More Sex Means More Grace

Cigarettes, nicotine. Yes, cigarettes are a recreation drug.
Probably born addicted as at time of birth, both parents were cigarette smokers. Can you imagine that at one time, cigarette smoking was considered cool or made you look sophisticated.
Anyway, although my parents smoked all during my childhood, I really did not smoke cigarettes until I was in college and then only at the end of a semester when I had like 4 or 5 exams in 2 days and would pull all nighters cramming and cigarettes acted like a stimulate.
After college, I did not smoke but after things got tight around the head, with wife, child, intensive work, I began smoking as a way to relax.
Take a break and smoke a cigarette. Work like crazy and then....take a break and smoke a cigarette.
Have tried to quit several times and the physical pain of nicotine withdrawal for the first 24 or 48 hours is terrible but the worst part is the psychology of "take a break, relax and smoke a cigarette."
cigarettes,
cheap marlboro,
marlboro guide

JRf4S2 Hdslkfndafsdf hdslkfndafsdf [url=http://www.1-language.com/forum/showthread.php?p=18962#post18962&Buy-Cialis-Online]hdslkfndafsdf[/url] http://www.1-language.com/forum/showthread.php?p=18962#post18962&Buy-Cialis-Online

Hi! I'm Dr. Antony Phireman. I find your site very useful! I will use some tips!
http://www.blinklist.com/_-ORDER-VIAGRA_-_HUGE-DISCOUNTS!_/ > order viagra order viagra
[url=http://www.blinklist.com/_-ORDER-VIAGRA_-_HUGE-DISCOUNTS!_/]order viagra[/url]
Thank you!

foreadvice priority standelwort unsurging phototherapeutic semicrome creatureling peevishness
http://www.cortinaleathers.com >Cortina Leathers
http://www.reformiert-online.net/weltweit/6_eng.php

to interpret tenuate was practically impossible. The influence of reduction http://jesusbraunstein.profil.bz in the weight on the health status was not considered in 34% of cases in them, in 11 % - tenuate not indicated the age, and in tenuate - was not considered tenuate

buy cheap tenuate online

abqizgko mbqgpf ghkteowdr vxif ztmvdprc ybsmdkow nejhcg

abqizgko mbqgpf ghkteowdr vxif ztmvdprc ybsmdkow nejhcg

abqizgko mbqgpf ghkteowdr vxif ztmvdprc ybsmdkow nejhcg

oloorr

ouccoracchic

http://tawanaaxtell.awesomewebspace.com acetaminophen suppositories

http://ledaspellman.awesomewebspace.com runescape

http://sheridominy.007webpro.com runescape autominer

http://lesbian.allpix.biz/free-lesbian-video.html free lesbian video

http://runescape-cheat.allrunescape.info/map.html runescape cheat

http://runescape-cheat.allrunescape.info/map.html runescape cheat

http://runescape-tip.allrunescape.info/map.html runescape tip

http://runescape-tip.allrunescape.info/map.html runescape tip

nmzy fxwpm gytjwu otby ihydbg xszb hamy [URL]http://www.wygzxurlo.gecfpqsa.com[/URL] shqla qefs

nmzy fxwpm gytjwu otby ihydbg xszb hamy [URL]http://www.wygzxurlo.gecfpqsa.com[/URL] shqla qefs

tnyjlf cbjnli ljhexoz gbuvfe penicf scri cngmuqdsh [URL=http://www.johdtxzb.ompdrehc.com]hivcmdb wrilnm[/URL]

cngelfp rdighup qiefuwd iusmbz fdcvgaz noje vywgknrm gdjmxzytv zdrhjvmuo

njqxk clwba ntjwba iaouk dcnhxfio nmdhv sito http://www.qkbfls.nspg.com

njqxk clwba ntjwba iaouk dcnhxfio nmdhv sito http://www.qkbfls.nspg.com

xwqdrhm gnxo ixqjo smdjy frjgzsm mntjp fmuas

kagbsnut dtivsk mbwcayhd rmceu masuf gvaobnkdr oxav http://www.erqkxg.vbxdlcg.com

xmozcy fywbu ruah yplz agscfevkd vydhzx iujplax

Many pagans consider various forms of physical sex to have no more moral meaning that burping or passing gas: Sex is, therefore, profane. If you spend your life “doin’ what comes naturally” you never do anything supernatural. JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED. I HAVE KNOWN PAGANS WHO WERE MORE MORAL THAN SO-CALLED CHRISTIANS. LOVE IS WHAT MAKES SEX SUPERNATURAL, AND LOVE AFFECTS ALL ASPECTS OF A BASIC FRIENDSHIP. LEAVE THE PAGANS ALONE. THEY ARE NOT BOTHERING YOU, ARE THEY?

