? on masturbation

[GangGreen]

The female orgasm actually does play a role in procreation believe it or not and it definitely plays a role in the unitive aspect of sex. However, I would think it would still be the duty of the man to bring his wife to that point if she can’t do it through intercourse.

 

[agapewolf]

"Both the great sinners and the great saints know they’re created for ecstasy. It’s the Jansenists and other “starvation-diet subscribers” who have confused us on this point. The great sinners and the great saints, in fact, are made of the very same “stuff” - a mad, burning aching, wild desire for ecstasy. What’s the difference? The great sinners head for the fast food while the great saints have discovered the living hope of the banquet.

And this, it seems, helps explain why great sinners are often the ones who become great saints. They may have been eating from the wrong menu, but at least they’re in touch with their hunger, so when the banquet shows up, they’re often the first to recognize that that’s what they’ve been looking for all along. Those who subscribe to the “starvation diet,” on the other hand, aren’t even in touch with their hunger enough to know what it means to be invited to the feast. This is why the addict, in a real way, is closer to the mystic than is the stoic. …"

“Fill These Hearts”, Christopher West, pg 42.

Right, so according to Mr. West, sex fiends are closer to God than those who are living chastely but don’t express it in the way that suits Mr. West’s tastes.

He didn’t say “closer to God”. he said “closer to the mystic”.

Your “summary” again, is not what he is saying. and its not about what “suits his tastes”.

Have you read JPII’s Theology of the Body?

 

[Estevao]

He didn’t say “closer to God”. he said “closer to the mystic”.

Your “summary” again, is not what he is saying. and its not about what “suits his tastes”.

Have you read JPII’s Theology of the Body?

Yes I have, and so have Dr. Alice von Hildebrand and Fr José Granados (who has co-authored a much better book on JPII’s TOB than Mr. West ever has). They have explained the problems with Mr. West’s theology in public before:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/christopher_wests_ideas_on_sexuality_ignore_tremendous_dangers_alice_von_hildebrand_says/

Dr von Hildebrand is right. Where does Mr. West talk about mortifications? That’s not very fashionable I imagine though, and it won’t sell out auditoriums for his speeches.

In another book (“heart of the Gospel”) West called self-flagellation and hair shirts “extreme” and didn’t actually ever recommend them, despite the person on whom he makes a living, St. JP II, practicing these mortifications.

I don’t want to bash the man, but I would encourage people to stay clear of him and stick to more reliable theologians.

 

[agapewolf]

Yes I have, and so have Dr. Alice von Hildebrand and Fr José Granados (who has co-authored a much better book on JPII’s TOB than Mr. West ever has). They have explained the problems with Mr. West’s theology in public before:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/christopher_wests_ideas_on_sexuality_ignore_tremendous_dangers_alice_von_hildebrand_says/

Dr von Hildebrand is right. Where does Mr. West talk about mortifications? That’s not very fashionable I imagine though, and it won’t sell out auditoriums for his speeches.

In another book (“heart of the Gospel”) West called self-flagellation and hair shirts “extreme” and didn’t actually ever recommend them, despite the person on whom he makes a living, St. JP II, practicing these mortifications.

I don’t want to bash the man, but I would encourage people to stay clear of him and stick to more reliable theologians.

You are bashing, and again, misquoting and putting your own vocabulary to change the meaning of what he is saying, as well as insinuating he is in it to make money. This is SERIOUS detraction and defamation and you need to stop.

What YOU are neglecting to add is that Waldstein, Janet Smith, Kreeft, multiple bishops who advise him all support his work.

Christopher West speaks to the unchurched and cultural catholics. Hildebrand speaks to evangelized scholars. The message MUST sound different to the 2 vastly different audiences.

The those who this message is brand new, a speaker shouldn’t be expected to “recommend” self-flaggelation-- that would be a vile and gross misuse of time and quite irresponsible.

 

[agapewolf]

By the way, the article you quoted about the Nightline interview has been discussed ad nauseum by many people in support of West.

They took 7 hours and made it into 10 minutes. Hildebrand was commenting on the 10 minutes.

 

[SusanneT]

I think that it would be good to post this particular link in this thread… catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=999

(I’m NOT saying that Christopher West spoke in favour of this, because I don’t know. I’m not actually posting this article to say anything about West, but just to clarify some things).

I think we should be careful about how we talk about the marital act… I agree with Alice von Hildebrand that it should be with a certain reserve. (including in this thread).

To answer the question though, - marital union doesn’t exist for self gratification or seeking one’s pleasure, it exists for self giving.

I recently read somewhere, maybe the updated Good News about Sex and Marriage, or a blog about that book, that if during the course of the marital act the husband climaxes before the wife, and is “done”, there fore leaving her hanging so to speak, that it is not sinful for her to bring herself to climax…with in the realms of that specific act. I can see how over time the wife would become very sexually frustrated if the majority of the time her husband is leaving her this way, which would lead to resentment, but on the other hand it seems like masturbation? Thanks.

Surely it would be masturbation and if sexual frustration were acceptable grounds for committing a sinful act I’m sure most husbands would be hugely relieved - pun intended - but it is not.

I strongly suspect that this stretching the boundary of morally acceptable has a lot more to do with appeasing a feminist sense of inequality than following Gods order for all our behaviour

 

[kidsx10]

Ok. Found e blog. Was not In the book. Here is the post:
realcatholicloveandsex.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-honeymoon-series-part-12-catholic.html

 

[mommamaree]

Ok. Found e blog. Was not In the book. Here is the post:
realcatholicloveandsex.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-honeymoon-series-part-12-catholic.html

I read through the blog post and the comments. The last comment referencing St. Alphonsus Liguori was interesting. I intend to find out from whence that reference came, and find out if it is indeed true.

It is unfortunate that some husbands refuse to help their wives achieve fulfillment in the sexual act, but it does happen. This is plainly wrong and is a sin on the part of the husband.

 

[mommamaree]

books.google.com/books?id=VV_GNSx-vy4C&pg=PA14&lpg=PA14&dq=innocent+ecstasy+st.+alphonsus+liguori&source=bl&ots=h4PWxDqlsh&sig=IaHq_yv2gLvn9pT908awgy2eSjM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hoqQU5PbOoyuyASm4IHQCw&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=innocent%20ecstasy%20st.%20alphonsus%20liguori&f=false

Found a link to the book discussing St. Alphonsus Liguori’s assertion on the mutuality of orgasm and the obligation of the husband to seek satisfaction for his wife. Apparently the saint asserted that it was a sin on the husband’s part to deny his wife orgasm, and that it is not a sin on her part to achieve it if he denies her and merely attends to his own pleasure at her expense. You can read the book, and search it for the relevant portions by following the link I provided above.

Hope that helps!

 

[anixx]

I’m not sure if the woman could bring herself to climax after the fact, you should probably ask a priest.

Is there a new practice in the family, that if the husband is unable, then you should ask the priest!? Learning new stuff on this forum.