The marital act

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jaaanosik
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
travissbeloved said:
Not at all, like I said in my previous post we as intellectual human beings have to use our brains and prudence in knowing if what we are doing is too much or not. If you are just laying in bed with your husband and cuddling and have no intention of having intercourse then that is not sinful. If we had to finish the marital act with everyone we kissed or touched that would be crazy right? You kiss relatives and touch strangers. You have to use your God given common sense. Giving your husband a peck and holding his hand is not technically leading to the marital act although it could eventually.** That is why there really isn’t an exact “beginning” to the marital act.** Maybe a husband and wife are just cuddling one night but they get overcome by romantic and sexual feelings and end up having sex…but maybe they don’t, maybe they just fall asleep. You have to use your intelligence. The only truly sinful thing would be for the man to ejaculate outside the woman’s vagina or to force himself on her or she on him or to do anything the other doesn’t agree with. All other things would just be imprudent.
Click to expand...
That’s not logically possible.
If the marital act has the end then it HAS to have a beginning!
 
Jaaanosik said:
That’s not logically possible.
If the marital act has the end then it HAS to have a beginning!
Click to expand...
Well if you are unable to use your human intellect to decide if something is the start of a marital act or if it is just showing affection then I would just stick with the safest answer which would be that vaginal intercourse alone is the marital act.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
To my way of thinking, “common sense” decides. You seem to want to imply that a couple cannot kiss, hold each other, hug, etc., unless done so as part of a complete act of marital intercourse. Cuddling in bed after a long, exhausting day with no intent to take things further is hardly wrong - it’s a normal part of married life.
Click to expand...
I am just trying to understand how these things work.
I agree with you that common sense decides.
It seems though that it’s a double standard. I don’t see anything wrong with it but it should be recognized that is the case.
The unitive acts can happen within and outside of the marital act.

Back to the question. What defines the marital act? Is it male orgasm and ejaculation?
If it happens then we have the marital act. If it does not happen then we don’t have the marital act.

Is that correct?
 
Jaaanosik said:
I am just trying to understand how these things work.
I agree with you that common sense decides.
It seems though that it’s a double standard. I don’t see anything wrong with it but it should be recognized that is the case.
The unitive acts can happen within and outside of the marital act.

Back to the question. What defines the marital act? Is it male orgasm and ejaculation?
If it happens then we have the marital act. If it does not happen then we don’t have the marital act.

Is that correct?
Click to expand...
Yes I would say that is correct if the man is ejaculating into the vagina. If he orgasms and ejaculates outside of the vagina it would not be the marital act.

Also unitive acts are anything and everything that brings a husband and wife closer to together without breaking the rules of the Church. It is also important to point out that the man should make a concentrated effort to ensure his bride orgasms as well.
 
travissbeloved said:
Well if you are unable to use your human intellect to decide if something is the start of a marital act or if it is just showing affection then I would just stick with the safest answer which would be that vaginal intercourse alone is the marital act.
Click to expand...
Good, it makes sense. The vaginal intercourse is the marital act.

The logical consequence is that the unitive, love-giving acts are OK and allowed regardless if they finish in the vaginal intercourse.
In other words if there is no vaginal intercourse there is no marital act happening.

…

Well, stimulating your spouse up to the orgasm is a love-giving act. There is no vaginal intercourse so there is no marital act happening as well. So all is OK.

Is that correct?
 
Jaaanosik said:
Good, it makes sense. The vaginal intercourse is the marital act.

The logical consequence is that the unitive, love-giving acts are OK and allowed regardless if they finish in the vaginal intercourse.
In other words if there is no vaginal intercourse there is no marital act happening.

…

Well, stimulating your spouse up to the orgasm is a love-giving act. There is no vaginal intercourse so there is no marital act happening as well. So all is OK.

