Mark Driscoll defends his sex book to CNN, what is your opinion?

[Bob Hunter]

Since we all love to talk about (and occasionally criticize) Mark Driscoll, I thought it might be worth discussing his latest book, which apparently is doing very well on the N.Y. Times list. http://www.amazon.com/Real-Marriage-.../dp/140020383X

Dr. Ted Roberts has received similar criticism for his book "Sexy Christians". Pastor Ed Young gets a fair share of it for the 7 day sex campaign he promotes within his Church.

Obviously, people do not look to the Church for advice on sex. I can't recall hearing much of anything regarding sex from any of the Nazarene churches I have attended. Occasionally, something is mentioned about purity and it usually comes from the youth department. Yet, thousands of Christians (Nazarenes) sit in the pew and struggle with sexual issues within their own marriage. Our view of sex is sometimes distorted and unhealthy (it's a necessary evil). Sometimes the best place to address these issues is in a counseling office, privately. I get that...

I'm certainly not endorsing Mark Driscoll's theology, but I have to give him credit for trying to guide people sexually in a pornified world. He seems to be answering questions that people are asking. Dr. Ted Roberts claims there has never been a more difficult time for young men to walk in sexual health (especially when the largest users of internet porn are 12-17 year olds). Most Christian books have one primary focus: preventing young men from engaging in pre-marital sex. Our message is "No" or "Don't".

What are you thoughts? Where do Nazarenes find themselves in this dilemma?

Driscoll's CNN defense is found here:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/0...-and-sex-book/

[Doug Ward]

I have not read the book so I cannot add anything specific. Having said that, i generally believe more conversation is better than less, and that the church has generally abandoned this topic to the general culture - to our detriment. Sex is a powerful, natural drive, and we must deal honestly with it. I hope this book has done this.

[Ryan Pugh]

I could link to numerous reviews that I've read on Real Marriage that expansively detail everything that is wrong with the book. It sounds pretty ridiculous, which isn't very surprising to me.

One of the main criticisms I've seen is that it's almost all about sex (which the opening post displays). Sex is only part of what "real marriage" really is, but I guess the Driscolls can write a book on whatever they want to.

With his opinions about men and women what they are, whether it is their roles in the church or their role in the bedroom, it seems to me that Mark Driscoll is one of the last people that Nazarenes would want to look to for marriage advice.

[Billy Cox]

I have not read the book so I cannot add anything specific. Having said that, i generally believe more conversation is better than less, and that the church has generally abandoned this topic to the general culture - to our detriment. Sex is a powerful, natural drive, and we must deal honestly with it. I hope this book has done this.

I think that the church says plenty about sex, and almost all of it is unhelpful and/or damaging. It is in this area that legalism is very much alive.

[Bob Hunter]

I could link to numerous reviews that I've read on Real Marriage that expansively detail everything that is wrong with the book. It sounds pretty ridiculous, which isn't very surprising to me.

One of the main criticisms I've seen is that it's almost all about sex (which the opening post displays). Sex is only part of what "real marriage" really is, but I guess the Driscolls can write a book on whatever they want to.

With his opinions about me and women what they are, whether it is their roles in the church or their role in the bedroom, it seems to me that Mark Driscoll is one of the last people that Nazarenes would want to look to for marriage advice.

Mmmmm...you might have to give more specifics. Like you, I have not read the book, I do have one of his previous books on sex (free download) and I have watched several interviews with he and his wife Grace. They seem very happy, fulfilled and spiritually aligned with God as a couple. Not sure I have the heart to criticize that, in fact, I wish I could put more Nazarenes in that category.

[Doug Ward]

Ryan, since seeing this thread, I have looked around and read some reactions to parts of this book. It seems that his approach is more than a bit "man-centric." Whatever the man wants, the woman should happily do. It seems that the woman is getting lost in here somewhere.

Hopefully, this will spur conversation that will be helpful, even if Driscoll's advice is more than a bit one sided. Hopefully, we we will be more open about sex, more open about its role, and our advice will be better than, "sex is dirty and bad, so you should only share it with the one person you marry."

