S
SusanneT
Guest
Well said. Foreplay - surely the clue is in the name - is the part of intimacy which comes before and prepares the couple for intercourse. Not something separate and only tenuously cone ted with it.
- Status
G
GraceDK
Guest
S
SusanneT
Guest
Your PM full SHi SusanneT.
You are Protestant, how do you find it here on CAF?
A
AthenaC
Guest
Except that you’re not even supposed to engage in foreplay before marriage, so your reasoning, though interesting, is a moot point.
G
GraceDK
Guest
Exacly, I realise that. The foreplay belongs together with the sexual act. People strech it if they say they can begin the foreplay severel days before the unitive and procreative act.
As I see it they are talking about mutual masturbation and trying to rationalize it by using loop holes in the Catholic teaching, which simply doesn’t always explicitly teach things that are self evident.
S
searching04
Guest
G
GraceDK
Guest
As far as I know, getting each other all fired up is not alright if one does not intent it to lead to its natural consequence which is unitive and procreative sex.
I have no problem with people saying they have a foreplay over a few hours, but if they talk about days it no longer has any resemblance of respecting the act, especially if stimulation of genitals and female orgasm takes place. Its simply ceases to have any resemblance to what the Church teaches about the marital union…
A
AthenaC
Guest
But the intent IS to lead to its natural consequence. Just because it happens *for them *on a timeline that doesn’t work *for you *doesn’t negate this underlying fact.
And how do you know? Do you know 100% of the continuum of human experience in this regard? (Including thoughts, intentions, etc.) It is one thing to offer your opinion about what you think is inside and outside norms for most people, but when you go beyond that and state that you know definitively about a subject where the Church has apparently seen fit to leave open to a LOT of subjectivity, you sound like you are trying to play God. And this comment isn’t directed at you specifically; I see many people (myself included sometimes) that could use a dose of humility.
G
GraceDK
Guest
So let me get this straight, you think its okay for a woman and man to engage in fireing each other up and for the woman to climax 2-3 days before the actual union… you think its okay to masturbate as long as people have actual procreative and unitive sex after a few days.
Sorry, if you believe that then you have made Catholic principles unrecognizable for me.
For me its not a matter of humility. I merely am very negatively surprised at how people rationalize things when it comes to sexual pleasure alone. And I don’t think its humble of you to indicate I play God because I say I am repulsed.
There are alot of people that will call a serious Catholics intolerant and proud for pointing out the principles of Christian faith and morals. Hearing the same nonsense on a Catholic forum is disheartening.
Mary_Gail_36
New member
Please read my post where I quote Father Ford. He wrote in the 1960’s. His book carried an Imprimatur. I believe it was post #69
Incomplete arousing acts are permitted by married couples as long as the risk of climax outside of the act is minimal. “Incomplete act” means that there is no intercourse and no climax for either husband or wife.
There are a few other Catholic writers, whose writings carry an Imprimatur as well that state similar ideas, John Kippley, Greg Popcak.
John Kippley wrote a pamphlet with an imprimatur as well called, “Marital Sexuality: Moral Considerations” It was a very informative pamphlet that is no longer available in print…I wish they would re-release it, because it was so informative.
T
The_Bucket
Guest
Oh my goodness an informative post on the subject. Can’t have that here.
But snark aside, which tough to do because I’m basically all snark, people need to not lie to themselves. That’s the issue here isn’t it? How can you say that your foreplay timeline is several days? That doesn’t even make any sense. Why not just say your entire marital life is basically one gigantic sex act?
Like other posters said, stop looking for loopholes and just be honest with yourselves. There’s a difference between teasing or revving the engines say a couple hours before you plan to retire for the evening and engaging in a masturbatory session one day and then intercourse a couple days later and calling that one extended act.
And by the way, I use the term above to mean to completion. As Mary Gail noted, on days you don’t intend to have completed intercourse, you’re allowed to touch whatever whenever you want to provided that your spouse is A-OK with it… provided that you’re not deliberately “pushing the envelope.”
Frankly I think just getting a better understand of what martial sex is all about or even just the entire doctrine of the Church is all about is what is needed in nearly every case. It’s not a gigantic rulebook we’re trying to find loopholes to exploit. It is, as was said in another thread, a road map to salvation.
S
shipwrkd
Guest
Yup. Foreplay is anything that starts setting the mood for the Marriage Act. That could be a phone call from another city, a text message or a bouquet of flowers a day or even two in advance. As a couple ages, the longer foreplay will take to get both partners to completion. MaryG and bucket have made the most common sense.
I hate to even ask how long a husband and wife can enjoy the after glow of the Act given the amount of attention to this thread so far…
T
Tarpeian_Rock
Guest
A bouquet of flowers is considered foreplay? Has anyone told Ron Conte about this? And more importantly, does Ron approve?
S
shipwrkd
Guest
Yup, check the definition in Wiki. I think you’ll find you’ve been initiating arousal without even knowing it. My point is that this entire thread depends on one’s definition of foreplay, their sexual appetite and even age. I find that a properly presented single rose or text message will usually get the ball rolling. I got the idea from the Priest that married us 42 years ago. Maybe Ron should try it
R
Ron_Conte
Guest
Not all marital foreplay is immoral.
But then again, not all marital foreplay is moral.
If a sexual act is intrinsically evil, due to a lack of the procreative or unitive meanings, then it does not become moral when used for the purpose of foreplay. Intrinsically evil acts are always immoral, regardless of intention or circumstances.
But then again, not all marital foreplay is moral.
If a sexual act is intrinsically evil, due to a lack of the procreative or unitive meanings, then it does not become moral when used for the purpose of foreplay. Intrinsically evil acts are always immoral, regardless of intention or circumstances.
F
fpt
Guest
Could you define " Each and every sexual act "? How do you define this sentence without bad " ism words " ?
Could you give us information on how you interpret the different steps of marital act? Are you against the sexual phenomenology on this topic?
For you, what are the moral foreplay?
What is your acception of the notion of masturbation in the context of marital act?
G
GraceDK
Guest
Well I’m sorry. I never learned the word “foreplay” in English class.
I just assumed it meant the same in English as in my own language when directly translated. In my language forplay is something that involves sexual arousal and stimulation leading up to sexual intercourse.
If foreplay is divorced, intentionally, from its natural end - sexual union - the dignity of the sexual life of a marriage is undermined. Meaning, if you arouse your partner physically
and intentionally by touching their private areas, but have no intention of entering at that time, the full marital embrace, you are sinning; you do not respect the nature of the sexual act.
You know Church teaching… no need to find loopholes for lust to enter. And no, flowers don’t have anything to do with foreplay.
A
AthenaC
Guest
There are many marriage therapists who would disagree with you.
S
shipwrkd
Guest
Well, that clears everything up! You dance divinely.
So we’re not sure about flowers. What’s your take on a text message sent specifically to arouse my wife? I think I’ll continue with what kept my marriage and family strong for the last four decades.
S
shipwrkd
Guest
No, I don’t know the Church’s teaching and by the length of this thread, many of us don’t. BTW, I’m too old to need to find loopholes but it would be nice for someone to interpret them for us plain folks. West and Popack seem to be trying to clarify what they believe the Church is teaching and many discount them regardless of the Imprimatur given to their books.
- Status