sodomy

[MikeK]

Similarly, the Bible does not mention oral sex in marriage, burt the Church has developed a clear sense of God's plan for marriage and the spousal act over the centuries. When He established His Church, Jesus authorized His Church to teach both faith AND MORALS.
Traditionally, the Church teaches that a married couple may engage in oral sex foreplay, but this should always lead to a climax through vaginal sex. Oral sex is not to be used as an alternative to vaginal sex, as a form of birth control.
Cordially yours, Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB
- EWTN FAQ

Yup. Oral sex where the man completes might be comparable to masturbation, but oral sex as foreplay or afterplay is A-OK if husband and wife are both down.

 

[Miss Shelby]

You do realize that this is The Catholic forum and that that is the Authentic, De Fide teaching of the Catholic Church don't you?

your point would be?

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

You do realize that this is The Catholic forum and that that is the Authentic, De Fide teaching of the Catholic Church don't you?

One of our weaknesses as Catholics in general and members of OBOB in particular is the tendency to discuss topics in terms of whether something is a Church teaching and what level of teaching it is more than why the Church does or does not teach it.

 

[Anglian]

This might be a topic that one might bring up in confession. If one felt it difficult to do that, might that be a sign of something other than natural embarrassment?

Is the problem that the teaching of the Church is obscure? Or is it that our natural desire to do what we want leads us to obscure them?

Peace,

Anglian

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

Depends on how far you take it. What then?

What do you mean, what then? No other people, no animals, man's [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] inside the woman's vagina--only things which both spouse feel 100% okay with doing... It's not that hard to hash out, is it really?

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

I

because the reason reproductive organs exist at all is to procreate. (lol I sound like a biology textbook..) oral sex is going outside of their intended function.



oki well I just have one reason for disagreeing with oral (and anal) sex. I do consider it "icky" lol but that's not the reason I have a problem with it. The problem is that as I said to Mike, those parts of the body are meant for something else. Those types of sex can't ever result in conception, so that seems wrong to me. It's the same reason that masturbation is considered a sin by the Church. It is my opinion that the only "right" type of sex is one that can potentially produce a child.

.

God could have made it so twisting my third finger two times and jumping on one foot was what makes me pregnant- He didn't- He chose to make it something which is also pleasurable. A [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] has pretty much no function other than to allow a woman to feel sexual pleasure.

The Church teaches that sex is two-fold...unitive and ceative...and that part of the unitive aspect is that sex does, indeed, feel good and is pleasurable.

 

[JoabAnias]

What do you mean, what then? No other people, no animals, man's [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] inside the woman's vagina--only things which both spouse feel 100% okay with doing... It's not that hard to hash out, is it really?

No I don't think its that hard to hash out really -unless- one is already fallen into lust and the accompanying relativism that permitted them to convince themselves lust was not sin simply because said lust is in the context of marriage which then alludes to my statement of "then what" as self gratifying lust devoid of the dignity of the persons may invariably lead where? - Greater sins right?

 

[Miss Shelby]

Traditionally, the Church teaches that a married couple may engage in oral sex foreplay, but this should always lead to a climax through vaginal sex. Oral sex is not to be used as an alternative to vaginal sex, as a form of birth control.
Cordially yours, Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB
- EWTN FAQ

hear that guys and gals? Do not manually bring your wife to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. You can only use your penis, and that's only if it's inside the vag. And good luck with that, btw.

 

[JoabAnias]

hear that guys and gals? Do not manually bring your wife to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. You can only use your penis, and that's only if it's inside the vag. And good luck with that, btw.

Only inside if it means spilling seed right?

Does the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] of a woman cause ovulation?

 

[Miss Shelby]

also, this is not to insult anyone. but I have seen photos of a few of you guys and well, you look pretty average, certainly not like a John Holmes or stud muffins by any stretch of the imagination. So I'm guessing you last about 90 seconds MAX after penetration and your wives for all their trouble just get a little wet. So what it boils down to, is you guys get your [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] through penetration and your wives get nothing cause you won't get them off any other way.

 

[JoabAnias]

also, this is not to insult anyone. but I have seen photos of a few of you guys and well, you look pretty average, certainly not like a John Holmes or stud muffins by any stretch of the imagination. So I'm guessing you last about 90 seconds MAX after penetration and your wives for all their trouble just get a little wet. So what it boils down to, is you guys get your [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] through penetration and your wives get nothing cause you won't get them off any other way.

A bit explicit don't you think? I think expression about selfishness or dysfunction could be done without involving persons appearances or in relation to porn stars.

