A Q about oral sex...sort of

[joshvanrad]

The couple must make every attempt to have the male climax inside of the woman. Plain and simple.

 

[LongingSoul]

I’m a catechist, and I had a middle-aged couple come to me with the following query:

The wife is post-menopausal. They are both able to complete the marital act. But the husband has managed to convince his wife that oral stimulation to climax is permissible as long as they insert the semen into the wife afterwards.

I have never had this question before. I found lots of information about artificial insemination, and oral sex, but they do not address this very specific set of behaviors.

(name removed by moderator)ut would be most appreciated.

Char

Are these a newly married middle aged couple looking to convert? It would be weird if the husband has come up with this desire out of the blue and just expected his wife to perform. Sounds like the husband might have followed some of the ridiculous “oral/anul for Catholics” threads that have come up here in the moral theology section over and over. Reeeediculous stuff.

Just give them some information about mans natural caution regarding the transfer of bacteria between bottoms and mouths. We make a serious point of hand washing when we touch those areas before we eat so putting your gob right into or over someones waste disposal area goes against all wisdom, natural and divine. yuk!

 

[chartreuse]

I’d like to thank everyone for the advice and clarification. I will compose an email to my inquiring couple with your information, and then I will encourage them to return to their priest. Because frankly, I’m just not a human sexuality teacher. I’ve been called Victorian in the past, but I can live with the label.

If you knew me, you would probably smile at the irony.

Char

 

[chartreuse]

Are these a newly married middle aged couple looking to convert? It would be weird if the husband has come up with this desire out of the blue and just expected his wife to perform. Sounds like the husband might have followed some of the ridiculous “oral/anul for Catholics” threads that have come up here in the moral theology section over and over. Reeeediculous stuff.

Just give them some information about mans natural caution regarding the transfer of bacteria between bottoms and mouths. We make a serious point of hand washing when we touch those areas before we eat so putting your gob right into or over someones waste disposal area goes against all wisdom, natural and divine. yuk!

My understanding is that they converted a few years ago, and (this is my take) are trying to find ways to blend their former sexual practices with the teachings of the Church.

 

[Quietest]

The OP has an interesting question… This gets into somewhat undefined (and awkward) territory.

The two criteria for a licit sexual act are:

1. Unitive - Within the bonds of marriage? Yes. The physical union of both bodies? Yes/maybe?. It’s definitely a physical union, but under a broader definition of ‘unitive’ than we are accustomed to discussing in sexual morality (for obvious reasons as non-vaginal physical union has always been associated with contraception). The real question is whether “unitive” is actually defined by Church teaching as “strictly vaginal” in the abstract.
2. Procreative - Open to life in both intention and act. I believe this would certainly fit the criteria if performed carefully… Even more so (by quantity of semen reaching its destination) than the ‘perforated condom’ practice which is permissible for sperm testing.

My guess is that most Theologians and Priests would be extremely cautious about going near this question as ANY approval of this sort of thing could easily be misinterpreted by people who would use it to justify clearly immoral acts. Nobody wants to be responsible for leading others to sin. (Millstone anyone?)

Others will take the “if it quacks like a duck” approach – and dismiss it outright. But I don’t find that very helpful either if there’s no theological or moral underpinnings to the explanation. Catholicism is built on both faith and reason after all.

So there you go… This one appears to be in uncharted territory from where I sit. I’m sure someone far more studied than me may have some clarification/insight on the matter, I’d certainly like to hear from them

Until then, it might be better to be safe than sorry…

 

[LongingSoul]

My guess is that most Theologians and Priests would be extremely cautious about going near this question as ANY approval of this sort of thing could easily be misinterpreted by people who would use it to justify clearly immoral acts. Nobody wants to be responsible for leading others to sin. (Millstone anyone?)

Call me a simpleton, but any person with a basic understanding of hygiene knows that putting your mouth on someones genitals for sex or any reason, is counter to species wellbeing. You don’t need to be a theologian or a priest to have this ‘advanced’ wisdom. You just need a smidgeon of a brain. For heavens sake!

 

[MJJean]

Call me a simpleton, but any person with a basic understanding of hygiene knows that putting your mouth on someones genitals for sex or any reason, is counter to species wellbeing. You don’t need to be a theologian or a priest to have this ‘advanced’ wisdom. You just need a smidgeon of a brain. For heavens sake!

I understand as much as I am able that you think oral sex is yuck and I wouldn’t argue the point. To each their own. But, at least in my experience chatting online and with real life friends, it’s a pretty widespread practice. It’s kind of like eating squid or wrestling in the mud after a rain. Some people couldn’t imagine why anyone would do that and others couldn’t imagine why anyone wouldn’t! An awful lot of folks enjoy giving and receiving oral sex. For those that are converting or for the first time exploring their faith and trying to learn the rules this kind of question needs to be asked and answered.

