Simcha Fisher on male-female friendship

[Norseman82]

The original point here is that you can’t say that sex with one man permanently damages her from a stable relationship with another man, and then freely permit the remarriage of widows. Not that there was anything wrong with marrying a virgin woman, but that there was also nothing wrong with marrying a widow.

Except that sex within a valid Catholic marriage is no sin.

 

[Norseman82]

Yes I have, and the people who are saying that are wrong.

I disagree. It’s a very valid point, especially considering the diseases one could potentially pick up. Plus, the Bible (in one of St. Paul’s epistles) does compare fornication to joining one’s self to a prostitute. Is God wrong?

 

[Xantippe]

Except that sex within a valid Catholic marriage is no sin.

Do you want to make the argument that a man who marries a widow is having sex with her deceased husband, or that a woman who marries a widower is having sex with his deceased wife?

Or is a person who marries a victim of child abuse is having sex with the person who molested them?

That saying is not very helpful.

 

[DarkLight]

Except that sex within a valid Catholic marriage is no sin.

See that’s exactly the point.

It’s about sin and the pursuit of holiness - the same as any other sin. It’s not about how sex affects your future husband/wife in any sort of special way beyond how all sin affects those around us. It’s definitely not about any sort of nonsense about how she’s now bound to the man she married forever.

We had a couple, a deacon and his wife, speak to our group. He had been a virgin at marriage, while she had not. He stated that yes, it sometimes bothered him, but he knew that God had forgiven her, and it would be arrogant of him to deny the same to her.

 

[Norseman82]

Because sin still has consequences, even if they’re not permanent consequences.

And that is the point that these analogies are trying to make. The problem is that too many people today refuse to own up to the consequences of their actions. That, I believe, is why people do not like them, because they do not want to face the fact that there are consequences to their actions.

 

[Norseman82]

It’s about sin and the pursuit of holiness - the same as any other sin.

St. Paul actually states that it is NOT like any other sin.

And perhaps that is why the world is in such a horrible state with its promiscuity.

 

[DarkLight]

And that is the point that these analogies are trying to make. The problem is that too many people today refuse to own up to the consequences of their actions. That, I believe, is why people do not like them, because they do not want to face the fact that there are consequences to their actions.

The cure to jumping off of one side of the bridge isn’t to jump off the other side. “If you do this you’re damaged forever and ever and that can never be changed” isn’t better than “if you do this don’t worry because it’s totally ok and has no consequences.”

 

[Norseman82]

The cure to jumping off of one side of the bridge isn’t to jump off the other side. “If you do this you’re damaged forever and ever and that can never be changed” isn’t better than “if you do this don’t worry because it’s totally ok and has no consequences.”

No, but if a virgin is not comfortable with marrying a non-virgin, the non-virgin should not raise a big stink. If each would say “go in peace, may you find a compatible person” it would be much better.

 

[Norseman82]

Do you want to make the argument that a man who marries a widow is having sex with her deceased husband, or that a woman who marries a widower is having sex with his deceased wife?

Or is a person who marries a victim of child abuse is having sex with the person who molested them?

That saying is not very helpful.

Unfortunately, if a disease is involved, it is accurate.

 

[Xantippe]

Also, Corinth was an absolute cess pool of vice.

The new Christians that St. Paul was addressing were unlikely to be squeaky clean if they were converts, not brought up as Christians from childhood.

 

[DarkLight]

The people saying the unhelpful things are different in each case. In the one case, it’s probably Christians saying that the non-virgin is wrecked forever, while in the second case, it’s probably non-Christians. Needless to say, it’s more crushing to be told that one is wrecked forever by one’s co-religionists. A Christian need not listen very much to non-Christians.

This is also very important. And it will apply to a convert as well - we cannot very well expect someone to come to the faith knowing they’ll be forever seen as damaged beyond repair.

No, but if a virgin is not comfortable with marrying a non-virgin, the non-virgin should not raise a big stink. If each would say “go in peace, may you find a compatible person” it would be much better.

Would you also apply that to someone like me, who does not want to marry a man who is insistent their bride be a virgin?

Unfortunately, if a disease is involved, it is accurate.

Keep in mind there are other ways to get diseases as well. If a person received a diseased blood transfusion, are you having sex with the blood donor?

 

[Norseman82]

Also, Corinth was an absolute cess pool of vice.

The new Christians that St. Paul was addressing were unlikely to be squeaky clean if they were converts, not brought up as Christians from childhood.