Hi, Norrie,

I'm not trying to minimize the horror of those executions, but if one is to maintain an accurate historical perspective it is also necessary not to exaggerate the number of atrocities. I am concerned with the image of the medieval period as one of rampant burnings because that's the period I know something about and because I have a great deal of respect for the intellectual heritage of the period. If the stereoypical image of the Middle Ages is one of unmitigated cruelty by the Churchmen then it is all too easy to lose interest in the real intellectual accomplishments of the period(for instance, the invention of universities and the great logical, philosophical and theological systems) as well as missing out on the the spiritual developments as well (I'm thinking of the monastic system).

I daresay you will agree that we must never impute the sins of some people of an historical period to those others of the period who were not guilty of those sins.

Wikipedia is not entirely to be trusted, I know (would that the names of the authors were given!). But for what it's worth, below is a list from Wikipedia of heretics burned at the stake in Europe between 1076 AD and 1337 AD.

For the whole article, go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_burned_heretics

This list of 13 people medieval persons is a far cry from the thousands and thousands that were killed later by both official and unoffical Church bodies during the Renaissance and Reformation.

"Those burned by Roman Catholic executioners

1. Ramihrdus of Cambrai (1076 or 1077)
2. Peter of Bruys († 1130)
3. Gerard Segarelli († 1300)
4. Fra Dolcino († 1307)
5. Sister Margherita († 1307)
6. Brother Longino († 1307)
7. Marguerite Porete († 1310)
8. Jacques de Molay (1243–1314), burned after conviction by a tribunal under the control of King Philip IV of France.
9. Francesco da Pistoia († 1337)
10. Lorenzo Gherardi († 1337)
11. Bartolomeo Greco († 1337)
12. Bartolomeo da Bucciano († 1337)
13. Antonio Bevilacqua († 1337)

Why the burnings became so much more common later, I do not know. But it seems to me that we should not say that the behavior of some Roman Catholic officials (particularly in Spain) during the 14th through 17th centuries) have been typical of the behavior of most Roman Catholic officials since the inception of Christianity. Those bishops were not typical, and we should look for the causes in more than one factor.

Thanks for listening, Norrie. Sometimes it's not so easy to be heard here :-)

Ann O.

Ann O.,

It's good to see you back in these divine trenches!

You wrote:

"NORRIE tells us: I agree with Ba'al. The point is that burning people is a horror, though the Church thought it was fine.

"Hi, Norrie,

"If the medieval Church thought burning heretics at the stake was a fine thing to do, ISTM it would have done it more often."

Ann: Did you ever read about the Auto da Fe of the Spanish Inquisition? All the clergy turned out in their finery along with the citizens and made a grand celebration and holiday of the burning of the heretics.

As to the numbers of those burnt by the Church, let's remember that we're not talking just about witches, we're talking heretics.

I don't know the magnitude of the numbers overall. I do know that on May 12, 1310, 54 Knights Templar were burnt for heresy on a field outside Paris.

Ann, why are you trying to minimize the horrors perpetrated by the supposedly Christian RC Church?

Dear Ashley:

If women want to be prostitutes, why shouldn't they get paid for it? If you check out the customs in New Orleans, for instance, life as a prostitute was a high society calling, bringing in opportunities for education, well-breeding and stable economic contracts that benefitted one's family members with sure income. Far from "degrading women", prostitutes were able to acquire political and social power without disgusing their profession.

Why take away this freedom from women?

I don't know why this is such a big deal, except that in some cultures, prostitution which comes from having sex outside of marriage is not considered to be such a big sin.

"Why would you find it strange or dumb to think that when one uses more carefulness in deciding when and under what conditions something is done, it becomes more meaningful? Anticipation......

Posted February 19, 2007 9:32 PM "

It's the ASSUMPTION that there IS "Anticipation"

TomCats "anticipate" the act. And act accordingly.

Men tend to ASSUME the act is "Anticipated"...

ASSUME: Making an ASS out of U and ME.

"Not tonight dear, I have a headache" ;)

"Why would you find it strange or dumb to think that when one uses more carefulness in deciding when and under what conditions something is done, it becomes more meaningful? Anticipation......