[Bill Morrison]

I think ANY Christian who publishes a book on sex, no matter what it says, is going to get themselves into a heap of trouble.........hence my decision to have mine published at least ten years after I am put in the ground.

BILL

[Bob Hunter]

I think ANY Christian who publishes a book on sex, no matter what it says, is going to get themselves into a heap of trouble.........hence my decision to have mine published at least ten years after I am put in the ground.

BILL

That is hallyrous!

[Jeremy D. Scott]

I think ANY Christian who publishes a book on sex, no matter what it says, is going to get themselves into a heap of trouble.........hence my decision to have mine published at least ten years after I am put in the ground.

BILL

Rob Bell's most controversial book (Love Wins) was about hell. His book on sexuality ("Sex God") was hardly noticed (though I think it's his best). Even his first book made more waves.

Ed Young's book (and more so, his ploy to sell it) wasn't controversial. It was just silly and desperate.

So I'm not sure that it's just sex that makes this controversial. It's Driscoll's take on marriage.

[Todd Erickson]

http://matthewpaulturner.net/jesus-n...e-dotted-line/

http://matthewpaulturner.net/jesus-n...-at-mars-hill/

[Karen Troxler]

Here is Rachel Held Evans take on the book, which she wrote about in her blog on Jan. 3:

http://rachelheldevans.com/mark-dris...vans+-+Blog%29

[Ryan Pugh]

Mmmmm...you might have to give more specifics.

How about this and this to start with.

Like you, I have not read the book, I do have one of his previous books on sex (free download) and I have watched several interviews with he and his wife Grace. They seem very happy, fulfilled and spiritually aligned with God as a couple. Not sure I have the heart to criticize that, in fact, I wish I could put more Nazarenes in that category.

If the one of his previous books you have is Porn-Again Christian and "spiritually aligned with God" means equating masturbation with homosexuality, then yes, spiritually aligned with God they are.

If that's not what you are referring to and you have gotten a different impression from Mark and Grace, that's great. But I'd day the overall impression that Mark gives to Christians and non-Christians alike is anything but what we would hope for from a pastor.

[Bob Hunter]

Here is Rachel Held Evans take on the book, which she wrote about in her blog on Jan. 3:

http://rachelheldevans.com/mark-dris...vans+-+Blog%29

Rachel is eloquent as usual, I don't agree with the way she and others characterize complementarians (because they are always chauvinistic jerks who demand submission--when I have not always found that to be the case). Nonetheless, I do agree with this statement:

"Meanwhile, evangelicals in particular need to do something about our celebrity-pastor culture. Mark Driscoll is simply not qualified to serve as a sex therapist—most pastors aren’t!"

I would put myself in that category (not a celebrity pastor, I'm a flunkie), the category of not being an expert on the matter. However, I think being silent is very unhelpful and is all too often the case due to shame, guilt, etc. What if we took a different approach and instead of being prescriptive (like Driscoll), offered up our best take on what the Bible has to say about sex and do it in such a way that allows people to wrestle with their conscience and the Holy Spirit. Just trying to think of how we might best help those who are suffering in silence. I can't tell you the number of men I have counseled that have a private issue that is sexual in nature...and they suffer in silence. Dr. Ted Roberts (A Christian sex therapist) reports that he is seeing a rise in the number of women who are completely disinterested in sex. Or on the other extreme, they are overly aggressive (Like Potipher's wife).

For what it is worth...

[Jeremy D. Scott]

I'm growing weary of Christian bloggers of MPT's sort. I actually commented on one of his postings from last week, which said that FotF "endorsed" one of the candidates - I can't remember who - which isn't true. MPT didn't care. He'll post whatever gets hits on his blog.

The ways/things that these writers do to get hits is getting ridiculous. I unfollowed Kurt Willems recently because his efforts to get his followers just to click on his blog were becoming trite and childish.

