Australian couple tells pope and cardinals how great sex life kept them together

[FollowChrist34]

But that said, the whole issue with having all these types of discussion seems to be making a mockery of the entire synod IMO.

Maybe it’s a good thing it’s not in Latin. I don’t see it as something they would want to preserve.

No, we’re definitely in Monty Python territory here, no doubt about it.

 

[ProVobis]

No, we’re definitely in Monty Python territory here, no doubt about it.

Speaking of which,

youtube.com/watch?v=IUQcCvX2MKk

I hope we’re not headed that way.

 

[anthony022071]

This is a couple in a sacramental marriage. How is it related to “the baser (bottom) side of the human condition without any enlightenment as to the holy aspects of sex as intended by God”?

Being married doesn’t make all sexual behavior between a husband and wife alright. Even married couples must abide by natural law and are called to chastity and purity of heart,and should avoid indulging in sex solely for the sake of pleasure and the use of contraception. The purpose of sexual relations is procreation,not pleasure.

 

[gracepoole]

Being married doesn’t make all sexual behavior between a husband and wife alright. Even married couples must abide by natural law and are called to chastity and purity of heart,and should avoid indulging in sex solely for the sake of pleasure and the use of contraception. The purpose of sexual relations is procreation,not pleasure.

And do you have any evidence at all that the couple at the heart of this thread are engaging in and/or promoting sexual behavior that is contrary to Church teaching?

 

[Tigg]

This is a couple in a sacramental marriage. How is it related to “the baser (bottom) side of the human condition without any enlightenment as to the holy aspects of sex as intended by God”?

The article says they were “lecturing” the bishops on the joys of sex when talking about what makes a marriage last. Sorry, but even in this day and age of sex-crazed mania, there are still conventional rules of modesty which are being violated here, and I for one, feel rather badly for those in the audience. I will admit the media, though, in typical fashion, always goes for the shock value.

 

[gracepoole]

The article says they were “lecturing” the bishops on the joys of sex when talking about what makes a marriage last. Sorry, but even in this day and age of sex-crazed mania, there are still conventional rules of modesty which are being violated here, and I for one, feel rather badly for those in the audience. I will admit the media, though, in typical fashion, always goes for the shock value.

From the article:

Ron and Mavis Pirola, from Sydney, told a Vatican gathering of some 200 prelates that sexual attraction brought them together 57 years ago and sex had helped keep them married for 55 years.

“The little things we did for each other, the telephone calls and love notes, the way we planned our day around each other and the things we shared were outward expressions of our longing to be intimate with each other,” the couple said in a joint statement to the closed meeting late on Monday.

“Gradually we came to see that the only feature that distinguishes our sacramental relationship from that of any other good Christ-centered relationship is sexual intimacy, and that marriage is a sexual sacrament with its fullest expression in sexual intercourse.”

The audience of celibate men was a bit taken aback.

“That’s not what we bishops talk about mostly, quite honestly,” a sheepish British cardinal, Vincent Nichols, told reporters on Tuesday. “But to hear that as the opening contribution did, I think, open an area … and it was a recognition that that is central to the well-being of marriage often.”

Sex is not normally discussed frankly in this sort of situation. But maybe it should be. Not sordid details – not references to anything filthy. The phrase “sexual intimacy” is as racy as this couple got. That isn’t being immodest unless we’re equating modesty with shame. No bishop should be opposed to hearing that phrase. They may not have sex and they may be men of God but they minister to many who use their sexuality in the way God intended. This couple is a wonderful example of what sex should be according to the Church and God.

 

[JimG]

Maybe I’m speaking out of turn here, since I didn’t hear this couple’s talk. But I do worry that if they put so much emphasis on sexual intimacy, are they leaving the impression that lack of sexual intimacy would be grounds for ending the marriage? What if one of them were to become incapable of marital relations? Does that mean the marriage is over?

