difficult question

  • Thread starter Thread starter MariaPatricia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MariaPatricia

Guest
Hello, This is not an easy question to ask but this is about the only place I can think of to ask this question. I have been bleeding lately and my MD has said I should not engage in intercourse w/ my husband. However, he said anything that did not touch or approach my cervix is fine. Would it be permissable for us to engage in foreplay that ended w/ my husband ejaculating at the entrance, instead of totally inside? The doctor said that would be fine but I am looking to see if it would be morally okay.
MP
 
I think its time to practice marital chastity as in Casti Conubi (encyclical)

This is not a silly discipline but one totally based on love.
 
40.png
MariaPatricia:
Hello, This is not an easy question to ask but this is about the only place I can think of to ask this question. I have been bleeding lately and my MD has said I should not engage in intercourse w/ my husband. However, he said anything that did not touch or approach my cervix is fine. Would it be permissable for us to engage in foreplay that ended w/ my husband ejaculating at the entrance, instead of totally inside? The doctor said that would be fine but I am looking to see if it would be morally okay.
MP
Click to expand...
Sounds okay if you ARE MARRIED IN THE CHURCH!!
 
40.png
Agomemnon:
I think its time to practice marital chastity as in Casti Conubi (encyclical)
Click to expand...
Okay, I read it. Which section are you referring to?
**25. By this same love it is necessary that all the other rights and duties of the marriage state be regulated as the words of the Apostle: “Let the husband render the debt to the wife, and the wife also in like manner to the husband,”[28] express not only a law of justice but of charity. **
 
As long as every act ends open to the possibility of life, anything goes. Have fun. My question would be, if you are having cervical problems, what does your doctor say about pregnancy?
 
No i disagree with what you are doing moral sexual intercourse is when you both give yourselves to each other completely and are pro-creation. In other words you both must be willing to not only give yourselve completely unconditionally so that you become one flesh. but also you must be open to children. Just like the vows you said on the alter when you two were married. if you dont stay true to that the you are telling each other lies and thus not being morall.
Here is what the Bible says:
Onan, however, knew that the descendants would not be counted as his; so whenever he had relations with his brother’s widow, he wasted his seed on the ground, to avoid contributing offspring for his brother. What he did greatly offended the LORD, and the LORD took his life too.
Gen 38:9,10
In other words if you husband ‘wastes his seed’ outside of you it greatly offends the LORD. the seed can only be put inside of you.
 
Hebrews 13:4
[1 Cor 7:38; 1 Tim 4:3] Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled; [1 Cor 6:9; Gal 5:19, 21; 1 Thess 4:6] for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.

bottom line… your ok…
 
40.png
Scott_Lafrance:
As long as every act ends open to the possibility of life, anything goes. Have fun. My question would be, if you are having cervical problems, what does your doctor say about pregnancy?
Click to expand...
Does that apply to artificial insemination as well? Masturbation, skip the intercourse, ending in sperm meets egg. Just a thought.

God bless!
 
40.png
Ana:
Does that apply to artificial insemination as well? Masturbation, skip the intercourse, ending in sperm meets egg. Just a thought.

God bless!
Click to expand...
No, it does not. Masturbation is intrinsically disordered, and a mortal sin. There must be intercourse. Anyone who tells you that “as long as you are married, anything goes” is either seriously mistaken, or does not care about sin.

If it is not possible for the couple to engage in marital intercourse, with the man ejaculating within his wife’s vagina, then they must abstain, and that means not starting what you cannot finish!
 
Joan M:
No, it does not. Masturbation is intrinsically disordered, and a mortal sin. There must be intercourse. Anyone who tells you that “as long as you are married, anything goes” is either seriously mistaken, or does not care about sin.

If it is not possible for the couple to engage in marital intercourse, with the man ejaculating within his wife’s vagina, then they must abstain, and that means not starting what you cannot finish!
Click to expand...
What is permissible is, “IF you are married, anything goes, as long as it ends open to life.”
 
40.png
Scott_Lafrance:
What is permissible is, “IF you are married, anything goes, as long as it ends open to life.”
Click to expand...
If this statement were correct, it would have to allow for artificial insemination.:bigyikes:

Artificial insemination is open to life, but still the Church condemns it … married or not. It has to do with the removal of the “conjugal act.”

