Am I a prude?

[AlegreFe]

Sex within a loving marriage is a blessing from God and brings two people closer, even if procreation does not occur.

I don’t disagree with you about this.

I hate to think you are missing out on one of the God-given joys of Christian marriage, knowing that your spouse wants you and needs you–just you.

We are talking general. Let’s not bring our own lives into this. No one is missing out on anything that God does not want us to miss.

If a baby comes from that loving union - great, but if it doesn’t or is trying to be avoided for a Catholic couple using NFP, the physical and emotional bond between a husband and wife will still be strengthened.

This is backwards thinking. You seem to think pleasure first and if a baby comes then fine. That is not what the bible says.

God Bless and Get Some!

This is part of the problem. Get some?? I don’t “get some,” ever.

Also, a strong, healthy sex-life within a marriage will help prevent the illicit lustful thoughts you fear.

Who says I fear anything?
Do you realize that a man and/or woman can have lustful thoughts even within the marriage? Have you ever heard of living a chaste life even within marriage? We are all called to live a chaste life whether married or single. There’s a difference between being chaste and being celibate.

If a couple is committed to honoring and pleasuring each other, within the bounds of their marriage, there is no room for thoughts about others.

It is obvious you did not read my post. And if you did, you clearly do not understand what I’m trying to say. You seem to take “pleasuring each other” in the wrong way. We need to come together as one for the Glory of God, not merely for “pleasuring each other.” In the bible it says “the two become one.” What do you think the “one” means?

 

[CuriousInIL]

In my view, “Christian sex toys” to us are quite like a “kosher ham” to a Jew… a contradiction and nonsense!

I just don’t understand at all why this is viewed as such a contradiction or nonsense.

As I did try to say before, I don’t think it is so much “Christian sex toys” as it it stores or websites run by and for Christians that sell sex toys to married couples.

 

[emeraldcoast]

I don’t disagree with you about this.

We are talking general. Let’s not bring our own lives into this. No one is missing out on anything that God does not want us to miss.

This is backwards thinking. You seem to think pleasure first and if a baby comes then fine. That is not what the bible says.

This is part of the problem. Get some?? I don’t “get some,” ever.

Who says I fear anything?
Do you realize that a man and/or woman can have lustful thoughts even within the marriage? Have you ever heard of living a chaste life even within marriage? We are all called to live a chaste life whether married or single. There’s a difference between being chaste and being celibate.

It is obvious you did not read my post. And if you did, you clearly do not understand what I’m trying to say. You seem to take “pleasuring each other” in the wrong way. We need to come together as one for the Glory of God, not merely for “pleasuring each other.” In the bible it says “the two become one.” What do you think the “one” means?

Websters defines chaste as “innocent of unlawful sexual intercourse.” If you are exclusively having sex with your lawfully married partner, and not thinking about someone else while you are doing so, you are being chaste. You are chaste irrespective of whether your union produces a baby or not. There are many biblical verses (Proverbs 5:18-19; Song of Songs; 1 Corinthians 7:3-5,33-34) that speak about the place and importance of sex in a marriage, even if procreation is not a factor. Based on these Scripture teachings, how are having natural feelings of desire for you lawful partner not chaste?

Humans are about the only species (except maybe dolphins that I am aware of) that have sex at any time for pleasure, irrespective of the ability to procreate. This exceptional ability is so unique that is must be a gift from God. Coming together as one, in order to enjoy God’s blessing and to strengthen and enrich the holy sacrament of marriage, is furthering the Glory of God Why should we not “Get Some!” with our lawful husbands and wives?

Peace!

 

[AlegreFe]

Websters defines chaste as “innocent of unlawful sexual intercourse.” If you are exclusively having sex with your lawfully married partner, and not thinking about someone else while you are doing so, you are being chaste.

I don’t go to Webster for my definition of chaste. I go to the Church. “Lawfully” does not necessarily mean in the eyes of God. A secular dictionary is not going to make sure that “lawful” means in the eyes of God. Someone can be “lawfully” married by the Justice of the peace but that does not mean lawful in the eyes of God. So those two that are “lawfully” married by the justice of the peace are not committing adultery in the eyes of the law but that’s not so in the eyes of God.

Being chaste does not only mean not committing adultery in the physical sense with another person.

You are chaste irrespective of whether your union produces a baby or not.

This is true, I agree, but it’s not that cut-n-dry.

There are many biblical verses (Proverbs 5:18-19; Song of Songs; 1 Corinthians 7:3-5,33-34) that speak about the place and importance of sex in a marriage, even if procreation is not a factor. Based on these Scripture teachings, how are having natural feelings of desire for you lawful partner not chaste?

I did not say that having feelings for your partner is not chaste. But if you want to place physical feelings ahead of the glory of God then you could possibly run a danger of having lust come into the picture. That’s all I’m saying. It is clear that you did not read my first post before this conversation commenced.

