Foreplay when pregnant a sin if it doesn't go any further?

[lizziebits]

My understanding is that the CCC talks of climax outside of intercourse to mean masturbation as being alone and pleasing oneself with lustful thoughts.

In the marital embrace, this may not be the case at all. A husband and wife who really love eachother and share their love that doesn’t end in intercourse are not necessarily committing a mortal sin.

I think it’s very irresponsible to tell married couples that the CCC states they are in mortal sin. This is HUGE…they cannot accept the Eurcharist and they are doomed for Hell.

First, and most importantly here, no one is condemning anyone to hell. The Church will speak of things as grave matters, from which mortal sin can occur, but the Church never ever says that anyone is in hell, or is going to hell. That is only for God to judge.

Second, here is my logic, and please let me know where you disagree with it:

1. Contraception is intrinsically evil – I think it’s safe to say that would be a grave matter
2. Withdrawal is a form of contraception that relies on climax outside of normal intercourse
   Conclusion: Withdrawal is intrinsically evil.

Regardless of the circumstances, I don’t see how you could say that withdrawal is evil but foreplay with climax outside of normal intercourse is not. I’m just not seeing that there would be enough of a difference there.

So I guess that leaves me with two questions:

1. Do you think withdrawal is form of contraception?
2. Do you think that withdrawal and foreplay with climax outside of normal intercourse (hereafter referred to as Fw/COONI) are different, and if so, why?

 

[lizziebits]

I disagree w/your disagreement…but I totally LOL’d b/c my son, too, is due up any minute and I’m soooo tired…but i’ve become a tad obsessed w/understanding this issue.

I think it’s been well stated that the CCC does not say that climaxing outside of normal intercouse is intrinsically evil - If you can find where it says exactly that in the CCC, then I’ll humbly concede. In regards to the phrase “intrinsically evil”, I think you’re mixing up posts below where they started talking about birth control…“pulling out” etc…THAT I agree with b/c you’re actively engaged in having sex. Pulling out is an act of trying not to conceive and shows you’re not open to life.

But this whole foreplay/climaxing outside the wife/you’re sinning and hell bound dilema, doesn’t make sense to me. It’s just not that black n’ white. What if, for whatever reason, and several have been stated here already, a husband can’t have intercourse w/his wife. Or Vice Versa…they’re supposed to never climax together? Ever?

Sorry, I’m a little behind here, but I think most of the questions are addressed in the post to Serap above.

And he’s up!

Perhaps I’ll be back later to continue this discussion )

 

[OraProNobisIHM]

My understanding is that the CCC talks of climax outside of intercourse to mean masturbation as being alone and pleasing oneself with lustful thoughts.

In the marital embrace, this may not be the case at all. A husband and wife who really love eachother and share their love that doesn’t end in intercourse are not necessarily committing a mortal sin.

I think it’s very irresponsible to tell married couples that the CCC states they are in mortal sin. This is HUGE…they cannot accept the Eurcharist and they are doomed for Hell.

How is having sex, but not finishing the deed anything more than mutual masturbation?

I suggest you find an orthodox priest, and have him clear these issues up.

 

[OraProNobisIHM]

I disagree w/your disagreement…but I totally LOL’d b/c my son, too, is due up any minute and I’m soooo tired…but i’ve become a tad obsessed w/understanding this issue.

I think it’s been well stated that the CCC does not say that climaxing outside of normal intercouse is intrinsically evil - If you can find where it says exactly that in the CCC, then I’ll humbly concede. In regards to the phrase “intrinsically evil”, I think you’re mixing up posts below where they started talking about birth control…“pulling out” etc…THAT I agree with b/c you’re actively engaged in having sex. Pulling out is an act of trying not to conceive and shows you’re not open to life.

But this whole foreplay/climaxing outside the wife/you’re sinning and hell bound dilema, doesn’t make sense to me. It’s just not that black n’ white. What if, for whatever reason, and several have been stated here already, a husband can’t have intercourse w/his wife. Or Vice Versa…they’re supposed to never climax together via any other way? Ever?

