anal sex between married couples

So I was talking on a thread when the subject of sodomy came up. Someone said that anal sex is always a mortal sin… intrinsically evil.

But I distinctly remember discussing the issue back in collage when I was in the Catholic Student Association, and one of my peers (a knowledgeable and devout Catholic) mentioned that anal sex is ok as long as it is used as marital foreplay and as long as the husband finishes inside his wife… same concept as oral sex.

Don’t get me wrong, I think anal sex is totally gross and uncalled for (no offense to anyone), but I just got confused when I heard 2 opposing views, both coming from practicing Catholics. And so I got curious.

I don’t want anyone’s opinion. I want to know the Church’s position on this, and an official source that proves it.

Is or is not the Church against anal sex in a scenario where a couple is married and using it as foreplay only?

I’m pretty sure the Church does not have an official, documented opinion on this matter.

There will be plenty of theologians (and others including forum members) who will voice an opinion either way, but I just don’t think you’ll find anything official.

But isn’t there some official rule saying that anything (foreplay wise) in the bedroom is fine as long as the man finishes in the right place? At least I’m pretty sure the Theology of the Body says this.

And if there is no official rule saying that anal sex is an evil act in itself, shouldn’t we be able to put 2 and 2 together?

Right, many people put 2 and 2 together and conclude that it’s OK (assuming both are happy with it, it is done safely, and it leads to proper intercourse). But you won’t find anything “official” that says so, which is what you asked for.

I don’t think you’ll find anything “official” regarding foreplay either, but people put 2 and 2 together and conclude that provided sex is loving and open to life, that it does not contravene Church teaching or God’s will.

I ended up posting on your other thread:

You should only post in one forum, cross-posting confuses the situation and hampers discussion.

I probably should have made my post here though, as this seems the more appropriate forum.

These threads always seem to miss the true nature of married sexuality.

Yeah, I wasn’t sure whether to put it here or the family section, since this is about marriage but a moral issue as well. I apologize.

What do you mean?

I was just curious, that’s all.

It must be intrinsically evil for the following reasons.

  • Unlike oral sex, anal sex cannot be followed by vaginal sex for the completion of the act. The woman would be at risk for serious infection.

  • Anal sex is a violent act the puts the woman at risk of injuries such as fissures not to mention developing chronic incontinence.

There is no question that anal sex even in marriage violates the two great commandments.

I do not see how a man would want to do this. Even a child knows you shouldn’t touch poo poo.:eek:

The medical consequences have absolutely no bearing on the determination of the intrinsic evil or non-evil of an act.

Besides, oral foreplay can certainly result in infections, so by that criteria and your logic, it should be excluded.

“Violent act”? Where do you get that? Sure, it can be, but vaginal intercourse can also be “violent”, no?

I don’t know why this activity would be attractive as foreplay either, but as far as being intrinsically evil…nope, not any more so than oral or manual foreplay.

There is no such thing as the Catholic Kama Sutra. The Church is likely never going to produce a detailed and specific guide as to what is allowed in the marital bedroom. If they did, I think many, many people would be greatly scandalized. :eek: :wink:

There is a risk of infection just by kissing, shaking hands, even sharing a towel. Those are just the risks of being alive. Oral sex with your own spouse (within Catholically acceptable limitations) is not any riskier unless there is an actual infection to transmit. Putting fecal matter into your wife’s vagina is completely different. Fecal matter has things like e-coli; fecal matter is infectious. Baby girls have to have there bottoms wiped away from their vagina for this very reason. Adult women do not have any special immunity to fecal matter entering their vagina.

Vaginal intercourse has the possibility of being violent but is not by nature violent. Anal intercourse is always violent. The act itself places dangerous stress on the sphincter muscle.

A husband should not use or abuse his wife merely for pleasure. A husband is supposed to love his wife as Christ loves his Church. Anal sex is intrinsically harmful and therefore it is intrinsically evil.

AMEN!!:thumbsup: Not to mention anal sex is unnatural. The anus was not meant to be a substitute vagina. It’s a sick, sinful act and that’s all there is to it, IMO!!

