To my reading of this document it is saying it is not wrong to engage in foreplay but a couple should only so if the intention thereafter is complete the marital act by intercourse and orgasm inside the wife.
To others - I apologize in advance for the graphic nature of the essay nobeerinheaven linked, which I am now quoting from.bugz2007, nothing in that document contradicted what I had been saying, which is why I didn’t just bulk copy/paste it into here - opting, instead, to select the portions relevant to the discussion. No problem with relevance!
Compare this with your most recent statement:
Completely the opposite. As the document states, there is such a thing as being “excessively aroused” and some actions should be withheld for “immediate foreplay.” It isn’t just about orgasm, as you keep incorrectly stating.
Compare that to this from the document you linked:
You are accusing people the author mentions who have found that “no more than a hug and a kiss in the kitchen…is better for their overall marital relationship” [why would that be? Hmm…perhaps because more cuddling is too sexually arousing??] as being puritanical. This isn’t true.
Concur completely. Intent is critical, as it always is in Catholic moral theology. If the intent is closeness/romance and some arousal occurs, it’s probably OK, as long as the couple can control it. If the intent is to derive as much sexual pleasure as possible w/o orgasm, it is probably sinful.
…in a nutshell.
I suppose that could possibly be necessarily if a couple felt they would be unable to keep themselves from abusing the gifts of their bodies…not to say you are unable, but it seems you fear that you are if you think you need to sleep separately in order to keep from “going overboard.”It’s beginning to look like the only morally safe course is for one of us to move onto the sofa – at least until Winter and the Dreaded Flannel Nightie comes out…talk about grave matter…
I hope you are jokingIt’s beginning to look like the only morally safe course is for one of us to move onto the sofa – at least until Winter and the Dreaded Flannel Nightie comes out…talk about grave matter…
I was trying to add a little bit of levity to what has been – in several senses of the words - a “hot & heavy” thread. It was a joke. Lighten up.I suppose that could possibly be necessarily if a couple felt they would be unable to keep themselves from abusing the gifts of their bodies…not to say you are unable, but it seems you fear that you are if you think you need to sleep separately in order to keep from “going overboard.”
As noted, it was a perhaps poor try at lightening-up. That said, IIRC, there was a whiff of a thought earlier in the thread that if a couple found “just cuddling” to be arousing, then “mere” cuddling could be as morally questionable as direct genital stimulation w/o the intent of intercourse. All of which strikes me as veering into what I think of as “Talmudic Catholicism,” which does seem to break out periodically on these boards.I hope you are joking
IIRC correctly you were talking about cuddling/kissing etc. w/ the missus. No one has said there is anything wrong with that, under any circumstances.
The debate has revolved around sexual acts (i.e. genital stimulation) w/o any intent of intercourse.
That a whole different kettle of fish.
God Bless
Good point. Some people want too much specificity, and in trying to answer, other posters can get tied up in knots that lead to poor reasoning.
I recognized the joke, but in all seriousness, it’s possible for a couple to actually have that issue. I was more expressing distress on account of the couples who really do/would struggle.
Hardly. The both of you have been claiming that no sexually stimulating activity is morally permissible unless sex is planned on - the only thing that is morally permissible, you two have been arguing, is non-sexual activity like hugging and cuddling. That is an extreme position not supported by anything in the Catechism (unless one misreads it) or anything else the Church has officially declared.
It is not the opposite: I say genital stimulation is permissible, this document advises, for prudential reasons, against “repeated” genital stimulation - contextually, because such stimulation may be overboard for many couples and lead to strong temptations to sin. The document repeatedly emphasizes the capacities for couples to draw the line at what is “over-stimulation”, though, so if a couple is capable of engaging in these activities without any temptation to sin, then there is nothing in the document which forbids their acting on that inclination. Different couples have different limits on how much sexuality will lead them to temptation. Some couples may be able to get to third base without temptation, some couples may not even be able to go up to bat. Prudence is encouraged, though, so couples should not push the envelope and test their limits - still, no grave matter exists in “foreplay only” which is what this thread was designed to unearth.
I’m not accusing *couples *of being puritanical for wanting no more than non-sexual activity when no sex is planned - I’m calling a spade a spade when I say that it is puritanical to condemn as immoral sexual activity whenever no sex is planned afterwards. Couples can do what they want, but when people start to say that the Church condemns “foreplay only” (as you and others have argued, based on a misreading of the Catechism) then that ventures into a puritanical attitude about sex unsupported by clear Church teaching.
You have claimed that there is no clear line between cuddling and sexuality, but once one has clearly ventured into sexuality then it is wrong (unless sex is planned).You have gone one step further than this and claimed that engaging in any activity which one knows to be sexually stimulating, without planning any sex afterwards, is grave matter (here). *Not only is it not grave matter, it is not a matter of sin at all. *
nobeerinheaven,
No fish were used or harmed in the creation of our posts.
Stay-at-Home Catholic Dad of 3… is me! (and proud to be)
Hi Paul,
I agree fully with that sentiment, but I don’t think anyone is advocating having such an attitude with your spouse. If they do, quite frankly, even their conjugal act is probably not fully in accord with Church teaching. If a spouse uses the other primarily for their sexual fulfillment, then they are not participating in a “mutual self-giving” as the Catechism describes.
I have no idea what TC2’s “teasing” constitutes, nor do I need to know
; but, based on the post and my assumptions about the strength of human desires, my guess is that they are not “pushing the limits” as the earlier linked article warns against, which is why such teasing “never leads to orgasm.” As I have posted, intent is most important. If you can avoid becoming “excessively aroused” and having your “playful teasing” turn into actions that should be used only as foreplay for intercourse, then you are doing just fine.