Question...

[Oblio]

This is a question that simply can't be open to private interpretation by numerous spritual fathers who may all come to different conclusions. Either sex within marriage is right because God made it so for the union and blessing of husband and wife and for the procreation of children, or it is only right as a means to procreation. Which is it?

Well, like so many things in Orthodoxy (WRT the heterodox) it is not either/or but both/and

Steve & Bill broach this subject on OLIC segments that address the CT article by Sam Torode, even the belief that he feels that the 'encouraged marital fasting' is hidden until Holy Baptism and Chrismation is discussed.

 

[Annoula]

i agree with Michael.

and i would take it a bit further...(cause i see it that way)... if you lust for your husband/wife that may also be a bad thing.
because lust results in seeing the other person as an object, and you are trying to satisfy your personal materialistic needs. i would say that this may be "forgiven" in a marriage but it does not look good.

i strongly believe that there should be a "lust" to touch the other person's soul (because you respect, love, care for them) - through the body.

 

[joyfulthanks]

Well, like so many things in Orthodoxy (WRT the heterodox) it is not either/or but both/and

Steve & Bill broach this subject on OLIC segments that address the CT article by Sam Torode, even the belief that he feels that the 'encouraged marital fasting' is hidden until Holy Baptism and Chrismation is discussed.

Could you please define what you mean by 'encouraged marital fasting'?

And if this is hidden until Baptism and Chrismation is discussed, are there other things the church hides from inquirers/catechumens? It seems kind of shady to me to not be upfront about what will be required of you until after you have already committed yourself.

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

 

[icxn]

So what about those past menopause?

If this is truly representative of Orthodox praxis, I think it's something they ought to tell people before they sign on the dotted line:

"You have to fast 200 days out of the year, and oh yeah - no sex unless your sole intention is procreation."

So assuming the intent is procreation, do you consider it a sin to actually enjoy sex with your spouse?

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

While the Church (Saints) teaches us the ideal state of man it does not expect everyone, nor immediately to reach that state. Also, failure to achieve self-control is not alltogether bad. It can be a very good source of humility, which is very beneficial for our soul. On the other hand if we make failure the normal state of being, where is the benefit?

Here's the ideal:

Two of the fathers asked God to reveal to them the measure (of spiritual excellence) to which they had attained. And a voice came to them which said that in such and such a village in Egypt there was a certain layman called Eucharistos and his wife Mary, and that they had not yet arrived at their measure. And the two elders rose and went to the village. And they enquired and found his hut and his wife, and they asked her: "Where is your husband?" And she said: "He is a shepherd, and is pasturing the sheep." And she took them into her hut. And when the evening had come, her husband came with the sheep; and when he saw the elders, he prepared a table for them and brought water to wash their feet. And the elders said to him: "We shall not eat anything unless you tell us about your life." And he said with all humility. "I am a shepherd, and this is my wife." And the elders did not stop questioning him, but he would not speak. Then they said to him, "God sent us to you," As soon as he heard this, he was afraid and told them: "We inherited these sheep from our parents and if God wills us to receive any profit from them, we divide it into three portions: one portion for the poor, and a portion for the entertainment of strangers, and the third portion for our own use. From the time I took my wife, I have not known her, but she is a virgin, and each of us sleeps alone, and no one has known of this till now." And when they heard this, the elders marveled, and they went away glorifying God. - The Desert Fathers
​

 

[Annoula]

no one is obliged to do "marrital fasting", and i am not even sure if the Church encourages that. never heard a couple saying that their priest said "don't do it".

i've heard the former Archimandrite of Peireus saying that the Church does not get in the couple's bedroom.


i think that such fasting would have the intention of controlling our passions, similarily to "i stop eating chocolate because i am eager for it".

at least that's the way i understand it.

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

Grace,

While I really cannot comment at all on marital relations and the Church's position on them, I will say this: do not rely on the internet for sound Orthodox teaching.

