The marital act

[SMGS127]

I agree up to the bolded piece. I don’t see wrong in the seeking of personal pleasure, including its optimisation, where this is in the context of a willingly given, mutual, loving engagement of the two (married) persons. It goes off the rails when one party dominates or subjugates or subordinates the other for personal outcome.

I think he/she means for the sake of the man’s pleasure MORE IMPORTANTLY than the divine nature of the act itself. I doubt he/she was saying that pleasure should not be a goal at all.

 

[Jaaanosik]

What contradiction? the first one goes on to say that it is held by tradition, and that the basis of the tradition comes from Divine revelation and the natural law. The second one says that while it is not mentioned by name in scripture, tradition is still right to hold this as true as it is held in scripture (Divine Revelation) more generally under the terms “impurity” and “unchasteness”. In other words, both statements confirm that the basis for this teaching is in Divine Revelation, and because of that it is held by the tradition of the Church as true. Absolutely no contradiction whatsoever.

Thanks, it makes sense.

 

[Jaaanosik]

clem456;11470079:

Mutual stimulation between two married partners using the hands is not necessarily masturbation. Masturbation is selfish pleasure for it’s own sake, not for the sake of a Godly intimacy between marriage partners.

But could this selfish pleasure take place in the context of marriage? Of course it -could-. It depends on intent and disposition, not whether or not one uses one’s hand on his/her partner. It’s not the body parts involved, it’s the people and their intent.** If a man wants his wife to manually stimulate him for his own pleasure’s sake, he is using his wife and the pleasure as an object.**

The concept of objectification is key in sexuality. JP2 explains objectification at length in Theology of the Body.
I agree up to the bolded piece. I don’t see wrong in the seeking of personal pleasure, including its optimisation, where this is in the context of a willingly given, mutual, loving engagement of the two (married) persons. It goes off the rails when one party dominates or subjugates or subordinates the other for personal outcome.

Intent is important as well.
There is no denying that mutual masturbation can be mutual love-giving without objectification.

 

[Jaaanosik]

If we go back to the marital act - sexual intercourse.
Is there a document explaining the logic of the natural law that comes to the conclusion that the unitive and procreative aspects are inseparable?

 

[clem456]

Intent is important as well.
There is no denying that mutual masturbation can be mutual love-giving without objectification.

That’s not masturbation then.

Offenses against chastity
…
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."139

Objectification is not mutual self giving, it is **using someone **else for your own gain, even if that person is your wife.

 

[Jaaanosik]

That’s not masturbation then.

Objectification is not mutual self giving, it is **using someone **else for your own gain, even if that person is your wife.

I don’t understand. What is your point?

It seems objectification can not be judged by anybody, only by God. Only God sees into person’s heart and only God can judge if person’s intentions are for “own gain”.

 

[underacloud]

If we go back to the marital act - sexual intercourse.
Is there a document explaining the logic of the natural law that comes to the conclusion that the unitive and procreative aspects are inseparable?

Humanae Vitae is the document that discusses this most clearly. Perhaps you feel that it only states the teaching rather than explains the reasoning behind it? If that’s the case I’m not sure I can direct you to anything else directly treating the topic, and instead you’d have to undertake a lenghty exploration of natural law theory more broadly. St Thomas Aquinas is the leading Catholic writer on this topic (particularly in the Summa Theologica), but it is by no means an exclusively Catholic idea.

HV: vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

To be fair, HV is a teaching that many faithful Catholics struggle with. Leading up to HV, many within the Church lobbied for and expected contraception to be allowed. It wasn’t/isn’t, and so many faithful Catholics who find this a hard issue to understand are left with the challenge of accepting the clear teaching of the Magisterium on this issue. But that is part of our faith - accepting difficult teachings that we hold as coming from God through the Church.

 

[clem456]

If we go back to the marital act - sexual intercourse.
Is there a document explaining the logic of the natural law that comes to the conclusion that the unitive and procreative aspects are inseparable?

I wish I had the time or expertise to throw some links out to theological dissertations.

Let’s just observe the Trinity, one of the foundational concepts of Christianity, which models how all of life works:

The Trinity is three distinct persons unified in one God. God is perfect unity, or perfect love between persons. Because God is perfect love, he creates by nature. God cannot do anything but create because love is never sterile, it is always creative. All of the universe exists because Father is unified in love with the Son and Spirit, and because of this self giving, creation flows out of him. Love always gives itself fully to the other (look at the cross). Marriage mirrors this interior life of God, or models it back to God as he wills it.

This spousal language is just everywhere in Church teaching if you are open to it. The Church is the bride of Christ. Read Paul’s letters. Unitive and creative are the same love, if they are separate, it is not love, it serves the self.