Humans are about the only species (except maybe dolphins that I am aware of) that have sex at any time for pleasure, irrespective of the ability to procreate.

“Any time for pleasure??” Couples who are chaste and want to put off having children for good and sound reasons do not have “any time pleasure” as they need to use NFP. Just using NFP brings the couple closer as they need to communicate. And yes when the couple do come together for the glory of God it does bring them closer. Hormones are realeased that actually bond the couple closer to one another.

This exceptional ability is so unique that is must be a gift from God. Coming together as one, in order to enjoy God’s blessing and to strengthen and enrich the holy sacrament of marriage, is furthering the Glory of God Why should we not “Get Some!” with our lawful husbands and wives?

I don’t like that “get some” comment. There is nothing holy about it. It sounds like you want to “get some” piece of meat or something. That is not very respectful to the spouse. Also, one’s definition of “lawful” could be someone else’s definition of “unlawful.” There’s God’s law and there’s the law of the land.

 

[strngrnrth]

And what’s wrong with being a prude? I’m probably one. It’s not wrong, is it?
I have seen plenty of “toys”, and they aren’t exciting or daring or funny, just ugly and dull. I find it a little bit of a downer when I’m trying to celebrate a special occasion with friends and someone monopolizes the event with a display of ugliness.

 

[ALLGIRLS]

I had a feeling this was going to happen. I was going to make a longer post explaining why I feel this way but didn’t want to bother. I figure this is how I feel and why bother explaining myself.

I don’t completely feel that there should be absolutely no pleasure at all in the holy marital act. **The first and most important reason two people should come together is for procreation, to be open to life. Pleasure will come to many as a result, nothing wrong with that at all as long as life is the first priority. Now if a couple think “pleasure” first who knows what else could be going through their minds. It is very easy for lust to come into play when it **comes to the marital act. So I say don’t even bother thinking pleasure when you come together with your spouse. God will provide for those who seek the Kingdom first. God made our bodies a certain way. When two people come together, for most, it is a pleasurable feeling. So it’s obvious (not for all) that if you come together for life, there will be pleasure as a result. I hope you understand now how I feel.

Hi AlegreFe, sorry to hijack, but your post caught my eye, specifically the part I bolded. So, do you believe that couples where the wife is pregnant or past menopause shouldn’t be having relations? I’m currently pregnant, so when my husband and I come together, it is strictly for the unitive aspect, of which the pleasure is foremost (if we didn’t think it was going to be pleasurable, we’d just snuggle and go to sleep). Just curious, as this sounds like St. Augustine’s view of sex (which I believe was probably an overreaction to his very unchaste life prior to his conversion, but that’s just my opinion), which was never official Church teaching or doctrine.

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[ThuribleGuy45]

Great post, Cat! ITA! This may shock some here but God really wants you to have great sex with your spouse, it is part of His design–ENJOY!
“the marriage bed is undefiled”

God Bless!

Do you have a source for this remarkable statement? I was taught that carnal pleasure was not part of God’s original design, but came out of the Fall - that a kind of “rational reproduction” was God’s original design, certainly not the erotic encounter that even Catholic marriages and, amazingly, two popes, have come to regard as licit.

 

[hasikelee]

Do you have a source for this remarkable statement? I was taught that carnal pleasure was not part of God’s original design, but came out of the Fall - that a kind of “rational reproduction” was God’s original design, certainly not the erotic encounter that even Catholic marriages and, amazingly, two popes, have come to regard as licit.

You need to hear the Good News about sex and marriage!

www.christopherwest.com.

 

[turtle18]

You’ll have to forgive my stupidity, but I don’t know anything about “sex toys”. Are you talking about vibrators? I don’t see how these could be used, even in “unitive” foreplay. How can you use an artificial sex toy to give a female an orgasm when you can’t use artificial birth control? Does the fact that the husband hits the start button on it make it acceptable, whereas if the wife had hit the start button on it and used it herself, makes it a mortal sin? One of the God given beauties of lovemaking is that in its proper state, it is beautiful and natural. Using sex toys seems unnatural. Where do you draw the line with them?

I don’t think you are a prude. A prude in my mind, is someone who doesn’t enjoy sex because they view natural sexual intercourse as inherently evil.

 

[fbl9]

Hi AlegreFe, sorry to hijack, but your post caught my eye, specifically the part I bolded. So, do you believe that couples where the wife is pregnant or past menopause shouldn’t be having relations? I’m currently pregnant, so when my husband and I come together, it is strictly for the unitive aspect, of which the pleasure is foremost (if we didn’t think it was going to be pleasurable, we’d just snuggle and go to sleep). Just curious, as this sounds like St. Augustine’s view of sex (which I believe was probably an overreaction to his very unchaste life prior to his conversion, but that’s just my opinion), which was never official Church teaching or doctrine.

