Pints With Aquinas - 60: Let's talk about sex, baby. ... I mean, uh, Thomas.

Starting point is 00:00:00 Pints with Aquinas depends on your support. If you're an awesome person and want to prove it, go to pintswithaquinas.com, click the Patreon banner, and there you can learn how to support the show for as little as $2 a month. Every dollar helps, and we are grateful for your support. Welcome to Pints with Aquinas, episode 60. I'm Matt Fradd. If you could sit down with St. Thomas Aquinas over a pint of beer and ask him any one question, what would it be? Today we'll ask St. Thomas, is sex sinful? Yes, welcome back to Bites of Aquinas, the show where you and I pull up our barstool to discuss theology and philosophy, and today we're talking about sex with St. Thomas Aquinas. Now, you may have noticed if you've read much of Aquinas that

Starting point is 00:01:05 he's not a very colourful writer. He's not very flowery. And I think that's fine. I think that we could say that Augustine is beautiful like a garden is beautiful, but Aquinas is beautiful like a tool is beautiful. Now, I don't mean Aquinas is a tool, obviously, but he's precise and he uses language very clearly because he's very interested in communicating what he wants to communicate effectively and, as I say, clearly. So, the same will be true here in responding to an objection that sex is sinful. You know, he's not going to speak like I would speak, you know, like, no, like, sex is amazing. It's good. He's going to speak very specifically and concretely. So, what I want to do in this episode is read from the supplemental section of the Summa Theologiae.

Starting point is 00:02:07 Let's see, I'm probably going to look through a few of them here. Questions 41, 42, 49, and we'll see what he says. But this is the big one, isn't it? I mean, this is the question that most non-Catholics, or at least those who are against the Church, this is the problem they have. They think that Catholics are against sex, that Catholics have an undue suspicion of the body, and so forth. This might be true of Catholics, just like it might be true of anybody, but certainly the Church has a very high regard for human sexuality. Do you know what the first commandment in the Bible is? The first commandment, not in the sense of the Ten Commandments,

Starting point is 00:02:53 but the very first commandment from God to humanity. Do you know what that is? It's in Genesis 1, verse 28. And Aquinas, God, don't mix them up. God says, be fruitful and multiply and fill the face of the earth. And Aquinas, God, don't mix them up. God says, be fruitful and multiply and fill the face of the earth. Peter Kreeft once reflected upon this passage, quipped, I do not think, right, that by fruitful and multiply,

Starting point is 00:03:20 he meant grow grapefruit and invent calculators. No. All right. When he said be fruitful and multiply, he meant have sex, have babies. Right. And so, as we'll learn today from reading Aquinas, obviously nothing that God commands or that any of the authors of the New Testament suggest or that natural law mandates could possibly be sinful. So, let me read directly from Aquinas and towards the end of the episode, what I'd like to do is share with you a quotation from John Paul II. And if you haven't heard it before, if you're not familiar with the work, Love and Responsibility that he

Starting point is 00:03:58 wrote before becoming Pope, I think you're going to find it quite shocking and maybe you'll be very pleased. I'm not sure. Or offended, one or the other. All right, let's have a look here. Here's the objection, okay? Excess in the passions corrupts virtue. Now, there is always excess of pleasure in the marriage act, so much so that it absorbs the reason, which is man's principal good. Wherefore, the philosopher says that in that act, it is impossible to understand anything. Therefore, the marriage act is always a sin. Here's Aquinas' response. The excess of passion that corrupts virtue not only hinders the act of reason, but also destroys the order of reason. The intensity of pleasure in the marriage act does not do this, since though for the moment man is not being directed by reason, he was previously directed by reason.

Starting point is 00:05:18 Okay. Aquinas then says, on the contrary, it's written in 1 Corinthians 7, verse 28, if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. In 1 Timothy 5, 14, it says, I will that the younger should marry and bear children, but there can be no bearing of children have approved of it. Further, no sin is a matter of precept, a precept being obedience to a law, right? But the marriage debt is a matter of precept. And we read about it in 1 Corinthians 7, verse 3, where St. Paul says, let the husband render the debt to his wife. What do you think that is, that debt? It's the marital act. Therefore, it's not a sin. Every act whereby a precept is fulfilled is meritorious if it be done from charity. Now, such is the marriage act. All right.

