Sexual Intercourse and the Orthodox Church

Sex, marriage, and contraception: the vocation of the married couple and the goal of kenotic love

The following is an honest, straightforward take on the topic of sexual intercourse within Christian marriage. As such, the content will include discussion about sex, relationships, contraception, and the like. I hope to post only once about this subject for the purpose of providing an alternative take to the online sources that discuss and advise on this subject.

The Eastern Orthodox Church understands the proper practice of genital sex as an action oriented towards the fulfillment of the married couple’s vocation: mutual salvation. Within the bounds of this archetypal vocation of kenotic love there is a kind of radical freedom, as each couple seeks to individuate the self-giving love of Christ. Sexual intercourse, albeit a single component of larger whole, is a means that, when rightly exercised, fulfills this end in three distinct ways: 1. the procreation of children (Genesis 1:28; 9:7. Psalm 127:3-5), 2. the strengthening of the marital bond (Genesis 2:24; Mark 10:6-9),¹ 3. the quelling of lustful passion (1 Corinthians 7:3–5, 9).²

This does not mean, however, that, provided they meet one or more of these criteria, a couple can allow their sexual appetites to run rampant. The Fathers were adamant that the married couple should love ​chastely​;³ that they should not go “beyond necessaries,” which would make “the furnace [of lust] powerful”⁴ – the point being that sexual intercourse can either cool the flame of lust or strengthen it.⁵ Saint John Chrysostom comments: “as [Christ] does not forbid drinking, but drinking to excess” so, too, he does not forbid sexual intercourse, but sexual intercourse that “kindle[s] desire.”⁶ With this in mind, Chrysostom encourages his flock to, “indulge in an orderly way.”⁷

HOW TO HAVE SEX THE “ORTHODOX” WAY

But what does it mean to have sex without kindling desire? And what does “orderly” sex look like? Thank goodness we have the Orthodox internet that all-too-readily volunteers to answer, with dour seriousness, all of the questions we did not ask… *unrolls scroll, nearly as long as patchy beard, that lists dos and don’ts of Orthodox sex*

According to some online clergy and laymen, a lawfully wed husband and wife should only have sexual intercourse during periods of fertility (a span of roughly three days out of the month); they should not engage in this act when the woman is pregnant; once the period of fertility passes – whether by monthly cycle or with the onset of menopause – the couple should stop having sex; and if the couple is altogether infertile even as newly weds, they should live together as brother and sister. That is, they should cultivate a sexless marriage according to their strength. The reasoning: because sex without the possibility of pregnancy is sin.

In full disclosure, their answers are not likely to be this brusque. But the above is simply extrapolating the logic out to its conclusions. On this theme, it bears noting that the reductio ad absurdum, crude as it is, would affirm that proper conjugal conduct only requires the husband to orgasm.

Unsurprisingly, such answers do not sufficiently address the nuance needed with such questions.

IS IT SIN TO HAVE SEX FOR REASONS OTHER THAN PROCREATION?

But is it sin to have sex with your spouse without the possibility of getting pregnant?

The simple answer is not necessarily. Proper sexual conduct has much less to do with fertility and much more to do with one’s intentions. Contrast, for instance, the husband that uses his wife as little more than a gym sock for his own pleasure with the husband that gives himself to his wife in the act of conjugal love. The one treats the person as an object; the other makes present the self-giving, kenotic love of Christ in action. The latter does not preclude the possibility of personal pleasure, but it is not its chief aim. In some cases, this leads to the creation of new life – a further illustration of Trinitarian love, of God who is the giver of life.

THE PERSONA OF THE “ULTRA ORTHODOX”

The reality is that the answers are not, and will never be, as black-and-white as many would like to think. And anyone who tells you differently is likely selling an Orthodox “phronema” based in some version of authoritarian fundamentalism. But let me be clear: this is not done in malevolence. It is done by way of self-protection. Many that fall into these fringes of Orthodoxy – and certainly those that espouse it – betray an insecurity (of self, of personality, of overscrupulosity, etc.) that must be “secured” by rigorist strictures. This enables them to assess whether they have made the “right” decisions – or follow the “Orthodox” way of having sex or (insert: anything). Given enough time, such individuals construct an entire Orthodox persona upon such a precarious house of cards.

False beliefs are essentially parasites that preys upon the person. Over time, the long studied questions and preciously treasured conclusions of such “ultra Orthodox,” who value being right and doing it right (no pun intended), come to replace the autonomy of the person. And if a single card is removed, the entire structure collapses. When this happens, the person experiences a moment of crisis wherein one of two things will occur: he will “come to himself” like the prodigal (Luke 15:17) and begin building his house on the rock (Matthew 7:24–27) or he will double down on his folly (Proverbs 26:11) and plot how to kill Christ within himself (Matthew 12:14). For in the collapse of the persona is the calling of Christ – in the suffering, salvation. And in rejecting this, he rejects Christ. Following this, he kills his brother (Genesis 4); he takes up the stones and drive his brother away (from Church, from his community, and so on) if he disagrees with him or because he is not “Orthodox” enough.

