What does the church teach about spousal sodomy? I loath this subject, but the clergy apparently have discussed and possibly addressed this, so I want to know the particulars.
In denzinger, a footnote for dz 2239/2240 on the abuse of matrimony quotes a response from what appears to be the 1916 work "institutiones Alphonsianae" - declaring that a wife because of a threat of death or grave injury can cooperate in an interrupted copulation with her husband. But, by no means can she do so, not even for the sake of avoiding death, in a sodomitic copulation.
This begs the question. Why would this explicitly teach that a spouse cannot cooperate in an interrupted sodomitic copulation? Is it because the church was either implicitly approving when uninterrupted? Was the church not condemning uninterrupted sodomitical copulation? Why would a footnote in denzinger be useful? Do you follow?
Next is teaching from heribert jone moral theology. It is from a 1962 reprint of an 18th century work(18th century was a long time ago). According to the translation, it teaches in orwellian fashion that spousal sodomy is actually not sodomy nor a sin, and it implicitly teaches that there is a "perfect" type of sodomy.
This is from a michael hoffman link about heribert jone moral theology teaching about spousal sodomy -
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2013/06/another-challenge-to-hoffmans-thesis-on.html“757. I. Imperfect sodomy, i.e. rectal intercourse is a grave sin where the seminal fluid is wasted.”
The Moral Theology manual clearly teaches, for those who can read, that when the husband has anal intercourse with his wife without the intention of ejaculating in her rectum, he is free to do so in that it is not sodomy and it is not a grave sin:
“Excluding the sodomitical intention it is neither sodomy nor a grave sin if intercourse is begun in a rectal manner with the intention of consummating it naturally...”
In other words, if the husband begins his marital act with his wife by having rectal intercourse with her, as long he concludes the act by ejaculating in her vagina, it is not sodomy and it is not a grave sin.
It is also not sodomy or a grave sin, “if some sodomitical action is posited without danger of pollution.”
[All quotations from p. 539 of Moral Theology (Newman Press, 1962) and bearing the Imprimatur and Nihil obstat.
Topic: Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning (Read 3720 times)