don’t Forget: Confess your sins not your neighbors.
"In every age, the Church has the responsibility of reading the Signs of the Times, and interpreting them in the light of the Gospel." (Gaudium et spes) A gay relationship can be every bit as "mutually loving" (Humane Vitae) as a straight relationship where the couple either can not have, or do not WANT to have, children. But we don't call those latter marriages "intrinsically disordered" (because they're not having children). It simply flies in the face of clear, human common sense - given to us by God - that "masturbation" is an evil to be avoided. Our problem today with these "lists", is that they don't bring us any closer to responding to the love of Christ in a loving way; they just make us look like anti-intellectual fools in 2024. Because our Faith is 2,000 years old, it doesn't follow that our thinking about that Faith has to be 2,000 years old. As this Synod is teaching us.
Indeed. There would not be problems if Fr. Casey had said "separation" rather than divorce. If you are abused by your spouse, it's perfectly legitimate to live somewhere else for your own protection. This goes without saying. However, if the religious marriage itself were contracted in a fully valid way, then there is a problem. It cannot be "undone", because it is God's work. Our Lord was quite clear on the subject. What one can do in any case is to check if an annulment is possible, which actually is in most cases. Then it is as if the religious marriage never existed, and legal divorce, I believe, should be fine in God's and Church's eyes.
If the Catholic Church is right about everything then yes which it claims, then catholic church has the moral autority. You can decide not to follow it but truth stays truth
@@joepugh678 they always have a suspicious amount of likes, most likely by ai bots. They also often have a lot of comments about positive experiences with the product offered, the comments always have ai written text and are liked by each other.
I remember a few years ago that an engaged soldier was rendered conclusively and permanently impotent in an explosion, and upon returning home the church forbid him and his fiancee from getting married. Both of them loved one another very much and were perfectly willing to engage romantically with one another to the limits of their capacity to do so, and could have enjoyed a perfectly healthy relationship if they had - many people in their situation are able to enjoy perfectly healthy and fulfilling romantic lives, as has been repeatedly confirmed by psychologists. How does forbidding people in these sorts of situations to marry make the world a better place? It might fulfill an abstract interpretation of natural law but otherwise seems to be a fully bad thing to do, only producing misery. You will know them by their fruits, yes? What am I supposed to make of miserable fruits like this one?
From what I saw in this video Fr Casey said that as long as both parties are aware the marriage is permissable. Personally I think the church was wrong in the situation you outlined. I think the soldier and fiancee should absolutely have been allowed to get married.
LOL - if the Church was relying on "natural law" they would have a hard time explaining homosexuality throughout the animal kingdom. The current Church's understanding of "natural law" isn't understanding at all, it's a contrived fiction.
1:52 I think marriage is the celebration of unconditional love, and while we are called to have children, I think it's also important to consider the advancements we've had in psychology and sexual psychology. 100 years ago a person who felt no sexual desire was considered mentally disabled. Nowadays we know that's not necessarily true; there are a myriad of reasons why a person doesn't feel sexual attraction (ptsd, cptsd, hormonal issues, etc) and whether or not they choose to do something to feel that attraction should be up to the person and be upfront with their partner before marriage. If both parts choose to have no sexual intercourse while married, that should be respected, and they may be encouraged to adopt, foster, or live to serve the community. I don't believe asexuality is incompatible with marriage.
There is such a thing as a ‘Josephite’ marriage that is a valid option for a couple, like with Mary and Joseph. It’s just not common so I’m sure lots of priests aren’t aware of it being an option.
Father during a conversation with my urologist the topic of frequent ejaculation may reduce the possibility of prostate cancer, so if one masturbates or ejaculated out of concern for prostate health is this then a mortal sin?
You cannot do something evil for the sake of good. While sinful things may help us physically, you have to ask yourself: is it worth keeping your body alive while you weaken your soul?
@@BreakingInTheHabit Thank you Father, I love being Catholic and I love God and always want to be close to God. I struggle with fear and anxiety about getting sick. I give thanks to the Holy Spirit for guiding me to the church. Your videos have been a huge help. Please pray for me Father. Thank you and God bless you
@@antoniosanjurjo8442 Look to the work of Dr. Ornish and Greger to see how you can significantly reduce the risk of prostate cancer through diet. I suspect the study you cite was flawed. It's a big industry with political use.
@@BreakingInTheHabit Respectfully, it may. Just because in the current moment someone is doing a particular habit (bad in your mind, God hasn't spoken directly on this), doesn't mean that later in life they won't do something else. If the Prodigal son had never left, he would never have been welcomed home.
Liberal protestant denominations are the ones that lose attendants more easily... the traditional ones are the ones who keep and grow... The reason for that is the fact that no one would go to a church to hear the same thing they hear in social media.
With sin, we are like Peter walking on water towards Jesus. So long as we focus on Jesus we will walk, but should we lose our focus due to the crashing of the waves, we will fall. The original sin of Adam and Eve could have been avoided if they merely remembered God instead of focusing on the serpent and the fruit. So, to combat sin in you, focus on Jesus. I don't mean this in an abstract way, I mean it concretely: When you feel the craving, picture Jesus on the Cross in your mind and pray "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner." Masturbation is often habituated on lustful mental imagery; recognizing when that is happening, pausing, and turning to Jesus with your mind and your heart is what I have found has worked. You have to want Jesus more than you want sexual pleasure; if sexual pleasure is causing you to forget God, then you need to practice remembering God in the midst of temptation in order to overcome it. It will not be easy and you will fail, just like Peter fell when walking on water, but remember that turning to God is not just something you are doing, but it is a prayerful activity which God will answer by helping you. God always has one hand stretched out to you for you to hold on to in times of need. The problem is how often we forget that it's there. I used to be incapable of going even a week without masturbating, and some weeks it was every few days. Now I can't remember when the last time I masturbated was, and it's all because God has helped me to remember him in the midst of this temptation.
Humble advice: first, stop trying. For many, it is a very difficult life challenge, if, that is, one is trying to avoid it, which might be a good way of life for some. But perhaps not for all(this is me speaking, no Catholic dogma here!) But to simply say it is “wrong” and move on, as the Christian establishment tends to do, is a harmful oversimplification. Harmful because it is asking people to do something that is, for many, incredibly hard. Brahmacharya, as it is known in Hinduism, is a topic Gandhi spoke on quite a bit and what he had to say is quite helpful if you are interested. It requires a huge amount of discipline: just take a look at some of the no-fap videos here on youtube and you will be amused (so many relapses!). I am curious what goes on among the clergy themselves: they surely struggle with this and it must be discussed among them. My advice, give yourself a break first of all. Even the clergy has had all kinds of difficulty handling sexual urges, and they have the time and guidance around them. Most people don’t! Decide if you truly want to pursue a chaste life like this, and research how to go about it. Are you waiting for a partner? Are you no longer searching for a partner? How do you want to live your life? Personally, there are in my opinion many more grave sins than this: I, myself, wouldn’t even call it a sin unless it was “hurting” the self or someone else, and it is easy to say it is, when it really isn’t. Dont listen to that. It can actually be better than what many “church” focused people have done (France’s Abbé Pierre is a great contemporary example, where the Church did nothing). Wasting the resources we have been given on this Earth, polluting the environment, being mean to other people, fighting wars, not forgiving-there are many more important issues than this. Good luck.
It's a slow process but one which lots of people are fighting with. Take it one day at a time and trust in God's grace. It's hard to completely eradicate a bad habit. Instead try to replace it with a good habit. Get outside more, workout, cold showers whatever gets you away from the occasion of sin. Pray whenever you're in a potential occasion for sin (e.g before bed, before a shower). Keep up the good fight! Pick yourself up whenever you fall and learn from your mistakes. If you want it to break from the habit bad enough, it'll happen! God bless!
