Sex questions
#41
Quote:MM: It is dangerous, and usually disordered, so sinful in most cases, but not universally.



Okay, so this is the part that is puzzling me the most.   :huh:

Something is dangerous, usually disordered and so sinful in most cases, but not universally???

That's as clear as mud.

Especially when we are to avoid the near occasions of sin.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Sacred Heart lover's post:
  • Fionnchu
Reply
#42
(01-18-2020, 12:38 AM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote:
Quote:MM: It is dangerous, and usually disordered, so sinful in most cases, but not universally.



Okay, so this is the part that is puzzling me the most.   :huh:

Something is dangerous, usually disordered and so sinful in most cases, but not universally???

That's as clear as mud.

Especially when we are to avoid the near occasions of sin.

Well, firstly, I'm not a moral authority here, so I'm not obliged to be clear in order to clear up your confusion or direct your soul. Not my vocation.

Secondly, yes. Something can be dangerous, disordered and usually sinful, but also not be intrinsically evil.

In moral theology one has to make a distinction between what is intrinsically evil and what is not. What is intrinsically evil can never be allowed because it violates the Natural or Divine Positive Law. Thus, a lie is never allowed, because it is intrinsically evil.

There are things which are almost always evil when done, but admit of possibly legitimate purposes, so cannot be intrinsically evil, even if usually they are grave sins. Marijuana use is a good example. It is usually for most people mortally sinful to use it, however, there could be circumstances where for some legitimate medical purpose it could be used if there were not less harmful derivatives available.

If oral contact could be used in certain circumstances it cannot be intrinsically evil. Given that some traditional theologians are of the opinion that anal contact is not always sinful, it also cannot be said that it is certainly intrinsically evil. So these acts, while usually sinful, are not universally sinful.

The reason they are usually sinful is that they risk the man completing the act unnaturally. They are obviously quite undignified. Nevertheless, in certain very specific cases these things might not seriously risk pollution and might assist a couple to properly perform the act. For example if for a woman normal relations are so incredibly painful, but they are possible for a short period, the couple could engage in other actions before the husband completed the act properly.

The case is very similar to the Church's moral stance on NFP (Periodic Continence) in the 1940s and 1950s. It was discussed in expert circules, and was allowed under certain circumstances, but priests were strictly commanded never to recommend it even in confession and only to discuss it if the couple brought it up and asked about it. Priests were not to be seen recommending or promoting it because it had a serious risk of disorder and a contraceptive mentality nearly built in. However, under certain very limited circumstances it might be allowed. It is not therefore inherently sinful, but still not to be recommended lest it lead to sin by abuse. This is why the matter is discussed by Pius XII in an address to midwives, not a public address to the world. Midwives could then apply the principles and speak to women, and then the priest could be consulted if the matter was not clear.

So oral or anal sexual contact runs the risk of sin and serious disorder. It should not normally be used. If the topic comes up, for instance during marriage preparation, then the couple could be instructed that these things should not be used, but are not grave sins if the act ends correctly. Still, that is certainly not the ideal to be seeking out.

The problem is modern culture and especially the sexual revolution that brought all of this stuff out into common parlance. People should not be engaging in oral or anal sexual contact. Period. These are disordered things and should not be used in a good marriage. Most couples growing up in the last 40 years, though, have used these disordered things so much that normal "vanilla" sexual relations are impossible. In other cases weaker couples will use these acts, and when preparing for marriage should be told what they cannot do, what they can do, and what they should not, but could do, so consciences are clear.

As regards the avoidance of occasions of sin, the answer is no. We are not obliged to avoid all occasions of sin, nor even all near occasions of sin. We must avoid only unnecessary near occasions of grave sin. There is an objective element to such occasions, but also they are highly subjective. When there is some necessity to the occasion of sin, we have to try to reduce its gravity or proximity. It is more perfect, however to avoid any unnecessary occasion of sin, even if not near or only risks venial sin, but that is not a moral obligation.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • Sacred Heart lover
Reply
#43
(01-19-2020, 04:23 AM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: Well, firstly, I'm not a moral authority here, so I'm not obliged to be clear in order to clear up your confusion or direct your soul. Not my vocation.

