Are there other ‘biological’ purposes?
True, but I would think the Bishops of the Anglican Church do believe in God, and would think about the question you didn’t answer. Is the only way to experience love, pleasure, bonding, and sharing is through the sex act?
Yes they do. The problem starts when one rejects the idea there is order or equates secondary with primary or even reverses the order.
Of course.
I didn’t answer it, because I was clearly not suggesting that sex is the ONLY form of bonding. NO ONE claims or suggests this.
What “problem”? If I sing with my mouth each day rather than eat with it all day, what is the “problem”? If I hold my wife’s hand with mine, rather than make a tool for survival or convey food to my mouth, what is the “problem”? If I observe a painting simply for the pleasure it gives me rather than use my bi-ocular vision to track prey for food, what is the “problem”?
Can you list a few ‘biological’ purposes?
So you can experience love, pleasure, bonding, and sharing without having sex. So that would seem to eliminate them from being the primary unique purpose for it.
For what? Can you be specific please? I no longer even remember why you are asking this question. Do you really not know our biological needs? I don’t really want to list the obvious. If you just stated your point, this might be easier. I keep stating mine.
I already answered this. I granted that reproduction was the primary biological purpose of sex. My point is, why is pleasure aside from this purpose a “problem”? Why can’t sex in a couple just be about the pleasure? We use our organs and senses for pleasure in many ways. To some degree, I would say that we created as walking pleasure bags, with millions of nerve endings facing outward to observe and feel and take pleasure in the discoveries of everything outside ourselves. Is there something sinful in finding pleasure in the world?
Ok, I’ll review
Instead of saying the primary unique purpose for sex is conception or reproduction; you add the word ‘biological.’ It seemed you are either trying to avoid admitting there is one primary unique purpose for sex by introducing a qualifier or you do believe there are other biological purposes which only sex can provide.
Now it seems like you are trying to avoid admitting there is one primary unique purpose for sex because you did not list other biological purposes which only sex can provide. But I could be wrong.
can you?
One man’s needs are another man’s wants. Something parents explain to their children many times. When something is a true ‘need;’ we still ask, what is the primary unique purpose for that ‘need.’ Every living thing has the ‘need’ for food, water, and reproduction.
My point is: There are a number of reasons to have sex but there is one primary unique purpose for it. That purpose is reproduction.
No, and I think Catholics understand that better than the most non-Catholics I’ve known.
Well said Anna. This really should be a time of prayer for all Churches, but the Episcopal Church in particular at this time in its history. We need an outpouring of the Holy Spirit to heal and mend the damage done by the enemy. I say this as a Catholic. We have had more than our share of problems as the world very well knows.
great!
The qualifier meant nothing. I was trying to be as specific as possible. There could be purposes other than biology, so I thought that I would be clear.
yes, and some other things. But the list is long.
Then we agree. So what is your theological point from all this about sex?
No problem, vocal cords are for making sounds, mouth is an opening for consumption, hands are for gripping, eyes are for seeing, and reproductive organs are from reproduction. What kind of sounds you make, what kinds of things you consume, what you hold with your hand, what you choice to look at doesn’t matter; that is how we are designed. You can make sounds with your hands but that is not the primary reason why we have hands. It would be disordered to stick peas up your nose when nature tells us they should go in your mouth. If you put all your food up your nose, you would die of starvation.
Thank you, Anna. Your words are timely and very important. One of my best friends is a faithful and conservative priest. He has been feeling very alone lately. Elijah as the “last remaining prophet” has been on his mind. Interestingly enough, he’s on a church staff with other orthodox clergy, so he is by no means alone! But it hits so hard that they all feel that way. And several faithful parishioners have even stopped attending their church simply due to its affiliation, for they do not know how to respond either. For the few clergy and worshipers who remain true - who cannot leave (or who cannot bring themselves to leave) - let us pray without ceasing. They never needed it more than now.
Praying for all churches including TEC where Christians find Christ.
Never said they all did, I said many did, and that’s a fact. Ever heard of “sola scripture”?
Oh yes. You make excellent points, and it’s been my experience that those who remain stay for personal reasons. I hate to say it, but I don’t know of anyone who even believes or fights for change from within anymore. They stay because they don’t want to lose their building, or because they are afraid of the consequences if they commit sin of schism (I know the complications there), or because the word “Episcopalian” still caries some social prestige. And I’m aware of other reasons why. Frankly, it would be simpler for all if all conservative Episcopalians were in ACNA, and all non-Anglicans were out of ACNA.At coffee hour today I was talking with a fellow teacher from years ago. She was in Hanford, a nearby town. When the ACNA was forming, that parish chose to stay TEC. They disagreed with her views about homosexuality being a sin despite her liberal views that women should be priests. She wasn’t liberal enough and they actually ASKED HER TO LEAVE and no longer attend the parish!! They banished her! Then they were angry that the organist was opposed to gay marriage, etc. so they asked her to leave! The vestry told these women they weren’t welcome in that parish anymore and to hit the bricks! So now they drive to our town, 25 miles, and attend our parish. Amazing!!
The Elijah metaphor is appropriate. But I question to what degree is it realistic or beneficial to stay in TEC? Do the more conservative members actually think they can overhaul a denomination that is nationally extremely extremely liberal and far left of center like that? The TEC is heavily loaded with female priests, feminists, pro-choicers, pro-gay lefties, liberation theology-minded folks, people who are ok with cohabitation and divorce and out of wedlock pregnancy, abortion, etc.? How is it realistic to stick around and change that? It’s kind of like pro-life democrats. I see these “Blue Dogs” thinking they can really change things. In the end, guys like Stupak caved pure and simple. Caved. It’s a tsunami of liberalism.
I think caucusing with like-minded conservative, orthodox traditionalists is more feasible and productive than remaining in a liberal hotbed that is virtually impossible to change for the better?
I don’t say this stuff to be a cynic or a grouch but rather I just see it this way realistically. ‘Change from within’ isn’t going to work with TEC. ACNA would’ve been a great competitor and new vision of Anglicanism were it not for the idiotic toleration of female ordination thanks to Duncan and company as well as the openness to evangelical born-agains that mirror a Calvary Chapel episode. Anglicanism is such a wild, wacky, and bizarre pageant, I swear. In so many ways it has the evensong to inspire your soul. Other days it’s like watching the Gong Show.
What a tangled web Anglicanism weaves. It’s so confusing.“ALL” isn’t the question. I keep repeating this, but you don’t even acknowledge my point or answer the question I keep repeating. Nevermind.
my friend, the answer to your question is no. there is nothing sinful in finding pleasure in the world. however, when you overstep the bounds of natural law, and Gods law, serious consequences result. i know. i live with them every day. thanks to the free love mentality, we now have aids, herpes, gonnoreah, etc. not to mention blended families, an upward spike in child abuse as a result, broken homes. domestic abuse which i as a military police officer am well aware of, having to respond to these calls. where would you set the limits my friend? or are their no limits? personal pleasure at the expense of what or whom? Peace
I am one of those viewers and would be happy to pray. I am a RC covert that came from the Episcopal Church 7 years ago. There are MANY good Christian people in the TEC. It’s so sad to see the church ripping apart.
No, “ALL” is the answer. “ALL” is homosexual sex. Why is homosexual sex disordered? It is like putting “ALL” your food up your nose.