All Comments (36)

to quote Mark Twain
"The easy confidence with which
I know another man's religion is
foolish,teaches me to suspect
that my own is also."
Would that the average religious person had the ability to also ponder such a notion.

Robert B:
Sorry, meant for two people who have been dating for a while and knew one another. Agree with the happy medium. Thanks.
Jeff

Stephen Elder,

JD Crossan has not been a Catholic university professor for many years. He is married and currently a Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida. http://www.johndominiccrossan.com/index.html

To Ba'al --

Your comments are fair. I certainly don't wish to impose the Catholic view of sexuality on everyone, as that would impinge upon the individual's freedom. I was just trying to indicate that man, despite having evolved from animals, has the ability to resist his more bestial impulses through his reason.

To Steven --

You do know that the Catholic Church invented the concept of the university, right?

Also, sometimes the best way to understand something is to look at it from the outside. Otherwise, you might as well say that humans can't study cellular biology because we're not ameobas...

To Jeff --

I note that you do not posit any kind of relationship between these two people. Therefore, assuming that these two people are engaging in casual sex with no strings attached, I'd say yes, it is immoral. A sexual relationship should represent the epitome of deep commitment. That means that it is best saved until marriage.

Now, this does not mean that I think that pre-marital sex is a one way ticket to the Inferno. I leave judgment in such cases to God, who knows the souls of those involved. But such a treatment of sex as you describe does indicate a lack of maturity that is disturbing. The sexual revolution accomplished some wonderful things, but I tend to think that our society has gone too far in the "free love" direction. We need to find a happy medium between Victorian mores and a sexual free-for-all.

I don't understand how a professor at any catholic university (that's an oxymoron isn't it?)
could possibly even begin to talk about sex.

That would be more or less be like Satan talking on Love.

Please professor, stick with what you know best.
Whatever that may be.

Yockel --

Thank you for the info. As I don't read German, I'll have to wait for a translation.

Hi Robert,

The Authors of God's Secret Children (German) report that there are thousands of illegitimate children fathered by priests in Germany alone. Thank heavens, the Roman Catholic Church pays alimony but it does not disclose data. On the contrary, ecclesiastical authorties encourage mothers to remain quiet rather than cooperating with researchers. Therefore it is challenging to come up with hard numbers.

There are some fascinating qualitative studies. For example, God's Secret Children estimates that as many as fifty percent of Catholic priests in Germany have illegitimate children. That figure is probably too high but even if it is only half as much, celibacy is a problematic institution.

For those who can read German, here is a link to the book:
http://www.dtv.de/dtv.cfm?wohin=dtvnr34274

FTA: "...But, actually, in our current popular media sex is neither sacred nor sinful—just silly."

OK...I dont think Ive laughed so hard in weeks. It thin that pretty much sums up this entire debate. Well-said :D Nothing more to see here

The question was:
"Why do you think some religions have regarded sex as sacred while others have regarded it as a sin?"

The question disregards all the contingencies and contexts of sex. I know of no religion that regards all sex as immoral, though there may be some that never consider any type of sex as sacred. And it appears Wiccans may deem all consensual sex as sacred.

Organized religions that actively prescribe a sexual morality must make many decisions about human sexual behavior (impossible to stop); and all the different aspects of sexual behavior combine to present a potentially huge number of prescriptions.

To defray making a huge number of sexual laws and ordinances, most religions develop their sexual moralities from just a few ideas that can easily be digested and conformed to (at least in public) by their adherents. Easily followed formulas designed to guide their followers in proper sexual conduct, but still reflecting the society they function in and the normative sexual behaviour found there (but don't discount the importance of the society's ruling class in setting these formulas). Religions will describe sex as sacred or sinful when it is practiced in a way that can possibly be held as conforming to or rejecting it's precepts and principles.

The key to whether sex is considered sacred or sinful are these religious precepts and principles. Religions that developed where a society had positive attitudes toward sex would consider more variations of sex as sacred; and those developed where a society (or the ruling class) had more negative attitudes, fewer variations could be considered sacred, and many more would be considered sinful.

John Crossan makes some interesting observations about ancient sexual customs in his recent book on the Apostle Paul. In Greco-Roman society sex was defined largely in terms of power, with men practically given carte blanche to penetrate whoever they wilt - and they did. Women, children and men of lower social status could all be receivers of a man's "affections" - but the reverse was unacceptable. A man of high status was acting immorally when receiving sexually because that was acting below his status.

In many ways St.Paul's preaching of chastity - even for married believers - was an act of defiance against an unjust patriarchal system. Many Roman women became believers because they felt real power by denying their husband's "right" to penetrate them.

And Paul's counsel to married believers - that their bodies weren't their own, but belonged to their partners - is another radical stand against the status quo. Equality, even in bed.

So when you think about sex, and your preferences, what power game are you a player in? Do you believe in equality, even in bed?

Robert B

As long as everybody consents, and is old enough to consent, and nobody gets hurt, I couldn't care less what other people do. Ideas as to what is sexually moral vary with time and place. For example, polygamy was clearly acceptable in the Old Testament middle east, as it is in parts of those regions today (not that I think it is a particularly good idea). In fact, that custom is one of many that make it obvious to me that "moral" ideas about sex sometimes serve the function of keeping women as property.

Of course, we bear the marks in our biology that prove that what people say they do and what they actually do are two different things, and have been for a long time.

I am not sure what I am trying to say other than different people are clearly going to draw the line in different places, and I distrust the motives and sometimes even the sanity of a lot of the people who make the most noise about sexual "morality". I especially point to that subset of fundamentalists who are simultaneously against abortion and birth control.

Robert B.

The word obscure is a little much, dont you think? To just present another subject/issue of the council in passing is not dark, dim, faint or mysterious (at least thats what Websters tells me what obscure is..:-).

Sources?

That would be scripture, the bible. Along with commentaries, lexicons, Greek and Hebrew translations- to make it all a whole from translations such as the King James (that is riddled with error)..its all there.

You might try a google search- that will lead you to those who question things such as the Nicene council. There are denominations/organizations out there that promote blowing the dust off of our bibles and putting all the pieces together. I personally will not pick any at random just to 'list' someone who thinks differently. Im not here to say any one person is right or wrong. Thru my studies, I have just personally come across many errors in translations, among other things.

All the best on your search, or 'checking others out'...I personally feel it is a good thing for all Christians to blow the dust off their bibles
and study, to show themselves approved (II Tim 2:15)

I represent a curious mix of spiritual concerns, pragmatic observation and working in the sexual basement.

Many religions have viewied intercourse as an act of worship of deity. Indeed, the "Church" is the "Bride" of Christ. Jesus said very little about sex. OT injunctions are pragmatic necessities for holding together a culture. However....

Sex is a powerful animal drive, perhaps a cruel joke from God. Males have erections in utero. Females may also have similar responses, they are not currently observable. Adolescents are going to have sex and the cultural and economically damaging prohibitions are quickly ignored.

I work with sex offenders, many of whom get incredibly damaging punishments for relatively trival actions. The phrase "sex offender" is the modern equivalent of having leporsy. True, a few doing horrid actions and destroy lives. I have observed, however, that with many actions, the "victim" is damaged far beyond reason by "awfulizing" what has happened and by religious teaching that make them feel dirty and soiled for eternity.

A cruel Joke. Why couldn't we reproduce by mitosis?

Robert B:
A question. If two people are 18 (the age of consent however is 16) years old, each has their own place to live, both have jobs and are self reliant. If they have sex and both use contraception. In your opinion, is this immoral, and if yes, why?.
Thanks.
Jeff

To Ba'al --

The hard-wired sex drive may be true, but does that absolve us from treating it in a moral manner? After all, man has reason and the ability to control his passions...

As best as I can figure out what Professor Crossan is saying here, he is taking an extreme dualist view that is at odds with everything we know about how the mind works.

Sex is not sacred or sinful or silly. It is biological and it is hard wired at the most fundamental possible levels in our lineage (with nevertheless considerable variation within individuals).

To Yockel --

Could you perhaps provide some documentation for this statement: "Celibacy does not work, not even for priests."

For the record, it's the number of priests who have broken their vows of celibacy that I'm interested in.

To DW --

I note that that your obscure dissertation from Eusebius does not answer my original question regarding sources for your argument.

However, you did say, "And for the record, no, not all of Christian religions accept the Nicene council/creed as true. That, my friend, is a blanket statement that is not factual."

Forgive me, but I was not aware of this. Perhaps you might provide us all with a list of some denominations that do not accept Nicaea? I'd like to check them out.

Robert B.

An 'issue', yes...but not to leave out other issues, such as the following:

ON THE KEEPING OF EASTER.
From the Letter of the Emperor to all those not present at the Council.
(Found in Eusebius, Vita Const., Lib. iii., 18-20.)

Now, in your estimation, who and where did God give the authority to introduce rites of pagan origin into a 'celebration' of the ressurection of our Lord and Savior, who by the way, inspired scriptural teaching to learn not the way of the heathen (Jer 10:2) and that He (who was the Word and became flesh) is the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb 13:8). Our Lord and Saviour also spoke the words 'In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrine the commandments of men.' The bible is clear that Jesus Christ instructed his disciples to keep the Passover in a New Testament light (ie instead of the sacrificial lamb, He is now the Lamb of God..and we take the bread and wine at Passover) He did not do away with the Passover. The apostles taught it to all they preached to..including the gentiles. That is, before their teaching, and those who followed, was squelched. Thus, this is part of th e validity to Rev 12:9 ..where it states that Satan has deceived the whole world.

And for the record, no, not all of Christian religions accept the Nicene council/creed as true. That, my friend, is a blanket statement that is not factual.

Mommadona,

You noted:

"the words of the venerable Geraldine:

"THE DEVIL MADE ME DO IT!"

Longest running universal excuse the male has found to justify his weenie weakness."

A priceless gem!!! Short and to the point with a religious flare to stay on topic.

Somehow this post was originally under Anonymous' name:

Ashley,

Actually there is a Commandment for skydiving i.e. Thou shalt not skydive without a parachute.

With respect to STDs:

Intercourse outside of marriage can lead not only to STDs but also divorce, illegitimate children, children without inheritance, alimony, child support, and loss of leadership figures in the child's life. This is why Christianity extols the sanctity of the marriage contract.

And my Aunt Katherine was making a point about practicing self-control. We got the picture and never considered such mutilation. :)

The media's relationship to sexuality is pathological, no doubt about it. I am not sure, however, if that validates a religious view of sex and sexuality.

In light of modern biology the dichotomy between flesh and spirit seems to become increasingly irrelevant. Myths that are recognized as such loose their value to society.

Having said that, I believe that the body soul dichotomy has added value in the past in the sense of "Man does not live of bread alone." The question is how to find a concept that does not contradict contemporary insights into the nature of life.

Brambleton, it isn't quite that easy, is it? Procreation isn't a matter of volition for any species. People are going to have sex regardless of their good intentions. They don't call it a drive for nothing.

There is a role for self-control, discipline and denial but I am afraid that celibacy is not it.

The research is clear. Celibacy does not work, not even for priests. Graduates of abstinence only courses tend to break their promises within less than eighteen months. They are also more likely to engage into the most dangerous sexual practices such as anal and oral sex. The result are premature pregnancies and needless STDs.

The aggregate data is quite clear. Countries with rational sex education programs in the schools and the media have lower rates of STDs than the United States.

In this country, the problem is that the media tell the kids to do everything but the young folks know nothing about sex. That can be fatal. We got to get beyond the denial and deal with it.

To DW --

I see. Well, history says that the main issue at Nicaea was the problem of the Arian heresy, not the "pagan practices" you excoriate. Do you have any sources to back up your argument about Nicaea?

The entire Christian religion accepts Nicaea as a true council. So what church do you belong to?

For those of you keeping track, Revelation 12:9 says: "The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him."

>>The Church eventually declared such a practice heretical at the Council of Nicaea.

The Nicene Council was really no more than Constantine and his croonies, who desired to introduce pagan practices into Christianity (and succeeded with flying colors, I might add, to this very day)). From and through thus, comes the fulfillment of Rev. 12:9 upon this world. Any recognition of Constantine, the Nicene Council, et. al. has brought nothing but religious confusion upon this world.

To Brambleton --

Absolutely! Sixth graders should have to purchase condoms like everyone else! :)

Seriously, as a teacher, I am quite uncomfortable talking about sexual morality in front of kids. Such a discussion (apart from the purely biological point of view) is a thing for the home, not the classroom. Unfortunately, many parents seem to have surrendered this duty to the schools, so some kind of institutional sexual education is necessary.

Ashley,

Actually there is a Commandment for skydiving i.e. Thou shalt not skydive without a parachute.

With respect to STDs:

Intercourse outside of marriage can lead not only to STDs but also divorce, illegitimate children, children without inheritance, alimony, child support, and loss of leadership figures in the child's life. This is why Christianity extols the sanctity of the marriage contract.

And my Aunt Katherine was making a point about practicing self-control. We got the picture and never considered such mutilation. :)

In the words of the venerable Geraldine:

"THE DEVIL MADE ME DO IT!"

Longest running universal excuse the male has found to justify his weenie weakness.

Everything else being equal, abstaining from sex will prevent you from acquiring STD's. Period. These are the facts and they are not in dispute. And if Ms. Ashley would stop watching Oprah for a second, she'd learn that the history of STD's does not show any sign, whatsoever, of ceasing anytime soon. Condoms to 6th graders is not the answer. (Apologies for veering off point).

Like Ashley, I too tend to doubt that the two commandments were established to prevent STDs. In a strict legal sense (that is, leaving moral truths out of it), they were an extension of maintaining harmonious social relations between members of the communities. Very few things tend to piss human beings off more than discovering their spouses in the arms of another. Such feelings are probably a holdover from our time as lower primates. :)

As for Aunt Katherine's suggestion, some early Christians went so far as to willingly castrate themselves to "purify" themselves from the temptations of the flesh. The Church eventually declared such a practice heretical at the Council of Nicaea.

I apologize Sir, I did not mean to be disrepectful. Please forgive me. I'm still aching here. Bear with me please.

Concerned,

It is obvious that skydiving can be very, very pleasurable but it can also be very, very dangerous. Do we need commandments against that?

I dispute the notion that Christian sex hang-ups derive from the threat of STDs. If we were to conquer every known STD, bible-thumpers would still spend most of their time crying out against the 'sins of the flesh'.

Your Aunt Katherine sounds sadistic.

Dear Sir, respectfully, you need counseling. We have so many hangups over sex it has become a damn battlefield. The planet is getting crowded. If you are in a serious relationship ONE is plenty. As many FRIENDS as you can make time for. Adam did not pay enough attention to Eve. If he did she would not have acted so stupid in the first place.

Robert B,

Well said!!

Another point:

In everything we do, there is always the safety aspect. It is obvious that intercourse can be very, very pleasurable but it also can be very, very dangerous especially when having intercourse with multiple partners. This has been recognized by Judaism and Christianity for many millenium with the resultant Commandments of Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery and Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Wife. Mother Nature can be very cruel when there are violations of said Commandments. This cruelity can be extended to the children of violators with diseases being transferred and families being torn apart.

My very wise Aunt Katherine's advice to her nephews? Slamming it in a window brings instant self-control.

Christianity's "obsession" with sexuality really seems to begin with St. Augustine. Throughout his life, Augustine struggled with sexuality as his chief temptation ("Give me chastity and give me constancy, but do not give them yet.") As a result, Christian theology is perceived as having a "sex is bad" message. In reality, however, Augustine claims that worldly love is *not* a bad thing (something which his old sect, the Manichees, denied). However, sexuality does become sinful when its expression becomes more important that our devotion to what he terms the "spiritual pleasures" (morality, faith, the love of God). Thus, sexuality is no sin when it is exercised within certain moral boundaries, which for Christians means marriage.