Well, thank you for obliging any way.

I appreciate your taking the time to clarify some things.

Other than my disdain for the sodomy craze, my reason for discussing this is not for my benefit but because I know that many wives are unsure about what they should submit to for their husbands.

They want to please them but are not comfortable with certain things.  They are oftentimes also aware that their husbands have porn fueled passions driving these desires rather than love and care for them.

If they acquiesce they deal with guilty feelings and are concerned that they have sinned.

But many will say that if you don't give your husband what he wants he'll look for it elsewhere.

Very few women are able to bring themselves to discuss these things with their priests.
Reply
#44
(01-19-2020, 05:02 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: Well, thank you for obliging any way.

I appreciate your taking the time to clarify some things.

Other than my disdain for the sodomy craze, my reason for discussing this is not for my benefit but because I know that many wives are unsure about what they should submit to for their husbands.

They want to please them but are not comfortable with certain things.  They are oftentimes also aware that their husbands have porn fueled passions driving these desires rather than love and care for them.

If they acquiesce they deal with guilty feelings and are concerned that they have sinned.

But many will say that if you don't give your husband what he wants he'll look for it elsewhere.

Very few women are able to bring themselves to discuss these things with their priests.

I have news for you, this cuts both ways. Take a stroll over to Psychology Today (taken with a grain of salt of course) or Cosmo (don't ask....I blame Yahoo News) and you will find an abundance of articles that make monsters out men for eschewing oral sex with their SO. You also have a handful of "studies" whereby they claim most straight women are actually bisexual and when men don't get them off they turn to other women a la Cynthia Nixon, Miley Cyrus, Kristen Stewart, etc style. According to recent studies (again grain of salt) most women (even straight ones) prefer the lesbian variety because "men are awful." Do you know what the one act most women in these "studies" cite as men being unwilling to perform? Yeah, oral. Need I reference "50 Shades of Grey" which was primarily a millennial woman thing? This woman (https://njfamilylaw.foxrothschild.com/20...s-of-grey/) divorced her husband because he wouldn't play along.

Its as if guys didn't have enough problems we have to deal with other women wooing our wives who probably spend more time with them anyway AND stupid books filling their heads with garbage. I also think too much is made of this "emotional connection" thing. I get human beings have feelings and those need to be addressed but lets be honest. Some of this "emotional" stuff is the result of what some call the cult of women's self-esteem. I highly doubt your great-grandmoms were getting all emotional with your great-grandads yet they still stuck together through worse economic circumstances than we have now. This "emotional" stuff we often hear about today is the result of several decades of telling women that their every impulse is a divine crisis than men are either 1) responsible for or 2) need to fix. They have no coping skills and therefore even a spider on the floor causes a dilemma. You can't tell me every emotional whim rises to the occasion of needing a response. It is not possible to function in a civilized world if you think it is....

Perhaps these are things that should be discussed in pre-cana programs. The folks on the left have no problem talking about these issues on their terms but we often skirt the issue (no pun intended) because the subject is too taboo (or near occasion) to discuss. When you cede the mic though you cede the opportunity to be heard then our minds begin to "fill in the dots" which is almost always a recipe for disaster.
Local anti-feminist.....if you think women deserve special treatment without any accountability for their actions expect to hear from me!
[-] The following 1 user Likes divinesilence80's post:
  • antiquarian
Reply
#45
(01-19-2020, 06:42 PM)divinesilence80 Wrote: I have news for you, this cuts both ways...

So sad.

The thing is though, I'm talking about Trad wives who are open to life, have large families and usually homeschool.

They never read that stuff.

One other note to add here, I went to a NO priest for confession once when I was married and confessed something in the most delicate and abstract terms possible because I wasn't sure if it was considered a sin or not and he berated me for putting that image in his head. :(
Reply
#46
(01-19-2020, 06:51 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: So sad.

The thing is though, I'm talking about Trad wives who are open to life, have large families and usually homeschool.

Again, a discussion in the pre-cana process would reveal or at least bring to the surface what each expects and what the Church has to say. I can't believe that EVERY trad guy would make such demands because it seems contrary to traditionalism in the first place. 

