Christian Marriage Bed Ethics

  • Thread starter Thread starter lanman87
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lanman87 said:
48.png
1ke:
Divine Revelation is Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
Click to expand...
And because the Catholic church defines what Scripture means and what Sacred Traditions means, it goes back to “Because we say so”.
Click to expand...
Yes! in matters of faith and morals the Catholic Church is guided by the Holy Spirit. It has the teaching authority.
 
Last edited:
Let me repeat something (for the benefit of those reading and listening)
The proscription against oral sex addresses oral sex per se, for it’s own sake, to it’s own completion, outside the pursuit of the compete marital act.

Not as part of the foreplay leading up to the complete marital act. Context is everything.
 
Last edited:
lanman87 said:
48.png
1ke:
Divine Revelation is Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
Click to expand...
And because the Catholic church defines what Scripture means and what Sacred Traditions means, it goes back to “Because we say so”.
Click to expand...
Authority is not self referential. Expressed authority might be sufficient reason for someone who has faith, but the essence of authority is not the assertion of the human being holding it or expressing it. Authority is a charism that is sourced elsewhere. So the expression of authoritative teaching depends on good observation of what is revealed in the ways that God reveals it.

By analogy, an astronomy textbook proposes the earth revolving around the sun. The vast majority accept the science on it’s own authority. But the thing isn’t true merely because the astronomers make the claim.
 
Last edited:
Vico said:
Remember that Joachim and Anna, the parents of the Virgin Mary, were old and barren.
Click to expand...
Do you know their status when they married?

Those that marry beyond child-bearing years do not have procreation as a reason to marry nor do they see it as a purpose of their marriage.
 
Theology of the body has a lot to say about this issue.
The issue at hand is the using of another person as opposed to the mutual respect and mutual pursuit of good ends by a couple.
The other person should never be a means to an end. A person is never a means. If mere one sided pleasure is the end of an act, it’s not ordered well.
 
goout said:
The other person should never be a means to an end. A person is never a means . If mere one sided pleasure is the end of an act, it’s not ordered well.
Click to expand...
Are you arguing that you should never let your partner take the lead and do what they want?

Oh, Uhm, you shouldn’t take the lead, either.

Hmmm. I’m not sure how this works, then.
 
PaulinVA said:
48.png
goout:
The other person should never be a means to an end. A person is never a means . If mere one sided pleasure is the end of an act, it’s not ordered well.
Click to expand...
Are you arguing that you should never let your partner take the lead and do what they want?

Oh, Uhm, you shouldn’t take the lead, either.

Hmmm. I’m not sure how this works, then.
Click to expand...
No not at all.
 
goout said:
Why not? I’m not sure where the confusion is with “a person is not a means to an end”
Click to expand...
I’m having trouble with, “If mere one sided pleasure is the end of an act, it’s not ordered well.” I’m sure you mean that one partner shouldn’t use the other, but, sometimes, isn’t that sorta what happens voluntarily?
 
PaulinVA said:
48.png
goout:
Why not? I’m not sure where the confusion is with “a person is not a means to an end”
Click to expand...
I’m having trouble with, “If mere one sided pleasure is the end of an act, it’s not ordered well.” I’m sure you mean that one partner shouldn’t use the other, but, sometimes, isn’t that sorta what happens voluntarily?
Click to expand...
Well yes, but this is a moral issue and intent is one of the sources of moral evaluation. Results do vary.
In actual happenstance, the phone wrings at the wrong time, or you think about that huge mortgage payment at just the wrong time, and pleasure can evaporate. Those are circumstances beyond control.
 
Last edited:
PaulinVA said:
I’m having trouble with, “If mere one sided pleasure is the end of an act, it’s not ordered well.” I’m sure you mean that one partner shouldn’t use the other, but, sometimes, isn’t that sorta what happens voluntarily?
Click to expand...
Mutual self-giving doesn’t have to always be mutually gratifying. The problem is when one partner doesn’t even get a chance bc only one person is deriving any pleasure from the acts taking place.
 
Last edited:
My wife and I have been married close to 50 years. We both agree that sexual activity is like many plays, drama or movies…often there is Act or Part 1 and then Act or Part 2.
 
phil19034 said:
Do Evangelicals agree that sodomy is sinful, as it is mentioned in the Bible?
Click to expand...
Depends on what you mean by sodomy because the term sodomy is an English word that doesn’t accurately reflect what happened a Sodom or the overall Biblical teaching about sex. Is homosexual sex or homosexual rape wrong? Absolutely, that is what was attempted in the story of Abraham and Lot and the three messengers from God in Genesis. All homosexual acts, oral, anal or other is considered sinful by the vast majority of non-Catholics (you can always find an exception to anything).