Not to mention that there is a pretty widespread misconception among teens and early 20-somethings who are “saving themselves for marriage” that oral and/or manual sex is a loophole and “doesn’t count”.

 

[LongingSoul]

I understand as much as I am able that you think oral sex is yuck and I wouldn’t argue the point. To each their own. But, at least in my experience chatting online and with real life friends, it’s a pretty widespread practice. It’s kind of like eating squid or wrestling in the mud after a rain. Some people couldn’t imagine why anyone would do that and others couldn’t imagine why anyone wouldn’t! An awful lot of folks enjoy giving and receiving oral sex. For those that are converting or for the first time exploring their faith and trying to learn the rules this kind of question needs to be asked and answered.

Not to mention that there is a pretty widespread misconception among teens and early 20-somethings who are “saving themselves for marriage” that oral and/or manual sex is a loophole and “doesn’t count”.

It’s one of those topics that I really don’t see a need to tip toe around like some other topics require and doesn’t really need to have a specific ‘Catholic’ answer other than in regards the need for purity and chastity in our sexual lives. I’m feeling the need to appeal straight to common sense but more importantly, nature, as a member of the human species.

I know it is a widespread practice nowadays and we also know through ancient Roman art and literature, that at least in ancient Rome, this particular practice had also subverted the natural taboos along with the general degradation of sexual mores. But we have spent nearly two centuries promoting handwashing after toileting and before eating as a general practice. We know how bacteria and disease works and the role of the the human immune system in being dominant over disease. We understand the huge importance of hygiene and how that is supported by general taboos in fortifying our species against these foriegn armies (disease) fighting for control.

We’ve forgone our common sense and deferred to concupiscence due to the hard work of our forebears in taking control over disease and making us think that taboos regarding hygiene don’t really matter.

I think if we as a species try to think bigger than our immediate sexual urges in conducting our sexual lives, try to think of our precarious dependence on the wellbeing of our species and have some appreciation for the legacy of our forebears in creating healthy societies… then we can understand that by breaking down these taboos, we are leaving a legacy of damage to our children and descendents.

Rant over.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

That is sodomy and is thus sinful.

 

[joshvanrad]

There is a big difference between oral sex and oral stimulation. One is inherently evil and the other is not.

A married couple who stimulate each other via oral acts are not going against church teaching. The church has never said anything against those actions.

 

[phillylawyer]

That is sodomy and is thus sinful.

For anyone happening upon this article, the above is a personal opinion (which anyone is certainly free to hold and live by), as is the opinion that oral stimulation is “dirty and gross.” However, this “opinion” is not the teaching of the Church and is not binding on Catholics.

So, Catholics are not bound by these personal opinions, anymore than they are bound by my personal opinion that the Eagles are much better team to root for than the Cowboys!

Cheers!

 

[joshvanrad]

For anyone happening upon this article, the above is a personal opinion (which anyone is certainly free to hold and live by), as is the opinion that oral stimulation is “dirty and gross.” However, this “opinion” is not the teaching of the Church and is not binding on Catholics.

So, Catholics are not bound by these personal opinions, anymore than they are bound by my personal opinion that the Eagles are much better team to root for than the Cowboys!

Cheers!

+1

 

[LongingSoul]

For anyone happening upon this article, the above is a personal opinion (which anyone is certainly free to hold and live by), as is the opinion that oral stimulation is “dirty and gross.” However, this “opinion” is not the teaching of the Church and is not binding on Catholics.

So, Catholics are not bound by these personal opinions, anymore than they are bound by my personal opinion that the Eagles are much better team to root for than the Cowboys!

Cheers!

And for those readers, I appeal to common sense in considering that oral sex is not “dirty and gross” in the way of eating squid and rolling in mud as another poster suggested… but that oral sex means putting the genitals of another person into your mouth without regard for the wise taboos that dictate the overall health and wellbeing of the species.

Lust notoriously suppresses the higher sensibilites and it is entirely within the capacity of an individuals common sense to know what behaviours and practices conform to nature and the wellbeing of the species. Personal integrity often means that in these days we need to be counter cultural in our behaviours.

Don’t be tricked by this lie that ‘Catholic teaching allows oral sex’. The Catholic Church doesn’t even need to make moral judgements on things that belong to taboo by virtue of nature and the species survival.

Sex is a wonderful unitive and procreative gift from God but nothing warrants taking someones genitals into your mouth as a matter of course, not even great orgasmic feelings that hedonists use as the highest good of sex.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

For anyone happening upon this article, the above is a personal opinion (which anyone is certainly free to hold and live by), as is the opinion that oral stimulation is “dirty and gross.” However, this “opinion” is not the teaching of the Church and is not binding on Catholics.

So, Catholics are not bound by these personal opinions, anymore than they are bound by my personal opinion that the Eagles are much better team to root for than the Cowboys!

