The Catholic Culture Podcast

Thomas Mirus explores Catholic arts & culture with a variety of notable guests. A production of CatholicCulture.org.

R.I.P. Jane Greer (1953-2025) 07/29/2025

200 - Moral Questions about NFP w/ Eamonn Clark 07/21/2025

200 - Moral Questions about NFP w/ Eamonn Clark Get free PDF of New Questions, Old Answers: Catholic Morals and Natural Family Planning Article on the marital debt The way Natural Family Planning is commonly taught does not adequately reflect the Church’s perennial teachings on the purpose of marital relations, on sexual asceticism, and the good of continence. To be sure, critics of NFP are wrong when they say it is the same as contraception. The Church has deemed it legitimate to use under certain circumstances. Yet its typical presentation in marriage prep programs and by popular Catholic speakers has ended up, in practice, encouraging couples toward habitual venial sin. Discussions of NFP often end up in confusion because they fail to distinguish two separate moral issues: that of avoiding marital relations during fertile periods, and that of engaging in them specifically during infertile periods. As to the first issue, the Church has said we need sufficient reason to deliberately avoid procreating for a long period of time. But the second issue involves a moral doctrine that is virtually never heard of today: that there are particular ends which must be intended in any act of marital relations, and in particular, that it is a venial sin for married couples to have relations purely for pleasure (solam voluptatem, in Pope Innocent XI’s phrase). The latter is the teaching of all Fathers and Doctors of the Church without exception. Given this moral doctrine, and given the Church’s (and St. Paul’s) traditional encouragement of asceticism within marriage, the question arises: may married couples engage in recreational relations specifically while trying to avoid conception? Answering this question involves questions about the intrinsic ends of sexual intercourse, questions about what “purely for pleasure” even means, etc. The stakes of the question are low in the sense that this would generally be a matter of venial sin, but high in the sense that it bears on our understanding of the very purpose of marriage and sex, and because habitual, deliberate venial sin is incompatible with a marriage’s growth in holiness. Moral theologian Eamonn Clark joins the podcast to discuss his groundbreaking book (the first on this topic since the 1940s), New Questions, Old Answers: Catholic Morals and Natural Family Planning. His conclusions occupy a middle ground between the extremely strict position of some great Catholic authorities of the past, and the laxity and sensualism presented by some well-regarded and well-meaning popular speakers today. This discussion will be spiritually and perhaps emotionally challenging to many listeners, but I urge you to listen with an open heart, because even if you end up disagreeing with some of the specific conclusions, you will come away better informed about Church teaching, and equipped to consider for yourself how you can seek greater holiness in marriage. In particular, I highly recommend Eamonn’s book to anyone who is involved in running marriage preparation programs. Eamonn Clark is a licensed moral theologian of the Catholic Church – he has an STB and STL from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome, where he is currently a lay doctoral student researching the social teaching of Pope Pius XI. DONATE to make this show possible! SIGN UP for Catholic Culture's newsletter: /episode/index/show/catholicculturepodcast/id/37473560

Pope Leo XIII on the restoration of Christian philosophy 07/08/2025

198 - The Music of St. Hildegard of Bingen - Margot Fassler 06/30/2025

197 - Same-Sex Attraction and Conversion w/ Andrew Comiskey & Marco Casanova 06/10/2025

197 - Same-Sex Attraction and Conversion w/ Andrew Comiskey & Marco Casanova We all know the secular world opposes the very idea of a person with same-sex attraction seeking any kind of therapy or spiritual counsel that might enable them to reach a state of healthy relations with the opposite sex. But what’s odd is that many Catholics seem to have bought into this. Many assume that if someone is not currently attracted to the opposite sex, this is a static, lifelong condition and therefore they must be called to celibacy. But this view involves multiple misunderstandings – of the SSA experience, of anthropology, of the power of God’s grace, and of the good of celibacy itself. Today’s guests know otherwise because they both have a background with same-sex attraction, and yet are each now married with children. Andrew Comiskey and Marco Casanova run Desert Stream and Living Waters Ministries, which for decades have offered help to Christians seeking healing from sexual disorders (including but not limited to SSA). This conversation offers solid, spiritually and psychologically sound, experience-based answers to some disputed questions about how the Church should be pastoring those with same-sex attraction. It's not about “conversion therapy”. It’s about conversion in the Catholic sense – one day at a time. --Can we really put a ceiling on God’s ability to heal us psychologically? --Does any attempt at such healing amount to the secular bugbear of “conversion therapy”? --What does life look like for a person with a “gay” past who is now married to the opposite sex? --Is it legitimate for Christians to embrace a gay identity as long as they don’t act out sexually? --Is there such a thing as a chaste same-sex romantic relationship? Links Thomas Mirus, “Your sexual pathology doesn’t make you special” Andrew Comiskey, Rediscovering Our Lost Fullness: A Guide to Sexual Integration Desert Stream Ministries Desert Stream on YouTube DONATE to make this show possible! SIGN UP for Catholic Culture's newsletter: /episode/index/show/catholicculturepodcast/id/36941830