T
thistle
Guest
The Church has not and cannot make errors in matters of faith and morals. Not even the “bad” Popes taught anything Church teaching. The Holy Spirit protects the Church against that.
- Status
M
Methodi
Guest
What`s destroying the church today?I’m not reading the rest of this topic, because bad spelling and grammar is my kryptonite. However…
The Catholic Church (of course, back then, we were simply the Christian Church, because ya’ll Protestants hadn’t run off and tried to steal our name yet) has had some really awful Popes. Alexander VI comes to mind (Popes, as a rule, should not catch syphillis while Pope). The Church is and always has been half-full of bad, bad men and women, and, in the words of Flannery O’Connor, “You’ll suffer as much from the Church as for it.”
However, the Church as a corporate body of bishops is led unerringly by the Holy Spirit. Though the individuals who comprise the Church, from the terrible Alexander VI right up to the great John Paul II, are all flawed and sinful men (and women), the Church has never taught error under its magisterial authority. Even Pope Alexander avoided that. If the fact that Pope Alexander and some of his late-medieval ilk didn’t destroy the Church isn’t proof of our divine leadership, I don’t know what is.
D
distracted
Guest
that’s kinda like saying its OK to fornicate as long as you don’t lust after the person you’re fornicating with…
there is the story of Onan who didn’t complete the sex act with his wife, as God instructed, so they would have children… He was struck dead. Some say it was because he was practicing birth control… but it could have ALSO been masturbation… God hates both… both are an abuse of sexuality…
I can’t see the point… It is a mortal sin… which will separate one from intimacy with God… (no impure thing will enter Heaven - Rev 21:27)
M
MarieCB
Guest
She wasn’t technically his wife, and it certainly wasn’t so that THEY could have children. She was his brother’s wife. Weird situation for us to contemplate, I think. Judah was clearly doing a rotten job as a father. (I don’t think the dysfunctional family he grew up in helped!) Er was evil and God killed him. (Now, for those who say that Onan had to have done more than not do his duty - the punishment for being evil generally isn’t being struck dead by God!) However, Er left a wife - Tamar - and no children. Without children, Tamar had no rights to inherit anything from Judah.
Judah clearly told Onan to perform a levirate marriage so that Er would have an heir and so Tamar would be able to access Er’s part of the inheritance through the child. Genesis 38:8 makes it pretty clear that, although Onan had no problems with having sex with Tamar, he refused to give her a child. This is because, as the Bible states, he knew that the child wouldn’t be legally his. They would be his brother’s children, and would therefore take precedence over him when it came to inheritance. It wasn’t that he wanted to avoid having children of his own - I’m sure he would have been quite happy to have children. But he certainly doesn’t appear prepared to create competition for himself. It was a despicable thing to do.
L
Lucky7
Guest
I find it interesting that people keep referring to this story on this site when:
(a) the Catechism does not refer to it when discussing its teaching on masturbation (Paragraph 2352) and
(b) the notes in the New American (Catholic) Bible do not mention the connection of this story to the Church’s teaching on masturbation. In fact it states, "The ancient Israelites regarded as very important their law of levirate, or “brother-in-law marriage”. In the present story, it is primarily Onan’s violation of this law, rather than the means that he used to circumvent it, that brought on God’s displeasure."
M
MnklyMRPD
Guest
Good day!
For (a), catechism does not refer to it when discussing masturbation, because Onan’s deed was not just mastubation… it was actually sex (genital contact) which did not lead to full “unity” with the woman due to his withdrawal as soon as his seeds came off…
For (b), during that time, there is no need for population control yet, so Onan had no reason at all not to spill his seeds into his brother’s wife during his sexual act with her. But, as MarieCB said, his child with his brother’s wife was going to be acknowledged as his bother’s child (and not his) which will allow the child and his mother inheritance from the line of his brother. Onan agreed with his father to bed his brother’s wife on this agreement, but he only used the wife for sex and did not fulfill the agreement due to his selfishness and fear of competition with the inheritance. Onan outwardly accepted this “brother in-law marriage” thing, but inwardly denied the compete fullfillment of it. He only used the woman for sex, without thinking of the woman and the supposed to be conceived child’s lawful inheritance. Poor brother’s wife or poor woman. She must have felt used and abused by Onan… This, I think is what angered God most. His selfishness and being abusive…
You know, invoking Onan’s violation of the law, as what displeased God, but not not how Onan circumvented the possible conception, seemed to me that you are for this “withdrawal method” of family planning. Are you? Is withdrawal method accepted by our Catholic church as a natural family planning deed?
