Delicate question about sexuality (warning: graphic language)
#11
(04-16-2018, 11:51 AM)austenbosten Wrote:
(04-16-2018, 05:01 AM)Ludovicus Wrote:
Quote:No, it is not, but I will say it is immoral for the wife to "stimulate" herself to orgasm. This is masturbation and it should be the husband who does this if she has not climaxed yet.

Sex must always be a unitive, cooperative act where climaxing is a result from the stimulation of the other spouse.

Thank you for your contribution, Austenbosten. This is not the subject of this thread but I respectfully disagree with you. It is preferable if it is the husband who stimulate the wife. Nonetheless, it is not immoral if she does it herself and it is not masturbation. Masturbation is a selfish act and in our case it is part of a real marital act. My opinion is based on saint Alphonsus Liguori or Fr. Marie-Michel Labourdette, O.P., to name only two well-known theologians. 

Well just so you know, the Magisterium has spoken on this and you are wrong.

Quote:The traditional Catholic doctrine that masturbation constitutes a grave moral disorder is often called into doubt or expressly denied today. It is said that psychology and sociology show that it is a normal phenomenon of sexual development, especially among the young. It is stated that there is real and serious fault only in the measure that the subject deliberately indulges in solitary pleasure closed in on self ("ipsation"), because in this case the act would indeed be radically opposed to the loving communion between persons of different sex which some hold is what is principally sought in the use of the sexual faculty.

This opinion is contradictory to the teaching and pastoral practice of the Catholic Church. Whatever the force of certain arguments of a biological and philosophical nature, which have sometimes been used by theologians, in fact both the Magisterium of the Church - in the course of a constant tradition - and the moral sense of the faithful have declared without hesitation that masturbation is an intrinsically and seriously disordered act.[19]

----------------------------------------------

9. Fréquemment aujourd’hui on met en doute ou l’on nie expressément la doctrine catholique traditionnelle selon laquelle la masturbation constitue un grave désordre moral. La psychologie et la sociologie, dit-on, démontrent que, surtout chez les jeunes, elle est un phénomène normal de l’évolution de la sexualité. Il n’y aurait de faute réelle et grave que dans la mesure où le sujet céderait délibérément à une auto-satisfaction close sur soi (« ipsation »), car alors l’acte serait radicalement contraire à la communion amoureuse entre des personnes de sexe différent, dont certains prétendent qu’elle est ce qui est principalement recherché dans l’usage de la faculté sexuelle.

Cette opinion contredit la doctrine et la pratique pastorale de l’Eglise catholique. Quoi qu’il en soit de la valeur de certains arguments d’ordre biologique ou philosophique dont se sont servis parfois les théologiens, en fait, tant le Magistère de l’Eglise, dans la ligne d’une tradition constante, que le sens moral des fidèles ont affirmé sans hésitation que la masturbation est un acte intrinsèquement et gravement désordonné.(14)


Persona Humana

English - http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congre...na_en.html
Français - http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congre...na_fr.html

(04-16-2018, 11:51 AM)austenbosten Wrote:
(04-16-2018, 05:01 AM)Ludovicus Wrote:
Quote:No, it is not, but I will say it is immoral for the wife to "stimulate" herself to orgasm. This is masturbation and it should be the husband who does this if she has not climaxed yet.

Sex must always be a unitive, cooperative act where climaxing is a result from the stimulation of the other spouse.

Thank you for your contribution, Austenbosten. This is not the subject of this thread but I respectfully disagree with you. It is preferable if it is the husband who stimulate the wife. Nonetheless, it is not immoral if she does it herself and it is not masturbation. Masturbation is a selfish act and in our case it is part of a real marital act. My opinion is based on saint Alphonsus Liguori or Fr. Marie-Michel Labourdette, O.P., to name only two well-known theologians. 

Well just so you know, the Magisterium has spoken on this and you are wrong.