Where is this stated?

How is climaxing outside of intercourse NOT grave matter?!

 

[tampagrl]

…I don’t see how you could say that withdrawal is evil but foreplay with climax outside of normal intercourse is not. I’m just not seeing that there would be enough of a difference there.

I know that wasn’t addressed to me, but I feel it’s b/c in regards to the original issue of this thread - she’s already pregnant!
She and her hubby were obviously open to life. Withdraw is a deliberate act w/the intent of not “taking the chance” of getting pregnant.

There are many cicrumstances where “normal” intercourse can’t happen - medical reasons, etc… and that would make climaxing outside of actual intercourse appropriate btwn the husband and wife - in my opinion.

 

[Serap]

First, and most importantly here, no one is condemning anyone to hell. The Church will speak of things as grave matters, from which mortal sin can occur, but the Church never ever says that anyone is in hell, or is going to hell. That is only for God to judge.

Second, here is my logic, and please let me know where you disagree with it:

1. Contraception is intrinsically evil – I think it’s safe to say that would be a grave matter
2. Withdrawal is a form of contraception that relies on climax outside of normal intercourse
   Conclusion: Withdrawal is intrinsically evil.

Regardless of the circumstances, I don’t see how you could say that withdrawal is evil but foreplay with climax outside of normal intercourse is not. I’m just not seeing that there would be enough of a difference there.

So I guess that leaves me with two questions:

1. Do you think withdrawal is form of contraception?
2. Do you think that withdrawal and foreplay with climax outside of normal intercourse (hereafter referred to as Fw/COONI) are different, and if so, why?

You’ve made some very good points and it is for this reason that many of us still don’t understand what is mortal sin (aka “grave matter”) and what is venial sin.

In terms of the marital embrace, the CCC called a marital embrace that is not open to life “disordered” not a grave matter. Therefore, I would conclude that this is a venial sin to do otherwise.

Birth control is an entirely different subject b/c you could also argue that NFP is a form of birth control and therefore a “grave matter”. NFP is licit even though it is used in place of birth control.

As for withdrawal, I do not know the semantics of it and I have never used this method.

My husband and I used NFP to conceive and avoid. We used a licit means to avoid when we weren’t ready even though we were doing the same as birth control “technically”. We were acting according to God’s will.

As for foreplay; it is not always a climax outside of intercourse; it can be kissing and touching. If it does end in a climax outside of intercourse the CCC says it’s “disordered” not a “grave matter”.

I conclude that it is therefore a venial sin that the couple has engaged in. The couple should still ask for forgiveness for their human weakness, but it doens’t require confession with a priest.

This is definitely not black and white. I wish it were less confusing because my head is spinning :hypno::hypno:

 

[lizziebits]

TampaGirl –

I didn’t feel like going back and quoting, but I have a second (DS just woke up from his nap, but he just asked me to go away…I believe he wants a little privacy to relieve his bowels ).

OK, so, here are the points I was trying to make, probably rather badly.

1. I called climaxing outside of intercourse intrinsically evil because
   a) I don’t think it’s any different, really, than withdrawal
   – both are done in the context of marriage
   – both are deliberately not procreative (procreative being ordered toward life, not meaning that there must be the possibility of conception)
   b) The Church includes withdrawal in its list of illicit methods of birth regulation, and it calls those methods intrinsically evil (CCC 2340, I believe)
2. Intrinsically evil does not mean mortal sin for sure, it means the potential for mortal sin
3. This can certainly place couples in VERY difficult situations. If I was on bedrest for 6 months with pelvic restriction, I’m sure my husband would go insane, and would be very tempted to sin. However, that does give him the license to sin – whether that be masturbating, or committing adultery, or anything else. The teachings of the Church, the teachings of Christ, can be very very difficult for sure.

