Do I have this right?

[newbetx]

Anytime a man wilfully ejaculates outside of his wife’s vagina, he is commiting a sin?

This is one of those things that has me in the cafeteria. I am trying, it seems absurd.

Welcome to the Cafeteria! I was once there on such subjects, too. But I did find something that makes sense of all of this…

Is this belief unique to the RCC?

Does this matter? Why?

Which ones still hold to it? What about the Orthedox? Or Jews?

And to be a bit clearer, I am referring to a situation between a married couple.

Well, we hope so.

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”.

TLM08 is well known here for not liking Church teaching on this subject. Be careful how you consider his (name removed by moderator)ut.

I don’t know if it’s unique to catholicism, but the Bible is stunningly silent when it comes to sex rules for married couples.

Not true at all. See what I told you?

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.

Every act that ends with ejaculation outside the vagina IS an act of contraception…

Why does it matter if it’s unique again? Aren’t you interested if it is right or wrong. And why?

Well that’s where TOB comes in. Theology of the Body explains all these “absurd rules” and, if you are like me, you may find they aren’t absurd at all. How do YOU want to be loved? What is the TRUE value of sex? It’s all there. Read about it from Vatican approved sources and make up your own mind. OK? PM me if you want some book/mp3 suggestions.

Peace!

 

[Newbie2]

Every act that ends with ejaculation outside the vagina IS an act of contraception…

Peace!

You mean purposeful act, no?

 

[Seatuck]

You mean purposeful act, no?

No ,that statement is correct. It just might not be a mortal sin which is what you are getting act.

 

[TLM08]

Hair trigger. Premature…you know.

Yea… I know alright.

 

[Spirithound]

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

“Whoopses” are never sinful, in whatever context. Sin requires a willful action.

 

[newbetx]

You mean purposeful act, no?

That 0.00001 percent “accident” thing is excused of course.

 

[Newbie2]

No ,that statement is correct. It just might not be a mortal sin which is what you are getting act.

Yes. I guess it stands to reason that swimmers can’t do their thing if they’re not in the right waters.

 

[newbetx]

ANYONE know if this is a belief unique to Catholicism?

Because it is BIZARRE.

What many of us find BIZZARRE is that sex has become so undervalued. It’s now done as entertainment, return of favors, something that is done for oneself, or as a matter of course on a date with no real desire to be involved with another person. Now THAT is bizarre!

 

[Seatuck]

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

TLM08, still waiting for you to answer me. Do you need help in showing what scripture says the punishment is?

 

[Newbie2]

If only one sperm was needed, why not just partially ejaculate?
If you are a mom, you’d not understand how that is not possible.

Well–what if the sperm God needed was the one that spilled?
Same could about the semen “lost” during a nocturnal emmission. Since God has the power whether conception occurs or not, your argument seems to be contrary to the omnipotent power of the Almighty.

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

Ah, but you were open to life 10 minutes ago, when you did it the “right way”. And still are. No contraception was used. It’s disingenuous to say that someone who does what we are talking about in that sequence is closed to life.

Where there’s a will, there is a way.

Right. Which is why the first “correct” act demonstrates the couple’s openess to life.

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

We’re not talking about oral sex as a means of contraception.

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.

Again, we aren’t talking about oral sex as a means of contraception.

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.

Fine, but once again the discussion isn’t about oral sex as a means of contraception

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

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.

One cannot ever take away God’s power.

“Whoopses” are never sinful, in whatever context. Sin requires a willful action.

Exactly my point. It’s been repeatedly posted that every act MUST finish inside, never acknowledging that a whoops can and does occur, that it’s not sinful, and that it’s not against life.

 

[Seatuck]

Exactly my point. It’s been repeatedly posted that every act MUST finish inside, never acknowledging that a whoops can and does occur, that it’s not sinful, and that it’s not against life.

Every marital act must begin with the intention to finish in the procreative and unitive manner. It’s always about the intention.

 

[Jennifer_J]

Exactly my point. It’s been repeatedly posted that every act MUST finish inside, never acknowledging that a whoops can and does occur, that it’s not sinful, and that it’s not against life.

Here, let me reword that for ya:

Every act must INTEND to finish inside…whoops-es do happen and it’s not sinful if its not the intention. However, if these whoops-es happen every time, or the majority of the time, a trip to the Doc is warranted for a full physical exam.

 

[TLM08]

TLM08, still waiting for you to answer me. Do you need help in showing what scripture says the punishment is?

Whoa… Slow down there Nitro!


Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the LORD, and he put him to death also. GENESIS 38:8-10

The story of Onan and Tamar was not about birth control. Even the solitary sin of impurity would have been a much better example to use if sperm wasting was the offense being punished. Why didn’t the Holy Spirit choose a contracepting married couple to make an example of?

 

[Seatuck]

Whoa… Slow down there Nitro!


Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the LORD, and he put him to death also. GENESIS 38:8-10

The story of Onan and Tamar was not about birth control. Even the solitary sin of impurity would have been a much better example to use if sperm wasting was the offense being punished. Why didn’t the Holy Spirit choose a contracepting married couple to make an example of?

You didn’t answer my question. I asked you to show me the punishment under levirate law for not giving his brother’s wife a child. It’s clearly not the death penalty.