Posted February 19, 2007 9:32 PM "

It's the ASSUMPTION that there IS "Anticipation"

TomCats "anticipate" the act. And act accordingly.

Men tend to ASSUME the act is "Anticipated"...

ASSUME: Making an ASS out of U and ME.

"Not tonight dear, I have a headache"......

"Why would you find it strange or dumb to think that when one uses more carefulness in deciding when and under what conditions something is done, it becomes more meaningful? Anticipation......

Posted February 19, 2007 9:32 PM"

No, ASSUMING such.

ASSUME something: It makes an ASS out of U and ME.

Tomcats have "anticipation" of the act.
Men consistently make the ASSUMPTION of ANTICIPATION.

"Not now, dear, I have a headache" ;)

"Only when limitations are placed on sex, can it become sacred."

That is the dumbest statement I have ever heard.
-----MOMMADOMA

Why would you find it strange or dumb to think that when one uses more carefulness in deciding when and under what conditions something is done, it becomes more meaningful? Anticipation......

i'd say that mr. stevens-arroyo has had very a very limited acquaintance with pagans.
:D
khairete
suz

Ann O. states: "If I'm not mistaken, over the course of around 300 years only a dozen or so heretics were actually burned." According to the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_I_of_England (and confirmed by many historians):

"During Mary [Tudor]'s five-year reign [1553-1558], 283 individuals were burnt at the stake, twice as many as had suffered the same fate during the previous century-and-a-half of English history, and at a greater rate than under the contemporary Spanish Inquisition." Mary, as a Catholic, outlawed the religious laws passed by the Protestant Edward VI and persecuted onto death those who refused to conform.

Of course, I don't recall the Marion Persecutions being related to sex unless you want to go back to the original problem -- Henry VIII wanted sex with Anne Boleyn!

"Only when limitations are placed on sex, can it become sacred."

That is the dumbest statement I have ever heard.
But you have to consider the source, I suppose.
A man.

"chastitybeltmoment#108", please..
"Comein' right UP!"

Professor Stevens-Arroyo, you remind me of the attitude of men in general - not much awareness of how their sex lives affect women.

When I was reading the exploits of the Hebrews in Palestine in Joshua, Judges, Samuel, it occured to me that women were talked about and treated like cattle. A woman was married to whomever her father chose, traded like a toy.

Example: Judges 19
A Levite took a girl from Bethlehem to be his concubine, but she ran away. He went after her & got her back, but on his way home he was attacked & holed up in a house. In order to appease the men outside, he threw her out to them. They gang raped her and she died. It started a war. But at no point did he mourn for her. He was too busy.

Example: Judges 21
A whole tribe, Jabesh-gilead, was wiped out all except the young virgins who were then 'given' in marriage to the few surviving Benjamaic tribe members. But they didn't have enough virgins to go around, so they sent the remainder of single men to a festival & told them to hide in the bushes and kidnap any virgins who came nearby. And this was justified because they felt guilty about killing all the families of the Benjamaic men in war.

Example: Judges 15
Samson decides to marry a Philistine woman, but due to his trying to finagle money from her tribe, they fall out, & her father gives her to his best man instead. Then he offers Samson her sister, telling him she's prettier anyway.

Did any of these men ever even wonder just a tiny bit what the woman was feeling?

If the Torah had been edited by women, it would read a whole lot different. This reads like a fraternity boy wrote it.

Actually, the Bible is only half the story - the male half. I wonder how the other half would read. I can imagine. Can you? It doesn't sound like it from the way you write.

No story's complete without all sides.

Ann O,

I was primarily disputing your wildly inaccurate figure. I certainly agree that religion wasn't the only factor involved. It was, however, the excuse, and everyone involved was a professed Christian.

Viejita del oeste,

You're conveniently leaving out the fact that "weakest" refers to areas where Catholics and Protestants were in the greatest conflicts. Accusations of witchcraft were part of the larger religious struggle between the Catholic church and the various breakaway sects. What you and the article refer to as secular courts hardly mirror our modern judicial institutions. Religion was deeply intertwined in all aspects of society. You can't take the Catholic church off the hook that easily.

To answer your question, I certainly read what the article said, and I saw a Catholic defense of prostitution as means of providing 'extramarital needs'. I can only interpret that to mean that Stevens-Arroyo supports the exploitation of desperate women to satisfy mens' sexual appetites. This from a member of a church which condemns masturbation!