Starting point is 00:06:30 Now, Aquinas says here in question 41 in the supplemental section of the Summa Theologiae, I answer that if we suppose the corporeal nature to be created by the good God, we cannot hold that those things which pertain to the preservation of the corporeal nature and to which nature inclines are altogether evil. Therefore, since the inclination to beget an offspring whereby the specific nature is preserved is from nature, it is impossible to maintain that the act of begetting children is altogether unlawful and that it is impossible to find virtue therein, unless we suppose, as some are mad enough to assert, that corruptible things were created by an evil God, whence perhaps the opinion mentioned in the text is derived. Therefore, this is a most wicked heresy.

Starting point is 00:07:34 There Aquinas gets a little sassy, doesn't he? Go, Aquinas, yes, go get him. But, yeah, I love it. Some are mad enough to assert this. Notice how strong, I mean, again, Aquinas doesn't usually use strong language like this, but he did there. Here's an objection, okay? The sacraments derive their efficacy from Christ's passion, but matrimony, since it has pleasure annexed to it, does not conform man to Christ's passion, which was painful. Therefore, it's not a sacrament.

Starting point is 00:08:13 Aquinas says, although matrimony is not conformed to Christ's is regarding charity, whereby he suffered for the church who was to be united to him as his spouse. Some say that whenever pleasure is the chief motive for the marriage act, it is a mortal sin. That when it is an indirect motive, it is a venial sin. And that when it spurns the pleasure altogether and is displeasing, it is wholly void of venial sin. So that it would be a mortal sin to seek pleasure in this act, a venial sin to take the pleasure when offered, but that perfection requires one to detest it. I'm going to pause here for a moment. When I worked at Catholic Answers, I worked there for three years as an apologist. I remember getting a letter. I think it was addressed to Jason Everett, whose office I had taken over when he moved to a different state. And it was from this couple

Starting point is 00:09:27 that really sounded like the objections that Aquinas is parroting in the Summa Theologiae. These people were saying that, you know, perfection, right, would require that a man and a wife become less and less interested in the sexual act, as if the sexual act was unholy. And the holier they became, as I say, the less frequently they would have to endure the sexual act, and eventually they wouldn't want to do it at all. And so, here's what Aquinas is saying, right? He's saying, some people, and it sounds like these people who wrote that letter to me, would say it's a mortal sin if you seek sex for its pleasure. Venial sin if, okay, you'll take it, but that's not why you're doing it.

Starting point is 00:10:14 But that, and here I quote him, but that perfection requires one to detest it. Aquinas says this. But this is impossible. Aquinas says this, Don't you love how logical Aquinas is? As the marriage act is not evil in itself, neither will it be sin to seek pleasure therein. Consequently, the right answer to this question is that if pleasure be sought in such a way as to exclude the honesty of marriage, so that it is not as a wife, but as a woman that a man treats his wife, but as a woman that a man treats his wife and that he is ready to use her in the same way if she were not his wife, it is a mortal sin. That is, when a man seeks wanton pleasure in his wife when he sees no more in her than he would in a wanton. FYI, what is a wanton? A wanton is a prostitute. So, Aquinas is saying it's not

Starting point is 00:11:29 sinful to seek pleasure in the marital act since the marital act is good, right? And pleasure in a good action is good. But if one were to treat his wife like a prostitute, then this would constitute mortal sin. In other words, I really want to have sex with this woman who's my wife. And let's say all of a sudden, you know, he comes home to have sex with his wife and well, the wife's not there, but hey, you know, like someone brought in a prostitute for some weird reason and you would have sex with her. Yeah, that would be a mortal sin. And if you were to treat your wife just like she's a prostitute, in other words, just a warm body, right, to masturbate with essentially, then this would be mortal sin. And of course, the same applies to a wife who would treat her husband in that regard.

Starting point is 00:12:17 So, before I share with you a little bit about Aquinas, not Aquinas, a little bit about Voitua and what he shared in Love and Responsibility. Let's take a quick break. My name is Gomer and I'm the co-host of Catching Foxes. Foxes. Foxes. Catching Foxes. Foxes.