L
Lucky7
Guest
My point is that neither the Catechism nor the Bible commentary use this story to support Church teaching on masturbation (yet posters continually bring it up as support). If its teaching about the sinfulness of masterbation had to do with the spillage of seed, then I would think the Church would have made a point of referencing this story in the Catechism (by the way, this story is not referenced in the whole Catechism…if you go to the back there is no mention of Genesis 38:8).
As for what angered God, the Bible commentary I highlighted is what angered God…not all the other things you …and others… think angered Him.
I am not arguing with Church teaching on masterbation …I am arguing the use of the Onan story to support it…and it’s done ad nauseum on this site.
N
Non_sum_dignus
Guest
Folks, that site is a joke. It starts with masturbation and goes on to describe fisting as a spiritual gift from God.
F
Free03384986
Guest
There is nothing morally indecent about masturbation. It is a perfectly healthy and normal act. Masturbation should not be condemned because in condemning it, you a condemning apart of yourself because being sexual is apart of being human. It is a personal decision and no religious dogma should make that decision for an individual, not even his wife, however it should be discussed.
N
Non_sum_dignus
Guest
Sorry, but this is fallacious. I am attracted to women to whom I am not married. I can make the argument that it is “perfectly healthy and normal” to have sex with every one of them. In fact, I’ve read two studies which conclude that monogamy is utterly contrary to human nature, particularly in men. Morality is defined largely by the control of instincts and impulses.
The dignity of human sexuality does not allow for masturbation, promiscuity, and a number of other things, human impulses notwithstanding.
M
Methodi
Guest
When U read stuff like that written in the bible, it makes u wonder, this day & age to go into your brothers wife is a terrible thing to do,thats why certain things in the bible I dont get
M
Methodi
Guest
There is written in the bible also, it is better for a man to cast his seed into the belly of a whore, than to waste it on the ground. What would this mean?
G
GodLovesTheSpek
Guest
The church teaches that it is a sin, it is a sin against chastity. It is a sin, end of story. Those who argue otherwise, do not accept the church’s teachings and present a doubt which could very well be an obstinate doubt.
M
MnklyMRPD
Guest
This is really in the bible? May I know the book title and the chapter and verses for these? I find this hard to believe…
L
Lucky7
Guest
It’s not.
L
Lucky7
Guest
I will add, however, that if one continues to read the story of Tamar (the brother’s wife), one understands where the phrase comes from:
Tamar poses as a prostitute and seduces Onan’s father, Judah. By him, she conceives and bears twins…but God does not strike Judah or punish him in any way for having intercourse with a prostitute.
Isn’t this fascinating…
C
CWBetts
Guest
I am seriously wondering where anyone gets the idea they know more than the Church, the “pillar and foundation of all truth” (1 Tim 3:15 NAB). Even if masturbation were not explicitly spelled out in the Holy Scruptures, Sacred Tradition has pronounced it. To pick and choose which doctrines to accept is to no longer be Catholic.
M
MarieCB
Guest
LOL I tried to explain it to my sweetie using me, him, his younger brothers … You should have seen the look on his face. He said, “I don’t care if I’m dead, you still can’t have sex with my brother!” I said, “But in Tamar’s case, not having a child would have left her destitute.” He growled, “Well, fine. But JUST long enough to get you pregnant and he’d better not enjoy it!!!”
M
MarieCB
Guest
Nor was Tamar punished - Judah clearly states that she’s more righteous before God than he is - for having sex with her father-in-law. There’s so much more to this story than sex. Consider - when Judah first hears that she’s pregant, HE orders that she be killed. Well, by modern thinking, she was no longer married to his son, and she was now living with her own father, so why should Judah have any say?
Part of the problem with understanding these stories is that we are so completely removed from the culture of the time, and that culture is very different than ours.
M
Methodi
Guest
Yes it is, I just am not sure where, but it is
- Status