serious questions
What do you do when you stumble across a blog of a sex-obsessed Catholic divulging the details of their daily struggle with porn? Before any jokes roll in, it’s not titillating – it’s a seriously concerning confusion of obsession, repression, guilt and disturbing sexual naivety. It’s the sort of thing you hope is someone’s very realistic character writing project, but you fear may be true. And when the blogger expresses the desire to one day become a priest, it sends alarm bells ringing all round your head.
When it comes to the world of blogs, I’m now used to randomly sticking my oar in whenever I read anything that interests me, angers me or intrigues me. This is the first time I feel it’s important what I say and how I say it. But what on earth can you actually say to someone who believes they are innately evil, that Satan is tempting them all day and that if they go to church and say a few set prayers on a regular basis they have a hope of being ‘cured’ of ‘sinful’ sexual desire? How do you explain to someone that the guilt their religion is thrusting upon them is compounding their obsession? How do you get a religious person to objectively analyse their behaviour, take full responsibility for it and look for real solutions? How do you explain to a Catholic that sexual desire is normal but guilty, repressed obsession often leads to dangerous and unacceptable behaviour?
You don’t. Leave it to a competent person to assist this person instead.
LikeLike
That would certainly be my preference. But how do I know a ‘competent person’ will ever stumble across his blog?? It certainly doesn’t sound like any ‘competent person’ is in touch him at the moment. I don’t see any point in ignoring something so potentially harmful in the hope that someone else will deal with it.
LikeLike
What do you suppose is more “potentially harmful”? That I think pornography is “sinful”? Or that this shit is ruining my life? I don’t know what your conception of “sinful” is, but mine is, first and foremost, that it causes harm to me or others.
LikeLike
I agree with Francis Philip, as the Vatican has embraced evolution and is not anti-science as such. You might tell him to talk both to his priest, and also a psychiatrist. If the priest is any good, he will tell this troubled individual to go to the psychiatrist. If the priest is barking mad and tells him the opposite, there is still a good chance that the person finds the spychiatrist more helpfull in the end. Especially, if the psychiatrist is a part of such culture where he/she has to deal with such problems deriving from religion often.
LikeLike
I’m not convinced he’s giving his priest all the details that are in the blog. I’m sure priests hear men saying they’ve been thinking about sex or looking at porn all the time, and give the priestly advice of saying the set prayers, which is what he seems to be doing. How can a priest evaluate the difference between normal sexual desires and serious obsession if they have no experience of sex and think it’s all sinful anyway? I’m not sure about this, but I think the Catholic Church doesn’t have a successful history of dealing with sexual problems.
I could suggest he goes to psychiatrist but if someone suggested that to you on a blog would you take them seriously? Even if he recognises he has a obsessional condition that the church cannot help him with, what are the chances of him being able to talk to his doctor about it and ask for a psychiatric referral?
Like I say, it could be a very convincing writing exercise and I’m making a fuss about nothing, but on the chance it’s not, I think having stumbled upon it I have to attempt to intervene. The Christians who find it are going to tell him they’ll pray for him, the feminists will shout at him, some people will laugh, most will be disgusted. I’m not saying I expect I can have any effect, but I think it’s worth trying and I’m trying to explore what people think might be in way useful.
LikeLike
I’m interested in whatever advice you think you have for me. And yes, I’m very honest with my priests about what I deal with. And they do give me good advice.
Um, what makes you assume I have no experience of sex? I’m pretty sure I’ve stated in my blog that I have. For being such a miserable failure at dating and relationships, I’ve actually had quite a bit of experience (if one pursues it hard enough, one finds it). Thinking it’s “sinful” is quite a recent development. Sex, in itself, is not sinful, but the kind of destructive and dysfunctional sexual relationships I’ve been a part of are certainly harmful and not okay. And a priest can evaluate just as well as you can evaluate, apparently.
I am under psychiatric care. Have been for most of my life. I am medicated (at some points in my life, heavily). I also see a therapist (not a Catholic or Christian). It would be kind of fun if a feminist found me and shouted. And if people (other than you) want to mock me and laugh, that’s okay, too. I know I am putting some provocative and disturbing things out there. I’m not sure that my Catholicism doesn’t disturb you more than my problems.