Starting point is 00:12:37 I would like to tell you about something more important than my podcast. What? Pints with Aquinas. Pints with Aquinas. Pint, pint, p-p-p-p-pints with Aquinas. Matt Fradd actually wrote a book on 50 plus deep thoughts from the angelic doctor. Pints with Aquinas. Here's the deal. Beer is easily lovable, but medieval monastic philosophers, they can be quite intimidating. Yet in this short pithy book, and I don't use that word often. In fact, I never use the word pithy. But I'm going to use it here, and you're going to agree with me.

Starting point is 00:13:08 Matt Fradd made The Greatest Mind in the History of the Church as easily accessible as your favorite beer. You'll laugh, you'll cry. Well, you won't cry. But you'll laugh, and you'll discover that this old school philosopher's wisdom is just as relevant today as it was back then. So do yourself a favor. Get a copy of this enlightening, pithy little book from Amazon right now. And when it arrives, pour yourself a frothy pint and dig in. You'll be glad you did.

Starting point is 00:13:37 All right. Good to have you back here at Pints with Aquinas. So now we have Aquinas' understanding of the matter, right? Sex isn't sinful, can't be sinful. Let me say a little bit to this before we look at Wojtyla. So much to say. If the body, right, if the human body didn't have intrinsic dignity, if it wasn't good, if the naked body wasn't good, you couldn't degrade it. Does that make sense? Like, in order to degrade something, you have to, well, the thing has to have a grade, right? An interior sort of value worth to begin with.

Starting point is 00:14:22 We don't talk about degrading comic books and, I don't know, reading glasses, but we do talk about degrading people. So, the very fact that you can degrade another person and that Christians make a big deal about this is proof that we think that the body is good, right? That the body is an outward expression of the profound mystery of the human person. It's, guess what? Here's something that a lot of people think. They think that John Paul II said this. Pornography isn't wrong because it shows too much. It's wrong because it shows too little. I'm almost convinced that John Paul II never said those words because I've never been able to find a source for it. I checked with

Starting point is 00:15:10 Christopher West. He agrees. So, there you go. A bit of trivia for you. By the way, if you do know who said that, you can give me the source. I'd be very grateful. But it certainly sums up John Paul II's thought, right? So, the problem with pornography isn't that it shows too much because there is nothing wrong with breasts and penises and vaginas, right? It shows too little. Like, with pornography, it reduces this person to the lowest common denominator. That's what's wrong with porn and looking upon our wife as if she were porn or looking upon our husband as if he was. Secondly, like the idea that Christians think sex is bad, I just have to say it. I think that this is a tremendous straw man.

Starting point is 00:15:58 I've never met a Christian in my life who said that sex was bad. met a Christian in my life who said that sex was bad. That said, I think that many people do have this unnecessary suspicion of the sexual appetite and of sex. And that's probably because we've been raised in a pornified culture. We've been exposed to things that involve sex and which are very vulgar, maybe violent and bad. And it can be really difficult after being exposed to that kind of bad sex to then switch into marriage mode and realize that sex is good, etc, etc. But put it this way, like, if sex wasn't in some way beautiful, wasn't in some way beautiful, right? You couldn't make it ugly. You can't make mud ugly, right? If sex didn't have a purpose, then you couldn't pervert it, right? You know, you can't thwart it because it had no ends to begin with. So, needless to say that Christians think that sex is good. Now, I do want

Starting point is 00:17:06 to share with you a quote from John Paul II, which usually freaks people out the first time they've heard it. But given all that we've said thus far, hopefully you will recognize it to be very beautiful. One of my favorite all-time books is Love and Responsibility by John Paul II. Now, Love and Responsibility by John Paul II. Now, prior to becoming Pope, his name was Karol Wojtyla. I just gave a big talk recently in which I cited Karol Wojtyla and afterwards, people were coming up to me, who was that woman philosopher you were talking about? I'm like, no, no, no, no. Karol is Polish for Charles, you know, Karol Wojtyla. But in Love and Responsibility, John Paul II says that as a matter of duty and love, a man should lead his wife to orgasm. Wait, he's not finished. And that whenever possible, both man and wife should orgasm at the same time. Listen to what he says here.