Even Rachel Held Evans is getting rather conflicting for me. She had a great campaign encouraging Christians to "just get along" and stop nitpicking one another, but she has no problem throwing rocks at Driscoll (because he's a bully, afterall). It fits her schtick, so its good-to-go.

I am no fan of Driscoll, but I chalk him up to Romans 13 or Luke 9:49 or Mark 9:38, just like I would like people to do for me. If someone enters membership in a local church, that begins a rather personal relationship. Membership should be taken rather seriously. One's free to leave, but to rip on the church on the way out is hardly the way of Jesus or the rest of the NT. Different expressions of the Body of Christ will be...well...different.

Jesus indeed needs new PR, I just don't think that Christian bloggers are doing it very well. I'm sure that MPT is getting all the hits he had desired by digging up that golden nugget of a document out of Mars Hill. It was an internal document! Don't get me wrong - I think there are times for Christians to call out Christians. But there has to be prior relationship. Jesus' advice was to go to the person, not post it on the Internet.

Anyway, the neo-reformed Church may indeed be the new Roman Catholic Church. It's sad. Trade one stoning for another.

[Bob Hunter]

http://matthewpaulturner.net/jesus-n...e-dotted-line/

http://matthewpaulturner.net/jesus-n...-at-mars-hill/

Oh my Lord, where is the grace?

[Ryan Pugh]

I'm growing weary of Christian bloggers of MPT's sort. I actually commented on one of his postings from last week, which said that FotF "endorsed" one of the candidates - I can't remember who - which isn't true. MPT didn't care. He'll post whatever gets hits on his blog.

The ways/things that these writers do to get hits is getting ridiculous. I unfollowed Kurt Willems recently because his efforts to get his followers just to click on his blog were becoming trite and childish.

Even Rachel Held Evans is getting rather conflicting for me. She had a great campaign encouraging Christians to "just get along" and stop nitpicking one another, but she has no problem throwing rocks at Driscoll (because he's a bully, afterall). It fits her schtick, so its good-to-go.

Definitely see what you're saying here, even though I think there is still value in most of what these three are sharing. The annoying attempts to get hits need to go away.

If someone enters membership in a local church, that begins a rather personal relationship. Membership should be taken rather seriously. One's free to leave, but to rip on the church on the way out is hardly the way of Jesus or the rest of the NT. Different expressions of the Body of Christ will be...well...different.

Don't you think the issue comes when a church is incorrectly using scripture to encourage its members to avoid a former member except if it's to point out former member's sin? That's not the way of Jesus, is it?

Jesus indeed needs new PR, I just don't think that Christian bloggers are doing it very well. I'm sure that MPT is getting all the hits he had desired by digging up that golden nugget of a document out of Mars Hill. It was an internal document! Don't get me wrong - I think there are times for Christians to call out Christians. But there has to be prior relationship. Jesus' advice was to go to the person, not post it on the Internet.

I do agree that posting it on the internet isn't the way to deal with this problem. But I'll be honest, part of me is a little pleased that the controlling ways of Mars Hill is being exposed in some form. Thanks for helping me (us) think about all this, Jeremy (even though we're just a little bit off topic now. Sorry Bob ).

[Bob Hunter]

Even Rachel Held Evans is getting rather conflicting for me. She had a great campaign encouraging Christians to "just get along" and stop nitpicking one another, but she has no problem throwing rocks at Driscoll (because he's a bully, afterall). It fits her schtick, so its good-to-go.

And she has no problem characterizing complementarians as control freaks that force submission on their partners. Not always the case, would you call Billy Graham a chauvinist? I don't think so...

So yeah, some of the things she says trouble me...but not in a bad way, I'm more a fan of hers than not.

[Craig Laughlin]

http://matthewpaulturner.net/jesus-n...e-dotted-line/

http://matthewpaulturner.net/jesus-n...-at-mars-hill/

I have really witnessed an increase in this sort of thing since moving to the PNW. I'm not sure what the deal is but there are a number of churches that have pretty aggressive "church discipline" like this. I am running into way to many folks who have been damaged by this sort of thing. Most often the greatest damage is not from the original issue but the members resistance to what appears to me to be very invasive and presumptive discipline. I can't tell you how often I hear the words "controlling" about these things. Mars Hill is not at all the only church like this in the area. Maybe it is because of the success and influence of MH?

