T
TK421
Guest
Hi.
Question is above. Somebody lay this out succinctly for me to explain.
Question is above. Somebody lay this out succinctly for me to explain.
Why wouldn’t it be, presuming the two people in question are married to each other.Hi.
Question is above. Somebody lay this out succinctly for me to explain.
No, because I said you have a right to acts which are, by their nature, procreative. Not achieving pregnancy does not change the nature of the act. If you engage in the marital act, even knowing you cannot possibly procreate, you are still acting within your rights because the act itself is still, by its nature, procrative.If it were as you fear, every time you had sex and did not achieve pregnancy you would be guilty of something.
That’s exactly the point I was making. I’m sorry I did not express it well.No, because I said you have a right to acts which are, by their nature, procreative. Not achieving pregnancy does not change the nature of the act. If you engage in the marital act, even knowing you cannot possibly procreate, you are still acting within your rights because the act itself is still, by its nature, procrative.
:hug1:That’s exactly the point I was making. I’m sorry I did not express it well.
oh, I see, I responded to the wrong post. I meant to quote the op and grabbed you instead.
I agree we should not downplay the unitive part, as it is a beautiful element of the married state. But, the unitive part is the secondary purpose, the primary purpose is procreation. We must uphold and respect the unitive part as the secondary purpose of the marital act.We should not downplay the unitive part–the Church doesn’t and knows it is important to a marriage.
What moral principle do you feel would make it impermissible?Hi.
Question is above. Somebody lay this out succinctly for me to explain.
Marital relations is permissible during pregnancy, even though procreation cannot result, because the knowingly chosen act is still ordered toward its proper good moral objects: the marital, unitive, and procreative meanings. For it is not the attainment of the object that makes the act inherently good or evil, but the ordering of the chosen act toward that good or evil end.Hi.
Question is above. Somebody lay this out succinctly for me to explain.
Ty.Marital relations is permissible during pregnancy, even though procreation cannot result, because the knowingly chosen act is still ordered toward its proper good moral objects: the marital, unitive, and procreative meanings. For it is not the attainment of the object that makes the act inherently good or evil, but the ordering of the chosen act toward that good or evil end.
Similarly, an elderly couple can still have marital relations, though they are very unlikely to conceive, because the act has its proper ordering (telios) toward its proper end. The choice of a morally-ordered act is licit, even if the good end which gives the act its good order is not attained.
Conversely, a married couple who use contraception sin gravely, even if by chance they conceive a child (due to failure of the contraception). For they have knowingly chosen an inherently disordered act. Their chosen act failed to attain its evil object of thwarting procreation. But they sinned by that choice.
Hi.
Question is above. Somebody lay this out succinctly for me to explain.
lol? Gotta take a screenshot.Why wouldn’t it be, presuming the two people in question are
married to each other.
Perhaps you can lay out why you think it would not be permissible?
When a woman is pregnant she and her husband need to be very closely united. The bond between a mother and a father is of the utmost importance to the unborn child. This is not only a moral and religious concept it is also necessary in the world of nature. The human child needs the care and love by his or her father and mother and needs the security of the love between them.I agree we should not downplay the unitive part, as it is a beautiful element of the married state. But, the unitive part is the secondary purpose, the primary purpose is procreation. We must uphold and respect the unitive part as the secondary purpose of the marital act.
Texting can be ruinous.The thread directly above this one is titled “Driving and Texting,” so when I saw this one I thought for a moment it was entitled “Why is texting during intercourse permissible.”
Sadly I don’t think any of the ancient Fathers have weighed in on that.