If sodomy is a mortal sin that cries heaven for vengeance

Shouldn't fellatio ("blowjob") be considered the same ?
I mean, sodomy is worst of course but fellatio shouldn't fall way behind, it's the same perversion of something sacred and fruitful into something perverse/hedonist and sterile. It's anti-Logos. Same thing for cunnilingus really.
And as for sexual positions, I think that anything beside missionary is pretty much degenerate in my opinion, but I wouldn't know about what the bible's says, but pretty sure they would dismiss primitive positions like "doggystyle" and such.
So, do anyone can inform me in the New Testament's position on oral sex and sexual positions? I think that oral sex probably is a serious sin, since it's a perversion of the sacred gift of reproduction.

Attached: 1537731065613.jpg (960x707, 141.31K)

Other urls found in this thread:

johnsanidopoulos.com/2014/04/divine-eros-according-to-saint-john.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiss_of_peace
dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/12/21/like-a-rutting-buck/
dalrock.wordpress.com/2019/01/25/the-chivalric-rules-of-love/
dalrock.wordpress.com/2019/01/21/call-me-unchivalrous/
catechism.cc/articles/marital-foreplay.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Are you seriously looking for a passage in the gospels and epistles concerning sexual positions?

Read song of Solomon and tell me that sex isn't designed for enjoyment in addition to procreation.

I'm sexually excited by making out with my wife. What's the ethical difference between that and fellatio?
I can impregnete her in a handstand on a waterbed if I really wanted. Is that frustrating God's design?

What's wrong with regular sex

No, it's designed solely for procreation. Pleasure is just a bonus gift given to God in the sexual act, but it wasn't designed for this purpose.

Of course you are. You are to procreate inserting your penis into her vagina. Oral sex is non-constructive and non-creative. It is sterile and thus it is degenerate and a sin. That's the argument for qualifying sodomy a mortal sin, so it should be the same for hedonists practices about sex. Moreover, when you engage in oral "sex", that be cunninlingus or oral sex, you will kissing your husband/wife everyday with these filth lips that have had a lot of sexual fluids, you will kiss your children with thoses filthy lips and your friends too. It's extremely degenerate and nothing pure about it. When you put your penis in your wife's lips and mouth, it will be the same lips and mouth that will kiss your son in the morning when he will go to school.
The lips and mouth weren't designed to be involved in sexual attacks, that be with the penis or vagina, and thus they are sinful in my humble opinion.

Attached: 4chan.jpg (320x239, 30.24K)

Fellatio is sodomy, what are you talking about?

Doggystyle is just a term people came up with but there's nothing wrong with having sex that way. I don't think the Bible ever says or implies you have to be facing each other to have sex. It's the way most of God's creatures have sex if you want to get into what's 'natural'. And while man are not the same as animals our sex positions are not what separates us from beasts. I hear some women only orgasm from doggystyle for example. Sexual pleasure is good within marriage which is why God made it so pleasurable, He wants us to enjoy it, properly. Anal, I think, only became popular because it's seen as naughty and painful and degrading. I remember hearing a standup comic who said something along those lines, that girls always say 'Why do guys always want anal' and the answer is because girls don't want them to do it. Most guys who try it as a novelty don't want to go back to it. I mean think about it, the idea of putting something in a butthole just feels wrong. If you had something in your butt, the first instinct would be to get it out of there, right? That's for expelling waste. I think that is probably the appeal for gays. The wrongness of it is fetishized. As casual sex and anal have become popularized in the straight community, straights begin acting indistinguishable from gays. Things that people used to criticize gays for, they can't any more because they do almost the same thing. As for oral, I think the Catholics are right about that, it's fine as foreplay but shouldn't be a sex act in and of itself.

Its going to be one of those arguments.