Can we stick civilly to the OP and the topic of moral theology so this might be more efficacious for people.

So what is it your really trying to say MS? Only ugly folk have hair triggers and wives get cheated? I fail to see how that addresses the morality issues.

Are you raising the point that these morality issues have anything to do with appearance or performance?

 

[Anglian]

also, this is not to insult anyone. but I have seen photos of a few of you guys and well, you look pretty average, certainly not like a John Holmes or stud muffins by any stretch of the imagination. So I'm guessing you last about 90 seconds MAX after penetration and your wives for all their trouble just get a little wet. So what it boils down to, is you guys get your [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] through penetration and your wives get nothing cause you won't get them off any other way.

Dear Miss Shelby,

Too much information?

Anglian

 

[MikeK]

Are you raising the point that these morality issues have anything to do with appearance or performance?

I think she is, and I agree with her. We have a duty to be good lovers to our spouses. As a husband, it isn't morally okay for me to look at sex with the attitude of "well, I got off, so now we're done - goodnight, that was nice - <snore>".

 

[Miss Shelby]

A bit explicit don't you think?

The title of the thread is sodomy. You think we should be in here talking about dasies in the spring Mary Poppins style?

I think expression about selfishness or dysfunction could be done without involving persons appearances or in relation to porn stars.

The point is a valid one. Many women need a little extra help in the sex department than just penetraation.

Can we stick civilly to the OP and the topic of moral theology so this might be more efficacious for people.

Let's look at the Jewish teaching on this. They believe sex should be for the pleasure of the woman only. Not the man, he's always gauranteed his cut. I think there is much we can take away from our Judaic roots with this.

So what is it your really trying to say MS? Only ugly folk have hair triggers and wives get cheated? I fail to see how that addresses the morality issues.

I am saying most of you men have hair triggers. Morality? All you've shown is some opinions of priests. I can show you quotes from other priests who say that it's permissable for the woman to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] through other means than just penetration.

Are you raising the point that these morality issues have anything to do with appearance or performance?

I think the point I raised, pardon the pun, is quite on the money. You've yet to raise any point at all.

 

[Miss Shelby]

btw, Joab I didn't use the description ugly. I said average. As in ordinary.

 

[JoabAnias]

The title of the thread is sodomy. You think we should be in here talking about dasies in the spring Mary Poppins style?

No, just what won't offend someones grandmother.

The point is a valid one. Many women need a little extra help in the sex department than just penetraation.

Yes it is. I think sodomy for that purpose is immoral though. As far as oral well, thats a gray area. For what its worth its a mutual situation within the context of marriage and that would seem to fall within the unitive aspects but never the less should remain moral don't you think?

Let's look at the Jewish teaching on this. They believe sex should be for the pleasure of the woman only. Not the man, he's always gauranteed his cut. I think there is much we can take away from our Judaic roots with this.

So now lets look at the Christian teaching; procreation and unity. Note that procreation comes first, unity is a result, pleasure is a perk.

I am saying most of you men have hair triggers. Morality? All you've shown is some opinions of priests. I can show you quotes from other priests who say that it's permissable for the woman to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] through other means than just penetration.

So whats the cure for dysfunction? Surly its not immorality. Personally I think the immorality of Lust and selfishness of gratification greatly contributes to the dysfunction.

By all means cite your quotes. That may be a great contribution.

I think the point I raised, pardon the pun, is quite on the money. You've yet to raise any point at all.

Am I expected to raise a point? I answered some questions about sodomy and morality I didn't post the OP. Sorry if you felt those were pointless answers but I can see how one might if their priority was gratification.

 

[JoabAnias]

I think she is, and I agree with her. We have a duty to be good lovers to our spouses. As a husband, it isn't morally okay for me to look at sex with the attitude of "well, I got off, so now we're done - goodnight, that was nice - <snore>".

I agree, and your liable to get in the dog house too. Adversely though, if something was immoral wouldn't you want that to be elimiated too?

 

[JoabAnias]

btw, Joab I didn't use the description ugly. I said average. As in ordinary.

Ah, fair enough, I was just picturing myself.

 

[MikeK]

Joab is ignoring the OP's definition of sodomy, you know, the thing that this entire discusion is based on, and using one that he found instead. I think that's creating some confusion.

 

[JoabAnias]

Joab is ignoring the OP's definition of sodomy, you know, the thing that this entire discusion is based on, and using one that he found instead. I think that's creating some confusion.

Have you got a better definition than the one from Fr. John Hardon?