Do Catholics have a repressed attitude of sex?

  • Thread starter Thread starter YinYangMom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

YinYangMom

Guest
Hope you don’t mind, Cynic, but I liked your post in response to mine over at the porn thread that I felt it warranted it’s own thread:
40.png
cynic:
Not really relevant or anything to do with porn, but this is typical of a repressed attitude by people obsessed with sin. What does ‘one with God’ mean? why does it have to be put into some ridicuous analogy like “sexual desire is really about desire for God” Er, no it isn’t, it’s about desire for the other person. Catholics still can’t accept that, so using language like this, talking about it in impersonal ways such as “offering your body up to God to become co-creators with him” - that kind thing is just another way of saying sex is dirty. Behind it lies the idea that worldly attachments are evil, including to your wife or husband. God isn’t just top of the list, he’s ALL that’s on the list, thus even in marriage all this icky personal stuff has no place, instead it has to be turned into something clean by changing it into worship.(sarcasm)
Click to expand...
Would anyone like to help me answer this?
I have my thoughts, but would like to see how others here would respond.
 
I don’t know if it’s a symptom of a repressed attitude, but there is a trend to over-religiousize (like that word? I just made it up) everything.

I had chicken salad for lunch today. Is that an expression of my powerful but unacknowledged yearning to internalize and assimilate the wonders of God’s creation by the process of digestion, or was I just hungry?

It is not a Deeply Significant Spiritual Action to pick ticks off the cat.

Sex is a different thing from ticks or chicken salad. There is an intense physical pleasure, and (if you do it right and you’re not too tired and the kids are asleep and maybe you had a glass or two of wine) an intense spiritual connection with your partner. Is it a Deeply Symbolic Religious Act?

Not for me. It is what it is, and what it is is nice. Maybe for some people it’s a religious act, like running a marathon or painting or something like that. For me, no.

Does that mean that I think people who trumpet the Great Spiritual Meaning of Sex are repressed? Nah. I think they’ve fallen prey to the tendency to attribute spiritual significance to everyday events.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And sometimes chicken salad is just chicken salad.
 
Catholics involved in a true Sacramental marriage have a very healthy attitude towards sex because it is recognized as one of God’s greatest gifts for their enjoyment and pleasure.

Scott Hahn PHd says that God’s love is so powerful in this Sacrament that in 9 months you may have to give it a name!

It is not only physical but emotional and spiritiual for us. It’s NOT just a bodily function it consumes the entire being.

What a great gift!
Blessings,
Joanie
 
Sure, many Catholics DO have a repressed attitude of sex. We are the guilt kings. We take guilt and shame to a fine art form. :tsktsk: But, is that really bad?

My wife and I both, to different degrees, have a repressed attitude of sex. We both grew up that way. She more so than me, but I think we’ll both admit, it can be a little fun when you blend a little guilt and shame into the marital mix. Even though we both fully know that there is nothing wrong with the marital act, still she has a tendency to think we’re doing something bad and shameful.

So, rather than feeling guilty about being ‘stuck’ with that ingrained feeling of guilt, why not just have some fun with it? Sort of make it a little game?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif Or would that be too shameful?
 
We’ve been so brainwashed by the Kinsey attitude toward sexuality (If anyone does something, it’s just a variation of the norm), that it’s hard to define what a “repressed” attitude is. I was never taught that sex was bad-in marriage. But outside of marriage, yes it is. By point of reference, I’m in my late fifties and went through 12 years of Catholic school.

Also, you need to look at some history. In the late 19th and early 20th century, Catholic immigrants were seen as a threat because we had large families–our numbers would swamp the demographics and the Irish, Italian, Polish etc. Catholics would take over. Were we too sexual then? Weren’t we repressed enough? So there were people like Margaret Sanger who set out to stem what she considered a threat by a group of people she did not want to reproduce with “family planning,” not to mention the heavier club of forced eugenics. She could also sexually “liberate” everyone to conform to her ideas of sexuality, with the happy result that people like Catholics would not be a breeding problem AND the new moral climate would undermine our beliefs and the authority of the Church.

Sorry for the long post, but I think it’s important to note that the idea that Catholics are “sexually repressed” seems really a part of a larger scheme to manipulate us to conform to what others want us to be.
 
…REPRESSED?

i should say not… i’m not afraid to talk about the …married thing…

 
Strangely – and it IS strange to me to see someone else taking on these two issues in this thread – I’ve thought about both of these issues raised by cynic.

