Bodily pleasure and true spirituality

  • Thread starter Thread starter thinkandmull
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thinkandmull

Guest
**I was just reading the encyclical of Pius XII on virginity and am a little confused. St. Augustine said that perfect abstinence was easier than moderate sexual activity in marriage. You married folk out there: do you think he is right? St. Jerome said that it is pretty much inevitable that a venial sin will be committed in the marital act, and the encyclical says “As the Angelic Doctor has it, the use of marriage ‘keeps the soul from full abandon to the service of God.’” Summa Th., II-II, q. 186, a. 4. However, suppose a man loves his wife in a godly way, and uses sex in a noble manner, are his sacrifices not equal to that of a celibate, or perhaps more, if it is harder for him to be moderate that it is for a priest to be celibate? Is sexual abandon in marriage not psychologically healthy?? Were these celibates being to hard on married people?

Finally, why is it less likely that you will have a profound spiritual experience of God after you had a chaste orgasm then when you haven’t had one for a long time?

I hope we all can figure these questions out together…**
 
A family member of mine is getting married soon and I was wondering if it was appropriate to be happy about it, considering what the Council of Trent says: **As it is the duty of the pastor to seek the holiness and perfection of the faithful, his earnest desires must be in *full *accordance with those expressed by the Apostle when writing to the Corinthians: I would that all men were even as myself, that is, that all should embrace the virtue of continence. No greater happiness can befall the faithful in this life than to have their souls distracted by no worldly cares, the unruly desires of the flesh tranquillized and restrained, and the mind fixed on the practice of piety and the contemplation of heavenly things.

Someone on CAF said that you should be happy to win the lottery for ten thousand dollars even though it could have been a million. But there is no option of not winning anything in the announcement of a wedding. They are announcing that they are not called to be led to deeper spirituality until one of them is died. Am I being scrupulous? 🤷
 
thinkandmull said:
A family member of mine is getting married soon and I was wondering if it was appropriate to be happy about it, considering what the Council of Trent says: **As it is the duty of the pastor to seek the holiness and perfection of the faithful, his earnest **desires must be in *full *accordance with those expressed by the Apostle when writing to the Corinthians: I would that all men were even as myself, that is, that all should embrace the virtue of continence. No greater happiness can befall the faithful in this life than to have their souls distracted by no worldly cares, the unruly desires of the flesh *tranquillized *and restrained, and the mind fixed on the practice of piety and the contemplation of heavenly things.

Someone on CAF said that you should be happy to win the lottery for ten thousand dollars even though it could have been a million. But there is no option of not winning anything in the announcement of a wedding. They are announcing that they are not called to be led to deeper spirituality until one of them is died. Am I being scrupulous? 🤷
Click to expand...
Paul also says that if one cannot embrace the celibate life, he (or she) should have a spouse so as not to fall into sin.

So I think I must say that I do not agree with the idea that, “it is pretty much inevitable that a venial sin will be committed in the marital act”.

Peace
James
 
Paul was speaking of mortal sin I think

Maybe God dwells more readily in those who don’t enjoy sexual pleasure for a reason we cannot know of until we get to heaven 🤷
 
Its a weird thought to think that a certain sin is inevitable, but then again, isn’t sin inevitable in this world, despite the fact that it is done by free will? I don’t think we can reconcile that paradox either
 
thinkandmull said:
Paul was speaking of mortal sin I think
Click to expand...
Perhaps…
But Paul also is “wishing” that all could be like him.
Maybe God dwells more readily in those who don’t enjoy sexual pleasure for a reason we cannot know of until we get to heaven 🤷
Click to expand...
I doubt this very much.
Marriage is a sacramental call. It is a vocation.
The call to one vocation is just as valid and loving as a call to any other vocation.
There is no inequality there - no reason for God to “dwell more readily” in one vs the other.

Remember that the root of all things spiritual - and pleasing to God - is Agape. God dwells most readily one who embraces, nurtures and (to the best of their ability) fulfills Agape. This is equally true for the married as well as the unmarried.
thinkandmull said:
Its a weird thought to think that a certain sin is inevitable, but then again, isn’t sin inevitable in this world, despite the fact that it is done by free will? I don’t think we can reconcile that paradox either
Click to expand...
There really isn’t a paradox here. Yes sin is inevitable and yes it is done with free will. This is reconciled by the fact that we are (as yet) imperfect. We commit sin when we fail live up to our call to Agape.