Quote:The traditional Catholic doctrine that masturbation constitutes a grave moral disorder is often called into doubt or expressly denied today. It is said that psychology and sociology show that it is a normal phenomenon of sexual development, especially among the young. It is stated that there is real and serious fault only in the measure that the subject deliberately indulges in solitary pleasure closed in on self ("ipsation"), because in this case the act would indeed be radically opposed to the loving communion between persons of different sex which some hold is what is principally sought in the use of the sexual faculty.

This opinion is contradictory to the teaching and pastoral practice of the Catholic Church. Whatever the force of certain arguments of a biological and philosophical nature, which have sometimes been used by theologians, in fact both the Magisterium of the Church - in the course of a constant tradition - and the moral sense of the faithful have declared without hesitation that masturbation is an intrinsically and seriously disordered act.[19]

----------------------------------------------

9. Fréquemment aujourd’hui on met en doute ou l’on nie expressément la doctrine catholique traditionnelle selon laquelle la masturbation constitue un grave désordre moral. La psychologie et la sociologie, dit-on, démontrent que, surtout chez les jeunes, elle est un phénomène normal de l’évolution de la sexualité. Il n’y aurait de faute réelle et grave que dans la mesure où le sujet céderait délibérément à une auto-satisfaction close sur soi (« ipsation »), car alors l’acte serait radicalement contraire à la communion amoureuse entre des personnes de sexe différent, dont certains prétendent qu’elle est ce qui est principalement recherché dans l’usage de la faculté sexuelle.

Cette opinion contredit la doctrine et la pratique pastorale de l’Eglise catholique. Quoi qu’il en soit de la valeur de certains arguments d’ordre biologique ou philosophique dont se sont servis parfois les théologiens, en fait, tant le Magistère de l’Eglise, dans la ligne d’une tradition constante, que le sens moral des fidèles ont affirmé sans hésitation que la masturbation est un acte intrinsèquement et gravement désordonné.(14)


Persona Humana

English - http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congre...na_en.html
Français - http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congre...na_fr.html

Just so I know what your talking about are you saying a women stimulating herself after intercourse is a sin? 

Or are you saying not only is the above sin but it's also a sin during intercourse for the women to stimulate herself while the husband is performing the penetration act?
Reply
#12
(04-16-2018, 01:08 PM)havok579257 Wrote: Just so I know what your talking about are you saying a women stimulating herself after intercourse is a sin? 

Or are you saying not only is the above sin but it's also a sin during intercourse for the women to stimulate herself while the husband is performing the penetration act?

I'll answer that in reverse: I am for one, ignorant on every sexual position, but I find that if a man is penetrating it would be difficult for the woman to stimulate herself. As for the other, I am not saying that, the document I listed says that. Deliberate stimulation of the genitals by oneself for the purposes of sexual gratification is a disordered act that is inexcusable, even if it is in the presence of a spouse.

However these are not my words, but of the Church. I am not against someone explaining to me how this interpretation is incorrect.
Reply
#13
I can't imagine that if the wife were to touch herself for a brief time in order to get going a bit because whatever her husband is doing just isn't doing it for her, that such wouldn't be sinful. It could be argued that it's part of the act without which maybe doesn't happen at all.

I think we tend to become to rigorist with sex, no one knows what's allowed and what isn't. It'd be much easier to say as long as his stuff ends up inside of her then anything else involved in that sexual act is licit. If you separate them from the overall sex act it becomes sinful.
Blood of Christ, relief of the burdened, save us.

“It is my design to die in the brew house; let ale be placed in my mouth when I am expiring, that when the choirs of angels come, they may say, “Be God propitious to this drinker.” – St. Columbanus, A.D. 612
Reply
#14
(04-16-2018, 02:11 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(04-16-2018, 01:08 PM)havok579257 Wrote: Just so I know what your talking about are you saying a women stimulating herself after intercourse is a sin? 

Or are you saying not only is the above sin but it's also a sin during intercourse for the women to stimulate herself while the husband is performing the penetration act?

