Christian Marriage Bed Ethics

[whatistrue]

But being loving and generous to a spouse does serve God.

As I understand it, the issue is not that you serve your spouse in a loving and generous way, it is that there is at least a risk that your spouse will cross the line between unifying and mutual self-giving to using you for their own pleasure absent that mutual self-giving aspect and certainly it is an issue that the faculty is being used in a way not intended; that is “ordered towards procreation”. It’s not “either / or” it is “both / and” as is so often the case with the Church.

 

[lanman87]

to using you for their own pleasure absent that mutual self-giving aspect

But “him taking care of her” or “her taking care of him” expecting nothing in return is one the most self-giving things a person can do. Provided they do it willing with the purpose of being loving toward the other and meeting the others physical/emotional needs.

 

[Inquiry]

Inquiry:

And yet Christ said that lusting after someone is committing adultery, so clearly the commandment goes beyond the physical act.

But we aren’t talking about Lust either.

Aren’t we? A husband can certainly look upon his wife with lust. Being married doesn’t stop that. If he rejects a part of who she is so that he can satisfy his own sexual desires, that would be an act of lust.

 

[whatistrue]

But “him taking care of her” or “her taking care of him” expecting nothing in return is one the most self-giving things a person can do.

Show me where I disputed that. The issue isn’t with the giving, it is (or potentially could be) with the receiving. Any time one, even momentarily, uses another human solely for their own pleasure, they are denying that person the dignity due them as a child of God. That is not loving. That is the trap.

 

[lanman87]

If he rejects a part of who she is so that he can satisfy his own sexual desires, that would be an act of lust.

But if she is willingly and lovingly giving that gift to her husband then it can’t be called lust. It is an act of love.

 

[JMMJ]

These are the kinds of discussions that make the Catholic Church seem so short-sighted to those who don’t believe in it.

 

[lanman87]

Any time one, even momentarily , uses another human solely for their own pleasure, they are denying that person the dignity due them as a child of God.

Denying someones right to bless you in a loving way is also denying that person the dignity due them as a child of God.

 

[1ke]

Adultery means Adultery.

The enumerations of the commandments are short hand only. The commandment encompasses all sins against chastity and marriage. This is the Jewish and Catholic understanding, historically and confirmed in Scripture-- hence Jesus’s discussion on the commandments and Paul’s enumeration of many sins that are not listed in the decalogue but fall under the sins.

It is completely ignoring the entire body of Christianity to claim the commandments are to be interpreted in that literal way.

 

[Inquiry]

Inquiry:

If he rejects a part of who she is so that he can satisfy his own sexual desires, that would be an act of lust.

But if she is willingly and lovingly giving that gift to her husband then it can’t be called lust. It is an act of love.

If she willingly gives herself while withholding part of herself? That can absolutely be called lust.

 

[1ke]

But if she is willingly and lovingly giving that gift to her husband then it can’t be called lust. It is an act of love.

Again we are back to moral relativism and rationalization on the part of the person committing the disordered act.

 

[1ke]

It seems Ron Conte is back under a new name.

 

[Jen7]

No male orgasms.

Female too if it’s not part of a PIV sex session.

Aaaaand, I’m bowing out of this conversation. “The Good News About Sex and Marriage” by Christopher West will answer all your questions and more. He also has a Q&A book but I can’t remember the title.

 

[1Lord1Faith]

lanman87:

Inquiry:

And yet Christ said that lusting after someone is committing adultery, so clearly the commandment goes beyond the physical act.

But we aren’t talking about Lust either.

Aren’t we? A husband can certainly look upon his wife with lust. Being married doesn’t stop that. If he rejects a part of who she is so that he can satisfy his own sexual desires, that would be an act of lust.

You’re misrepresenting the verses and their context. The “lust” is in the context of committing adultery. Its not referring to even two single people eyeballing each other, much less a married couple.

Another thing about that saying. The “lust” that is referred to is not simply an ogling of the opposite sex. It’s referring to a person who is actively pursuing an adulterous affair, but has not actually done it.

 

[whatistrue]

Denying someones right to bless you in a loving way is also denying that person the dignity due them as a child of God.

Nope, not even close. The giving is supposed to be mutual, not one-sided (regardless of whether the giver is doing so out of love - that was never the issue); that is the entire point that you seem to either not understand or reject outright.

ETA: And as @Inquiry rightly pointed out, it is also supposed to be total.

 

[lanman87]

If she willingly gives herself while withholding part of herself? That can absolutely be called lust.

I don’t think ya’ll understand that a spouse can get enjoyment and fulfillment out of giving them self to their spouse and not expect anything in return.

 

[Inquiry]

Inquiry:

If she willingly gives herself while withholding part of herself? That can absolutely be called lust.

I don’t think ya’ll understand that a spouse can get enjoyment and fulfillment out of giving them self to their spouse and not expect anything in return.

On the contrary, our point is that that is what spouses should strive to do at all times, not just in bed. That means giving a total gift of self, not a partial one.

 

[PaulinVA]

LOL.

It’s uninformed to argue that biological necessities are intrinsically evil acts.

I’ve been married for over 35 years. Two people, especially as they get older, do not just decide to have relations and their bodies respond instantly to allow it to happen.

 

[PaulinVA]

No, it doesn’t. They’re not related at all.

Would you mind sharing how long you’ve been married?

 

[whatistrue]

Not if you actually read what was written.

 

[lanman87]

On the contrary, our point is that that is what spouses should strive to do at all times, not just in bed. That means giving a total gift of self, not a partial one.

I agree is should be all the time in everything. But we aren’t talking about all the time. We are talking about specific circumstances. Also, sometimes a partial gift may be a total gift, because it may be all the person is capable of at that time.