Generally speaking, if someone cannot take criticism or disagreement or questioning, or insists on being obeyed, or is constantly ranking things by “Orthodox and not Orthodox” (us vs. them), or claiming that they want to be “more Orthodox,” or if they are obsessed with your sex life as a married couple (or want explicit details about this or any sexual sins confessed), or obsessed about talking about sexual sins in general, these are all major red flags.

THE ORTHODOX CHURCH AND CONTRACEPTION?

The patristic literature surrounding contraception as a whole can be read a few different ways: 1. contraception in any form is not in line with the Orthodox tradition. 2. contraception is permissible provided that it is (a) not abortifacient and (b) not used to stir the fire of lust (overindulge). Patristic figures such as Saint John Chrysostom (4th century) would write against abortion and abortifacient contraception – both of which have always been against the teachings of the Church. But elsewhere Chrysostom would write that a married couple does not need procreation as an excuse for copulation.⁸ The fact that most contraceptive practices (barring onanism) were abortifacient until recently (20th century) allows room for one's personal preference to be read into the literature. This complicates the issue.

The main issue Orthodox have with contraception is that it separates sex from the “fruit of the womb”⁹ – and is often used to indulge sexual apetite on a whim. Unfortunately, this leads to an increase in promiscuity, one night stands, and lustful desire. This not in line with an Orthodox Tradition.

It is the unique vocation of the sexually active married couple fulfill, according to their ability, the three aforementioned purposes for the sexual act:

1. To bear and raise children according to their God-given ability.

Children are a gift of God. They are to be loved and taught to love God and others; they bind the married couple together in kenotic love. To bear and raise children is a vocation for the married couple (not simply unmarried, cohabitating couples) because of the traditional stability that marriage provided.

Today, the stability of marriage has been seriously damaged by laws such as no fault divorce. This is a great disservice to children who need the stability provided by a two-parent household.

2. To unite as “one flesh” – for marital unity

Sex within marriage requires more than lustful intent. Any married man will tell you that foreplay starts long before the lights go off; it starts with respect of the other, selfless giving, and connection in daily life. These are often the prerequisite for foreplay in the bedroom.

While lustful intent may be the cause of initial attraction (for most men, at least), the sustained relationship of husband in wife in marriage allows lust to be transformed into love.

You’ve likely heard the phrase “don’t go to bed angry” (Ephesians 4:26). Well, try having sex when your spouse is angry – or if you have offended them. Pro tip: don’t actually try this. It does not work. Hence, sustained relationship in marriage is, for the Orthodox Church, the foundation of sexual intercourse – not because we are prudes but because we seek the transformation of the whole person, not just the fulfillment of lust.

3. To cool the passions of the flesh through chaste love.

Sex within marriage can also provide a defense against sexual sins. While having sex for the purposes of personal gratification may not be the ideal, it is a valid aspect to marital love. To have sex within the marital relationship, even for the sake of quelling lust, is better than abstaining but resorting to a box of Kleenex and pornography.

The reality is that chaste love – and love in general – takes time. Chaste love does not mean abstaining from sexual intercourse, though. Indeed, married couples can have sexual intercourse “chastely.” Which simply means kenotically, in self-giving, which does not preclude personal pleasure as a byproduct.

Success in this vocation necessarily requires ​fasting from sexual activity​ at certain times, as able. The husband will have to restrain his desire, for instance, when his wife is not able to engage him in that manner – and likewise the wife. But to go without sex purposefully, or for a long duration, is not the prerogative of either individually. Rather, it is decision that the couple must agree upon together – and only for a certain time (1 Corinthians 7:5–7). Traditionally, this has meant fasting from sex, as able, on fasting days. But I would not recommend the newly Orthodox couple attempt this on extensive fasting periods.

What if a couple is infertile? Or does not want children?

If a couple getting married is, for whatever reason, unable to bear children, it does not mean (or should not mean) that sexual intercourse is off the table. Neither is it if the couple is unable to bear children for other reasons – simply because procreation is not the only reason for marital love.¹⁰

My opinion concerning contraception:

My personal opinion on this topic is that certain contraceptive practices (NFP, barrier methods, etc.) are permissible given proper use. But this is something the couple should consider together. Not everyone will agree with this opinion, which is fine. But to paint the issue as an open and shut case is simply disingenuous.

1. See also Ephesians 5:22-33; Revelation 19.

2. Each of these are reflected to varying degrees in patristic literature.

3. Chaste meaning “restrained” or without excess. See ​Clement of Alexandria. ​The Instructor​, 3.11; ​John Chrysostom, ​Homily 7 on Colossians​.

4. John Chrysostom, ​Homily 24​ on Romans.

5. See Proverbs 27:20 – If the “eyes of a man are never satisfied” then how is lust ​cooled​? Through “

6. Saint John Chrysostom, ​Homily 24​ on Romans.

7. Ibid.

8. Ps. 127:3 (NKJV numbering) – that is to say, it is used not to “indulge in an orderly way” but to indulge in any way the flesh moves.

9. See On Virginity.

10. See On Virginity by John Chrysostom, who notes that “procreation is not the primary reason for marriage.”