I'll answer that in reverse:  I am for one, ignorant on every sexual position, but I find that if a man is penetrating it would be difficult for the woman to stimulate herself.  As for the other, I am not saying that, the document I listed says that.  Deliberate stimulation of the genitals by oneself for the purposes of sexual gratification is a disordered act that is inexcusable, even if it is in the presence of a spouse.

However these are not my words, but of the Church.  I am not against someone explaining to me how this interpretation is incorrect.
ok, so your thinking is reversed.  its nearly impossible for a man to stimulate the wife and perform the penetrative action and support himself in most positions.  think of it like this, could you first stand on one leg, then start hoping on one leg, then start writing an essay with great penmen ship?  Like I am sure there are a few people in the worlds history who could do that but it would be very rare.  so for most positions it is just not possible for a men to perform 3 different things at one time and not to mention be mentally involved in the act as opposed to a robot who is so focused on performing his 3 jobs he is not being unnative because he is to distracted which then could lead to not even completing the sexual act. 

so now we go to the women.  the "vast majority" of women can not climax without direct stimulation of their outer sexual organ.  some can, a small percentage.  just as there is a small percentage of women who are not able to climax at all.  so we know the vast majority are unable to climax without assistance.  

which would mean its almost impossible for a women to receive an orgasm while her husband orgasms through intercourse.  which would mean the couple would always have to have instances where either the women climaxes before penetration or after penetration, never during.  nothing is wrong with this by the way but if this would be the case, then the universal norm would be for the man to "get his" and then the women "get hers" so to speak.  so for the vast majority of couples, they would never be able to climax together which is mentioned in Humane Vita as a good thing or the best thing.(I can't remember how its worded).  So then we are to come to the conclusion since this is the way God made women, he really didn't intend for the couple to ever climax together.

also masturbation is an act a person performs on themselves, solo.  you can not perform masturbation during an actual sexual act.  like if the wife is using manual means to arouse her husband she is not said to be masturbating him.  that doesn't make sense because we know masturbation is a solo act.  if your with someone else its not masturbation.  if a man assists a women to climax he is not masturbating her.  so the the women manually stimulating herself while (key word here) he is in the process of intercourse can not be masturbation.  you can not be masturbating and having intercourse at the same time.  since one is by yourself and one is with another.  its logically impossible.  Just like you can't be in a room alone with someone else in the room.  Either your alone or not.  i mean if you had no open to life sex with a women or man and went to confession, how would you confess it.  would you tell the priest you are guilty of masturbation 1 time on another person?  or would you say you performed a sexual act on another person that was not open to life?  The Catechism talks about this in 2352.  It says masturbation is the sexual pleasure is sought outside of the sexual relationship.  Also the article you posted says that masturbation is by ones self. So the women can not be involved in masturbation during actual intercourse since she is not performing the act alone.



I think because of our sexual nature people get confused about stuff like this.  I mean there are so many misunderstandings about sex that leads couples into so many problems.  I have seen numerous times people try to argue that masturbation can be performed by on another person so neither couple can touch each others genitals and only straight intercourse can be performed.  Which doesn't make sense at all.  I mean it totally ignores the women's sexual organ is on the outside and ignores the fact that as men get older we are not all going to be like we were when we were younger and can get ready for the act without any assistance.  which then if we logically follow their line of thinking it was not the intent for women to orgasm during sex.  orgasm just happens to be a happy off shoot for a few women but the intent was never for women to orgasm since the sexual organ is on the outside of the body.  which although the orgasm is not the end all be all and you can still be unnative without the women's orgasm from time to time I would challenge any person to argue the sex would be unnative when the women is aroused and brought close to climax and then left out to dry so to speak.  eventually the women would stop being unative because she would either become extremely frustrated or closed off during the act to avoid the arousal and then nothing else.  not to mention that's forcing a women into an occasion of sin because its one thing to not have sex but its a completely different thing to have sex, get everything going, get so aroused and into it and then NEVER have a release.  so then the husband is putting his wife into an occasion to sin.  cause he is consistently putting his wife into a situation of temptation.

we need to look at sex as something wonderful that God gave us.
Reply
#15
(04-16-2018, 11:51 AM)austenbosten Wrote:
(04-16-2018, 05:01 AM)Ludovicus Wrote:
Quote:No, it is not, but I will say it is immoral for the wife to "stimulate" herself to orgasm. This is masturbation and it should be the husband who does this if she has not climaxed yet.