You are right about fellatio being a grave sin and unacceptable, but you are using the wrong reasons.
It is not that marriage is purely for procreation and pleasure is just an incidental extra. Marriage has 4 purposes. In order of importance:

1) Marriage is for a man and a woman to become two consubstantial hypostases, in the image of the eternal love within the Trinity. St. John Chrysostom says: "When the man and woman are united in marriage, they cease to be considered an earthly thing, but rather an image of God Himself." For this, the man and woman become united by the sacrament like Christ and His Church are united (Ephesians 5:22-33). The couple becomes a "miniature church", a "cell" of the Body of Christ, and the Word of God becomes incarnate through them, which is why Isaiah 7:14 is read during the marriage service (in Orthodoxy anyway). Therefore, they become one flesh, like the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one God. Through the sacrament, marrriage is UNITIVE.

2) Marriage is for a man and a woman to learn to give up themselves to one another completely. (Genesis 2:18-24; 1 Corinthians 7:3-4) Marriage is for MUTUAL SPIRITUAL EDIFICATION.

3) Marriage is for PROCREATION. (Genesis 1:28)

4) Marriage is for CHASTITY. (1 Corinthians 7:2)

The main reason homosexuals cannot be married is that the man is an icon of Christ and the woman an icon of the Church - therefore marriage requires for there to be a man and a woman. That homosexuals cannot have children is almost a detail in comparison, since post-menopause women can get married, and a couple that cannot have children can always adopt.
But of course that is not the sole reason homosexuals cannot get married. Homosexual intercourse is against natural law, and is the great sin of impudicity. Oral sex, etc. is also a great sin, because it is misusing, almost violating, the body. Our mouths are designed to receive the Eucharist, not genitals. Non-vaginal intercourse defiles the marriage bed, and the Fathers often compare anal sex to rape and oral sex to cannibalism.
But marriage is for pleasure as much as it is for procreation. Pleasure is unitive, read the Song of Songs (which is itself about God's love for Israel). Pleasure in marriage is rooted in eroticism, and, indeed, God's love for us is "erotic" (in the sense that God intensely wants us, specifically, for who we are). See this article about divine eros: johnsanidopoulos.com/2014/04/divine-eros-according-to-saint-john.html

See also this quote of St John Chrysostom:

I wouldn't agree personally. Why?
Because sexuality has two roles: 1) procreation 2) pair-bounding with your wife or husband.
However, when you have sex in the "doggystyle" position, you don't have a genuine connection with your partner, but you are just having her sexual back involved and your faces and eyes won't meet, but only primal sex, where you just are using the woman as lust object and where the woman fells like being sexually used and penetrated, but without the "pair-bonding" connection. So while in term of raw pleasure, I'm sure that both parteners feel good during "doggystyle", it looks as an uncivilized and impure way of having sex in my opinion, and not really genuine love. What would be genuine love and pair bonding would be a position where both the woman and men have their faces and eyes that meet during the penetrating act, something like the missionary, or woman riding on top while facing her husband's face and possibily kissing. That way, it would truly be love and pair bounding, and not just primitive lust and primal f*cking.
That's my opinion on the matter. As I said, I don't know the "official" position of the bible and the Church on these specific talking points.

Attached: Moral.png (806x236, 22.3K)

What the bible says about kissing each other ? I somehow feel that we are naturally meant to kiss our Husband or wife as a way to unite. Well, it's obvious since you are asked to kiss the wife when you marry in the Church. But I would like the teaching in short about this, and the logic behind it, I want to fully understand.
Thank you.

Attached: 1541396069508.jpg (1650x1275, 116.67K)

The mouth isn't naturally lined with feces.
Is suckling your wife's breasts sodomy? Is French kissing sodomy?

The issue is ejaculation , don't treat the mouth like a vagina, don't put your seed there, but for foreplay I don't see the comparison.

Huh? Kissing someone is not the same as swallowing bodily fluids that are meant for sexual lubrification and insemination.

