{Love and Sex (9) continued [continued (4)]}[6th October 1989]

[Redbook6:293-294][19891006:0908b]{Love and Sex (9) continued [continued (4)]}[6th October 1989]

19891006:0908

[continued]

I realise that I must seem pre-occupied by sex.* I love it, of course, when it is an expression of true Love. The questions which arise from sexual relationships are perhaps the knottiest, in terms of the interpretation of Christ’s message, because of the intricate interrelationship of higher and lower matters.

Finally, and perhaps because of the flowering of Love** in me, I am every day becoming more aware of the lovely girls living around me – mostly mums in their thirties, hardworking, often tired and unglamorous, but to me the Spirit seems to shine out more and more in their eyes, faces and bodies – and they seemingly more aware of me (and yes, with men too friendship seems to become swifter and deeper) – so that the reconciliation of my inclination to treat each relationship as unique – its reconciliation both with Jesus’ teaching and with the Church’s code; and the necessity not to feel guilty about what God has given us in nature – require continued re-assessment of the state of this art.
  
The fact is, on further reflection*** it seems all too easy to love, penetrate and cuddle, in real Love, more than one girl; the caution is in our circumstances (and in our own natures).

*[cf eg [Redbook6:288-290][19891004:1242]{Love and Sex (9)}[4th October 1989] (&ors?)]

**ie at R~-C-r~

***ref [[Redbook6:291][19891004:1242g]{Love and Sex (9) continued [continued]}[4th October 1989],] 291

[→[Redbook6:295][19891006:0908e]{Love and Sex (9) (continued) [continued (5)]}[6th October 1989] (journal entry after next two)]

[continues after next two journal entries]

[PostedBlogger30062020]

{Love and Sex (9) continued [continued (3)]}[6th October 1989]

[Redbook6:291-293][19891006:0908]{Love and Sex (9) continued [continued (3)]}[6th October 1989]

19891006:0908

The last part of the article above* is a demonstration of a man trying in all sincerity to prove to himself that he believes something which he does not really believe at all. I’ve reached a watershed, and have formally to acknowledge that my views on love and sex, pre-marital, marital and extra-marital, may fit the overall quality of Christ’s person and teaching, but do not comply with what I believe to be the Church’s interpretation of what Jesus is reported to have said on the matter.

From the starting point that no action is evil in itself, but that only the state of mind can be evil – which is similar, but not identical, to the mens rea doctrine of the English common law, and is also I believe the main thrust of Jesus’ ‘moral’ teaching – it follows that no sexual act can be considered to be evil:** and as we are not gnostics, and do not believe that matter is in itself evil, we cannot say that genital intercourse (or physical intercourse) are evil in that respect either.

We may consider that a certain level or type (mentally speaking) of genital intercourse is symptomatic of a low level of spiritual development, refinement or integration: that is, one in which love is not predominant. We also may say that the predominance of self-less Love must mean that factors such as the feelings of other parties (spouses, children) must be considered, and that to wilfully ignore their feelings would be wilfully to turn away from the Spirit of God in others: and wilful separation from God is evil. So each case will be judged – is judged – on its merits, on its circumstances and in the mind of the individual: and not by us. Our function is not to judge, but to guide. And when we guide, our guidance is not primarily to be ethical – e.g. ‘Think of your wife’[,] ‘Try to keep things together for the sake of the children’. The primary guidance is to live in the Spirit – from which the rest follows.

*[See last previous journal entry]

**[as such; in itself]

[continues]

[PostedBlogger29062020]

{Love and Sex (9) continued [continued]}[4th October 1989]

[Redbook6:291][19891004:1242g]{Love and Sex (9) continued [continued]}[4th October 1989]

19891004.1242

[continued]

I think also* I have found a description, in practical terms, of why adultery is normally (as I believe Doctors say) contra-indicated. It is possible to have genital intercourse without expressing love. A significant part of the expression of love in genital intercourse is by intimate physical intercourse: e.g. cuddling before, during and after genital intercourse. Genital intercourse without this – I know from youthful experience – is pretty bleak and leaves a feeling of emotional lack.

On the other hand, however greatly I may love my female friends – and there are one or two that I do love, quietly and without telling them, quite deeply, and believe that they love me – and however much I may be attracted to them sexually from time to time, it is difficult to imagine having a relationship of such physical and genital intimacy (particularly the cuddling afterwards, which is vital) with more than one person – and that person is [W]. Not impossible: but very difficult. Therefore adultery is not recommended.**

*[See last previous journal entry but two]

**But see next journal entry.

[continues]

[PostedBlogger28062020]

{Love and Sex (9) continued*}[4th October 1989]

[Redbook6:290][19891004:1242f]{Love and Sex (9) continued*}[4th October 1989]

19891004.1242

[continued]

- - - -

It is interesting that this chart* seems to correspond to the different ways relationships may commonly develop.**

*[See last previous journal entry but one]

**Note, for example, that you can enter from C at S~ or at r~.

[continues]

[PostedBlogger27062020]

{Prayer at u~}[4th October 1989]

[Redbook6:290][19891004:1242e]{Prayer at u~}[4th October 1989]

19891004.1242

[continued]