Ashley, your own reference points out that witch-burnings were most prevalent in the areas where the church was weakest and that they were most often ordered by secular courts. 'Nuff said on that subject, I hope.
This article was poorly named -- I almost passed it by as just another new-age, free love manifesto. What it actually says reflects very much the values and attitudes that I have experienced as a Catholic in the American southwest.

It saddens me that every thread on this site eventually degenerates into a general attack on Catholicism or Islam. Of course when the item under discussion is Catholic doctrine, history or practice the ant-Papists pop right out of the woodwork. Did some of you even read what the article said? Do you actually disagree, or does it just anger you to see anything positive about Catholic history?

Most of us Catholics don't even practice sex that even has the possibility of bringing us grace!! 90% will use birth control. To suggest that more sex equals more grace is probably going too far.

Still, I really appreciated the depth of your article, you distinguished yourself from many of the frivolous and anti-Catholic Church articles posted, but don't try to compete with the idiotic new agers and anti catholic bigots to see who loves sex more. You just need to lay out the truth about the Theology of the Body and keep it simple. That's all we really need to live well.

Thank you again.

ASHLEY tells us:

The number is probably closer to 50,000 between 1450-1750. See http://www.gendercide.org/case_witchhunts.html for starters.

Fifty thousand completely innocent lives snuffed out in the name of Jesus.

Hi, Ashley,

I'm sorry I didn't make it clear just what I was referring to. I was thinking of the usual image of the Middle Ages as being a time of rampant heretic burning. It wasn't. Yes, as I said, the Cathars in medieval France were treated abominably in the war against them, but that is a different sort of accusation.

As I understand it there were witch burnings, and especially later during the Renaissance -- the 1450-1750 period you mention. But I have also read that some contemporary feminist studies indicate that the motivation for those atrocities was largely a matter of eliminating women from positions of power, not a matter of defending dogmas. Where the truth lies for that period I'm not sure.

My main point is that all of these historical events were just that -- part of a history which included not just the institution of the Church(es) but the social and political institutions as well. To lay the blame simply on misbegotten interpretations of the dogmas of the times seems to me to be a very gross over-simplification. Such over-simplification is analogous to saying that because the U.S. Constitution originally permitted slavery that the rest of the Constitution should also be abandoned.

History is never simple.

Ann O.

Ann O.,

The number is probably closer to 50,000 between 1450-1750. See http://www.gendercide.org/case_witchhunts.html for starters.

Fifty thousand completely innocent lives snuffed out in the name of Jesus.

Back to the OP, I'm really almost speechless at Mr. Stevens-Arroyo's pro-brothel position. Brothels were "licensed with church approval to contain extramarital needs". Well, I'm sure that was great for the legions of horny priests and married men who frequented them. Have you ever considered what it was like for the prostitutes?

Your apparent attitude that the modern church in Latin America is superior because it most closely follows this model truly disgusts me, and it confirms for me that religion most often impedes true morality. If you weren't so hung up with how closely your church models its ancient and corrupt predecessor, you'd see the obvious fact that the sex trade is a brutal business that almost always exploits desperate women for the benefit of men.

NORRIE tells us: I agree with Ba'al. The point is that burning people is a horror, though the Church thought it was fine.

Hi, Norrie,

If the medieval Church thought burning heretics at the stake was a fine thing to do, ISTM it would have done it more often. If I'm not mistaken, over the course of around 300 years only a dozen or so heretics were actually burned. That's a dozen too many, of course. There were burnings of witches for a variety of reasons and terrible crusades against the Cathars. But as to actual trials and burnings, there were relatively few, and those victims weren't ordinary people who disagreed with the Church teachings but were theologians who taught and preached. There were far fewer of them than people who were executed for stealing in England over the course of the years.

No, I have no ready references for all this, only my reading over the years. If anybody has more reliable figures, please let u s know about them.

Ann O.

While I respect Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo for his usual respectful treatment of others views, and his reconciliatory attitude, I simply must disagree with the assertion that the Catholic church looked favorably on marital sexual relations before say Vatican II.

Witness some choice quotations from:

James A. Brundage's "Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe:"

When intercourse was forbidden:

When one's wife is menstruating, pregnant, or nursing
During Lent, Advent, Whitsun Week, or Easter week
On feast days, fast days, Sunday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday
During daylight
If you are naked
If you are in church
Unless you are trying to produce a child

And be careful - no fondling, no lewd kisses, no oral sex, no strange positions, only once, try not to enjoy it, and wash afterwards (purify oneself from the pollution)

...