This reality is also self evident everywhere in nature.
For example:

24 Verily, verily I say unto you, unless a grain of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

The grain gives of itself, or rather reflects the self-giving love God has imbued into all of nature. The nature God created is always giving itself up for the good of God’s plan, and through giving creates new life and love. A tree does not live only for the beauty of it’s own leaves and flowers, it lives to give itself up and create new life. If it only lived for the production of beautiful flowers, it would be sterile. But it creates because the whole process is unified in God’s perfectly loving plan.

As for documents, HV as others have said.
Theology of the Body
Scripture

 

[clem456]

Here’s an example from Ephesians. (please let’s not go off on the cultural language and gender issues of the ancient world, please).

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives,** just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church**— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and** be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church**. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

The whole concept of marriage is based on God’s self giving love, which is always unifying and creative (fruitful). They are inseparable parts of the same love.
From Sunday’s (12/8) 1st reading:
Notice the language of fruitfulness, of creativity…alongside the language of the unity of opposites. It is an incredibly powerful expression of the unitive and creative power of God’s love.

On that day, **a shoot shall sprout **

from the stump of Jesse,
and from his roots a bud shall blossom.
The spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him:
a spirit of wisdom and of understanding,
a spirit of counsel and of strength,
a spirit of knowledge and of fear of the LORD,
and his delight shall be the fear of the LORD.
Not by appearance shall he judge,
nor by hearsay shall he decide,
but he shall judge the poor with justice,
and decide aright for the land’s afflicted.
He shall strike the ruthless with the rod of his mouth,
and with the breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked.
Justice shall be the band around his waist,
and faithfulness a belt upon his hips.
**Then the wolf shall be a guest of the lamb,
and the leopard shall lie down with the kid;
the calf and the young lion shall browse together,
with a little child to guide them.
The cow and the bear shall be neighbors,
together their young shall rest;
the lion shall eat hay like the ox.
The baby shall play by the cobra’s den,
and the child lay his hand on the adder’s lair.**There shall be no harm or ruin on all my holy mountain;
for the earth shall be filled with knowledge of the LORD,
as water covers the sea.
On that day, the root of Jesse,
set up as a signal for the nations,
the Gentiles shall seek out,
for his dwelling shall be glorious.

Another beautiful statement of God’s unifying and creative love from John 17:

24“Father, I want those you have given me to be **with me **

where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.
God the Father loves the Son, they are unified as one (unum, unity), and breath the Spirit of this love in the act of creation.

 

[Jaaanosik]

Humanae Vitae is the document that discusses this most clearly. Perhaps you feel that it only states the teaching rather than explains the reasoning behind it? ** If that’s the case I’m not sure I can direct you to anything else directly treating the topic, and instead you’d have to undertake a lenghty exploration of natural law theory more broadly. ** St Thomas Aquinas is the leading Catholic writer on this topic (particularly in the Summa Theologica), but it is by no means an exclusively Catholic idea.

HV: vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

To be fair, HV is a teaching that many faithful Catholics struggle with. Leading up to HV, many within the Church lobbied for and expected contraception to be allowed. It wasn’t/isn’t, and so many faithful Catholics who find this a hard issue to understand are left with the challenge of accepting the clear teaching of the Magisterium on this issue. But that is part of our faith - accepting difficult teachings that we hold as coming from God through the Church.

It seems there is not a document explaining the natural law logic of HV and it’s disappointing.
I’ve studied the natural law but I could have made a mistake in my understanding.
Something official would be nice.

 

[clem456]

It seems there is not a document explaining the natural law logic of HV and it’s disappointing.
I’ve studied the natural law but I could have made a mistake in my understanding.
Something official would be nice.

Why don’t you give us the understanding you have of the natural law, so that someone might speak to that context?
It seems to me that some of the material in the last few posts speak about natural law revealed through our reason. The tree bearing fruit etc…
What exactly are you looking for?

 

[underacloud]

It seems there is not a document explaining the natural law logic of HV and it’s disappointing.
I’ve studied the natural law but I could have made a mistake in my understanding.
Something official would be nice.

As indicated, the Summa Theologica is arguably the most important work on natural law and you could start by searching that for relevant discussions regarding sex/lust/etc. In the Summa, you’ll find Aquinas express the same clear teaching that is echoed in HV:

On this way, as hindering the begetting of children, there is the “vice against nature,” which attaches to every venereal act from which generation cannot follow

As for something “official”, HV is as official as it gets. You can absolutely trust the teaching contained in it. Understanding it may be difficult, as I already said, but just keep trying to understand natural law in general, how it applies to sex specifically (again, read the Summa), and pray for the meaning of the teaching to become clearer to you.