Blessings

Here are some thoughts I personally have about “this taboo church subject”:

Ultimately, it would be great to rely on families to raise children up in a home environment that would promote healthy, loving, mature, relationships that would last “until death do us part.” But in my opinion we are living in a bubble if we believe that will happen.

Why?

If the church (I was raised in a CofC home and was in church the first Sunday after my birth) had a more open approach regarding sex perhaps men and women would have healthier relationships. Age appropriate discussions could lead to healthier families and thus healthier congregations.

Here are some of the things my family taught me:

A woman is to submit to the man. The man is the man and whatever he says goes.

If a woman is raped, she asked for it.

Children in my family were told that anything that happens in the family stays in the family. (Funny {not ha ha funny{since all sin was to be confessed in church!)

If issues such as sex, relationships, etc. had been discussed in a healthy way in church, perhaps I would’ve felt that I could’ve approached someone at church and told them about the abuse I was suffering at home. Instead, I felt condemned to hell, sinful, unforgivable, unlovable, unworthy, ugly, and the list goes on and on.

On the outside, my family looked very good. But behind closed walls it was an unsafe and unhealthy environment.

By the grace (and that’s another thing I believe should’ve been taught in church, grace!) of God I was able to break the cycle of abuse I suffered. I have grown in faith instead of turning away from God.

I no longer attend the CofC. I now attend a non-denominational church that addresses the hardships of life and talks about grace.

God is good!

But seriously, I think marital intimacy is certainly a legitimate subject for church, but not sure about the challenge. As someone already pointed out, there are those for whom physically this can be problematic. This could add more strain to an already difficult situation. Now 30 days of intimacy would be better. Intimacy can mean sex, or it can mean other things.

My wife and I went to a Dr. Gary Chapman seminar Saturday February 16th. I think he really has a handle on Christ-centered marriage and helping couples to bring the intimacy back to their marriage. I agree with Dr. Chapman that all couples should try to go to one marriage seminar/conference/class each year, just to make an intentional effort at keeping connected. As he pointed out, no matter what job you have, your employer probably requires you go to seminars or some kind of training event at least annually, and what is more important than your marriage?

Peace,

Ray

http://branthansen.typepad.com/letters_from_kamp_krusty/2008/02/pastor-wirth-lo.html?cid=103993592#comments

Like another poster implied, I think I’d rather have Dr. Love Beam conduct seminars on these subjects as opposed to a Pulpit Challenge.

By the time you’re done, you’ll be glad to be done with it.

Sometimes you have to get sick of something before you can put it in its proper place.

PS – For men, there is no such thing as intimacy separated from sexuality. It is part of a man’s self-worth. Men cannot have their need for intimacy fulfilled by two hours of holding hands and smelling flowers. Men exhibit servant leadership in the marital relationship by sacrificing their sexual need for intimacy in order to develop their spouse’s sense of worth, which must be nurtured carefully. Peter calls women “fine china” (1 Pet 3:7) whom husbands should treat with understanding rather than ruling over them in a domineering sense. I think that in our world today, this situation has been reversed. Wives have something that husbands desperately need – the power to display approval of them AS MEN – and it is consistently used as a means of control.

In a culture that has no idea how to deal with sexuality, I think it is foolish to suggest that it should be locked behind bedroom doors and ignored by the Christian community. One of the most destructive forces in humanity, and we shouldn’t counsel one another on how to deal with it?

This isn’t Eisenhower’s America anymore, people. Wake up.

g

For one, while “having sex” or “making love” in a physical way can be a great source of joy for a married couple, there are other things between the couple that can be just as important. Intimacy.

And you can have (and should have) true intimacy apart from the sexual relationship alone. It all goes together, but the physical relationship should not be the central component to a married couple’s life. I don’t think.

There can arise a lot of physical problems in a marriage as the couple grows older, but their love is not diminished at all. In fact, it continues to grow and flourish.

That’s been OUR experience, anyway.

Maybe for younger people in their prime physical state such a challenge would have some meaning, but I think it takes away from and distracts from what is really more important, which I think it intimacy.

I would certainly not like to hear such a challenge from the pulpit. I would be offended, frankly, because I think it’s a superficial thing and not the most important thing to be talking about to try to build up marriages.

Every marriage is different, for one thing, and every partner in a marriage is different. Not all are ready or capable of following such a strict schedule, to put it bluntly.

Oh my word . . . what is this world coming to.

Much love,

Dee

Just a thought.

I don’t think the old style, used with young people, of dividing up the group by gender and discussing it is the best way. But, I am not sure the pulpit is the best way to be as clear as I think some of these things should be said. I think it was Tommy Nelson who did a series on Song of Solomon that was pretty clear on this topic. We used it in a young marrieds class 10 years ago.

As for the non-married challenge, why should we pretend like they aren’t doing anything. Concepts like ‘friends with benefits’ have been around along time. I look at the my space pages and the like of ‘good christian kids’ and some are shocking. Not to sound too judgmental but look at some of the favorite music of some of the staff of this ‘relevant’ church. Is listing Tupac or Kanye West a good guage of the difference in reality and what we think a good christian is doing, thinking or living. (Those artists don’t reflect my understanding of Christian values – imho, fwiw)