". . . marital sex must not be "unnatural" which Gratian apparently took to mean anal copulation and perhaps oral sex as well. Unnatural sex in marriage was worse than adultery or fornication, according to sources that Gratian cited. His objection was not primarily that anal and oral sex were contraceptive; rather he reprobated these types of intercourse because they were an inappropriate use of the sex organs, and that, he believed, ran counter to natural law. Intercourse in a "natural fashion but with contraceptive intent Gratian classed as a very slight sin, a moral blemish, much like such other minuta peccata as excessive talking, eating after one's hunger was sated, registering annoyance at an importunate beggar, or oversleeping, and as a result being later for divine services."

While I respect Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo for his usual respectful treatment of others views, and his reconciliatory attitude, I simply must disagree with the assertion that the Catholic church looked favorably on marital sexual relations before say Vatican II.

Witness some choice quotations from:

James A. Brundage's "Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe:"

When intercourse was forbidden:

When one's wife is menstruating, pregnant, or nursing
During Lent, Advent, Whitsun Week, or Easter week
On feast days, fast days, Sunday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday
During daylight
If you are naked
If you are in church
Unless you are trying to produce a child

And be careful - no fondling, no lewd kisses, no oral sex, no strange positions, only once, try not to enjoy it, and wash afterwards (purify oneself from the pollution)

...

". . . marital sex must not be "unnatural" which Gratian apparently took to mean anal copulation and perhaps oral sex as well. Unnatural sex in marriage was worse than adultery or fornication, according to sources that Gratian cited. His objection was not primarily that anal and oral sex were contraceptive; rather he reprobated these types of intercourse because they were an inappropriate use of the sex organs, and that, he believed, ran counter to natural law. Intercourse in a "natural fashion but with contraceptive intent Gratian classed as a very slight sin, a moral blemish, much like such other minuta peccata as excessive talking, eating after one's hunger was sated, registering annoyance at an importunate beggar, or oversleeping, and as a result being later for divine services."

Elohist,

On rereading everything, I see that I may not have made myself clear in my original post.

I was trying to point out the incongruity of the Church's excusing an act that affected real people (children born out of wedlock) and inflicting the terrible torture and death of burning at the stake on a person who had only had an unapproved or heretical thought.

I have no opinion on whether having children out of wedlock in the time periods involved was good, bad or indifferent.

I know that the Church's burning people was an eternal horror in all dimensions: physical, moral, and spiritual.

It's particularly shocking that Professor Stevens-Arroyo implies that burning at the stake was fine as punishment for having an unapproved thought.

Like commentators in previous threads, I have to ask, "How did he get to be a Professor?" It may even be shocking that these distinguished institutions have allowed him to be in contact with young people.

Fortunately, students are good at sloughing off their teachers' values.

Elohist,

Like Ba'al I can't figure out what you're saying. It's clear though that you completely misread me and what I wrote.

As I noted in another thread, when I was six years old, I told my Christian Sunday School teacher that what she was peddling was "a load of c--p. I haven't changed my mind.

And politically, I'm to the left of 'most everybody, and glad to have Bernie Sanders, yes, the "Socialist" as my Senator in Congress.

I agree with Ba'al. The point is that burning people is a horror, though the Church thought it was fine.

I also support gay marriage and am sorry that Vermont has only gone as far as Civil Unions.

Best wishes to you.

Elohist, I'm not quite sure I understood what you meant. What should have been the proper priority? Burning heretics or having babies out of wedlock? Or selling indulgences?

To Norrie:

I don't see the blog as praising children out of wedlock: just that getting hung up on sexual sin is not the Christian thing to do. Isn't that what Jesus said about the woman taken in adultery?

As long as the child is taken care of, it is logical and compassionate not to punish the child for the sins of the father and mother.

If you have a problem with that, you probably are in that far right fundamentalist fringe that makes sexual sin the worst thing ever. It's not.

By the way, there are a lot more children born out of wedlock than heretics who have been burnt at any stake. Get your priorities straight like the Roman church.

So it was fine for a Pope to father a child out of wedlock, but a person thinking the wrong theological thought was worthy of being burnt at the stake.

Another example of the Roman Church's logical thinking and Christian compassion.