While forums such as this can serve as a guide, it really is best to discuss these things with a priest.

I know you don't want to hear that, but it is true. For only a priest can discern what is right for your situation, and what will serve your spiritual needs best.

This all goes back to the the analogy that the Orthodox Church is a hospital for sinners, and the priests are our doctors. Only they can prescribe what is right for each of us.

God bless,

Maureen

 

[Annoula]

icxn,

maybe you have another story when an elder visited two women who had married 2 brothers???

the wives were greater than the elder in virtue although they have not said no to marrital relations. their virtue was that they were humble and never said a bad word to each other. they never criticised.

you may have this one somewhere!!!

(have to go now! bye!)

 

[VickiY]

What I have been told by a priest was that the West had a very different view of sexual relations withing marriage than the East. The West was largely influenced by Augustine, who had rather a bit of an anti-pleasure thing going.

The Orthodox Church does not "hide" information from inquirerers or catechumens. However, the reality is that the answer depends on the individuals. What is bad for one couple may be perfectly acceptable for another couple, given their circumstances.

Hence, "Ask your priest". (and, I'll see if I can find someone who does not mind being e-mailed on the subject).

 

[Oblio]

Could you please define what you mean by 'encouraged marital fasting'?

And if this is hidden until Baptism and Chrismation is discussed, are there other things the church hides from inquirers/catechumens? It seems kind of shady to me to not be upfront about what will be required of you until after you have already committed yourself.

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

Agreed !

The false claim by Sam (a neophyte convert) was that the Church encourages fasting from sex, and hides this until it is too late. The show debunks this claim.

 

[Michael G]

What I have been told by a priest was that the West had a very different view of sexual relations withing marriage than the East. The West was largely influenced by Augustine, who had rather a bit of an anti-pleasure thing going.

That is largely due to the unhealthy case of scruples he had due to his own sinfulness as a youth. Augustine could not forgive himself for the sinfullness of his youth. According to my priest not being able to forgive yourself of your sins, even though God probably has already forgiven them, is due to pride. It is for his case of scruples, so ardently outlined for us in the Confessions that I have a hard time regarding him as being a saint. Yes, the west has a much less healthy view of marital relations than the east does.

 

[kamikat]

Could you please define what you mean by 'encouraged marital fasting'?

And if this is hidden until Baptism and Chrismation is discussed, are there other things the church hides from inquirers/catechumens? It seems kind of shady to me to not be upfront about what will be required of you until after you have already committed yourself.

Your sister in Christ,
Grace

In my experience, it hasn't been hidden at all. However, there are things that apply to cradle Orthodox that might not apply to converts, especially if your spouse is not joining the church with you. A non-Orthodox or non-Christian spouse is not obligated to follow the marital fast, therefore the Orthodox spouse can not impose it on him/her. You may read somewhere on-line that Orthodox couples are encouraged to fast from relations, but only YOUR priest knows you and your spouse.
(I can't remember if you have mentioned how your husband feels toward Orthodoxy. If he's coming along for the ride, you still need to discuss it with your priest)
The marital fast is no different from the food fast. Your priest knows if you have diabetes and needs to eat certain things or you work hard manual labor and need more food. Only your priest knows what's best for you and your husband. I will admit, it can be embarrassing to discuss this with someone other than your spouse, but only discussing it with your priest will eleviate your worries. Believe me, several months ago, I almost let someone from this board talk me out of Orthodoxy because he told me I couldn't be a good Orthodox Christian because my husband wasn't Christian because of the marital fasting. This was a big deal for me. Don't let it be a big deal for you.
kamikat

 

[Vedant]

Wow! This thread is exactly why I like Orthodoxy. Things can and can't be sin, but whatever it might be, a person is called to go on a continuous process towards getting better.

Love is the most important thing in marriage. The Catholics believe that love without being open to procreation isn't true love. I don't know, it's just so awkward and mechanical to me, that is, putting into a box what love and love isn't and defining it, because it's expressed in so many different ways, sexually and non-sexually.