Sex must always be a unitive, cooperative act where climaxing is a result from the stimulation of the other spouse.

Thank you for your contribution, Austenbosten. This is not the subject of this thread but I respectfully disagree with you. It is preferable if it is the husband who stimulate the wife. Nonetheless, it is not immoral if she does it herself and it is not masturbation. Masturbation is a selfish act and in our case it is part of a real marital act. My opinion is based on saint Alphonsus Liguori or Fr. Marie-Michel Labourdette, O.P., to name only two well-known theologians. 

Well just so you know, the Magisterium has spoken on this and you are wrong.

Quote:The traditional Catholic doctrine that masturbation constitutes a grave moral disorder is often called into doubt or expressly denied today. It is said that psychology and sociology show that it is a normal phenomenon of sexual development, especially among the young. It is stated that there is real and serious fault only in the measure that the subject deliberately indulges in solitary pleasure closed in on self ("ipsation"), because in this case the act would indeed be radically opposed to the loving communion between persons of different sex which some hold is what is principally sought in the use of the sexual faculty.

This opinion is contradictory to the teaching and pastoral practice of the Catholic Church. Whatever the force of certain arguments of a biological and philosophical nature, which have sometimes been used by theologians, in fact both the Magisterium of the Church - in the course of a constant tradition - and the moral sense of the faithful have declared without hesitation that masturbation is an intrinsically and seriously disordered act.[19]

----------------------------------------------

9. Fréquemment aujourd’hui on met en doute ou l’on nie expressément la doctrine catholique traditionnelle selon laquelle la masturbation constitue un grave désordre moral. La psychologie et la sociologie, dit-on, démontrent que, surtout chez les jeunes, elle est un phénomène normal de l’évolution de la sexualité. Il n’y aurait de faute réelle et grave que dans la mesure où le sujet céderait délibérément à une auto-satisfaction close sur soi (« ipsation »), car alors l’acte serait radicalement contraire à la communion amoureuse entre des personnes de sexe différent, dont certains prétendent qu’elle est ce qui est principalement recherché dans l’usage de la faculté sexuelle.

Cette opinion contredit la doctrine et la pratique pastorale de l’Eglise catholique. Quoi qu’il en soit de la valeur de certains arguments d’ordre biologique ou philosophique dont se sont servis parfois les théologiens, en fait, tant le Magistère de l’Eglise, dans la ligne d’une tradition constante, que le sens moral des fidèles ont affirmé sans hésitation que la masturbation est un acte intrinsèquement et gravement désordonné.(14)


Persona Humana

English - http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congre...na_en.html
Français - http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congre...na_fr.html


Don't say that I am wrong, Sir. At the most you can say that you disagree with me.

I don't know if you can read latin and french but here are some texts that could interest you.