Fundamentally their understanding of "repentance" is flawed.

[Tami Martin]

Since we all love to talk about (and occasionally criticize) Mark Driscoll, I thought it might be worth discussing his latest book, which apparently is doing very well on the N.Y. Times list. http://www.amazon.com/Real-Marriage-.../dp/140020383X

Dr. Ted Roberts has received similar criticism for his book "Sexy Christians". Pastor Ed Young gets a fair share of it for the 7 day sex campaign he promotes within his Church.

Obviously, people do not look to the Church for advice on sex. I can't recall hearing much of anything regarding sex from any of the Nazarene churches I have attended. Occasionally, something is mentioned about purity and it usually comes from the youth department. Yet, thousands of Christians (Nazarenes) sit in the pew and struggle with sexual issues within their own marriage. Our view of sex is sometimes distorted and unhealthy (it's a necessary evil). Sometimes the best place to address these issues is in a counseling office, privately. I get that...

I'm certainly not endorsing Mark Driscoll's theology, but I have to give him credit for trying to guide people sexually in a pornified world. He seems to be answering questions that people are asking. Dr. Ted Roberts claims there has never been a more difficult time for young men to walk in sexual health (especially when the largest users of internet porn are 12-17 year olds). Most Christian books have one primary focus: preventing young men from engaging in pre-marital sex. Our message is "No" or "Don't".

What are you thoughts? Where do Nazarenes find themselves in this dilemma?

Driscoll's CNN defense is found here:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/0...-and-sex-book/

I haven't read the book, but I did watch all of his Peasant Princess sermons which is pretty much the same thing, minus the extensive personal examples. I'm not a big Driscoll fan. I will probably always be in the line to throw a stone or two. But on this subject, I'm grateful. I'm grateful he's getting people to talk about sex. Like Billy said, the Church tends to say nothing helpful about sex. I'm wondering Bob if a less Victorian attitude about sex would be helpful to the congregants you are talking to and aware of (the men) as well as those you're not talking to (the women, I'd presume). I'm especially grateful he's talking about sex in 2012 rather than sex in the fictionalized world of 1811.

[Bob Hunter]

I haven't read the book, but I did watch all of his Peasant Princess sermons which is pretty much the same thing, minus the extensive personal examples. I'm not a big Driscoll fan. I will probably always be in the line to throw a stone or two. But on this subject, I'm grateful. I'm grateful he's getting people to talk about sex. Like Billy said, the Church tends to say nothing helpful about sex. I'm wondering Bob if a less Victorian attitude about sex would be helpful to the congregants you are talking to and aware of (the men) as well as those you're not talking to (the women, I'd presume). I'm especially grateful he's talking about sex in 2012 rather than sex in the fictionalized world of 1811.

The Driscoll hermeneutic of scripture is so convoluted at times I find it hard to follow. He sanctions beer drinking as biblical, yet does not want women in leadership. Does that make sense to you?

I just went back and read his stuff on masturbation and I have to say I don't disagree with it. He actually lays out advice for both men and women that is very healthy and sound (Unless his views have changed since 2009). Let's face it, about half of married men masturbate, the number for women is much smaller. Another subject Nazarenes never talk about...so our kids end up figuring it out by watching internet porn and then suffer the shame, guilt and despair of lust.

[David Morris]

The Driscoll hermeneutic of scripture is so convoluted at times I find it hard to follow. He sanctions beer drinking as biblical, yet does not want women in leadership. Does that make sense to you?

I just went back and read his stuff on masturbation and I have to say I don't disagree with it. He actually lays out advice for both men and women that is very healthy and sound (Unless his views have changed since 2009). Let's face it, about half of married men masturbate, the number for women is much smaller. Another subject Nazarenes never talk about...so our kids end up figuring it out by watching internet porn and then suffer the shame, guilt and despair of lust.

