sexual ethics question

  • Thread starter Thread starter patricius79
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The church allows you to do darn near anything with your spouse, as long as it involves “being open to creation” (which generally means ejaculation into vagina), and the acts involve continence (ensuring your sexual desires are focused on your spouse).

Oral sex, marital aids, mutual masturbation…many of “those things” that Catholics are taught as “dirty” by some people ARE PERFECTLY FINE, and are even VIRTUOUS, as long as they are used with continence.

From Pope JPII’s Theology of the Body, which gives the greatest detail on sexuality the church has ever issued:

In “Continence protects the dignity of the conjugal acts “ (ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/jp2tb123.htm), Pope JPII says that what we do with our spouses must always be done in light of continence. A part of the “more general virtue of temperance…Continence consists in the capacity to dominate, control and direct drives of a sexual character (concupiscence of the flesh) and their consequences, in the psychosomatic subjectivity of man. Insofar as it is a constant disposition of the will, this capacity, merits being called a virtue.” ……”This virtue is seen to be the fundamental condition for the reciprocal language of the body to remain in the truth and for the couple to ‘defer to one another out of reverence for Christ,’.

“In this way also the essential character of conjugal chastity is manifested in its organic link with the power of love, which is poured out into the hearts of the married couple along with the consecration of the sacrament of marriage….Conjugal chastity…is manifested at first as the capacity to resist the concupiscence of the flesh. It later gradually reveals itself as a singular capacity to perceive, love and practice those meanings of the language of the body which remain altogether unknow to concupiscence itself…progressively enrich(ing) the marital dialogue of the couple, purifying it, deepening it, and at the same time simplifying it. Therefore….continence…does not impoverish affection manifestations, but rather makes them spiritually more intense and therefore enriches them.”

Viewed in this way, continence (ensuring your sexual desires are focused on your spouse) sanctifies a couple’s concupiscence.

In “Continence frees one from inner tension” (ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/jp2tb124.htm), Pope JPII explains that in the masculine/feminine relationships, within each of us there is “excitement” and “emotion”. Excitement is, of course, “above all corporeal and in this case sensual. On the other hand, even though aroused by the mutual reaction of masculinity and femininity, emotion refers above all to the person understood in the person’s integrality. We can say that this is an emotion caused by the person, in relation to the person’s masculinity or femininity.”

But here is the important party.
“Continence is not only – and not even principally – the ability to abstain, that is mastery over the multiple reactions that are interwoven in the mutual influence of masculinity and femininity. Such a role would be defined as negative….(but rather it is the positive) ability to direct the respective reactions, both as to their content and their character.”

“Excitement seeks above all to be expressed in the form of sensual and corporeal pleasure. That is, it tends toward the conjugal act which…includes the possibility of procreation. Emotion, on the other hand, caused by another human being as a person, even if in its emotive content it is conditioned by the femininity or masculinity of the “other”, does not per se tend toward he conjugal act.”

So continence is the controlling of your sexual character, specifically toward turning your sensuality toward your spouse, and is virtuitous. Add in another virtuitous act, that of charity (to your spouse), and keep in mind the dual requirements for the marital act to always be unitive and procreative, and I believe that much of what is commonly held as “taboo” (marital aids, oral stimulation, self manual-stimulation, post-coital stimulation) is perfectly fine….as long as it is done in light of continence.
 
No, it’s wrong.

I am not married and don’t want to be married, but I am a professor of theology. This is not my specialty, however, Christology is. However, this semester, I am teaching a Moral Theology class, so I do know the answer to this question.

Masturbation, of oneself or one’s spouse, is always an intrinsically evil act and as such, no good intention can make it not intrinsically evil. It is sinful to engage in such behavior. Even for married persons. St. Pope John Paul II in the Theology of the Body recommends sexual counseling if the woman is unable to reach a climax during coitus.

catechism.cc/articles/QA.htm#04

See question and answer number four.
Try reading the Theology of the Body and dissecting it. Neither Christ, any of his apostles, nor any Popes have ever said that touching your spouse is immoral, just some church bureaucrat who wrote the “answers”.

Pope JPII said it best - what you do isn’t as important as why you do it. Do everything with continence. Even INTERCOURSE WITH YOUR SPOUSE IS IMMORAL IF IT’S NOT DONE WITH CONTINENCE.
 
