What is Reddit's opinion of
Love and Responsibility?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
13 reviews of this product found across Reddit:
> Somehow that makes condoms a grave evil while a $250 class, $130 monitor, $45/month test strips, and daily charting is wholesome and good.
So... don't use Marquette? Marquette and Creighton are crazy expensive (for different reasons), but Billings is cheap-to-free, CCL is cheap-to-free, and there are even $15 books that cover the basics for people with "normal" fertility. And you can chart almost any method in Google Sheets or Excel if you can't afford the official charts.
As for the basis of it, it's pretty clearly laid out in Humanae Vitae and, if you want some not-so-light reading, I highly recommend St. JPII's Love and Responsibility. I think it can be inferred from Scripture and the logic around what marriage is and what sex is, but the deep philosophical underpinnings and thorough explanations are also helpful.
> your only argument left is "Words don't actually mean what the dictionary says they mean."
...that's not a controversial position. Dictionaries are merely descriptions of usage, not a prescriptive source. And a general purpose dictionary (such as what you cited) only gives colloquial definitions of most words since it would take too long to cite every possible usage in every possible field. That's why you can find special dictionaries, like legal dictonaries. For "affective" in this context I'm drawing on a background of academic Catholic philosophy and theology.
> You've certainly provided no explanation!
Sure, "Affective" here is referring to the manner in which a properly understood sexual relationship in a genuine marriage (one man and woman capable of penetrative sex at least once who are open to children who commit to each other for life with a full understanding of that commitment and proper consent) makes one more holy through its expression
Sexual activity between two people of the same sex, just like various immoral sex acts between two heterosexual people, lacks some elements of this since there's no reproductive principle involved.
You will note that this is not a full explanation and my definition takes a bunch of other stuff for granted, and you'd be right. For that, you need to do serious reading. Here's the first book on the specific topic that comes to mind, although there are other works to read as well
I’ll reply tomorrow morning when I get a chance, but I want to thank you for coming here and asking this. I’m really enjoying this conversation. If you want to delve further, I’d recommend reading this: https://www.amazon.com/Love-Responsibility-Karol-Wojtyla/dp/0898704456/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=love+and+responsibility+by+pope+john+paul+ii&qid=1596144239&sprefix=love+and+respon&sr=8-3
Theology of the body? I recommend going straight to the source. (link to the book Love and Responsibility.)
> Yes, that's when the orgasms happen.
This is a psychological condition known as sado-masochism and you should see a professional.
> Don't learn BDSM through p***, you will make mistakes and my break something.
Well, it's not the sort of thing that just springs to mind naturally.
> yes of course, all BDSM is consensual. If it wasn't consensual it's rape.
Legally justifiable contractual consent is much less important than actively, positively consenting to participating in some behavior, especially between spouses.
> Also come up what's wrong with degrading?
For the long version, read Love and Responsibility. For the short version, human persons have inherent dignity and should be treated with dignity as human persons. Degrading, dehumanizing behaviors go directly contrary to this dignity and transform human interaction from a relationship of two persons to a transactional use of one person-as-object by another person for self-gratification. Sexual intercourse of this type is hardly worth the name, but is more like mutual masturbation.
Degrading and dehumanizing people is the psychological basis for racism, sexism, genocide, slavery, and the Stanford prison experiment, among other things. It is taking something valued highly by God and treating it as if it has no particular value at all; or, "What God has made clean, you must not call profane."
If you don't mind heavy reading, I say skip to this. JPII wrote it before becoming pope; it covers the theological and philosophical basis for the Theology of the Body.
It's also pretty heavy reading.
I know people who got pregnant while using birth control.
If you confess fornication and struggle with accepting the Church's teaching on sex, may I suggest digging deeper? I've had to do that to understand more than one topic. Theology of the Body, Love and Responsibility, and Humanae Vitae are great places to start. If you're anything like me and you suck at theology, Christopher West and Edward Sri might be helpful.
As with others, I appreciate the honesty. Is there any intellectual argument that would make you reconsider your stance? (For example, prior to the 1930s all Christians regarded birth control as sinful... this position only started to shift with the advent of the birth control pill in the 1960s).
I joined the Catholic church about 3 years back for a variety of reasons, but essentially decided that the resurrection was an actual historical event, truth is found in the person of Jesus (John 14:6), Jesus built a church on St. Peter (Matthew 16:18), and the church is the pillar and foundation of all truth (1 Timothy 3:15).
Prior to my conversion, I had beliefs that differed with the church on birth control, LGBT issues, and a variety of other topics, but realized in my research that the Catholic positions on faith and morals have not changed throughout the centuries regardless of what was culturally acceptable... I'm not saying this is easy - plenty of Christians throughout the ages have rejected the Catholic Church's authority and gone in their own direction.
I will pray for you that you find peace in your current research, and I respect your decision to not receive the Eucharist while dissenting from church teaching. With that being said, sin does cloud our intellect and the sacraments confer real graces and saving power, so missing out on Mass, Confession, and the Eucharist will make your journey significantly harder.