Cheers!

All inherently sterile sex is sodomy
Oral sex is inherently sterile sex
Ergo oral sex is sodomy

note, oral sex≠oral stimulation

 

[joshvanrad]

And for those readers, I appeal to common sense in considering that oral sex is not “dirty and gross” in the way of eating squid and rolling in mud as another poster suggested… but that oral sex means putting the genitals of another person into your mouth without regard for the wise taboos that dictate the overall health and wellbeing of the species.

Lust notoriously suppresses the higher sensibilites and it is entirely within the capacity of an individuals common sense to know what behaviours and practices conform to nature and the wellbeing of the species. Personal integrity often means that in these days we need to be counter cultural in our behaviours.

Don’t be tricked by this lie that ‘Catholic teaching allows oral sex’. The Catholic Church doesn’t even need to make moral judgements on things that belong to taboo by virtue of nature and the species survival.

Sex is a wonderful unitive and procreative gift from God but nothing warrants taking someones genitals into your mouth as a matter of course, not even great orgasmic feelings that hedonists use as the highest good of sex.

Nope. The church has never come out and condemned oral stimulation. If they had such a problem with such a “widespread issue” then they would confront it as such.

You are spreading misinformation in saying that the church has an official stance on such a thing. If there is such a stance I would prefer that you use the CCC to back it up.

Thanks,
Joshua C.

 

[LongingSoul]

Nope. The church has never come out and condemned oral stimulation. If they had such a problem with such a “widespread issue” then they would confront it as such.

The church has never come out and comdemned marijuana smoking or downloading movies of the net or showing cleavage in Mass or auto eroticism and so on. It gives us direction and tools to help us walk the path to salvation with maturity and the wisdom given to us through the Holy Spirit.

You are spreading misinformation in saying that the church has an official stance on such a thing. If there is such a stance I would prefer that you use the CCC to back it up.

No, you’re spreading misinformation in saying the CHurch has an official stance on such a thing. I’m saying the Church doesn’t need an official stance because nature and common sense give more than clear direction in what is right and healthy. What is holy and chaste naturally follow from natures clear direction.

 

[phillylawyer]

The church has never come out and comdemned marijuana smoking or downloading movies of the net or showing cleavage in Mass or auto eroticism and so on. It gives us direction and tools to help us walk the path to salvation with maturity and the wisdom given to us through the Holy Spirit.

No, you’re spreading misinformation in saying the CHurch has an official stance on such a thing. I’m saying the Church doesn’t need an official stance because nature and common sense give more than clear direction in what is right and healthy. What is holy and chaste naturally follow from natures clear direction.

Correct. The Church gives us general principles on how to live a Christian life, and it is up to each Catholic to use his God given reason to follow God in his particular circumstance. There are certain firm rules that the Church sets down, abortion is always wrong, stealing is always wrong, using artificial means with the intention of preventing conception is always wrong. And, there are a lot (the vast majority) of areas in each individual Catholic’s life that are up that Catholic to use prudence, his reason, his understanding of the faith, etc. to follow God and live a virtuous and holy life - whether to hunt animals, whether to drink alcohol, whether and in what contexts to use any “curse” words, what constitutes appropriate dress at mass (or at the beach or at work), whether it is acceptable to drive a car, whether to engage in oral stimulation as part of married sexual activity.

I believe that it is perfectly acceptable to engage in oral stimulation during the course of marital sexual activity. Longing Soul does not. Catholics are free to have (and live by) different personal opinions on this. I would be happy to discuss and defend my particular view of this moral issue.

However, because there are so many misunderstandings about what the Church actual does teach about sexuality (and many other things), and this is the “Catholic Answers” website, it’s absolutely essential to make clear that there is no official Church teaching on this issue (any more than there is an official church teaching on whether it is acceptable for a Catholic to drive a car to work in the morning). God (and the Church) give each person enormous freedom to follow him in our own lives and in our particular circumstances. The Church, as a loving mother, gives us general principals as to how to follow Christ and live a holy life, and does give us certain specific prohibitions on actions that are always morally evil (murder, adultery, etc.). Is it ok for a Catholic to drive a car? Is it ok for a married Catholic couple to engage in oral stimulation as part of sexual intercourse? The Church does not have specific guidance on those points, but, as a loving mother, provides general principals on how to live a Christian life, and then it is up to her children to follow Christ and live a holy life in the best way possible.

Anyone who says otherwise about the Church’s position on oral stimulation is wrong. Longing Soul’s opinion is his opinion and mine is mine. That’s fine. Catholics are allowed to disagree with each other.

Cheers!

 

[phillylawyer]

The church has never come out and comdemned marijuana smoking or downloading movies of the net or showing cleavage in Mass or auto eroticism and so on. It gives us direction and tools to help us walk the path to salvation with maturity and the wisdom given to us through the Holy Spirit.