Most non-Catholic Christian writers, who write about sex (mostly Christian Psychologist/marriage counselors) will tell you that anal sex in marriage is wrong. Not because the Bible says it is (it doesn’t) but because it can be physically damaging and is just stupid. I remember reading something to that effect in a book by Dr. Kevin Leman.

Most consider oral sex to be a matter of personal conscience that shouldn’t be demanded by either but is okay if they both are okay with it and want to bless each other in that way. You can find exceptions but that is the general attitude. But generally speaking, it is okay to “complete” each other in any way that is mutually agreeable, loving, and satisfying (physically and emotionally).

Here is a short article by the highly respected John Piper.

This is an excerpt from Linda Dillow, who has written several books on how to decided what is okay in the marriage bed.
  • Is it prohibited in Scripture? If not, we may assume it is permitted. “Everything is permissible for me,” (1 Corinthians 6:12, NIV).
  • Is it beneficial? Does the practice in any way harm the husband or wife or hinder the sexual relationship? If so, it should be rejected. “Everything is permissible for me — but not everything is beneficial.” (1 Corinthians 6:12, NIV).
  • Does it involve anyone else? Sexual activity is sanctioned by God for husband and wife only. If a sexual practice involves someone else or becomes public, it is wrong based on Hebrews 13:4, which warns us to keep the marriage bed undefiled. Let’s see how these questions can help when it comes to making decisions about certain sexual practices that are not specifically spelled out in Scripture.
Just a side note. If you Google Christian Sex books there are a plethora of books by Non-Catholic Christian Marriage counselors, Pastors, and Psychologist that I’m sure would make a good Catholics head explode if they read them.
 
Last edited:
goout said:
The other person should never be a means to an end. A person is never a means . If mere one sided pleasure is the end of an act, it’s not ordered well.
Click to expand...
I agree with this but believe it is beyond physical but also emotional and spiritual. Meaning that under certain circumstances, health issues for instance, one person making sure the other person is satisfied is a loving act and can greatly build up the marriage.

I would also like to point out that a person can be a “means to an end” even under procreative activity. You can still use someone even if it is technically following the “correct method”.
 
goout said:
Let me repeat something (for the benefit of those reading and listening)
The proscription against oral sex addresses oral sex per se, for it’s own sake, to it’s own completion, outside the pursuit of the compete marital act.

Not as part of the foreplay leading up to the complete marital act. Context is everything.
Click to expand...
Says who? For every priest or person (like Christopher West) who says oral sex is ok, another priest and Catholic organization (like the Knights of Columbus & the Catholic Information Service) says it’s a sin.

According to this article on Catholic.com, oral sex is immoral and that the Church has always accepted the teachings of St. Alphonsus on this matter
https://www.catholic.com/qa/catholic-theology-and-oral-pleasure

Plus (again), the Catholic Information Service and the Knights of Columbus (among others) also say that oral sex is sodomy and that oral sex violates personal integrity and violates the nuptial meaning of the body.
Sodomy. Sodomitical acts, e.g., anal sex, oral sex, can be either
heterosexual (done by persons of the opposite sex) or homosexual
(done by persons of the same sex). Such acts are in many ways similar
to acts of masturbation insofar as sodomites choose to use their own
and each other’s bodies as a mere means of providing consciously
experienced satisfactions. They thus choose in a way that violates the
good of personal integrity as bodily persons insofar as they treat their
own and each other’s bodies as mere instruments of the consciously
experiencing subject. They thus violate the nuptial meaning of the
body and thus the body’s capacity for the marital act, and in this way
they violate the good of marriage itself.
Click to expand...
Page 25

 
Last edited:
goout said:
Theology of the body has a lot to say about this issue.
The issue at hand is the using of another person as opposed to the mutual respect and mutual pursuit of good ends by a couple.
The other person should never be a means to an end. A person is never a means. If mere one sided pleasure is the end of an act, it’s not ordered well.
Click to expand...
And this article on Catholic Answers says that when people try to argue that Theology of the Body approves of oral sex, they are 100% wrong.

https://www.catholic.com/qa/catholic-theology-and-oral-pleasure
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top