"No penetration, no mortal sin", says Sam (age 70)

[spiritblows]

Well Abby, I suspect most 13 year olds have heard the word, er, shall I dare say it? It starts with a ‘V’, you know, and ends with an ‘a’.

Come to think of it, we’re talking about, er, alternative sexual practices here, done orally… It is a little risque, actually… But, I noticed quite a few sexual threads so I guessed that it was okay.

 

[Myangel]

puzzleannie:

In my considerable experience with old geezers (having lived in two retirement parks for last 5 years) the old gents delight in saying such shockers, just to get a reaction. Just give a vague answer and write it off to hardening of the arteries to the brain.

I am not so sure about that. I have an aunt (70 years) who is devout, daily mass, confesses regularly etc etc. One day talking about a cousin who was pregnant for the third time (on the verge of lossing her father to cancer and who lost her mother 2 years ago from the same disease) and is having difficulty in raising her 2 children, my aunt said to me “With all the contraceptions today, I cant understand why she didnt take precautions” . I was horrified, I approached my mother and she said when they were young they were taught basic things like sex before marriage was a mortal sin, abortion was a mortal sin! Maybe he was looking for a reaction but it could also be that some were poorly educated in their faith! SAD

 

[LittleDeb]

This elderly gentleman’s comment could also be a product of the 1950’s sexual communication problem. I posted this recently in another thread but it is important here too.

During the 1950’s homilies were given to try to get people to stop confessing having sex. Until recently all canonized saints were priests, nuns, and other religious. For a few decades it was a rumor that sex was sinful since no one who had sex was a saint. Trying to counter that thought some homilies were given to tell people sex wasn’t sinful. Some people being what they are misunderstood that it was marital sex that was not sinful and thought it meant sex (without penetration) was not sinful.

My mom, now in her mid sixties, says she remembers some strange homilies during her teen years. She had to ask her parents what it really meant. Luckily her parents got it right! She did not find it strange that these misunderstandings were right before the sexual revolution of the 60’s.

 

[fix]

spiritblows:

Well, how about that? That’s a new one on me. I thought it was forbidden. I never liked it anyways, but I thought it was forbidden.

I guess we should define what the terms mean. When some say oral sex is licit within the the marital contract they mean only oral-genital stimulation, not climax.

 

[spiritblows]

fix:

I guess we should define what the terms mean. When some say oral sex is licit within the the marital contract they mean only oral-genital stimulation, not climax.

Truthfully, I really had more in mind oral sex performed on a man to completion, actually. Never thought about women needing fulfillment outside of regular intercourse, I never experienced that personally. I understand now that it can be used essentially as foreplay or to assure the satisfaction of the wife.

 

[fix]

spiritblows:

Truthfully, I really had more in mind oral sex performed on a man to completion, actually. Never thought about women needing fulfillment outside of regular intercourse, I never experienced that personally. I understand now that it can be used essentially as foreplay or to assure the satisfaction of the wife.

I was speaking about the male being stimulated by the woman. Your above post brings up an entirely different discussion in regard to moral theology.

 

[manualman]

fix:

It seems a terrible smear on the many holy men and women who came before us. Contrast your assertion with what we have today. With all the catechesis, internet, quick and easy access to information and the majority of folks who call themselves Catholics think contraception is licit, as one example.

My grandmother, with little formal education, knew more of her faith and how to live a moral life then many who claim education and enlightenment today.

Not at all. Just like bemoaning the widespread lack of proper catechesis today does not smear the good number of incredible catholics living holy lives today.

My point was that there are far too many around here that would seem to believe that back before V2 everybody knew their faith, practised it, was holy and went to heaven. Nuh uh! There were plenty of weird disconnects then too. Just different ones than today. This thread is just exhibit A. And it does nothing to denigrate anybody’s holy grandma.

 

[fix]

manualman:

Not at all. Just like bemoaning the widespread lack of proper catechesis today does not smear the good number of incredible catholics living holy lives today.

My point was that there are far too many around here that would seem to believe that back before V2 everybody knew their faith, practised it, was holy and went to heaven. Nuh uh! There were plenty of weird disconnects then too. Just different ones than today. This thread is just exhibit A. And it does nothing to denigrate anybody’s holy grandma.

I do not want to veer too far off topic, but your post said this:

Contrary to what some would have you think, ALL was not well before Vatican II!

The Baltimore Catechism didn’t mention it. So he doesn’t know it. Perhaps he’s one of the pray, pay and obey guys that prompted the calling of Vatican II in the first place!

Where may I read that VII was called for the reason you state?

 

[EsclavoDeCristo]

puzzleannie:

In my considerable experience with old geezers (having lived in two retirement parks for last 5 years) the old gents delight in saying such shockers, just to get a reaction. Just give a vague answer and write it off to hardening of the arteries to the brain.

Too funny…I hope I’m not like that in 50 or so years… although I do enjoy visiting old folks…they are so wonderful…even the “old gents”

 

[iamrefreshed]

spiritblows:

I was talking with “Sam” (ficticious name), who is a really nice older (70s) gentleman from my parish. I ran into his wife at Safeway, and she said Sam was waiting in the car. He’s been getting chemo for lymphoma lately and hasn’t been to church for awhile. He’s normally a greeter, he’s just the nicest guy with a friendly twinkle in his eyes and normally the nicest head of hair you’d ever want to see on an older guy you’d ever want to see.(everyone says he’s not going to church because he lost his hair)

Well, we were talking about this and that for a long time, and I mentioned that I think I needed to find a husband. He said “Why’d you want to go and do that, you’ll just end up having to put up with him and take care of him when he gets sick. You’re doing pretty well on your own!” (Good point, btw, Sam). I laughingly said that it was the only way I could get to have sex again, because it was a mortal sin to have sex out of marriage.

He told me that that was only true for penetration! I said, no, I’m sure that’s not true, Sam. He said yes it is, that without penetration it was no different than kissing! (sounds like Bill Clinton) I laughingly refuted him then we went on to other subjects.

Now this guy goes to confession at least a couple of times a year and still receives communion on his knees. I was surprised at his lack of knowledge of sexual morality, unless I’m wrong about something. I told him that oral sex was a mortal sin, and he catagorically denied that. I always thought that was the case though.

So you said to a seventy year old man (from your parish) that it was time to get married so you could have sex again?

Why do I have trouble with this thread?

 

[JimO]

iamrefreshed:

So you said to a seventy year old man (from your parish) that it was time to get married so you could have sex again?

Why do I have trouble with this thread?

My thought exactly.

 

[the-3rd-parent]

The question is, what is the martial act? Once you answer that, you know what to avoid and on top of that you want to avoid near occassions of sin.

What does that mean? You can kiss so long as the kiss does not arouse you and done out of affection and not passion. Now when I was younger, I pushed it a bit when my boyfriend complained and decided to kiss while letting my mind think of other things to prevent myself from becoming aroused, but that’s wrong too.

There’s no real set of rules of because affection and passion meet a kind of crossing area, an intermixture of the same behavior. What you need to be aware of it whether or not you are becoming aroused. Now becoming aroused isn’t a sin, but seeking it I would say is. If you become aroused, that means its time to back off with the affection as its becoming more than affection.

As my priest told me in the confessional a number of times when I was struggling with my sexual behavior and asking him how to make it stop (as even though I still consider myself a virgin, though not as pure as our blessed mother, I knew in my heart that what I was doing was still wrong), his answer was always “Don’t get started.”