*sigh* my heart is still schismed.

I wonder if Eastern Catholics have sacrificed this Eastern Orthodox openness to things like this for the sake of being in communion with Rome.

 

[Monica child of God 1]

Here is the response I got when I asked a priest about this:

YOU WRITE: Are certain sexual acts between married people forbidden? What if one's spouse is not Orthodox, as is my case?

RESPONSE: In general, any sexual act that is "self-directed" -- that is, aimed at pleasing "me" rather than displaying my love for my partner -- is selfish and sinful. Also, any sexual act that is forced upon another person against his or her will would be considered sinful as well. Whether one's partner is Orthodox or not has nothing to do with this...

Please do not substitute any online advice for personal pastoral counseling. Sex is an important part of marriage. Even those Orthodox who decide to forgo relations in order to draw closer to God see it as an sacrafice (as in, an offering) to God not to be taken lightly.

Also, lets not forget that there is a very, um, well...hot love poem in the middle of the Old Testament that does not mention procreation at all:

Lover: How beautiful you are and how pleasing,
O love, with your delights!

Your stature is like that of the palm,
and your breasts like clusters of fruit.

I said, "I will climb the palm tree;
I will take hold of its fruit."
May your breasts be like the clusters of the vine,
the fragrance of your breath like apples,
and your mouth like the best wine.

Beloved: May the wine go straight to my lover,
flowing gently over lips and teeth.

I belong to my lover,
and his desire is for me...


Beloved: Awake, north wind,
and come, south wind!
Blow on my garden,
that its fragrance may spread abroad.
Let my lover come into his garden
and taste its choice fruits.

Lover: I have come into my garden, my sister, my bride;
I have gathered my myrrh with my spice.
I have eaten my honeycomb and my honey;
I have drunk my wine and my milk.


M.

 

[tall73]

The thing about Orthodoxy is this: you can't quote one father of the Church and think that is the majority opinion. My priest has made it quite clear there are majority and minority opinions among the fathers. Thus you have to read a BUNCH of the fathers to get the majority opinion. This is not Rome, there is not cut dry answer. .

Interesting perspective. I guess my question would be then do different priests come to different conclusions about the fathers regarding such issues if all have read thoroughly? Or is it the situation that determines the advice?

The Orthodox understanding of the fathers is something that can be confusing for someone trying to learn

 

[tall73]

I think the following quote from St. Maximus should give you an answer:

Vice is the wrong use of our conceptual images of things, which leads us to misuse the things themselves. In relation to women, for example, sexual intercourse, rightly used, has as its purpose the begetting of children. He, therefore, who seeks in it only sensual pleasure uses it wrongly, for he reckons as good what is not good. When such a man has intercourse with a woman, he misuses her. And the same is true with regard to other things and our conceptual images of them. - St Maximos the Confessor, 2nd Century on Love
​

I have read a couple threads on this topic now, and there are some obvious differences of opinion. But from the perspective of those who take Maximus above, how does one reconcile the view of Maximus with that of Paul in I Corinthians 7?

1Co 7:1 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman."
1Co 7:2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.
1Co 7:3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband.
1Co 7:4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
1Co 7:5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
1Co 7:6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this.
1Co 7:7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.
1Co 7:8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am.
1Co 7:9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

First of all it is clear that Paul would prefer they "be as him" ie, be single. It is good for a man not to have sex with a woman, as Paul says. However, each has their own gift. The point is that he seems to say he would rather they not marry, to save themselves trouble, and to better serve the Lord (keeping the whole chapter in view). But he also seems to say that some are not called to this. Jesus too framed it in this way, saying those who CAN accept it, should accept it. But there is also the recognition that once you are married, there are certain expectations.