Is that statistic that result of research, or just a number you've thrown out on the topic?

[Ryan Pugh]

I just went back and read his stuff on masturbation and I have to say I don't disagree with it. He actually lays out advice for both men and women that is very healthy and sound (Unless his views have changed since 2009).

Bob, can you explain how you come to the conclusion that his views/advice on masturbation are very healthy and sound? I'm just so far on the opposite end of the spectrum that I'd appreciate hearing the reasoning. If you don't want to here, that's ok with me.

[Ryan Pugh]

Is that statistic that result of research, or just a number you've thrown out on the topic?

In Porn-Again Christian, Driscoll references the Janus Report on Sexual Behavior and Sex in America, indicating that 44% of married men masturbate at least once-a-week. That's probably where Bob got that stat.

[Billy Cox]

In Porn-Again Christian, Driscoll references the Janus Report on Sexual Behavior and Sex in America, indicating that 44% of married men masturbate at least once-a-week. That's probably where Bob got that stat.

...and the other 56% are liars?

[Ryan Pugh]

...and the other 56% are liars?

I have enough faith (and knowledge) in men to not think that 100% of men fit the description. I'm sure it's still higher than 44%, maybe much higher, but not 100%.

[Bob Hunter]

Bob, can you explain how you come to the conclusion that his views/advice on masturbation are very healthy and sound? I'm just so far on the opposite end of the spectrum that I'd appreciate hearing the reasoning. If you don't want to here, that's ok with me.

Yeah, no problem here. The statistic is not verifiable. I've heard various numbers and percentages from Dr. Roberts and others, no real scientific number can be established since most men lie about it anyway (Thanks Billy!). But I think we would all agree that it if porn is an epidemic problem as numerous experts contend, then I don't think we have to argue what men do after looking at porn. It's a forgone conclusion. Now, married Christian men...they say there is no difference.

Nonetheless, I had to dig up Driscoll's book on Porn and read a bit today since I went out on a limb and posted this thread. In just reading through it, I didn't find anything objectional or unhealthy on this topic. I think he repeated some advice that has been popularized by Dobson, Gungor, Leman and other experts I've listened to. So nothing terribly earth shattering. Essentially, the Bible neither condones or forbids the practice, but when the masturbation is tainted by lust, it clearly becomes unhealthy and produces behavior that is self-destructive. Gungor & others I've read, point out that men who chronically masturbate tend to have an early onset of prostate issues. They claim there are conclusive studies to prove it--I haven't seen them. Dr. Roberts says, chronic masturbators create a nuero-brain path that conditions a young male to think of sex as a momentary "crack" cocaine type of high instead of a deep intimate expression of love between a man and a women. The Penners do something similar when they distinguish between "Adrenaline sex" and "commitment sex". I suppose they all have valid points. Again, I read nothing from Driscoll that was new and that I haven't already heard from others. I think he just regurgitated some stuff he read from experts.

I can certainly summarize and post Driscoll's main points if we want to debate masturbation and its potential pitfalls (and there are some). Don't know if the moderators want me to do that though. I can certainly learn a thing or two on this topic, again, I'm not an expert. I just try to make sense of what the experts are saying and filter it through my understanding of scripture.

[Marcus Kibbe]

I have enough faith (and knowledge) in men to not think that 100% of men fit the description. I'm sure it's still higher than 44%, maybe much higher, but not 100%.

I would agree. You have to factor in paraplegics.

[Shea Zellweger]

I have enough faith (and knowledge) in men to not think that 100% of men fit the description. I'm sure it's still higher than 44%, maybe much higher, but not 100%.

This might get me in trouble with some folks here but... does a man masturbating equal out to a man doing something wrong? There seems to be an underlying assumption that men who masturbate are looking at pictures/videos/stories about naked women who are not their wives while they do so. If that's the case, it's probably a bad thing, but what if men (and maybe even women) are masturbating as a part of a healthy, consentual aspect of their sex life? It does happen...