No, you’re spreading misinformation in saying the CHurch has an official stance on such a thing. I’m saying the Church doesn’t need an official stance because nature and common sense give more than clear direction in what is right and healthy. What is holy and chaste naturally follow from natures clear direction.

Actually, he is saying that the Church does not have an official position on it (which is absolutely true).

To use an example from one of the front page posts today, my wife and I are not comfortable watching movies with graphic nudity in them. Some Catholics do find them acceptable. The Church has no specific position on this topic. My wife and I will explain to people why we don’t watch these movies, but make it clear that this is our personal opinion on the matter, it’s not “Catholic” teaching. It’s up the prudential judgment of each Catholic.

Cheers!

 

[joshvanrad]

Also, to address more of the misinformation:

The smoking of marijuana is directly in violation of church teaching for the same reasons that getting drunk is. The smoking of marijuana immediately inhibits the reasoning and logic of the user and is therefore sinful.

 

[LongingSoul]

Correct. The Church gives us general principles on how to live a Christian life, and it is up to each Catholic to use his God given reason to follow God in his particular circumstance. There are certain firm rules that the Church sets down, abortion is always wrong, stealing is always wrong, using artificial means with the intention of preventing conception is always wrong. And, there are a lot (the vast majority) of areas in each individual Catholic’s life that are up that Catholic to use prudence, his reason, his understanding of the faith, etc. to follow God and live a virtuous and holy life - whether to hunt animals, whether to drink alcohol, whether and in what contexts to use any “curse” words, what constitutes appropriate dress at mass (or at the beach or at work), whether it is acceptable to drive a car, whether to engage in oral stimulation as part of married sexual activity.

I believe that it is perfectly acceptable to engage in oral stimulation during the course of marital sexual activity. Longing Soul does not. Catholics are free to have (and live by) different personal opinions on this. I would be happy to discuss and defend my particular view of this moral issue.

However, because there are so many misunderstandings about what the Church actual does teach about sexuality (and many other things), and this is the “Catholic Answers” website, it’s absolutely essential to make clear that there is no official Church teaching on this issue (any more than there is an official church teaching on whether it is acceptable for a Catholic to drive a car to work in the morning). God (and the Church) give each person enormous freedom to follow him in our own lives and in our particular circumstances. The Church, as a loving mother, gives us general principals as to how to follow Christ and live a holy life, and does give us certain specific prohibitions on actions that are always morally evil (murder, adultery, etc.). Is it ok for a Catholic to drive a car? Is it ok for a married Catholic couple to engage in oral stimulation as part of sexual intercourse? The Church does not have specific guidance on those points, but, as a loving mother, provides general principals on how to live a Christian life, and then it is up to her children to follow Christ and live a holy life in the best way possible.

Anyone who says otherwise about the Church’s position on oral stimulation is wrong. Longing Soul’s opinion is his opinion and mine is mine. That’s fine. Catholics are allowed to disagree with each other.

Cheers!

The position that LongingSoul has is not based on opinion but rather conventional taboos inspired by nature and by extension, the morality of loving our neighbour. (LongingSoul is also a she. Not a he.)

You’re right. There are some things that don’t constitute crime or sin in and of themselves especially if they come from ignorance or even if driven by addiction. But they serve as taboos and we defer to the taboos because we have a natural care for the wellbeing of the wider structures like the family or the community or the species. They come from a place of morality in that regard. For example, a loving married couple not using contraception and fully conforming their sex lives to Church teaching, still wouldn’t have sex in the loungeroom in front of their visitors. It isn’t officially a crime or sin (unless the visitors are being physically forced to watch against their will) but something inside us knows that this is not a good practice to encourage or promote among people. It’s got a subtle toxicity about it that undermines healthy societal ‘norms’.

Think of how the immune system supports the body. We conduct ourselves in certain way that conforms to health. We cook food in a healthy way. We wash our hands before cooking and eating. We clean teeth. We clean ears. etc etc. If someone says ‘well I don’t wash my hands and I don’t get sick’… that doesn’t mean that if we break that norm of handwashing and dispense with the taboo, that society won’t be affected in the long term. It just means that that one person, supported by the healthy society we live in, has a free ride based on the conformity and dedication of others to the norm that underpins immunity. If everyone stopped washing their hands as a matter of course… disease would come back into society and affect everyone, especially the weakest among us.

This is what is happening with the taboo of keeping our mouths, with their balance of chemistry that supports the immune system… away from our genitals, with their own bacterial makeup that comes with the presence of our waste products. When something so basically unhealthy becomes a widely practiced norm on the principle of ‘well I do it and it doesn’t make me sick’… that’s the type of ignorance that disease and other problems are waiting for.

Oral sex has no place in human sexual conduct that is healthy or holy. Fact.