So then, here are my specific questions (please note, these are questions to aid understanding. I don't intend to debate the answers, as this is not my forum, but am requesting clarification. The specific answers are important, but so is the question of how individual church fathers effect Orthodox theology.)

a. those who are "aflame with passion" are counseled to marry. Why would they be if marriage is only for procreation. It would seem to be MORE tempting to be married, have the person there all the time, and not engage in sexual relations.

b For those who are married they should not withhold except for mutually agreed on times of prayer. The text records that this is done to avoid the temptations of the evil of the times. If they are not to withold because of temptation, does this not imply that sex is about more than just procreation? There seems to be an admission that there is pleasure involved.

d. To refrain is not seen as being more holy when one is married, but is seen to "deprive". That implies that it is meant for pleasure. It is also seen as FURTHERING temptation to illicit sex.

It seems that Paul sees married sex as the only appropriate place for sex. And while he would prefer everyone be single, he seems to uphold that sex for those who are married should be frequent, and apparently enjoyable enough to satisfy the natural drive.

So then, how does one reconcile all of this with Maximus' view, which seems to take married sex as something that should not be done often, and only for procreation?


Finally, what are the details on the marital fast? Is it , as Paul mentions, a voluntary time for prayer that is mutually agreed on? Or is it more formal?

 

[Oblio]

Voluntary. The determination is between husband, wife, and often their spiritual Father.

 

[kamikat]

Finally, what are the details on the marital fast? Is it , as Paul mentions, a voluntary time for prayer that is mutually agreed on? Or is it more formal?

As far as I know, the marital fast is whenever there is a food fast, such as every Friday and Wednesday, the night before receiving the Eucharist, both lenten periods prior to Pascha and Christmas and the fast before the feast of Sts Peter and Paul. Sure, that sounds like alot, but it has to be in mutual agreenment. As has been mentioned before, like the food fasts, marital fasting should be under the guidance of a priest who knows the couple well.

kamikat

 

[rusmeister]

Blah blah blah.. you have to spread some rep around before giving it to Michael again, baah blah blah.
In general, very well said, Michael!!!

 

[icxn]

I have read a couple threads on this topic now, and there are some obvious differences of opinion. But from the perspective of those who take Maximus above, how does one reconcile the view of Maximus with that of Paul in I Corinthians 7? (...)

This time the Desert Fathers have an answer for most of your questions:

Abba Abraham came to Abba Arius, 'And as they were sittings another brother came to the elder and said to him: "Tell me, what must I do to be saved?" The elder said to him: "Go and for the whole of this year eat bread and salt in the evening; then come again, and I shall tell you. The brother went away and did so. When the year was over, the brother came again to Abba Arius. And it happened that Abba Abraham was also there, The elder said again to the brother: "Go and fast this year too, taking food every other day." And when the brother had gone, Abba Abraham said to Abba Arius: "Why do you talk to all the other brethren about an easy yoke, while on this brother you lay a heavy burden?" The elder replied: "As the brethren come to ask, so they receive an answer; but this one comes for God's sake. He is a laborer, and whatever you tell him to do he does zealously. And so I tell him the way of perfection." - The Desert Fathers
​

In other words, each situation is unique and a lot of discretion is required to give correct guidance, bottom line:

Ask your spiritual father.

 

[joyfulthanks]

Okay, now I need further clarification about asking one's spiritual father about things all the time.

If there are a variety of opinions in Orthodoxy about things, and no one opinion is simply "right," and one is to ask one's spiritual father about what is right for him or her all the time, how does this differ much from protestantism?

In other words, if you have various spiritual fathers interpreting the scriptures and the church fathers for themselves and applying them to individual situations, how does that differ much from each believer (or each congregation's pastor) interpreting scripture for himself and applying these interpretations to individual circumstances?

What firm foundation do you have to stand on if different priests are giving different counsel to different people based on differing interpretations of the fathers (whose interpretations themselves don't always agree)?

Sorry, I know these sentences are wordy, but it was the best I could do today.

Your sister in Christ,
Grace