Marital Foreplay and Sex

[jilly4ski]

The missionary position on fertile days was sarcastic mockary; tha’s why I mentioned the 4rth Wednesday of every month.

Which is against forum rules. Please see here before you post.

 

[jilly4ski]

What about the 23 or so different rites of the catholic church that isn’t under the same Pope but all have claim to holy orders? that is 23 reasons the church hasn’t been consistent. Which rite is the right one? I don’t want to get off topic, from the OP so I’m going to leave it at that. I can start another thread to discuss that somewhere else.

??? There are 23 different rites but they are all under the Pope, so I don’t know what your point is. Are you trying to talk about the Orthodox? Should we lump all protestants in there too and then claim that the Church has changed? But that is really not relevant since we are talking about morality and the constant teaching of marriage and sexual relations in the Church, not about different acceptable modes of worship.

 

[TrueLight]

Sorry to interrupt the two of you, but I’m going to ask again.

Is sex discussed this openly in Pre-Cana? Where does one learn this kind of thing in detail?

Also, are most orthodox priests consistent when it comes to what is allowed and what is not allowed?

 

[shipwrkd]

Sorry to interrupt the two of you, but I’m going to ask again.

Is sex discussed this openly in Pre-Cana? Where does one learn this kind of thing in detail?
Also, are most orthodox priests consistent when it comes to what is allowed and what is not allowed?

I think you’ll find the answers to many questions regarding sex and the Church in Christopher West’s book: Good news about sex and Marriage and Greg Popcaks book: Holy Sex. Both books try to explain John Paul II’s teachings on Theology of the Body in layman’s terms. They are entertaining and informative and carry the Imprimatur which I understand to be a declaration that they are free from moral or doctrinal error. You’d be very surprised at how nonrestrictive the Church is as long as the sex ends with tab A in slot B. As was stated by several before, almost anything goes.

 

[TrueLight]

I think you’ll find the answers to many questions regarding sex and the Church in Christopher West’s book: Good news about sex and Marriage and Greg Popcaks book: Holy Sex. Both books try to explain John Paul II’s teachings on Theology of the Body in layman’s terms. They are entertaining and informative and carry the Imprimatur which I understand to be a declaration that they are free from moral or doctrinal error. You’d be very surprised at how nonrestrictive the Church is as long as the sex ends with tab A in slot B. As was stated by several before, almost anything goes.

Thanks.

And as long as foreplay doesn’t last for days?

 

[Gordon_Sims]

Is sex discussed this openly in Pre-Cana? Where does one learn this kind of thing in detail?

Also, are most orthodox priests consistent when it comes to what is allowed and what is not allowed?

It seems to me that there is room for some subjective decisions here.

I’m not sure how it is now, but when my wife & I got married it really wasn’t discussed at all. Sure, they mentioned that the marital act was intended to be just between a man & wife and was one of the benefits of marriage, but that was it. The priest who married us touched on it a bit, although he certainly didn’t give us anything close to orthodox advice. He told us that once we were married, we were free to do whatever we chose in the bedroom. He also told us that artificial contraception was okay, and a good idea for a young couple who didn’t want to get pregnant right away. I was never given valid answers to what the Church really teaches about sex until I first read these forums a few years ago.

 

[kelvinf]

I think you’ll find the answers to many questions regarding sex and the Church in Christopher West’s book: Good news about sex and Marriage and Greg Popcaks book: Holy Sex. Both books try to explain John Paul II’s teachings on Theology of the Body in layman’s terms. They are entertaining and informative and carry the Imprimatur which I understand to be a declaration that they are free from moral or doctrinal error. You’d be very surprised at how nonrestrictive the Church is as long as the sex ends with tab A in slot B. As was stated by several before, almost anything goes.

Wow! The way you presented your post reflects how problematic those two books could be.

Christopher West only presents his own interpretation of Bl. JPII’s work and not the Church’s interpretation. The Pope was holding a general audience–open to lay people–and I believe it’s a challenge for those of us who were not there to directly read what he said, rather than relying on someone else’s interpretation–which is not in anyway the interpretation of the Church.

Again, West and Popcak do not represent or speak for the Roman Catholic Church. So saying that the Church is nonrestrictive as long as sex ends with tab A in slot B is misleading.

And for your information, I am very, very sure that, the book, Holy Sex by Popcak carries no imprimatur on it! I have a copy at home. When I go back home, I will double check. I have read just a dozen of pages of Holy Sex and I find too many problems with this book. I will never recommend such a book to anyone.

For 2000 years, we have had many saints, great theologians and Mother Church. They have always respected the secrecy of the marital act. If some individuals (who I wouldn’t even call theologians) today think otherwise, then that’s simply their opinion and not Church teaching. The things about oral sex, anal sex, vibrators, dressing like porn stars cannot be found in the Theology of the Body or any official Church document. Otherwise, I would like to have a reference to such a document.

So all in all, your post is misleading.

 

[shipwrkd]

.Christopher West only presents his own interpretation of Bl. JPII’s work and not the Church’s interpretation. The Pope was holding a general audience–open to lay people–and I believe it’s a challenge for those of us who were not there to directly read what he said, rather than relying on someone else’s interpretation–which is not in anyway the interpretation of the Church.