LikeLike
Agree with the first two commentors. However, it is a piece of information to file away and hope it properly mixes with something else “rattling” about for another muse later down the road.
LikeLike
I don’t think they’ve been helpful at all! I’ve posted lots about these issues (sin, guilt, morality, sexual objectification) so it’s Sod’s Law that I’ve found this horrible blog. I can’t just ignore it and assume that someone else will successfully intervene. He could end up taking my daughter on a school trip in 10 years time!
LikeLike
You can’t cure the world…even at one nutter at a time.
I would not get involved.
A) you don;t know how ‘real’ the person on other side of the computer is.
I mean, I am probably the best looking bloke you are likely to ever meet, and would I lie to you?
Right….
B) Even if you are qualified to deal with such a problem, (and you may be for all I know) is it your place, unless your are being specifically asked to intervene, to do so?
Caution should usually be the watchword here.
LikeLike
I’m just not a big fan of ignoring things and hoping they get better on their own. Everyone else is clearly ignoring him and hoping it’s a joke or someone else will deal with it. I spend time discussing sin and morality with perfectly nice Christians, or arguing about discrimination with some nasty ones. I don’t know who they are on the other side of the computer and they don’t specifically ask me to intervene. I discuss things with them because I think what they say and believe is harmful and they’ve put it out in a public forum. Similarly, this is harmful and it’s in a public forum. If it’s real, I have no doubt that someone who expresses thoughts like this is a danger to other people. I should maybe send an email to my local Cardinal to see what he advises …
LikeLike
Well, as they say in the Classics, You gotta do what you gotta do, but there is a difference between the nonsense most bloggers get wrapped up in and dispensing advice that may require psychological counselling. But as i said…your decision.
LikeLike
Okay, I’m probably not going to comment. For two reasons:
– I hadn’t considered there is a possibility I could make the situation worse by attempting to get involved.
– I found the blog in ‘sin’ tag but it’s drifted away into oblivion two days later under a huge pile of sinful bloggers ….
LikeLike
There you go. Focus on more healthy pursuits such as explaining to misguided Christians why Jesus is not watching when they go to the loo or steal chocolate from the fridge or looking over their shoulder while they read Playboy/girl. 🙂
How’s your Monday?
LikeLike
Difficult. I’m trying to go blog cold turkey this week so I can do other things in life. But I can’t stop mulling over the idea that theism is the default position for humans. I enjoyed your retort to ‘Why do atheists hate (g)God?’ That whole post was just bizarre and blatant atheist baiting. It must be a bitter response to someone else’s post called ‘Why do Christians hate rational thinking?’
LikeLike
PRO TIP: If you’re writing about a Catholic and trying to be discreet, you probably shouldn’t tag your post “Catholicism.”
LikeLike
Sorry VW ( sounds like a car?), bit slow off the mark replying. What blog was that? I forgot?
My stance has always been that if Christians were open to rational thinking there would be no religion. End of story, finito.
This is what fear and faith are all about.
LikeLike
I don’t actually remember now, it wasn’t within WordPress, but it was one of the regular Christian commenters.
LikeLike
Um, hi? Pleased to meet you, too? Forgive my presumptuousness, but as far as I know I’m the only one in this vicinity who fits your description.
Apparently what you do is make gross assumptions and then post about that person behind their back. You don’t know me. You apparently didn’t even read very much of my blog. Let me correct some things.
I don’t think “sexual desire” is “sinful.” I don’t think nudity is sinful, or the human body is sinful, or sex is sinful. I actually really like all of those. But I am having a struggle here. This is not just that I’m looking at porn and feeling guilty about it. For one thing, I don’t feel guilty about it. Haven’t in years. I like it and crave it and my mind works awfully hard all the time coming up with reasons to dive into it again. And those impulses usually win.
