Lusting after your wife

Since becoming Catholic this is one area that had me scratching my head for awhile. I never hear this talked about in evangelical protestant circles. Most Consensus is that anything between husband and wife is fair game. Personally adopting this idea has helped me in many areas of life especially in the the way I percieve other women in general. I'm curius how others feel about

Personally, I think that there is a difference between lust and desire. If you're lusting after your wife's body and seek to only please yourself, I think that's a sin. If it's a genuine desire to be with your wife, than I think that's not bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tealblue

Since becoming Catholic this is one area that had me scratching my head for awhile. I never hear this talked about in evangelical protestant circles. Most Consensus is that anything between husband and wife is fair game. Personally adopting this idea has helped me in many areas of life especially in the the way I percieve other women in general. I'm curius how others feel about

---

Well, the good news is that there is nothing in the bible against your sentiment of lust for your wife. In fact, according to 'the Song of Songs' book, this seems encouraged and normal. In brief, you can love each atom of your beloved wife without the feel of guilt. The bad news is that uncontrolled lust for other women is sin.

Your sexual attraction for your wife is psychologically and biologically normal, and like any pleasure in life, be moderate. Also, this is good for your health. Particularly for your prostate (against cancer).

Trinity

CCC 2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from unchas***y; that each one of you know how to take a wife for himself in holiness and honor, not in the p***ion of lust like heathen who do not know God; that no man transgress, and wrong his brother in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as we solemnly forewarned you. For God has not called us for uncleanness, but in holiness." (1 Thes 4:3-7)

Both the bible and catechism talk of lust which includes ones spouse.

Like I said, I think there is a difference between desire and lust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tealblue

CCC 2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from unchas***y; that each one of you know how to take a wife for himself in holiness and honor, not in the p***ion of lust like heathen who do not know God; that no man transgress, and wrong his brother in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as we solemnly forewarned you. For God has not called us for uncleanness, but in holiness." (1 Thes 4:3-7)

Both the bible and catechism talk of lust which includes ones spouse.

---

Of course mutual enjoyment between a husband and a wife is into the rule. However, even the Church knows that sexual intercourse for procreation only do not work. The 'ogino' method was the prescribed method for our parents before the sexual revolution of the 60s.

In the context of a marriage, I believe that desire should be accepted by the man and the woman, and that should not been forced. Respect and tenderness is the key for a strong bond.

The Thessalonians were driven by the same forces that drive us. Paul taught them how to handle life in many practical areas.

Quote:

---

Let us put it plainly: Immorality means no sexual wrongdoing. It means no making out in the backseat of the car; no premarital sex (no fornication); no messing around with someone else's husband or wife (no extramarital sex); no ****sexual sex (the Scripture is very clear on this issue in many places); no pornography (no standing in the newsstand at the airport and flipping through Penthouse or Playboy magazines and getting yourself turned on by looking at the pictures; that is sexual fantasy, and it is wrong). To "avoid sexual immorality" means to have none of these things going on in your life.

---

From Expository Studies in I and II Thessalonians, by Ray C. Stedman

Quote:

---

Now they are right in saying that sex is a natural function, but what they are not saying, and what the Scriptures reveal, is that all natural functions need certain degrees of control. Take hunger, for instance. You do not eat anytime you feel like eating. You learn to control your appe***e. The same applies to sleep. You do not go to sleep whenever you feel like it.

Control increases the enjoyment of a natural function. For example, you enjoy your food more if you do not eat between meals. When a flooding river is controlled by banks, its intensity is increased.

Many young people are discovering that in these days when moral restraints are removed from sexual practices, the result is a kind of listless flood in which one wades continually with no enjoyment whatsoever. But God has designed sex to be stimulating and arousing. That is why marriage cons***utes a kind of channeled control for sex. There is ample provision made for the stream, but the limits increase the intensity and enjoyment. That is what God has in mind as part of the process of producing a whole person. Anything that tears down those boundaries destroys the strength and beauty of wholeness.

So Paul says that we are to learn how to control our bodies in holiness-wholeness-and honor. Control contributes to that sense of wholeness. You are to be in charge of your own body. You are not to be bound to it. You are not to be a slave to it.

Secondly, he said: "no one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him" (v. 6). Let me put it plainly: this means no adultery; no haunting the houses of pros***ution; no sexual involvement with anyone but your marriage partner; no carrying on affairs with your neighbor's wife or husband. Such behavior wrongs others. It steals their property and destroys their rights. The tenth commandment says, "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor" (Ex. 20:17). That perhaps is what some of the Thessalonians were doing, and their conduct had not only destroyed the wholeness of their own lives, but had also hurt others. In counseling, pastors hear seemingly endless stories of damaged families, of children's lives being ruined by the adulterous affairs of their parents. Enormous misery and heartache follow the p***ions of adultery and sexual affairs.

---

From Expository Studies in I and II Thessalonians, by Ray C. Stedman

Like anything in life, moderation, keep us out of the shame.