Also, we're not Jews or Muslims. We don't follow a manual on what can and cannot be done during our daily life. Read the gospels, read the scriptures, pay attention during the church services, ask your priest about things, let your conscience judge you.
Kissing is a symbol of love and respect. I'm not sure why you would think kissing one's husband or wife would be problematic when we are to greet each other with a kiss: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiss_of_peace
Again, there isn't a "manual of theology on kissing". We're not Jews or Muslims.

Fr. Ripperger and St. Alphonsus spoke about it in depth, foreplay is fine but with some restrictions.

- no sex toys
- it's very favorable to women actually, men can perform fellatio and do other things, since the woman's arousal and orgasm are conducive towards pregnancy

for all the talk about "catholic prudishness", women have a ton of leeway in bed. it's actually more strict for men.

song of solomon is a metaphorical work. making out with your wife is fine.


chastity within marriage is more than attainable, it is actually considered having no sexual outside of marriage. what people confuse "chastity in marriage" with, is actually called a "josephine marriage", where both spouses agree to not have intercourse for the purposes of spiritual advancement. ofc, it is extremely rare.


yes, any ejaculation outside of martial sex is mortally sinful. any ejaculation outside of coitus is mortally sinful, unless it's something like a night emission where it is outside of man's control/will

As long as the focus of the sexual attraction is on the spouse and the sex is procreative, sexual position does not matter.

What about inside the marriage but during pregnancy? It's not like the wife can get double pregnant, so the location of the ejaculation is irrelevant. Or after menopause?

no, it still has to be vaginal. your wife being pregnant is not a free sin card.


still satisfies the unitive criteria for licit marital sex

Sex only during marriage, only open to procreation and missionary.

Attached: 1543083565673.gif (500x364, 982.65K)

I mean theoretically the sin of the sodomites is really faggotry.
As if blowjobs or not are sins I think I can safely assume that at the very least the seed has to go to the vagina.
but I thing which I think very much that it must be sinful

Source on St. Alphonsus?
There's no Catholic official statement and probably never will (can you imagine the title of such a document lol) but my conscience tells me it's a sin.
Would like to know what a Saint has to say about it.

Song of Solomon is the correct answer to this question, but Catholics will all say it's a metaphor only, because literal interpretation is haram.

Song of Solomon 4:12, 16, 6:2-3


Pretty obvious what this is talking about.

Oh, Catholics. Stop.

dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/12/21/like-a-rutting-buck/

dalrock.wordpress.com/2019/01/25/the-chivalric-rules-of-love/

>dalrock.wordpress.com/2019/01/21/call-me-unchivalrous/

Of course you can.
Sexual bonding is much more than staring at each other like meerkats while abstently thrusting.

yikes, a degenerate.

Im a virgin.
I still realize sex isnt about looking into each eyes soulfully while thinking of England, or that certain positions are not icky because they look disrespectful or something.

I don't think so bro. Fellatio is sucking a pecker and I don't think God likes it when men put peckers in their mouths. Cunnilingus, however, when performed by a man on a woman in the act of marital intercourse is acceptable.

Fellatio does cry to Heaven for vengeance, user. It’s unnatural and disordered because the marital act is created for the purpose of the union of the man with the woman and for procreation. Fellatio isn’t procreative and it also corrupts the natural union of the man’s flesh with the woman’s. Therefore it is sodomy and is evil in the same way that sodomy is evil. Keep in mind sodomy isn’t always homosexual, and is evil even when a married couple performs it (though even moreso when homos do it).

I'm not a Catholic.
Actually, Catholics allow oral sex if it is for foreplay.

Attached: 1473270158830.jpg (420x523, 73.02K)

This thread won't go anywhere productive.

It's already down the bottom.

That's how Prots see sex, user :^)

Friend you can't just nit-pik a verse from a love poem. You have to see it as a whole for what is it.

based and bible projected

No one can give a source about this on St. Alphonsus?

I've been struggling with which denomination I should choose, but if Catholicism is the only denomination that believes sex is solely for creation then I may seriously consider becoming a catholic

Attached: hmm.gif (480x480, 405.43K)

What if it's foreplay to vaginal sex, and you don't come from the oral. What if it gets you harder, and thus go deeper and are more likely therefore to impregnate your Christian wife???

