Marital Foreplay and Sex - Page 16

waywardson · #**226** Jul 15, '12, 10:20 am

This thread needs to die.

Let's analyze the OP's problem with the Catechism.

2366 Fecundity is a gift, an end of marriage, for conjugal love naturally tends to be fruitful. A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment. So the Church, which "is on the side of life"150 teaches that "each and every marriage act must remain open 'per se' to the transmission of life."151 "This particular doctrine, expounded on numerous occasions by the Magisterium, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act."

All sexual activity in a marriage must be BOTH for the good of the spouses and open to life. Separating the procreative from the act is sinful, but so is having procreative sex when it is not for the good of the spouses. EVERY act must be "open" to the transmission of life and man on his own initiative may not break it.

2367 Called to give life, spouses share in the creative power and fatherhood of God.153 "Married couples should regard it as their proper mission to transmit human life and to educate their children; they should realize that they are thereby cooperating with the love of God the Creator and are, in a certain sense, its interpreters. They will fulfill this duty with a sense of human and Christian responsibility."154

Couples are called to both generously create new life and to responsible parenthood.

2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality.

As part of the Church's their duty responsible parenthood, couples may plan their families and avoid pregnancy. However, they must carefully discern whether they are avoiding pregnancy for good, responsible, "just" reasons or out of selfishness. Furthermore, they must use moral means to avoid pregnancy.

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.157 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil.

Natural Family Planning is moral and encouraged. Contraception, which interferes with the conjugal act to make conception impossible is intrinsically evil. But this does not necessarily include ALL sexual activities that are not open to life. Some are not contraception, but forms of masturbation, which is a different sin.

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

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."137 "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."138
To form an equitable judgment about the subjects' moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety, or other psychological or social factors that lessen or even extenuate moral culpability.

Masturbation (including mutual masturbation) is sexual stimulation outside of the context of the marriage relationship (i.e. the context of married intercourse). It is based in lust and is a sin. But it is NOT contraception. While contraception is "intrinsically evil", masturbation is merely "intrinsically gravely disordered". The catechism goes on further to mention mitigating factors, such as immaturity, habit, anxiety, and other psychological or social factors. If such factors apply to an individual, they certainly apply to married couples together.

IMHO, the difference between the two is whether the act itself carries a risk of pregnancy or whether it is interference with an act that can lead to pregnancy. If either is the case, it is contraception, if not, it is masturbation. For example, withdrawal is a form of contraception, even though climax is brought outside of intercourse. It is interference with the natural procreative act. Oral sex (to completion, outside the context of intercourse), on the other hand, is a form of masturbation. The act is inherently non-procreative stimulation of the genitals and there is no interference with anything.

So, from the Catechism, we can draw the following conclusions:

Intercourse = Objectively licit act at all times. Designed to be mutually loving and pleasurable. May or may not be subjectively sinful based on external conditions and if the intent of the spouses is incompatible with the unitive aspect of marital relations. As for procreation, a procreative action shows procreative intent, no matter what is on the spouse's mind.

Contraception = Always intrinsically evil. Period.

Masturbation = Always intrinsically gravely disordered and sinful, but there may be mitigating factors that reduce culpability.

The next post will analyze the case.

waywardson · #**227** Jul 15, '12, 11:05 am

The issue is old, but I want to post a conclusion for anyone stumbling across this thread. It keeps coming up.

It appears that OP and her husband are engaging in some form of lust related to masturbation. They are confused about the difference between masturbation and contraception. The difference is not about "spilling the seed", it is about sterilizing the act. They are not sterilizing any sort of procreative act, so what they are doing is not contraception. The act is inherently sterile and it is masturbation.

But it also appears that there are mitigating factors, because she said that they "cannot have a baby right now" and continuing on to intercourse would not be responsible parenthood or would not be good for both spouses. It appears to be a loving, though disordered, activity.

They do not understand the proper definition of lust and are confused because they are probably acting out of love. Giving your spouse an orgasm is a very loving thing.

But the activity is disordered and it is lust.

So, under these circumstances, what they are doing is a sin, but it is not the worst sin in the world. It's certainly not a mortal sin, which contradicts the love of God and of neighbor, but it is a problem that needs to be addressed. It is a sin of immaturity and poor self-control.

227 posts for a venial sin.

As for her husband, he is sinning, too. If he is going to sin, he's better off enjoying sinning with his wife than to sin by himself and lie about it or to just be miserable so that he can pretend he's not sinning.

The big problem I see here is the husband's lack of self control and lack of willingness to comply with Church teaching. A common problem, but one that needs addressing with proper spiritual counseling and a proper understanding of the benefits of Phase 2. Part of the benefit of Phase 2 is to learn to love each other with your clothes on.

Couples do need to be close during the infertile phase and it's not always easy not to sin. They should not get so close they torture themselves (this is especially cruel to the husband, who gets physically uncomfortable), but not remain so distant that they become roommates. Couples naturally want to be close, but this does not mean that God is calling them to make a baby. (Remember "responsible parenthood.") Couples (and all others) should put forth a good faith effort to remain chaste, but not overly burden themselves if they fail, and always remember to love each other first. Plus, some couples have cycle issues where Phase 2 is unusually long, so this may be especially difficult. If Phase 2 becomes a reminder to go to confession once a month, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

It seems OP and her husband are confused by bad catechesis more than anything. This is causing most of their problems. She needs to stop reading Kimberly Hahn, Christopher West, and Gregory Popcak and start reading the Catechism. (Her attorney husband should read the Catechism like a judge, not like a lawyer.) Perhaps they should get a YouCat. Love and Responsibility is good too, but dense. I believe there are some good summaries of it that are more accessible.

jilly4ski · #**228** Jul 16, '12, 4:31 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by godisgood77

I think the comment was meant to illuminate that fact that there are several Catholic rites that are in communion with the Pope. And more important because it is relevant to this conversation is that they all have different Catholic doctrines.