I can’t say no to those impulses. This is an addiction, just as much as alcoholism or dependency on any other drug is an addiction. It’s an addiction to the fireworks of brain chemicals that porn and masturbation and orgasm sets off in my brain. It’s so much of an addiction and obsession that if I don’t fight it, it consumes my whole life. There have been weeks, recently, when I’ve done nothing, from dawn to dusk, for days on end, but surfed for porn and wanked. It’s a compulsive, ritualistic behavior that involves getting up in the morning (or the afternoon, as quickly becomes the case as my biological clock gets screwed up), going straight to the computer, hunting and collecting and hoarding gigs and gigs and gigs and probably close to a terabyte of images of naked girls. Teasing myself, keeping myself just on the verge of orgasm, for hours — for all day. And then when I finally tip over the edge, starting right back all over again. Literally, this goes on for days — not eating, not sleeping, not leaving the house — missing class, missing work, refusing all social contact. This is hell. This is wrecking my life. That’s why I need to break this. I really do hope you think what I just described above is dysfunctional and pathological and not normal and acceptable behavior.
I fell into porn when I was a very naive twelve years old (speaking of sexual naivete) and was immediately hooked. That’s child abuse. I abused myself. It warped my view of sex and women and while I do hope and pray, I fear that I’ll never be able to have a healthy and happy and functional sexual or romantic relationship.
I’m not “innately evil.” I’m actually a pretty nice, outwardly normal guy, you would think if you met me. I am troubled by some of the thoughts this leads me into, especially when I draw really deep into my darkness — and I do have darkness. I do believe in Satan, but just as much as he tempts me and torments me, I tempt and torment myself. I’m responsible for my own actions and choices. It’s very easy to blame the devil for my own weaknesses, and I try not to do that. But I do ascribe to him the lies and persecutions that do attack me, that I know are not true, that I do not even believe myself.
Also, I’m Catholic by choice. I chose this. I converted. Because it’s actually been more helpful to me in this struggle than any other path. It’s given me strength and support and hope, where for many years I just wallowed in it. If it makes you feel any better, I won’t become a priest, or anything else, as long as I’m struggling with this. I wouldn’t let myself near a child or any other vulnerable person as long as I’m struggling with this. For now, I am a mess.
LikeLike
Thanks for joining the discussion. I apologise if I mis-represented you in any way. I can see you have a serious struggle with obsession in your life and I’m sure it it isn’t helpful to read other people’s distorted views on it.
I understand that your obsessional state is not desirable for the reasons you have mentioned and many more. Any obsession that takes over someone’s life and stops them from doing other things in life they want to be doing clearly needs to be addressed. In addition to this, there is concern for other people. The use of porn is supporting an industry that exploits and abuses vulnerable women and men. The more people use it, the bigger a demand it creates and the more of these vulnerable people are brought into the industry. I believe we all have a responsibility to choose to shun it for that very reason. It’s very sad to hear that a child can be dragged into it before they have the chance to make this choice.
However, I fail to see how aligning yourself with an organisation that believes your thoughts and actions are ‘sinful’ will help your situation. It takes away from the goodness inside you and your recognition that it’s the obsessional aspect of behaviour that needs to change. It seems probable that the short-term comfort it provides you will lead to longer term issues and more unhelpful associations with sex generally.
It’s good to hear that you have indeed sought professional help outside of your church. I wish you the best in dealing with this.
LikeLike
Speaking of “distorted views” — not at all surprisingly, you have some awfully distorted, and honestly, ignorant views about religion. I asked above what you thought “sinful” meant. That’s a “serious question,” too. What is “sin”? Because what you just described in your comment sounds awfully in agreement with my own views on pornography. And I think you would actually find a good bit of common ground with any knowledgeable Catholic on these issues. This is not just a case of “aligning myself with an organisation”: I am Catholic through and through. I accept and adhere and agree fully with the teachings of the Church.
You seem to think that the Church just arbitrarily labels things “sinful” with no justification; that the Bible is some arcane and archaic foundation for Catholic morality from which we draw our sense of right and wrong with no other reasoning. I may be just a sheep, but most religious people aren’t that stupid. If Christianity were as empty as that, it would not have held so many wise and brilliant and thoughtful minds for nearly 2,000 years. Unlike some evangelical Protestants — who really do stand on the Bible as their only foundation — Catholics have really thought this through. We have a couple of millennia of theology and philosophy, writing and wondering, on just about every moral and social and theological issue you could think of. The secular world may think it’s modern and the Church is not, but trust me: there’s nothing “modern” about the world the Church hasn’t been dealing with for centuries.