As Catholic I object to that.
Your wife will receive the Eucharisty in the mouth. You cannot stain the place where she will receive Christ.
Theoretically a man can go on a women, since he isn't swallowing anything, but I'm not sure and I wouldn't do it.

"Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man." - Matthew 15:11

Your idea of sanctity being based on physical occurrences is unbiblical.

Lad don't try to justify it. Jesus was talking about food prohibitions not bl*wjobs.

It's not a justification. I argue the verse should be interpreted that the idea of ritually pure thing (i.e. unclean food, or, in your case, unclean body parts) is incorrect. Rather, it is what comes out of a person - his actions and words, that demonstrate how righteous he is.

Now, you can argue on other grounds that foreplay in the mouth is wrong, though I don't agree. But I think I supplied a biblical verse that states the "ewww, penor in mouth unclean when you use the mouth for other stuff" is wrong.

That argument makes about the same amount of sense as yours.

I agree entirely. Although we shouldn't use the words of the Lord in another context to justify any sexual acts.
Why don't you agree?
You have to admit it, a c*ck is a billion times more disgusting than vomit. And besides vomit is involuntary (one can try to puke but its because one swallomgs something dangerous etc)

Attached: absolutely heretic.png (226x250, 8.88K)

Isn't that a famous Brazilian priest?

Yes, Paulo Ricardo.

Btw does he say anything about the discussion of this thread?

Okay, I see your point about the cock, but only because I'm male and only because it comes with the consideration of it being someone else's and being near me. Otherwise, vomit more disgusting.

Also, -bulemia? Not necessarily involuntary. Can bulemics not ever take communion again?

Fair point. I have not, as of yet, heard an argument that makes oral wrong if within the marriage and if the male still ejaculates inside the woman - however, you may be able to make such an argument, so it's unfair to say I won't agree but, rather, should have said - I think it's improbable that you will state such an argument because I have argued this before without caring which side I ended up on but, this is where I ended up.

That said, I don't have my wife give oral because she's not that into it and I'd rather just have sex… but she does other things for me that turn me on and I don't want to get all bent out of shape over a guy who wants his wife to suck it a little just cause' it's not my thing.

But sucking the thing is disgusting as winnie the pooh. Maybe I am saying this because I'm a man. Don't know if you get my point lad.
Theoretically only this would be "lawful" although it could be a venial sin, since the primary intention of the relation would be lustful pleasure and not primarily having kids (assuming the couple is Catholic and is always open to life, althogh the main motive here would be lust and so since theyre married it would be only venial).
The main reason why I'm sceptical of that shit (although my lustful me would like it) is that something in my mind tells me it's unnatural.

Honestly the only good posts ITT.

Attached: 53793f9d5ed0be660e3f605781e8bc5eef3442280749a6af4c203dde69fa36e8.jpg (960x540, 64.6K)

Read my whole post; I don't find my own cock disgusting.

What about this user bro
He says father Ripperger and St. Alphonsus allow fellatio, although I thing the user meant the equivalent on females, even though, can it be somehow justified?
That's why I'd like that source on the Saint, since St. Alphonsus is a great Saint and I'd like to look for myself what he says.

I wouldn't take a piss if I found it disgusting. Its the act that my Christian side finds disgusting.

Lol as if you will ever be in a sexual encounter with this cringy ass shit goin thru your head all day

On the real tho women are bound by satan and they will bring you away from what is right, you just have to repent.

Lies

Why does this trigger you so?

Here. Brasileiro ou português, anão?

There is no marriage in heaven, so there is no sex in heaven and if there is no sex in heaven then that means that sex is only for reproduction

Attached: 76f24717b251d073dfc21a322e7b399585fff5a7_hq.gif (450x250, 1.03M)

Baseado pe. Paulo.

based father paulo

>catechism.cc/articles/marital-foreplay.htm
Sorry user, but the transient pleasure of sin does not negate its intrinsic punishment.

