Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

Jul 13th 2013 new
(quote) Jerry-74383 said: I agree with you, Mary. Husbands and wives have an obligation to fulfill the "marital duty"; I have never seen anything that suggests the Church teachings on this matter extend to dressing provocatively at the request of one's spouse.
Thank you, Jerry.
Jul 13th 2013 new
(quote) Monica-291280 said: Should a Christian man look at a woman in a bikini? Yes, we women should dress modestly, even when swimming. However, men have to take responsibility to control themselves at the sight of an ankle , an arm, or a curve. Those burkahs don't look very comfortable.
Here you go:

http://www.muslim-swimwear.com
Jul 13th 2013 new
(quote) Jerry-74383 said: It would depend on the circumstances. In fact, it might be sinful for one spouse to appear naked before the other if they were knowingly furthering a lustful situation.

From the Catechism, under the heading "Offenses Against Chastity":

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0015/__P85.HTM

Note there is no exception for spouses within marriage.



Carefully note the adjectives used; "a disordered desire" an "inordinate enjoyment" "when sought for itself" isolated from its... purposes."

To force a spouse to do something sexually which they find distasteful is always wrong. Using non-perverted means by the spouses to enhance their sexual pleasure not sought for itself aside from the purposes of sex is perfectly permissible.
Jul 13th 2013 new
(quote) Paul-866591 said: Carefully note the adjectives used; "a disordered desire" an "inordinate enjoyment" "when sought for itself" isolated from its... purposes."

To force a spouse to do something sexually which they find distasteful is always wrong. Using non-perverted means by the spouses to enhance their sexual pleasure not sought for itself aside from the purposes of sex is perfectly permissible.
It hardly seems unitive when one spouse is being pressured into wearing revealing clothing against their wishes.

Jul 13th 2013 new
(quote) Peter-449116 said: Here you go:

http://www.muslim-swimwear.com
This is the second time you have posted a link (that I know of), that points to Islamic clothing. Is this a hint?
Jul 13th 2013 new
(quote) Alex-789274 said: This is the second time you have posted a link (that I know of), that points to Islamic clothing. Is this a hint?
It is merely a humorous attempt at pointing out that so far, we in the west have no Christian Taliban. Most Christian women practice some level of modesty, some do not. Unlike strict Islamic countries that practice sharia law, here in the US women are not stoned to death for being immodest. We can have opinions without imposing them on others.
Jul 13th 2013 new
(quote) Roystan-340472 said: What's the evidence for the claim that 'androgyny' is objectively immodest as well as an extreme of indecency? Is it objectively immodest for a woman who is a police or military officer to come home from work and change into a sportscoat and chinos to go bowling?
St. Thomas Aquinas points to the Law as objectively binding on Christian men and women, except in a case of necessity (necessity is not synonymous with ease or convenience, by the way).

"As stated in the foregoing Article, outward apparel should be consistent with the estate of the person, according to the general custom. Hence it is in itself sinful for a woman to wear man's clothes, or vice versa; especially since this may be a cause of sensuous pleasure; and it is expressly forbidden in the Law (Deuteronomy 22) because the Gentiles used to practice this change of attire for the purpose of idolatrous superstition. Nevertheless this may be done sometimes without sin on account of some necessity, either in order to hide oneself from enemies, or through lack of other clothes, or for some similar motive."
Jul 13th 2013 new
(quote) Mary-847286 said: Chelsea said that it might be sinful for a woman to refuse to wear a bikini for her husband if he wanted her to.

I say that a woman can refuse to wear a bikini for her husband. Whether the wife is refusing because she doesn't like the way she looks in it, or she feels like an object does not matter. She can say no and not be sinning. My point was that if it were a sin to refuse to dress in a manner that pleases a husband, then women could be put in a position to demean themselves--not that all requests are demeaning.
I didn't say that it was absolutely sinful. I didn't say that it was absolutely not sinful. I said that it may be sinful, meaning that one would have to know all of the circumstances. Only if one is actually IN the situation can he know all the circumstances. The point is not about one being bound by any moral law to provoke his spouse to the marital embrace, but rather that being stingy with the goods which one gives over in marriage can and may be sinful. St. Paul teaches us that "the wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband. And in like manner the husband also hath not power of his own body, but the wife." (1 Cor. 7:4) Obviously one has no obligation to sin himself or participate in the sin of others, but still in the ordinary course of things, one ought be very careful what he refuses his spouse in regard to his body.
Jul 13th 2013 new
Hi everyone,
Ok, I am sure I am going to get nailed to the wall for this. But yes, I do think it's ok to wear a bikini. As long is the bikini is in good taste. No G-strings, no super tiny tops with nothing but strings, ect. I wear a bikini and when there are lots of people starting to come to the pool, I put a T-shirt on to cover up. My bikini is pretty modest. I know to many that is an oxymoron but I feel comfortable and am always aware of what is showing. I am really looking forward to buying the new kind with boy shorts as the bottom instead of the usual bikini bottoms. I feel comfortable in a bikini and would NEVER be exposed without my cover up T-shirt if there were married men and families around. But when there is no one out there by my pool I do wear my bikini. I don't think it's sinful. If I start thinking along those lines I will become scrupulous and that can be the sin of pride. I have so much work to do and really try to watch what I do, say, and think. If I felt or was told it was a sin...I would wear a maxi- cover up dress!
Jul 13th 2013 new
(quote) Chelsea-743484 said: I didn't say that it was absolutely sinful. I didn't say that it was absolutely not sinful. I said that it may be sinful, meaning that one would have to know all of the circumstances. Only if one is actually IN the situation can he know all the circumstances. The point is not about one being bound by any moral law to provoke his spouse to the marital embrace, but rather that being stingy with the goods which one gives over in marriage can and may be sinful. St. Paul teaches us that "the wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband. And in like manner the husband also hath not power of his own body, but the wife." (1 Cor. 7:4) Obviously one has no obligation to sin himself or participate in the sin of others, but still in the ordinary course of things, one ought be very careful what he refuses his spouse in regard to his body.
"Being stingy with the goods" is different from how one packages the goods. St Paul did not mean that men choose what their wives wear and women choose what their husbands wear. If a man needs "special" packaging to be intimate with his wife, then there is a bigger problem than what she wears.

Being "very careful what he refuses his spouse in regard to his body" puts the emphasis on the wrong person. A spouse should be "very careful" (actually, just be considerate and loving) to not ask anything that would be offensive to the other person. Any spouse should be free to refuse anything that they are not comfortable with (short of "paying the debt"). My mom would never "french" kiss my dad. She thought it was disgusting; however, she had three kids. I do not believe that my dad should have 'forced' her to do it. She said no, and that was that--according to her.
Posts 31 - 40 of 164