Author Topic: Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning  (Read 1366 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1734
  • Reputation: +455/-472
  • Gender: Male
Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
« on: August 14, 2015, 03:17:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5730
    • Reputation: +3128/-147
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
      • Julian Moore
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #1 on: August 14, 2015, 03:24:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I have seen similar claims from supposedly Catholic sources that sodomy that ends in normal intercourse is not a sin. I was frankly scandalized by that to the highest degree. I believe it must be a sin. If Catholic husbands and wives behave that way, it seems to me, they are no better than the hedonist homosexuals, because they are abusing the sexual act for pleasure in the same way that the homosexuals do.
    I Love Watching Butterflies . . ..


    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +455/-472
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #2 on: August 14, 2015, 03:27:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The footnote is taken from 1954 denzinger thirteenth edition by loreto publishers.  If someone owns older versions, perhaps it is useful to search for that footnote.  
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +455/-472
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #3 on: August 14, 2015, 03:37:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matto -Thanks for the response.  And, I agree with you.  I condemn it all the way to the stake.  And, I do not believe that the church teaches this.  What I want to do is unveil the degree to which evil clerics have been successful pushing it on us.  I want to put 2 and 2 together, and see a larger picture. I want to know what it means concerning the hierarchy(an 18th century moral theology book has implications), and I want to know how far back it goes.  
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 19075
    • Reputation: +10520/-5028
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #4 on: August 14, 2015, 03:52:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • When there's mortal sin involved with venereal pleasure it's due to it not being within marriage and ordered therefore at least ultimately towards procreation.

    So the principle is that it isn't the pleasure per se that's mortally sinful.

    With that said, there can be varying degrees of venial sin involved when there's inordinate pleasure taken in the activity.

    There does appear to be a slightly overlooked / missing element here regarding the fact that this seems contrary to nature (even if "perfect").


    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +455/-472
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #5 on: August 14, 2015, 04:46:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I believe denzinger 2303 concerning artificial fertilization is applicable.  DZ 2303 # 4 states "... it goes without saying that the active element is always procured illicitly by acts which are contrary to nature".  

    The context is:

    "As for the morality of artificial fertilization within marriage, let it suffice for the present for us to call to mind the principles of the natural law; the mere fact that the end which is intended is actually achieved in this way does not make the use of this means lawful; and the desire of spouses of having offspring does not yet prove sufficiently that the use of artificial fertilization, by which this desire is fulfilled, is licit.
    It is an erroneous opinion which holds that marriage between persons incapable of contracting marriage because of the impediment of impotence can be rendered valid by the use of this means.
    On the other hand it goes without saying that the active element is always procured illicitly by acts which are contrary to nature."




    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +455/-472
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #6 on: August 14, 2015, 05:00:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It doesn't hurt to post the rest of dz2303 #4.  I put bold on the part that some may use to argue to my contrary.  

    "although a priori new methods cannot be excluded merely because they are new, nevertheless, as far as artificial fertilization is concerned, not only is there need of the greatest circumspection, but it simply must be avoided.  By these words we do not necessarily forbid the use of artificial means, which are destined only either to render the natural act easier or to bring it about that the completed act attain its end in a natural way.

    Let it not be forgotten: only the procreation of new life, which takes place according to the will and order of the creator, obtains to a truly perfect degree the ends intended by it.  Such procreation corresponds at once to the corporal and spiritual nature and the dignity of the spouses and to the normal and happy development of the infant. "    

    Now, if someone could please provide a papal teaching/quote saying that sodomy is contrary to nature, then we can close this case and move on.
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +455/-472
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #7 on: August 15, 2015, 01:25:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Folks, let not this scandalous subject become in itself an occasion of scandal by being silent.  I have been wanting to discuss this for a long time, and I am pleased that matto's comment received two up thumbs.  But, I am disappointed that more are not commenting.  This is coming from an 18th century moral theology manual.  I mean, we reject sr. faustina for the pious errors found in her book.  But, this is permissible?  This can be "taught with confidence" as denzinger often responds.  There is no way that bishops and cardinals are unaware of this teaching.  Yet, the manual is in use.  It is quoted by traditional clerics.  Was it not our lady of la salette who said that the church has problems of sins of the flesh?  

    Here is st. peter damian commenting on sodomy - "Truly, this vice is never to be compared with any other vice because it surpasses the enormity of all vices.… It defiles everything, stains everything, pollutes everything. And as for itself, it permits nothing pure, nothing clean, nothing other than filth.





