This is from my Moral Theology book by Rev. Heribert Jone
So, if there is a a danger of such pollution, then it is a grave sin for spouses to kiss each other. (The book specifies it as being grave further on in the explanation.)
The day I look to the secular media for the Gospel is the day the world suddenly becomes orthodox Catholic (as in following the Pope and not dissenting) . Never gonna happen. I’ll stick with what I know the Church teaches and accepts.
Nope, not the way I used “media” Media as in different methods on giving information. Books are a medium, the internet is a medium, tv is a medium, radio is a medium. Media is plural. I would NEVER suggest what we call the secular media is a good place to go for ANYTHING. Just that “go read a book” is not a good answer to someone’s question.
Well then they need to see a priest regarding some possible puritanical/unhealthy view of marital sexuality.
Your interpretations are extreme.
How so. The question was answered in a medical way. There is nothing to worry about in reguards to the “pre” factor. If the OP continues to worry then I would agree with you. But right now maybe they were concerned that it was equal to ejaculation. It isnt and maybe they know that now. Dont be so quick to jump on the poster because in the past others have been as you describe.
I agree. Now that could have been called a puritanical and perhaps unhealthy view.
I agree that porn is a problem. But do you really think “most people dont even want to touch their wives?” Wow, I personally know of no marriages that that can be said for. Though I am sure there are some. I would not say “most”
I never called anyone a “prude,” neither did I even use that word.How so. The question was answered in a medical way. There is nothing to worry about in reguards to the “pre” factor. If the OP continues to worry then I would agree with you. But right now maybe they were concerned that it was equal to ejaculation. It isnt and maybe they know that now. Dont be so quick to jump on the poster because in the past others have been as you describe.
I have noticed in the past that you get upset when people point fingers at you on these sexual topics perhaps you should put the “prude” label away for a little bit so you aren’t doing what others have done to you. Assume and accuse.
I guess I didnt see where the OP had “puritanical” thoughts.I never called anyone a “prude,” neither did I even use that word.
My suggestion was that the OP go see a priest for *possibly *having scrupulosity or possibly having unhealthy or puritanical views.
I’m not diagnosing the OP with either of these conditions, only saying that they may be a possibility. Perhaps I’m wrong, and perhaps the OP simply had no idea what “pre” is, as you said. Either way, I still think it is best to see a priest regarding such personal matters rather than just take answers from strangers online.
Yes, absolutely. Such can only be done as foreplay in connection with the marital act, and climax must be vaginal.
My “interpretations” are out of the same moral theology book that is used in Moral Theology by the FSSP at the seminary in Nebraska. The OP is referring to “making out”. That’s more than simply kissing one’s spouse.
Words to live by. I would not have intimated, however well-intentioned, that the OP even had the possibility of scrupulosity or puritanical views. I think that speaks more of your own opinions coloring your advice, rather than a truly objective observation.I never called anyone a “prude,” neither did I even use that word.
My suggestion was that the OP go see a priest for *possibly *having scrupulosity or possibly having unhealthy or puritanical views.
I’m not diagnosing the OP with either of these conditions, only saying that they may be a possibility. Perhaps I’m wrong, and perhaps the OP simply had no idea what “pre” is, as you said. Either way,** I still think it is best to see a priest regarding such personal matters rather than just take answers from strangers online.**
Why?
You can start a thread about why the marital embrace should be both procreative and unitive and educate yourself on Catholic teaching but this is about something else.
No, I would encourage you not to see intercourse as a way of morally rationalizing other expressions of your love physically.
You must have been posting before I edited it.
Sexual pleasure is not permissible outside of the conjugal act save for a woman needing to “finish” because her husband finished before her. She is allowed to climax after the conjugal act if it is necessary.
Which is why I suggested a good moral theology reference book. It will answer most questions, and you’ll learn how to “discuss the details” in a manner priests should be comfortable with (answering these types of questions is an important part of the teaching priests do. It’s not something they can neglect or discourage because it “makes them uncomfortable.”) The book I use is used in the seminary in Nebraska and is quite comprehensive, but not crude or blunt.
Ok.