@SuperLutheran I haven't listened yet, but what are your thoughts on the idea of *Proxy Mortality* as it relates to this (I had to look this term up, so maybe there's a better one)? While I've no doubt there are people who hold fast to the church's official position on matters of the marital bed, I think it's known that the rebellious streak in many of us will push some boundaries. It's far better to make the rule breaking go into a safe place than set your hard-line where the first violation is outright deviancy. Of course this is all under the assumption that people should control their sexual appetite for their spiritual benefit. While I do agree that it ought to be tempered, lest the flesh lead the mind and soul away from God, it should be allowed to properly thrive in a healthy marriage.
@BowsacNoodle I believe the Church ought not set up fake rules to protect the real rules. That's what the pharisees were well known for doing, and it screwed up dozens of generations, making them neurotic.
@SuperLutheran That's a good point if such things are declared sinful which aren't explicitly, but the line is a bit less clear on some things. I think the Phariseess made the letter of the law more important than the purpose of the law (doing what God wants, loving Him and our neighbor) and I am not convinced that the church's current views are comparable to Pharisees in their expounding. I will give this a listen and see if it changes my mind. I much prefer the idea of knowing oneself and boundaries and under spiritual guidance, but the sensitive nature of this make that a challenge. My priest is married, and I still don't think I'd be able to ask for personal guidance on something like this without seriously struggling with embarrassment.