@@abyvandanath6995 What if it isn't a "bad habit" but actually an deeply ingrained natural impulse? While I agree that controlling one's impulses is, to a great extent, key to a good, enriching, moral life, the advice you give here is really, with all due respect, useless. "Keep up the good fight! Pick yourself up whenever you fall." Yes, don't beat yourself up about it. But it takes a great deal of control, meditation, willpower, and a willingness to discuss difficult issues, rather than to dismiss them, which, clearly, no one here including Father Casey and the Church in general are actually willing to talk about.
Priests are such hopeful romantics! :D I love the line: "It's been seven years, maybe it's time to make it official?" Hehe. Awesome video Fr. Casey! God bless you, all priests and all who serve in Holy Orders!
@@MadelineBuckner humm, maybe it means that he has no Sexuality to set aside. Someone who doesn't like sexual relationships would be an odd bird to tell others what is a sin
Thank you for answering the question on art vs pornography, the three questions seem useful. I know it's something that's been an issue since people got mad at the sistine chapel paintings.
What's the bare minimum for a marriage to be valid in the eyes of the church? Does the church recognize common law marriage? Is it enough for the couple to proclaim that they are married, without any ceremony or documentation? What if you have a some people stranded on a desert island, and a couple fall in love and want to get married while they're there?
Father I think I might want to have a baby later on but if I dont find the right man.. Which is harder now since many are away from our faith. Would it be ok to have a baby on my own? Thru IVF or something like that?
@@bbygrlpt2 I would suggest raising that matter with your own family, physician and local parishioners. Best not ask in a public forum. The only advice that can be given is the School solution. In the local parish, I am confident that Father Casey offers more nuanced and caring advice.
@@anthonydiaz2185 the medically assisted fertility treatment has been occurring for almost half a century. It is only recently that there has been some teaching offered by the Roman Catholic church. However Roman Catholic church hospitals, medical practitioners and scientists haven't changed their attitudes. Rather, secular countries have long had laws which the church is catching up too. Eg, in Australia commercial surrogacy is a crime, even if it occured in other jurisdictions. Whereas in the USA state of Maryland's a contract to provide a baby is enforceable under contract laws - almost no other country recognises such contracts. The Church teaching on the matter seems to be belated and irrelevant to Roman Catholic adherents
I find your videos interesting, and educational. That being said, I'm very happy I am not Catholic (nor Christian), as it seems like a very limited life that ignores human nature, and love, for the sake of doctrine.
@@boonskis I don't understand. Could you elaborate? I thought your comment was in a different conversation. Where I stated some simple truth, politely. Then I was mobbed by a bunch of "Catholics" who made all kinds of baseless personal attacks against me and leaped to all sorts of fantastic conclusions.. Don't you like facts either? Are you also a Catholic? Are you going to tell me all about myself in condescending and presumptuous ways too?
@@br.m Yes, I'll explain. "Ignorant" is a strong word. That some people don't agree with you do not mean that they are ignorant about something you put in quotes. On the contrary, questioning people are not ignorant, they are intelligent. You should respect that. Jesus didn't often insult people, they gave them good arguments and tried to teach that way. That's all I was saying.
@@ironymatt have you every heard a Roman Catholic school teacher or parish priest say such things ... Look, we all day stuff on Blogosphere to get attention. But in real World this is just not an issue. Goosh priest just tell children not to worry about such things.
I don’t really see why every single sexual encounter between a married couple has to be open to life. It feels arbitrary and puts a major burden on people. Openness to new life is a condition for a valid marriage, but why that translates into a complete ban is perplexing. It doesn’t feel nuanced. NFP is not a perfect system, and in many cases issues like the health of the mother and financial considerations put added pressure onto a couple.
the sexual act in it's very nature is open to (a direct cause of) life. Trying to block the possibility of life through contraception goes against the nature of the sexual act that God created it for, and hence is a grave sin. this doesn't mean that married couples must try to procreate every single time. married couples are allowed to engage in the sexual act merely for the purpose of pleasure. the rule is to be open to procreation, ie. not block it.
Abortion is the intentional killing of an unborn baby. If the intention of treatment is to save the life of the mother and an unintended consequence is the loss of life of the baby, this wouldn't be considered an abortion.
Just like 2000 years ago and even before God (Jesus) couldn't tell the people that the slavery was wrong, because the people's hearts were hardened, the Holly Spirit untill now couldn't reveal that discriminaling against the LGBT people is bad, and not desired by God. Some people have already evolved sufficiently to understand it, the other - I guess - have their hearts still hard, like a depleated uranium.
2:50 I have to take issue with your interpretations of how the catholic church viewed divorce. In my country , Ireland (Renowned its relationship between catholic church and state,) the constitution stated 'No law shall be enacted providing for the grant of a dissolution of marriage' until 1995 after 2 referendum on the topic.
I'm in an irregular relationship so I am hearing with a biased ear. To me, you sound glib, conveying no awareness of the price tag you are laying on people with issues. Spouting rules is not conveying the heart of God for each person and their situation. Don't take me wrong, you don't usually come across as cold.
I know nothing about the nature of your relationship, but my guess is that it’s only “irregular” because the Church teaches us it is. So maybe it’s not you that is biased but the church.
Hello! I have a question regarding birth control. What is the moral difference between NFP and artificial family planning options? Both intend to avoid pregnancy. I've also wondering if condoms specifically are moral to use, as I'm reminded of Genesis 38: 8-10. It is challenging for me to tell if the Lord punished Onan because he refused to provide a child for Tamar or if the punishment was a result of his method of preventing pregnancy. While I am Christian, I am not Catholic, so if you reference Catholic-specific doctrine or literature, would you explain the thoughts behind them? I say this not to disrespect your beliefs or church, but so that I can better understand your points. Specifically, I most agree with Baptist thought (just to provide some context of my perspective). Thank you for your thoughts!
Ive searched around for years for a logical, non arbitrary distinction between NFP and the other methods of contraception. There really isn’t one. Its just more of a passive method. Imagine in an extreme example, the difference between actively killing your child, or passively neglecting them and letting them starve to death. Its still basically the same thing. They’ll try to convince you otherwise
@@Unclenate1000 Thank you for your thoughts and perspective! The intent of avoiding pregnancy is definitely a big reason as to why I am confused as to the difference, which is why I was looking to ask the content creator what his thoughts were. I’m not sure if the “they” you’re referring to at the end are our Catholic brothers and sisters. If so, please try to avoid an “us vs them” mentality. We are all one church under Christ, even if we disagree on non-core theology (by which I mean theology that is not the Gospel).
Regarding marriage and asexuality, could a Josephite marriage take the place of a traditional marriage? My understanding of a Josephite marriage is one where both spouses agree to forgo a sexual relationship for the physical, mental, or spiritual benefit of one or both spouses. Mutually agreeing to a non-sexual relationship and opening a home to fostering or adopting would seem like a perfectly licit form of marriage, again unless I'm very mistaken.
The degrees of consanguinity and affinity the catholic church have applied in relation to whether two people can marry have varied over time despite the fact that the truth is supposedly eternal and unchanging. If the catholic church's perception of the truth with regard to sexual morality in respect of incest has had to be corrected over time, who is to say its current perceptions overall are correct?
Is not inmoral. It's just against arbitrary rules dictated by a supernatural entity, written in a collection of very old books that have been translated and re-translated and contradict themselves.
1'20" In the Sistine Chapel, Michelangelo represented God the Father with naked butts: can anyone help me understand how this fits with the three questions?
It wasn't made to arouse. It doesn't arouse (at least not that I've ever heard or seen or experienced). It honors the beauty of the human body in a way that is still discreet IMO (it's depicting God in His glory, not something sexual)
Former atheist , just begun RCIA and I live with my boyfriend and children. We are now living chastely until marriage but can we continue to share a bed?
In my humble opinion, since this behaviour may lead you in temptation (how original I am!), it ought to be avoided. However, if you are 100% sure that either of you won't give in any blessed but misplaced sexual instinct, then it should be fine. But talk to a good priest first.
Sounds like you found a really great guy. Share a bed in my opinion, it sounds like a logistical nightmare to buy another mattress for a few months. If you give in to temptation, it sounds like you're in a position where you'd truly seek reconciliation and God will always forgive those who ask, that's what Confession is for.