Starting point is 00:18:08 should orgasm at the same time. Listen to what he says here. Sexologists state that the curve of arousal in woman is different from that in man. It rises more slowly, falls more slowly. The man must take this difference between male and female reactions into account, male and female reactions into account. Not for hedonistic, but for altruistic reasons. That's a really important line that I think after the shock of that one line about men should lead their wives to climax, you know, it's really important that you get that next bit. Not for hedonism, but because of altruism. In other words, you know, I want to make my wife climax so I can feel like the man. He's like, no, you've precisely got it the wrong way around. It's for the good of the other, not for your good, you selfish person. Okay. So, not for hedonism, but for altruism. Right. He then goes on and says this.

Starting point is 00:19:07 There exists a rhythm dictated by nature itself, which both spouses must discover, so that climax may be reached both by the man and by the woman, and as far as possible, occur in both simultaneously. Now, if that offends you, that's your problem. So go deal with it, with a therapist or with Jesus or with somebody. But this is the goodness of sex. Orgasms weren't Playboy's idea, all right? It was God's idea. He goes on, you know, what happens when a woman doesn't experience this

Starting point is 00:19:54 gratification that comes from sex? He says, if a woman does not obtain natural gratification from the sexual act, there is a danger that her experience of it will be qualitatively inferior, will not involve her fully as a person. It is usually the result of egoism in the man, who, failing to recognize the subjective desires of the woman in intercourse and the objective laws of the sexual process taking place in her seeks merely his own satisfaction, sometimes quite brutally. So there we are. That will do us for today. I want to suggest a couple of resources. If you would like to learn more about the goodness of human sexuality, perhaps to untwist some of the lies you've believed in your own life.

Starting point is 00:20:46 One would be my new book, The Porn Myth, exposing the reality behind the fantasy of pornography. This is a non-religious book that I wrote and published with Ignatius Press, in which I throw a ton of research at the reader. There's about 37 or so pages in the bibliography, much of which comes from peer-reviewed literature and experts in the field. And I think it makes the case, right, that pornography is detrimental to the viewer. And of course, by extension, treating people as objects. Another resource I would recommend would be Jason Everett. Everything Jason does, I'm a big fan of. So, chastityproject.com is his website where you can learn, read articles, listen to talks that he and others have given. Fantastic

Starting point is 00:21:31 resource. Finally, I would recommend Christopher West. I love Christopher West. I actually know him and I probably have said this before. I'm just looking up his exact website right now, so don't mess it up. I love him. He's one of the holiest people I've ever met. So, I know Christopher personally, and I know that there's people out there that like to criticize people. For some reason, we take delight in that or something. I don't know. But listen, the dude's amazing. And if you go to his website, coreproject.com, amazing and if you go to his website coreproject.com you can you know he's he I think he's a very he's obviously a very popular presenter and I think an accurate presenter of John Paul II's theology of the body if you don't know what that is ever more reason to go and look up

Starting point is 00:22:17 Christopher West at coreproject.com all right well that does it for this week. Thank you for sticking around. If you want, you have to go back and check out the podcast I did on wet dreams. Did you know that Aquinas talks about wet dreams? Well, he does. It's towards the beginning. So scroll back throughout the history of these podcasts and you'll find that one and be sure to listen to it. In the meantime, please consider supporting Pints with Aquinas on Patreon so that this show can continue. Go to pintswithaquinas.com, click the Patreon banner and support the show for as little as $2 a month or $5 a month or whatever. And by doing that, you'll see the thank you gifts I'll give you in return for being such an amazing person. Thank

Starting point is 00:23:03 you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Also, if you want to review Pints with Aquinas on iTunes, I'd be hugely grateful. I know it's just a few clicks for you, but it means a lot to me actually, because the more reviews a podcast gets, the higher it comes up when people search different things like, I don't know, sex, wet dreams or something. So there you go. God bless you all and I'll chat with you next week.

Pints With Aquinas - 60: Let's talk about sex, baby. ... I mean, uh, Thomas.

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.