Quote:919. – An autem, si vir se retrahat post seminationem, sed ante seminationem mulieris, possit ipsa statim tactibus se excitare, ut seminet ? Negant Auctor additionum ad Wigandt (tr. 16. post n.106.) ac Diana et Rodr. (ap. Boss. l.9. n. 54.), adhaeretque Pal. (p. 4. §.3. n.6) dicens, id non esse licitum, si mulier posset se continere. Ratio, qui semen mulieris non est necessarium ad generationem ; item quia effusio illa mulieris, utpote separata, non fit una caro cum viro. Communius vero affirmant (Wigandt tr.16. n.103. v.solve, Less l.4. c.3. n.94., Bon. q.4. p.6. n.15. in fine cum Sanch. l.9. d.17. n.10., Pot. T.1. c.4. n4310., Tambur dec. l.1. c.3. §.5. n.18., Salm. c.15. n.80. in fine cum Dic., Fill. tr.10 n.330., Sport. n.491., Boss. c.9. n.55. cum Aversa, Perez, Fag. et Leand. ac Elbel conf.17. n. 425. cum Cleric., Honob., Diana, Gob. et Bosco.), et non reprobat Conc. (p. 406. n.11.). Ratio, tum quia seminatio mulieris pertinet ad complendum actum conjugalem, qui consistit in seminatione utriusque conjugis ; unde, sicut potest uxor tactibus se praeparare ad copulam, ita etiam potest actum copulae perficere : tum quia, si mulieris post talem irritationem tenerentur naturam compescere, essent ipsae jugiter magno periculo expositae mortaliter peccandi, cum frequentius viri, quia calidiores, prius seminent (sed haec ratio non suadet ; nam si hoc permitteretur uxoribus, deberet permitti etiam viris, casu quo mulier post suam seminationem se retraheret, et vir maneret irritatus ; at DD. Communiter dicunt, id vetitum esse viris, ut Sanchez (n.10.), Wigandt et Bon. l. c.) ; tum quia, ut plures sentiunt, seminatio mulieris est necessaria vel saltem multum confert ad generationem ; nihil enim a natura frustraneum agitur. Omnes autem concedunt uxoribus, quae frigidioris sunt naturae, posse tactibus se excitare ante copulam, ut seminent in congressu maritali statim habendo (vide Conc. n.13.).

Tractatus de matrimonio, Alphonsus Liguori

Quote:« […] il sera donc permis à la femme de commencer plus tôt son excitation sexuelle (cf. Cajetan, in IIa-IIae, question 154, 11, IX) mais il vaut beaucoup mieux que ce soit par les soins du mari. Bien plus, les moralistes autorisent la femme qui n'a pas atteint l'orgasme au moment de la copulation à poursuivre elle-même l'excitation jusqu'à ce qu'elle l'ait atteint : ce n'est pas une masturbation, c'est aider la nature dans l'achèvement d'un acte bon et normal. » p.92.

Cours de Théologie Morale N°15 La Vie Sexuelle La Chasteté, Père Marie-Michel LABOURDETTE, 1958, Toulouse, Studium Saint Thomas d'Aquin, 244 p.

The text that you quoted says that masturbation is a grave sin and I agree with that. A woman touching herself during a marital act is not masturbation, here is the point.
Reply
#16
(04-16-2018, 10:06 AM)SacraCor714 Wrote: I am glad you came to this forum and asked these questions, because it is important for Catholics and non-Catholics to understand that the Church isn't a pleasure-squelching confederacy of prudes. We are supposed to have lots of sex and enjoy ourselves too (all inside the context of marriage of course!). 

If you have already ejaculated into your wife's vagina and afterwards she takes your penis into her mouth and gets some residual semen in her mouth, that is all right as long as you do not ejaculate again into her mouth. The husband must always ejaculate into his wife's vagina and nowhere else.  Oral stimulation is fine as long as there is no ejaculation in the wife's mouth. Christopher West's book Good News about Sex and Marriage and Greg Popcak's book Holy Sex have all of these questions and answers laid out in detail.

If you are good at making love with your wife, she shouldn't have to stimulate herself to orgasm. Perhaps you could try different positions or she could try utilizing Kegel exercises so it is something you can both experience together as a gift to each other.

Thank you for your answer, SacraCor714.

Quote:If you are good at making love with your wife, she shouldn't have to stimulate herself to orgasm. Perhaps you could try different positions or she could try utilizing Kegel exercises so it is something you can both experience together as a gift to each other.

Chère Madame, do not forget that I am French and, moreover, a Mediterranean. More seriously, I think that Havok579257 is right.

Quote:If you have already ejaculated into your wife's vagina and afterwards she takes your penis into her mouth and gets some residual semen in her mouth, that is all right as long as you do not ejaculate again into her mouth.

Does anyone else agree with this?

Please, let me know your opinion about the subject of this thread. It would be very helpful.
Reply
#17
(04-16-2018, 03:22 PM)Ludovicus Wrote: The text that you quoted says that masturbation is a grave sin and I agree with that. A woman touching herself during a marital act is not masturbation, here is the point.