The Church doesn’t hold that sex is “sinful.” I believe a quote from one such wiser soul than me, G.K. Chesterton, will suffice here:
G.K. Chesteron, Saint Thomas Aquinas (1933)
LikeLike
‘What is “sin”?’
Sin is a label attached to behaviour that certain religions disagree with. If you want to know more about my opinion on sin and morality you can read my previous post, ‘a big bunch of bunkum’.
‘You seem to think that the Church just arbitrarily labels things “sinful” with no justification; that the Bible is some arcane and archaic foundation for Catholic morality from which we draw our sense of right and wrong with no other reasoning.’
Yes, that pretty much sums it up. That’s why perfectly acceptable things like homosexuality and sex outside marriage are all labelled as ‘sinful’. The only sex the Catholic Church doesn’t think is sinful is within the marriage of a man and woman, and they can’t even use contraception. Am I surprised this is a church run exclusively by men?
‘If Christianity were as empty as that, it would not have held so many wise and brilliant and thoughtful minds for nearly 2,000 years. ‘
My understanding is that 90% of the wise and brilliant minds who understand modern science are atheists. Also, you could say the same about Buddhism and Islam (give or take a few hundred years). Do you agree with all their beliefs too? Until science could explain the inexplicable the superstitious human mind was apt to believe whatever the default religion of their society was.
‘We have a couple of millennia of theology and philosophy, writing and wondering, on just about every moral and social and theological issue you could think of.’
True. And the people who dared to disagree were burned at the stake or went off to start their own version of Christianity where they could live by their own interpretations.
LikeLike
I scanned your other post. Again, you’re showing your ignorance and shallowness. Even assuming your stance of atheism — who do you suppose came up religion? Why? You deny that there is objective morality or “sin,” but why do you suppose anyone ever decided certain things were “wrong”? Because they “disagreed with it”? Why do you suppose they disagreed with it? Just because they were no fun and didn’t want anybody else to have fun, either?
Are you intentionally trying to be obtuse? Can you not even think beyond your narrow prejudices? Why do you think anyone ever supposed any one of those things was “sinful”? Because they were hateful and wanted to hurt people? Do you think that anyone and everyone who disagrees with you is arbitrary and stupid and has no rational reason for having a different viewpoint?
As far as I know, no one has ever polled the whole of the world’s wise and brilliant minds as to their opinions on this. Richard Dawkins can throw biased statistics at you, and I can throw equally biased and equally inconclusive statistics to show just the opposite. And yes, I absolutely would defend my argument with regard to Buddhism and Islam or any other religion. There have been many, many brilliant and intelligent people over the ages who have had religious beliefs. There are many, many today who have religious beliefs and “understand modern science.” You seem to think that modern science has “debunked” theism or belief in God. Well, not really. Science and religion ask different questions, and can’t conflict with each other, unless you’re a fundie who thinks the Bible is a science textbook. Science can tell us an awful lot about the universe we can see, but it can’t tell us anything at all — by its nature — about what we can’t see. Science can’t tell us anything about the existence or nonexistence of God.
And back to my original statement: if you think Christianity, or Islam, or any other religion bases its system of morality solely on religious texts or the supposed dictates of “God,” then again, you’re pretty dense. Even thinking as an atheist, somebody wrote those religious texts. And somebody else — a lot of somebodies else — thought they made sense and embraced them. Why? Because they were mindless sheep who couldn’t think for themselves? You seem to have a pretty low opinion of the human race.
I think you’d be surprised by the inaccuracy of your statement. I doubt you could name more than a few people who were “burned at the stake” because they “disagreed.” I can think of only one or two who could even conceivably fit that bill, and there was a lot more to their cases than that they “disagreed.” I accept — and the Church has accepted — that the Church has done things to people in the past that were wrong. But you’re painting religious people with an awfully big brush. People are human. Humans do stupid and sometimes evil things. But for all their stupidity, there is still something called the Catholic Church that exists throughout the world, with millions of adherents, that has been around for 2,000 years, arguably the longest continuously-existing institution.
Anyway, we are getting off on rabbit trails. I am sure we have a lot of opinions and arguments we could share about religion and atheism. But you said you had something you wanted to share with me about my blog and my problems? Did you have anything substantive to say? Or did you only want to bash my religion?
