Do I have this right?

[David_Chryso]

Then why not just abstain? We aren’t animals. We can know when we’re fertile and when we’re not and choose to act accordingly based on our circumstances.

I agree.

 

[LJN21]

God knows everything. However, the early theologians of the Church are not God. Go back and read it again. Furthermore, the Bible is completely silent on the topic of masturbation, which has absolutely nothing to do with the original post.

I guess Onan got killed then because of some other reason than “spilling his seed on the ground”.

 

[Newbie2]

New ejaculation makes new intercourse. The second intercourse is not completed if the ejaculation is elsewhere than the vagina.

Seems like a pretty legalistic argument to me.

I guess Onan got killed then because of some other reason than “spilling his seed on the ground”.

Disobedience.

 

[chris_molter]

Disobedience.

Kinda like having contraceptive sex when the Church teaches that it’s sinful?

 

[stbruno]

That’s why married couples are encouraged to practice Natural Family Planning. It has one side effect…the couples love each other more. Less than 1% divorce.

 

[TLM08]

I guess Onan got killed then because of some other reason than “spilling his seed on the ground”.

The sin of Onan was disobeying Levite law which required Him to carry on his deceased brother’s name by impregnanting his sister-in law. There is much more to Onan’s story than a little wasted semen.

 

[Jennifer_J]

That’s not an invalid comparison. CPR is an interruption of the natural dying process by artificial means.

Maybe the man and woman have 4 children already and are on the verge of losing their jobs due to the recession. Under those circumstances perhaps “pulling out” is done in the best interest of the children already depending on you for food, clothing, shelter, education and medical care.

Actually “pulling out” is a VERY BAD way to do family planning (aside from the moral implications). Many a child was conceived this way. If the couple is in such dire straights, they might want to totally abstain OR learn about NFP–so that they can follow Church teaching and licitly plan their family. I don’t know what’s so difficult to understand about that

 

[Florida_mom]

I am in complete agreement with you Ella. The Bible is silent about this topic. There was a lot more to Onan’s story than “pulling out”.

You would have to go to the direction that you are killing life.

By not being open to it, it is wasted. It is dead. Granted there are millions of little swimmers and if a life were made, only one lucky fellow gets to live while the rest die. But this is how God made it.

You would probably have to refer to apologetics for exact scripture.

But Catholics are also not solo-sciptura, so a precise quote prohibiting this act would not make it any less sinful.

I mean–if we were to follow “Do not covet thy neighbor’s wife” literally–I would be able to covet all the men I want as the Bible says God commandment literally is only talking to the men.

 

[Florida_mom]

That’s not an invalid comparison. CPR is an interruption of the natural dying process by artificial means.

Maybe the man and woman have 4 children already and are on the verge of losing their jobs due to the recession. Under those circumstances perhaps “pulling out” is done in the best interest of the children already depending on you for food, clothing, shelter, education and medical care.

On that reasoning alone, why bother helping sick people at all. Cancer occurs in nature. Just let them all die, right?

But that isn’t scriptural.

NFP is the only valid method in church to postpone children if circustances dictate that it would be undue hardship to have another.

So instead of “pulling out”, the couple can abstain during her ovulation timeframe.

I would suggest researching that.

There is more to a relationship than sex and if the man can’t abstain out of love for his wife and family so as not to gain another mouth the feed, then he should reevaluate the intentions of the physical act in the first place.

The couple is either united as one–or they aren’t. Pulling out, divides the couple.

The church is very clear. It understood how the Rhythm Method was ineffective. NFP is much more effective and is actually practiced by non-Catholics as well (but called something else and not including Catholic Doctrine).

I had a friend who got pregant with the withdrawal method. NFP has a much higher success rate in postponing pregnancy.

 

[Florida_mom]

Let me clarify a bit more. The hypothetical couple do not wish to contracept. But they wish to enjoy oral sex.
It is possible that a couple who is open to life could also wish to enjoy oral sex. This insistence that every ejaculation must be in the vagina of his wife is, well, weird. I am not aware of any Protestant, Orthedox, or Jewish rules in this specific matter. Would like to find out if it is unique to Catholicism.

While oral sex is not prohibited as part of the marital act, by itself it goes agains the law of the church.

From what I remember from NFP–the couple can play all they want up to and not including orgasm. However, with orgasm, the man must ejaculate within the woman. It is acceptable for the husband to bring the woman to orgasm outside of the act if she has not yet done so by the time he ejaculates.

