RE: What IS good, and how do we determine it?
June 24, 2015 at 2:21 pm
(This post was last modified: June 24, 2015 at 2:29 pm by Metis.)
(June 24, 2015 at 2:15 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:(June 24, 2015 at 1:50 pm)Metis Wrote: The Jew topic has come up quite a few times though and none of the apologists there seem to really want to explain it. Another one they don't like is "Natural Law" a.k.a: "Body parts can only be used for a specific purpose and it's wrong to use them for something different or change them, so dicks up the butt are bad but boobjobs are totally cool" (you can really tell it was men who came up with this right?). Unless you're a transsexual of course, then you're a godless heathen going to hell for "perverting Gods wonderful design".
Just to clarify, the Church actually does not teach that anal foreplay is wrong. When a Catholic says they believe it to be wrong, they are speaking on their own opinions and not on any official Church teaching.
The book, Moral Theology, which was used by priests in the confessional distinguishes between what is called 'perfect sodomy' and 'imperfect sodomy". This is what is says about Imperfect sodomy:
"it is neither sodomy nor a sin if intercourse is begun in the rectal manner with the intention of completing it in the natural manner" (Jone "Moral Theology" 757)
Ah, you highlight an interesting point there Catholic_Lady, that itself is another interesting change in Church Teaching. Previously the Church forbade sodomy full stop, but after John Paul II released the Theology of the Body it became fine for heterosexual couples. Of course with the provision that the man must ejaculate within the vagina so there's still a chance of babies in theory, that's still a must. If he cums before then it's a sin.
I'm not making that up http://www.worldcat.org/title/iota-unum-...c/35022655 . There's probably other places you can read this too, most Traditionalist Catholic sites like those of the SSPX have several pages worth of "evidence" condemning John Paul II for doing this.
I think the reason given for why anal sex without climax became ok was a "change in perception across history about what constituted a contraceptive act". Really I just think it was giving a bit of ground to the sexual revolution.
Quote:-and you? Do you enjoy a little rimming before being railed? I'm remembering, now, what I found so delicious about catholic girls -then-. We have a subforum you might want to join......shame is intoxicating, my love.
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=media.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FgyltTPvict94c%2Fgiphy.gif)