Embarrassing question about marital activity
#41
Ok.  Start listening from 10:18.  It's right there, and it's even added as an addendum to the main recording.
Reply
#42
(01-13-2016, 10:53 AM)ermy_law Wrote: Perhaps. As I recall, the opinion given suggested that those moralists were incorrect about this particular described behavior. So, in this instance, they would be "bad moralists."

No one person contains the whole of truth, and thus, if someone makes a mistake, that does not make that individual a bad practitioner of his profession. St. Thomas was wrong about the Immaculate Conception, but that does not make him a bad theologian.
Reply
#43
"in this instance" has meaning in what I wrote
Reply
#44
(01-13-2016, 11:38 AM)ermy_law Wrote: "in this instance" has meaning in what I wrote

Apologies. I read to quickly. So, would you say that in "the instance" of the Immaculate Conception, St. Thomas was a bad theologian, or would it be better to say, "the good theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas, was wrong in particular instance?"
Reply
#45
I think that if I wrote that, in that instance, St. Thomas was a "bad theologian," it would convey the same meaning as saying that the otherwise good theologian St. Thomas was wrong in that particular instance.

The second is clearer, to be certain. But it lacks the verbiage mimicry that I was going for when I wrote my response. Also I don't know if these moralists we're talking about are otherwise "good moralists."
Reply
#46
It's one of those things where people say, well how can the saints or any priest for that matter, be an authority on sexual practice when they have never had sex themselves (or at least quite a lot have not). In some sense, there is truth to it. The Saints can easily refer to perennial teachings of the Church and of our Lord on many issues. However, the gray areas are more down to interpretation or opinion. Where, the Church, has not ever concretely said what's permissible or not.

We can go on and on about so many different topics. Sex toys, interior or exterior. Self stimulation within intercourse. Self stimulation just prior to intercourse. Self stimulation to keep oneself going while there's a break for whatever reason. Oral sex. Anal penetration. Anal stimulation. Hands, feet, arms, legs, or whatever other external body parts.  Different "fetishes" and on and on.

To what point do we draw a line? Is there a line? Is the line further back or more restrictive than we think? There are some who say that anything but intercourse is off limits. Others are more liberal and say that anything goes as long "he puts his good stuff in her good stuff." Others fall somewhere in between. What's the truth here? I have no idea really.
Reply
#47
You are making a tremendous error in suggesting that the truth is difficult to find, and your error appears to be based on the falsehood that the Church has not concretely said what is permissible and what is not.  As I have shown in this thread, the teachings are available for people to find -- usually they should be obtained from a priest. 

That you erroneously believe that there are no teachings, that the teachings (if they exist) are difficult to locate, or that you disagree with the teachings is your fault, not the Church's.  You have a duty as a Catholic to form your conscience.  Seeking out the teachings, learning them, and implementing them in your moral decision-marking is your responsibility.

It is absurd to say, "What's the truth here?  I have no idea really."  For whatever reason, perhaps, you don't like the truth.  But that doesn't mean that it isn't true or that it isn't possible to know what the truth is.
Reply
#48
So why not post what the truth is straight out and a concrete source? Not some random priest's opinion, or a 45 minute talk, or even a saint's opinion, but something easy to understand that is published officially by the Church? 
Reply
#49
Wasn't a Doctor of the Church quoted? What more do you want? An ecumenical council to decide on the morality cunnilingus?

This thread is a bit of a sad commentary on our society. Even "trads" view temperance with suspicion.
Also, its on the wrong subforum. In no way this is philosophy.
Reply
#50
Can we all agree that one should not engage in: Masturbation, pornography, or any disruption of copulation (contraception, coitius interruptus ect.), during the marital act?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)