(01-19-2020, 06:51 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: They never read that stuff.

One doesn't have to read that stuff to become a servant to it. I don't think a psych study wins converts so much as it reflects on the reality of some sample.

Think about it this way.... You get together with a gaggle of women all bemoaning how terrible their husbands are. It becomes an echo chamber. You validate / justify / choose your word each other. Then you sit with the soccer moms / football moms / etc while your kids play sports / boy scouts / girl scouts / etc. Again, same discussions ensue and then being secular folks they start sowing the seeds of pop psych / tabloid drama / etc. This only serves to magnify your unhappiness and maybe bitterness. Vicious cycle commences and the next thing you know its one sin after another. No one is insulated from this stuff unless you take up residence off the grid and away from every other human being. Even then....good luck.

(01-19-2020, 06:51 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: One other note to add here, I went to a NO priest for confession once when I was married and confessed something in the most delicate and abstract terms possible because I wasn't sure if it was considered a sin or not and he berated me for putting that image in his head. :(

Some priests, with the utmost charity, are just not with it when it comes to confession. They may be in a hurry or the opposite and use it for hour-long counseling. I've also had a priest tell me once something I confessed was "ok" but the Church teaches plain as day it isn't. It really wasn't a gray area thing. Quite black and white actually. I had another priest basically have a dialog with himself and barely let me speak during the Confession too.

Just curious.....was the priest that berated you an older guy? If so, perhaps even the modest of details were too much for him because he's from a different era. Or if he was younger.....maybe he was struggling with impurity too.
Local anti-feminist.....if you think women deserve special treatment without any accountability for their actions expect to hear from me!
[-] The following 1 user Likes divinesilence80's post:
  • antiquarian
Reply
#47
(01-19-2020, 08:54 PM)divinesilence80 Wrote: Again, a discussion in the pre-cana process would reveal or at least bring to the surface what each expects and what the Church has to say. I can't believe that EVERY trad guy would make such demands because it seems contrary to traditionalism in the first place. 

I didn't say every, I said many.  I only know because I've been asked by others and I have asked others and these are common questions that my girlfriends were never sure about but are too shy to bring up under most circumstances. 

 Priests will tell you that porn is ubiquitous and it changes the way men view women.  This can happen years into the marriage. A couples' sex life can change over the years. Also, not all trad wives are married to trads and many have husbands who have converted externally rather than internally. And if the couple are virgins at pre-cana, or just rather inexperienced,  they wouldn't even know some of the things to ask about.  


As for the comments about a "gaggle" of women bemoaning their husbands and becoming convinced they are unhappy (when really they are truly happy) I can only speak from my experience and the trad women I know see that kind of a thing as a sin.  Trad women tend to be scrupulous and refrain from speaking ill about their husbands.  It's looked down upon. It's very hard to find help and support for very real problems because they don't want to damage their husband's reputation by committing the sin of detraction.

In my case, when I was finally informed by two priests that I had to leave for the sake of my health and safety since I had tried everything possible to rectify the situation for 20 years, people were shocked because we appeared to have an idyllic marriage.  Some of my "friends" berated me because they couldn't imagine why I felt the need to leave.  They were clearly not close enough to me for me to divulge any details and think poorly of me to this day.

But sure, I guess some trad woman could become dissatisfied and turn to lesbianism or something like that...just not very likely so I wouldn't be too worried DS.  I've never heard of it anyway.

If you are concerned, perhaps take a note from the husband I mentioned earlier who takes his vocation to loving his wife (mother of 9) as much his own body seriously enough to schedule a weekend away with her once a year (he would schedule four a year) as well as regular date nights. He wants the best marriage possible, not just good enough. He sees his vocation to her in the same way a priest sees the importance of time alone with God while praying his breviary in front of the blessed sacrament and annual retreats.  Don't do it for her, do it for yourself.  "He who loves his wife loves himself".  Ephesians 5:28, After all, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.  :)  Like I said, they have a very strong marriage and it has gotten them through some very difficult times.

