Traditional Catholics and Sex

[BoomBoomMancini]

From what I understand, he can “help you out” with his hands

just to be clear, oral sex would also be perfectly fine.

 

[Gabika50]

If it respects mutually one another’s dignity, this is fine- no sin here…

 

[Richca]

Well, in general, sexual pleasure obtained while the spouses are separated, lacks the unitive meaning of sex and also the procreative meaning.

I agree. It appears to me that to intentionally cause your spouse to orgasm or climax outside of intercourse is nothing other than masturbation which is a sin.

 

[Start]

There’s more criteria then that.

 

[AdamP88]

The trouble I am having is that it is considered a mortal sin if my husband touches me intimately to help me achieve climax.

No. It’s not. Many women require a little “help” to achieve climax.

My parish priest’s say that sex is only for procreation and not for pleasure.

Not exactly what the catechism says on the matter.

 

[AdamP88]

I agree. It appears to me that to intentionally cause your spouse to orgasm or climax outside of intercourse is nothing other than masturbation which is a sin.

True. You have to be careful when advising on this subject I think. There’s always the chance that someone will takeaway “mutual masturbation is ok”.

I think the idea is that certain touching to bring the woman to climax is ok during the normal sexual act but not apart from/after it. The real problem is, shall we say the “logistics” of that.

 

[Gabika50]

Often times I get the feeling that the Church wants to control your sex life so it can control you. This appears to divide people into 4 camps: 1) Active and scrupulous for every act 2) Active and not caring what others think 3) asexual or celibate 4) active in an inappropriate way. The least of which (aside from misconduct with minors) is a question of healthy boundries.

 

[1ke]

Often times I get the feeling that the Church wants to control your sex life so it can control you.

Weird. Because what the Church actually does is teach us God’s truth to help us get to Heaven.

 

[Gabika50]

And, they are not mutually exclusive!

 

[1ke]

And, they are not mutually exclusive!

Actually, they are.

The Church does not control anyone’s sex life, or does it seek to control anyone.

 

[Gabika50]

At this point, you are correct; that measure of control presumed or otherwise has been lost by many of its members.

 

[Gabika50]

Nor the mnisconduct of many of our members.

 

[1ke]

That was a typo, should have been SEEK.

You have the idea the Church wants to control people, but that isn’t true.

The Church gives us the truth and what we do with it is our choice.

 

[TechieGuy]

Often times I get the feeling that the Church wants to control your sex life so it can control you.

It would be more charitable to think that a group of men who have no experience being part of a healthy marriage have made a set of rules based on flawed premises.

And because the official line is that these flawed premises are actually the Will of God Almighty, there is no way within the system to modify the initial premises.

(on edit)

That’s assuming you are going with the premise that it is them that are wrong and not you that are wrong, of course.

The canonical explanation would be that you just don’t understand sexuality as well as The Church does.

 

[TechieGuy]

Sorry, I was using the general ‘you’ not meaning to attack you specificially.

That canon would be the entire development of Catholic thought that stems from the original assumption that all sexual intimacy must be both unitive and procreative in form.

You might not agree with that - heck, I sure don’t - but that’s where, I think, the issue you raised comes from - not a desire to control the laity through sexual taboos, but from logical arguments that stem from false assumptions along with unfamiliarity about how sex works in a relationship between husband and wife.

 

[Gabika50]

Understood, thanks!