<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sex in the Eucharist (Part 1)</title>
	<link>http://stevebrownetc.com/blogs/the-guest-room/sex-in-the-eucharist-part-1/</link>
	<description>This blog needs a description!</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:40:06 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Steve Brown Etc. &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Sex in the Eucharist (Part 2)</title>
		<link>http://stevebrownetc.com/blogs/the-guest-room/sex-in-the-eucharist-part-1/#comment-30476</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Brown Etc. &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Sex in the Eucharist (Part 2)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:43:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://stevebrownetc.com/blogs/the-guest-room/sex-in-the-eucharist-part-1/#comment-30476</guid>
		<description>[...] my last post in The Guest Room (March 3, 2008), I ended by arguing that the Lord’s Supper is the proper starting place for [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] my last post in The Guest Room (March 3, 2008), I ended by arguing that the Lord’s Supper is the proper starting place for [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John H. Armstrong</title>
		<link>http://stevebrownetc.com/blogs/the-guest-room/sex-in-the-eucharist-part-1/#comment-23538</link>
		<dc:creator>John H. Armstrong</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:49:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://stevebrownetc.com/blogs/the-guest-room/sex-in-the-eucharist-part-1/#comment-23538</guid>
		<description>Molly,

You have read me carefully and correctly. I very much agree with much of John Paul II's thinking about sexuality and the human body. It is very important theology. You are also right about the 1930s and birth control. Remember, until then we did not have the modern potential for birth control. The movement, regardless of your conclusions re: birth control, was deeply rooted in radical feminism and thus in pro-choice ethics. This should make even Protestant evangelicals like me take pause at least. Thanks for your insightful comments.

John</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Molly,</p>
<p>You have read me carefully and correctly. I very much agree with much of John Paul II&#039;s thinking about sexuality and the human body. It is very important theology. You are also right about the 1930s and birth control. Remember, until then we did not have the modern potential for birth control. The movement, regardless of your conclusions re: birth control, was deeply rooted in radical feminism and thus in pro-choice ethics. This should make even Protestant evangelicals like me take pause at least. Thanks for your insightful comments.</p>
<p>John</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Molly Means</title>
		<link>http://stevebrownetc.com/blogs/the-guest-room/sex-in-the-eucharist-part-1/#comment-23526</link>
		<dc:creator>Molly Means</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:50:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://stevebrownetc.com/blogs/the-guest-room/sex-in-the-eucharist-part-1/#comment-23526</guid>
		<description>I very much enjoyed John's thoughts.  They remind me of Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body.  I wonder if John has studied this?  Also, John mentions that he does not agree with the Roman Catholic Church on the matter of birth control and that the rest of the Christian Church also disagrees.  Am I right in thinking that until the 1930's, all Christian churches did agree with Rome on this issue?  It has only been in the past 70 years or so that all other churches changed their teaching, I believe.  Just an interesting thing to consider...I think John is right in saying that the point is "worthy of much more thought by all Christians".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I very much enjoyed John&#039;s thoughts.  They remind me of Pope John Paul II&#039;s Theology of the Body.  I wonder if John has studied this?  Also, John mentions that he does not agree with the Roman Catholic Church on the matter of birth control and that the rest of the Christian Church also disagrees.  Am I right in thinking that until the 1930&#039;s, all Christian churches did agree with Rome on this issue?  It has only been in the past 70 years or so that all other churches changed their teaching, I believe.  Just an interesting thing to consider&#8230;I think John is right in saying that the point is &#034;worthy of much more thought by all Christians&#034;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