 

[dans0622]

Maybe I’m speaking out of turn here, since I didn’t hear this couple’s talk. But I do worry that if they put so much emphasis on sexual intimacy, are they leaving the impression that lack of sexual intimacy would be grounds for ending the marriage? What if one of them were to become incapable of marital relations? Does that mean the marriage is over?

Hello,

Here is all they actually said on the topic:

That attraction that we first felt and the continued bonding force between us was basically sexual. The little things we did for each other, the telephone calls and love notes, the way we planned our day around each other and the things we shared were outward expressions of our longing to be intimate with each other.

and

Gradually we came to see that the only feature that distinguishes our sacramental relationship from that of any other good Christ-centred relationship is sexual intimacy and that marriage is a sexual sacrament with its fullest expression in sexual intercourse. We believe that until married couples come to reverence sexual union as an essential part of their spirituality it is extremely hard to appreciate the beauty of teachings such as those of Humanae Vitae. We need new ways and relatable language to touch peoples’ hearts.

press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2014/10/06/0716/03007.html#Introduzione del Presidente delegato, Card. André Vingt-Trois

If I was talking to the Synod, would I have said this? Probably not. But, I can’t disagree with any of it and it is worthy of consideration if we are trying to explore the topic of the family and how to make secular culture appreciate the doctrine of the Church (cf. Humanae vitae).

Dan

 

[JimG]

“Gradually we came to see that the only feature that distinguishes our sacramental relationship from that of any other good Christ-centred relationship is sexual intimacy and that marriage is a sexual sacrament with its fullest expression in sexual intercourse.”

The ONLY feature that distinguishes marriage? I think perhaps couples with large families might find that children distinguish their relationship from other relationships as well. They seem to be saying that the unitive aspect of sex distinguishes their relationship but not the procreative aspect. That seems a little off kilter.

 

[Lormar]

When I was growing up, adults didn’t commonly talk about sex with their neighbors, friends, kids, or anyone else. It was considered a private matter. That did not keep the Church from having a detailed moral theology of sex. It just didn’t need to be a topic of casual conversation. Now, sex talk is all over TV, the internet, everywhere. I’m amazed at the amount of sex talk even on CAF. It seems that reticence is a vice, modesty is suspect, and excessive talk will solve everything. And yet, with all the sex talk, our sexual mores have not improved, but worsened.

 

[dans0622]

“Gradually we came to see that the only feature that distinguishes our sacramental relationship from that of any other good Christ-centred relationship is sexual intimacy and that marriage is a sexual sacrament with its fullest expression in sexual intercourse.”

The ONLY feature that distinguishes marriage? I think perhaps couples with large families might find that children distinguish their relationship from other relationships as well. They seem to be saying that the unitive aspect of sex distinguishes their relationship but not the procreative aspect. That seems a little off kilter.

I didn’t conclude that they “seem to be saying” that. But, I did cut a passage which referred to their children so you don’t have that context.

If it was me, I suppose I may not have said “only” or, if I did, would have replaced “sexual intimacy” with “conjugality” or some such academic circumlocution… But, they aren’t canon lawyers so they said it the way they said it. Beyond this, I don’t think I will bother to defend/interpret the remark.

Dan

 

[anthony022071]

And do you have any evidence at all that the couple at the heart of this thread are engaging in and/or promoting sexual behavior that is contrary to Church teaching?

No,I was responding to what you said,which seemed to imply that sexual behavior in a sacramental marriage could never be wrong. The couple said that the only thing that distinguishes their marriage from any other good Christian relationship was their sexual intimacy. That is a wrong attitude to have. They did not mention using contraception,but their focus on sexual intimacy without mention of having children suggests contraception. It is odd that they expressed admiration for Humanae Vitae,which rejects contraception,while exalting about sexual intercourse apart from procreation. And it is silly for them to say that married couples should reverence sexual union as an essential part of their spirituality. Spirituality is not carnal,and people don’t need to reverence sex,as if it was an object of veneration.

 

[oneofmany]

It’s nice that couple has a great sex life but are they saying of one of them loses the ability to have sex that their marriage would be over for them? I sure hope not.