To play devils advocate regarding the objections:

Anal sex followed by vaginal sex can arguably be made safe by using a condom for the anal sex and discarding it prior to vaginal sex.

If the woman does not enjoy anal sex, I agree that it is not justifiable. But if she does enjoy it, that objection does not hold.

As to whether anal sex is violent…well, some people might enjoy “rough” sex, and as long as it is done safely and lovingly, why would that be inherently wrong?

I’m not advocating anal sex and it’s not something my wife and I do, or will do. But I think the objections raised can possibly be answered by a couple who lovingly decide together that it’s something that they will enjoy doing, can do it safely, and will complete the act in the proper manner.

However, if there is a strong medical opinion that anal sex absolutely cannot be done safely with regard to infection and/or the violence of the act, then there would be a strong case against it.

Kind of an icky subject, but here’s my take.

I doubt it’s directly forbidden as long as the act is completed by natural sex.

However, there’s more problems with it than just the risk of infection. The colon is not built for it. It’s not shaped right, the musculature and lubrication are not right and the tissues are delicate. The vagina is built for it and is much stronger and more flexible. In addition, it has the right kind and amount of lubricant for the most part.

Anal sex does not seem like a good idea to me at all.

I’ve seen theologians argue against this type of sex on the basis it is against natural law. As far as an official Church position on the matter, I haven’t seen one.

If a person has to worry about taking safety precautions when engaging in something as natural as sexual activity then I think it is safe to say there is something very, very wrong. In fact now that I think about it, the term “safe sex” is really only relevant to sinful sex.

I take safety precautions when I cook in the oven, play soccer, clear the guttering, go rock climbing, put chlorine in the pool, drive the car, etc… I don’t think the fact that one needs to use safety precautions is in itself a sign that the activity is sinful.

This is clearly, IMO, the best argument against anal sex. But is it a clear cut argument? Can a couple consider these issues and take adequate precautions against the health risks?

It doesn’t seem like a good idea to me either, but some people will make a case that it can be done safely.

I have read from cover to cover Pope John Paul II masterpiece book Theology Of The Body I still frequently use it for reference.
Nowhere does Pope John Paul II describe in any implied detail that Anal Sex is morally supported or to be freely practiced in sexual fore-play as a precursor to sexual intercourse in a Catholic Marriage sanctified by God who overlooks the entire life of married life between husband and wife.

Lets not mince words and call Anal Sex for what it truly is…quite plainly without secular rationalization and political correctness it is undoubtedly an act of Sodomy period.

One can read throughout several books in the Old Testament that Sodomy was a severe grievous Sin punishable by death.

In the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Romans
Douay Rheims version Chapter One verses 17 through 32 we read:

[17] For the justice of God is revealed therein, from faith unto faith, as it is written: The just man liveth by faith. [18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice: [19] Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. [20] For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.

[21] Because that, when they knew God, they have not glorified him as God, or given thanks; but became vain in their thoughts, and their foolish heart was darkened. [22] For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. [23] And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts, and of creeping things. [24] Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. [25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

[26] For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. [27] And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. [28] And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; [29] Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, [30] Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

[26] “God delivered them up”… Not by being author of their sins, but by withdrawing his grace, and so permitting them, in punishment of their pride, to fall into those shameful sins.

[31] Foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. [32] Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.

If Sodomy is morally wrong I’m at a loss to understand how Catholic married couples can comfortably and euphemistically diminish the demoralizing act of Sodomy and make it justified within sexual foreplay in Catholic Marriage. Something seriously does not jive here.

I keep hearing Catholics say over and over again that the Magisterium has never made an official ruling on Anal Sex/Sodomy as it being permissible in Marriage sexual foreplay.

The Church shouldn’t have to spell it out and engrave it on our noses.
From a purely Scriptural standpoint; it is a gravely disordered SIN.
Catholic Married couples don’t get dispensation to carry out the Act of Sodomy even if it is consensual.

I don’t know how somebody can make this any clearer.