tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696956101824934089.post3895726318982901381..comments2024-03-12T16:53:52.795-04:00Comments on Crypto-Catholic Libertine: Agape versus ErosJules Aiméhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08262535377454858987noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696956101824934089.post-7693678092129632262010-08-18T18:33:19.748-04:002010-08-18T18:33:19.748-04:00Not only would I not get an erection under those c...Not only would I not get an erection under those circumstances, I would feel nothing but contempt for the woman. How could I respect a woman who didn't have the strength of character to say "I can't do this anymore because I don't love you" but just passively spread her legs for me? No woman under those circumstances could fake real lovemaking, and I would know it even without her saying it.BobinCThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07349641483981235572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696956101824934089.post-87240654458848336012010-08-18T18:18:08.073-04:002010-08-18T18:18:08.073-04:00This is a response to your earlier post about the ...This is a response to your earlier post about the marriage vow being about sexual love. I believe that the marriage vow includes--but is not limited to--sexual love. People marry for all sorts of reasons, you would be surprised at how many people I know--some in my own family--who married to upgrade their lifestyles. Some marry because the woman is pregnant, or a single mother (or father) is looking for the missing parent for their child, there are all sorts of reasons. But even if the marriage vow were limited to sexual love, how many couples do you think understand what that means? I'm thinking of young couples who often confuse sexual love with just being horny as a result of raging hormones, or because she has great tits. Because sexual desire is so powerful and can often cloud reason, I have no objection to couples having sex before they are married, because it gets that aspect of the relationship out of the way so to speak, and enables couples to concentrate on whether or not there is more to the relationship. If there isn't--as is so often the case--they are better off not getting married. In those cases, living together without the benefit of marriage is a learning experience which can prevent them from making a mistake.<br /> <br />Pre Cana, from what I have observed and heard, is virtually useless. Most priests don't have enough of an understanding of the issues to even have the discussion we're having, and these days they're just happy to have straight couples who want to get married! In addition, by the time a couple gets to Pre Cana, the dress is bought, the non-refundable deposit is made on the reception hall, the invitations are printed and paid for, few have the balls to back out at that point assuming they could even comprehend what we're talking about.<br /><br />But more to the point, I would not want to be married to a woman who didn't love me anymore but was only staying with me because of a vow. Nor would I want to have sex with her if she was doing it out of obligation. If I knew that, I wouldn't even be able to get hard.<br /><br />Falling in love with and making a committment to someone involves taking a huge emotional risk, and no commandment is going to change that. That's life.BobinCThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07349641483981235572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696956101824934089.post-30201316568692267352010-08-18T15:16:06.210-04:002010-08-18T15:16:06.210-04:00I think Benedict's distinction between Eros an...I think Benedict's distinction between Eros and Agape is a bit simplistic, but nonetheless. I agree with your last statement, yet sometimes despite all of the best efforts of both parties in the couple, Eros cannot be rekindled. At that point all they can do is trust God and do what is best for both of them.BobinCThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07349641483981235572noreply@blogger.com