[Ryan Pugh]

This might get me in trouble with some folks here but... does a man masturbating equal out to a man doing something wrong? There seems to be an underlying assumption that men who masturbate are looking at pictures/videos/stories about naked women who are not their wives while they do so. If that's the case, it's probably a bad thing, but what if men (and maybe even women) are masturbating as a part of a healthy, consentual aspect of their sex life? It does happen...

I won't judge (really, I won't) anyone who says that it is "part of a healthy, consensual aspect of their sex life", but I have a hard time understanding how it can be healthy. In my mind, sex is about giving one's self to the other. It seems like masturbation doesn't lend itself well to giving one's self to the other. It seems to be more about self-pleasure, even if it's not done while lusting after a non-spouse.

[Todd Erickson]

I won't judge (really, I won't) anyone who says that it is "part of a healthy, consensual aspect of their sex life", but I have a hard time understanding how it can be healthy. In my mind, sex is about giving one's self to the other. It seems like masturbation doesn't lend itself well to giving one's self to the other. It seems to be more about self-pleasure, even if it's not done while lusting after a non-spouse.

It's nice to say that sex is about giving one's self to the other. But it doesn't tend to work out that way very often, especially since the particular drives/desires of the pair involved are almost never complementary. Especially in the many marriages which are essentially celibate, outside of that particular activity.

[Bob Hunter]

How about this and this to start with.



If the one of his previous books you have is Porn-Again Christian and "spiritually aligned with God" means equating masturbation with homosexuality, then yes, spiritually aligned with God they are.

If that's not what you are referring to and you have gotten a different impression from Mark and Grace, that's great. But I'd day the overall impression that Mark gives to Christians and non-Christians alike is anything but what we would hope for from a pastor.

Ryan, I do not think Driscoll is making an absolute statement here when he equates masturbation with homosexuality. He uses the word "can" he doesn't make a water tight statement that all masturbation is an act of homosexuality. Though he makes a great point, some guys look at gay porn and do exactly as he described. My homosexual roomate in College once confessed that he bought Playgirl mags to masturbate with. He also met with other men and shared in the act without making physical contact. So Driscoll actually has a point there. Same sex lust can fuel masturbation and in that case it is a real problem.

My only comment about Mark & Grace was that in the many interviews I've watched featuring both of them, they seem to be spiritually aligned with each other and God. Their marriage appears to be very honest and open and that is more than a lot of people can say.

I know its tempting to dismiss everything Driscoll on the basis of what he teaches, but I can't do that with a clear conscience.

[Bob Hunter]

This might get me in trouble with some folks here but... does a man masturbating equal out to a man doing something wrong? There seems to be an underlying assumption that men who masturbate are looking at pictures/videos/stories about naked women who are not their wives while they do so. If that's the case, it's probably a bad thing, but what if men (and maybe even women) are masturbating as a part of a healthy, consentual aspect of their sex life? It does happen...

yeah, he addresses that in the book and it would appear that you and Driscoll would have some areas of agreement. How do you like them cookies? Shea + Driscoll = Oxymoron.

[Bob Hunter]

Bob, can you explain how you come to the conclusion that his views/advice on masturbation are very healthy and sound? I'm just so far on the opposite end of the spectrum that I'd appreciate hearing the reasoning. If you don't want to here, that's ok with me.

I have no idea what your view is, I do know there is a lot of room for disagreement here. So maybe express your point of view or be specific as to what you disagree with. I had my own view, before ever reading Driscoll. So maybe we can wrestle with the issues and not inject Driscoll into the mix.

[Shea Zellweger]

I won't judge (really, I won't) anyone who says that it is "part of a healthy, consensual aspect of their sex life", but I have a hard time understanding how it can be healthy. In my mind, sex is about giving one's self to the other. It seems like masturbation doesn't lend itself well to giving one's self to the other. It seems to be more about self-pleasure, even if it's not done while lusting after a non-spouse.