In Christ,

Ellen

your post too caught my eye in what you said about St. Augustine in his reaction to sex was due to his not so grand past.i don’t know if he was married. if he was his wife may have been a bit grumpy at times. eh?given his negative attitude.when i first came back to the fullness of truth i had St. Augustine’s view towards sex.no chance of baby no sex. my view has changed but one does have to be careful in this matter as it can be very easy to become too liberal in these matters.

 

[Catholic90]

The first and most important reason two people should come together is for procreation, to be open to life.

To be open to life may NOT always be the first reason 2 people (even good practicing faithful Catholics) come together…

As someone else has already pointed out…an already pregnant woman, a woman in her infertile time as determined via NFP, a post-menopausal woman…obviously none of them are coming together with the creation of a baby forefront in their minds…

None of them are wrong either!

 

[turtle18]

There is no question God designed sex to be more enjoyable and pleasing for a woman when she is ovulating. The biology behind this seems to back up procreation first.
True, a women is capable of having sex at any given point in her life, after menopause, while pregnant, while not ovulating and even before puberty! But honestly, is it as “unitive/pleasurable” for these women during these periods as it when she is ovulating?
We do see examples in the Bible of women being pregnant after going through menopause. Even in “non-fertile” times you are still being open to life as you are not taking any deliberate measures to block conception if it happens.

 

[JudieK]

Great post, Cat! ITA! This may shock some here but God really wants you to have great sex with your spouse, it is part of His design–ENJOY!
“the marriage bed is undefiled”

God Bless!

I know I should just stay well away from this discussion… It seems to be getting heated! I jumped in early on and was reluctant to jump in again… however… this verse always gets me.
It is Hebrews 13:4

“Let marriage be honored among all, and the marriage bed be kept undefiled, for God will judge the adulterers and the immoral.”
(my emphasis)

This isn’t to comment on whether sex for pleasure is good/bad etc. I think sex is good and wonderful with my husband, and I believe God smiles at our joy in that regard. But this verse… so many Protestant friends I know believe this verse means that ANYTHING GOES in the marriage bed, because the Bible says it is “undefiled.” So any unnatural, kinky, weird, whatever thing a married couple does is A-OK, because they are married. I have heard them say that their pastors have spent their whole sermons giving that same message.

Now my way of reading it is more of an exhortation and a warning: “Keep the marriage bed undefiled, for God will judge the immoral!” To me, it is saying that because marriage is holy and honorable, reflective of God’s love, we must keep the marriage bed holy and honorable, too. Keep immorality out. Now how you define immorality is not my concern… I would say erotica, fantasies, pornagraphy, etc., but that’s me.

Sorry for the interuption… carry on, all!

 

[AlegreFe]

Hi AlegreFe, sorry to hijack, but your post caught my eye, specifically the part I bolded. So, do you believe that couples where the wife is pregnant or past menopause shouldn’t be having relations? I’m currently pregnant, so when my husband and I come together, it is strictly for the unitive aspect, of which the pleasure is foremost (if we didn’t think it was going to be pleasurable, we’d just snuggle and go to sleep). Just curious, as this sounds like St. Augustine’s view of sex (which I believe was probably an overreaction to his very unchaste life prior to his conversion, but that’s just my opinion), which was never official Church teaching or doctrine.

But you see, life is already there if you’re pregnant. Even so, thinking ‘lust’ is not right. Thinking love is best. As I said in a previous post, when two people come together in the holy marital act it brings them closer together. But I also feel if one or both think lust (whether coming together for life or not) there could be a danger in that. When someone thinks ‘lust’ they are not thinking “glory of God.” That is our concupiscence as a result of the fall of Adam & Eve.

As far as ‘past menopause’ goes, the same thing as I said about the a bond forming when the couple come together. God gave us the gift of coming together as a “renewing of vows” also, not just for pleasure. Marriage is a Sacrament and every time a couple come together the vows are renewed and the bond is strengthened. But again, ‘lust’ can be dangerous here too. Think ‘love’ not ‘lust’ and you’ll be fine.

Oh, and you can call me Sandy.

 

[AlegreFe]

your post too caught my eye in what you said about St. Augustine in his reaction to sex was due to his not so grand past.i don’t know if he was married. if he was his wife may have been a bit grumpy at times. eh?

No he was not married. He lived with his ‘lust’ partner. I said that as opposed to saying “he lived with his ‘lover’.”

given his negative attitude.when i first came back to the fullness of truth i had St. Augustine’s view towards sex.no chance of baby no sex. my view has changed but one does have to be careful in this matter as it can be very easy to become too liberal in these matters.

I agree. We have to be careful, that’s all I’ve been saying.