What about directly after the husband ejaculates into his wife?.. do you believe it is okay to manually stimulate the wife then, if she has not yet climaxed?

(anyone else’s comments welcome here as well).

My understanding is that Christopher West says this is fine. (And of course I realize that sex should always be respectful and prayerful, etc(

But where are these issues regarding manual stimulation on the woman–before or after ejaculation into the woman–officially addressed by the Church?
YES, again, as long as it is done in continence. It would be immoral for hubby to be stimulating his wife while thinking of the neighbor wife, and it would be immoral for wife to be stimulated while thinking about neighbor husband.

Christopher West writes his opinion. But Pope JPII gave the church’s official position in “The Theology of the Body”
 
Okay. Thanks guys. I still find it curious that such issues are–as far as I can tell—not dealt with very officially, like in an encyclical, or catechism, etc.
They are, in the “Theology of the Body”. But Pope JPII didn’t give us a list of “you can do this, you can’t do that, that toy is good, that toy is bad, you can’t put that there, you can only do this if she doesn’t do that” etc. Instead, Pope JPII said you can do pretty much anything you and your spouse want to, as long as it is done in continence and charity.

The Catholic Church’s position is WONDERFUL! It allows spouses to totally dedicate and SANCTIFY their concupiscence together. Catholic sex should be TERRIFIC for both spouses!!
 
Okay. Thanks guys. I still find it curious that such issues are–as far as I can tell—not dealt with very officially, like in an encyclical, or catechism, etc.
You’ve been given very good guidance here, with an exception or two. It would be kind of creepy if there was an explicit Catholic Sex Manual. Love God, love each other and be open to life. You can fill in the blanks in a way that accomplishes that for the two of you and God.
 
They are, in the “Theology of the Body”. But Pope JPII didn’t give us a list of “you can do this, you can’t do that, that toy is good, that toy is bad, you can’t put that there, you can only do this if she doesn’t do that” etc. Instead, Pope JPII said you can do pretty much anything you and your spouse want to, as long as it is done in continence and charity.

The Catholic Church’s position is WONDERFUL! It allows spouses to totally dedicate and SANCTIFY their concupiscence together. Catholic sex should be TERRIFIC for both spouses!!
Yes, and I realize that maybe this thread should have been in the moral theology area or maybe shouldn’t have been posted due to the young people on the board…?

Anyway, I think one of the keys which young people need to know is that a sexually free person does not strictly need sex, but rather is able to allow his/her sexual feelings to center themselves. As you say, everything should be done in continence/temperance and charity
 
You’ve been given very good guidance here, with an exception or two. It would be kind of creepy if there was an explicit Catholic Sex Manual. Love God, love each other and be open to life. You can fill in the blanks in a way that accomplishes that for the two of you and God.
Right.

Plus even if there were an official Catholic Sex Manual, there might be activities that were technically OK but that one spouse found degrading or humiliating or (pardon the expression) triggering.
 
Right.

Plus even if there were an official Catholic Sex Manual, there might be activities that were technically OK but that one spouse found degrading or humiliating or (pardon the expression) triggering.
Agreed and that is where the love would come in.
 
No, it’s wrong.

I am not married and don’t want to be married, but I am a professor of theology. This is not my specialty, however, Christology is. However, this semester, I am teaching a Moral Theology class, so I do know the answer to this question.

Masturbation, of oneself or one’s spouse, is always an intrinsically evil act and as such, no good intention can make it not intrinsically evil. It is sinful to engage in such behavior. Even for married persons. St. Pope John Paul II in the Theology of the Body recommends sexual counseling if the woman is unable to reach a climax during coitus.

catechism.cc/articles/QA.htm#04

See question and answer number four.
Where do you teach?
:eek:
 
I just don’t get why there is so many hang ups about sex. Let’s go hetero, Two people at the age of consent are going to have sex. Both want to try something different than vanilla sex. Let them! Variety is the spice of life. What goes on between two consenting adults behind closed doors is none of anyone’s business.
 
I just don’t get why there is so many hang ups about sex. Let’s go hetero, Two people at the age of consent are going to have sex. Both want to try something different than vanilla sex. Let them! Variety is the spice of life. What goes on between two consenting adults behind closed doors is none of anyone’s business.
Nobody here is trying to involve themselves in someone else’s sex life (especially when done behind closed doors).

