Sodomy vs. The True Nature of Marriage

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='15 April 2010 - 04:03 PM' timestamp='1271358224' post='2094150']
...oral sex is not appropriate foreplay...it is...to put it lightly...rather disgusting, and not at all "honoring God with the body..."
[/quote]
Again show me explicit documentation from the last 30 years where it states oral stimulation of the genitals [ oral sex]is forbidden. Your disgust is not criteria.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='15 April 2010 - 03:03 PM' timestamp='1271358224' post='2094150']
...oral sex is not appropriate foreplay...it is...to put it lightly...rather disgusting, and not at all "honoring God with the body..."
[/quote]

I have no clue what to think of it.

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

I had no idea that Catholicism had rules about what a husband and wife could and couldn't do when having sex (obviously, except the birth control issue). What's left? Having sex with a sheet between you with a hole in it? What about love? Joy? Having fun with your spouse? Emotional intimacy?

I read somewhere where a Catholic writer likened the joy of orgasm between married couples to the joy and love that God feels for us when we love him.

I, too, would be interested in hearing about any church rulings within the past 30 years on what is and isn't allowed.

Note: I am not agreeing, disagreeing, or questioning ANY posters in this thread. I am honestly confused. I had also never even heard Christopher West's name until I read this thread, so I have no opinion.

Edited April 15, 2010 by IgnatiusofLoyola

[kamiller42]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='15 April 2010 - 03:02 PM' timestamp='1271358148' post='2094147']
sorry, I mis understood ya...it seemed like you were twisting my points and criticizing them and making me sound like some sort of puritan...(see, it works both ways...)
[/quote]
Give that I said "Which goes to show we lose our humanity if we become too puritanical [b]or[/b] licentious," I find it curious [i]you[/i] connected your opinion with puritanical and not licentious. Of course, I agree with your connection since you said the three steps I outlined would "suffice."

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='15 April 2010 - 03:08 PM' timestamp='1271358520' post='2094152']
It was not [u]only[/u] rooted in the idea that the act causes women pain, but that the act degrades both persons. That it would cause her pain is just [u]one[/u] example of how it degrades a woman. I just listed one example. Although I did mention the positioning of the spouses for the act, which removes eye contact and physical embrace from the act, which again makes the woman the object and the man selfish (after his own interests).[/quote]
You know what's crazy. You and I agree with the verdict. We are on the same side! We are debating how we get there.

Positioning is not a substantial argument. What if he embraces from the back and she turns her head to make eye contact. Is it no longer selfish?

I guess what I am getting at is I think we, the Church, needs to make sure we do not explain our morality as a series of "do not's."
- "Do not do X because homosexuals do it."
- "Do not do Y because it's disgusting."
- "Do not do Z because that's the way it's been."

Take the positive route. We "can not" because [b]we embrace greater principles[/b]. God created an order to things. Everything has its time, place, and purpose. Genesis tells us so. This we accept. (An orange is not meant to open cans. Its purpose is to be eaten when hungry.) Scripture tells our bodies are temples, holy and sacred. As holy and sacred, we avoid activities which violate its specialness.

Catholicism is not a religion of "do nots." We leave that for other traditions. "We do" because we love our God who asks us to respond with an "I do," and therefore, we have to say "can not" to some things.

[quote]As for a woman "enjoying" anal penetration, well I do not know how that is possible - biologically or psychologically.[/quote]
Sadly, you would be surprised what people enjoy. Carnal pleasures seem to have no bounds.

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='15 April 2010 - 03:11 PM' timestamp='1271358664' post='2094156']
I have no clue what to think of it.
[/quote]
I doubt HCF does not have a clue about anything. You are smart. Based on what has been discussed so far, I think you do.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='kamiller42' date='15 April 2010 - 03:35 PM' timestamp='1271360152' post='2094168']
I guess what I am getting at is I think we, the Church, needs to make sure we do not explain our morality as a series of "do not's." [/quote]

Then perhaps spouses should question the [i]why[/i].

- Why have anal penetration as foreplay?
- Is the marital act not "satisfying" enough? If "yes" - why?
- Why risk mortal sin? (Since it is very likely the man will finish by accident; I said in the other thread that anal penetration is like a mockery of the marital act)
- Are your motives pure and selfless?

[quote] Take the positive route. We "can not" because [b]we embrace greater principles[/b]. God created an order to things. Everything has its time, place, and purpose. Genesis tells us so. This we accept. (An orange is not meant to open cans. Its purpose is to be eaten when hungry.) Scripture tells our bodies are temples, holy and sacred. As holy and sacred, we avoid activities which violate its specialness.[/quote]

Yes, I believe these points have been brought up already.