No, they don't have different doctrines.

They have different acceptable modes of worship, that does not equal doctrines.

godisgood77 · #**229** Jul 16, '12, 6:17 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jilly4ski

No, they don't have different doctrines.

They have different acceptable modes of worship, that does not equal doctrines.

Doesn't the dramatic differences between Roman Catholic teaching and Orthodox Catholic teaching on Mariology and Papal infallibility constitute doctrinal differences?

jilly4ski · #**230** Jul 16, '12, 7:05 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by godisgood77

Doesn't the dramatic differences between Roman Catholic teaching and Orthodox Catholic teaching on Mariology and Papal infallibility constitute doctrinal differences?

Are we talking about the Orthodox or Eastern Catholics? Indeed the Orthodox do have doctrinal differences, but neither are they Catholic.

godisgood77 · #**231** Jul 16, '12, 7:17 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jilly4ski

Are we talking about the Orthodox or Eastern Catholics? Indeed the Orthodox do have doctrinal differences, but neither are they Catholic.

How are the Eastern Catholic Churches not Catholic?

jilly4ski · #**232** Jul 17, '12, 4:22 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by godisgood77

How are the Eastern Catholic Churches not Catholic?

Sigh, I think you are confused. Eastern Catholics are Catholic and under the pope and do not have different doctrines. The Orthodox are not Catholic and not under the pope, and do have different doctrines. We are talking about the constant teachings of the Catholic Church in faith and morals which has not changed, not Orthodox teaching and not things which do not qualify as doctrine.

billdakelski · #**233** Feb 11, '13, 8:23 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by searching04

If you and your husband can engage in days of foreplay before getting to the final event, good for you! Frankly don't know how the guy can hang on that long!

Let me assure you this is possible and can be not just days but even weeks. It takes practice (a man under 35 may not be able to do it) ,it makes the final session quite intense, best have a strong heart.

RedSparklyShoes · #**234** Feb 11, '13, 10:34 am

I'm always annoyed when people refer to manual stimulation within the confines of foreplay leading to intercourse as masterbation for the woman. It's just a fact of anatomy that many (most?) women cannot orgasm without some sort of other stimulation other than intercourse. I sometimes climax during intercourse, but only in times when there was enough stimulation ahead of time for it to happen.

Masturbation is a solitary act. Foreplay can include any number of things, including manual or oral stimulation.

LittleFlower378 · #**235** Feb 21, '13, 9:34 am

I am not hot on Christopher West writings on the part of "as long as you climax inside" everything else is o.k. Oral stimulation is unnatural. Light kissing in that area would seem allowable and more proper.

godisgood77 · #**236** Feb 21, '13, 9:54 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by LittleFlower378

I am not hot on Christopher West writings on the part of "as long as you climax inside" everything else is o.k. Oral stimulation is unnatural. Light kissing in that area would seem allowable and more proper.

Seems like a completely subjective statement and belief. I have no idea how or why anyone would think to lay down norms to regulate to physical intimacy to this degree.

Shall we go back to the days of having Church Sex Police where if a couple was caught having relations with the woman on top, the couple would be killed??

Good grief...

Gerard94 · #**237** Mar 19, '13, 2:28 pm

This has nothing to do with the question posted, but I couldn't see where else to post it.
So anyway, I'm an 18 year old male and I believe in waiting for marriage to have sex and then use sex for making children. But sometimes I feel I can't/won't wait until marriage, my hormones get the better of me.

I just want any help or advice from anyone who has waited or is waiting for marriage to have sex. I would appreciate any advice.

Thanks,
Gerard.

fpt · #**238** May 4, '13, 6:15 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by LittleFlower378

I am not hot on Christopher West writings on the part of "as long as you climax inside" everything else is o.k. Oral stimulation is unnatural. Light kissing in that area would seem allowable and more proper.

I am not hot on Christopher West writings on the part of "as long as you climax inside" everything else is o.k. Oral stimulation is unnatural. Light kissing in that area would seem allowable and more proper.

What is the diffrence between the oral stimulation of intimate external organs and the light kiss in that area??? Is it not the same thing???

By nature, in the context of the marital act, the kiss, the massage, the touching, the caresse... are done for the stimulation of bodies (the sexual cooperation in the human fashion).

Thus, the oral sex is morally wrong, of course.
But, the oral sexual stimulation, as foreplay, done by husband on her wife is morally permissible, it is totally natural, per se. Only, the abuses or excesses can be morally wrong, under special conditions.

By nature and in itself, the oral sexual stimulation is not morally wrong.

TheRealJuliane · #**239** May 4, '13, 6:19 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gerard94

This has nothing to do with the question posted, but I couldn't see where else to post it.
So anyway, I'm an 18 year old male and I believe in waiting for marriage to have sex and then use sex for making children. But sometimes I feel I can't/won't wait until marriage, my hormones get the better of me.

I just want any help or advice from anyone who has waited or is waiting for marriage to have sex. I would appreciate any advice.

Thanks,
Gerard.

You need to look through the archives, there is plenty of material, if you want to start a new thread, do that instead of tagging your question onto an old thread that isn't directly related. Don't try to resurrect a dead thread that seems related, just start a new one. There are also chastity groups on CAF.