October 31, 2004

Not your grandfather's Vatican...

With the blessing of the Vatican, two Italian theologians have just published a book on sex for Catholics, entitled It's A Sin Not To Do It. One might be forgiven for thinking that this is just a way to get the faithful to increase the Catholic birth-rate; far from it. It's much more expansive in scope. For example, as the Telegraph reports, the book "unearths theological justification for post-coital masturbation for women who fail to achieve orgasm during intercourse". How times change. Mentioning something like that in the Catholic school I attended back in the early 1960s would have meant six of the best. (But I thought Catholic teaching was supposed to be inerrant and eternal....smile6.gif)


Posted by geoff2 at October 31, 2004 01:19 PM
Comments

It is still all about procreation!
If they were concerned with a woman having an orgasm either before or during intercourse but before the man then maybe I would believe it was far from "just a way to get the faithful to increase the Catholic birth-rate"
There are several theories suggest that when a woman orgasms she creates a suction that can essentially suck any remaining sperm into her cervix, Baker and Bellis (http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=880)
Anecdotally, any women who has tried to break the suction of a cervical cap or even an instead feminine hygiene device fairly soon as orgasm can tell you how much harder it is than at other times.

Posted by: Susan in St. Paul at November 1, 2004 01:56 AM

1) It's all about context. A knife used in the kitchen is good usage, same knife in a murder is misuse. Ditto Catholic teaching on sex. You can't "go forth & multiply", or have Jesus celebrate & create more wine at a wedding, if marriage & sex was bad.

2) Comment about Catholic teaching be "inerrant" - that only applies to solemnly pronounced doctrine "ex cathedra". All other comments, remarks, even Papal encyclicals & writings & teachings, are not considered "ex cathedra". They are therefore allowed changes / modifications / updates as knowledge increases. The religion is not as rigid as its made out to be. We should look to the example of Jesus, not the Pharisees.

Posted by: Chris at November 3, 2004 09:12 AM

I strongly disagree with your first point, Chris! Over the ages people have had no problem at all multipying with bad marriages and bad sex, absolutely none at all. Consider the current over-populated areas where female infibulation, clitoridectomy, and clitoral circumcision are practiced, you think that is good sex? From a female view point, good sex also is not being taken care of after your partner climaxes, as encourage by the new church writings, but to have better sex all around.
In Judiasm, female sexually satisfication is part of a marriage agreement but in Catholicism it is not and never has been. It isn't a question of context at all, it is merely another attempt to increase the numbers of the church.
Wine at a wedding is essential when your water supply is bad, as I am sure it was in Jesus time.

As to look at the example of Jesus,he was a Jew,not a Christian and certainly not a Catholic . The Catholic Church is only marginally built on the actually examples of Jesus. The Catholic Church while less rigid than it was, is still fairly rigid. Ask the Pope about sex and I am sure he will come down hard on the side of procreation. He has made statements against birth control, abortion(even when the woman's life is in grave danger) and practices that spill and waste seed. The only reason the Catholic Church has changed overtime is to stem the outgoing flow of membership.

I agree that Christains should look more to the teachings of Christ, even if they were to follow their own 10 commandments I think the world would be a better place.

Posted by: Susan in St. Paul at November 4, 2004 02:13 PM

This is stupid! I have found many blogs saying this, but never have I found an actual picture of the book or anything of it on any church web site!

Plus, the whole thing would be obviously wrong according to the perspective or account of what the book says according to the Telegraph.

No matter what, Christians should pray about this.

Posted by: Dag at November 4, 2004 02:16 PM

The problem in this idea that the post coital masturbation is less than reproductive is that church doctrine puts forth the idea that climax increases the likelihood of conception. Even post intercourse, if orgasm did enhance the likelihood of pregnancy, there is still plenty of chance that the sperm still swimming around inside could benefit from whatever an orgasm supposedly does to increase the chances of fertilization...

Posted by: hMmm at November 5, 2004 11:41 PM

I'm less concerned about the efficacy of post-coital masturbation in promoting conception than I am about the bizarre notion of the church going open-kimono about stuff that would have caused Mother Superior to break your knuckles with her ruler in parochial school.....

And no, despite Dag's disbelief, this is real, not a hoax. Here's a URL which includes the ISBN:
http://www.liberonweb.com/asp/libro.asp?ISBN=8838484139

Posted by: Geoff Arnold at November 6, 2004 12:42 AM

Oh, don't worry Geoff, Mother Superior will still be breaking school boy knuckles over such things, after all only those who are married will be encourage to read it.

Posted by: Susan in St. Paul at November 8, 2004 10:22 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?



Anyone is welcome to leave a comment. However I reserve the right to delete blogspam,
as well as any comments that are abusive, irrational, or grossly off-topic.

Please copy the grey, four digit security code into the text box below.
This is to confirm that you are a human being and not a robot.