Sexual Morality and Christian Marriage - Mere Christianity, Book 3, Chapters 5-6

Perhaps I was a bit silly, even glib, yesterday.

I publish my blog to my facebook page (shameless self promotion, torture to my friends and family). I received a facebook comment on the post from a guy I went to high school with, of whom I have always had a high opinion. He eloquently said, "Uh ... Wow."

"Uh ... Wow," can be taken a few ways; he meant it in the bad way. He later clarified, "Well, I think all I can do is point you to C.S. Lewis' fantastic book 'Mere Christianity', book (or part) 2 [sic] chapters 5 & 6 entitled "Sexual Morality" and "Christian Marriage". He makes my argument better than I can--if you care to."

I never take a challenge lightly; especially one against my Christianity and morality.

Fortunately (???!!!), I was able to download and read the assignment as I waited in the Kid Care Clinic with my Crichton.

(Crichton, we now know, has the flu and pneumonia. I've been up all night watching him breathe; takes me back to those new-mother nights. Except, now, I'm not breastfeeding, so Dr. Pepper and I can have at it, guilt free)

(hey, did you like that appeal to your sympathy, to get you on my side: poor woman, good mother, up all night, sick child - such a cheap ploy, don't let it deceive you).

C.S. Lewis - in LDS culture, his words are held as nearly sacred. However, I'm not sure he can be taken as an authority on marriage for a number of reasons. It has been speculated that Lewis had some sort of on going relationship with the mother of a war buddy (they had promised that if either died in battle, the other would care for the dead man's family). Lewis, himself, was not married until he was 58. The woman was divorced and Lewis opted to marry her civilly, however, once it was determined she had cancer, they had a Christian marriage performed. This marriage only lasted 4 years. As in many things, one can theorize, but practical application, i.e. life, is not always so neat and tidy.

He admits that one might argue that his lack of marital experience makes him incompetent to discuss the topic, but he advises readers to be sure we are analyzing the situation from a basis of reality and not trying to impose the silly ideas from novels and movies (i.e. happily ever after).

Who can know the secrets that have gone on, even in very long and seemingly successful marriages? As I look at the marriages around me, my peers', my family's, my own, I can see the benefits of marriage, clearly, for both husband and wife. But I see (and feel) how much hard work really has to be put into maintaining a good and healthy marriage. I see how quickly they can crumble apart. I know how painful it is when, as a spouse, you feel like you are putting everything you have into the marriage, feel like you are making so many sacrifices, and you still struggle with unhappiness.

There are many, many things I could take contention with in these two chapters (like how the man should be the head of the household because women are too emotionally involved in protecting the family and the man is better eqipped to protect other people from his wife's intense familial patriotism - tho, to be fair, he's probably right). However, overall, I do agree with Lewis.

The feeling of being "in love" makes us want to commit to a lifetime (or eternity) of devotion and concern for the object of our desire. Those feelings spur us on to make sacred promises and commitments before God and all mankind, to put the other's happiness and well being above all else, even our own. Feelings come and go. However, our morality comes into play when we hold strong to those promises, despite how our feelings may change over time.

This concept I adore and have no argument against.

I just wonder, if, when we are perfect beings, or as we become perfected - I wonder if the commitments will always be limited to one on one, husband and wife. Or if maybe the love we feel towards our spouses, the commitment and devotion to their well being, we will be able to extend to all mankind ... and then, because I am a little hormonal, I wonder how that might pertain to sex, etc.

We have a limited understanding of Love and Love One Another, I think. I'm not trying to be dirty minded or flippant (tho I'm sure I fail) - but I enjoy contemplating ideas and it is not a terrible thing to do. It annoys me when people try to corral you into "right" thinking by shoving guilt and morality at you, as if to say, "I am Right and anything not what I think is dangerously wrong." Pshaw. Perhaps most of us are only capable of deeply loving one person at a time. And thus the commandments are given according to our ability and capacity. Of course, then you have children and that opens up your hearts in ways you never thought possible.

Yes, married folk must be very careful not to open our hearts up to exciting "in love" (eros) feelings, it is true. However, Lewis also says, "[w]hen we meet someone beautiful and clever and sympathetic, of course we ought, in one sense, to admire these good qualities. But is it not largely in our own choice whether this love shall, or shall not, turn into what we call 'being in love?"

I say, probably.

So, make the conscious decision not to allow yourself to entertain your married self with exciting "in love" feelings. Yes, and avoid inciting lust, also. Except in and for your spouse.

I vote for Agape, which means love in modern-day Greek. It generally refers to a "pure," ideal type of love, rather than the physical attraction suggested by eros. It has also been translated as "love of the soul."

I love your soul and I don't care who knows!

Is that better? Are we clear?