Then please recommend a book that presents the Church’s view. I’ve tried to read TOB and it was written by a VERY scholarly man and is quite vague, as it probably has to be.Again,

West and Popcak do not represent or speak for the Roman Catholic Church. So saying that the Church is nonrestrictive as long as sex ends with tab A in slot B is misleading

This was an over simplification on my part, I’ll take the slap on the knuckles.

And for your information, I am very, very sure that, the book, Holy Sex by Popcak carries no imprimatur on it! I have a copy at home. When I go back home, I will double check. I have read just a dozen of pages of Holy Sex and I find too many problems with this book. I will never recommend such a book to anyone.

Your right about the imprimatur on Holy Sex, but many priests HAVE recommended it, including mine.

For 2000 years, we have had many saints, great theologians and Mother Church. They have always respected the secrecy of the marital act. If some individuals (who I wouldn’t even call theologians) today think otherwise, then that’s simply their opinion and not Church teaching. The things about oral sex, anal sex, vibrators, dressing like porn stars cannot be found in the Theology of the Body or any official Church document. Otherwise, I would like to have a reference to such a document.

We’d probably like to have reference the other way, can you show me such a document?

 

[TrueLight]

I’m not sure how it is now, but when my wife & I got married it really wasn’t discussed at all. Sure, they mentioned that the marital act was intended to be just between a man & wife and was one of the benefits of marriage, but that was it. The priest who married us touched on it a bit, although he certainly didn’t give us anything close to orthodox advice. He told us that once we were married, we were free to do whatever we chose in the bedroom. He also told us that artificial contraception was okay, and a good idea for a young couple who didn’t want to get pregnant right away. I was never given valid answers to what the Church really teaches about sex until I first read these forums a few years ago.

Wow!

 

[shipwrkd]

Wow!

There’s a lot of GOOD stuff in the forum but there’s also some misconceptions posted…probably some by me. If you don’t believe me, join one on the Church and gun control. There are good Catholics who believe every gun should be destroyed and there are good Catholics who will give up their gun when it’s pried from their cold, dead hand. Both positions are OK as is any position in between.(please, no comments on gun control, it was only an example) Take everything you can from here…but before you start living it, make sure it’s right.

BTW, artificial contraception is NOT OK, it’s one of the gravest sins we could commit. And that’s not my opinion, it’s fact.

 

[Jessup]

??? There are 23 different rites but they are all under the Pope, so I don’t know what your point is. Are you trying to talk about the Orthodox? Should we lump all protestants in there too and then claim that the Church has changed? But that is really not relevant since we are talking about morality and the constant teaching of marriage and sexual relations in the Church, not about different acceptable modes of worship.

start another post we’ll discuss it there. but I don’t want to get off the OP topic here

 

[Tiziana]

This is delightful.

 

[kelvinf]

Then please recommend a book that presents the Church’s view. I’ve tried to read TOB and it was written by a VERY scholarly man and is quite vague, as it probably has to be.Again,

The Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic are the books that represent the Church’s view.

Your right about the imprimatur on Holy Sex, but many priests HAVE recommended it, including mine.

I was waiting to have a discussion with a theologian (a retired Professor of Theology at our university) and it finally happened. I heard that he explained complex Church teachings in a way that young people would easily grasp and appreciate. He–Prof. of Theology, who taught Theology students (and priests!?)–believes in pluralism, as he frequently used pluralism to contradict moral relativism whenever I brought it up. He is sometimes very critical of the Church and the Pope and says that’s the job of theologians.

Here on CAF, posters have said questionable things coming from priests. E.g. the use of contraception.

Holy Sex (the back cover and the very first pages) is flooded with positive remarks from a lot of priests even though the book seems to advocate questionable and unnatural acts within Catholic marriage.

One of the saints said that she had difficulties with the spiritual journey because she did not have a good confessor. Sins that were mortal were considered venial by her confessors…she said. (I will check again and cite the source later.)

And I will conclude on this by quoting St Thérèse of Lisieux:
The second thing I learnt had to do with Priests. Up to this time I had not understood the chief aim of the Carmelite Reform. To pray for sinners delighted me; to pray for Priests, whose souls seemed pure as crystal, that indeed astonished me. But in Italy I realised my vocation, and even so long a journey was a small price to pay for such valuable knowledge. During that month I met with many holy Priests, and yet I saw that even though the sublime dignity of Priesthood raises them higher than the Angels, they are still but weak and imperfect men. And so if holy Priests, whom Our Lord in the Gospel calls the salt of the earth, have need of our prayers, what must we think of the lukewarm? Has not Our Lord said: “If the salt lose its savour wherewith shall it be salted?”[6] Oh, dear Mother, how beautiful is our vocation! We Carmelites are called to preserve “the salt of the earth.” We offer our prayers and sacrifices for the apostles of the Lord; we ourselves ought to be their apostles, while they, by word and example, are preaching the Gospel to our brethren. Have we not a glorious mission to fulfill? But I must say no more, for I feel that on this subject my pen would run on for ever.
(Bold mine)

We’d probably like to have reference the other way, can you show me such a document?