But in reality–oral sex is a contraceptive. They want to enjoy–well the man does from an orgasm standpoint–the act without the commitment.

I am not familiar with other faiths, but NFP is widely practiced outside of the church but under different names. In the absence of Catholic Doctrine, my understanding is that it is tought as a method of preventing children without barrier or chemicals that interfere with the natural process of intercourse.

While you may find the notion to be absurd, it really doesn’t matter what other faiths say. If you wish to follow the rules of those faiths, why be Catholic.

The sperm is set to be wasted life. End of story.

It is immoral from a LIFE standpoint!

It is immoral in the marriage sacrament as the couple by fully engaging in oral sex are clearly not open to life. So she can’t swallow it either. It doesn’t count. Her body digests and kills the life and she could NEVER conceive that way. There is no openness.

But just b/c the Baptists of Montana agree with the Catholic churh, why would you be practicing Catholicism based on what Protestants have to say anyway?

That to me is the bigger question.

 

[Florida_mom]

For what reason? The procreation aspect has already been completed. Adding another million swimmers or so won’t affect the open-ness to life.

Conception is a fascinating difficult result to achieve. It is a matter of statistics.

If only one sperm was needed, why not just partially ejaculate?

Well–what if the sperm God needed was the one that spilled?

Interferring with the process and being closed to life–puts your Human will above God’s desires.

Where there’s a will, there is a way.

The only way you won’t conceive is to abstain 100% of the time.

But God has a way of working on our hearts. And if our hearts aren’t listening and he intends for you to have that child, then suddenly–oops, the methods used to prevent don’t do so.

NFP permits a period of abstaining while allowing the woman to know when she is definitely unfertile and cannot conceive at all—to permit the act in full.

As for scripture, there are folks who prescribe to the Quiverfull movement who think even NFP interferes with God’s plan. They accept whatever children God provides and that is scriptural.

The Catholic Church has just come to understand that there are limits due to health, finances, or other circumstances in which obligating relations during ovulation would greatly put an undue burden on the family if a baby was conceived.

So they have relaxed their stance—when it was discovered that a woman’s cycles aren’t like clockwork, something better than the Rhythm method was developed…Hallejuah! Parents who practice NFP “shouldn’t” have those Catholic twins anymore as long as there was no user error in the NFP and they were postponing.

My last 2 children were NFP successess. The great thing–you are ALWAYS open to life and when you are ready to bring a new one on board, NFP can be utilized to optimize your chances of conceiving.

So to say there is no scripture backing the Catholic church stance–is a lie! In fact it more than supports it.

Psalms 127:3-5:
Sons are a heritage from the LORD,
children a reward from him.
Like arrows in the hands of a warrior
are sons born in one’s youth.
Blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them.
They will not be put to shame
when they contend with their enemies in the gate.

Children are a blessing–where does it say it is okay to deny the Lord’s blessing in the Bible?

Now–I don’t aspire to be the Duggar Family. I do have issues being medicated right now that I cannot take while pregnant. I am currently in therapy for these issues–as much as I would like another child right now, we are holding off to get me fully up to snuff.

We have 3 and we wanted 4. For financial reasons, we may not go past 4–but if we did, it would not be the end of the world and that baby would be welcome with open arms. But maybe we will have 6, who knows!

From my limited research there appears there are more quotes, but my time is limited.

To ejaculate outside of the vagina–is clearly denying a blessing from God in the chance that he wished to provide you one. But you would never know b/c you took away God’s power when you spilled the seed.

 

[Florida_mom]

ANYONE know if this is a belief unique to Catholicism?

Because it is BIZARRE.

Read to your hearts content and I am POSITIVE that you will find nothing that says it is okay to ejaculate outside of the woman.

And these folks are much more strict about that Bible and God’s thoughts on sex than the Catholics.

quiverfull.com/index.php

 

[Florida_mom]

God knows everything. However, the early theologians of the Church are not God. Go back and read it again. Furthermore, the Bible is completely silent on the topic of masturbation, which has absolutely nothing to do with the original post.

Well, even though we know millions of sperm do not one human create…as it only takes one.

The problem is–how do humans know which “one” is the winner?

So while not all million can become a living and breathing being, there is no way to predict which one.