I was trying to avoid being explicit, and will continue to do so, but...

IMO, a husband and wife can give of themselves through masturbation. A husband and wife can also be very selfish through sex. Almost no couple's sex drives match up 100%. If the spouse with the higher sex drive insists that they have sex every time s/he wants, that's selfish. If the spouse with the lower sex drives insists that they only have sex when s/he is "in the mood," that's also rather selfish. A loving couple will usually meet somewhere in the middle, and they will figure out what's best for them. If that means the spouse with the lower sex drive giving the spouse with the higher sex drive "something to think about," then so be it. If a couple enjoys masturbating in front of one another, or considers it a part of foreplay, that's okay too. I've read books on marriage from folks far more conservative than I that encourage men with less "stamina" to masturbate prior to sex, so that they can make the experience enjoyable for their wives.

Basically my point is that there are a LOT of reasons that someone might choose to masturbate, and it may very well be a part of a loving relationship. I don't know what subsection of the masturbating male population is doing so for "noble" reasons, and I wouldn't be surprised to discover that most do so out of selfishness and dissatisfaction. But without some other statistics, we really don't have a context for knowing what the 44% means. If 43 out of the 44 suffer from premature ejaculation and are doing their wives a favor, I'd say that's pretty durn loving. If, on the other hand, 43 of the 44 are waiting until their wives are otherwise occupied and then logging on to their favorite porn site... well, that would be a problem.

I'd also like to highlight a specific part of your post- "In my mind, sex is about giving one's self to the other." I agree with this. But I think we need to be careful with it. There are those who would argue against foreplay, or contraception, using more or less the same claim- even some on NazNet- and while I don't begrudge them that position, or judge them for holding it, I happen to disagree. Same goes for masturbation. If someone cannot imagine how masturbation within marriage could be a healthy or loving action, then it probably wouldn't be in their marriage. But if that's the case, they probably also haven't faced some of the trials in their sex life that some others have. I know of two couples who, for differing reasons, literally could not have sex for over a year. In one instance it was the husband, and in the other it was the wife, who could not have sex for health reasons. I don't know what those couples' sex lives looked like during that time period, but I have to say that if they decided to find alternative ways to remain sexually satisfied, and mutually agreed upon masturbation was a part of that, I think that's a loving relationship in which the sexually able spouse showed respect for the inability of his/her partner.

[Jim Chabot]

Shea, you are a brave man, and you are a good man! Just thought that this should be noted.

[Bob Hunter]

I was trying to avoid being explicit, and will continue to do so, but...

IMO, a husband and wife can give of themselves through masturbation. A husband and wife can also be very selfish through sex. Almost no couple's sex drives match up 100%. If the spouse with the higher sex drive insists that they have sex every time s/he wants, that's selfish. If the spouse with the lower sex drives insists that they only have sex when s/he is "in the mood," that's also rather selfish. A loving couple will usually meet somewhere in the middle, and they will figure out what's best for them. If that means the spouse with the lower sex drive giving the spouse with the higher sex drive "something to think about," then so be it. If a couple enjoys masturbating in front of one another, or considers it a part of foreplay, that's okay too. I've read books on marriage from folks far more conservative than I that encourage men with less "stamina" to masturbate prior to sex, so that they can make the experience enjoyable for their wives.

Basically my point is that there are a LOT of reasons that someone might choose to masturbate, and it may very well be a part of a loving relationship. I don't know what subsection of the masturbating male population is doing so for "noble" reasons, and I wouldn't be surprised to discover that most do so out of selfishness and dissatisfaction. But without some other statistics, we really don't have a context for knowing what the 44% means. If 43 out of the 44 suffer from premature ejaculation and are doing their wives a favor, I'd say that's pretty durn loving. If, on the other hand, 43 of the 44 are waiting until their wives are otherwise occupied and then logging on to their favorite porn site... well, that would be a problem.

