Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Journal: June 16, 2009

I don't know about the painting I'm working on - sometimes I think, "Why bother?" you know?
.
Why blog? Sometimes certain Catholics disgust me.
.
Whatever. I was thinking about the martyrs during meditation this morning. Today we remember Blessed Brother Thomas Redying, one of the Carthusians martyred for refusing to take Henry VIII's anti-papal oath of supremacy. Thomas was one of 10 monks (out of 30) who resisted apostasy, choosing to die rather than compromise the faith as had most of the remaining 20; these later were exiled from the Charterhouse which they had surrendered to the crown. The Carthusians were martyred in batches - if I remember correctly, the last group of 20 was not killed, although I don't know what happened to them.
.
That isn't my point however. The martyrs who suffered during the reformation, during the French revolution, as well as those killed under Communism, Nazism, the Spanish martyrs, the Mexican martyrs, and so on - they died because of stuff the world considers foolish. Even fellow Christians thought as much. They could have pretended they went along with the State - but they didn't. They believed in the Gospel without compromise.
.
Imagine how alone some of them felt. My reflections caused me to remember Fr. MacRae then.
.
Moving on.
.
Remember Lot's wife, who turned to look at those perishing amid much clamour.
.
So anyway.
.
A friend sends me news links she finds interesting - I get many of my post this way. The latest that struck me was the Christopher West Theology of the Body saga. Another blogger had a good post discussing the issue - lots of comments - it was all about common sense regarding the defense of AP - okay, I'll say it once, Anal Penetration as foreplay in heterosexual marriage. (BTW - if Catholics do this crap - oh, and some people call guys who do it fudge packers, then I was right about the slut/pimp thing I referred to in Sunday's post on modesty.)
.
As St. Paul says - "this stuff should not even be mentioned amongst you, your sanctification forbids it". But sex sells and this culture is sex saturated beyond belief, and rather than correcting that, some people seem to be condoning immoral acts, which they insist lead to the greater good. That's wrong.
.
Read this...
.
"In Chapter Five of his book Good News About Sex & Marriage – Answers to Your Honest Questions About Catholic Teachings (First Edition), in response to a question on the morality of anal sex for married couples, West states “There’s nothing inherently wrong with anal penetration as foreplay to normal intercourse.” This is a false teaching and a serious moral error.
.
Based on my 17 years of research for The Rite of Sodomy – Homosexuality and the Roman Catholic Church, which included a study of all of the Church Fathers, including Saint Peter Damian and Saint Bernardino of Siena, on the vice of sodomy, I can categorically state that the Catholic Church has always defined sodomy to include anal penetration, with or without ejaculation.
.
The act of sodomy, whether carried by homosexuals or by spouses, is intrinsically evil and a perversion. A married couple who engages in anal penetration and then goes on to normal coitus has engaged in two separate acts - the first, sodomy, is a grave sin, whether or not ejaculation has occurred. Further, the physiology of anal copulation is such that it would be most difficult to prevent ejaculation.
.
Now, alas, we have Janet Smith, claiming that: Certainly there isn’t any “Church teaching” about this action at a magisterial level, but few seem to know that there is a tradition of approval of such behavior as foreplay to intercourse (not to be confused with the biblical condemnation of sodomy which replaces intercourse) by orthodox Catholic ethicists. The principle generally invoked is that consensual actions that culminate in intercourse are morally permissible…." - Randy Engel, Sodomy and Theology of the Body, Les Femmes - The Truth
.
Of course, none of the stuff these folks teach is dogma - but it certainly is popular. This type of thinking does indeed lead to greater permissiveness and certainly can be used to justify other behaviors, entertainments, fashions, and the like.
.
Oh well.
.
Once I was out to dinner with some gay friends and one friend told me, "Aristotle Onassis liked anal sex - he used to do it with Maria Callas all the time, but Jackie refused to do it." He laughed and I said "Ick! Good for Jackie!" He looked at me so surprised.
.
I think it is disgusting - gay or straight - and the practice degrading to any human being, as well as a mockery of the marital act.
.
"Today there arises the risk of a serpentine secularization even within the Church". - Pope Benedict XVI

10 comments:

  1. My gay friends have been on my mind a lot lately. I was thinking about them last night. Besides my personal disgust at the thought of AP, I've heard so much about the awful health problems that come from that. One can be seriously damaged from such acts--forever! Even though I think gay people love each other, that sort of action is anything but loving. I would never do that to someone I love.

    St Joseph, loving spouse, pray for people to discover how to love each other truly and chastely!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very informative post, Terry. I can't believe that any Catholic would promote such abominations. Unbelievable.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great post. I agree with your comments about Christopher West's TOB.
    Which reminds me of this: when there is an apparition, the Church does an investigation. If there is one thing wrong with the apparitions (words contrary to the faith, for example), despite the fact that the apparition is "good" (conversions for example), the Church is adamant: it will not be recognized by the Church.
    How can we then say that Christopher West's stuff is okay besides this and besides that? It does not make sense. It is relativism in action.
    Why is it that Christopher West is not answering some of our questions? Where is he?

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Fr. John Hardon, SJ, said that "only the humble and the chaste will go to heaven" and then he adds "Nobody else, nobody else, nobody else". Sounds like you are absolutely right, Belinda.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good to give us the real facts Terry!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous8:53 AM

    Early in our marriage my husband frequently demanded anal sex. I was completely repelled by this, but went along with it reluctantly. The sexual component of our marriage was never that great -- he wanted sex very often, regardless of my feelings, once trying to initiate it while I was feeding our son as a baby -- and used to get quite angry when I tried to reason with him about sexual issues. As a result, and also because of his attitude in other areas of the marriage, I became completely turned off... We are still together (going on 31 years) only by the grace of God. For obvious reasons, this comment must remain anonymous. I hope you will find it appropriate to post. Thank you for affirming the truth of something that till now was only a "gut feeling". God bless you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous - thanks for posting that. I'm glad you and your husband remain together.

    I think sometimes when a man wants sex all of the time as you mentioned, it is less about lust than it is about seeking a sort of affirmation - perhaps even using sex as a proof of love. Sometimes this can indicate early sexualization, neglect, abandonment issues, or physical abuse. It is interesting that you mention he wanted it even as you were feeding your son, that might confirm what I suggested - perhaps there was an unconscious envy of the infant and he needed your attention?

    It sounds as if you weathered all of that and that your staying together helped to stabilize his insecurity - if that was his issue. You can sometimes figure out a guy by looking at his parents and how he was raised.

    I wish both of you God's blessing.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous1:08 PM

    Thank you, Terry -- it does have a lot to do with his upbringing, especially his relationship with his Dad -- a total control freak, a man I had great difficulty getting along with. One of our biggest arguments happened when he criticized my husband and I came to his defence. I guess that was a convenient target! Actually, when my husband gets angry he starts to sound more and more like his Dad. Very thought-provoking, and thanks for your prayers. They never go to waste!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous - I'm so glad you weren't offended. I was also going to mention control and dominance issues - which often underlay sex on demand and AP situations.

    ReplyDelete


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. Be sure and double check if your comment posted after you do the verification deal - sometimes it doesn't print if you made an error.