LikeLike
I expect we’re wasting our time discussing religion, as I don’t see that you’ve responded to any of my points coherently and I’m not a big fan of discussions that get reduced to calling the other person ignorant, shallow, obtuse and prejudiced.
I think you saw what I wanted to share as it’s the original topic of this post. I was concerned that the only support you were getting for your addiction was from the Catholic Church, an organisation which has a horrendous history of dealing with sexual issues. As I responded to the first comment by Francis Philip, my preference would be that a ‘competent person’ is helping you, and you have indicated that this is the case.
LikeLike
I apologize for calling you obtuse and ignorant and prejudiced. I did not mean to level those adjectives polemically or to call you names. But it’s quite evident that there are many things you don’t know or understand about religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular — which isn’t surprising or unexpected, given that you’re not a religious person. You don’t seem particularly interested in learning, either, or in considering any other point of view but your own. Your uninformed views are already set and unchangeable; by definition, that’s prejudice. Your post assumed from the get-go that there was something wrong or inferior with a religious approach to my problem, and that I was somehow defective in my point of view and my postings; and your comments since then have continued to imply that religion is devoid of rational thought and is only for mindless sheep (I may be slow, but I’m not mindless). Now, I don’t have any intention or hope of convincing you of the truth of mine or any religion. But I had hoped you would at least consider that mine is not a defective point of view.
I did my best to respond to your points. I apologize if my responses were not coherent. I am just a dim-witted sheep; I do my best with what I’ve been given. I appreciate your concern for me. I do wish you had said something to me rather than to start the party without telling me.
LikeLike
In the end, whatever the issue, the individual must take responsibility.
Thus, with your particular problem, maybe try chucking out the computer first off?
Then make an appointment with a specialist.
As for religion and church….sorry, mate, this route will eventually only compound the guilt trip. These folk are not equipped to deal with such issues. And this has zip to do with them not being involved with sex at a personal level, as your issues isn’t really about sex, but self worth.
LikeLike
I think the question about whether or not to get involved, and what would be the best way to go about it, was a valid one. There was also the possibility that if something useful was said and you stumbled across it, it would be a way for you to get another opinion without having to respond, if you didn’t wish to.
I understand that the Catholic Church holds a very strong attraction for people who are unhappy with their sexual behaviour. I have seen many friends wrapped up in the painful cycles of guilt and repression that the teachings of the Catholic Church often promotes, and I have a natural concern for anyone caught in the midst of this. I have a degree in medieval History and am well aware of the development of the Catholic Church, and historically how it treated people who disagreed with its teachings. I was also brought up in a very religious household and have quite a good understanding of religion and Christianity. It’s your right to disagree with everything I say, but don’t make the assumption it’s because I come from a position of ignorance.
LikeLike
@Violetwisp
I got the impression from a few of the comments – here and on Agonistes’s blog – that involvement was being encouraged. Maybe I misunderstood?
However, I would reiterate, judging from the tone of this ‘dialogue’I would step away. There is an od undertone that brings me back to what I first made mention of..this is cyberspace. Caution. Possible loony ahead.
LikeLike
I know what you’re saying, but as you correctly point out, and as I’m sure he is aware, a lot of this is to do with self worth. And everyone ignoring his uncomfortable cry for help probably doesn’t help his situation. But then again, perhaps this type of involvement doesn’t help either.
LikeLike
Again, I apologize for my presumptuousness. “Ignorance” is probably a very poor word to have used and carries more negative connotations than I really intended. The fact is, you don’t know what I know (and I don’t know what you know). Our backgrounds and experiences of these things are different, and you don’t have the same understanding of religion and such that I do. As an historian and an academic (I don’t know if you are by profession or not, but you have a background in it at least) you should understand that no people or group or movement can be painted black or white (or red, or yellow, or purple, or any other color).