Trinity

The hyper-sexuality or the sexualization of the female into the medias (car and beer ads, cinema, internet etc.) is in my opinion the important factor for the distortion of the sexuality in our society.

Quote:

---

C.S. Lewis, "Eros ceases to be a devil when it ceases to be a god."

---

Christian Reflections,
Christianity and culture,
1940, Section 3,
para. 12, p. 35

In brief, a man should master his instincts. Also and sometimes, lust is a synonymous of beauty. Desires p*** by the eyes. And in the right context there is nothing evil.

Trinity

I have no problem with the idea of desire but I often hear people talk of "healthy" lust. Obviously if there was no desire the human race would have died out along time ago. I see this as another area that gets skipped over because its not exclusively pointed out in scripture.

Evangelical protestants aren't AS "hung up" about sexual activities between a man and his wife as folks (catholic OR protestant) who haven't thrown OFF the Romanist silliness about "procreation" being the only real "Legitimate" purpose of sex.

Their ADAMANT commitment of Romanists to Mary being "ever virgin" is an illustration of their twisted view of marital sex, which in the cl***ical Romanist mind is, in and of itself, somehow "dirty" and "defiling". Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tealblue

I have no problem with the idea of desire but I often hear people talk of "healthy" lust. Obviously if there was no desire the human race would have died out along time ago. I see this as another area that gets skipped over because its not exclusively pointed out in scripture.

---

We know for sure that the New Testament has something to say about chas***y, modesty, virtue, and the temperance.

Quote:

---

*** 2:5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

1 Peter 3:1-2 , ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.

---

chaste (gr. agnos): innocent, modest, perfect, good example, good mate, being clean, pure, etc.

Sexuality like anything else can be distorted, falsify and perverted. I believe we all have a code for living, and we should behave according to our ethical norms and guidelines.

I agree that a compulsive life style oriented throughout lust, is a deadly sin. When we lose control on lust, and lust is controlling us permanently, we surely have a spiritual and also a psychological problem that demands to be healed.

However, to enjoy sexuality, mutually, with his wife, is completely normal. If I remember correctly Jesus was saying that lust for an other woman is sin. He had never said that lust for his own wife was abnormal or immoral. That goes with love, the erotic love. Her flesh is your flesh, and vice versa.

Quote:

---

"Now flee from youthful lusts, and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace with those who call on the Lord from a pure Heart." 2 Timothy 2:22

---

"There are three things which the superior man guards against. In youth...lust. When he is strong...quarrelsomeness. When he is old...covetousness." ---Confucius

We should find the reasonable bounds in everything.

Trinity

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Carabbio

Evangelical protestants aren't AS "hung up" about sexual activities between a man and his wife as folks (catholic OR protestant) who haven't thrown OFF the Romanist silliness about "procreation" being the only real "Legitimate" purpose of sex.

Their ADAMANT commitment of Romanists to Mary being "ever virgin" is an illustration of their twisted view of marital sex, which in the cl***ical Romanist mind is, in and of itself, somehow "dirty" and "defiling". Nothing could be farther from the truth.

---

The Catholic church doesn't teach that sex is only for procration. It does teach that every sexual act must be open to life. Early protestants were against birth contol but over the years the church has skewed itself towards secularism.

"The Catholic church doesn't teach that sex is only for procreation. It does teach that every sexual act must be open to life."

And the difference between the two statements is????

Thats the problem with evangelicals is they see everything as black or white. There is a big difference between only having sex to have a child and having sex with being open for having a child. A women can't have a child every day of the month so if that were the case then catholics would teach that you can only have sex 2 days a month.

I think what he is saying is that Catholics shouldn't use birth control because that takes away the possibility of having a child. Is that right tealblue?

The early reformers were against birth control. The reformers had alot of beliefs that today are considered unbiblical. Christianity is becoming more and more resticted to what is specificly defined in black and white. Most christians believe abortion is immoral. What about artificially preventing an egg or sperm from completing its God driven purpose. Some christians have even suggested masterbation is ok.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tealblue

The early reformers were against birth control. The reformers had alot of beliefs that today are considered unbiblical. Christianity is becoming more and more resticted to what is specificly defined in black and white. Most christians believe abortion is immoral. What about artificially preventing an egg or sperm from completing its God driven purpose. Some christians have even suggested masterbation is ok.

---

Where have you read that the early reformers were against birth control? Who were these early reformers? I agree that Christianity is prone to have an absolute view rather than a relative view, such as immorality of abortion or artificial insemination.

TruthSeeker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker

Where have you read that the early reformers were against birth control? Who were these early reformers? I agree that Christianity is prone to have an absolute view rather than a relative view, such as immorality of abortion or artificial insemination.

TruthSeeker

---

Up until 1930 all protestant denominations were against birth contol until the anclican church caved in to social pressures and opened the floodgates.

Martin Luther said, "[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchas***y, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him."