Cynic: Not really relevant or anything to do with porn, but this is typical of a repressed attitude by people obsessed with sin. What does ‘one with God’ mean? why does it have to be put into some ridicuous analogy like “sexual desire is really about desire for God” Er, no it isn’t, it’s about desire for the other person.

The proof that Cynic is ultimately mistaken is probably in Hell. In those descriptions of Hell by Near-Death Experiencers, we see sick, crazed desperados trying madly to assuage the perfect, desperate hopelessness of their situations with a kind of mad, cannibalistic self-aggrandizing, perhaps driven by the this-is-not-going-to-God hopelessness of the contact.

Off in the distance, outside the room in the hall, he heard voices calling him. They were pleasant voices, male and female, young and old, calling to him in English. “Come out here,” they said. “Don’t you want to get better?”
He stepped out into the hall, full of anxiety. The area seemed to be light but very hazy, and he couldn’t make out any details.
He followed them shuffling along in his bare feet with the memory of pain in his belly, yet feeling very much alive. The fog thickened as they went on, and it became gradually darker. Overwhelmed with hopelessness, he told them he would go no farther and that they were liars. He could feel their breath on him as they shouted and snarled insults. Then they began to push and shove him about, and he began to fight back. A wild frenzy of taunting, screaming and hitting ensued. As he swung and kicked at them, they bit him.

Even though he couldn’t see anything in the darkness, he was aware there were dozens or hundreds of them all around and over him and that his attempts to fight back only provoked greater merriment. They began to tear off pieces of his flesh, and he realized that he was being taken apart and eaten alive, methodically, slowly, so that their entertainment would last as long as possible. In that wretched state he lay there in the darkness. Suddenly remembering a prayer from childhood Sunday School class, he said, “Yea though I walk in the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for thou art with me.”

To his amazement, the cruel merciless beings were incited to rage by his prayer. They screamed at him, 'There is no God! Nobody can hear you!" But at the same time they were backing away. He realized that saying things about God was actually driving them away, and he became more forceful. They became more rabid, cursing and screaming against God, but in time, they retreated back into the distant gloom beyond his hearing.

I have sometimes imagined that Hell will be a mad Bedlam of fellow self-aggrandizers, consummately evil in all ways because of their consummate deprivation of the grace of the cross. Deprived of grace and of hope, they’ll perpetually look for happiness in “getting” from each other, and never reach it, and become “Hell” for each other.

I.e., because sex is ultimately a seeking-after God, deprived of that hope sex becomes unenjoyable, an empty shell of marital sex.
 
Cynic: Catholics still can’t accept that, so using language like this, talking about it in impersonal ways such as “offering your body up to God to become co-creators with him” - that kind thing is just another way of saying sex is dirty. Behind it lies the idea that worldly attachments are evil, including to your wife or husband. God isn’t just top of the list, he’s ALL that’s on the list, thus even in marriage all this icky personal stuff has no place, instead it has to be turned into something clean by changing it into worship.(sarcasm)

Poor, poor, poor cynic. My wife is Jewish, and I am Catholic. We are both deeply religious. After an intimate encounter, which is always wonderfully enjoyable, we laugh and thank God for His kindness to us.

There was an interesting article in Redbook Magazine about 30 years ago. A survey done for the article found that devout Catholics and devout Orthodox Jews get the most enjoyment out of the sexual relationship. Interesting, huh?!?!?!

The more disconcerting finding in the Redbook survey- disconcerting at least to the secularly enlightened-is that women who rated high on the religion index were having a lot more fun in bed. This came as good news to the Honk If You Love Jesus people. Not only did more of the highly religious women say that their sex lives are “very good,” but they apparently did not have a lower expectation of what sex should be. Women who had sex only with their husbands, for instance, experienced orgasm twice as often as women with multiple partners. The above-mentioned FRC survey now produces similar findings. Among married “traditionalists” (those who strongly believe that sex should be reserved for marriage), 72 percent report high sexual satisfaction. That is 31 percent higher than unmarried “nontraditionalists” (those who take a more casual view of sex outside of marriage) and 13 points higher than married nontraditionalists. “The couple that prays together ___________.” Fill in the blank and come up with a snappy slogan for a campaign that might evangelize America.