But they do, though catechism.cc/articles/marital-foreplay.htm

this post reeks of unbridled virginity

you can do any sex act with your wife including foreplay as long as you end up ejaculating in her vagina and not purposely outside it.

The answer is it depends.
If you winnie your wife's pooh, then it's bad, but w/e.
If you sodomize a young boy, who's pre-pubescent or early pubescent, one who is under your care, then you REALLY need to die, because that boy cannot grow up into a man in a normal way anymore… not without some serious work to get over that trauma.

There are degrees of punishment, because there are degrees of sin. Blowjob isn't so against the natural order as anal. But pederastic sodomy is one of the most evil acts possible.

Also, if it's your wife blowing you, it's probably fine.

...

Português

Thank you very much user. Best Post on this thread.
I knew it was against natural law.
It could only be against it.

I bet to differ, specially second point where it says that foreplay isn't unitive or procreative. But essentially every way to feel your partner is body fully can be a bonding experience and increase intimacy and love between the two. This is the unitive part, and as long as it lead to a protective end goal, it can be moral.

Mark 7:10
And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: 11Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
So we can surmise that a penis in a wife's mouth does not defile.

gays go to hell.

Attached: the world.png (258x258, 133.04K)

Using natural organs for a unnatural purpose is bad. In fact, that's what makes sodomy worse than rape.
Vomit is a natural reaction the body that increases the average lifespan of the person.

Blowjobs and other forms of foreplay are fine as long as they lead to actual vaginal intercourse immediately afterwards that is open to life, and you don't cum in her mouth.

I can't believe this thread you guys.

Attached: haytham.jpg (350x335, 60.58K)

Attached: vladik.jpg (261x250, 13K)

This thread resurrect from the deads…Just like Jesus-Christ.

(Not today Satan)
I'll put it simply and crudely: If you shoot your goo in anywhere but the cooch, you go to hell before you die.

The main problem is that there's no official document whatsoever of the Church explaining what can be done and what not.
That said you'll have different priests saying different things and different Anons shitposting different things.

And so these kids of threads will show up every once in a while, with one faction saying that oral is permissible and one not.
Actually that's the only talking point of these threads, anal, toys and whatever the frick is already obviously not allowed.

I've literally just been told that any sexual act that can't lead to conception is a no no. So BJs, TFs, or anything where the end result couldn't result in conception is a no go… But that still leaves a lot of leeway to get away with some kinky stuff anons… ya know, if you're so inclined.

So actually, some toys would be fine so long as it doesn't get in the way of conception. It could be seen as an act of lust since it's intended to increase orgasmic pleasure, but that's debatable based on context and how much of a role it actually plays in intercourse.

BJ's as FOREPLAY do not negate contraception, there's a huge difference.
Also, what the frick is TF?

This is something that's completely prohibited because you're not shagging your wife if you're using a dildo.

Tit (fill in the blank)
didn't want to have to say it…
Who said it's being inserted vaginally? ( ° ʖ °)

Attached: 44582909_350875435478315_4270350157326697065_n.jpg (640x640, 135.59K)

But then you would be committing sodomy, one way or another, either in you or her…
I'll have to agree this was an interesting fetish I used to share, but its completely lustful and deviates from the whole process that is love making, its definitely sinful since you're lowering the act to be purely based on the flesh.
On the other hand I see how fellatio can in many forms better the experience over baby making, its an act of care with kisses and everything, and even shows devotion of the wife. Wouldn't you say kissing your wife body also a sign of love and care? (and I'm excluding hardcore deepthroat)

Friendly reminder that the anus is one way only. Buttsechs is degenerate, considered sodomy, and a one way ticket to hell.

Attached: f25.jpg (600x600, 68.82K)

Your "love" and the love of your God is just as superficial as any kink.

Well Zig Forumsster…do you believe that in your single lifetime on this winnie the pooh gay Earth you will possibly come close to what is Logos?