Be happy for the one being married before God. They are embarking on a beautiful vocation and journey with Christ.

Peace
James
 
thinkandmull said:
**I was just reading the encyclical of Pius XII on virginity and am a little confused. St. Augustine said that perfect abstinence was easier than moderate sexual activity in marriage. You married folk out there: do you think he is right? St. Jerome said that it is pretty much inevitable that a venial sin will be committed in the marital act, and the encyclical says “As the Angelic Doctor has it, the use of marriage ‘keeps the soul from full abandon to the service of God.’” Summa Th., II-II, q. 186, a. 4. However, suppose a man loves his wife in a godly way, and uses sex in a noble manner, are his sacrifices not equal to that of a celibate, or perhaps more, if it is harder for him to be moderate that it is for a priest to be celibate? Is sexual abandon in marriage not psychologically healthy?? Were these celibates being to hard on married people?

Finally, why is it less likely that you will have a profound spiritual experience of God after you had a chaste orgasm then when you haven’t had one for a long time?

I hope we all can figure these questions out together…**
Click to expand...
Were called to continence-self-mastery of passions or appetites-inside or outside of marriage. The Church recognizes marriage as a critical, sacramental, vocation-and one that most are called to. Others may be called to a marriage to the Lord, giving up human marriage for the sake of the Kingdom.This is another vocation, and as such it’s a blessing to us all. Either vocation can be lived out more or less faithfully, more or less in alignment with Gods will. Either way we all must struggle to be holier-truer to self and God-within the context of the particular course we’ve set ourselves upon.
 
fhansen said:
Were called to continence-self-mastery of passions or appetites-inside or outside of marriage. The Church recognizes marriage as a critical, sacramental, vocation-and one that most are called to. Others may be called to a marriage to the Lord, giving up human marriage for the sake of the Kingdom.This is another vocation, and as such it’s a blessing to us all. Either vocation can be lived out more or less faithfully, more or less in alignment with Gods will. Either way we all must struggle to be holier-truer to self and God-within the context of the particular course we’ve set ourselves upon.
Click to expand...
Beautifully Said. 👍
 
Why would St. Paul say in the word of God that he wishes all to be like him if one can find the same spirituality in marriage?

And if sin is done with free will, then it is hypothetically possible that people from now on will never sin right? Well, no, paradox…
 
thinkandmull said:
Why would St. Paul say in the word of God that he wishes all to be like him if one can find the same spirituality in marriage?
Click to expand...
Why would God institute and sanctify marriage as a sacramental vocation if you cannot find the same spirituality in marriage?

Or

Perhaps there are different spiritualities - each suited to the vocation to which one is called - and each equal in quality before God.

Paul wrote his opinion on these matters. He even says in 1 Corinthians 7 that he has no word from the Lord on this. So there is no reason to assume that marriage is somehow a lesser vocation than others.
And if sin is done with free will, then it is hypothetically possible that people from now on will never sin right? Well, no, paradox…
Click to expand...
Yes it is hypothetically possible.

Peace
James
 
Maybe its a mystery why God instituted marriage as a sacrament. Did not the Council of Trent say that celibacy is a higher vocation than marriage, confirmed by it’s catechism and Pius XII? St Paul merely said that with regard to virgins he had no advice from the Lord because he couldn’t make a general rule either to marry or don’t. His statement that he wished all be to celibate is still in the word of God, and God allowed that, and it is a scriptural statement of fact when he says an unmarried man will do better than a married man. You might as well ask why didn’t God immaculately conceive everyone! Each is called to be a different flower in the garden of Christ. The CCC quotes Pius XII on the point that sex can be spiritual in marriage, but its a natural spirituality, the kind (wrongfully) found in drugs sometimes, pure in marriage. But as far as I can tell from spiritual writings, orgasms are antithetical to direct spiritual encounters with God. You must be free from them to have a spiritual moment of ecstasy.
 