66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:gi56BjG-DIMJ:www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9405/public.html+Redbook+survey+sex+Catholic&hl=en

The ultimate proof against Cynic on this issue are sterile couples. When a couple discovers that their sexual relationship will always be non-fruitful because the fruitfulness is already dead because one or both are sterile, they start going to reproductive specialists and spending tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands, to conceive. When you see that happening, you suddenly realize that the reproductive aspect of their physical relationship had overwhelming power in their psychology.
 
40.png
GodBlessJoanie:
Catholics involved in a true Sacramental marriage have a very healthy attitude towards sex because it is recognized as one of God’s greatest gifts for their enjoyment and pleasure.

Scott Hahn PHd says that God’s love is so powerful in this Sacrament that in 9 months you may have to give it a name!

It is not only physical but emotional and spiritiual for us. It’s NOT just a bodily function it consumes the entire being.

What a great gift!
Blessings,
Joanie
Click to expand...
Love this answer. We seem to be able to show our love of sexuality. Just look at the families in churches. It is mostly religious persons (no matter what religion) that show they are sexually active in that the results are very visable.:bounce: LOL the children are usually with them.
 
Originally Posted by cynic
Not really relevant or anything to do with porn, but this is typical of a repressed attitude by people obsessed with sin. What does ‘one with God’ mean? why does it have to be put into some ridicuous analogy like “sexual desire is really about desire for God” Er, no it isn’t, it’s about desire for the other person. Catholics still can’t accept that, so using language like this, talking about it in impersonal ways such as “offering your body up to God to become co-creators with him” - that kind thing is just another way of saying sex is dirty. Behind it lies the idea that worldly attachments are evil, including to your wife or husband. God isn’t just top of the list, he’s ALL that’s on the list, thus even in marriage all this icky personal stuff has no place, instead it has to be turned into something clean by changing it into worship.(sarcasm)
Click to expand...
I see. You know all about Catholics and their sex lives even though you are not Catholic and do not have the kind of sex life Catholics have. Aren’t you assuming too much? 😛

So let me get the drift of your sarcastic post here–calling sex holy is the same thing as calling sex dirty. Ummmm. Are you sure that’s what you wanted to say?
 
One has to decide if there really is such a thing as true love or there isn’t and your actions confirm the belief. Sacrifice for the beloved, chaste marriage and the fruit of it: children confirm true love. Selfish acts of masturabation, fornication, contraception, abortion deny it.
 
Gee, I wasn’t aware that in today’s society, anyone had a repressed attitude about sex! If Catholics are so repressed about sex, why are there so many of them?
 
I’m always puzzled when modernists use 21st century psychological categories to critique timeless doctrine.

As one who is quite expert in psychodynamic psychology, including Sigmund Freud, I can tell you that the concept of sexual repression has been warped beyond all recognition in the modern world.

There is not a shred of credibility - not a shred - to the belief that sexual repression is “psychologically unhealthy.”

That’s a big fairy tale that *libertines *made up to prop up their base lifestyles, under cover of looking like big intellectuals.
 
40.png
cargopilot:
Sure, many Catholics DO have a repressed attitude of sex. We are the guilt kings. We take guilt and shame to a fine art form. :tsktsk: But, is that really bad?

My wife and I both, to different degrees, have a repressed attitude of sex. We both grew up that way. She more so than me, but I think we’ll both admit, it can be a little fun when you blend a little guilt and shame into the marital mix. Even though we both fully know that there is nothing wrong with the marital act, still she has a tendency to think we’re doing something bad and shameful.

So, rather than feeling guilty about being ‘stuck’ with that ingrained feeling of guilt, why not just have some fun with it? Sort of make it a little game?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif Or would that be too shameful?
Click to expand...
This is just one of the ways to keep the sexual slice of the marriage pie interesting. I say have fun with it.
 
Peace be with you

God has created man with desire and and apitite for good things.
We through fault of our own can destort or taint what is good in our desires and apitite by adding ingreeddiants to suit our taste that shoud not be included.
Take cookies for example. Some like differant types of cookies and some like none at all and some desire them but they are good for their diet. There are many ways to add or subtract ingreediants, but how many cooks put dog do do in them and how much do do would it take for you not to take a bite?
It’s a good thing to have a healthy apitite for good things and God made us in way as enjoy life, just leave out the do do.
 