While attending at u~ (3pm)* yesterday, I think it was, or perhaps not – I felt a curious tingling along a band across my forehead; which continued for some minutes, I think.**

*[[Redbook6:278-279][19890929:1130b]{A Circle Structure for Prayer (1)}[29th September 1989]ff]

**And before? – and more recently. Tumour? <891226>

[[Redbook2:201-202][19810914:1900]{Physical Signs}[14^th September 1981];

[Redbook2:208][19811017:0915]{The Itch}[17^th October 1981];

[Redbook2:280][19830516:1945]{The Itch (2)}[16^th May 1983];

[Redbook2:313][19831025:2300]{The Itch (3)}[25^th October 1983];

[Redbook2:326][19840116:2400c]{The Itch (4)}[16^th January 1984]

[Redbook4:287][19880104:1622b]{The Itch (5)}[4th January 1988]]

[PostedBlogger26062020]

{Love and Sex (9) [continued (4)]}[4th October 1989]

[Redbook6:290][19891004:1242d]{Love and Sex (9) [continued (4)]}[4th October 1989]

19891004.1242

[continued]

POSSIBLE MANIFESTATIONS OF LOVE

					?Degree		Location	Type
		UNITY			↑				Unity
			/	/	c	1	Most High	Divine	(above crown of head)
			|	<	|
(Inner Circle)	?Spiritual Love	Inward action Faith	| < |	\	m~	2	Crown of Head	Spirit
			|		|
Loving	kindness:	Revelation	| |		g~	3	Face & Head	?Soul	Light in the face & eyes
Attraction	to Unity	c	\	c
The Quality	of Love	r~	/	r~	┤
			| | |	←↓ .	R~	4	Throat & Neck	Lovers	“Necking”; & the“lump in the throat” on parting
			|	.	↑
?Emotional	love	(Envy)	| < |	. . .	G~	5	Heart & Chest	Family	(Close & loving) Heart warming & heart break
			|	.	↑
(Outer Circle)		(Gluttony)	\ |	. .	J~	6	Central Stomach	Friendly	(Intimate friends) (Meals together)
			|	.	↑
	Distraction		\	.	A~	7	Bowels	Pro-motive
				.	↓↑
(Complication	– Lust)			.	(U~)	(8	Enlargement	(Pro-coital)
(Outward	Action)			↓↑	(M~)
(Will –	Ordination)			→	(S~)
	(Attraction)				C

No blood-relationship or formal tie (e.g. marriage, adoption) is required or implied for any of these types, * nor do any of them necessarily follow from such a blood-relationship or formal tie. The right-hand column consists only of labels, for convenience, not necessarily precise descriptions. For example, ‘Lovers’ in no sense necessarily implies genital intercourse.

*’Family’, for example, can include ‘honorary family’, ie even closer friends than 6.

[continues after next journal entry]

[PostedBlogger22for25062020]

{Love and Sex (9) [continued (3)]}[4th October 1989]

[Redbook6:289-290][19891004:1242c]{Love and Sex (9) [continued (3)]}[4th October 1989]

19891004.1242

[continued]

Genital love, unfortunately, is not quite so precise a term as genital intercourse, per the analysis of Gregory’s letter (earlier):* there is a vital difference between the ‘bowels of love’, felt in (any or all of) back, middle and front – rectal area, lower stomach, and genitals – on the one hand; and what I suppose might be called ‘enlargement’** in both male and female organs (corresponding to what is known as*** the ‘excitement’ stage of sexual intercourse – misleadingly, in one sense). 

It might be practical to analyse and describe the two phases as... no, I can’t think of anything. How about ‘minor’ and ‘major’ genital love? Or, rather better, ‘emotional genital love’ and ‘copulative (or ‘coital’) genital love’?

These are rather unwieldy; what about ‘Pro-coital love’ for the enlargement stage, which is clearly leading towards genital intercourse? | And ‘Pro-motive love’ for the love felt in the bowels, including genitals, but not in enlargement? – The thinking behind ‘Pro-motive’ is that this manifestation of love, although it can move ‘forward’ into enlargement and pro-coital love, more usually moves upwards to emotional love {(}which may be the love felt in the central stomach{)} **** and is a great mover: it motivates not only higher forms of love but, through them, the actions of its own and the higher loves. I have noticed, too, that it tends to occur only when fairly obviously reciprocated, at least as love if not necessarily in the same form: I suppose that it is an initiating form of attraction, responding to its reciprocal in mutual attraction capable of leading to mutual love; but it does not necessarily (as Gregory’s letter# suggests)#* occur only at an early stage in relationships, I believe. (Or does it?)

*ref [[Redbook6:190-193][19890803:0908d]{Love and Sex (5)}[3rd August 1989]ff,] 190

**[ie engorgement]

***E[ncyclopaedia] B[ritannica] 10: 676 ‘Sexual intercourse’

****[[Redbook6:190-193][19890803:0908d]{Love and Sex (5)}[3rd August 1989]ff,] (p191)

#ref [[Redbook6:190-193][19890803:0908d]{Love and Sex (5)}[3rd August 1989]] 190

#*(assuming he’s talking about the same thing!)

{Does it?}

[continues]

[PostedBlogger22for24062020]