Advice Sexual Activity During Marriage - Information Resources Required

[CatholicGuy87]

Hi All

I’m enjoying developing my understanding as a Catholic and hopefully being really awesome in the eyes of God and now I’ve met someone who I want to marry who’s also a great Catholic.

I believe that the Catholic explanation on contraceptives and nfp is very clear and easy to understand so as a result I intend to follow the nfp approach. However, I believe that there’s great confusion and ambiguity in regards to what sexual activity is permitted within a Catholic marriage and that really disappoints me because everything else is clear and all I want to be is a great person and Catholic. There’s so many different ways of looking at it.

In the minefield of sexual activity does anyone know of any good resources to read? I intend to read the book produced by a Polish monk called ‘Sex As You Don’t Know It: For Married Couples Who Love God’ and I also intend to talk to my priest during the pre-marriage course, but does anyone know of other resources to read?

Me and my fiancé just don’t want to do anything wrong but we also want to enjoy ourselves when married, and we’d just like to know if there’s any concrete answers to this part of being a Catholic. Everything that we read seems to contradict other statements so it’s really unclear what’s right. We cannot find anything fundamentally clear like nfp is and that’s really frustrating so hopefully this can be resolved with the assistance of people within this forum.

God bless

 

[pensmama87]

I really like Greg Popcak’s “Holy Sex!”

The reality, though, is that you’re never going to get a definitive list of “these activities are approved” and “these are not approved.” The Church just isn’t that interested in the minutiae of how you and your fiancée work out your sex life once you are married. What the Church cares about is that you don’t treat your spouse as an object to satisfy your lust, and that you respect sex as God created it. Some people have attempted to make lists based on general guidelines, and some of those are quite good, but there isn’t 100% agreement on them.

The two of you, if you are open to it, will learn how to love each other well as your marriage continues. You will learn what your wife likes best and what you like best, and what you like to do to “spice things up,” and you may come across a few things that one of you would like but the other dislikes (it’s uncomfortable physically or emotionally, one considers it demeaning even though the other never would have thought of it that way). You may find that sometimes you like one thing but it’s not so good at other times in your life (pregnancy and postpartum can change not only how interested a woman is but what specifically she likes to do, not to mention it may make certain things at least temporarily impossible).

I think this is part of the reason that the Church does not issue a definitive list on “this is when you can use NFP.” So much depends on the couple working together to figure that out for themselves and their circumstances. Think of it less as “what can we get away with?” and more as “What can we build together that will keep our marriage strong?”

 

[CatholicGuy87]

Thanks for your response. We’re not thinking of it as what we can get away with; we just want clear guidance because we respect the church. I’ll definitely read the book that you recommended as well as the book that I mentioned and talking to my priest. Thank you for your opinion.

Any assistance from others is very welcome.

 

[OraLabora]

I think that as long as it is mutually agreeable, not demeaning, does not objectify your spouse, is not dangerous, and is open to life, then you’re pretty much free to work out what’s best for you and your spouse. There’s no specific list of prohibited or approved activities.

By open to life is understood that no contraception is used and whatever activities you engage in end with the husband completing the act with natural intercourse. Beyond that, whatever floats you boat!

I’d add that the husband is allowed to help his wife reach orgasm by whatever means she requires. Only the man must finish through natural intercourse. Men and women work differently in that regard! Sex should be mutually satisfying for the husband and wife.

 

[KatieM2]

I’d add that the husband is allowed to help his wife reach orgasm by whatever means she requires. Only the man must finish through natural intercourse. Men and women work differently in that regard! Sex should be mutually satisfying for the husband and wife.

The above is widely held to be true and supported by the catechisms. However I see no support for it in the Bible. IMO stimulation of the wife by the husband other than through natural intercourse is sinful because it serves no procreative purpose but instead feeds lustful thoughts/sensations in women.

 

[OraLabora]

The above is widely held to be true and supported by the catechisms. However I see no support for it in the Bible. IMO stimulation of the wife by the husband other than through natural intercourse is sinful because it serves no procreative purpose but instead feeds lustful thoughts/sensations in women.

Utter nonsense. The Bible doesn’t give exact instructions on every aspect of life.