As an experiment of trust in God, it might be a good idea to take a period of time (i.e. 2 weeks, a month, etc.) to try the following: Try a short period of abstinence with your wife. Go to confession. Go to a daily mass (or as frequently as you can) and receive Jesus in the Eucharist. Read everything you can on the church teaching on sexuality. Pray the rosary. Rinse, repeat.
https://www.amazon.com/Love-Responsibility-Karol-Wojtyla/dp/0898704456
I’m really uplifted to read that your taking such an honest and straightforward approach to the subject. I think pop culture and others have really muddied the waters in a very straightforward and sacred aspect of being human. Here’s a book I would recommend. It’s by Karol Wojtyla (Later Pope John Paul II) and explains the traditional stance on marriage, family, and contraception. https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/63292093/download-love-and-responsibility-pdf
Here it is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Love-Responsibility-Karol-Wojtyla/dp/0898704456
I believe this is the book where Scott Hann learned back when he was an Evangelical Protestant that before the 1930’s all Christian churches throughout the world denounced contraception on Biblical grounds. That was the exact topic which got him started in his conversion. I also recommend G.K. Chesterton on the topic. He foresaw a lot of what would happen with eugenics and abortion back at the turn of the 20th century. There are some great talks on YouTube. Here’s his work on the topic. Not sure if this fits into your reading schedule, but it’s a great work on the topic. Chesterton was Orthodox Christian (meaning again traditional). Not sure if he has converted to Catholicism at the time he wrote this: https://youtu.be/Z-GxK2TgBUU.
Have you read Love and Responsibility by Saint John Paul? reading your post I can't help but think how greatly you would benefit from reading John Paul's book of Love and Responsibility. I recommend it if you havent!
I went through a similar period in my life a couple of years ago and the book helped shined some perspective in my life.
This is... a really skewed view. Your wife/girlfriend is not an escape from lust. She's not some mystical being to fulfill all your fantasies. Saint JP2 is incredibly explicit that you can be married and still lust after your spouse - using them to fulfill your own desires. I would really recommend you read Love and Responsibility, or start with this primer. Men, Women and the Mystery of Love is a fantastic secondary source.
I've just seen it too many times - If you're looking at porn, it's not going to magically stop once you get married.
Pope JP2 wrote a famous book that is quite sex positive while maintaining Catholic doctrine. No joke.
http://www.amazon.com/Love-Responsibility-Karol-Wojtyla/dp/0898704456
>For as much text as you write, I'm still pretty confused as to what your point is.
For what it's worth - I am not surprised.
>>You misunderstand my meaning of "sexuality." I am referring to gender.
>WTF?! Those are not the same thing at all!
This is exactly my point in what I am arguing. There is a confusion of terms that exists in our world today. I am explaining how I am using the terms - in a philosophical, theological understanding. You are stuck in a narrow worldview that cannot see beyond itself that says, "Nuh-uh! You're using those words incorrectly!"
No, I explained my meaning. If you cannot grasp the basic understanding of the terms, then we may as well cease our discussion here.
>Completely wrong! Look at the Church's teachings on sexuality... the talk about adultery, chastity, contraception, fornication, lust, masturbation, etc. Those things have nothing to do with gender or biological sex (i.e., whether you have XX or XY chromosomes, what genitalia you have, etc.).
Emphasis mine. What you describe is not sexuality, but sexual actions. But to then argue that gender has nothing to do with the sexual act? My, you are confused. The male was created with a very specific end in regards to the sexual act, as was the female.
If you need it put simply, I simply quote Kindergarten Cop: "Boys have a penis; girls have a vagina."
You simply cannot make the claim that, biologically speaking, gender has nothing to do with the sexual act, unless you would like to defend that claim. The male is meant to make a - quite literal - self gift by giving himself to the woman. The woman is to receive the male in the co-creative act. That is how the bodies are ordered in the sexual sphere.
I genuinely and sincerely do not understand your objection.
>I have literally no idea how you brought up one while talking about the other, or why you think they're related.
As I said above, the body reveals a certain meaning and order unto itself. To argue that gender has nothing to do with the sexual act is a most-erroneous assertion.
>I hope that someday they, and you, will meet some gay people who don't struggle with their sexuality, who have successfully integrated it in to their lives and who are positive role models in every sense.
I have never met a person who is not broken inside. I have never met a person who is not carrying a deep-seated wound. I have never met a person who does not have that yearning for the Love that satisfies.
You seem to be under the impression that a "struggle" is an intrinsically evil thing. I - and the Church - argue that it is not.
Recommended Reading, especially if you would like to understand the Church's teaching on sexuality versus sexual actions or sexual orientation:
- <em>Love and Responsibility</em> Karol Wojtyla
- <em>Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body</em> by Blessed Pope John Paul II
These beautiful books illustrate the true meaning of the body, human sexuality, and the gift of love.
Popular alternatives to Love and Responsibility
How to Have Impossible Conversations: A Very Practical Guide
God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships
