In God's eyes, you who have struggled and kept your virginity ALL your life, is EQUAL to a Prostitute who repented for her sins and was baptised in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
YOU ARE EQUAL.
Agreed, she would have incurred physical chastisement as a result of her actions, but in terms of purity, you are EXACTLY the same.
So, I would disagree with you.
When you say:
Why can't we view them the same? Simple. Both had to struggle. God will never give you something more than you can handle. While it's unfortunate that one person fell, it doesn't make them the equal of the person who has kept his/her virginity.
This is totally incorrect, and its unchristian.
Their Baptism or repentance, confession makes them EQUAL to you!!
Why do you have a problem with that? I'm not God.. take it up with Him!!
[quote author=Zoxsasi link=topic=10674.msg130923#msg130923 date=1297950231] Why do you have a problem with that? I'm not God.. take it up with Him!!
If I'm not mistaken, there's a crown for chastity. Think about that one for a moment. My stance was clear. If you choose to twist my words as you clearly have earlier, that's up to you. I will no longer post on this thread, you (Zoxsasi) are wasting my time and energy.
[quote author=GODlovesme link=topic=10674.msg130924#msg130924 date=1297952020] [quote author=Zoxsasi link=topic=10674.msg130923#msg130923 date=1297950231] Why do you have a problem with that? I'm not God.. take it up with Him!!
If I'm not mistaken, there's a crown for chastity. Think about that one for a moment. My stance was clear. If you choose to twist my words as you clearly have earlier, that's up to you. I will no longer post on this thread, you (Zoxsasi) are wasting my time and energy.
Go! But PLEASE do not tell others that YOUR opinion is that of the Church, NOR of God. It has NOTHING to do with Christianity.
OK?
Its FAR from it.
Its the exact opposite even.
How have I twisted your words. I think you were abundantly clear - that because you are a virgin all your life, you should get some credit for it, more than another girl who wasn't and repented and confessed everything the last day of her life.
GOD TREATS YOU THE SAME. He treats the repentant prostitute, who has been baptised AS IF SHE was a VIRGIN ALL HER LIFE. So she too also gets a crown of chastity.
Let me tell you how I see it...I struggle with my sexual desire A LOT (sometimes it gets so bad as to be on a daily basis). How is it fair that I have to struggle SO much to keep my purity while my future spouse may not have struggled as much to keep his purity? And once you defile yourself by committing a sexual sin, you are forgiven entirely yes, but your body is defiled forever. You cannot reverse the sin. While a person who has committed such a sin but is working on his or her relationship with God should be treated with a lot of respect in that they are sincerely trying to overcome the sin they had fallen in, we cannot view them the same as someone who has kept his/her purity. Why can't we view them the same? Simple. Both had to struggle. God will never give you something more than you can handle. While it's unfortunate that one person fell, it doesn't make them the equal of the person who has kept his/her virginity.
What about a person who was not as fortunate as you to actually know God or have good spiritual leadership to help him on the right path? You have no clue what are the circumstances of a person committing this sin! What about a convert who was raised thinking premarital sex is normal and to be encouraged? What about the person who was emotionally abused all his/her life and for him/her this sin was due to an extreme need for intimacy/comfort with all the psychological damage done in early or late childhood? You have any idea how vulnerable people can be? You have any idea how great the weakness can be once you find that person who seems to show you the love and attention you have lacked for long years? Often there IS circumstances. Sometimes there isn't. But once again, you don't know what is the reason people fall in sin. If you managed to stay a virgin, then that is very much to be respected, but don't forget that you remained ur chastity first and foremost due to God's grace working in you.
You make it look like it's not fair that others get to have "fun" and then be treated the same as you. My view is radically different. I think you should be sorry for those who didn't manage to remain pure becaues it was DAMAGING to themselves first and foremost. But once they repent, you should accept them as if they are 100% pure again, and rejoice that they came back to the light and not look back anymore. So those who fell due to whatever reason and changed their lifes clearly and regret what they did, and are now on a path of purity should ABSOLUTELY not be judged by you, me or anyone else and cannot be treated as adulterers. You belittle the power and effectiveness of repentance, baptism and confession and the blood of Christ HIMSELF. How bold of you!
On the other hand, the person who sinned, is still sinning in his/her heart continually and is demanding to marry a virgin for whatever cultural reason...such a person should not get married in the first place untill he/she repents and prepares him/herself to be a good future spouse.
And again you seem to make a huge difference between inner virginity and outer virginity. What about the spiritual scars of the lack of inner purity? The words of Christ are clear, whoever lusted in his heart HAS COMMITTED ADULTERY.
You're a lovely guy. If you look at the story of the Prodigal Son - his brother was complaining and even jealous that he had been a good brother, stayed with his father, and he couldn't fathom why his own father greeted his younger brother with such love??
That's because when the younger brother was away, he was dead. He was lost.
This is the same with sin. Because you haven't sinned.. what prize do you want for that? The prize IS that you were close to your father. Its like expecting a prize for crossing the road without getting injured. People seem to be seeing fornication as some kind of "fun" - its not. The scars that could happen to you, both emotionally and physically are immense.
The Prodigal son found himself WANTING to eat the pods of the pigs.. THAT's HOW LOW A PERSON CAN BE in such conditions of falling into sin; yet you are congratulating yourself that you didn't suffer like that??
Is it not thanks to God's grace that we are saved from such things???? If someone doesn't even know God, what then? What Grace was working in their lives to even help them??
In fact, it is better to see yourself as the Prodigal son, than the elder brother. The Elder brother suffered from self-righteousness and he didnt even love his brother.
[quote author=Zoxsasi link=topic=10674.msg130929#msg130929 date=1297954830] Thanks Hos Erof...
You're a lovely guy. If you look at the story of the Prodigal Son - his brother was complaining and even jealous that he had been a good brother, stayed with his father, and he couldn't fathom why his own father greeted his younger brother with such love??
That's because when the younger brother was away, he was dead. He was lost.
This is the same with sin. Because you haven't sinned.. what prize do you want for that? The prize IS that you were close to your father. Its like expecting a prize for crossing the road without getting injured. People seem to be seeing fornication as some kind of "fun" - its not. The scars that could happen to you, both emotionally and physically are immense.
The Prodigal son found himself WANTING to eat the pods of the pigs.. THAT's HOW LOW A PERSON CAN BE in such conditions of falling into sin; yet you are congratulating yourself that you didn't suffer like that??
Is it not thanks to God's grace that we are saved from such things???? If someone doesn't even know God, what then? What Grace was working in their lives to even help them??
In fact, it is better to see yourself as the Prodigal son, than the elder brother. The Elder brother suffered from self-righteousness and he didnt even love his brother.
zoxa, you are insane!!! you certainly got lots of problems. you are obsessed with sexuality and sex!! you will not sort your problem out by writing these ridiculous posts. go and sort your problems elsewhere!!! this is not the place for you to find the solution to your problems. i have studied counselling and i know what i mean!! this is not the place to deal with your sexual obsessions!!! be good to yourself and to others on this blog and stop messing around!! if you decide to continue with this compulsive behaviour, i advice everyone on this blog to treat you accordingly, ...as insane, just as you seem to be. all you posts are saying in bold: i am sexually obsessed, please help!!!! this is professional advice: you cannot get the help you need on this blog. stop it an go elsewhere!!! for god's sake!!! if you continue like this, you make a mockery of the orthodox faith!!! eventually, go and see a psychiatrist if necessary. there is adequate help everywhere!! don't waste your opportunities! i understand you need help, desperately, but my advice is ... ask for it where you can get it, not here!!! and not in the sex shop either!...
You all know my standpoint. I'm not going to repeat myself for the trillionth time. My words are the same as GODlovesme. Although it may sound "Egyptian" to most of you, I'd like to stick with it regardless.
I think Father Peter is having a splendid time watching us argue. He is probably laughing at us in ridicule. I hope he enlightens us soon with words of wisdom.
If there is ANYTHING unorthodox in anything I've said , please quote me. I think i've just talked using scriptural references.
I just mentioned the story of the prodigal son to support Hos Erof's post.
You are all free to do as you please in your private life. But in terms of what is Orthodox, and what is fundamentally Christian, I have to state that and defend it. You cannot make your opinion the opinion of the Church. You are free to behave and think as you all wish.
The opinion of the Church is clear: Repentance makes the adulterer/ess into a Virgin. And they should be treated like one.
By insisting otherwise, you are imposing your cultural standards over God's word - and that is a sin.
I don't think you're using scripture the right way. You said "Do not call unclean what the Lord has made clean". Not wanting to marry (a person who is going to affect YOU, your kids, and ALL your futures after death) a bad influence is not calling something unclean!! A person who is not a virgin is a bad influence. WE DON'T TRULY KNOW IF THEY REPENTED OR NOT!
The CHURCH teaches us to avoid anything that MIGHT be harmful. If eating meat will cause my brother to sin, I shouldn't eat meat. If marrying this person MIGHT cost me my salvation, I shouldn't marry this person!
We should still treat people equally, but we don't to MARRY THEM!! There is a difference. A HUUUUUUUUGE difference!
I hope you see my point. I believe it is the Church's opinion.
[quote author=TITL link=topic=10674.msg130943#msg130943 date=1297960004] I don't think you're using scripture the right way. You said "Do not call unclean what the Lord has made clean". Not wanting to marry (a person who is going to affect YOU, your kids, and ALL your futures after death) a bad influence is not calling something unclean!! A person who is not a virgin is a bad influence. WE DON'T TRULY KNOW IF THEY REPENTED OR NOT!
The CHURCH teaches us to avoid anything that MIGHT be harmful. If eating meat will cause my brother to sin, I shouldn't eat meat. If marrying this person MIGHT cost me my salvation, I shouldn't marry this person!
We should still treat people equally, but we don't to MARRY THEM!! There is a difference. A HUUUUUUUUGE difference!
I hope you see my point. I believe it is the Church's opinion.
Have you ever lied, stolen, lusted, or gotten mad at anyone?? Would you like your future husband to say "well.. TITL, she's a nice girl , but I'd rather not chance it, she may end up stealing from me also."
Even if you've repented for it!
Whatever it may have been!! Would you like someone to hold it against you??
You dont HAVE to marry someone who has had a sexual past.. OF COURSE NOT. I'm not suggesting that AT ALL!!
But you have no right to hold it against them if they have repented of it. How do you know they have repented for it? Are they like this with you?
As Fr. Peter said, look at their spiritual life.
For example, as I mentioned, I was having a chat with a girl who was a devout Christian. She just said that she lived with her bf for 4 years and it was normal - like married life. So, this would have told you that she hasn't even BEGUN to see this as a sin, not even repented for it.
You can ask their FoC - are they sincere in their repentance? In their confession?? But that's it.
TITL,
Let me ask you ONE question:
Let's say you go to one of those youth events - ok? the ones that ANba Angaelos and Moussa organize. You get to know a REALLY charming guy there. You like him. You stay as good friends. Then, you develop a strong interest in him. He likes you too.
You want to know whether he is a virgin or not: right? So you ask: He tells you that when he was 16 , he was far from the Church and had a girlfriend, and he sinned with her. He has since dedicated his life to God.
If he is someone PERFECT for you, and you like him a lot - would you reject him over the fact that he lost his virginity??
I wish you would post more. We all cherish and respect your opinion-- even if it's short and brief.
Zoxsasi,
You can't turn marriage into a yes or no question. It's never as simple as you put it.
I can't get married based on my emotions solely. I would only be deceiving myself and it could possibly ruin my future. If someone is "perfect" for me (as you put it), they would be a virgin. If they're not then they wouldn't receive my parent's blessing. I don't control how my parent's think. I would never marry anyone not pleasing to my parents and FOC... even if I think they are perfect for me. I believe my parent's decison and God's will go hand in hand.
I wish you would post more. We all cherish and respect your opinion-- even if it's short and brief.
Zoxsasi,
You can't turn marriage into a yes or no question. It's never as simple as you put it.
I can't get married based on my emotions solely. I would only be deceiving myself and it could possibly ruin my future. If someone is "perfect" for me (as you put it), they would be a virgin. If they're not then they wouldn't receive my parent's blessing. I don't control how my parent's think. I would never marry anyone not pleasing to my parents and FOC... even if I think they are perfect for me. I believe my parent's decison and God's will go hand in hand.
Sorry TITL, i didnt mean to put you on the spot.
Let's wait until Fr. Peter writes on this thread. You said that I had mis-used the term "what God has made clean, do not call unclean" with respect to how we should see and treat people who have been baptised, yet may not have known God before; despite having a sexual past.
[quote author=TITL link=topic=10674.msg130951#msg130951 date=1297962448] I have no idea what you just said, but yeah I think waiting for Father Peter is a good idea.
You have said that I mis-interpreted or applied the verse "What God has made clean, do not call Unclean". You are saying it doesn't apply for the situation of a person who has repented or been baptised after having a sexual past. Right??
No that's not what I'm saying. It applies in all situations. It even applies if one hasn't repented. We shouldn't ever treat people differently--all are equal in the sight of God. What I'm saying is choosing a spouse is much much different than just having friends. We shouldn't be partial when talking to people. I should be kind and loving to all people. BUUUT I'm only marrying one person. If I'm not picky then I will lose my Eternal life. I must be firm with myself and not let my emotions and sympathy take over.
[quote author=ilovesaintmark link=topic=10674.msg130948#msg130948 date=1297960900] I think the argument is revolving around definitions.
Some clergy, in using arabic as a language, will mix the use of "virginity" and "chastity".
They are not the same thing.
The arguement that is ensuing is relative to the nuance between the both. It is not a matter of semantics. There is a major delineation.
This hit the nail on the head.
And so, applying the difference between the two in TITL's post:
[quote author=TITL link=topic=10674.msg130943#msg130943 date=1297960004] Not wanting to marry (a person who is going to affect YOU, your kids, and ALL your futures after death) a bad influence is not calling something unclean!! A person who is not a virgin is a bad influence. WE DON'T TRULY KNOW IF THEY REPENTED OR NOT!
Suppose that someone (as was mentioned by someone earlier in this thread) is addicted to pornography or has some other sexual sin that does not involve actually sleeping with someone.
Suppose that you think about marrying this person: you don't know whether they have repented or not, just like you don't know if the person who isn't (physically) a virgin has repented (as you have previously said).
So what makes one better than the other to you from a marital prospective?
Would you differentiate between them merely on the severity of their sin?
What if one of them repents (i.e. the guy who isn't a (physical) virgin, and let's assume he has truly repented) and tells you about his history, while the one who didn't physically give his virginity away doesn't disclose this sin of his and is yet ongoing in his sin?
What would prevent something like this happening, and you ending up marrying a person who hasn't repented because you are basing your judgement on the physical definition of the sin?
you are all a bunch of confused people, consumed with sex. you must sort your heads out before displaying any more of your ridiculously smashed brains.!! has your brains dropped down into your underpants??!! get yourselves a cold shower every morning or an ice cream before bed time and it would do you better than these stupid debates! you just need to calm down, all of you who are obsessed with sex. time is running out!
[quote author=lightening link=topic=10674.msg130964#msg130964 date=1297964175] you are all a bunch of confused people, consumed with sex. you must sort your heads out before displaying any more of your ridiculously smashed brains.!! has your brains dropped down into your underpants??!! get yourselves a cold shower every morning or an ice cream before bed time and it would do you better than these stupid debates! you just need to calm down, all of you who are obsessed with sex. time is running out!
lightening,
The purpose of this discussion is for us all to benefit, by understanding the Orthodox thing to do in a situation of marriage like this. It doesn't mean we are "consumed with sex" or are "displaying any more of" our "ridiculously smashed brains."
If anyone needs to calm down it's you; this discussion is solely for edification - don't try to condemn those taking part, or blow everything out of proportion like a frenzied fanatic.
[quote author=lightening link=topic=10674.msg130964#msg130964 date=1297964175] you are all a bunch of confused people, consumed with sex. you must sort your heads out before displaying any more of your ridiculously smashed brains.!! has your brains dropped down into your underpants??!! get yourselves a cold shower every morning or an ice cream before bed time and it would do you better than these stupid debates! you just need to calm down, all of you who are obsessed with sex. time is running out!
i don't see the problem of humans being sexual persons. we are created that way.
The purpose of this discussion is for us all to benefit, by understanding the Orthodox thing to do in a situation of marriage like this. It doesn't mean we are "consumed with sex" or are "displaying any more of" our "ridiculously smashed brains."
If anyone needs to calm down it's you; this discussion is solely for edification - don't try to condemn those taking part, or blow everything out of proportion like a frenzied fanatic.
Peace.
ok buddy, i understand your claim (for us all to benefit). but you also need to understand that if you continue this way none of you benefit anything! instead you will confuse each other even more! believe you me! i have been married for almost 18 years and i, just like you, struggled with questions regarding celibacy, chastity and a god honouring approach to marriage. from my experience and education i have been through, what you are doing here is anything but a favour to yourselves. just chill out and try the cold shower instead for a while. you'd be much better off!
[quote author=lightening link=topic=10674.msg130968#msg130968 date=1297965769] what you are doing here is anything but a favour to yourselves. just chill out and try the cold shower instead for a while. you'd be much better off!
I consider your posting style rather offensive, but I'll choose not to reply.
sorry that my messages are viewed as offensive. i apologise for that, despite the fact that no one has apologised so far for slating the protestants, which is by no means less offensive.
[quote author=lightening link=topic=10674.msg130979#msg130979 date=1297968111] sorry that my messages are viewed as offensive. i apologise for that, despite the fact that no one has apologised so far for slating the protestants, which is by no means less offensive.
I accept your apology, but where has anyone "slated protestants" on this thread?
Since this thread is not about Protestantism, I don't know why any of us should shift the focus to that, either with apologies or praises. Can we accept the idea that, as far as we can know, no one here is being intentionally offensive but people are being offended due to the emotionally-charged atmosphere of the discussion? (Which really shouldn't be in this thread to begin with, as the question of the OP has been answered...)
I have been very busy the last couple of days and had to work early and late and then attend a meeting today. So I have not had the time to be involved on the site today.
Hos Erof, thank you for pointing to that previous post of mine. I think that it is a good starting point for describing my own understanding of this issue and I will post it in its entirety here, together with an earlier one, so that hopefully some will read it.
---------
Physical intimacy is both for the ongoing survival of humanity, and is also a means of pleasure and comfort for the strengthening of the bonds between a husband and wife. The Fathers teach us that in the beginning God created humanity as male and female, and therefore the sexual aspect of our being is both good and in the will of God. Our sexuality is not part of the Fall of humanity as some have taught in the past. The Fathers teach us that seeing that Adam and Eve would sin, God created them in such a way that through procreation the human race would survive. Yet in the Garden of Eden Adam and Eve were entirely complete in their own male and female sexuality and were not ashamed.
Just as the use of the appetite was part of the created human order, nevertheless there was a right and a wrong way to exercise that created aspect of our humanity. Adam and Eve fell into sin by the wrong exercise of their will when they chose to serve themselves rather than God's will. So our sexuality, created as a good, must be exercised in accordance with the proper order which God has set.
In the case of Adam and Eve, they had been given to each other, indeed in a sense Eve was created to be in a marital relationship with Adam. Therefore the exercise of their sexuality was in accordance with God's will. In a sense they were already of one flesh. But for us the exercise of our sexuality is dangerous when we disobey God.
The Scriptures teach us that when we engage in sexual intimacy we become 'one flesh' with the other person. This seems to mean to me that we share some aspect of our being, and they share some aspect of their being. What if our relationship with this person breaks down? It seems to me that we lose something when the relationship breaks. Something is torn from us. We become damaged. And if we enter another relationship, and that breaks down? Well, we are torn again. Something is taken from us. And when we do enter into a lasting relationship we cannot help but find that some aspect of our relationship is affected by previous relationships.
There is no such thing as easy, cost-less sexual intimacy.
Here are a few thoughts about the costs...
i. There is a spiritual cost. To engage in sexual intimacy outside of marriage is sin. It does not mean that sexual intimacy is bad, but that we have chosen to serve ourselves rather than God. That is what sin is. Our own will rather than Gods'. Even if the sexual relationship is between a couple who plan to get married, and who do get married, to engage in sin is not a solid foundation for a Christian relationship.
If a man cannot keep himself pure for his prospective wife, or rather if he cannot help his prospective wife keep herself pure, then this is not a good beginning for a marriage. What other sins will he allow into this relationship? Instead of being a priest to his family, he will be in danger of leading his family into sin instead of into life.
ii. There is also the fact that engaging in sexual activity outside of the safeguards which God has provided leads to sexuality being over associated with physical pleasure, especially personal satisfaction. It becomes very difficult for sexuality to be considered in a chaste manner for such a person, even when and if they become married. When sexuality becomes too closely identified with pleasure it ceases to become a God ordained means of self-giving and genuine intimacy.
iii. Within the context of marriage it is possible for a person to be entirely self-giving, and to discover intimacy with another person. This is part of the meaning of becoming 'one flesh'. But outside of marriage, especially when sexual practice is casual, or when a person is not even living in a co-habiting relationship, such attempts at finding intimacy will fail, or will certainly be inadequate. We are consciously and sub-consciously concerned with questions like - does this person love me? is our relationship cooling? how can I keep this person liking me? Intimacy in such a context is damaging because rather than giving ourselves freely we gve ourselves to keep the other person, or to manipulate the other person into liking us. This distorts our ideas of love and intimacy and often causes lasting damage in any future marital relationship with someone else.
iv. Of course sexual practice outside of marriage also has health implications. There are all manner of sexually transmitted diseases which can be and are passed around communities of people who engage in sexual activity. Many of these have long lasting effects, and can even be deadly.
Let us not be fooled. Sex is not harmless. Sex is not just a physical act. It is a most powerful means of expressing and producing intimacy between a man and a woman who have committed themselves to a self-less life together. In any other context it is dangerous. To practice sexual acts outside of marriage both damages those who participate, and also damages any future marriage. In a sense, when you have sex with someone you become united to them in body and soul, and when you walk away some part of your soul is torn away from you. Do it enough times and you are diminished. You are less than the person God made you. And you are harming the person you engage in such casual sex with as well.
The teaching of the Church that we should remain chaste until marriage, and remain chaste within marriage, is for our salvation, and for the proper exercise of our sexuality. It is not an arbitrary rule, but one which serves to save us from harm. Sex is very powerful and so very dangerous. Within marriage it can be a source of great comfort and intimacy, outside of marriage it hardens our hearts, leads us away from God, teaches us to seek our own pleasure, and distorts our understanding of what sexuality and intimacy mean.
For the sake of our own salvation, and for the salvation of those other people with whom we are tempted to engage in 'casual sex', let us flee from this temptation and learn what it means to be chaste. The person who has not learned to find true and lasting intimacy with God before all others, will not be able to find intimacy in casual sex, and the person who has found such intimacy with God will not want to seek it in a counterfeit.
-------------------
I am not sure that I agree that it is necessary or wise for partners in a marriage to share every sexual experience they may have had prior to becoming engaged or married. Such disclosures are suitable for the FOC, but within a marriage would probably cause a great deal more harm than good. It is enough for a potential partner to be honest - well before marriage and at the point of engagement - and say, 'You should know that I have had a/some sexual partners before'. There is no need at all to be explicit.
They do not need to know details. Perhaps the number of partners, and whether or not full sexual intercourse took place. But no details.
What matters more, in my opinion, is whether or not the person has any sense of repentance for such actions in the past. If the person has repented then they are forgiven by God. We are all of us sinners. We are sinful people when we become engaged and sinful people when we are married. But a faithful Christian is always seeking to become more holy, more loving, more gentle, more obedient, more Christ-like.
There is certainly something special about two people who have not had sexual experience marrying each other. But it cannot be a universal experience, nor does it seem to me one that we can demand. If we have been forgiven by God and received absolution by our priest then we are restored to purity.
It is not good for us to look down on others because they have sinned (I do not mean that you are). Just as it is not good for us to sin in the first place. I understand that there is a wider Middle-Eastern culture around this issue, but it is not always Christian. What will happen, as has been posted here before, if thousands of Americans and British people become Christians in our Churches, a great many of them with sexual histories - who would dare to say that they are second-class because of it.
There seem to me to be two elements here. On the one hand we must preserve ourselves so that we can offer ourselves in purity to a prospective partner - but even more so that we may be blameless before God who knows our hearts. And on the other hand I do believe that we must be much more open-hearted towards those who fall into sexual sin. It is not the end of the world - IF THERE IS REPENTANCE. (I say this from the point of view of being generous to those who have sinned, not being easy going on ourselves).
Our Lord Himself is very strict with us. To look lustfully on a woman IS THE SAME AS HAVING SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH HER. I say it in capitals so that it is clear to us all. The sin is in the desire not in the act. By the time we act out our desire we are already committed to sin, we have already turned from God.
Let us examine our own hearts. When we tut-tut because a good boy is going out with a bad girl who slept with a boyfriend some years ago and has repented and tried to be a good servant ever since, let us remember every drawn out and lingering glance which condemns us as adulterers. We should be afraid to demand that our prospective partner tells us all about her boyfriend, because we know that there are not enough hours in the day to recall all of our own hidden and private sexual sins - how can consider ourselves pure just because we have not had a girlfriend.
Surely we should preserve ourselves, and be forgetful of the absolved sins of others. I know this is hard in many cultures, and it is perhaps a sign of spiritual maturity when it is possible. But I know for myself that I am a great sinner and have no right to judge anyone else, least of all my wife who has put up with me for 21 years. Is she a sinner as well? Of course. But the Lord is her judge, not me.
Should there be some disclosure before engagement? Yes, of course. It is reasonable to share that a person has had some sexual experiences. (But not to go into detail). It is reasonable to share that a person has been in prison, or bankrupt, or lost their job for various reasons. A partner needs to know the sort of person they might marry, and what we have done with our lives. But the details of our sins are best left to God and our FOCs. Otherwise we must be constantly telling our partners of our sins in a way that would be destructive of a relationship.
"I am sorry my dear, I have just sinned by thinking this dinner was awful". "I am sorry my dear, I have just sinned by staring at that attractive woman over there and wishing you looked like her".
Such honesty is for our FOCs not our partners. They are not directly involved and so are able to offer, hopefully, balanced and prayerful advice.
In terms of bringing a marriage date forward, that is a good idea in some situations and a bad idea in others. Within marriage, as much as outside of it, our sexuality is to be preserved in chastity. This means that marriage is not an excuse for any exercise of sexuality at any time. If someone is so burning with sexual desire that they feel the need to get married just to exercise that desire then their spiritual life is unbalanced. I would suggest that they have still lessons to be learned. One's partner is not a sexual object, but a sister/brother in Christ, with whom we are to grow in Christ together. If the main reason for getting married is to be able to have sex legitimately then I think I would have to say that such sexual practice would verge on the sinful even within marriage.
Nevertheless, once a couple have agreed to marry, and all other things in balance - job, somewhere to live, a degree of maturity - then there is not much good in a long engagement. I do agree with you that learning self-control before marriage, before engagement, and before dating, is the best option for all concerned. Even within marriage there is a need for self-control, and we are called to abstain from sexual relations at certain times. This is very hard if there is no self-control in the relationship.
God bless us all as we seek to perfect our relationships with others in love
Hi Fr. Peter, Could you kindly answer this quote below. Its what led us to this discussion.
Is this right or wrong?
Is a person who has committed adultary EQUAL as a virgin in God's eyes if they have become baptised and have repented??
[quote author=TITL link=topic=10674.msg130836#msg130836 date=1297895405] Repentance is only good for your spiritual life, but if you were a prostitute, you still are in the eyes of people. Nothing will change that- not even repentance.
St. Moses the Strong and St. Paul are still a murderers.
We are called to have the mind of Christ. The mind of Christ says these people have been justified. Therefore i think it's irelevant as to what "people" think. We are called to be more than just "people".
Comments
In God's eyes, you who have struggled and kept your virginity ALL your life, is EQUAL to a Prostitute who repented for her sins and was baptised in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
YOU ARE EQUAL.
Agreed, she would have incurred physical chastisement as a result of her actions, but in terms of purity, you are EXACTLY the same.
So, I would disagree with you.
When you say: This is totally incorrect, and its unchristian.
Their Baptism or repentance, confession makes them EQUAL to you!!
Why do you have a problem with that? I'm not God.. take it up with Him!!
Why do you have a problem with that? I'm not God.. take it up with Him!!
If I'm not mistaken, there's a crown for chastity. Think about that one for a moment. My stance was clear. If you choose to twist my words as you clearly have earlier, that's up to you. I will no longer post on this thread, you (Zoxsasi) are wasting my time and energy.
[quote author=Zoxsasi link=topic=10674.msg130923#msg130923 date=1297950231]
Why do you have a problem with that? I'm not God.. take it up with Him!!
If I'm not mistaken, there's a crown for chastity. Think about that one for a moment. My stance was clear. If you choose to twist my words as you clearly have earlier, that's up to you. I will no longer post on this thread, you (Zoxsasi) are wasting my time and energy.
Go! But PLEASE do not tell others that YOUR opinion is that of the Church, NOR of God. It has NOTHING to do with Christianity.
OK?
Its FAR from it.
Its the exact opposite even.
How have I twisted your words. I think you were abundantly clear - that because you are a virgin all your life, you should get some credit for it, more than another girl who wasn't and repented and confessed everything the last day of her life.
GOD TREATS YOU THE SAME. He treats the repentant prostitute, who has been baptised AS IF SHE was a VIRGIN ALL HER LIFE. So she too also gets a crown of chastity.
What about the person who was emotionally abused all his/her life and for him/her this sin was due to an extreme need for intimacy/comfort with all the psychological damage done in early or late childhood? You have any idea how vulnerable people can be? You have any idea how great the weakness can be once you find that person who seems to show you the love and attention you have lacked for long years?
Often there IS circumstances. Sometimes there isn't. But once again, you don't know what is the reason people fall in sin. If you managed to stay a virgin, then that is very much to be respected, but don't forget that you remained ur chastity first and foremost due to God's grace working in you.
You make it look like it's not fair that others get to have "fun" and then be treated the same as you. My view is radically different. I think you should be sorry for those who didn't manage to remain pure becaues it was DAMAGING to themselves first and foremost. But once they repent, you should accept them as if they are 100% pure again, and rejoice that they came back to the light and not look back anymore.
So those who fell due to whatever reason and changed their lifes clearly and regret what they did, and are now on a path of purity should ABSOLUTELY not be judged by you, me or anyone else and cannot be treated as adulterers. You belittle the power and effectiveness of repentance, baptism and confession and the blood of Christ HIMSELF. How bold of you!
On the other hand, the person who sinned, is still sinning in his/her heart continually and is demanding to marry a virgin for whatever cultural reason...such a person should not get married in the first place untill he/she repents and prepares him/herself to be a good future spouse.
And again you seem to make a huge difference between inner virginity and outer virginity. What about the spiritual scars of the lack of inner purity? The words of Christ are clear, whoever lusted in his heart HAS COMMITTED ADULTERY.
You're a lovely guy. If you look at the story of the Prodigal Son - his brother was complaining and even jealous that he had been a good brother, stayed with his father, and he couldn't fathom why his own father greeted his younger brother with such love??
That's because when the younger brother was away, he was dead. He was lost.
This is the same with sin. Because you haven't sinned.. what prize do you want for that? The prize IS that you were close to your father. Its like expecting a prize for crossing the road without getting injured. People seem to be seeing fornication as some kind of "fun" - its not. The scars that could happen to you, both emotionally and physically are immense.
The Prodigal son found himself WANTING to eat the pods of the pigs.. THAT's HOW LOW A PERSON CAN BE in such conditions of falling into sin; yet you are congratulating yourself that you didn't suffer like that??
Is it not thanks to God's grace that we are saved from such things???? If someone doesn't even know God, what then? What Grace was working in their lives to even help them??
In fact, it is better to see yourself as the Prodigal son, than the elder brother. The Elder brother suffered from self-righteousness and he didnt even love his brother.
Thanks Hos Erof...
You're a lovely guy. If you look at the story of the Prodigal Son - his brother was complaining and even jealous that he had been a good brother, stayed with his father, and he couldn't fathom why his own father greeted his younger brother with such love??
That's because when the younger brother was away, he was dead. He was lost.
This is the same with sin. Because you haven't sinned.. what prize do you want for that? The prize IS that you were close to your father. Its like expecting a prize for crossing the road without getting injured. People seem to be seeing fornication as some kind of "fun" - its not. The scars that could happen to you, both emotionally and physically are immense.
The Prodigal son found himself WANTING to eat the pods of the pigs.. THAT's HOW LOW A PERSON CAN BE in such conditions of falling into sin; yet you are congratulating yourself that you didn't suffer like that??
Is it not thanks to God's grace that we are saved from such things???? If someone doesn't even know God, what then? What Grace was working in their lives to even help them??
In fact, it is better to see yourself as the Prodigal son, than the elder brother. The Elder brother suffered from self-righteousness and he didnt even love his brother.
zoxa, you are insane!!!
you certainly got lots of problems. you are obsessed with sexuality and sex!!
you will not sort your problem out by writing these ridiculous posts. go and sort your problems elsewhere!!!
this is not the place for you to find the solution to your problems.
i have studied counselling and i know what i mean!! this is not the place to deal with your sexual obsessions!!! be good to yourself and to others on this blog and stop messing around!!
if you decide to continue with this compulsive behaviour, i advice everyone on this blog to treat you accordingly, ...as insane, just as you seem to be.
all you posts are saying in bold: i am sexually obsessed, please help!!!!
this is professional advice: you cannot get the help you need on this blog. stop it an go elsewhere!!!
for god's sake!!!
if you continue like this, you make a mockery of the orthodox faith!!!
eventually, go and see a psychiatrist if necessary. there is adequate help everywhere!! don't waste your opportunities!
i understand you need help, desperately, but my advice is ... ask for it where you can get it, not here!!! and not in the sex shop either!...
I don't agree.
You all know my standpoint. I'm not going to repeat myself for the trillionth time. My words are the same as GODlovesme. Although it may sound "Egyptian" to most of you, I'd like to stick with it regardless.
I think Father Peter is having a splendid time watching us argue. He is probably laughing at us in ridicule. I hope he enlightens us soon with words of wisdom.
I just mentioned the story of the prodigal son to support Hos Erof's post.
You are all free to do as you please in your private life. But in terms of what is Orthodox, and what is fundamentally Christian, I have to state that and defend it. You cannot make your opinion the opinion of the Church. You are free to behave and think as you all wish.
The opinion of the Church is clear: Repentance makes the adulterer/ess into a Virgin. And they should be treated like one.
By insisting otherwise, you are imposing your cultural standards over God's word - and that is a sin.
The CHURCH teaches us to avoid anything that MIGHT be harmful. If eating meat will cause my brother to sin, I shouldn't eat meat. If marrying this person MIGHT cost me my salvation, I shouldn't marry this person!
We should still treat people equally, but we don't to MARRY THEM!! There is a difference. A HUUUUUUUUGE difference!
I hope you see my point. I believe it is the Church's opinion.
I don't think you're using scripture the right way. You said "Do not call unclean what the Lord has made clean". Not wanting to marry (a person who is going to affect YOU, your kids, and ALL your futures after death) a bad influence is not calling something unclean!! A person who is not a virgin is a bad influence. WE DON'T TRULY KNOW IF THEY REPENTED OR NOT!
The CHURCH teaches us to avoid anything that MIGHT be harmful. If eating meat will cause my brother to sin, I shouldn't eat meat. If marrying this person MIGHT cost me my salvation, I shouldn't marry this person!
We should still treat people equally, but we don't to MARRY THEM!! There is a difference. A HUUUUUUUUGE difference!
I hope you see my point. I believe it is the Church's opinion.
Have you ever lied, stolen, lusted, or gotten mad at anyone?? Would you like your future husband to say "well.. TITL, she's a nice girl , but I'd rather not chance it, she may end up stealing from me also."
Even if you've repented for it!
Whatever it may have been!! Would you like someone to hold it against you??
You dont HAVE to marry someone who has had a sexual past.. OF COURSE NOT. I'm not suggesting that AT ALL!!
But you have no right to hold it against them if they have repented of it. How do you know they have repented for it? Are they like this with you?
As Fr. Peter said, look at their spiritual life.
For example, as I mentioned, I was having a chat with a girl who was a devout Christian. She just said that she lived with her bf for 4 years and it was normal - like married life. So, this would have told you that she hasn't even BEGUN to see this as a sin, not even repented for it.
You can ask their FoC - are they sincere in their repentance? In their confession?? But that's it.
TITL,
Let me ask you ONE question:
Let's say you go to one of those youth events - ok? the ones that ANba Angaelos and Moussa organize.
You get to know a REALLY charming guy there. You like him. You stay as good friends. Then, you develop a strong interest in him. He likes you too.
You want to know whether he is a virgin or not: right? So you ask: He tells you that when he was 16 , he was far from the Church and had a girlfriend, and he sinned with her. He has since dedicated his life to God.
If he is someone PERFECT for you, and you like him a lot - would you reject him over the fact that he lost his virginity??
Some clergy, in using arabic as a language, will mix the use of "virginity" and "chastity".
They are not the same thing.
The arguement that is ensuing is relative to the nuance between the both. It is not a matter of semantics. There is a major
delineation.
I wish you would post more. We all cherish and respect your opinion-- even if it's short and brief.
Zoxsasi,
You can't turn marriage into a yes or no question. It's never as simple as you put it.
I can't get married based on my emotions solely. I would only be deceiving myself and it could possibly ruin my future. If someone is "perfect" for me (as you put it), they would be a virgin. If they're not then they wouldn't receive my parent's blessing. I don't control how my parent's think. I would never marry anyone not pleasing to my parents and FOC... even if I think they are perfect for me. I believe my parent's decison and God's will go hand in hand.
ilovesaintmark,
I wish you would post more. We all cherish and respect your opinion-- even if it's short and brief.
Zoxsasi,
You can't turn marriage into a yes or no question. It's never as simple as you put it.
I can't get married based on my emotions solely. I would only be deceiving myself and it could possibly ruin my future. If someone is "perfect" for me (as you put it), they would be a virgin. If they're not then they wouldn't receive my parent's blessing. I don't control how my parent's think. I would never marry anyone not pleasing to my parents and FOC... even if I think they are perfect for me. I believe my parent's decison and God's will go hand in hand.
Sorry TITL, i didnt mean to put you on the spot.
Let's wait until Fr. Peter writes on this thread. You said that I had mis-used the term "what God has made clean, do not call unclean" with respect to how we should see and treat people who have been baptised, yet may not have known God before; despite having a sexual past.
I have no idea what you just said, but yeah I think waiting for Father Peter is a good idea.
You have said that I mis-interpreted or applied the verse "What God has made clean, do not call Unclean". You are saying it doesn't apply for the situation of a person who has repented or been baptised after having a sexual past. Right??
I think that is clear.
Let's see what Fr. Peter has to say.
I think its interesting.
I think the argument is revolving around definitions.
Some clergy, in using arabic as a language, will mix the use of "virginity" and "chastity".
They are not the same thing.
The arguement that is ensuing is relative to the nuance between the both. It is not a matter of semantics. There is a major
delineation.
This hit the nail on the head.
And so, applying the difference between the two in TITL's post:
[quote author=TITL link=topic=10674.msg130943#msg130943 date=1297960004]
Not wanting to marry (a person who is going to affect YOU, your kids, and ALL your futures after death) a bad influence is not calling something unclean!! A person who is not a virgin is a bad influence. WE DON'T TRULY KNOW IF THEY REPENTED OR NOT!
Suppose that someone (as was mentioned by someone earlier in this thread) is addicted to pornography or has some other sexual sin that does not involve actually sleeping with someone.
Suppose that you think about marrying this person: you don't know whether they have repented or not, just like you don't know if the person who isn't (physically) a virgin has repented (as you have previously said).
So what makes one better than the other to you from a marital prospective?
Would you differentiate between them merely on the severity of their sin?
What if one of them repents (i.e. the guy who isn't a (physical) virgin, and let's assume he has truly repented) and tells you about his history, while the one who didn't physically give his virginity away doesn't disclose this sin of his and is yet ongoing in his sin?
What would prevent something like this happening, and you ending up marrying a person who hasn't repented because you are basing your judgement on the physical definition of the sin?
you must sort your heads out before displaying any more of your ridiculously smashed brains.!!
has your brains dropped down into your underpants??!!
get yourselves a cold shower every morning or an ice cream before bed time and it would do you better than these stupid debates!
you just need to calm down, all of you who are obsessed with sex.
time is running out!
you are all a bunch of confused people, consumed with sex.
you must sort your heads out before displaying any more of your ridiculously smashed brains.!!
has your brains dropped down into your underpants??!!
get yourselves a cold shower every morning or an ice cream before bed time and it would do you better than these stupid debates!
you just need to calm down, all of you who are obsessed with sex.
time is running out!
lightening,
The purpose of this discussion is for us all to benefit, by understanding the Orthodox thing to do in a situation of marriage like this. It doesn't mean we are "consumed with sex" or are "displaying any more of" our "ridiculously smashed brains."
If anyone needs to calm down it's you; this discussion is solely for edification - don't try to condemn those taking part, or blow everything out of proportion like a frenzied fanatic.
Peace.
you are all a bunch of confused people, consumed with sex.
you must sort your heads out before displaying any more of your ridiculously smashed brains.!!
has your brains dropped down into your underpants??!!
get yourselves a cold shower every morning or an ice cream before bed time and it would do you better than these stupid debates!
you just need to calm down, all of you who are obsessed with sex.
time is running out!
i don't see the problem of humans being sexual persons. we are created that way.
lightening,
The purpose of this discussion is for us all to benefit, by understanding the Orthodox thing to do in a situation of marriage like this. It doesn't mean we are "consumed with sex" or are "displaying any more of" our "ridiculously smashed brains."
If anyone needs to calm down it's you; this discussion is solely for edification - don't try to condemn those taking part, or blow everything out of proportion like a frenzied fanatic.
Peace.
ok buddy, i understand your claim (for us all to benefit). but you also need to understand that if you continue this way none of you benefit anything! instead you will confuse each other even more! believe you me! i have been married for almost 18 years and i, just like you, struggled with questions regarding celibacy, chastity and a god honouring approach to marriage. from my experience and education i have been through, what you are doing here is anything but a favour to yourselves.
just chill out and try the cold shower instead for a while. you'd be much better off!
what you are doing here is anything but a favour to yourselves.
just chill out and try the cold shower instead for a while. you'd be much better off!
I consider your posting style rather offensive, but I'll choose not to reply.
sorry that my messages are viewed as offensive. i apologise for that, despite the fact that no one has apologised so far for slating the protestants, which is by no means less offensive.
I accept your apology, but where has anyone "slated protestants" on this thread?
Peace.
http://tasbeha.org/content/community/index.php/topic,8734.0.html
Check out post # 12
Hos Erof, thank you for pointing to that previous post of mine. I think that it is a good starting point for describing my own understanding of this issue and I will post it in its entirety here, together with an earlier one, so that hopefully some will read it.
---------
Physical intimacy is both for the ongoing survival of humanity, and is also a means of pleasure and comfort for the strengthening of the bonds between a husband and wife. The Fathers teach us that in the beginning God created humanity as male and female, and therefore the sexual aspect of our being is both good and in the will of God. Our sexuality is not part of the Fall of humanity as some have taught in the past. The Fathers teach us that seeing that Adam and Eve would sin, God created them in such a way that through procreation the human race would survive. Yet in the Garden of Eden Adam and Eve were entirely complete in their own male and female sexuality and were not ashamed.
Just as the use of the appetite was part of the created human order, nevertheless there was a right and a wrong way to exercise that created aspect of our humanity. Adam and Eve fell into sin by the wrong exercise of their will when they chose to serve themselves rather than God's will. So our sexuality, created as a good, must be exercised in accordance with the proper order which God has set.
In the case of Adam and Eve, they had been given to each other, indeed in a sense Eve was created to be in a marital relationship with Adam. Therefore the exercise of their sexuality was in accordance with God's will. In a sense they were already of one flesh. But for us the exercise of our sexuality is dangerous when we disobey God.
The Scriptures teach us that when we engage in sexual intimacy we become 'one flesh' with the other person. This seems to mean to me that we share some aspect of our being, and they share some aspect of their being. What if our relationship with this person breaks down? It seems to me that we lose something when the relationship breaks. Something is torn from us. We become damaged. And if we enter another relationship, and that breaks down? Well, we are torn again. Something is taken from us. And when we do enter into a lasting relationship we cannot help but find that some aspect of our relationship is affected by previous relationships.
There is no such thing as easy, cost-less sexual intimacy.
Here are a few thoughts about the costs...
i. There is a spiritual cost. To engage in sexual intimacy outside of marriage is sin. It does not mean that sexual intimacy is bad, but that we have chosen to serve ourselves rather than God. That is what sin is. Our own will rather than Gods'. Even if the sexual relationship is between a couple who plan to get married, and who do get married, to engage in sin is not a solid foundation for a Christian relationship.
If a man cannot keep himself pure for his prospective wife, or rather if he cannot help his prospective wife keep herself pure, then this is not a good beginning for a marriage. What other sins will he allow into this relationship? Instead of being a priest to his family, he will be in danger of leading his family into sin instead of into life.
ii. There is also the fact that engaging in sexual activity outside of the safeguards which God has provided leads to sexuality being over associated with physical pleasure, especially personal satisfaction. It becomes very difficult for sexuality to be considered in a chaste manner for such a person, even when and if they become married. When sexuality becomes too closely identified with pleasure it ceases to become a God ordained means of self-giving and genuine intimacy.
iii. Within the context of marriage it is possible for a person to be entirely self-giving, and to discover intimacy with another person. This is part of the meaning of becoming 'one flesh'. But outside of marriage, especially when sexual practice is casual, or when a person is not even living in a co-habiting relationship, such attempts at finding intimacy will fail, or will certainly be inadequate. We are consciously and sub-consciously concerned with questions like - does this person love me? is our relationship cooling? how can I keep this person liking me? Intimacy in such a context is damaging because rather than giving ourselves freely we gve ourselves to keep the other person, or to manipulate the other person into liking us. This distorts our ideas of love and intimacy and often causes lasting damage in any future marital relationship with someone else.
iv. Of course sexual practice outside of marriage also has health implications. There are all manner of sexually transmitted diseases which can be and are passed around communities of people who engage in sexual activity. Many of these have long lasting effects, and can even be deadly.
Let us not be fooled. Sex is not harmless. Sex is not just a physical act. It is a most powerful means of expressing and producing intimacy between a man and a woman who have committed themselves to a self-less life together. In any other context it is dangerous. To practice sexual acts outside of marriage both damages those who participate, and also damages any future marriage. In a sense, when you have sex with someone you become united to them in body and soul, and when you walk away some part of your soul is torn away from you. Do it enough times and you are diminished. You are less than the person God made you. And you are harming the person you engage in such casual sex with as well.
The teaching of the Church that we should remain chaste until marriage, and remain chaste within marriage, is for our salvation, and for the proper exercise of our sexuality. It is not an arbitrary rule, but one which serves to save us from harm. Sex is very powerful and so very dangerous. Within marriage it can be a source of great comfort and intimacy, outside of marriage it hardens our hearts, leads us away from God, teaches us to seek our own pleasure, and distorts our understanding of what sexuality and intimacy mean.
For the sake of our own salvation, and for the salvation of those other people with whom we are tempted to engage in 'casual sex', let us flee from this temptation and learn what it means to be chaste. The person who has not learned to find true and lasting intimacy with God before all others, will not be able to find intimacy in casual sex, and the person who has found such intimacy with God will not want to seek it in a counterfeit.
-------------------
I am not sure that I agree that it is necessary or wise for partners in a marriage to share every sexual experience they may have had prior to becoming engaged or married. Such disclosures are suitable for the FOC, but within a marriage would probably cause a great deal more harm than good. It is enough for a potential partner to be honest - well before marriage and at the point of engagement - and say, 'You should know that I have had a/some sexual partners before'. There is no need at all to be explicit.
They do not need to know details. Perhaps the number of partners, and whether or not full sexual intercourse took place. But no details.
What matters more, in my opinion, is whether or not the person has any sense of repentance for such actions in the past. If the person has repented then they are forgiven by God. We are all of us sinners. We are sinful people when we become engaged and sinful people when we are married. But a faithful Christian is always seeking to become more holy, more loving, more gentle, more obedient, more Christ-like.
There is certainly something special about two people who have not had sexual experience marrying each other. But it cannot be a universal experience, nor does it seem to me one that we can demand. If we have been forgiven by God and received absolution by our priest then we are restored to purity.
It is not good for us to look down on others because they have sinned (I do not mean that you are). Just as it is not good for us to sin in the first place. I understand that there is a wider Middle-Eastern culture around this issue, but it is not always Christian. What will happen, as has been posted here before, if thousands of Americans and British people become Christians in our Churches, a great many of them with sexual histories - who would dare to say that they are second-class because of it.
There seem to me to be two elements here. On the one hand we must preserve ourselves so that we can offer ourselves in purity to a prospective partner - but even more so that we may be blameless before God who knows our hearts. And on the other hand I do believe that we must be much more open-hearted towards those who fall into sexual sin. It is not the end of the world - IF THERE IS REPENTANCE. (I say this from the point of view of being generous to those who have sinned, not being easy going on ourselves).
Our Lord Himself is very strict with us. To look lustfully on a woman IS THE SAME AS HAVING SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH HER. I say it in capitals so that it is clear to us all. The sin is in the desire not in the act. By the time we act out our desire we are already committed to sin, we have already turned from God.
Let us examine our own hearts. When we tut-tut because a good boy is going out with a bad girl who slept with a boyfriend some years ago and has repented and tried to be a good servant ever since, let us remember every drawn out and lingering glance which condemns us as adulterers. We should be afraid to demand that our prospective partner tells us all about her boyfriend, because we know that there are not enough hours in the day to recall all of our own hidden and private sexual sins - how can consider ourselves pure just because we have not had a girlfriend.
Surely we should preserve ourselves, and be forgetful of the absolved sins of others. I know this is hard in many cultures, and it is perhaps a sign of spiritual maturity when it is possible. But I know for myself that I am a great sinner and have no right to judge anyone else, least of all my wife who has put up with me for 21 years. Is she a sinner as well? Of course. But the Lord is her judge, not me.
Should there be some disclosure before engagement? Yes, of course. It is reasonable to share that a person has had some sexual experiences. (But not to go into detail). It is reasonable to share that a person has been in prison, or bankrupt, or lost their job for various reasons. A partner needs to know the sort of person they might marry, and what we have done with our lives. But the details of our sins are best left to God and our FOCs. Otherwise we must be constantly telling our partners of our sins in a way that would be destructive of a relationship.
"I am sorry my dear, I have just sinned by thinking this dinner was awful". "I am sorry my dear, I have just sinned by staring at that attractive woman over there and wishing you looked like her".
Such honesty is for our FOCs not our partners. They are not directly involved and so are able to offer, hopefully, balanced and prayerful advice.
In terms of bringing a marriage date forward, that is a good idea in some situations and a bad idea in others. Within marriage, as much as outside of it, our sexuality is to be preserved in chastity. This means that marriage is not an excuse for any exercise of sexuality at any time. If someone is so burning with sexual desire that they feel the need to get married just to exercise that desire then their spiritual life is unbalanced. I would suggest that they have still lessons to be learned. One's partner is not a sexual object, but a sister/brother in Christ, with whom we are to grow in Christ together. If the main reason for getting married is to be able to have sex legitimately then I think I would have to say that such sexual practice would verge on the sinful even within marriage.
Nevertheless, once a couple have agreed to marry, and all other things in balance - job, somewhere to live, a degree of maturity - then there is not much good in a long engagement. I do agree with you that learning self-control before marriage, before engagement, and before dating, is the best option for all concerned. Even within marriage there is a need for self-control, and we are called to abstain from sexual relations at certain times. This is very hard if there is no self-control in the relationship.
God bless us all as we seek to perfect our relationships with others in love
Father Peter
Hi Fr. Peter,
Could you kindly answer this quote below. Its what led us to this discussion.
Is this right or wrong?
Is a person who has committed adultary EQUAL as a virgin in God's eyes if they have become baptised and have repented??
[quote author=TITL link=topic=10674.msg130836#msg130836 date=1297895405]
Repentance is only good for your spiritual life, but if you were a prostitute, you still are in the eyes of people. Nothing will change that- not even repentance.
St. Moses the Strong and St. Paul are still a murderers.
I meant St. Paul once was a murderer. It's in the Bible that he was. It's a fact, not my opinion. HE. IS. IN. HEAVEN.
If one repents, their sin is gone and they become saints. I'm noooot refuting that. I don't know why you think I'm against that?
I NEVER said "to me, they are still murderers/prostitutes" I said "in the eyes of people".
Stop misreading.
Therefore i think it's irelevant as to what "people" think. We are called to be more than just "people".