C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
Agreed. God gives us strength to resist temptation, as well as natural rhythms in the body. Why do we need artificial measures?
- Status
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Because celibacy is an exceptional gift and not a norm.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
Chastity is what we are all called to. We all have the ability to be chaste and if sex is not in a couple’s best interest, it’s not too much to ask of them to be abstinent.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
If they have #4 at 35 and she doesn’t completely cease her cycles until 55, that’s 20 years to be “chaste”, bud.
Longer than you’ve been alive, friend.
In my world, that’s a “non-real solution”.
Last edited:
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
If 4 is all they can support and NFP is impossible, then 20 years is what they must give. 20 years of non-sexual marital bliss is far better than an eternity in hell.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Makes me nervous to think how close the Papal Committee on Birth Control came to damning us all!
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
Especially since married couples are sharing a bed, meals, a life. They share an intimacy they share with no one else. The physical is a part of that sharing.
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
Pretty sure twenty years of abstinence in a loving marriage would not be bliss.
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
Don’t think we’re called to chastity. I think we’re called to “be fruitful and multiply” and re-populate the earth.
Priests, religious, are called to celibacy, which includes chastity, but even some of they have urges they must resist. The sexual drive does not magically disappear.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
All are called to chastity. It just means proper sexual contact at your point in life. All have urges, all must be resisted if they’re improper. Nobody said getting to heaven was easy.
@vonsalza It’s a good thing we have an infallible head of God’s church then!
@vonsalza It’s a good thing we have an infallible head of God’s church then!
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
Divorce the concept of married love from sex. The two are linked but married love can be experienced independent of sex.
Last edited:
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Jesus appears to disagree with you.
Mark 10:6 “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’[a] 7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.’[c] So they are no longer two, but one flesh. (NIV)
Sex seems pretty central here.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
Does Jesus put down a strict rule? Does it say, “And the two will become flesh at least once every week, no matter the emotional or physical condition of the pair.”?
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
Then the Church should not ban marriage between two people if one or both is incapable of performing the sexual act. Yet, they do.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
He says “For this reason…”
The reason seems to be the unitive aspect of martial relations.
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
I have no idea what you’re talking about. Sorry. I don’t know what “it” is.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
Those don’t need to be carried out regularly. Otherwise, we’d be in the wrong for condemning post-menopausal relations. Does the church allow relations while the wife is pregnant?
He means chastity and abstinence @ConstantLearner
He means chastity and abstinence @ConstantLearner
Last edited:
V
Vonsalza
Guest
I’m getting dizzy watching you try to spin that rebuttal…
Mark 10 pretty well settles it man. “Relations” are central to marriage.
Last edited:
C
ConstantLearner
Guest
And that’s why the Church bans marriage between couples who cannot become one flesh. Physical union is very important to God as well as us.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
So then the church shouldn’t condemn post-menopausal relations.
- Status