Polish Priest Advocates Happy Sex Life In New Book

[tinytherese]

[quote name='ariaane' post='1866953' date='May 14 2009, 03:26 AM']I thought this thread was about to be about this popular priest who writes sex novels and publishes them. I think he might do it under an alias though.[/quote]


When I first saw this thread I thought that it would be about a priest who was advocating "free love."

[ariaane]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' post='1866963' date='May 14 2009, 09:48 AM']Are you looking at your spouse as a means to an end? Wanting just to get your own sexual pleasure? That's lust.

Or do you instead look at them with pure love, wanting not just your own pleasure, but, more importantly, [b]wanting to love them, to show them that love, to give them that pleasure[/b]?

A bit simplistic perhaps, but hopefully that helps. [/quote]

It does.

So is every feeling of lust betwen a husband and wife a mortal sin which has to be confessed?

[ariaane]

[quote name='tinytherese' post='1866976' date='May 14 2009, 10:37 AM']When I first saw this thread I thought that it would be about a priest who was advocating "free love."[/quote]

There is, however, a popular priest in the US who does publish erotic novels.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1866587' date='May 13 2009, 08:17 PM']I predict this thread will soon move to the debate board.

. . . then be closed after twenty-odd pages.

[/quote]
I can only get one more warning, so hopefully it will be moved and closed fast.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='ariaane' post='1867034' date='May 14 2009, 12:21 PM']It does.

So is every feeling of lust betwen a husband and wife a mortal sin which has to be confessed?[/quote]
That is a good question, and I'm afraid I don't really know the answer. I would assume that it would be like any other mortal sin, so if it was done intentionally, with full knowledge, that it would be.

[ariaane]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' post='1867038' date='May 14 2009, 01:28 PM']That is a good question, and I'm afraid I don't really know the answer. I would assume that it would be like any other mortal sin, so if it was done intentionally, with full knowledge, that it would be.[/quote]

There must be a lot of married couples in the confessional on weekends then...

[Groo the Wanderer]

[quote name='ariaane' post='1866953' date='May 14 2009, 03:26 AM']Question: How do you distinguish between lusting for your spouse, and being sexually excited during the marital act?

I’ve never understood this...[/quote]


Easy one.

Arousal and the emotions/feelings, etc it raises are normal and they come from God. Sex is a gift from God.

What distinguishes this from lust is what you do with it. If you look at (or whatever) your spouse and see them (or parts of them) as objects for your personal gratification, be it physical or mental, then it is lust. If however, you see them as what they are: a person created in the image and likeness of God, who with you represent and mirror the Holy Trinity and the relationship between Christ and His Church, then you are not lusting.

Inside marriage, one can indeed have an 'exuberance' when sharing the marital act. If it is indeed sharing and not selfish, it cannot be lustful.


It's really like anything else God has created. When used properly, it is wonderful. When abused and twisted for selfish reasons, one descends into sin. Pizza for example is definitely inspired by God and comes close to being so wonderful as to aspire to sacrament-ship. But the abuse of pizza by consuming vast quantities in too short a time leads to gluttony.

[MithLuin]

Only if you equate 'lust' and 'sexual desire' - which the Church does not.

By analogy, we all have hunger pangs from time to time, but that does not mean we are being gluttonous.

Sexual desire directed towards someone who is not a spouse is going to be lustful, yes. That is why we are taught to guard our eyes, avoid occasions of sin, etc. Impure thoughts are sinful.

In matrimony, the spouses pledge to give themselves totally to one another. So, in looking at one's spouse, one is not desiring something that [u]doesn't belong to you[/u]. The misuse of something is sinful.

That is not to say that one cannot lust after one's spouse - one certainly can. An 'I got what I wanted' attitude about sex makes it clear that it's all about you, not about your spouse at all. In other words, you are treating your spouse, a human being you profess to love, as a mere object for your use. SERIOUSLY messed up. How will you know if your sexual desire is an example of lust or love? Well....what are you seeking? The good of the other person? Is your concern for your spouse? Or...are you only interested in what [i]you[/i] want. That would be a strong clue that something is wrong and messed up. That, or your spouse coming after you with a rolling pin But in all honesty, a person who feels used may not tell you, or be able to put into words what is wrong...but that person would certainly be more likely to put off the sexual advances of the spouse. Lustful relationships are not healthy, and the sin manifests itself by damaging the relationship between the spouses. In other words "something is wrong" translates to the marriage.


We should keep in mind that a book written and published in Polish is meant to address Polish cultural attitudes. It is quite possible that this priest spoke to many couples who had an attitude that sex was something 'dirty' that they were wrong to engage in, and he was trying to correct that with a more Christian, Biblical understanding of the role of sex in marriage. He may have overshot in trying to make that point, but if he helps couples to understand a bit more about their relationship with God and remove some [i]needless[/i] guilt, then some good will come of it. Obviously, none of us have read his book, but if it becomes available in English, there will likely be some points that can be challenged.