Men and women are different. Conjugal relations are meant to be procreative AND unitive. A perpetually dissatisfied wife certainly won’t make sex unitive. John Paul II has said it was OK for a husband to help his wife reach orgasm. It’s a husband’s duty to do so, within the boundary of being open to life. Nothing about helping his wife do so closes the act off to life.

 

[phillylawyer]

Hi All

I’m enjoying developing my understanding as a Catholic and hopefully being really awesome in the eyes of God and now I’ve met someone who I want to marry who’s also a great Catholic.

I believe that the Catholic explanation on contraceptives and nfp is very clear and easy to understand so as a result I intend to follow the nfp approach. However, I believe that there’s great confusion and ambiguity in regards to what sexual activity is permitted within a Catholic marriage and that really disappoints me because everything else is clear and all I want to be is a great person and Catholic. There’s so many different ways of looking at it.

In the minefield of sexual activity does anyone know of any good resources to read? I intend to read the book produced by a Polish monk called ‘Sex As You Don’t Know It: For Married Couples Who Love God’ and I also intend to talk to my priest during the pre-marriage course, but does anyone know of other resources to read?

Me and my fiancé just don’t want to do anything wrong but we also want to enjoy ourselves when married, and we’d just like to know if there’s any concrete answers to this part of being a Catholic. Everything that we read seems to contradict other statements so it’s really unclear what’s right. We cannot find anything fundamentally clear like nfp is and that’s really frustrating so hopefully this can be resolved with the assistance of people within this forum.

God bless

You’re going to find a bunch of people jumping on here with their own personal opinions about what is right and wrong in sex (which is fine - everyone can have their personal opinions). But, if you are asking what is the official Church teaching on this, it’s not actually that complicated.

To sum it up, there are really only three hard and fast rules regarding sexual activity within marriage:

**1. The man and woman must have the intention of the man climaxing inside the woman;

1. The woman’s climax should come “within the context of” intercourse, where the man and the woman have the intention of the man climaxing inside the woman; and
2. No artificial contraceptives may be used with the intention of preventing pregnancy.
   **
   These are the clear limitations laid out by the magisterium. Other Catholics have other opinions out there about other restrictions and things that are “immoral”, and people are of course free to have (and live by) those opinions. However, they are just opinions and not binding on all Catholics. Those are the only three defined hard and fast rules about sexual activity between married couples. If both couples are fine with an activity, and it doesn’t violate one of those three rules, it’s perfectly permissible and between the married couple.

With regard to 1, there is the qualifier “the intention of” because, especially when you are newly married, there might be some “oops” moments. If you are truly waiting for marriage, as a man, you might be too excited and, while you and your wife intend for you to finish inside the woman, you may be overstimulated and you may climax before you get to that point. If that happens, don’t worry about it and obsessed that you “sinned” or weren’t “open to life.” Your wife will likely feel desirable and everything is fine. Speaking from experience, for Catholic couples that wait until marriage, that type of thing can happen, especially as newlyweds.

With regard to 2, essentially that means no sexual activity outside of “the context of intercourse.” No mutual masturbation. Now, there is no strict rule on “how long,” but, in the couples judgment, it must be within the context of intercourse. If the man climaxes inside the woman, they talk lay in bed and talk and cuddle for 5 minutes, and then the man helps the woman finish, probably fine. If the man finishes inside the woman; he heads out the door to pick up some groceries and wash his car, 2 hours later comes back to finish off his wife, probably not “within the context” of the original act. But, what that means is within the prudent discretion of the couple.

The qualifier is also added “within the intention of…” because, there may be times when, in the course of sexual activity, the man helps the woman achieve climax, with the intention of later climaxing inside the woman (also fine). However, before the man can climax, 3 year old daughter knocks on the door crying with a tummy Ache, the smoke detector goes off, etc., and the man doesn’t climax. Don’t obsess about it, it wasn’t a sin. The intention was right.

The point is that sex should be unitive and procreative. This means that for sexual activity within a married, the three concrete rules are that the man and the woman must intend that:
(1) the man climaxes inside the woman; and
(2) The woman’s climax occurs “within the context of” (whether before, after or during) intercourse.
(3) Not to use artificial contraception with the intention of preventing pregnancy.

