Pastoral Judgment on Unrepentant Pornography in Marriage
Pastoral Judgment on Unrepentant Pornography in Marriage
The biblical foundation for understanding marriage and sexual purity is established in Hebrews 13:4, which states that "Marriage should be honored by all and the marriage bed kept undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterers" [1]. This verse underscores the importance of maintaining purity within marriage.
In the context of marriage, the use of pornography by one partner can be seen as a form of sexual immorality that potentially defiles the marriage bed. The early Christian tradition, as reflected in the writings of Augustine, acknowledges that marriage is not just for procreation but also involves a level of concupiscence or lust. However, Augustine also notes that while some level of intemperance is tolerated in married couples to avoid greater sins like adultery, using marriage "for the mere pleasure of lust is not without sin" [7].
The Catholic tradition, as represented by Thomas Aquinas, views marriage as a sacrament that involves a mutual consent between spouses. This consent is not just about the act of marriage but about the commitment to one another. Aquinas argues that the consent that makes a marriage is a consent to marriage itself, which includes carnal intercourse as part of its essence [3].
The issue of unrepentant pornography use within marriage raises questions about the nature of consent and the commitment made in marriage vows. If one partner uses pornography without repentance, it can be seen as a breach of the mutual commitment to honor and purity within the marriage. According to Aquinas, a consummated marriage involves a mutual belonging of the spouses to each other, making it indivisible [2].
In Jewish tradition, as represented by Maimonides, there are strict rules regarding marital purity and the prohibition against adultery. A woman who has engaged in adulterous relations becomes forbidden to her husband, and he is punished for engaging in marital relations with her if she has not been properly divorced or purified [4].
Reformed tradition, as seen in the writings of John Calvin and Charles Hodge, emphasizes the importance of marital fidelity and the seriousness of adultery. Calvin critiques the Catholic tradition for its handling of marriage and celibacy, arguing that it has led to widespread immorality [5]. Hodge discusses the grounds for divorce and remarriage, noting that the Bible allows for divorce in cases where one partner is an unbeliever and departs, but emphasizes that the marriage bond is not to be taken lightly [6].
In addressing unrepentant pornography use within marriage pastorally, it's crucial to consider the biblical call to purity and the commitment made in marriage vows. The use of pornography can be seen as a form of sexual immorality that undermines this commitment. Pastoral judgment should involve guiding the couple towards repentance and restoration, emphasizing the importance of mutual fidelity and the pursuit of purity within marriage.
The historical and theological traditions represented in the sources emphasize the gravity of marital commitments and the need for fidelity. While there are differences in how various traditions approach issues like divorce and remarriage, there is a common emphasis on the importance of honoring one's spouse and maintaining the purity of the marriage bed.
Sources
- Hebrews “Hebrews 13:4 (BSB) — Marriage should be honored by all and the marriage bed kept undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterers.”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Supplement (Supplementum), Of the Impediment to Marriage, Arising from a Solemn Vow, Art. 1: Article: Whether one party after the marriage has been consummated can enter religion without the other's consent? I answer that, No one can make an offering to God of what belongs to another. Wherefore since by a consummated marriage the husband's body already belongs to his wife, he cannot by a vow of continence offer it to God without her consent. On the contrary: On the contrary, Married persons are forbidden (1 Cor. 7:5) to abstain from the use of marriage even for a tim”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Supplement (Supplementum), Of the Object of the Consent, Art. 1: Article: Whether the consent that makes a marriage is a consent to carnal intercourse? I answer that, The consent that makes a marriage is a consent to marriage, because the proper effect of the will is the thing willed. Wherefore, according as carnal intercourse stands in relation to marriage, so far is the consent that causes marriage a consent to carnal intercourse. Now, as stated above (Question [44], Article [1]; Question [45], Articles [1],2), marriage is not essentially the carnal union itself, b”
- Mishneh Torah (Maimonides) (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Mishneh Torah (Maimonides), Mishneh Torah%2C Divorce 11:14: Included in this prohibition is that every woman who engaged in adulterous relations becomes forbidden to her husband. He is punished by lashes [for engaging in marital relations with her], 31 Note the Kessef Mishneh , which cites an apparent contradiction between the Rambam's statements here and those in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah 1:22 and Hilchot Sanhedrin , Chapter 19, from which it would appear that a man is not punished by lashes for engaging in relations with his wife in such a situation. as [implied by the inclusion of the phrase] "”
- CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 94: to mention with what impunity whoredom prevails among them, and how, trusting to their vile celibacy, they have become callous to all kinds of iniquity. The prohibition, however, clearly shows how pestiferous all traditions are, since this one has not only deprived the Church of fit and honest pastors, but has introduced a fearful sink of iniquity, and plunged many souls into the gulf of despair. Certainly, when marriage was interdicted to priests, it was done with impious tyranny, not only contrary to the word of God, but contrary”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 49: woman’s leaving her husband, which do not justify a dissolution of the marriage bond. With regard to those cases in which one of the parties was a Christian and the other an unbeliever, he teaches, first, that such marriages are lawful, and, therefore, ought not to be dissolved. But, secondly, that if the unbelieving partner depart, i.e ., repudiates the marriage, the believing partner is not bound; i.e ., is no longer bound by the marriage compact. This seems to be the plain meaning. If the unbelieving partner is willing to continue in t”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 5: Augustine — Anti-Pelagian — CHAP. 16 [XIV.]--A CERTAIN DEGREE OF INTEMPERANCE IS TO BE TOLERATED IN THE CASE OF MARRIED PERSONS; THE USE OF MATRIMONY FOR THE MERE PLEASURE OF LUST IS NOT WITHOUT SIN, BUT BECAUSE OF THE NUPTIAL R: But in the married, as these things are desirable and praiseworthy, so the others are to be tolerated, that no lapse occur into damnable sins; that is, into fornications and adulteries. To escape this evil, even such embraces of husband and wife as have not procreation for their object, but serve an overbearing concupiscence, are permitted, so far as to b”