So, now I guess it depends on what constitutes the “conjugal act.”:confused:

God bless!
 
40.png
MariaPatricia:
Would it be permissable for us to engage in foreplay that ended w/ my husband ejaculating at the entrance, instead of totally inside?
Click to expand...
Without being too graphic (I hope), as long as he releases his seed inside of you, even if he hasn’t penetrated as far as he normally would, it would be okay. You would be open to the transmission of life, which is the important thing.
 
I am trying to picture myself in the situation as the OP. I am not claiming to “know” anything.:hmmm: Just throwing thoughts out while seeking a definitive answer.

I keep getting stuck on the lack of intercourse. It seems if the Church condemns ABC because it removes the procreative from the unitive aspect, that POSSIBLY she would disapprove also if the unitive was removed from the procreative.:ehh:

This was why I brought up artificial insemination, though when mentioned in the CCC it makes more of a referance to the intrusion of the doctor, it also speaks of the removal of the “conjugal act”.

Any thoughts?
 
40.png
Ana:
I am trying to picture myself in the situation as the OP. I am not claiming to “know” anything.:hmmm: Just throwing thoughts out while seeking a definitive answer.

I keep getting stuck on the lack of intercourse. It seems if the Church condemns ABC because it removes the procreative from the unitive aspect, that POSSIBLY she would disapprove also if the unitive was removed from the procreative.:ehh:

This was why I brought up artificial insemination, though when mentioned in the CCC it makes more of a referance to the intrusion of the doctor, it also speaks of the removal of the “conjugal act”.

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
Consider that some sexual acts as foreplay are entirely permissible if it culminates with the husband climaxing inside his wife. There is no formula for what constitutes an appropriate amount of lapsed time between floreplay to ejaculation, as long as it is within his wife, vaginally.

Lovemaking must be love-giving and life-giving, yes. But the unitive aspect is more than just the physical definition of a husband inside his wife. It is the surrender of one to the other. A wife is a receptacle of her husband’s love. The two become one flesh. Based on what the OP described, with the knowledge that her husband would indeed enter minimally within her, they are having intercourse and no less loving toward one another.
 
40.png
Princess_Abby:
Consider that some sexual acts as foreplay are entirely permissible if it culminates with the husband climaxing inside his wife. There is no formula for what constitutes an appropriate amount of lapsed time between floreplay to ejaculation, as long as it is within his wife, vaginally.

Lovemaking must be love-giving and life-giving, yes. But the unitive aspect is more than just the physical definition of a husband inside his wife. It is the surrender of one to the other. A wife is a receptacle of her husband’s love. The two become one flesh. Based on what the OP described, with the knowledge that her husband would indeed enter minimally within her, they are having intercourse and no less loving toward one another.
Click to expand...
Sounds good to me!😃
It’s nice that she cares enough about the issue to look into it.👍
 
40.png
Princess_Abby:
Consider that some sexual acts as foreplay are entirely permissible if it culminates with the husband climaxing inside his wife. There is no formula for what constitutes an appropriate amount of lapsed time between floreplay to ejaculation, as long as it is within his wife, vaginally.

Lovemaking must be love-giving and life-giving, yes. But the unitive aspect is more than just the physical definition of a husband inside his wife. It is the surrender of one to the other. A wife is a receptacle of her husband’s love. The two become one flesh. Based on what the OP described, with the knowledge that her husband would indeed enter minimally within her, they are having intercourse and no less loving toward one another.
Click to expand...
Thank you very much. I think you summed up the situation very well.
 
I guess I can’t get through the very basic problem. If something is wrong, then shouldn’t you just be chaste until you are healed? My point is that your health is important, and if your doc advised you originally against intercourse, then shouldn’t you abstain until he gives you the all clear? Pardon me if I sound confused…
 
40.png
Scott_Lafrance:
What is permissible is, “IF you are married, anything goes, as long as it ends open to life.”
Click to expand...
Gee, thanks for the correction! :rolleyes:

Anyway, the point is that - to be open to life there must be ejaculation within the vagina.

And, to a poster below you - “There is no formula for what constitutes an appropriate amount of lapsed time between floreplay to ejaculation, as long as it is within his wife, vaginally.” - you surely are not suggesting that days or weeks can elapse? That would really be stretching it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top