martial sex

[thewanderer]

You will be guided by your conscience.
But the Church does agree with my conclusion…sodomy is a sin. Ask your confessor.Every source you see will agree on the same definition of sodomy. The Catholic Church does not have a different definition.

Yes indeed, I will be guided by my conscience, and this is not a matter that I have just tossed by the sideline either, as I previously noted. I am being perfectly honest in saying that if my conclusions on this (which are by no means solely mine) false then so is my entire understanding of sexual morality as all of it is based on the same principles. The problem is, the only way I have been able to understand the Church’s teachings on sexuality is through these very same principles and I, quite honestly, cannot see any other way that the Church’s teachings could be true. As for the Church having a different definition I must ask you to actually show me that she does because everything I have read as well as my own reason leads me to conclude that she does not have a different definition. So it is not enough for you to simply claim that she uses a different definition, especially after a very well-reknowned moral theologian from the 20’s has already been quoted on this thread specifically saying that stimulation is a different thing than sodomy. I’m sorry, but everything so far leads me to conclude that you are incorrect about this matter and so my conscience actually leads me in the very opposite direction of where you seem to think it should. I cannot violate my own reason which is guided by everything I have read of the Church teachings. Also nowhere am I promoting sodomy, so please stop saying that, it is very misleading, I am 100% against sodomy, the thing is, I just don’t see how oral or manual stimulation could possibly be considered sodomy as the Church talks about it for moral issues.

 

[thewanderer]

I’m going to repost this because I find it telling that this post has not really been addressed by anyone opposing it. It has some very good points.

The onus is on you to show that foreplay is an unnatural sex act. Approved Catholic document that says this please.

A well-informed conscience can inform us of such. We form our conscience on Church teaching, not merriam’s dictionary or Mickey’s or Portrait’s or Ron Conte’s opinions.

You definition of sodomy is based on the merriam dictionary and your own personal opinion. However, there is a more accurate definition that was provided to all the world’s Priests starting in the 1920’s by the renowned and orthodox moral theologian of his time, Heribert Jone. His volume was printed in at least 8 languages and used as the vernacular Moral Theology text for seminarians who were not fluent enough in Latin for the Latin volumes.
This was one of the most common Pre-Vatican II Moral Theology text books.

It is set up as a confessional aid for priests, so it’s indexed by sin or potential sin and describes any mitigating factors and how serious the sin is.
There is a section on sodomy. Jone distinguishes between what is called ‘perfect sodomy’ and 'imperfect sodomy".

“Perfect Sodomy” is when it occurs between two members of the same sex or when the act results in the waste of seminal fluid. It is always gravely sinful.

“Imperfect Sodomy” is when neither of the above conditions are true.

Jone had this to to say about “Imperfect Sodomy”

"it is neither sodomy nor a sin if intercourse is begun in the rectal manner with the intention of completing it in the natural manner" (Jone “Moral Theology” 757)

Here we have the approved Catholic definition of sodomy, by a renowned and orthodox moral theologian of his time vs. Mickey’s personal opinion+secular dictionary version. I have found nothing in Church teaching that conflicts with Jone’s. Perhaps Mickey would like to point us all to an official Catholic teaching that conflicts with that?

According to whom? Please cite the official Catholic teaching that states that all oral or anal sexual activity is sodomy. I believe you are confusing “sex” with “preparation for sex” (aka foreplay).

 

[fpt]

If you do not want to be touched by a woman , or if you do not want to touch a woman, the marriage is not for you.

If you do not want to be touched by a man , or if you do not want to touch a man, the marriage is not for you.

Marriage is a sexed and sexual contract. The right of body, the mutual and reciprocal donation of bodies for making one flesh, in the human fashion with sexual cooperation.

 

[Mickey]

Christopher West’s interpretations are based upon “Love and Responsibility,” written by Pope John Paul II, before he was Pope.

Christopher West’s interpretations are not Pope John Paul II’s interpretations and have been lambasted by Catholics.