 

[VociMike]

Just a couple of comments-

First, if I had to bet whether “Christian Sex Toys” was a joke, I would have bet YES (and lost some money!). I just never imagined…

Second, just for fun I googled “Christian Gun Shop” and sure enough… (no, I’m not equating guns with sex toys, but you get the idea)

Third, I didn’t turn up any “Catholic Sex Toys” or “Catholic Gun Shops”. Wonder what I should infer from that.

 

[AlegreFe]

To be open to life may NOT always be the first reason 2 people (even good practicing faithful Catholics) come together…

As someone else has already pointed out…an already pregnant woman, a woman in her infertile time as determined via NFP, a post-menopausal woman…obviously none of them are coming together with the creation of a baby forefront in their minds…

None of them are wrong either!

That is not up to us though. We do not know what God has planned for us. What’s to say that if I come together in a marital union during what I think is not a time of ovulation, that I not get pregnant. I think that is part of the point of not using any artificial contraception; we leave it up to God. When two people use NFP and they do not want to conceive, at least they are not using AC or ABC. That could still be considered “being open to life” because nothing is being blocked and God could step in at any time to create a life. NFP is 99% accurate but that 1% is still there and God can do anything with the littlest possible opening.

 

[AlegreFe]

There is no question God designed sex to be more enjoyable and pleasing for a woman when she is ovulating. The biology behind this seems to back up procreation first.
True, a women is capable of having sex at any given point in her life, after menopause, while pregnant, while not ovulating and even before puberty! But honestly, is it as “unitive/pleasurable” for these women during these periods as it when she is ovulating?
We do see examples in the Bible of women being pregnant after going through menopause. Even in “non-fertile” times you are still being open to life as you are not taking any deliberate measures to block conception if it happens.

You make a lot of sense and I agree. We seem to be on the same page with my previous post.

 

[AlegreFe]

emeraldcoast:

Great post, Cat! ITA! This may shock some here but God really wants you to have great sex with your spouse, it is part of His design–ENJOY!
“the marriage bed is undefiled”

Hebrews 13:4
“Let marriage be honored among all, and the marriage bed be kept undefiled, for God will judge the adulterers and the immoral.”
. . . . .
Now my way of reading it is more of an exhortation and a warning: “Keep the marriage bed undefiled, for God will judge the immoral!” To me, it is saying that because marriage is holy and honorable, reflective of God’s love, we must keep the marriage bed holy and honorable, too. Keep immorality out.

This is exactly the way that I see it. This is what I’ve been trying to say. If only I remembered this passage when trying to give you my point.

 

[AlegreFe]

In my view, “Christian sex toys” to us are quite like a “kosher ham” to a Jew… a contradiction and nonsense! Must have come from a denomination quite lax in matters of morals… Their teachings on the Gospel must be quite watered down, alas!

I didn’t spot this post at first because this was within the other post. So I’m just now replying to this. I completely agree with you. As far as the “denomination quite lax in matters of morals” I agree. I have heard that some “christian denominations” say that it’s okay to do whatever when it comes to married couples. I disagree as I think this is immoral.

After all, I’m not the one who said it. Jesus was the one that said, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart…” This is very clear to me. As I repeatedly said, do not think ‘lust,’ rather think ‘love.’ I do believe it is possible for a man to look at his wife with lust and vice versa.

I know some of you especially emeraldcoast, will think that there can exist no lust within a marriage. But that would be false. Read Hebrews again and you’ll see what I mean.

Hebrews 13:4
Let marriage be honored among all and the
marriage bed be kept undefiled, for God will
judge the immoral and adulterers.
NAB

Let marriage be held in honor among all, and
let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will
judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.
ESV

Marriage is to be held in honor among all,
and the marriage bed is to be undefiled;
for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
NASB

Marriage should be honored by all, and the
marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge
the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.
NIV

Honroso sea en todos el matrimonio, y el
lecho sin mancilla; pero a los fornicarios y
a los adúlteros los juzgará Dios.
RVR1960

Let marriage be held in honor among all,
and let the marriage bed be undefiled; for
God will judge the immoral and adulterous.
RSV

Marriage honourable in all, and the bed
undefiled. For fornicators and adulterers
God will judge.
DR-V: commentary;
“Marriage honourable in all”… Let marriage
be honourable in all-- That is, in all things
belonging to the marriage state. This is a
warning to married people, not to abuse the
sanctity of their state, by any liberties or
irregularities contrary thereunto.

The Douay-Rheims version is not as clear as all the others but it’s there and I guess that is why that commentary was put there; so that people would not be confused as to what that verse means. I know the KJV and a few others, not most, can easily be misinterpreted because of how it is translated. I believe this is the reason why some protestant denominations teach that ‘anything goes’ within marriage. They use and abuse that verse with faulty interpretations of the verse without any commentary to explain the real meaning.