I’ve not experienced these “painful cycles of guilt and repression.” What is supposedly being repressed? Having sexual mores — even conservative sexual mores — does not equal “repressing” sexuality. Unless you’re a fan of unrestrained, unprincipled, free-for-all, whomever-it-hurts-be-damned sexuality, I don’t see the “repression.” I’ve never been made to “feel guilty” by a priest for having sexual feelings or even for masturbation. (I’ve been told, rightfully, and I needed to hear it, that certain excessive behaviors were messed pretty messed up.) For it being a “sin,” the Church is rather understanding about it. I see nothing wrong with striving to for chastity and discipline in the use of one’s gonads, especially since I seem to have a problem with that.
You acknowledge that pornography and the pornographic industry are exploitative and abusive and harmful to vulnerable people. That’s a judgment of its “goodness” or “badness.” How is that any different than calling it “sinful”? Certainly the primary reasons why it’s “sinful” are that it’s exploitative and abusive and harmful to vulnerable people.
Again, I like opinions and discussions and advice. And I’m sorry that this started out with such a negative tone. I was kind of upset when I first found your post.
LikeLike
The tone of the posts are a tad too aggressive for my taste, in as much as while acknowledging the issue – the confession may have a cathartic effect, which has been a mainstay of catholic church procedure, after all – the answer to the problem has already been subtly offered – God.
I cannot argue succinctly with this approach as we are now entering the realms of the supernatural and this plainly suggests that standard ”operating procedure” is pretty much moot.
Meaning. You will be arguing til you are blue in the face. Best of luck, I shall watch from the sidelines.
And may your god go with you too. 😉
LikeLike
I like involvement. I wouldn’t be blogging about my issues publicly if I wanted people to leave me alone. And if I am loony, I’m not the only one who’s gotten out of the gate out here on the Internet.
“God helps those who help themselves” is not exactly a canonical Catholic teaching — but it’s pretty much the Catholic approach to issues like mine. Nobody expects God to automagically “heal” me or “cure” me of my “disorder” — and nobody supposes having sexual feelings or impulses is a “disorder” at all. But the way I’m handling them is pretty disordered, pretty much anybody can admit. The “operating procedure” is pretty much this: each week, if I have fallen off the wagon, I go and confess it. And it is cathartic and beneficial to admit that to God and to myself. And I pray that God will help me and give me the grace and the self-control to do better. A atheist would say, nobody’s there and nobody’s going to “give” me “grace.” But pursuing self-control and trying to do better and having hope and a positive outlook are good things, no? Whether anybody “gives” me self-control or not, the act of pursuing it and hoping for it edges me closer to attaining it.
LikeLike
Well, what the heck, I’ll tag along for a few rounds.
First up, prayer is a waste of time and effort, and there are stats to prove it, and even those of us with average intelligence know this already – and I shall unreservedly include you in this.
Second. You have a recognized problem, so go and seek recognized solutions. God is not one of these solutions and will do sweet Fanny Adams. And you know this to be true as well.
Third. Stop using the term ”Sin”. This is degrading, damaging garbage at its worst, guaranteed to reduce anyone to a shadow of themselves under normal circumstances, let alone anyone with issues’ FTS as they say on the street.
Four: Stop playing the victim. Your language suggests you are prone to feeling sorry for yourself.
Religion is the excuse for when you fall off the wagon. The excuse to plead for forgiveness. It is crap.
See a professional not a damn priest.
LikeLike
I’m not playing games, and I had hoped my tone, now, was more agreeable than it was before. I certainly was not hostile or abusive to you in that comment, as you have turned around and been to me.
I could likewise cite statistics demonstrating the beneficial effects of prayer. “Statistics” and “studies” are well nigh useless in these regards, considering their malleability and inherent bias.
I am sorry you think the idea of “sin” is “garbage.” You and your friend seem to have a very different understanding of that word than I do. I am perfectly okay with using it even detached from any concept of God or judgment, and there’s plenty of currency in the English language to support that usage. If there is a “right” and a “wrong,” a “good” and a “bad,” a “help” and a “harm,” then there is a “sin.”
LikeLike
That’s an interesting comment about sin. I looked it up in the dictionary to be sure I don’t have any odd misconceptions about it’s meaning – ‘an offence against God or a religious or moral law’. I guess I do have a notion about things being generally good or bad actions, but that in no way coincides with the definition of sin.
LikeLike
Sidelines, eh?