Pius XII: “As the Angelic Doctor has it, the use of marriage ‘keeps the soul from full abandon to the service of God.’” Summa Th., II-II, q. 186, a. 4. The same applies to romantic feelings, which is why Pius XII mentions “marriage”, not just sexual pleasure, as an obstacle in find spiritual depth. It’s impossible to completely separate feelings of romance and sex from selfishness, the carnal. That’s what a priest told me
 
Pope John Paul II , Vita Consecrata, no. 32: “As a way of showing forth the Church’s holiness, it is to be recognized that the consecrated life, which mirrors Christ’s own way of life, has an objective superiority. Precisely for this reason, it is an especially rich manifestation of Gospel values and a more complete expression of the Church’s purpose, which is the sanctification of humanity. The consecrated life proclaims and in a certain way anticipates the future age, when the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven, already present in its first fruits and in mystery,[62] will be achieved and when the children of the resurrection will take neither wife nor husband, but will be like the angels of God (cf. Mt. 22:30)”

Pope Pius XII, Sacra Virginitas, no. 32: “This doctrine of the excellence of virginity and of celibacy and of their **superiority **over the married state was, as we have already said, revealed by our Divine Redeemer and by the Apostle of the Gentiles; so too, it was solemnly defined as a dogma of divine faith by the holy council of Trent, and explained in the same way by all the holy Fathers and Doctors of the Church."

Council of Trent “If anyone saith that the marriage state is to be preferred before the state of virginity, let him be anathema.” "writing to the Corinthians, [Paul] says: I would that all men were even as myself; that is, that all embrace the virtue of continence…A life of continence is to be desired by all.”

Saint Thomas Aquinas, ST II-II.152.4: “Virginity is more excellent than marriage, which can be seen by both faith and reason. Faith sees virginity as imitating the example of Christ and the counsel of St. Paul. Reason sees virginity as rightly ordering goods, preferring a Divine good to human goods, the good of the soul to the good of the body, and the good of the contemaplative life to that of the active life.”

Paul “It is a good thing for a man not to touch a woman”

religious-vocation.com/
 
The purpose of this thread was whether it is harder to be celibate or to be chaste in marriage. Which has the greater sacrifice. That is crucial to this issue
 
Well - you seem to be very well read on the subject…Or at least on one side of it…

Much better read than I am I’m afraid. So perhaps I am not the one to answer these questions for you.

I would make one suggestion though…
Now that you have studied this (rather negative) view of marriage, perhaps it would be a good idea to see what has been written in praise of it.
This might give you the balance you seek.

Peace
James
 
I’ve read the theology of the body before: “The ‘superiority’ of continence to marriage never means, in the authentic tradition of the Church, a disparagement of marriage or a belittling of its essential value. It does not even imply sliding, even merely implicitly, toward Manichean positions, or a support for ways of evaluating or acting based on a Manichean understanding of the body and of sex, of marriage and procreation. The evangelical and genuinely Christian superiority of virginity, of continence, is thus dictated by the motive of the kingdom of heaven. In the words of Christ reported by Matthew 19:11—12, we find a solid basis for admitting only such superiority, while we do not find any basis whatsoever for the disparagement of marriage that could be present in the recognition of that superiority.”

I’ve also read John Chrysostom on marriage a long time ago. I haven’t read Augustine’s On the Good of Marriage though. Saints say that the number of those who actually have deep spiritual relationships with God through continence is VERY small. A lot of celibates are just people who didn’t marry for various reasons. Married people should rejoice that they get to have intimacy and bodily joy, which is so healthy for mind and body.
 
thinkandmull said:
Pius XII: “As the Angelic Doctor has it, the use of marriage ‘keeps the soul from full abandon to the service of God.’” Summa Th., II-II, q. 186, a. 4. The same applies to romantic feelings, which is why Pius XII mentions “marriage”, not just sexual pleasure, as an obstacle in find spiritual depth. It’s impossible to completely separate feelings of romance and sex from selfishness, the carnal. That’s what a priest told me
Click to expand...
Its impossible to separate the *appetite for food *from selfishness, the carnal-from inordinate desire. And I believe that both the Angelic Doctor as well as STA were living proof of that fact!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top