I'd also like to highlight a specific part of your post- "In my mind, sex is about giving one's self to the other." I agree with this. But I think we need to be careful with it. There are those who would argue against foreplay, or contraception, using more or less the same claim- even some on NazNet- and while I don't begrudge them that position, or judge them for holding it, I happen to disagree. Same goes for masturbation. If someone cannot imagine how masturbation within marriage could be a healthy or loving action, then it probably wouldn't be in their marriage. But if that's the case, they probably also haven't faced some of the trials in their sex life that some others have. I know of two couples who, for differing reasons, literally could not have sex for over a year. In one instance it was the husband, and in the other it was the wife, who could not have sex for health reasons. I don't know what those couples' sex lives looked like during that time period, but I have to say that if they decided to find alternative ways to remain sexually satisfied, and mutually agreed upon masturbation was a part of that, I think that's a loving relationship in which the sexually able spouse showed respect for the inability of his/her partner.

I don't disagree with any of this, and I'm not so sure Driscoll does either. I can tell you from experience (being a low T male) that I am not up to par. But believe me, I find ways to satisfy my wife and I do it completely out of love. The tables have been turned at different times in our marriage. After my wife gave birth, holy smokes...6 weeks before intercourse is like an eternity for a vibrant 30 year old! Believe me, there are ways to make it happen without yanking on yourself in the shower. Seriously, we have to be creative...and Driscoll encourages that. Not defending his other views, I'm not that crazy.

[Shea Zellweger]

After my wife gave birth, holy smokes...6 weeks before intercourse is like an eternity for a vibrant 30 year old! Believe me, there are ways to make it happen without yanking on yourself in the shower.

Unless, you know... your wife is in the shower with you... that's kinda what I was trying to get at before. We hear "masturbation," and I think a lot of people immediately jump to the idea of a guy sitting at his desk, or standing in the shower, trying to give himself the pleasure that he believes his wife is denying him (or a woman doing the same). I'd like to kick that stereotype on its head and ask 'what if his wife is standing in the shower with him?' If you look at the raw survey results, a husband and wife who masturbate together (or one of them masturbates while the other is present and encouraging/participating in the activity) would yield the same results as a husband who sneaks onto porn sites when his wife is asleep. Clearly, one of those men is engaging in a pleasurable activity with his wife, while the other is doing something that could very well be detrimental to his marriage, but they both show up as a part of the same statistic.

I'm not trying to say the statistic is meaningless, because my guess is that most of the men who admit to masturbating do so in the surreptitious, damaging manner. But for those couples who choose to engage in mutual masturbation as a part of their sex lives, I'm sure it's a bit frustrating to read statistics which imply they're doing something wrong.

[Bob Hunter]

Unless, you know... your wife is in the shower with you...

I'm very tempted to say something here but I won't....

[Kami Tuenning]

JPII wrote the magnum opus on the subject here: http://www.amazon.com/Man-Woman-He-C.../dp/0819874213 all else pales in light of this extraordinary work grounded in theology. Anyone who is serious on the topic must read this in its entirety.

The Archdiocese of Omaha and others across the nation have invited Christopher West of :http://www.tobinstitute.org/default.asp to address the work in layman's language. This writing has made a remarkable impact upon young believers. My husband has West's Marriage Counseling material.

As I stated, if you want an authentically theological approach to the topic, Theology of The Body is a must read.

Somewhere, I once read that according to Chestetton, "sex will be the final heresy"

[Cam Pence]

JPII wrote the magnum opus on the subject here: http://www.amazon.com/Man-Woman-He-C.../dp/0819874213 all else pales in light of this extraordinary work grounded in theology. Anyone who is serious on the topic must read this in its entirety.

The Archdiocese of Omaha and others across the nation have invited Christopher West of :http://www.tobinstitute.org/default.asp to address the work in layman's language. This writing has made a remarkable impact upon young believers. My husband has West's Marriage Counseling material.

As I stated, if you want an authentically theological approach to the topic, Theology of The Body is a must read.

Somewhere, I once read that according to Chestetton, "sex will be the final heresy"

I suppose THEOLOGICALLY is the only way he could really engage in the subject matter