LikeLike
Course! Haven’t you seen those soccer coaches on the ‘sidelines’ running up and down shouting the odds to their players and yelling “Ref, are you bleedin’ blind, or what?” 😉
Morning Violetwisp…It’s night time where you are, right?
LikeLike
“Im not playing games, and I had hoped my tone, now, was more agreeable than it was before. I certainly was not hostile or abusive to you in that comment, as you have turned around and been to me.”
Abusive? Where? you upset about the use of the word crap?
“I could likewise cite statistics demonstrating the beneficial effects of prayer. “Statistics” and “studies” are well nigh useless in these regards, considering their malleability and inherent bias.”
Ah..semantics. Fair enough. The beneficial effects are not, of course, the same as being effective, i.e. God answering. Which has never happened, or certainly never been shown to have happened. But if it makes you feel better, ah, well that is different, and if this is the case, carry on.
“I am sorry you think the idea of “sin” is “garbage.””
Sorry? No, you are not. And it is garbage. A theological concept that has no relevance in any society.
You and your friend seem to have a very different understanding of that word than I do. I am perfectly okay with using it even detached from any concept of God or judgment, and there’s plenty of currency in the English language to support that usage. If there is a “right” and a “wrong,” a “good” and a “bad,” a “help” and a “harm,” then there is a “sin.”
It cannot be detached from the concept of a god, as it was your god, (through his henchmen) that introduced the term, with the specific aim of introducing guilt and fear as a means to control.
Sin has repugnant and offensive theological connotations.
There is no need to use the word, so use a different one otherwise you will always be a slave to someone else’s standard of morality.
LikeLike
What was “abusive” was your whole attitude to me and what I’m doing, your insistence that everything I believe and hold dear is “crap” and worthless. That’s not nice. “See a professional, not a damn priest” does not exactly convey a friendly tone.
If you admit that prayer has beneficial effects, then it does so “do sweet Fanny Adams.” I could cite reams and reams of anecdotal evidence of prayers having been answered, even from personal experience. Since that is not something that can be scientifically studied, we’ll just have to disagree about that.
Um, the term “sin” was introduced by “my god”? Really?
Quoth the OED:
Quoth the OED a little more:
Yes, the implication of the word sin is primarily religious, but certainly not strictly.
As for “my god” introducing the concept: The Romans had the concepts of nefas, something contrary to divine law, i.e. sinful, impious, wicked, and vitium, a general fault or vice or failing. The Greek concept of ἀμαρτάνειν, to do wrong, err, sin, is Homeric. (Certainly you remember all the times the Achaeans and Trojans pissed off various gods?) Nearly every culture on earth, from the ancient Sumerians to the Chinese, has had some sense of sin or wrongdoing or offense against the moral law, both with and without religious connotations.
What about my standard of morality? Can’t I sin against it, too?
LikeLike
I’ll leave this to Ark to answer, if he wants to. I’ve explained my understanding of ‘sin’ in my ‘a big bunch of bunkum’ post. My understanding of your behaviour is that you’re doing something that goes against your better judgement (the weight of the outcomes is undesirable for all concerned). I don’t think you’re sinning against anything, you’re just currently unable to control an obsessional behaviour that stems from childhood. I’m sure with appropriate treatment this can change.
LikeLike
Smile..When I said your god I was being a tad , facetious , as I am sure you are aware, and was of course, referring to those naughty little religious folk who have held the likes of yourself and bizillions of others under the yoke of false pretense aided by the odd Inquisitional Device, since before my granddad fell off the bus.
Of course the measure of a procedure, be it therapy or prayer is its effectiveness in fixing the issue.
So if praying to an imaginary friend, and confessing to a Priest is working then ‘kudos’. Who am I to gainsay it? Pray ’til the wax runs out of your ears. Hell, if it isn’t bust, don’t fix it, right?
if it isn’t….then maybe you should rethink this whole religious thing?
Have you bothered at least to remove the temptation yet? Making sure the computer, and all those terabytes is out of ‘harms way’ as it were.
Seems you are more interested in establishing a grammatically and etymologically correct reason for sin rather than admitting that in this day and age it is almost exclusively tied in with religion. Which, I reiterate is crap.
LikeLike
Pingback: What is Sin? | Agnes in Agony