{"id":19684,"date":"2018-05-26T00:00:38","date_gmt":"2018-05-26T06:00:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.markmallett.com\/blog\/?p=19684"},"modified":"2022-09-06T20:36:48","modified_gmt":"2022-09-07T02:36:48","slug":"human-sexuality-and-freedom-part-iv","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.markmallett.com\/blog\/human-sexuality-and-freedom-part-iv\/","title":{"rendered":"Human Sexuality and Freedom – Part IV","gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"text"}]},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

As we continue this five part series on Human Sexuality and Freedom, we now examine some of the moral questions on what\u00a0is right\u00a0and what is wrong.\u00a0Please note, this is for mature readers…<\/i><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

ANSWERS TO INTIMATE QUESTIONS<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

SOMEONE <\/b>once said, \u201cThe truth will set you free\u2014but first it will tick you off<\/i>.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

In our first year of marriage, I began reading about the Church\u2019s teaching on contraception and how this would require\u00a0periods of abstinence. So I thought that, perhaps, there were other \u201cexpressions\u201d of affection that were permissible. However, here it seemed the Church was also saying, \u201cno.\u201d Well, I was kind of angry at all these \u201cprohibitions\u201d, and the thought flashed through my mind, \u201cWhat do those celibate men in Rome know about sex and marriage anyway!\u201d\u00a0Yet I also knew that if I began to arbitrarily pick and choose what truths were true or not in my opinion<\/i>, I would soon become unprincipled in many ways and lose friendship with He who is \u201cthe Truth.\u201d As G.K. Chesterton once said, \u201cMoral issues are always terribly complex\u2014for someone without morals.\u201d<\/p>\n

And so, I laid down my arms, picked up the Church\u2019s teachings again, and tried to understand what \u201cMother\u201d was trying to say… (cf. An Intimate Testimony<\/i><\/a>).<\/p>\n

Twenty-four years later, as I look back on our marriage, the eight children we\u2019ve had, and the new depths of our love for one another, I realize that the\u00a0Church was \"\"never saying \u201cno.\u201d She was always saying \u201cYes!\u201d Yes<\/i> to God\u2019s gift of sexuality. Yes<\/i> to holy intimacy in marriage. Yes<\/i> to the wonder of life. What she was saying \u201cno\u201d to were actions that would distort the divine image in which we were made. She was saying \u201cno\u201d to destructive and selfish behaviors, \u201cno\u201d to going against \u201cthe truth\u201d that our bodies tell all on their own.<\/p>\n

The Catholic Church’s teachings on human sexuality aren\u2019t arbitrarily\u00a0drawn up, but flow from the laws of creation, flow ultimately from the law of love. <\/i>They\u00a0aren\u2019t proposed to infringe on our liberty, but precisely to lead us to greater <\/i>freedom\u2014just as the guardrails on a mountain road are there to safely lead you \"\"higher and higher as opposed to inhibiting your progress.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n

…feeble and sinful as he is, man often does the very thing he hates and does not do what he wants. And so he feels himself divided, and the result is a host of discords in social life. Many, it is true, fail to see the dramatic nature of this state of affairs in all its clarity… The Church believes that Christ, who died and was raised for the sake of all, can show man the way and strengthen\u00a0him through the Spirit…<\/strong>\u00a0 \u2014<\/span>Second Vatican Council,\u00a0Gaudium et Spes,\u00a0<\/em>n. 10<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The “way” that Jesus shows us and that is the\u00a0basis of freedom in our sexuality, lies in \u201cmutual self-giving\u201d, not taking. And therefore, there are laws as to what defines \u201cgiving” and what defines \u201ctaking.\u201d Yet, as I said in Part II<\/a>, we live in a society where it\u2019s okay to tell others not to speed, not to park in a handicapped zone, not to hurt animals, not to cheat on taxes, not to overeat or to eat poorly, not to drink excessively or drink and drive, etc. But somehow, when it comes to our sexuality, we have been told the lie that the only rule is that there are no rules. But if there was ever an area of our lives that impacts us more deeply than most everything else, it is precisely our sexuality. As St. Paul wrote:<\/p>\n

\n

Shun immorality. Every other sin which a man commits is outside the body; but the immoral man sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own; you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body. (I Cor 6:18-19)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

So with that, I want to discuss the \u201cno\u2019s\u201d of the Church\u2019s teaching precisely so that you and I can enter more fully into God\u2019s \u201cyes\u201d for us, His \u201cyes\u201d for both<\/i> body and soul. For the\u00a0greatest way you can glorify God is to live fully according to the truth of who you are…<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED ACTS<\/p>\n

There is a new resource that was published recently by Pursuit of Truth Ministries, a group of Christians\u00a0who have lived with same-sex attraction. One of the authors recounts how he felt about the Church\u2019s use of the term \u201cintrinsically disordered\u201d to refer to the homosexual tendency.<\/p>\n