 

[Serap]

TampaGirl –

I didn’t feel like going back and quoting, but I have a second (DS just woke up from his nap, but he just asked me to go away…I believe he wants a little privacy to relieve his bowels ).

OK, so, here are the points I was trying to make, probably rather badly.

1. I called climaxing outside of intercourse intrinsically evil because
   a) I don’t think it’s any different, really, than withdrawal
   – both are done in the context of marriage
   – both are deliberately not procreative (procreative being ordered toward life, not meaning that there must be the possibility of conception)
   b) The Church includes withdrawal in its list of illicit methods of birth regulation, and it calls those methods intrinsically evil (CCC 2340, I believe)
2. Intrinsically evil does not mean mortal sin for sure, it means the potential for mortal sin
3. This can certainly place couples in VERY difficult situations. If I was on bedrest for 6 months with pelvic restriction, I’m sure my husband would go insane, and would be very tempted to sin. However, that does give him the license to sin – whether that be masturbating, or committing adultery, or anything else. The teachings of the Church, the teachings of Christ, can be very very difficult for sure.

Thanks for clarifying that “intrinsically evil” does not neccessarily = Hell (mortal sin).

I can understand ABC b/c it’s a blatant barrier to God’s will for new life. It eliminates God completely.

I am pregnant and used NFP with my husband. We are open to life.

OK…:banghead::hypno::doh2:

 

[tampagrl]

…I conclude that it is therefore a venial sin that the couple has engaged in. The couple should still ask for forgiveness for their human weakness, but it doens’t require confession with a priest…This is definitely not black and white. I wish it were less confusing because my head is spinning :hypno::hypno:

Scoot over sister, I’m in your boat. I might concede the venial sin thing, but I’m still not sure on that, but everything else I’m with ya.

God bless you for trying to live out a sincere Catholic marriage. We should all be so humble as to want only what God wants from us in our marriages.
Best wishes with the new baby!!

 

[tampagrl]

.:banghead::hypno::doh2:

lol…and you can’t even have a glass of wine…sorry, I’m not helping…

 

[iluvmybabies]

You’ve made some very good points and it is for this reason that many of us still don’t understand what is mortal sin (aka “grave matter”) and what is venial sin.

In terms of the marital embrace, the CCC called a marital embrace that is not open to life “disordered” not a grave matter. Therefore, I would conclude that this is a venial sin to do otherwise.

Birth control is an entirely different subject b/c you could also argue that NFP is a form of birth control and therefore a “grave matter”. NFP is licit even though it is used in place of birth control.

As for withdrawal, I do not know the semantics of it and I have never used this method.

My husband and I used NFP to conceive and avoid. We used a licit means to avoid when we weren’t ready even though we were doing the same as birth control “technically”. We were acting according to God’s will.

As for foreplay; it is not always a climax outside of intercourse; it can be kissing and touching. If it does end in a climax outside of intercourse the CCC says it’s “disordered” not a “grave matter”.

I conclude that it is therefore a venial sin that the couple has engaged in. The couple should still ask for forgiveness for their human weakness, but it doens’t require confession with a priest.

This is definitely not black and white. I wish it were less confusing because my head is spinning :hypno::hypno:

Mine is too and I am still not understanding…I have been reading this and I have a migraine the size of a football field!! LOL

 

[baylee]

1. I called climaxing outside of intercourse intrinsically evil because

a) I don’t think it’s any different, really, than withdrawal

– both are done in the context of marriage
– both are deliberately not procreative (procreative being ordered toward life, not meaning that there must be the possibility of conception)

b) The Church includes withdrawal in its list of illicit methods of birth regulation, and it calls those methods intrinsically evil (CCC 2340, I believe)

It’s not different **if **the couple is purposely doing these things so as to as contracept. However, I suspect that most couples are not doing these things for that purpose.

Besides the CCC paragraph that you are referring to…2370…is specifically quoting Humanae Vitae which discusses the use of artificial contraception to regulate births when having sexual intercourse. It is not discussing certain other acts between a husband and a wife.

