Friday, November 10, 2006

A Conservative Catholic Chimes in...:

...on my post where I noted Ed Feser's post informing that Thomistic/Catholic teachings allow for oral sex between married couples provided the act in no way frustrates the procreative purpose of sex -- in other words, if it's done as "foreplay" to intercourse, but not as a completed act in itself.

Someone named "Ken" left the following comment. When Dr. Kuznicki, in an email, alerted me to this comment, I replied that I worried this post wasn't for real, but done to make Catholics look bad. Anyway, here it is:

Catholic marriage is not license for “anything goes”. We are bound by the limits of marital chastity. The Holy Sacrament of Marriage between a Man and a Woman does NOT and cannot validate gravely immoral unnatural sexual acts - i.e. oral sex, anal sex and mutual masturbation etc.

Oral sex for a married couple is a gravely disordered abominable act. It does nothing but defile the Holy Sacrament of Marriage, darken the soul and block the Grace of God.

Do not be deceived by the argument that these acts – borrowed from the disordered and diabolical behavior of homosexuals – serve to strengthen the bond between husband and wife. Allowing these insidious acts into your marriage creates a fissure, which ultimately will severely damage your marriage or completely destroy it altogether.

Advice to follow one’s conscience on the subject is permissible provided one’s conscience has been properly formed in accordance with the truths of the Catholic Church. Anything less is spiritual suicide.

“Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man’s most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths.”

1 comment:

Prup (aka Jim Benton) said...

As I said when this came up on POSITIVE LIBERTY, this position is hardly that of the Catholicism I grew up with -- at this was pre- and during Vatican II. My religion teachers in high school specifically stressed that while sex was to be limited to marriage, within marriage it had many functions and was NOT 'for procreation only.' It was for the strengthening of the bond between husband and wife, for the display of affection, etc. And because of this, sexual variations were certainly allowable, with no 'but only as foreplay and not to the point of orgasm' exceptions. It is true that the Jesuits who taught me were particularly liberal in many matters, but to say there is "A" Catholic position is simply wrong.