\n

The first time I read about this term, it was difficult to take. I felt as though the Church was calling me<\/i> disordered. I could not have found a more hurtful phrase, and it made me want to pack up and leave, and never come back. <\/b>\u2014\u201cWith Open Hearts\u201d<\/a>, P. 10<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But he goes on to rightly point out that any <\/i>orientation or act that is contrary to the \u201cnatural law\u201d is \u201cintrinsically disordered”, meaning “not according to one’s nature.” Acts are disordered when they do not lead to the fulfillment of the purposes of our bodily faculties as they are structurally created. For example, making yourself vomit because you believe yourself to be too fat even though you are skinny is an intrinsic disorder (anorexia) based on a perception of yourself or your body that is contrary to its true nature. Likewise, adultery between heterosexuals is an intrinsically disordered act since it is contrary to the order of creation as intended by the Creator between spouses.<\/p>\n

St. John Paul II taught:<\/p>\n

\n

Freedom is not the ability to do anything we want, whenever we want. Rather, freedom is the ability to live responsibly the truth of our \"barbed-wire-freedom\"<\/a>relationship with God and with one another.<\/strong> \u2014POPE JOHN PAUL II, St. Louis, 1999<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Just because one can<\/i> do something does not mean one should<\/i>. And so here, we must be straightforward: because the anus is a \u201chole\u201d does not, therefore, mean it should be penetrated by a penis; because an animal has a vagina does not mean that it should be penetrated by a man; likewise, because the mouth is an opening does not, therefore, make it a moral option for completion of the sex act.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Here, then, is a summary of the Church\u2019s moral theology regarding human sexuality\u00a0that flows from the natural moral law. Keep in mind that these “laws”\u00a0are ordered to God\u2019s \u201cyes\u201d for our bodies:<\/p>\n

\u2022 it is a sin to stimulate oneself, called masturbation, whether it ends in orgasm or not. The reason is that stimulation for self-sexual gratification already tends toward an objectively disordered use of one\u2019s body, which is designed for the completion<\/i> of the sex act with one\u2019s spouse.<\/p>\n

\n

For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of \u201cthe sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved.\u201d<\/b><\/span> \u2014Catechism of the Catholic Church, <\/i>n. 2352<\/span><\/p>\n

(Note: any involuntary act that results in an orgasm, such as a nocturnal \u201cwet dream,” is not sinful.)<\/i><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u2022 it is always wrong for a male orgasm to take place outside of\u00a0his wife, even if preceded by penetration (and then withdrawn prior to ejaculation). The reason \"\"is that ejaculation is always ordered toward procreation. Any action which procures an orgasm outside of intercourse or purposely interrupts it in the course of sexual interaction in order to avoid pregnancy is an act not open to life, and therefore contrary to its intrinsic function.<\/p>\n

\u2022 stimulation of another\u2019s genitalia (\u201cforeplay\u201d) is only permissible when it results in the completion<\/i> of intercourse between a husband and wife<\/em>. Mutual masturbation between spouses is unlawful because the act is not open to life and is contrary to the intended design of our body’s sexuality if\u00a0<\/em>it does not end in intercourse. When it comes to oral means of stimulation, as said above, kissing, etc. cannot lead to the\u00a0man’s\u00a0<\/em>seed being spilled outside of intercourse, but is not illicit if it is ordered to the “mutual self-giving” that is the basis of the unitive and procreative act, for the body is in its essence “good.”<\/p>\n

\n

Let him kiss me with kisses of his mouth,\u00a0for your love is better than wine… (Song of Songs 1:2)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Here, the husband has a particular duty to ensure that his “touch” is giving in love, and not taking in lust. In this way, their mutual pleasure is raised to the dignity which God intended it to have, since He designed pleasure as an intrinsic part of our sexuality. It is not illicit, in this regard, for a woman to have an orgasm before or after the penetration of the man, so long as the completion of the conjugal act does in fact occur, as God intended it. The goal is not orgasm alone, but a complete giving of self that leads to a deeper union in sacramental love. In his work Moral Theology<\/em> by Fr. Heribet Jone, which bears the\u00a0Imprimatur\u00a0<\/em>and\u00a0Nihil Obstat,\u00a0<\/em>he writes:<\/p>\n

\n

Wives who do not obtain complete satisfaction may procure it by touches immediately before or after coition since the husband may withdraw immediately after ejaculation.<\/strong> (p. 536)\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

He continues,<\/p>\n

\n

Mutual acts that are sexually stimulating are lawful when done with a just cause (eg. as a sign of affection) if there is no danger of pollution (even though this should sometimes accidentally follow) or even if there is such danger but there is also a reason justifying the action….<\/strong> (p. 537)\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In this regard, it is worth repeating St. John Paul II’s insight that ideally…<\/p>\n

\n

\u2026the climax of sexual arousal takes place both in a man and in a woman, and that it occurs inasmuch as possible in both spouses at the same time.<\/b>\u00a0\u2014POPE JOHN PAUL II,\u00a0Love and Responsibility<\/em>, Kindle version by Pauline Books & Media, Loc 4435f<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This orders the conjugal act toward a mutual “climax” of giving\u00a0and\u00a0<\/em>receiving.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u2022 Sodomy, once considered illegal in most countries, is not only gaining ground as an acceptable form of sexual expression, but is being casually mentioned\u00a0in some sex education classes with children, and even encouraged as a form of recreation for\u00a0heterosexual couples. However, the Catechism states that such acts are “sins gravely contrary to chastity” [1]<\/sup><\/a>cf. CCC,\u00a0<\/em>n. 2357<\/span><\/span>