I see Fr Cole making a video about sexual ethics. A certain part of me kind of thought it was going to be about a specific topic. Morbid curiosity encouraged me to click. The more rational part of me is glad I was wrong.
I see we deleted the comment about queer people which included my criticism that if heterosexual infertile couples can marry in the church then it makes no sense to refuse the sacrament to homosexual couples on grounds that they don't have a procreative union. I'm a queer Catholic and I'm honestly so tired of being actively ignored by people who claim to care about us and want us to stay in the Church. Like, what am I even here for? You're not gonna listen?
Infertile is not sterile. Infertile people still have the ability to do normal intercourse, while sterile means both cannot by any means perform normal intercourse. Homosexuals couple are by definiton sterile.
It's because a heterosexual relationship (even if one is infertile) still has a procreative possibility (look at the countless miraculous conceptions throughout the Old and New testaments). With a homosexual relationship, there is and always will be 0 chance of a procreation ever occurring. I really really valuable resource I found is JP2 Theology of the body it really breaks down everything far more eloquently than some random guy on UA-cam like me could lol. Hope some of this helps!
It isn't always the channel who deletes comments. UA-cam has its own moderation for comments that applies across all videos, you might have triggered it.
The Bible clearly blesses infertile couples. But also their infertility or sterility is not innate to the act. It is possible that, in most cases, their condition could someday be curable. Although it might be possible, someday, to use a woman's DNA to create sperm (sounds outlandish but I've read some geneticists indicating it might be possible) that would be artificial reproduction. Natural reproduction through homosexuality just can't happen in mammals so far as we know. (In the all-female whiptail lizard I believe same-sexual activity can "activate" or at least "stimulate" their bodilty process of parthenogenesis, but we aren't whiptail lizards.) Treating sterility clearly can happen. Now an intersex woman might be a wrinkle on this, but I don't know what the churches teaching is there. It would seem to me an intersex person could not marry, but I'm not certain. BTW: This links to my e-mail address so I'm taking a risk saying this, as only a few in my life know, but I'm not straight. I'm not entirely gay either, but my attraction to men is maybe as strong as mine to women. But I don't see any valid way to interpret the Bible or Christian tradition that allows it. Plus celibacy and self-sacrifice are praised in Catholicism, we're not an "everyone must marry" church. (Granted I could marry a woman, but not sure I have the temperament for that.)
>what am I even here for... i think standing up for queer catholics is a noble and neccessary thing, but I'm not sure if you should see that as your sole reason for being in the Church. We're all here for Jesus, the earthly goings-on and politicing are the, sometimes unfortunate, side dishes that we have to sit through to get to the main course (the eucharist). i can't pretend to know what it's like dealing with being an lgbtq catholic but I know it's not easy. But I hope that you stick around for Christ and that you don't leave because of Judas, if you catch my meaning. I'll keep you in my prayers
Thank you Fr. Casey for answering my question regarding asexuality. In addition to being a very helpful and informative answer it was also the first time anyone has suggested that my orientation is a gift, which helped me see it in a better light and genuinely made my day. :)
Trust is God and his Church
I am so happy for you, truly!
I am also asexual and was very happy with this response. I am considering the route of consecrated virginity.
I would honestly like to be like you sometimes, someone harder to tempt by this world, at least when it comes to lust. If I had that gift I probably would have pursued a Church career or become a missionary. Rejoice in what God has given to you, and God bless you!
No,
the obvious answer is to resist being made into a eunuch.
I have a better question: “If you banned banned, but you do it hatefully instead of banned, then is that murder?”
Thank you for the clarification on the birth control! I’m on the pill due to anemia, and “friends” calling me a sinner have been hurtful. After my doctor recommended it, I talked to a priest and he gave me the go ahead. When the time comes that abstinence is no longer a valid form of birth control for me, I will have to revisit the issue- but that day is certainly still a while off.
Your friends don't sound like very good friends, so I'm sorry to hear that. And let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
@@Constantina.Valenti To be fair, that is why I put it in quotes. My true friends (both Catholic and not) either don't know, don't care, or asked, "Did you talk with a priest?" and let it go afterwards.
im a Catholic on birth control as well for medical reasons. I have PCOS and don't ovulate which increases my cancer risk. I know birth control can as well but its only temporary for me and me not getting my cycle is higher chance of cancer then birth control.. I want 1 more child I take medication to ovulate so once im done with having kids ill be getting either a hysterectomy or an ablation
i used to take birth control to regulate my hormones (but can't now because they all give me dangerous side effects) because being on my period for 4+ weeks is really bad. i'm glad he answered that, too, because i was curious
i'm sorry some people have been so close minded towards this. i'm glad you have friends who actually care
What year is this? Am I in a time warp! Have we learned anything over the last 60 years. My God take the wheel of this bus, cause this is a rough road!
A very complicated topic and a very eloquent explanation. Thank you Fr. Casey.
Clarity is a beautiful thing.
PREACH, SIS!
But that is not the world that God made - which doesn't exist in black & white - but various shades of gray.
@@ScottA2345Of course there's black and white, where do you think the various shades of gray come from?
@@ironymatt I didn't write that there is "no" black and white. It's only one sentence - try reading it again.
@@ScottA2345 there is indeed black and white in the world that God made. What I said also isn't complicated, yet it's not quite what you said I said either.
God bless
2:42 I don't think the way you approached this question was appropriate. If a person is suffering verbal, physical, sexual and/or psychological abuse inside marriage, it _is_ a good thing to divorce. I hope your intention was not to put the blame on the person who chooses to divorce, but it sounded like so. You cannot put your family's wellbeing below your marriage, that's negligence. Divorce is tough for children, but seeing their parent suffer through the avoidable is worse and can put them at risk.
I’m sorry you heard what I said in that way, but it’s not what I said. It may be the *right* thing, it may be the *appropriate* thing, but divorce is never a good thing. It is an admission of failure and something that will hurt children and bring scandal, and so should be avoided as much as possible, but there are times it cannot be avoided. There’s a difference between saying something is “a good,” as in it reflects God and brings life, and something is necessary but unfortunate.
@@BreakingInTheHabit oh divorce is no big deal. I am confident you have family and friends, Father Casey, whom have divorced on amicable terms and perhaps found another more enriching marriage. If perchance you left your Vocation - which is akin to marriage - there maybe some disappointments, and you'd just move on and reinvent your life life. Far worse to remain with the Coth or in a marriage that is not enriching, causes pain and misery to yourself and children.
God is quite OK with such. Trust me on that
@@russellmiles2861you don't understand Catholic morality. Just because divorce can bring good, doesn't mean the act itself is morraly right. Jesus said "What God unites, let no man separate. That's why the Church doesn't allow divorce and those who see marriage as something they can try and see how it is shouldn't get married, especially in the Catholic Church.
@@kaktustustus1244 I understand you perspective; but as I am sure you are well aware in practice the Roman Catholic church has a don't ask don't tell way of things. Oh sure, a few parish priest refuse to baptise baby whose parents aren't married and such. But in my experience there is always a near by parish where the priest is more open and caring. The same with remarriage.
So sure: cannon law says many things - but when it comes to laws and ethnics folk choose right conduct
@@russellmiles2861the Church doesn't have the authority to change the definition of marriage. It can give annulments, that is to say that the marriage wasn't valid to begin with, but that's not the same thing as a divorce.
A divorce treats marriage like a contract. Marriage is not that, it's a covenant, it cannot be broken. So if your marriage is valid and you divorce then remarry, you would be committing adultery.
Guarding our thoughts is absolutely true
Spilling water on the counter, you wipe the counter.
Thank you father, for answering my question. It clarifies so much. God bless 🙏🙏
The Church once adopted a very strict line when it came to marriage. When my grandparents married, my grandfather was a Catholic and my grandmother was Church of England. She did not wish to become a Catholic. It would, I think, have been possible for my grandfather to have applied to his Parish Priest to obtain a dispensation to marry a non Catholic, however, at the time, it was in the middle of the Depression and the fees, even if modest, would not have been affordable. As it was, finding the five shillings for the Registrar for a civil marriage was probably a great hardship at the time. However, as a result, the Parish Priest considered that my grandfather was “living in sin” and he was required to sit at the back of the Church and never receive Holy Communion. When my mother was asked what name she wanted at her Confirmation, she asked for St. Margaret Mary but the Nun said that she could not have any Saint other than St. Mary Magdalene - the nuns took the view that, while my other might be legitimate according to the Law of England, she was not really legitimate as far as they were concerned because her parents were not properly married in Church. Yet, despite the technical irregularities, my grandmother permitted my mother to be brought up as a Catholic, even taking an extra job to earn the fees for a private convent school for her. My mother says that she never heard her parents argue and that her home was filled with love. Of course, the Parish Priest was quite wrong in his behaviour. Knowing that my grandparents were not able to afford the cost of a formal Dispensation, he should have made Church funds available to permit them to obtain one and to marry in Church. In my view, by taking the view that, since they could not afford a Dispensation, the only alternative, as far as the Church was concerned, was for them to “live in sin” he was acting contrary to his duties as a Pastor. However, in those days, that was, very much the way of things.
Very interesting!
The church has come a long way from such foolishness! Such is the case with many issues but that was the time they lived in. I’m glad we are growing and I’m sorry your grandparents went through that I assume Gods love shined through regardless the way how you make it seem so good for them!
@@danielreyes5063 Orthodox Christians should not marry out of the Orthodox faith.
Would have liked a follow-up on the divorce question regarding the fact that the divorce does not actually end a marriage in the eyes of the Chruch. Divorce in this case would only be in the eyes of the state as a practical measure to secure financial or physical well-being; both parties would not be free to re-marry since their original union is still valid before God.
Correct, but the Catholic Church does provide a method for determining if that marriage was a valid one. If they find it to be an invalid marriage, it can be annulled as if it never was and the divorced person would be free to remarry.
@@m_d1905 this might just have been a semantic choice on your part, but if a marriage is invalid, it isn't "annuled as IF it never was" valid, but it is recognized to simply have never been valid in the first place :)
@@johnf6002 Yes, you are right. Perhaps I didn't word it well. It would not be considered a sacramental marriage.
I believe the Priest's explanation is confusing. There is no divorce for Catholics. Only, in rare cases, a separation might be possible but not to remarry with a different person.
@@luiscarvalho5651 Divorce is ultimately a secular thing. An annulment of a prior marriage may allow a Catholic to remarry. I had a Catholic coworker who's late husband had a prior marriage thatcwas annulled by the church so he and my coworker could marry in the church. They went through a cannon lawyer. You are not wrong though.
Well done Fr. Casey!!
Not related to the subject of the video but I was always curious. How do Catholics solve the trolley problem?
Love this! Love the explanation of nuances.
Thank you for making these videos. My church no longer catechizes correctly I wish I had these videos as a kid.
Thank you Fr. Casey for all your hard work. I have appreciated all your videos over the years and always look forward to hearing more compassionate insightful views of our shared faith! Keep up the great work!
I do appreciate your nuance and consideration when it comes to this topic. It's a very complex matter. Thank you!
Fr Casey I like your content and I've been following you for years but with all humility I'd like to make a little correction regarding the question about divorce, as you rightly stated in some extreme cases divorce is allowed by the Catholic Church, but you failed to mention that is not allowed to contract another marriage or start another sexual relationship with another person, unless you get an annullment of your marriage, otherwise you commit the sin of adultery . People might get confused and think that divorce AND remarriage is ok to do. God bless you and the Virgin Mary protect you. Greetings from Italy
We need to progress beyond some ridiculous stuff that has made RC's feel guilt, those days are well and truly gone. Don't care about any rules or laws made by people on this earth, live a good Christian life, all will be well in the next life.
@@Lifeisaballoffluff-b2v The teaching on divorce comes directly from the Gospels.
@Lifeisaballoffluff-b2v well that's a convenient way to look at it. The problem is two people can disagree on what a good life means.
What will Marry protect him from? Thanls for correcting Casey. I have a little correction, Mary is no protector of anybody.
@br.m it brings me such amusement to see how angry Protestants get over Jesus' mother. Probably the first thing he'll ask you about if you ever meet him is what's with the disrespect to the mother of God
I think you may be causing some confusion on the divorce topic. Divorce does not exist for Catholics, but a civil divorce may be necessary on some rare cases. This never allows for remarriage though.
Otherwise very good orthodox teaching Father.
Divorce is a legal word, rarely is it appropriately used in Catholic authority, but there are cases (rare). The Church Generally has free to marry (single), presumed married (outside wedding), sacramentally married presumed valid and licit. Annulled sacramental marriages are a striking of the Church records thus a return to free to marry(single). The only legal interplay is the Church requires a full commitment so no intentional mixed states as Church married but legally singles or legally married but church single. Clear as mud.
If a Catholic pursues a civil divorce, the next logical step would be to seek an annulment. They may have a better case for one than they realize.
@@jamestown8398 interesting indeed!
You can’t get an annulment unless you’ve had a divorce.
Thank you for being willing to discuss these challenging topics!
Every time I hear some argument against gay relationships, I remember the heartbreaking time when a friend I had known for eight years called me up to tell me he was gay. He was so incredibly afraid that this would make him lose my friendship.
It sounds very nice to say you accept that people are gay. But if you don't accept the implications of that, you do not really accept people being gay.
You have explained logically what your criteria for having a physical relationship are, but you have not explained why these criteria are the morally correct ones.
Yep correct, and they cant, not with any sound, unarbitrary reasoning that is.
Exactly. A heterosexual, married couple cannot fulfil one of the categories if one or both of them is infertile. So that doesn’t seem like a good reason for me to
The thing is: moral is subjective. This is the truth he chooses to go by. It will not make sense for someone that sees sexuallity differently.
Never catched an upload this early. God bless.
7:22, I also wanna add that a person must be aware at that moment that the thought itself is sinful.
To add a personal example, there were situations in the past in where I genuinely thought something wasn’t sinful or that it was a mere occasion if sin, so I didn’t think match of it.
However, in the middle of that situation I gained an understanding of the gravity of the situation and moved on, learning to avoid anything I consider an unnecessary near occasion of sin
Under secular morality the well being of two consenting adults of the same sexuality and/or gender decing to marry or enter a relationship is not violated. A far more accepting and civilised society in which to live.
Here, I'll remove the wool from your eyes 😅
@@jmorr1780 as if that's an argument.
Father Casey speaks his loving truth plainly, yet eloquently and with sincere compassion. I appreciate that very much, even though I left the Catholic Church many years ago and have been a practicing Unitarian - Universalist for over 20 years. People of good character and civility can always agree to disagree, as I do with many of the church teachings.
Thank you so much! This was awesome. God bless you!
Thank you for your video, fr. Casey. I have a question: as far as we know some aspects of the catholic doctrine have changed throughout history, and that's because the living Spirit of God guides the Church. I remember a video in which you recalled how, for example, the doctrine of religious freedom has changed from a "radical no" to a "yes" after Vatican Council II. So my question is: "do you consider possible a change in catholic doctrine about sexuality?" Of course moral doctrine cannot change because of our desires or lusts, but maybe it definitely can after a better understanding of some phenomena, even with a more objective and non-ideological scientifical studies. Let's also think about death penality and the concept of "just war", that only recently have been officially declared immoral "in any case". Thank you for your ministry in God's sheepfold. Giovanni
Also, for more than a thousand years usary - the taking of interest on a loan - was considered a grave sin against human nature. By the year 1500, theologians living in a time of rapid economic expansion found a way to justify a five percent interest rate (the so-called German contract.)
The Lateran Council III (1179) decreed that persons who accepted interest on loans could receive neither the sacraments nor Christian burial.