Don't worry, [b]Apo[/b], I don't think anyone has forgotten your opinion on disgusting sexual practices which I will not utter here.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

The "fantasy" suggestion in the article bothers me. I've never understood how it is respectful of one's spouse in the sexual act to pretend they are someone else (and I maintain that pretending they are, say, of a certain profession that they clearly aren't, is still pretending they are different from themselves). I think sex should be two spouses accepting one another as they are (albeit spouses should always want to improve one another in holiness).

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='ariaane' post='1867034' date='May 14 2009, 07:21 AM']It does.

So is every feeling of lust between a husband and wife a mortal sin which has to be confessed?[/quote]

No. Feelings are not sins; sins require choices. If a man has a lustful thought about his wife and shakes it off, he has not sinned. If he chooses to follow through with the thought, he has sinned.

By the way, if a man has a genuine sexual desire for his wife, he can keep it in mind if his intention is to turn it into an opportunity for sexual intercourse. I mean, all sex starts with one spouse getting the thought in his/her head and choosing to follow through with that thought by trying to see if the other is interested. Obviously this is not immoral, or else no one would ever have sex without sinning.

All the situations I mention can have the men and women switched, as I'm sure you know.

By the way, just as an aside, I never find my wife more attractive than when either she or I (or both) is fresh from Confession. Everything is sort of put behind us and we can see each other clearly out of love as brother and sister in Christ, not stressed-out anxiety about our arguments or the things that have come between us.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1867127' date='May 14 2009, 11:51 AM']The "fantasy" suggestion in the article bothers me. I've never understood how it is respectful of one's spouse in the sexual act to pretend they are someone else (and I maintain that pretending they are, say, of a certain profession that they clearly aren't, is still pretending they are different from themselves). I think sex should be two spouses accepting one another as they are (albeit spouses should always want to improve one another in holiness).[/quote]

I guess it depends on what you mean by fantasy. I don't think we should assume what isn't necessarily there. While I'm not sure I agree with the whole profession thing, the word fantasy could indicate various desires that are holy.

[MithLuin]

Keep in mind that we are dealing with a translation from Polish - it would be worthwhile to see what word was used in the original that has been translated as 'fantasy' - but I agree that the English word certainly has connotations of 'pretending your spouse is someone he or she is clearly not' - which would not be a great way to honor him or her as a person. Hopefully, the context of that quotation goes on to explain that.

To put this in a different context, playing at 'make-believe' is not typically disrespectful. If you go for a walk in the woods with a person, and pretend there are bandits to hide from (or pretend that you are Lewis and Clark or something), that would not be disrespectful of anything. But this is because both people are agreed that you [i]want[/i] to be walking in the woods with that person, and this is a game that you are playing while doing it. It wouldn't be as much fun if you said, 'This walk is boring - I'd really rather be on an expedition somewhere else.'

I think there is plenty of opportunity for the message of "I'd rather be..." to come across within marriage, which would be harmful. A couple could pretend they are somewhere they are not, though, and this would not necessarily be a problem.

The real problem is that fetishism (of any variety) objectifies a person by focusing on an attribute, which would then be interchangable with any other person; reducing someone to a uniform, rather than recognizing her as a person.

1 Corinthians 10:31 applies to marriage, too:
"Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatsoever else you do, do all to the glory of God."

Edited May 14, 2009 by MithLuin

[Theoketos]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1867127' date='May 14 2009, 10:51 AM']The "fantasy" suggestion in the article bothers me. I've never understood how it is respectful of one's spouse in the sexual act to pretend they are someone else (and I maintain that pretending they are, say, of a certain profession that they clearly aren't, is still pretending they are different from themselves). I think sex should be two spouses accepting one another as they are (albeit spouses should always want to improve one another in holiness).[/quote]

I think that the part about fantasy was saying that it is a negative and on par with sex being without joy.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1867134' date='May 14 2009, 03:58 PM']No. Feelings are not sins; sins require choices. If a man has a lustful thought about his wife and shakes it off, he has not sinned. If he chooses to follow through with the thought, he has sinned.

By the way, if a man has a genuine sexual desire for his wife, he can keep it in mind if his intention is to turn it into an opportunity for sexual intercourse. I mean, all sex starts with one spouse getting the thought in his/her head and choosing to follow through with that thought by trying to see if the other is interested. Obviously this is not immoral, or else no one would ever have sex without sinning.

All the situations I mention can have the men and women switched, as I'm sure you know.

By the way, just as an aside, I never find my wife more attractive than when either she or I (or both) is fresh from Confession. Everything is sort of put behind us and we can see each other clearly out of love as brother and sister in Christ, not stressed-out anxiety about our arguments or the things that have come between us.[/quote]
You said what I was trying to, only much better.

[CatherineM]

I have a friend from law school who married a man who has a simple labor job. Nothing wrong with that, but she obviously makes substantially more money that he does. That can be emasculating. They joined a Renaissance reenactment group where they spend their weekends with him as a knight, and her as a lady in waiting. She said the fantasy saved their marriage. When men get older, sometimes arousal can be a more complicated matter than it is for a 20 year old. I don't see anything wrong with some fantasy so long as both partners want to take part, and neither is being degraded in any way.