At one point in time in the Church’s history it was believed by some that sex was a sacrament. It was considered similar to Holy Communion only it came from the bonds of Matrimony. While the Church later decided that it was not a sacrament they did continue to believe that it was a renewal of the marital vows. Also, the Church praised sex because it praised the goodness of Children and the goodness of the flesh. Historically Catholics have had a very fleshy faith. However, one day in France there was a problem. Jansenism crept into the minds of some of the faithful and because of it sex and sexuality became bad and dirty and something everyday and animalistic. At nearly the same time the Puritains developed with a similar conception of sex. Then the US was formed by the Puritains and in the catholic areas many were populated by catholics who had Jansenist Priests and Bishops so in the US we were confronted with both problems. However, the Church has been consistant to condemn those who find sex dirty or a necessary evil of any sort.

Now as far as its level of spiritual significance is concerned it is impossible for me to understand those who do not see this and feel pit for those who do not experience that aspect of sex. Sex involves the whole person and not just part of the person that is it involves body and spirit and to exclude the spirt is to miss a sugnificat portion of the beauty of sex. Some here should read the works of John Paul II and in particular “Love and Responsibility” Karol Woytila. Those who do not allow the Holy Spirit into their bedrooms I find are actually the most sexually repressed.
 
40.png
JimG:
Gee, I wasn’t aware that in today’s society, anyone had a repressed attitude about sex! If Catholics are so repressed about sex, why are there so many of them?
Click to expand...
Haha!! Good question, JimG!! there surely are a lot of us, eh? heehee!!
 
BibleReader said:
Cynic: Catholics still can’t accept that, so using language like this, talking about it in impersonal ways such as “offering your body up to God to become co-creators with him” - that kind thing is just another way of saying sex is dirty. Behind it lies the idea that worldly attachments are evil, including to your wife or husband. God isn’t just top of the list, he’s ALL that’s on the list, thus even in marriage all this icky personal stuff has no place, instead it has to be turned into something clean by changing it into worship.(sarcasm)

Poor, poor, poor cynic. My wife is Jewish, and I am Catholic. We are both deeply religious. After an intimate encounter, which is always wonderfully enjoyable, we laugh and thank God for His kindness to us.

There was an interesting article in Redbook Magazine about 30 years ago. A survey done for the article found that devout Catholics and devout Orthodox Jews get the most enjoyment out of the sexual relationship. Interesting, huh?!?!?!

The more disconcerting finding in the Redbook survey- disconcerting at least to the secularly enlightened-is that women who rated high on the religion index were having a lot more fun in bed. This came as good news to the Honk If You Love Jesus people. Not only did more of the highly religious women say that their sex lives are “very good,” but they apparently did not have a lower expectation of what sex should be. Women who had sex only with their husbands, for instance, experienced orgasm twice as often as women with multiple partners. The above-mentioned FRC survey now produces similar findings. Among married “traditionalists” (those who strongly believe that sex should be reserved for marriage), 72 percent report high sexual satisfaction. That is 31 percent higher than unmarried “nontraditionalists” (those who take a more casual view of sex outside of marriage) and 13 points higher than married nontraditionalists. “The couple that prays together ___________.” Fill in the blank and come up with a snappy slogan for a campaign that might evangelize America.

66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:gi56BjG-DIMJ:www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9405/public.html+Redbook+survey+sex+Catholic&hl=en

The ultimate proof against Cynic on this issue are sterile couples. When a couple discovers that their sexual relationship will always be non-fruitful because the fruitfulness is already dead because one or both are sterile, they start going to reproductive specialists and spending tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands, to conceive. When you see that happening, you suddenly realize that the reproductive aspect of their physical relationship had overwhelming power in their psychology.
Click to expand...

This gave me a laugh, my debased thoughts are straight from the pits of Hell.

For your information, I wasn’t argueing to justify sex outside of marriage, or contraception. I was simply wondering why everything has to be descirbed in a worship context, all the time. God may ultimately be the end of everything good, but why we need to direct our thoughts to that in every moment is hard to see, and also quite impossible if things are to …happen. Maybe a tendency to do that is based on unease? And from what you say, couple should no longer do that after 50.
 
Would you be referring to the Catholics with just 5 kids instead of 8? Yeah, probably the “repressed-Catholic-guilt/sexuality” thing at work!! 😛
 
I remember reading The Catholic Imagination whose author I can’t recall, but I do remember the considerable statistics he brought up that suggested that Catholics are more satisfied with their sex lives than the general population.

Scott
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top