That’s why–in some infertility issues (turkey baster)–scientists insert millions of the little fellows.

That’s why–some infertility treatments don’t work–that sperm was just not the one or that egg was not the one.

Science knows its stuff–and if they knew which magical sperm and which magical egg would create the magical human–they’d make even more money off of the procedures than they do now.

Science can increase the odds to make you pregant, but they cannot guarantee it. That is up to God.

God knows which sperm and egg. We don’t.

So even if our early church leaders misunderstood biology, it still holds up to science that they don’t know which little swimmer, when left to his own devices–will get to the golden egg.

Why do you think in issues of infertility they make you try for a year before they intervene? B/c in all those tries–it can take that long despite the tens of millions of swimmers who particiapted in the effort to get just ONE sperm to fertilize an egg.

 

[Paul1961]

I don’t want to hijack the thread but I have a related question.

Why is it that for the most part we are instructed to basically ignore most of the Old Testament except those few passages that the church has based a fundamental teaching upon. I am certainly not a Bible scholar and don’t have a Bible with me to quote direct chapter verse for you. In the NT, we are told specifically byJesus, Paul and others that the “old laws” do not need to be followed. For example, circumcision. Jewish ritual cleaning. Animal sacrifices ect. But people want to point again and again to the story of Onan. Or in the case of every act must be procreative, they point to “be fruitful and multiply” in Genesis.

It seems to me very selective. On the other hand if you went by the number a passages devoted to it, the OT Bible certainly seems to endorse genocide.

Is it really just a case of, I know what answer I want it to be and then I will only support those passages help me prove my case?

 

[Jennifer_J]

Those things that point to morality are the things we keep. Ritual purity laws don’t apply anymore, as Jesus came to fullfill the law. So we keep the 10 commandments, and those things that deal with moral law.

I’m sure someone else can give you a more complete answer, but that’s it in a nutshell You might want to start another thread, though, and not hijack this one…

 

[djrakowski]

It seems to me that lots of folks are missing the point.

Is the Catholic Church the one, true church instituted by Jesus Christ, or isn’t it?

If it is the one, true church instituted by Christ, does it not have authority to pass judgment on what constitutes sin?

Does it not also have the authority to interpret sacred scripture and sacred tradition such that the act being discussed in this thread is or isn’t gravely immoral?

We’re not sola-scripturists, so we shouldn’t go digging through scripture to justify every single prohibition, restriction and duty the Church places upon us. We can, and should, recognize the harmony between sacred scripture and the teachings of the Church (which never, in any way, contradict those same scriptures).

Is there anyone who’d dare to state that the Church’s prohibition against this act is directly contrary to scripture?

 

[Newbie2]

While oral sex is not prohibited as part of the marital act, by itself it goes agains the law of the church.

From what I remember from NFP–the couple can play all they want up to and not including orgasm. However, with orgasm, the man must ejaculate within the woman. .

Anyone have a specific reference for this? Does HV address sequental acts?

Also, “must” implies that a “whoops” is sinful, no?

 

[Seatuck]

The sin of Onan was disobeying Levite law which required Him to carry on his deceased brother’s name by impregnanting his sister-in law. There is much more to Onan’s story than a little wasted semen.

Please provide evidence for the punishment that Onan received as being the just punishment for disobeying the Levirate Law.

 

[Florida_mom]

Anyone have a specific reference for this? Does HV address sequental acts?

Also, “must” implies that a “whoops” is sinful, no?

I had heard that in NFP with catechism backup, but don’t recall.

Not sure how one can “whoops”.

In which case, I came across this paper by a seminary student that addresses the issue.

It seems (according to chatechism as stated in this paper):

Oral sex not okay outside of the procreative act.

Oral stimulation okay.

Male’s orgasm is required for the procreative part of the act–so it must be with penetration of the vagina.

Female’s orgasm is NOT required for procreation and while ideal to happen at the same time, that is easier said than done and as long as it is part of the act and not separate of it, the timing when it happens is not considered immoral as long as it is within the marital act approved by the church.

Now I just have to find the number in the Catechism cited.
ETA: I cannot sort the specific citation: vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm but I do recall JPII’s HV goes into further detail on this and the summary above is the interpretations based on Catechims, HV, and the Bible.

 

[Newbie2]

Not sure how one can “whoops”.

.

Hair trigger. Premature…you know.