 

[baylee]

Remember, the Catechism does not contain the whole of Catholic Moral Teaching. It is a high level reference book with footnotes and links to the entire documents.

This does not appear to be what John Paul II states in his forward. He states that it is “a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine” …“I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith…”

Although I agree that there are footnotes to the original documents, I highly doubt, based on JPII’s own words, that anything critical is left out.

 

[baylee]

Masturbation is done alone and the lustful thoughts that accompany it are sinful.

You’re not completely off Serap. The Catechism makes a point of describing masturbation as sexual pleasure sought “outside of marriage”.

 

[kage_ar]

This does not appear to be what John Paul II states in his forward. He states that it is “a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine” …“I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith…”

Although I agree that there are footnotes to the original documents, I highly doubt, based on JPII’s own words, that anything critical is left out.

A statement - not the complete statement.

Sure norm for teaching the faith - yes, but it is not the COMPLETE teaching of the faith.

If they left nothing out, the book would be a mile thick. It is inteded as a high level reference book, like an encyclopedia.

Let’s say you look up “spruce trees” in the World Book encyclopedia. Would that contain EVERYTHING there is to know about spruce trees? This is something far more compex than a spruce tree.

Read the documents. West and Popcack have written very readable books on the TOTB work.

 

[baylee]

A statement - not the complete statement.

Sure norm for teaching the faith - yes, but it is not the COMPLETE teaching of the faith.

If they left nothing out, the book would be a mile thick. It is inteded as a high level reference book, like an encyclopedia.

Let’s say you look up “spruce trees” in the World Book encyclopedia. Would that contain EVERYTHING there is to know about spruce trees? This is something far more compex than a spruce tree.

Read the documents. West and Popcack have written very readable books on the TOTB work.

Sorry…I might give you that it’s not “complete” but it sure as heck isn’t going to leave out the biggies…and I think making a point of stating what is gravely disordered/intrinsically evil, etc would = biggie. As far as I can see the only time that acts between a husband and wife are considered as such is when they have sexual intercourse and use artificial contraception. I would think if there were other such acts between a husband and wife, the Catechism would not have left them out…and if they are, I think it might be a good idea to update the Catechism because it’s leaving out some pretty big stuff.

 

[kage_ar]

Sorry…I might give you that it’s not “complete” but it sure as heck isn’t going to leave out the biggies…and I think making a point of stating what is gravely disordered/intrinsically evil, etc would = biggie. As far as I can see the only time that acts between a husband and wife are considered as such is when they have sexual intercourse and use artificial contraception. I would think if there were other such acts between a husband and wife, the Catechism would not have left them out…and if they are, I think it might be a good idea to update the Catechism because it’s leaving out some pretty big stuff.

The Catechism is not intended to be a sex manual. Remember, we rely on the entire teaching of Scripture and the Magusterium

 

[baylee]

The Catechism is not intended to be a sex manual. Remember, we rely on the entire teaching of Scripture and the Magusterium

Sex manual? I’m trying really hard not to laugh at that one.

If the Catechism takes no issue with discussing certain sex-related topics, then I see no reason why it would take issue with mentioning where it all fits into the husband and wife relationship if it deemed it necessary for our salvation…it does so when discussing sexual intercourse and artificial contraception. The average Catholic should not have to go back to the original documents…you’re lucky if they go to mass.

 

[tampagrl]

Spruce trees and sex manuals?! Sheesh, I can’t leave this thread alone for a minute!

…and I think making a point of stating what is gravely disordered/intrinsically evil, etc would = biggie. As far as I can see the only time that acts between a husband and wife are considered as such is when they have sexual intercourse and use artificial contraception. I would think if there were other such acts between a husband and wife, the Catechism would not have left them out…

that makes total sense to me.

 

[kage_ar]

Article that pulls together some of the Moral Theologians words on the topic

nds.edu/old/well-Palermo.htm