H
HoBo30
Guest
What is official teaching about oral and other non-vaginal forms of sex? Specifically, such types of sex when a couple is practicing NFP?
- Status
1
1ke
Guest
These types of activities, when they are the end in-an-of themselves, are gravely immoral.
These activities as foreplay leading to intercourse are fine.
When practicing NFP and avoiding the fertile period, these acts are merely masterbation. You can find the teaching on masterbation in the Catechism-- a violation of the sixth commandment.
These activities as foreplay leading to intercourse are fine.
When practicing NFP and avoiding the fertile period, these acts are merely masterbation. You can find the teaching on masterbation in the Catechism-- a violation of the sixth commandment.
C
chevalier
Guest
Because sex can’t be disconnected from the spreading of life. This means that ejaculation should happen in the vagina and that it should happen if sexual activities are pursued - or rather, such activities that stimulate sexually should lead to marital intercourse.
The problem with non-vaginal intercourse is the waste of seed. Non-officially, I also have a problem reconciling it with human dignity - or even the proper use of genital organs.
S
Scout
Guest
I’m sorry,perhaps I’m not understanding what it is you’re trying to say. Why is oral sex against human dignity.
Also, from what I understand from the teachings of the Church, it is only the man that has to finish inside the woman. Physiologically speaking, it is almost impossible for a woman to finish that way.
Scout
1
1ke
Guest
I answered that:
These acts are merely masterbation. You can find the teaching on masterbation in the Catechism-- a violation of the sixth commandment.
To expand on that:
All acts that are in line with God’s plan for marital sexuality are ordered to a completed act of unaltered intercourse-- fully unitive and fully procreative.
1
1ke
Guest
You are correct. There must be a completed act of intercourse.
1
1ke
Guest
I did not say it was morally degrading or inhumanizing. I don’t know where you got that.
I said that when done *without *completing intercourse they are gravely immoral-- gravely disordered. That is because marital sexuality is properly *ordered *to intercourse.
As I already stated, these acts are fine as foreplay leading up to a completed act of intercourse.
The OP’s question was whether these acts can be done *without *intercourse. The answer to that question is no.
S
Scout
Guest
This is where I got the impression that you found it demoralizing. I thought you meant just in general, not realizing that you meant it in place of actual intercourse. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
And, as far as a woman is concerned, it is absolutely the proper use of genital organs since there can be almost no climax for her without oral sex or masturbation.
I’m not trying to be graphic or anything, but I do believe in speaking frankly. I hope it doesn’t offend anyone.
Scout :tiphat:
1
1ke
Guest
I believe you are confusing two different posters. The “dehumanizing” quote you are referencing is from **chevalier **not me.
As a woman, I disagree with you.
H
HoBo30
Guest
Catechism 2352: “By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure…”
I hope you can see how that definition can include intercourse.
As a side note, I’d like to point out how poorly drafted the Catechism is. The language is often vague and it never cross references itself to other parts of the Catechism that might help you understand a concept. If I had asked somebody to draft a legal code and they returned to me w/ the Catechism, I’d fire them. The intent behind it is very good, the execution is poor.
I really don’t understand this prejudice against sex merely for pleasure…
I hope you can see how that definition can include intercourse.
As a side note, I’d like to point out how poorly drafted the Catechism is. The language is often vague and it never cross references itself to other parts of the Catechism that might help you understand a concept. If I had asked somebody to draft a legal code and they returned to me w/ the Catechism, I’d fire them. The intent behind it is very good, the execution is poor.
I really don’t understand this prejudice against sex merely for pleasure…
S
Scout
Guest
Amen to that! I can’t have children, and I have no qualms saying that sex between my husband and myself is entirely for pleasure.
Scout :tiphat:
H
HoBo30
Guest
What about sex for pleasure between people that CAN have kids…
J
johntkd
Guest
I will try to answer in simpler terms that are not so run aroundish.I’m sorry,perhaps I’m not understanding what it is you’re trying to say. Why is oral sex against human dignity.
Also, from what I understand from the teachings of the Church, it is only the man that has to finish inside the woman. Physiologically speaking, it is almost impossible for a woman to finish that way.
Scout
oral sex anal sex, etc are all fine, BUT HAVE to be used AS FOREPLY ONLY, when the man reaches climax He must do so inside the vagina,
now if i am reading your responses correctly you may be wondering if say the man was to finish first can you “finish” the woman after that, this question was addressed in the appologetics area and the answer to that is most definite yes,
as far as human dignity goes on types used that is personal preference, everyone is different,I see nothing wrong as long as both partners are in total agreement and no force or leverage has been used,
hope that helps you, if i were you i would drop by the appologetics forum and do some searches there are tons of great info there, and for the most part very direct and not beat around the bush answers to your questions…
Hope i did help a little
John
1
1ke
Guest
No. That is just silly and disingenuous.
You did not quote the entire paragraph which states:
2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action."138 “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved."
The Catechism is quite clear in my opinion.
It is organized very logically. And, it references the source documents from which it quotes.
The Catechism is not a legal code. For that, you need to look at the Code of Canon Law.
God did not create it that way. It is not a “prejudice” any more than it’s a prejudice against men that women have wombs, or a prejudice against mammals that chickens lay eggs and fish breathe through gills.
1
1ke
Guest
What about them?
1
1ke
Guest
Scout, this is directly in opposition to Church teaching.
- Status