Thank you for the Labourdette quote, it is difficult to find texts in English search engines of French authors who are not someone famous like Rousseau or Dumas.

However, I do not see how to get around the writings of Persona Humana. It plainly says that to say masturbation is wrong only in that it is separate of the marital act, is contrary to the Church. Perhaps I am not reading it, but that is how I am reading it. Not just the solo act, but any deliberate stimulation to climax.
Reply
#18
(04-16-2018, 03:40 PM)Ludovicus Wrote:
Quote:If you have already ejaculated into your wife's vagina and afterwards she takes your penis into her mouth and gets some residual semen in her mouth, that is all right as long as you do not ejaculate again into her mouth.

Does anyone else agree with this?

Please, let me know your opinion about the subject of this thread. It would be very helpful.

Yes that would be correct.  Although the thing to remember is for the couple this would in essence be another sexual act and would require the man to finish again the right way.  If he can't because he tried but it was to soon, then no fault.  Although if he knows he won't be able to again or is just using it for pleasure with no intent to climax then I think it would be a sin.  Since every time a couple has sex the man must finish the proper way and the couple must always attempt for the man to finish every time they start sex.  Sometimes it doesn't happen but that's not because the couple makes it not happen.  I would just look at it that every time a man finishes the sex act for him is finished and if continues on then it would be a new sex act for him and he would be required to finish a second time.  The women is not held to this since her orgasm is not directly tied to procreation and a women can have no or multiple orgasms in the course of one completed sex act.
Reply
#19
(04-16-2018, 04:00 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(04-16-2018, 03:22 PM)Ludovicus Wrote: The text that you quoted says that masturbation is a grave sin and I agree with that. A woman touching herself during a marital act is not masturbation, here is the point.

Thank you for the Labourdette quote, it is difficult to find texts in English search engines of French authors who are not someone famous like Rousseau or Dumas.

However, I do not see how to get around the writings of Persona Humana.  It plainly says that to say masturbation is wrong only in that it is separate of the marital act, is contrary to the Church.  Perhaps I am not reading it, but that is how I am reading it.  Not just the solo act, but any deliberate stimulation to climax.

but it says its separate from the marital act.  a women manually stimulating herself during intercourse is not separated from the marital act and is during the actual act.  its a combined thing by husband and wife.  the husband and wife are working together during the marital act to satisfy each other.
Reply
#20
(04-16-2018, 04:00 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(04-16-2018, 03:22 PM)Ludovicus Wrote: The text that you quoted says that masturbation is a grave sin and I agree with that. A woman touching herself during a marital act is not masturbation, here is the point.

Thank you for the Labourdette quote, it is difficult to find texts in English search engines of French authors who are not someone famous like Rousseau or Dumas.

However, I do not see how to get around the writings of Persona Humana.  It plainly says that to say masturbation is wrong only in that it is separate of the marital act, is contrary to the Church.  Perhaps I am not reading it, but that is how I am reading it.  Not just the solo act, but any deliberate stimulation to climax.

The second paragraph that you quoted was not complete.
 
Quote:This opinion is contradictory to the teaching and pastoral practice of the Catholic Church. Whatever the force of certain arguments of a biological and philosophical nature, which have sometimes been used by theologians, in fact both the Magisterium of the Church - in the course of a constant tradition - and the moral sense of the faithful have declared without hesitation that masturbation is an intrinsically and seriously disordered act.[19] The main reason is that, whatever the motive for acting this way, the deliberate use of the sexual faculty outside normal conjugal relations essentially contradicts the finality of the faculty. For it lacks the sexual relationship called for by the moral order, namely the relationship which realizes "the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love."[20] All deliberate exercise of sexuality must be reserved to this regular relationship. Even if it cannot be proved that Scripture condemns this sin by name, the tradition of the Church has rightly understood it to be condemned in the New Testament when the latter speaks of "impurity," "unchasteness" and other vices contrary to chastity and continence.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)