America and the western world are also polluted. But again, toward the end of 1 Cor. 7, St. Paul does refer to “the man who marries his virgin, acts fittingly”, so I don’t think any of us can absolutely say that there were no virtuous people in Corinth.

 

[Xantippe]

No, but if a virgin is not comfortable with marrying a non-virgin, the non-virgin should not raise a big stink. If each would say “go in peace, may you find a compatible person” it would be much better.

Ideally, yes.

But at the same time, the virgin should not treat the non-virgin like garbage, and the virgin should be prepared for the possibility that if they insist on marriage to a fellow virgin, that it may never happen.

I know when I was a single young Evangelical woman, I was very realistic about the fact that it was unlikely that I would wind up married to a man without a “past.”

 

[Norseman82]

This is also very important. And it will apply to a convert as well - we cannot very well expect someone to come to the faith knowing they’ll be forever seen as damaged beyond repair.

There is a thing called the law of God written on their hearts.

Keep in mind there are other ways to get diseases as well. If a person received a diseased blood transfusion, are you having sex with the blood donor?

Come on. You know full well that what is referred to are sexually transmitted diseases (at least I hope you do).

Would you also apply that to someone like me, who does not want to marry a man who is insistent their bride be a virgin?

I don’t understand this post in light of what you posted earlier:

As a virgin, why would I want to marry a guy who saw my virginity as a prize for him, rather than something between me and God?

So, color me confused

 

[Xantippe]

This is also very important. And it will apply to a convert as well - we cannot very well expect someone to come to the faith knowing they’ll be forever seen as damaged beyond repair.

That’s exactly right.

If we are bringing in adult converts nowadays, many of them will have a past, and the vast majority of them will never have been through an adequate presentation of Catholic sexual morality before they became involved in sexual sin.

I grew up as an Evangelical and although the “don’t have premarital sex, mmmkay?” message came through loud and clear and I was fully onboard for that, that was just about it. It wasn’t part of a well-worked out theory, and there was no practical advice as to how to go about safely traversing the no-man’s-land between childhood and marriage. Literally the first time I heard practical ideas about chastity was from my future husband, who (fortunately!) had gotten a lot of good advice on the subject.

Knowing what I know now about purity culture, I feel relieved to have escaped getting the full treatment, which was in many respects worse than what I got.

I cannot overstate how distinct chastity as an idea is from purity culture.

 

[Norseman82]

Ideally, yes.

But at the same time, the virgin should not treat the non-virgin like garbage, and the virgin should be prepared for the possibility that if they insist on marriage to a fellow virgin, that it may never happen.

I know when I was a single young Evangelical woman, I was very realistic about the fact that it was unlikely that I would wind up married to a man without a “past.”

The problem is that the objection often is raised when the virgin simply states that he/she wants someone on “equal footing”.

 

[Xantippe]

America and the western world are also polluted. But again, toward the end of 1 Cor. 7, St. Paul does refer to “the man who marries his virgin, acts fittingly”, so I don’t think any of us can absolutely say that there were no virtuous people in Corinth.

I don’t think anybody is saying that, just that it would be a mistake to assume that Paul’s audience was either married, widowed, or virginal.

Presumably, there would be some Corinthian ex-prostitutes (perhaps of both sexes) in the audience.

 

[Norseman82]

I know when I was a single young Evangelical woman, I was very realistic about the fact that it was unlikely that I would wind up married to a man without a “past.”

You seem to have a very low opinion of men.

 

[DarkLight]

Come on. You know full well that what is referred to are sexually transmitted diseases (at least I hope you do).

You also, I presume, know that sexually transmitted diseases are, in most cases, transmitted by any exchange of bodily fluids. Sex is the most common, but not the only way for transmission. Most of them can be transmitted, for example, by receiving a blood transfusion of infected blood (and that has happened), and the recipient of the transfusion can spread them via sexual contact the same as someone who got them from sex.

Sex is simply the most common scenario when two people’s bodily fluids are in contact with each other.

I don’t understand this post in light of what you posted earlier:

So, color me confused

Some people don’t want to be married to someone who sees their virginity as necessary for marriage. Would you be ok with that person asking the partner who wants a virgin to “go in peace”?

 

[Xantippe]

There is a thing called the law of God written on their hearts.

That’s true, but I think you’ll find that the exact details of Catholic sexual morality are not perfectly intuitive or immediately obvious.

In fact, there are many fairly serious Christians who have very different beliefs.