John Calvin said, "The voluntary spilling of semen outside of intercourse between man and woman is a monstrous thing. Deliberately to withdraw from coitus in order that semen may fall on the ground is doubly monstrous. For this is to extinguish the hope of the race and to kill before he is born the hoped-for offspring."

John Wesley warned, "Those sins that dishonor the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he [Onan] did displeased the Lord—and it is to be feared; thousands, especially of single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls." (These p***ages are quoted in Charles D. Provan, The Bible and Birth Control, which contains many quotes by historic Protestant figures who recognize contraception’s evils

OF course the "sin of Onan" really had nothing to do directly with anything being wrong necessarily with contraception, but was directly related to Onan's refusal to honor the law regarding the wife of his brother.

Agreed that the Catholic Church has always attempted to tie it to their distorted view of sex among Humans, but that's never been a TRUE teaching - only a denominational one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Carabbio

OF course the "sin of Onan" really had nothing to do directly with anything being wrong necessarily with contraception, but was directly related to Onan's refusal to honor the law regarding the wife of his brother.

Agreed that the Catholic Church has always attempted to tie it to their distorted view of sex among Humans, but that's never been a TRUE teaching - only a denominational one.

---

The Catholic church doesn't take scripture then try and make doctrine out of it like evangelicals do. Comes from Tradition of the apostles handed down thru the early church. There are plenty of early writings that are explicite against artificial birth control. I don't think you could make a case in scripture for every moral situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tealblue

The Catholic church doesn't take scripture then try and make doctrine out of it like evangelicals do. Comes from Tradition of the apostles handed down thru the early church. There are plenty of early writings that are explicite against artificial birth control. I don't think you could make a case in scripture for every moral situation.

---

What do you mean by that statement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exegete.writ

What do you mean by that statement?

---

What I mean is Christianity was never based on the bible. The church was in place 100 years before the last ink was written. Then it wasn't until 400 until a cannon was even agreed upon. Yes the bible is inspired but who is doing the interpretation. It all comes down to anyone who says the bible is their authority is actually their own authority.

"I don't think you could make a case in scripture for every moral situation."

I'd say that there are sufficient guidelines in the Word to get real "ballparkey" about just about everything, and the "Tradition" of the Romanist organization has yielded much ANTI-biblical belief as it has developed and grown over the years - so it's hardly a "Standard" by which anything can be evaluated safely.

Well when you say ballparky that leads to private interpretation which leads to you own moral standard. People choose churches that fit thier own theology or if that doesn't work they creat their own. Making themselves their own master.

I not being a big fan of the traditions of men (Catholic, Protestant, or otherwise) say that these quagmires always develop as the result of not being from God.

The tradition of man defined lust and then back imposed it upon the biblical meaning of the word. I have to state the obvious... the word of God takes precedent over the words of men... otherwise its all for naught.

There is nothing in the Bible about lust between a husband and a wife being wrong. The marriage bed is undefiled (Hebrews 13:4).

Ornan's sin was in his willingness to have sex with his brother's widow and not fulfill raising up and heir to his dead brother... which didn't refrain him from the intercourse.

Honestly... I never understood the Catholic mind set... how folks made to feel so guilty about sexual relations could be expected to have big families... and the imposed celibacy on the priesthood and the monasteries and convents...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnd

I not being a big fan of the traditions of men (Catholic, Protestant, or otherwise) say that these quagmires always develop as the result of not being from God.

The tradition of man defined lust and then back imposed it upon the biblical meaning of the word. I have to state the obvious... the word of God takes precedent over the words of men... otherwise its all for naught.

There is nothing in the Bible about lust between a husband and a wife being wrong. The marriage bed is undefiled (Hebrews 13:4).

Ornan's sin was in his willingness to have sex with his brother's widow and not fulfill raising up and heir to his dead brother... which didn't refrain him from the intercourse.

Honestly... I never understood the Catholic mind set... how folks made to feel so guilty about sexual relations could be expected to have big families... and the imposed celibacy on the priesthood and the monasteries and convents...

---

1 Thes 4:3-7 This is the will of God, your holiness: that you refrain from immorality,
4
that each of you know how to acquire a wife for himself in holiness and honor,
5
not in LUSTFUL p***ion as do the Gentiles who do not know God;

This verse talks about HOW to aquire a wife NOT in lustful p***ion.

As far as celabacy Paul goes himself recomended it.

Hi Tealblue,

I'm sorry you became a Catholic. I'm ***uming you mean Roman Catholic.

All those consistent in Roman Catholicism are bound for purgatory, forever.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

The term Roman Catholic came from the 17th century to seperate Catholics who are and are not in communion with the pope. The word Catholic first appeard in the early second century. The church has always been Catholic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leslie

Like I said, I think there is a difference between desire and lust.

---

Perhaps in the dictionary, but in real life I would think the lines are blurry....

I think to really understand this topic you would need to sit down and carefully draw-out what you means by the terms, because at first glance the terms used by people are very interchangeable.