The Bible and the Catechism condemn immoral unnatural acts that by their very nature cannot lead to the creation of new life. But today, everything is relative.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Wow! The way you presented your post reflects how problematic those two books could be.

Christopher West only presents his own interpretation of Bl. JPII’s work and not the Church’s interpretation. The Pope was holding a general audience–open to lay people–and I believe it’s a challenge for those of us who were not there to directly read what he said, rather than relying on someone else’s interpretation–which is not in anyway the interpretation of the Church.

Again, West and Popcak do not represent or speak for the Roman Catholic Church. So saying that the Church is nonrestrictive as long as sex ends with tab A in slot B is misleading.

And for your information, I am very, very sure that, the book, Holy Sex by Popcak carries no imprimatur on it! I have a copy at home. When I go back home, I will double check. I have read just a dozen of pages of Holy Sex and I find too many problems with this book. I will never recommend such a book to anyone.

For 2000 years, we have had many saints, great theologians and Mother Church. They have always respected the secrecy of the marital act. If some individuals (who I wouldn’t even call theologians) today think otherwise, then that’s simply their opinion and not Church teaching. The things about oral sex, anal sex, vibrators, dressing like porn stars cannot be found in the Theology of the Body or any official Church document. Otherwise, I would like to have a reference to such a document.

So all in all, your post is misleading.

TOB is a scholarly work. How about something more accessible and less vague? You can’t just expect people to “know” something unless you come right out and say it in language that can be understood.

 

[kelvinf]

TOB is a scholarly work. How about something more accessible and less vague? You can’t just expect people to “know” something unless you come right out and say it in language that can be understood.

I was complaining about the book Jesus of Nazareth by Pope Benedict being a hard read not because I had tried to read the book but simply because someone on Amazon said so. And this is what one poster told me:

Anyone who thinks that Catholic Christian writings are devoid of logic and reason should be pointed to the Summa. It’s not for summer reading on the beach.

I have equally come across posters saying that the CCC and Humane Vitae are hard to comprehend.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

I was complaining about the book Jesus of Nazareth by Pope Benedict being a hard read not because I had tried to read the book but simply because someone on Amazon said so. And this is what one poster told me:

I have equally come across posters saying that the CCC and Humane Vitae are hard to comprehend.

I’m going to admit that I don’t understand. So what you’re saying is that there isn’t something less vague and less scholarly out there? I’ve tried to get my info outside of West and Popack but people either don’t answer or refer me to those works which I cannot understand.

 

[kelvinf]

I’m going to admit that I don’t understand. So what you’re saying is that there isn’t something less vague and less scholarly out there? I’ve tried to get my info outside of West and Popack but people either don’t answer or refer me to those works which I cannot understand.

What do you really mean by less vague and less scholarly? Lo, if you are looking for the kind of things you find in West and Popcak books, I am pretty sure you wouldn’t find them in other books. And neither would some people be able to provide you with the answer you want to hear.

It has never been the tradition of the Church to provide an A-Z guide on the marital act, which is secret. Is that what you mean by vague? Or maybe you should question why for 2000 years, we haven’t had good Catholic books reminiscent of those of West and Popcak.(?)

 

[TradConMom]

Unfortunately…the marital act is NOT secret anymore. Young kids are now exposed no matter how hard we try to hide it. (ehem…that’s one reason we homeschool) so this new sexually wounded culture needs a new language! West has found it. (I won’t comment on Popcak until he had the imprimatur). But I think the imprimatur of archbishop Chaput is a BIG yes for the need to speak frankly on these matters to 3+ generations of us who need to hear it and need it loud and clear and as simply as possible. My husband and I don’t want to use the same style as West for out kids because they shouldn’t need it if they are not exposed to trash and are properly formed in TOB gently and over time. But we also teach pre cana couples who are contracepting and cohabitating…and they need the West style! And guess what. They CHANGE! They actually do when some one finally explains to them the beauty of Gods design and plan for marriage. The ultra traditionalist prude will run away screaming in the other direction…I’m sorry…but you don’t know first hand the damage done to us…my generation…and we need healing so we can raise out children right!

 

[fpt]

I have an idea for helping:

1. the " scrupulous, puritan, uptight, jansenist, victorianist, victorian, fideist, rigorist, moralist and / or prudish " couples;
2. the " crupulous, puritan, uptight, jansenist, victorianist, fideist, rigorist, moralist and / or prudish " wifes;
3. The crupulous, puritan, uptight, jansenist, victorianist, fideist, rigorist, moralist and / or prudish " husbands;

The solution is to write a book with focus on " the conjugal foreplay within natural marriage " or " the catholic theology of conjugal foreplay between the wife and her husband ". Why not???

 

[godisgood77]

Yes, that’s just you, not our Church. You don’t need to add anything here. We have rules and the OP is trying to understand and follow those rules. Agree or disagree, what you say is irrelevant to Catholics.

Nice… if you dissent on a single not infallible doctrine… you are not Catholic…nice…