Unfortunately there are many Catholics who, after being taught by people like Lilly Bernans, think anything beyond “missionary style” sex with their spouse is intrinsically sinful. Fortunately Pope John Paul II clearly spelled out what is sinful, and what is sacramental, and it has nothing to do with the actual actions but rather with the purpose of the actions.

The Catholic Church’s position on sexuality is just as beautiful as it is on life, death, and everything in between. Life is precious and should be protected, however it is not sinful to accidentally take a life, perform a procedure that takes a life if the purpose of the procedure is to save another life, or to take a life in defense of yourself or another.

Just like in marital sex, the Church doesn’t publish a list of “this procedure is ok” and “this procedure isn’t” regarding life-saving (and life-ending) medical procedures. Instead the Church gives guidance on moral or immoral PURPOSES behind the procedures.

Same thing in self-defense. While the Church does expressly clarify that military service is acceptable, the Church doesn’t give you a list of when you can or cannot defend yourself or others against someone else, what weapons you can use, when you must run away, etc. Instead the Church gives guidance on moral or immoral PURPOSES of self-defense actions.

Hope this makes sense…
 
The fact that you are teaching Moral Theology, and using a catechism that is not approved by the Magisterium is frightening. :eek:

There are enough confused Catholics around, they don’t need “theology professors” confusing them anymore. :mad:
No, it’s wrong.

I am not married and don’t want to be married, but I am a professor of theology. This is not my specialty, however, Christology is. However, this semester, I am teaching a Moral Theology class, so I do know the answer to this question.

Masturbation, of oneself or one’s spouse, is always an intrinsically evil act and as such, no good intention can make it not intrinsically evil. It is sinful to engage in such behavior. Even for married persons. St. Pope John Paul II in the Theology of the Body recommends sexual counseling if the woman is unable to reach a climax during coitus.

catechism.cc/articles/QA.htm#04

See question and answer number four.
 
Where do you teach?
:eek:
Yes, I would also really like to know the answer to this question.

If someone is going to tout their “credentials”, I would at least like to know that they are teaching in a program that has been approved by the local Catholic authority.
 
No, it’s wrong.

I am not married and don’t want to be married, but I am a professor of theology. This is not my specialty, however, Christology is. However, this semester, I am teaching a Moral Theology class, so I do know the answer to this question.

Masturbation, of oneself or one’s spouse, is always an intrinsically evil act and as such, no good intention can make it not intrinsically evil. It is sinful to engage in such behavior. Even for married persons. St. Pope John Paul II in the Theology of the Body recommends sexual counseling if the woman is unable to reach a climax during coitus.

catechism.cc/articles/QA.htm#04

See question and answer number four.
Please tell me you are not using this unapproved catechism in teaching your students. Ron Conte may have some legitimate Catholic teachings on his website, but the section on sexual ethics is not Catholic teaching. It is full of errors.

Did you have permission from the university to use this unapproved catechism??
 
In a marriage, my understanding is that it is not wrong to manually stimulate one’s spouse on their genitals, even to the point of orgasm, as long as one fully intends to consummate the act genitally. Is that correct?
The woman may be aroused and stimulated manually or orally up to and including orgasm. Because God wants men to make their wives happy. 😃

The man may be aroused and stimulated similarly, but only as a prelude to climaxing during intercourse. Because God wants us to love the possibility of a new baby as much as He does. 🙂
 
In a marriage, my understanding is that it is not wrong to manually stimulate one’s spouse on their genitals, even to the point of orgasm, as long as one fully intends to consummate the act genitally. Is that correct?
The husband may manually stimulate his wife’s genitals to the point of climax, before, during, or after coitus. It is an act of charity and justice to take that time to prepare her for penetration and ensure her release of the sexual tension created within her body by her husband.

She may manually stimulate her husband to please or prepare him, but not to the point of climax. Because the husband’s climax is the event that accomplishes the procreative end of the marital act (two ends that must not be separated: procreative and unitive) his climax must occur within his wife’s vagina.

Hope that helps!
 
The woman may be aroused and stimulated manually or orally up to and including orgasm. Because God wants men to make their wives happy. 😃

The man may be aroused and stimulated similarly, but only as a prelude to climaxing during intercourse. Because God wants us to love the possibility of a new baby as much as He does. 🙂
Going to be blunt but this sounds so contrived. Where does it say God loves babies? just so much red tape for what is a pleasurable act.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top