Don’t sweat it. If you follow those three rules, then nothing you are doing is violating what the magisterium teaches. There are endless discussions about various people’s opinions about what is or isn’t compatible with the “procreative” or “unitive” aspects of sex. Those are all interesting, but they are just opinions.

Of course, the other “subjective” rule is that everything done should be respectful and loving to the other spouse. So, even if it’s not “morally impermissible” to, for example, use handcuffs. If one spouse finds it disrespectful, unloving, or demeanining, then it should not be done.

 

[phillylawyer]

I really like Greg Popcak’s “Holy Sex!”

The reality, though, is that you’re never going to get a definitive list of “these activities are approved” and “these are not approved.” The Church just isn’t that interested in the minutiae of how you and your fiancée work out your sex life once you are married. What the Church cares about is that you don’t treat your spouse as an object to satisfy your lust, and that you respect sex as God created it. Some people have attempted to make lists based on general guidelines, and some of those are quite good, but there isn’t 100% agreement on them.

The two of you, if you are open to it, will learn how to love each other well as your marriage continues. You will learn what your wife likes best and what you like best, and what you like to do to “spice things up,” and you may come across a few things that one of you would like but the other dislikes (it’s uncomfortable physically or emotionally, one considers it demeaning even though the other never would have thought of it that way). You may find that sometimes you like one thing but it’s not so good at other times in your life (pregnancy and postpartum can change not only how interested a woman is but what specifically she likes to do, not to mention it may make certain things at least temporarily impossible).

I think this is part of the reason that the Church does not issue a definitive list on “this is when you can use NFP.” So much depends on the couple working together to figure that out for themselves and their circumstances. Think of it less as “what can we get away with?” and more as “What can we build together that will keep our marriage strong?”

Excellent book suggestion.

 

[PaulinVA]

The above is widely held to be true and supported by the catechisms. However I see no support for it in the Bible. IMO stimulation of the wife by the husband other than through natural intercourse is sinful because it serves no procreative purpose but instead feeds lustful thoughts/sensations in women.

Katie, you need to tell us what your definition of* lust* is.

The Church says it is, “…the disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. …”

Seeking sexual climax, in the context of marital relations, is not disordered. Seeking sexual climax with one’s husband during sexual relations is not a desire for an inordinate enjoyment of sexual please but a desire for the normal sexual pleasure that the Lord has given us.

 

[CuriousInIL]

You’re going to find a bunch of people jumping on here with their own personal opinions about what is right and wrong in sex (which is fine - everyone can have their personal opinions). But, if you are asking what is the official Church teaching on this, it’s not actually that complicated.

To sum it up, there are really only three hard and fast rules regarding sexual activity within marriage:

**1. The man and woman must have the intention of the man climaxing inside the woman;

1. The woman’s climax should come “within the context of” intercourse, where the man and the woman have the intention of the man climaxing inside the woman; and
2. No artificial contraceptives may be used with the intention of preventing pregnancy.
   **
   These are the clear limitations laid out by the magisterium. Other Catholics have other opinions out there about other restrictions and things that are “immoral”, and people are of course free to have (and live by) those opinions. However, they are just opinions and not binding on all Catholics. Those are the only three defined hard and fast rules about sexual activity between married couples. If both couples are fine with an activity, and it doesn’t violate one of those three rules, it’s perfectly permissible and between the married couple.

With regard to 1, there is the qualifier “the intention of” because, especially when you are newly married, there might be some “oops” moments. If you are truly waiting for marriage, as a man, you might be too excited and, while you and your wife intend for you to finish inside the woman, you may be overstimulated and you may climax before you get to that point. If that happens, don’t worry about it and obsessed that you “sinned” or weren’t “open to life.” Your wife will likely feel desirable and everything is fine. Speaking from experience, for Catholic couples that wait until marriage, that type of thing can happen, especially as newlyweds.

With regard to 2, essentially that means no sexual activity outside of “the context of intercourse.” No mutual masturbation. Now, there is no strict rule on “how long,” but, in the couples judgment, it must be within the context of intercourse. If the man climaxes inside the woman, they talk lay in bed and talk and cuddle for 5 minutes, and then the man helps the woman finish, probably fine. If the man finishes inside the woman; he heads out the door to pick up some groceries and wash his car, 2 hours later comes back to finish off his wife, probably not “within the context” of the original act. But, what that means is within the prudent discretion of the couple.