How do you explain King David loving the much younger Jonathan (more than the love of any woman) and made a Covenant with him? Were they bisexual? Many powerful 'straight' men in those days had a wife, but also a younger boy on side. I Samuel 20:16-17
He had perfect love for him that Jesus commands in Mark 12:31
I found many Evangelical pastors have their own interpretation of the deep relationship between David & Jonathan in the bible, and according to them, the relationship was not a sexual/carnal one, but deeply platonic.
I believe it's because they cannot accept it was sexual because David was much favoured in God's eyes & also because Evangelicals are pointedly anti homosexual.
****Reading between the subtle biblical lines, my conclusion is it was a sexual/carnal relationship.
0:10 Women and Men are biologically different so they have something different to offer each other and can bring a human in this life natually with no 3rd party getting involved
My guess is that the unintended consequence, perhaps even intended, of such pernickety legalising in canons, clauses and subclauses of normal sexual behaviour is a culture of snooping, moralising, gossiping and condemnation (note ‘friends’ calling someone a sinner in a comment below). This would only lead to a world where we all live, as once was said of Ireland, in the 'valley of squinting windows’.
Thank you so so much Father. I have greatly loved this video. Please do more.😊
3:09 permissible within CIVIL law in certain cases in which civil laws demanded a divorce... I don't think you were very clear on this one.
Thank you for talking on this topic!
Does God only see a couple as married when they are married by law? Or could a couple marry by a priest never file any paperwork and legally not be married but still be married in the eyes of God?
Part of the validation of a marriage is following the laws of your country surrounding it. Gotta file that paperwork as obedience to just rules.
Love thy neighbour, whoever without sin casts the first stone, God loves us all including sinners and understands the struggle people go through he does not hold it against us
@@ankereisenman4824 The reason someone would ask this question is because they recognize the rules of their country are not just.
@TT-zl7ir A wife can divorce her husband at any time - and take his house and money and children. If he objects, he goes to prison. Jesus would not have recognized such an arrangement to be marriage.
@@ankereisenman4824 where is this in Church teaching? The Catechism doesn't mention anything as such
Hello Fr.! Could you answer a question on burning sage? I like to burn sage cause I like the way it smells honestly and it is relaxing to have an incense at home that isn’t as overpowering as the one in church. Is this considered anti catholic? Please and thank you!
No, if you’re using it as a perfume or incense just for the smell it is completely acceptable. The only way it would be unacceptable is if you intentionally use it as a way to signify anything non Catholic
It is advisable to get it blessed to cancel any kind of occult consecration that could have been done over the sage or incense.
I just saw a priest who said not to use it. 😮
You did a great job Father Casey. So far, tge comment section seems very charitable 😁
Yeah, when people get upset about Fr. Casey not being progressive enough on The Issues, I'm like, he's a Catholic priest. This is his educational vlog, not his personal diary. I'm not sure what they're expecting from a representative of the Church.
I wonder if they’ll be another counsel on this because even being a married couple right and doing everything correct but the biggest elephant in the room is maybe they can’t afford children and I always feel like this is constantly ignored. It’s one of the most important parts of reproduction, and there seems to be no solution so I wonder if the church will change its ruling and contraception for married couples eventually down the line
Concerning the asexual Catholic:
Maybe you should look at the church’s tradition and teachings:
Joseph and Mary were married and Mary remained a virgin despite that.
They would have to be asexual, but hetero-romantic.
That’s called a Josephite marriage.
Thank you for answering my question! Very clear and concise!
2:20 the question here is something I've been wondering, tyvm!
Wow this was a great video and this cleared up a lot definitely going to have to save it and re-watch it!
6:40 doesn't cohabitation is forbidden in Catholic Church? why Father said its not a sin to living together?
Cohabitation tends to imply sexual relations.
@@m_d1905 yes ik but living together isn't just about us, we represent our family, our Church, etc. even if we're patience to honour our purity its not wise, at least thats what i get taught.
@@matts-7566 That was strange to me too. As a Lutheran, I have heard my pastors speaking against cohabitation. Perhaps the Lutheran church is more in line with you and the Bible.. We consider it a violation.
@@matts-7566 I do agree as I was taught the same. Just giving a different perspective.
@@m_d1905 ah i see, i thought you were giving me the Catholic Church teaching 😅
Pew research found that 56% of those that left the Catholic Church are due to it's teachings on reproduction and gays.
St Augustine's theology on gender roles and sexual ethics has profoundly influenced the church and is deeply problematic, scientifically, psychologically and socially.
I am celibate and have been in chaste relationships, but it's very hurtful that this is the easiest way for me to remain Catholic, though I consider leaving often as most people I grew up have.
That said, I have not spoken privately with even one priest who actually says they believe deeply committed, loving, secularly married, and sexually active gay couples are committing a sin despite the teachings and public lip service to it.
I believe there will eventually be a schism or shift on this, but the countless souls harmed by it cannot be undone. The domino effect is staggering.
I appreciate your videos and recognize there are no winning answers on some of these subjects as the pew surveys show. Good on you for explaining the teachings despite it all.
If there is a schism, so be it. They would not be Catholic as they are not in communion with Rome. Those churches will not be full of attendees either, the belief that people stopped attending church because of the teachings is completely false. Regardless of what pew research states. There are many progressive protestant churches, and they are in decline, with empty pews, just like all other sects of christianity.
It would be foolish for the church to turn its back on those who actually attend church, in hopes of drawing in people that never planned on going to begin with.
The fact a person stopped attending church because they think homosexual marriage is more important than the teachings and commandments of Christ, they never believed to begin with. Jesus literally said following him would be taking the narrow path, why would someone think being a follower of christ means you get to have everything you wanted? It means sacrifice. Just like he sacrificed his life. There's a reason Jesus said not all who say father will see the kingdom of heaven, there are many misguided individuals, places priority on the wrong things.
@@TT-zl7ir He's likely meaning the US and maybe also the EU. Internationally it's possible more leave Catholicism for Pentecostalism than secularism, Pentecostalism tends to be stricter on homosexuality. Catholics can at least talk to people about it and avoid heterosexuality. (I don't agree on the TLM issue. Internationally I think charismatic Catholics are growing more than TLM, which is not what I'd maybe want as I am probably closer to TLM than charismatics but I'm going on the evidence I've seen not my preferences.)
Other problem with what he's saying is Augustine has very little influence in Eastern Orthodox, but they are if anything more united on this issue.
The kinks and paraphilias of 2 or 3% of the population are frankly irrelevant. It they can't control themselves they are no different to a kleptomaniac.
For some reason I feel like the church can stay out of the bedroom.
I'm pretty sure jesus and god are more concerned about the person and their overall behaviour rather than specifics in the bedroom
If gay relationships can be loving but they do not produce children why are they not allowed to get married if it’s permissible for an infertile couple to get married? In both cases there is love and an inability to reproduce. This seems like a contradiction to me. Would anyone like to explain ?
I would say that the infertile couple might always get pregnant by a miracle, or they could adopt children, who then would have a mother and a father for their parents.
@@strawberrysmile2212 why can’t a gay couple adopt ? Or use a sperm donor or surrogate? Isn’t it better for a child to be adopted by two gay parents than have none at all?
@@109moster100 Because no reason. Some people don't like gay people for some psychological reason of their own that they probably don't even understand themselves, and then they seek out various justifications like religion to affirm their gut feeling. There's no point arguing against someone who says that an infertile couple can get pregnant by a miracle. That is by definition impossible and the belief is in the magical realm of fantasy literature. Just laugh at the broken logic of many human brains and move on. 😊
It's officially agreed upon within the church, but this doesn't necessarily mean it's right
@@strawberrysmile2212 Yes, and the gay couple may get pregnant by miracle....the use of logic to justify Church teaching, and then the dismissing of logic the moment is goes against Church teaching is rich.
Thank you, Father, thank you.
3:16 If I don't remember it wrong, the Catholic religion teacher I had said as long as it does not have abortion effect, it is not sinful. Is it really realistic to expect husband and wife to be abstain for decades for birth control after having 2-3 children?
Is this channel a Roman Catholic channel or other Catholic channel?