 

[fpt]

By nature, only the sodomy (subsitution and replacement), the direct and voluntary contraception, the direct and voluntary abortion, the direct and voluntary adultery, the masturbation (stricto sensu acception, i mean manual or oral stimulation without wanting go further for the complete marital act) is wrong, in the marriage.

 

[ahs]

We should bring to the notice of those browsing this thread, dear friend, that the instructions of H.H. PJPII in Theology of the Body, clearly do not condone the deviant practices currently under review.

To avoid laying an unneccesary burden of guilt on those reading this, please cite the portions of TOB that you feel do not condone foreplay. I’m reading it now and I’d be really interested to see what I obviously must be missing.

However, as regards fellatio/cunnilingus these are manifestly not procreative and are therefore aberrant and unclean acts of depravity and should accordingly be avoided by the faithful.

The Church says that all sex acts must be procreative? Please provide that for us. And don’t cop out by saying “Those who demand explicit Church teaching condemning such vile practices are approaching this whole issue from very legalistic standpoint .…” The Church is very clear on this particular topic and has expounded upon it MANY times…please provide the official Church teaching that say each act of sex must be “procreative”, lest they be "aberrant and unclean acts of depravity ".

Portrait, do you care to answer this? As far as I know, the only part that ftp and I are in disagreement is on the very topic about which I quoted THE moral theologian whose Moral Theology volume has been used in all the world’s seminaries to teach our Priests moral theology. Since my position is directly supported by an official Catholic source, I feel that it is your turn to back up your assertions.

You need to define:

The masturbation in the catholic meaning? and the constitutive elements?
The sodomy in the catholic meaning? and the constitutive elements?
The marital act in the catholic meaning? and the constitutive elements?
The mutual and reciprocal donation of bodies for making one flesh in the human fashion with sexual cooperation, in the catholic meaning? ?
The human fashion of making love in the catholic meaning ?
The sexual cooperation in the human fashion for making love in the catholic meaning?

Are you capable???

The marital act in the human fashion with sexual cooperation means three steps before during and after the union of bodies? At each step, the own rules. The holy erotism is an part of marital act. Do you refuse the language of bodies during the marital act? The moral right on the body of the other during sex??? What is it? Do you want an incomplete donation of bodies?

 

[thewanderer]

Christopher West’s interpretations are not Pope John Paul II’s interpretations and have been lambasted by Catholics.

As have your interpretation of the matter, what of it? All that means is you need to show official Church teaching, or at least give an explanation for how the Church in the 20’s well before the issues of VII, so widely enabled and promoted West’s interpretation on this particular matter?

 

[fpt]

Do you ignore the catholic sexology?

 

[Mickey]

Have you like… ever engaged in sexual intercourse?

Your viscious sarcasm is not caharitable. If it happens again…you will be on my ignore list.

It’s quite clear you don’t have any clue as to what the doctrine of the Church teaches about marital relations, that’s been well-established.

The Church teaches that sodomy is a mortal sin. Let your conscience be your guide.

 

[The_Bucket]

Thanks fpt, you’re exactly right. If Portrait and Ron and Mickey think that oral and manual stimulation is icky, then they’re free not to do it. There’s nothing wrong with that.

But busting out a ridiculously condescending attitude and implying that we all have “radically defective conscience” is not only uncalled for, it’s uncharitable, un-Christian and totally contrary to the doctrine of the Church. Where the Church is silent we are called to follow our best judgment and to act with prudence. And it’s certainly would behoove you and everyone not to assume everyone has a radically defective conscience. I try to assume everyone’s conscience is good, and perhaps better than mine, even if that’s not true. Better that I consider myself last and be moved up to a higher place than to assume I’m in a higher place and be humiliated when I’m placed at the end of the table.

Portrait, you can add all the “dear friend” stuff you like, but you’re coming off as big a condescending jerk as Joe Biden was with Paul Ryan. All you’re doing is trying to use diction to assert authority over others where it does not exist.

The imprimatur and nihil obstat on West and other theologian’s works that have definitively stated that oral and manual stimulation is acceptable is all the laity need. Heck, the laity don’t even need that to be honest. All the laity needs to know is that sexuality is a gift from God, meant to be used in marriage and that its procreative and unitive natures cannot be frustrated without committing mortal sin. That’s it. If you think oral stimulation is degrading and therefore not unitive, don’t do it! But I don’t see it that way and neither do most people. You need to accept that.

 

[Mickey]

The onus is on you, since the Church hasn’t taken your position.

The Church has taken a position that sodomy is a sin. The onus is on you.

Priests do not decide doctrine/dogma; that is for bishops.

The priest represents the bishop who represents Christ. Ask your confessor about this issue…or ask your bishop.

“Is sodomy allowed?” the answer is obvious no.

Asked the question properly to my confessor…in great detail. I received a proper answer. Glory be to God!

 

[fpt]

To avoid laying an unneccesary burden of guilt on those reading this, please cite the portions of TOB that you feel do not condone foreplay. I’m reading it now and I’d be really interested to see what I obviously must be missing.

The Church says that all sex acts must be procreative? Please provide that for us. And don’t cop out by saying “Those who demand explicit Church teaching condemning such vile practices are approaching this whole issue from very legalistic standpoint .…” The Church is very clear on this particular topic and has expounded upon it MANY times…please provide the official Church teaching that say each act of sex must be “procreative”, lest they be "aberrant and unclean acts of depravity ".

Portrait, do you care to answer this? As far as I know, the only part that ftp and I are in disagreement is on the very topic about which I quoted THE moral theologian whose Moral Theology volume has been used in all the world’s seminaries to teach our Priests moral theology. Since my position is directly supported by an official Catholic source, I feel that it is your turn to back up your assertions.

Portrait, do you care to answer this? **As far as I know, the only part that ftp and I are in disagreement is on the very topic about which I quoted THE moral theologian whose Moral Theology volume has been used in all the world’s seminaries to teach our Priests moral theology. **Since my position is directly supported by an official Catholic source, I feel that it is your turn to back up your assertions.

Explain to me, please???

In my opinion, we are in the same line???

 

[The_Bucket]

Your viscious sarcasm is not caharitable. If it happens again…you will be on my ignore list.

Oh man, I’ll be ignored by some guy who follows in the footsteps of someone who thinks God allows him to predict the future! What ever shall I do?! Why not just watch Jack Van Impe if you want to be taken in by a charlatan?

The Church teaches that sodomy is a mortal sin. Let your conscience be your guide.

It certainly does. And has been explained ad nauseum in this thread and countless others, stimulation is not sodomy. Period. End of discussion. If you don’t want to engage in it then don’t. You’re committing no evil by not doing it. Stop accusing others of committing grave sins when you are the one who is misinformed about the doctrine.

 

[Mickey]

Once again, your mixing up terms.

No…I am not.
You have free will to do anything you like.
But it may be good to ask your confessor.

 

[Mickey]

However, as regards fellatio/cunnilingus these are manifestly not procreative and are therefore aberrant and unclean acts of depravity and should accordingly be avoided by the faithful.

Indeed!

That they occur within the marriage bed, dear friend, is wholly irrelevant since that does not render them any less deviant or intrinsically disordered. An unnatural and deviant action cannot be rationalized upon the basis that is a prelude to natural licit coitus. That is not consistent with the thinking that one normally associated with an authentic Catholic mind.

Exactly!

Those who demand explicit Church teaching condemning such vile practices are approaching this whole issue from very legalistic standpoint and need to read and mark what St. Paul, for example, says about impurity and uncleaness as regards sexual morality. This I have referenced in a previous post today. Purity necessarily involves the control and direction of sexual powers and impulses in accordance with the natural law and purpose of God. It is, dear friend, manifiestly incongruous for those who profess Christ’s holy religion to condone or indulge in filthy and deviant sexual practices. Moreover, that they occur within the context of the marriage bed, is wholly immaterial.

Absolutely!

 

[thewanderer]

The Church has taken a position that sodomy is a sin. The onus is on you.

Miickey, if you think that the onus is on us then you have completely misunderstood everything which people have been saying here, which is really frustrating. It is really hard to have an honest conversation with someone who refuses to address valid points that are being brought up. The question is **not whether sodomy is a sin. The question is whether the Church’s definition of Sodomy is the same as the one you assume it is. There have been arguments made that it is not, none of which you have addressed. Instead you just keep saying “well, sodomy is a sin”. The problem is, noone **here disagrees with you about that, that isn’t the question at stake here. If you are unwilling to address **the actual **question being asked here then this conversation will get nowhere. please address the actual question or else be willing to admit that you just simply don’t want to take part in this discussion and so leave it rather than continuing to reply with responses which do not address the question at hand.

 

[ahs]

…
The imprimatur and nihil obstat on West and other theologian’s works that have definitively stated that oral and manual stimulation is acceptable is all the laity need. Heck, the laity don’t even need that to be honest. All the laity needs to know is that **sexuality is a gift from God, meant to be used in marriage and that its procreative and unitive natures cannot be frustrated **without committing mortal sin. That’s it. If you think oral stimulation is degrading and therefore not unitive, don’t do it! But I don’t see it that way and neither do most people. You need to accept that.

Yes! Some will say, “it must be procreative”, but such is not the Church teaching. It must be “ordered toward procreation…and unification”, which is very different from “procreative”.

…And has been explained ad nauseum in this thread and countless others, stimulation is not sodomy. Period. End of discussion. If you don’t want to engage in it then don’t. You’re committing no evil by not doing it. Stop accusing others of committing grave sins when you are the one who is misinformed about the doctrine.

The Church has taken a position that sodomy is a sin. The onus is on you.

What the Church has NOT done, however, is accepted your own definiiton of sodomy.

“Perfect Sodomy” is when it occurs between two members of the same sex or when the act results in the waste of seminal fluid. It is always gravely sinful.

“Imperfect Sodomy” is when neither of the above conditions are true.

Jone had this to to say about “Imperfect Sodomy”

“it is neither sodomy nor a sin if intercourse is begun in the rectal manner with the intention of completing it in the natural manner” (Jone “Moral Theology” 757)

Here we have the approved Catholic definition of sodomy, by a renowned and orthodox moral theologian of his time vs. Mickey’s personal opinion+secular dictionary version. I have found nothing in Church teaching that conflicts with Jone’s. Perhaps Mickey would like to point us all to an official Catholic teaching that conflicts with that? Please cite the official Catholic teaching that states that all oral or anal sexual activity is sodomy. I believe you are confusing “sex” with “preparation for sex” (aka foreplay).

 

[fpt]

The fact of stating a wrong doctrine or a very wrong opinion can be sinful, under conditions.
The fact of being very presumptuous concerning one ban is not very honest.

Do you know the great principles of interpretation of the catholic moral?

 

[The_Bucket]

ewtn.org/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=512184&Pg=Forum11&Pgnu=1&recnu=6

ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=507442&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=

You can do you our Google searches. This question has been asked and answered many, many times. Continually substituting your own feelings for what the doctrine says and what those in authority say about the doctrine does not make it doctrine!

It’s almost the same thing as saying “Well I think birth control is OK, so it’s OK for me.” The only difference is that a married couple NOT engaging in oral or manual stimulation is not immoral. It’s fine. But arguing that such actions are immoral because well… you THINK it’s immoral is simply false.

 

[ahs]

Portrait, do you care to answer this? **As far as I know, the only part that ftp and I are in disagreement is on the very topic about which I quoted THE moral theologian whose Moral Theology volume has been used in all the world’s seminaries to teach our Priests moral theology. **Since my position is directly supported by an official Catholic source, I feel that it is your turn to back up your assertions.

Explain to me, please???

In my opinion, we are in the same line???

I was under the impression that we disagreed on “perfect” vs. “imperfect” sodomy…where Jone provides the definition of sodomy and states that couples using forplay in the rectal manner, then completing the act naturally, are not guilty of sodomy. Perhaps we do agree here?