Is that correct?
Click to expand...
No, either you are a troll or you are just not understanding. All unitive love giving acts are okay as long as the man either A. does not orgasm or ejaculate AT ALL or B. Ejaculates into the vagina

Stimulating your spouse to orgasm without vaginal intercourse is NOT the marital act and is NOT ok.
 
Jaaanosik said:
That’s not logically possible.
If the marital act has the end then it HAS to have a beginning!
Click to expand...
The logical beginning of the marital act is when both spouses agree to continue into the marital act. It is the moment of their choice that begins it.
 
Purposeful stimulation of genitals to climax is allowed in the context of the marital act. Affectionate caresses of the body of the spouse, including a caress of the genitals, without any intention to continue into the marital act at that time, is also good and holy, provided the couple has privacy. Kisses are also good.

What is not allowed is the stimulation of genitals for the purposes of seeking sexual pleasure and climax outside of the context of the marital act. Hope that helps!
 
mommamaree said:
Purposeful stimulation of genitals to climax is allowed in the context of the marital act.
Click to expand...
I hope it’s allowed because as men get older, sometimes they too need quite a bit of stimulation to get things going, and keep them going.
 
travissbeloved said:
No, either you are a troll or you are just not understanding. All unitive love giving acts are okay as long as the man either A. does not orgasm or ejaculate AT ALL or B. Ejaculates into the vagina

Stimulating your spouse to orgasm without vaginal intercourse is NOT the marital act and is NOT ok.
Click to expand...
Let me assure you that I am not a troll.
The argument presented in my post #25 is actually used to justify the NFP.
 
Jaaanosik said:
Let me assure you that I am not a troll.
The argument presented in my post #25 is actually used to justify the NFP.
Click to expand...
?? I’m a little confused… I looked back at your post and I don’t see how that has anything to do with NFP at all…
 
Well then I think everyone on this thread has laid it out for you quite plainly.
 
Thank you!
It’s a serious issue though.

HV quote:
Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means.
Click to expand...
If there is no intercourse then there is no before intercourse and no after intercourse.

That’s the same idea that defends hugging, kissing, touching, … without going to the marital act.
If there is no marital act then you are not separating the unitive aspect from procreative aspect.

Again, I am not trolling.
I am applying pure logic here. Why is it OK to use this defense for all other love-giving acts and not OK for the love-giving orgasm?
 
Jaaanosik said:
Thank you!
It’s a serious issue though.

HV quote:

If there is no intercourse then there is no before intercourse and no after intercourse.

That’s the same idea that defends hugging, kissing, touching, … without going to the marital act.
If there is no marital act then you are not separating the unitive aspect from procreative aspect.

Again, I am not trolling.
I am applying pure logic here. Why is it OK to use this defense for all other love-giving acts and not OK for the love-giving orgasm?
Click to expand...
Because “love-giving orgasm” is masturbation, which has its own special place in Church teaching to forbid it.
 
thewanderer said:
Because “love-giving orgasm” is masturbation, which has its own special place in Church teaching to forbid it.
Click to expand...
It’s not a masturbation.
It can be called mutual masturbation. There is a difference.
 
Jaaanosik said:
Is there a church document that says that love-giving mutual masturbation is immoral?
Click to expand...
The Catechism makes it clear:
2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action."138 “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of “the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved.”
Click to expand...
Basically, stimulating the genitals to derive pleasure should be restricted to its proper context, which is preparing for and/or within the marital act.

Kissing, cuddling, touching, etc as referenced earlier does not contradict this. But mutually masturbating each other would.
 
underacloud said:
The Catechism makes it clear:

Basically, stimulating the genitals to derive pleasure should be restricted to its proper context, which is preparing for and/or within the marital act.

Kissing, cuddling, touching, etc as referenced earlier does not contradict this. But mutually masturbating each other would.
Click to expand...
Yes, it’s clear. The masturbation is not good if it’s outside of marriage.

When in marriage then the CC quote would lead us back to Gaudium et Spes and HV.
How do you violate “human procreation” if there is no marital act?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top