Condoms and artificial contraceptives cannot be used, because it is a grave sin.
Of course, anytime they talk about sexual ethics. They always bring this up first because it’s the buy-in statement. Don’t Forget: Confess your sins not your neighbors.
@@williamboo9017 well said that man
Can we get a video on 1 Corinthian verse 6?
1:35 Born to be a monk fr
"In every age, the Church has the responsibility of reading the Signs of the Times, and interpreting them in the light of the Gospel." (Gaudium et spes)
A gay relationship can be every bit as "mutually loving" (Humane Vitae) as a straight relationship where the couple either can not have, or do not WANT to have, children. But we don't call those latter marriages "intrinsically disordered" (because they're not having children). It simply flies in the face of clear, human common sense - given to us by God - that "masturbation" is an evil to be avoided.
Our problem today with these "lists", is that they don't bring us any closer to responding to the love of Christ in a loving way; they just make us look like anti-intellectual fools in 2024. Because our Faith is 2,000 years old, it doesn't follow that our thinking about that Faith has to be 2,000 years old. As this Synod is teaching us.
The successor to St. Peter said "who am I to judge" .
It is very informative and important topic, Fr. Casey.
Why don't you make a video on the topic, "Celibacy in modern seminarians and priests'
I believe that clarification should be made on divorce. Only civil divorce is permitted in certain circumstances.
and to elaborate on what you said, those circumstances must be stuff like abuse or something along that callibre
Indeed. There would not be problems if Fr. Casey had said "separation" rather than divorce. If you are abused by your spouse, it's perfectly legitimate to live somewhere else for your own protection. This goes without saying.
However, if the religious marriage itself were contracted in a fully valid way, then there is a problem. It cannot be "undone", because it is God's work. Our Lord was quite clear on the subject.
What one can do in any case is to check if an annulment is possible, which actually is in most cases. Then it is as if the religious marriage never existed, and legal divorce, I believe, should be fine in God's and Church's eyes.
Question: if a man and woman lived together chastely without sexual activity and unmarried could either partner then partake in holy communion?
I don’t believe that there are any restrictions on roommate living situations.
I believe so, yes. On the condition that they live ''as siblings'' so to speak. That's what I've heard from my parish priest.
Technically it's a queer platonic relatipnship
You got to be more specific for the divorce
You can only get a divorce legally
Do you think the Catholic Church has the moral authority to lecture Humanity on sexual behavior? I don't.
If the Catholic Church is right about everything then yes which it claims, then catholic church has the moral autority. You can decide not to follow it but truth stays truth
what is grave matter?
Mortal sins, the big list of wrongs
What are your thoughts regarding Old Catholics?
Friar Casey,
There is a scam bot in the comments of this post. Fellow viewers, be careful with your private information.
Peace be with all of you,
Report it
@@anthonyhulse1248
Reported.
It's on many channels, I see it all the time. Always report it.
How can you identify this? I'd like to know too.
@@joepugh678 they always have a suspicious amount of likes, most likely by ai bots. They also often have a lot of comments about positive experiences with the product offered, the comments always have ai written text and are liked by each other.
"FROM EVOLUTIONIST TO CREATIONIST "BY PASTOR/PROF WALTER VEITH POWERFUL POWERFUL WATCH TRUTH ALWAYS WINS ❤
"THE MAN BEHIND THE MASK "BY PASTOR/PROF WALTER VEITH POWERFUL POWERFUL WATCH TRUTH ALWAYS WINS GOD SEES EVERYTHING KNOWS EVERYTHING ❤
I remember a few years ago that an engaged soldier was rendered conclusively and permanently impotent in an explosion, and upon returning home the church forbid him and his fiancee from getting married. Both of them loved one another very much and were perfectly willing to engage romantically with one another to the limits of their capacity to do so, and could have enjoyed a perfectly healthy relationship if they had - many people in their situation are able to enjoy perfectly healthy and fulfilling romantic lives, as has been repeatedly confirmed by psychologists.
How does forbidding people in these sorts of situations to marry make the world a better place? It might fulfill an abstract interpretation of natural law but otherwise seems to be a fully bad thing to do, only producing misery.
You will know them by their fruits, yes? What am I supposed to make of miserable fruits like this one?
From what I saw in this video Fr Casey said that as long as both parties are aware the marriage is permissable.
Personally I think the church was wrong in the situation you outlined. I think the soldier and fiancee should absolutely have been allowed to get married.
LOL - if the Church was relying on "natural law" they would have a hard time explaining homosexuality throughout the animal kingdom. The current Church's understanding of "natural law" isn't understanding at all, it's a contrived fiction.
1:52 I think marriage is the celebration of unconditional love, and while we are called to have children, I think it's also important to consider the advancements we've had in psychology and sexual psychology. 100 years ago a person who felt no sexual desire was considered mentally disabled. Nowadays we know that's not necessarily true; there are a myriad of reasons why a person doesn't feel sexual attraction (ptsd, cptsd, hormonal issues, etc) and whether or not they choose to do something to feel that attraction should be up to the person and be upfront with their partner before marriage. If both parts choose to have no sexual intercourse while married, that should be respected, and they may be encouraged to adopt, foster, or live to serve the community. I don't believe asexuality is incompatible with marriage.
There is such a thing as a ‘Josephite’ marriage that is a valid option for a couple, like with Mary and Joseph. It’s just not common so I’m sure lots of priests aren’t aware of it being an option.
Father during a conversation with my urologist the topic of frequent ejaculation may reduce the possibility of prostate cancer, so if one masturbates or ejaculated out of concern for prostate health is this then a mortal sin?
You cannot do something evil for the sake of good. While sinful things may help us physically, you have to ask yourself: is it worth keeping your body alive while you weaken your soul?
@@BreakingInTheHabit Thank you Father, I love being Catholic and I love God and always want to be close to God. I struggle with fear and anxiety about getting sick. I give thanks to the Holy Spirit for guiding me to the church. Your videos have been a huge help. Please pray for me Father. Thank you and God bless you
@@antoniosanjurjo8442 Look to the work of Dr. Ornish and Greger to see how you can significantly reduce the risk of prostate cancer through diet. I suspect the study you cite was flawed. It's a big industry with political use.
@@BreakingInTheHabit Respectfully, it may. Just because in the current moment someone is doing a particular habit (bad in your mind, God hasn't spoken directly on this), doesn't mean that later in life they won't do something else. If the Prodigal son had never left, he would never have been welcomed home.
Listen to Fr. Casey's answers, its no wonder people that people stop going to church. Such primitive medievalism
The truth doesn't care what year it is. The truth is always constant because it is the truth. You're suffering from the sin of moral relativism.
Liberal protestant denominations are the ones that lose attendants more easily... the traditional ones are the ones who keep and grow... The reason for that is the fact that no one would go to a church to hear the same thing they hear in social media.
Feel sorry for Fr. casey, pray for him.
How can you break masturbation addiction?
With sin, we are like Peter walking on water towards Jesus. So long as we focus on Jesus we will walk, but should we lose our focus due to the crashing of the waves, we will fall. The original sin of Adam and Eve could have been avoided if they merely remembered God instead of focusing on the serpent and the fruit.
So, to combat sin in you, focus on Jesus. I don't mean this in an abstract way, I mean it concretely: When you feel the craving, picture Jesus on the Cross in your mind and pray "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner." Masturbation is often habituated on lustful mental imagery; recognizing when that is happening, pausing, and turning to Jesus with your mind and your heart is what I have found has worked. You have to want Jesus more than you want sexual pleasure; if sexual pleasure is causing you to forget God, then you need to practice remembering God in the midst of temptation in order to overcome it. It will not be easy and you will fail, just like Peter fell when walking on water, but remember that turning to God is not just something you are doing, but it is a prayerful activity which God will answer by helping you. God always has one hand stretched out to you for you to hold on to in times of need. The problem is how often we forget that it's there.
I used to be incapable of going even a week without masturbating, and some weeks it was every few days. Now I can't remember when the last time I masturbated was, and it's all because God has helped me to remember him in the midst of this temptation.