As for the priest in confession, God bless him, yes he was older and he told me that God doesn't care about such things and now I've put this idea in his head.  So according to him, confessing it was a sin.   LOL ::shrug:: 

He's not the norm of course, but I'm just trying to point out how difficult it is for a wife who is trying her best to serve God and her husband to get the information she needs about the issues in this thread.
Reply
#48
(01-19-2020, 10:18 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: I didn't say every, I said many.  I only know because I've been asked by others and I have asked others and these are common questions that my girlfriends were never sure about but are too shy to bring up under most circumstances. 

Well that is tragic.....

(01-19-2020, 10:18 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote:  Priests will tell you that porn is ubiquitous and it changes the way men view women.

Changes the way women view themselves and men too. Like I've quoted before, look at Beggars Daughter (https://beggarsdaughter.com/).

(01-19-2020, 10:18 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote:   This can happen years into the marriage. A couples' sex life can change over the years. Also, not all trad wives are married to trads and many have husbands who have converted externally rather than internally. And if the couple are virgins at pre-cana, or just rather inexperienced,  they wouldn't even know some of the things to ask about.  

Well, there's issue numero uno (bold)! I think its a bit naive to say a late 20s / early 30s couple today doesn't know at least enough about sex to ask "why is this act ok / not ok?" Like I said, we don't live in a Catholic bubble and I'd bet my last buck that even in such a bubble folks may just not want to be honest about what they know.

(01-19-2020, 10:18 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: As for the comments about a "gaggle" of women bemoaning their husbands and becoming convinced they are unhappy (when really they are truly happy) I can only speak from my experience and the trad women I know see that kind of a thing as a sin.  Trad women tend to be scrupulous and refrain from speaking ill about their husbands.  It's looked down upon. It's very hard to find help and support for very real problems because they don't want to damage their husband's reputation by committing the sin of detraction.

Shame on me! I forgot trad women are perfect!

(01-19-2020, 10:18 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: In my case, when I was finally informed by two priests that I had to leave for the sake of my health and safety since I had tried everything possible to rectify the situation for 20 years, people were shocked because we appeared to have an idyllic marriage.  Some of my "friends" berated me because they couldn't imagine why I felt the need to leave.  They were clearly not close enough to me for me to divulge any details and think poorly of me to this day.

Everybody is a critic until they are in the hot seat.


(01-19-2020, 10:18 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: But sure, I guess some trad woman could become dissatisfied and turn to lesbianism or something like that...just not very likely so I wouldn't be too worried DS.  I've never heard of it anyway.

Absence of proof is not proof of absence. If it did happen you wouldn't know about it because it would be too embarrassing for the guy and the wife would likely have to disappear to avoid ridicule. Also, this is generally not something people advertise on a flagpole anyway.

My hang up on this issue comes from the fact that the first girl I dated was very much into porn and had an interest in wayyyy more. She said she was a virgin (I believe she was truthful) but once we got married she wanted to include other women. Everything she said was textbook psychology on the matter. Granted she was neither Catholic (she was conservative Lutheran...her mother was Catholic though) nor traditional but trad women are few are far in between. Thankfully that relationship went no where, only lasted 2 months, and I my biggest regret was wasting that time arguing with a miserable tyrant.

My concern however is that as the culture at large is becoming increasingly more hostile, venomous, and outright indignant towards male / female relationships it may very well cross a threshold that date nights alone won't solve. We may be traditional folks but what about our kids? You can't really cut your kids off from the outside world easily without making it look tempting to be a part of....

(01-19-2020, 10:18 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: .....

As for the priest in confession, God bless him, yes he was older and he told me that God doesn't care about such things and now I've put this idea in his head.  So according to him, confessing it was a sin.   LOL ::shrug:: 

He's not the norm of course, but I'm just trying to point out how difficult it is for a wife who is trying her best to serve God and her husband to get the information she needs about the issues in this thread.

And this is why I think pre-cana needs to pickup the reins....
Local anti-feminist.....if you think women deserve special treatment without any accountability for their actions expect to hear from me!
[-] The following 1 user Likes divinesilence80's post:
  • antiquarian
Reply
#49
I'd be extremely careful regarding what a priest tells you is permissible. I think we all know by now that a fair number of them outright reject Catholic teaching on a number of issues.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Eric F's post:
  • divinesilence80
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)