The law in question is found in Deut 25 5-10

"When brothers live together and one of them dies without a son, the widow of the deceased shall not marry anyone outside the family; but her husband’s brother shall go to her and perform the duty of a brother-in-law by marrying her.
6 The first-born son she bears shall continue the line of the deceased brother, that his name may not be blotted out from Israel. 7 If, however, a man does not care to marry his brother’s wife, she shall go up to the elders at the gate and declare, ‘My brother-in-law does not intend to perform his duty toward me and refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel.’ 8 Thereupon the elders of his city shall summon him and admonish him. If he persists in saying, ‘I am not willing to marry her,’ 9 4 his sister-in-law, in the presence of the elders, shall go up to him and strip his sandal from his foot and spit in his face, saying publicly, ‘This is how one should be treated who will not build up his brother’s family!’ 10 And his lineage shall be spoken of in Israel as ‘the family of the man stripped of his sandal.’

So you see , the punishment for breaking the Levirate Law it is not the death penalty. It is having your lineage spoken of with an insult and it is having his sandal taken from his foot and being spit in the face as well as being publically humiliated.

That is not what happens to our guy Onan. Onan was giving the death penalty for something . What was it? Spilling his seed. The HS used this passage specifically because there is a written law to govern the other part of the behavior .

catholic.com/thisrock/1991/9107chap.asp

The Jews understood their role in being fruitful and multiplying. Contraception in marriage was not widely looked upon as good. That topic doesn’t seem to come up a lot in Jewish writing from some sources I know because the Jews understood the great blessing of children.

 

[Newbie2]

Every marital act must begin with the intention to finish in the procreative and unitive manner. It’s always about the intention.

That’s better.

 

[JLSamuel818]

We talked about this.

It is okay to have sex with your wife/husband, whether oral, or any other in the privacy of their home, AS LONG as the seed is relieved in a pro-creative manner.

Take consideration of the following biblical passage.

Genesis 38; 9-10
Onan …] had relations with his brother’s widow, he wasted his seed on the ground, to avoid contributing offspring …] what he did greatly offended the LORD, and the LORD took his life.

Though the main sin here was greed when you read Onan’s full story. Nevertheless, the waste of his seed cosy him his life. Remember, seed is life.

Seed is life, you have no right to take it away, besides God alone.

The seed, must ALWAYS end in a pro-creative manner. The seed must ultimately be inside the woman’s womb WITHOUT any form of contraceptive.

Peace be with you.

_[Samuel]

 

[TLM08]

The law in question is found in Deut 25 5-10

So you see , the punishment for breaking the Levirate Law it is not the death penalty. It is having your lineage spoken of with an insult and it is having his sandal taken from his foot and being spit in the face as well as being publically humiliated.

That is not what happens to our guy Onan. Onan was giving the death penalty for something . What was it? Spilling his seed. The HS used this passage specifically because there is a written law to govern the other part of the behavior .

Omar’s guilt for breaking Levirate law was clearly compounded by actually *having sex *with Tamar. The sandal and spit punishment in Deuteronomy is for men who refuse to participate. You must admit that Onan’s act of contraception had aggravating circumstances. To apply that to twenty first century married couples who have brought several children into the world already isn’t rational.

 

[newbetx]

Omar’s guilt for breaking Levirate law was clearly compounded by actually *having sex *with Tamar. The sandal and spit punishment in Deuteronomy is for men who refuse to participate. You must admit that Onan’s act of contraception had aggravating circumstances. To apply that to twenty first century married couples who have brought several children into the world already isn’t rational.

OK… lets back up even more… when Adam and Eve ate the apple, did they die? How? Sprititually or physically? They ate the apple and lived, but not exactly.

I agree, he wasn’t in trouble with God for not havning sex. But when he did it in this manner, he thumbed his nose to God. Thumb your nose all you want. It’s your choice! The Church doesn’t hold a gun to your head. If you don’t feel it necessary of living properly chastity in marriage, go have an apple. It won’t *kill *you.

We try and try to explain, but you don’t even try to listen. How YOU and your wife want to have sex is up to you. We will TRY to explain to those that will listen why the church guides us as she does, but again, your continued anti-Catholic spewing here is very annoying.

 

[Spirithound]

…To apply that to twenty first century married couples who have brought several children into the world already isn’t rational.

Are we seeing the same stats? We’re in a population decline.

 

[Seatuck]

Omar’s guilt for breaking Levirate law was clearly compounded by actually *having sex *with Tamar. The sandal and spit punishment in Deuteronomy is for men who refuse to participate. You must admit that Onan’s act of contraception had aggravating circumstances. To apply that to twenty first century married couples who have brought several children into the world already isn’t rational.

The point is that God was displeased by what Onan did . And he gave him the death penalty for it.

God was trying to teach us about marriage as a sacrament and bring us to today.

You need to study what the meaning of the marital act is and how it relates to the Eucharist. You have been told this in multiple threads and you seem to refuse to do it.Why?

Marriage is a Sacrament and what the couple does within that marriage are sacramental actions. Lovemaking is part of the sacrament. When you understand what that lovemaking means the church teaching is beautiful and fitting.We use our bodies to express this sacrament. Certain bodily actions simply do not express the sacramental nature of marriage and therefore are not allowed. Again, you need to understand what the nuptial meaning of marital sex is and how it relates to the trinity and the Eucharst.

You already know about all the Christopher West resources. Here’s an audo lesson on it. See if it helps you make any progress .

catholicmentoday.org/2008/09/04/marriage–the-eucharist-the-two-shall-become-one.aspx