Humble advice: first, stop trying. For many, it is a very difficult life challenge, if, that is, one is trying to avoid it, which might be a good way of life for some. But perhaps not for all(this is me speaking, no Catholic dogma here!) But to simply say it is “wrong” and move on, as the Christian establishment tends to do, is a harmful oversimplification. Harmful because it is asking people to do something that is, for many, incredibly hard. Brahmacharya, as it is known in Hinduism, is a topic Gandhi spoke on quite a bit and what he had to say is quite helpful if you are interested. It requires a huge amount of discipline: just take a look at some of the no-fap videos here on youtube and you will be amused (so many relapses!). I am curious what goes on among the clergy themselves: they surely struggle with this and it must be discussed among them. My advice, give yourself a break first of all. Even the clergy has had all kinds of difficulty handling sexual urges, and they have the time and guidance around them. Most people don’t! Decide if you truly want to pursue a chaste life like this, and research how to go about it. Are you waiting for a partner? Are you no longer searching for a partner? How do you want to live your life? Personally, there are in my opinion many more grave sins than this: I, myself, wouldn’t even call it a sin unless it was “hurting” the self or someone else, and it is easy to say it is, when it really isn’t. Dont listen to that. It can actually be better than what many “church” focused people have done (France’s Abbé Pierre is a great contemporary example, where the Church did nothing). Wasting the resources we have been given on this Earth, polluting the environment, being mean to other people, fighting wars, not forgiving-there are many more important issues than this. Good luck.
It's a slow process but one which lots of people are fighting with. Take it one day at a time and trust in God's grace. It's hard to completely eradicate a bad habit. Instead try to replace it with a good habit. Get outside more, workout, cold showers whatever gets you away from the occasion of sin. Pray whenever you're in a potential occasion for sin (e.g before bed, before a shower). Keep up the good fight! Pick yourself up whenever you fall and learn from your mistakes. If you want it to break from the habit bad enough, it'll happen! God bless!
@@abyvandanath6995 What if it isn't a "bad habit" but actually an deeply ingrained natural impulse? While I agree that controlling one's impulses is, to a great extent, key to a good, enriching, moral life, the advice you give here is really, with all due respect, useless. "Keep up the good fight! Pick yourself up whenever you fall." Yes, don't beat yourself up about it. But it takes a great deal of control, meditation, willpower, and a willingness to discuss difficult issues, rather than to dismiss them, which, clearly, no one here including Father Casey and the Church in general are actually willing to talk about.
Never give up
Priests are such hopeful romantics! :D I love the line: "It's been seven years, maybe it's time to make it official?" Hehe. Awesome video Fr. Casey! God bless you, all priests and all who serve in Holy Orders!
"TOTAL ONSLAUGHT "BY PASTOR/PROF WALTER VEITH POWERFUL POWERFUL WATCH TRUTH ALWAYS WINS GOD SEES EVERYTHING KNOWS EVERYTHING ❤
As an Asexual, I like that answer
@@MadelineBuckner humm, maybe it means that he has no Sexuality to set aside. Someone who doesn't like sexual relationships would be an odd bird to tell others what is a sin
Thank you for answering the question on art vs pornography, the three questions seem useful. I know it's something that's been an issue since people got mad at the sistine chapel paintings.
6:43 isn't cohabitation a form of scandal?
What's the bare minimum for a marriage to be valid in the eyes of the church? Does the church recognize common law marriage? Is it enough for the couple to proclaim that they are married, without any ceremony or documentation? What if you have a some people stranded on a desert island, and a couple fall in love and want to get married while they're there?
All marriages are assumed valid. The Church recognizes Natural Marriage regardless of authority
What a bunch of crap.
Father I think I might want to have a baby later on but if I dont find the right man.. Which is harder now since many are away from our faith. Would it be ok to have a baby on my own? Thru IVF or something like that?
@@bbygrlpt2 I would suggest raising that matter with your own family, physician and local parishioners. Best not ask in a public forum. The only advice that can be given is the School solution. In the local parish, I am confident that Father Casey offers more nuanced and caring advice.
IVF is seen as wrong in the Catholic church, to my knowledge.
@@anthonydiaz2185 the medically assisted fertility treatment has been occurring for almost half a century. It is only recently that there has been some teaching offered by the Roman Catholic church. However Roman Catholic church hospitals, medical practitioners and scientists haven't changed their attitudes. Rather, secular countries have long had laws which the church is catching up too. Eg, in Australia commercial surrogacy is a crime, even if it occured in other jurisdictions. Whereas in the USA state of Maryland's a contract to provide a baby is enforceable under contract laws - almost no other country recognises such contracts.
The Church teaching on the matter seems to be belated and irrelevant to Roman Catholic adherents
Absolutely BASED!
I find your videos interesting, and educational. That being said, I'm very happy I am not Catholic (nor Christian), as it seems like a very limited life that ignores human nature, and love, for the sake of doctrine.
Then you are ignorant about "human nature".
@@br.m That's it: admonish people who question. That's a very "Jesus" like response isn't it?
@@boonskis I don't understand. Could you elaborate?
I thought your comment was in a different conversation. Where I stated some simple truth, politely. Then I was mobbed by a bunch of "Catholics" who made all kinds of baseless personal attacks against me and leaped to all sorts of fantastic conclusions..
Don't you like facts either? Are you also a Catholic? Are you going to tell me all about myself in condescending and presumptuous ways too?
@@br.m Yes, I'll explain. "Ignorant" is a strong word. That some people don't agree with you do not mean that they are ignorant about something you put in quotes. On the contrary, questioning people are not ignorant, they are intelligent. You should respect that. Jesus didn't often insult people, they gave them good arguments and tried to teach that way. That's all I was saying.
Sorry, I got confused, did you say masturbation is a sin?
@@richardchambers3002 he did. But it isn't.
@@russellmiles2861It is.
@@russellmiles2861 @richardchambers3002
Thank you for a little common sense!
It is, but not always mortal. What is it that you find confusing?
@@ironymatt have you every heard a Roman Catholic school teacher or parish priest say such things ... Look, we all day stuff on Blogosphere to get attention. But in real World this is just not an issue. Goosh priest just tell children not to worry about such things.
I don’t really see why every single sexual encounter between a married couple has to be open to life. It feels arbitrary and puts a major burden on people. Openness to new life is a condition for a valid marriage, but why that translates into a complete ban is perplexing. It doesn’t feel nuanced. NFP is not a perfect system, and in many cases issues like the health of the mother and financial considerations put added pressure onto a couple.
the sexual act in it's very nature is open to (a direct cause of) life. Trying to block the possibility of life through contraception goes against the nature of the sexual act that God created it for, and hence is a grave sin.
this doesn't mean that married couples must try to procreate every single time. married couples are allowed to engage in the sexual act merely for the purpose of pleasure. the rule is to be open to procreation, ie. not block it.
NFP is allowed by the Church.
In a way I feel more like the Orthodox, they admit contraception in some cases. But it's true they have less bioethics, so they may well be wrong
He also said sx is also to bring a couple deeper into a covenantal unionif love. So it can be for one or the other
Sir. Eating is for nourishment. Sexual Reproduction is for procreation.
What's the churches view on abortion if the pregnancy endangers the mothers life?
You can never do an evil thing to achieve a good. You can't kill one life to save another.
Abortion is the intentional killing of an unborn baby. If the intention of treatment is to save the life of the mother and an unintended consequence is the loss of life of the baby, this wouldn't be considered an abortion.
@@BreakingInTheHabit So if I see someone about to stab an infant I'm not allowed to use deadly force to stop them?
@@robertperry814you ideally shouldnt use lethal force to save the childs life. You dont need to kill the person to save the child
@@robertperry814 considering deadly force isn't the only way to stop that situation, ofc not.
You are a wonderful, educated young man, God bless you Father Casey.
What if you have a sexual thought about your spouse? Is that allowed?