    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15


    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +455/-472
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #8 on: August 15, 2015, 02:22:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What do you think are some examples of "artificial means" spoken of here by pius xii?  Because, the more I read this passage, the more it sounds as if he is speaking about things of this nature.  Because, he talks about completing the act in a natural way.   "By these words we do not necessarily forbid the use of artificial means, which are destined only either to render the natural act easier or to bring it about that the completed act attain its end in a natural way.



    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5730
    • Reputation: +3128/-147
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
      • Julian Moore
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #9 on: August 15, 2015, 03:23:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If it is not a sin to commit acts of sodomy then it if the husband demands that his wife commit sodomy with him wouldn't she sin if she refused because the wife has a duty to obey her husband? So if it was not a sin then we would have the absurdity of women going to hell because they refused to be sodomites.
    I Love Watching Butterflies . . ..

    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +455/-472
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #10 on: August 15, 2015, 04:14:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matto - brilliant.  I think you just nailed it.  If spousal sodomy is not a sin, then the spouse theoretically could not refuse.  She would have to render this marriage debt.  

    I think the next step is to brush up on the subject of degrees of marital sin, obedience, and the marriage debt.  
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15


    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +455/-472
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #11 on: August 16, 2015, 12:11:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, I am disappointed in myself.  I stated that this heribert jone theology manual was from the 18th century.  I knew that seemed wrong.  My eyes played a trick on me.  I cannot even remember now where I read that, but I do remember reading that.  So, Hoffman is actually just quoting from the 18th and last edition.  The book first appeared in 1930 and underwent 18 editions until 1961 or 64.  So, I sincerely apologize.  But, on the bright side, this is good news.  It means that this may not be a subject that the clergy as a whole are aware of, and silent about.  In fact, perhaps this teaching didn't make its way into the teaching manual until the 50s or 60s.  I know that the denzinger footnote was of a 1917 book, but that may not have been made a footnote until my edition 1957 or one close to it.  And, that footnote was not explicit.  But, that is still nothing really to feel good about.
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 19075
    • Reputation: +10520/-5028
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #12 on: August 16, 2015, 06:49:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matto
    If it is not a sin to commit acts of sodomy then it if the husband demands that his wife commit sodomy with him wouldn't she sin if she refused because the wife has a duty to obey her husband? So if it was not a sin then we would have the absurdity of women going to hell because they refused to be sodomites.


    No, the marriage debt does not refer to any specific types of acts; there's no obligation to do something specific just because the spouse wants to do it.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 19075
    • Reputation: +10520/-5028
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #13 on: August 16, 2015, 04:46:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: + PG +
    What do you think are some examples of "artificial means" spoken of here by pius xii?  Because, the more I read this passage, the more it sounds as if he is speaking about things of this nature.  Because, he talks about completing the act in a natural way.   "By these words we do not necessarily forbid the use of artificial means, which are destined only either to render the natural act easier or to bring it about that the completed act attain its end in a natural way.





    I don't necessarily think this passage has any reference to sodomy.  So, for instance, this would not rule out the use of Viagra for instance.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 19075
    • Reputation: +10520/-5028
    • Gender: Male
    Heribert Jone and denzinger on spousal sodomy - Warning
    « Reply #14 on: August 16, 2015, 04:57:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Sodomy between two men would certainly be against nature.  Sodomy which is completed would certainly be against nature.  But would sodomy during activities which are completed in natural intercourse be contrary to nature?  In other words, is it the "Onanistic" aspect which would render it inherently contrary to nature?  Are there then other activities which normally considered contrary to nature but would not be contrary to nature if not completed in Onanism?  I for one do think that there's something inherently contrary to nature in the act itself in the fact that the excretory system was clearly not designed by God for this purpose.  Whether it's a mortal sin if not complete?  Not sure.

    But I think that it's probably a waste of time for non-professional lay people like us to dwell on this.

    Since many approved reputable theologians seem to hold this position, that it's not grave sin per se so long as the marital act reaches its completion in a natural way, a Catholic who does so while following the position of these theologians would certainly not be committing a grave sin (cf. St. Alphonsus' "probabilism" vis-à-vis moral theology).  That's not to say that such Catholics would not sin at least venially (and perhaps even with relatively-serious venial sin) due to excessive indulgence in pleasure.  That's not to say that such a thing would please God or would be compatible with seeking perfection.  But it's only to say that it wouldn't constitute grave sin.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16