However, if sexual desire always needs healing from concupiscience and can actually find such healing, then it is unnecessarily harmful and simply untrue to condemn a same-sex romantic relationship to “either heartbreak of sin.” Of course, it may lead to either. But even assuming bad faith, something doesn’t become incorrect simply because it’s a justification.But it may also lead to remedies similar to what marriage provides, by curbing concupiscience’s desire to consume and dominate and control another through the realization of another’s goodness and through mutual love, care, and support. A well-argued argument is still well-argued, even if the intentions behind it are suspect.Whether inside or outside of marriage, man must always work to overcome concupiscience.And lust towards one’s spouse requires remedying, just as lust towards those outside of the marital relationship requires it.
I Do Podcast interviews today’s most successful and inspiring relationship experts, therapists and couples.
Sin and marriage find a union in common interpretations of 1 Corinthians 7 (and Augustine) which states, “If they cannot exercise self-control they should marry, for it is better to marry than to be on fire.” Under a frequent interpretation, the cultivation of sexuality in relationship always leads to sin, unless alleviated simply by the marital relationship.
Sexuality always involves some level of sin (in handing oneself over to sexual desire), but marriage provides a space in which such sin can be condoned.
A friend recently told me that same-sex dating was bound to “end in either sin or heartbreak.” This view was unsurprising, and I held it for a while myself.
But as I’ve explored this question, I’ve become increasingly concerned that it promotes harmful and theologically unsound views of human sexuality.
Search for Chris sexdating:
This reading says that marriage is a “second-class” option for those who lack sexual self-control, and that thus such self-control is unnecessary in marriage.