As ive heard, even trad priests have agreed its totally fine in that context
Just like 2000 years ago and even before God (Jesus) couldn't tell the people that the slavery was wrong, because the people's hearts were hardened, the Holly Spirit untill now couldn't reveal that discriminaling against the LGBT people is bad, and not desired by God. Some people have already evolved sufficiently to understand it, the other - I guess - have their hearts still hard, like a depleated uranium.
2:50 I have to take issue with your interpretations of how the catholic church viewed divorce. In my country , Ireland (Renowned its relationship between catholic church and state,) the constitution stated 'No law shall be enacted providing for the grant of a dissolution of marriage' until 1995 after 2 referendum on the topic.
I am not catholic but your information is always helpful
I'm in an irregular relationship so I am hearing with a biased ear. To me, you sound glib, conveying no awareness of the price tag you are laying on people with issues. Spouting rules is not conveying the heart of God for each person and their situation. Don't take me wrong, you don't usually come across as cold.
I know nothing about the nature of your relationship, but my guess is that it’s only “irregular” because the Church teaches us it is. So maybe it’s not you that is biased but the church.
Hello! I have a question regarding birth control.
What is the moral difference between NFP and artificial family planning options? Both intend to avoid pregnancy.
I've also wondering if condoms specifically are moral to use, as I'm reminded of Genesis 38: 8-10. It is challenging for me to tell if the Lord punished Onan because he refused to provide a child for Tamar or if the punishment was a result of his method of preventing pregnancy.
While I am Christian, I am not Catholic, so if you reference Catholic-specific doctrine or literature, would you explain the thoughts behind them? I say this not to disrespect your beliefs or church, but so that I can better understand your points. Specifically, I most agree with Baptist thought (just to provide some context of my perspective).
Thank you for your thoughts!
Ive searched around for years for a logical, non arbitrary distinction between NFP and the other methods of contraception. There really isn’t one. Its just more of a passive method.
Imagine in an extreme example, the difference between actively killing your child, or passively neglecting them and letting them starve to death. Its still basically the same thing. They’ll try to convince you otherwise
@@Unclenate1000 Thank you for your thoughts and perspective! The intent of avoiding pregnancy is definitely a big reason as to why I am confused as to the difference, which is why I was looking to ask the content creator what his thoughts were.
I’m not sure if the “they” you’re referring to at the end are our Catholic brothers and sisters. If so, please try to avoid an “us vs them” mentality. We are all one church under Christ, even if we disagree on non-core theology (by which I mean theology that is not the Gospel).
@@valerief.8295 Why wouldn't you have as many babies as God allowed you to have?
Regarding marriage and asexuality, could a Josephite marriage take the place of a traditional marriage? My understanding of a Josephite marriage is one where both spouses agree to forgo a sexual relationship for the physical, mental, or spiritual benefit of one or both spouses. Mutually agreeing to a non-sexual relationship and opening a home to fostering or adopting would seem like a perfectly licit form of marriage, again unless I'm very mistaken.
If hell is self imposed why did Jesus have to die in order people to be allowed into heaven?
Because without divine grace it is impossible to avoid all mortal sins.
hell is sefl inposed Because Jesus died for our sins. Without our savior we would be judged.
I'm glad I agree with you he.
Thank you. It is such a blessing to receive unflinching, kindly-stated answers to such questions.
That castle in Italy 1052 built it super rich Thomas 8.5 million Euros yes. Christie Italian property dealer sell it. Thanks Father Casey 🙏.
The degrees of consanguinity and affinity the catholic church have applied in relation to whether two people can marry have varied over time despite the fact that the truth is supposedly eternal and unchanging.
If the catholic church's perception of the truth with regard to sexual morality in respect of incest has had to be corrected over time, who is to say its current perceptions overall are correct?
There are plenty of acts that happen nightly within the marital bed "that are not open to procreation.'
But since they're married this is okay???🤭😂
art vs porn - That argument has been going on since Moses was a kid. I am sure it will still going on when the Sun cools lol
To commit adultery doesn't one need to be married. I take this line a being directed at married men. But I'm sure you disagree
An all powerful God could allow 2 gay individuals to have children. Guess yours isn't?
Is not inmoral. It's just against arbitrary rules dictated by a supernatural entity, written in a collection of very old books that have been translated and re-translated and contradict themselves.
1'20" In the Sistine Chapel, Michelangelo represented God the Father with naked butts: can anyone help me understand how this fits with the three questions?
It wasn't made to arouse. It doesn't arouse (at least not that I've ever heard or seen or experienced). It honors the beauty of the human body in a way that is still discreet IMO (it's depicting God in His glory, not something sexual)
Former atheist , just begun RCIA and I live with my boyfriend and children. We are now living chastely until marriage but can we continue to share a bed?
In my humble opinion, since this behaviour may lead you in temptation (how original I am!), it ought to be avoided. However, if you are 100% sure that either of you won't give in any blessed but misplaced sexual instinct, then it should be fine.
But talk to a good priest first.
Sounds like you found a really great guy. Share a bed in my opinion, it sounds like a logistical nightmare to buy another mattress for a few months. If you give in to temptation, it sounds like you're in a position where you'd truly seek reconciliation and God will always forgive those who ask, that's what Confession is for.
I see Fr Cole making a video about sexual ethics. A certain part of me kind of thought it was going to be about a specific topic. Morbid curiosity encouraged me to click. The more rational part of me is glad I was wrong.
Is it a sin not to like, subscribe, and click the post notification bell? lol
I see we deleted the comment about queer people which included my criticism that if heterosexual infertile couples can marry in the church then it makes no sense to refuse the sacrament to homosexual couples on grounds that they don't have a procreative union. I'm a queer Catholic and I'm honestly so tired of being actively ignored by people who claim to care about us and want us to stay in the Church. Like, what am I even here for? You're not gonna listen?
Infertile is not sterile. Infertile people still have the ability to do normal intercourse, while sterile means both cannot by any means perform normal intercourse. Homosexuals couple are by definiton sterile.
It's because a heterosexual relationship (even if one is infertile) still has a procreative possibility (look at the countless miraculous conceptions throughout the Old and New testaments). With a homosexual relationship, there is and always will be 0 chance of a procreation ever occurring. I really really valuable resource I found is JP2 Theology of the body it really breaks down everything far more eloquently than some random guy on UA-cam like me could lol. Hope some of this helps!
It isn't always the channel who deletes comments. UA-cam has its own moderation for comments that applies across all videos, you might have triggered it.
The Bible clearly blesses infertile couples. But also their infertility or sterility is not innate to the act. It is possible that, in most cases, their condition could someday be curable. Although it might be possible, someday, to use a woman's DNA to create sperm (sounds outlandish but I've read some geneticists indicating it might be possible) that would be artificial reproduction. Natural reproduction through homosexuality just can't happen in mammals so far as we know. (In the all-female whiptail lizard I believe same-sexual activity can "activate" or at least "stimulate" their bodilty process of parthenogenesis, but we aren't whiptail lizards.) Treating sterility clearly can happen.
Now an intersex woman might be a wrinkle on this, but I don't know what the churches teaching is there. It would seem to me an intersex person could not marry, but I'm not certain.
BTW: This links to my e-mail address so I'm taking a risk saying this, as only a few in my life know, but I'm not straight. I'm not entirely gay either, but my attraction to men is maybe as strong as mine to women. But I don't see any valid way to interpret the Bible or Christian tradition that allows it. Plus celibacy and self-sacrifice are praised in Catholicism, we're not an "everyone must marry" church. (Granted I could marry a woman, but not sure I have the temperament for that.)
>what am I even here for...
i think standing up for queer catholics is a noble and neccessary thing, but I'm not sure if you should see that as your sole reason for being in the Church. We're all here for Jesus, the earthly goings-on and politicing are the, sometimes unfortunate, side dishes that we have to sit through to get to the main course (the eucharist).
i can't pretend to know what it's like dealing with being an lgbtq catholic but I know it's not easy. But I hope that you stick around for Christ and that you don't leave because of Judas, if you catch my meaning. I'll keep you in my prayers