[quote] Sadly, you would be surprised what people enjoy. Carnal pleasures seem to have no bounds. [/quote]

Exactly. Since anal penetration is an unnatural sex act, it is disordered.

[quote] I doubt HCF does not have a clue about anything. You are smart. Based on what has been discussed so far, I think you do.
[/quote]

You're right. I know exactly what I think about oral sex but I'm not going to subject anyone to a three page rant.

[Hassan]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='15 April 2010 - 03:09 PM' timestamp='1271358582' post='2094154']
Again show me explicit documentation from the last 30 years where it states oral stimulation of the genitals [ oral sex]is forbidden. Your disgust is not criteria.
[/quote]


question
[spoiler]It's ejaculating in the mouth rather than the vagina. Which can't make the babies. Assuming you don't mean oral sex as the whole deal but just foreplay, I have to ask.

How is that any different than anal sex as foreplay?[/spoiler]

Edited April 15, 2010 by Hassan

[Hassan]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='15 April 2010 - 03:26 PM' timestamp='1271359568' post='2094165']
Thank you for making it clear that the Mod team has a large pro Christopher West bias, and that those that do not agree with his teachings are censored or 'highly encouraged' to keep objections to his errors secret. The errors taught by Mr. West will not be left out of this discussion. NO RULE WAS BROKEN, he was never personally attacked, the only thing attacked was his teaching. I object to the abuse of power and conflict of interest used by some of the Mods to suppress all debate in opposition to the errors of his teachings. There was no need to even think of closing the thread. The argument that because Mr. West is on sabbatical is not a reason to forgo a debate of his teachings. Calling his leave a sabbatical is a pro West spin, another way of looking at it is that he because of the errors of his teachings has been asked to temporarily suspend his duties and cease his teachings. The purpose of this debate was the error in West's teaching that caused that suspension.

Last night before I went to bed you asked for more info on the errors of West, with sources. I promised you I would return today with that information. Now you have prevented me from doing so, I object. It was an abuse of power and conflict of interest for you to ask me to provide other errors with proof and then to change the title of this thread and prevent a free debate on the errors of West. Just because you and others take a more pro-west side does not make it ok to suppress the options of those who object to the errors of West's teachings.
[/quote]

You aren't debating his teachings. You are debating what he said in a volume before replacing it with an edition which seems indisputably in conformity with your Church's views on sex.

No offense but you are way to obsessed with this West guy and sodomy.

[HisChildForever]

GROSS Hassan. Maybe you should change your wording in post 84.

[Hassan]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='15 April 2010 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1271363424' post='2094197']
GROSS Hassan. Maybe you should change your wording in post 84.
[/quote]

Wow. I honestly didn't mean to be vulgar. I thought all the language I used there had been in use throughout the thread. Was something in particular too much?

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Hassan' date='15 April 2010 - 01:32 PM' timestamp='1271363542' post='2094200']
Wow. I honestly didn't mean to be vulgar. I thought all the language I used there had been in use throughout the thread. Was something in particular too much?
[/quote]
+JMJ+
can you still put it into spoiler tags? if not, i can do it for you.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='15 April 2010 - 04:35 PM' timestamp='1271363702' post='2094201']
+JMJ+
can you still put it into spoiler tags? if not, i can do it for you.
[/quote]


I hid it. But I really am confused about what in it was gross. That has been the subject of most of the thread. Was it just stated too explicitly?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='15 April 2010 - 02:09 PM' timestamp='1271358582' post='2094154']
Again show me explicit documentation from the last 30 years where it states oral stimulation of the genitals [ oral sex]is forbidden. Your disgust is not criteria.
[/quote]

Why does it have to be from the last thirty years?

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Hassan' date='15 April 2010 - 01:37 PM' timestamp='1271363820' post='2094202']
I hid it. But I really am confused about what in it was gross. That has been the subject of most of the thread. Was it just stated too explicitly?
[/quote]
+JMJ+
yes. we need to be careful on how things are worded since we have youngun's around these parts. thank you

[Hassan]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='15 April 2010 - 04:42 PM' timestamp='1271364142' post='2094206']
+JMJ+
yes. we need to be careful on how things are worded since we have youngun's around these parts. thank you
[/quote]


Sorry. I'm not religious and I'm living in a dorm (I just mean that what I said was pretty innocent compared to what the normal standard of vulgarity is when you have four hundred teens/young adults living together). Sometimes I honestly just forget that the range of non-vulgar talk kind of shrinks here.

Edited April 15, 2010 by Hassan

[Seven77]

We did not know the reason behind West's suspension. KofC, the way you are pointing out his errors implies that they are the cause of the suspension. Point out the errors without calling West out (as the others here like Kam and HCF are doing). But you want to tar and feather the man because you "were right about West" and "can prove it."