The qualifier is also added “within the intention of…” because, there may be times when, in the course of sexual activity, the man helps the woman achieve climax, with the intention of later climaxing inside the woman (also fine). However, before the man can climax, 3 year old daughter knocks on the door crying with a tummy Ache, the smoke detector goes off, etc., and the man doesn’t climax. Don’t obsess about it, it wasn’t a sin. The intention was right.

The point is that sex should be unitive and procreative. This means that for sexual activity within a married, the three concrete rules are that the man and the woman must intend that:
(1) the man climaxes inside the woman; and
(2) The woman’s climax occurs “within the context of” (whether before, after or during) intercourse.
(3) Not to use artificial contraception with the intention of preventing pregnancy.

Don’t sweat it. If you follow those three rules, then nothing you are doing is violating what the magisterium teaches. There are endless discussions about various people’s opinions about what is or isn’t compatible with the “procreative” or “unitive” aspects of sex. Those are all interesting, but they are just opinions.

Of course, the other “subjective” rule is that everything done should be respectful and loving to the other spouse. So, even if it’s not “morally impermissible” to, for example, use handcuffs. If one spouse finds it disrespectful, unloving, or demeanining, then it should not be done.

While a good start and with a lot of truth, it is not correct to say that there are only those 3 rules (plus the “subjective” addition). For example, nothing in those three + rules indicates that only the husband and wife should be involved - yet, that clearly is included in clear teaching on married sexuality. So, these are 3 big rules, but they are far from the only 3 as advertised.

 

[phillylawyer]

While a good start and with a lot of truth, it is not correct to say that there are only those 3 rules (plus the “subjective” addition). For example, nothing in those three + rules indicates that only the husband and wife should be involved - yet, that clearly is included in clear teaching on married sexuality. So, these are 3 big rules, but they are far from the only 3 as advertised.

That’s a good clarification. I thought that was implied in the statement that these are the only rules in the “sexuality within marriage” context. A third person cannot be involved in sexual relations between the husband and wife, because then the husband or wife (or both) would be engaged in sexual activity outside of marriage.

Are there other restrictions that these three rules about sexuality within marriage don’t cover that you are thinking of?

 

[CatholicGuy87]

Would anal sex (with a condom), sex toys and oral sex be permissible in foreplay within the 3 rules? Is there anything from the Church specifically writing on this kind of foreplay?

 

[mommamaree]

Would anal sex (with a condom), sex toys and oral sex be permissible in foreplay within the 3 rules? Is there anything from the Church specifically writing on this kind of foreplay?

The Church does not forbid oral-genital contact during foreplay or afterplay. Oral stimulation is permitted, but the biological differences between husband and wife lead to slightly different guidelines. The wife may achieve climax from such foreplay, or even after coitus, if she and her husband so choose. The man, however, must climax within his wife.

I do not know if sex toys are permitted, so I will not answer that question. Maybe someone else here knows.

Regarding anal penetration: I do not know whether or not it is considered sinful, but it is very dangerous. It can cause anal tears and rectal bleeding and fecal incontinence. The rectum is just not designed as resiliently as the vagina, and is far less capable of accommodating the male organ. Please do some research on the damage that can be done, or ask a trusted doctor, and certainly ask a holy priest (regarding whether or not it is sinful).

 

[PaulinVA]

Regarding anal penetration: I do not know whether or not it is considered sinful, but it is very dangerous. It can cause anal tears and rectal bleeding and fecal incontinence. The rectum is just not designed as resiliently as the vagina, and is far less capable of accommodating the male organ. Please do some research on the damage that can be done, or ask a trusted doctor, and certainly ask a holy priest (regarding whether or not it is sinful).

I think the fact (shown in recent polls) that more heterosexual couples have engaged in this than gay males couples should tell you something about the practice. It might not be “sinful” but it certainly isn’t healthy.

 

[mommamaree]

I think the fact (shown in recent polls) that more heterosexual couples have engaged in this than gay males couples should tell you something about the practice. It might not be “sinful” but it certainly isn’t healthy.

I have read that there is more awareness within the MSM (men who have sex with men) population about the serious and painful consequences of anal penetration, because that had commonly been a form of copulation within that population, and that the numbers of MSM who engage in the practice has dropped dramatically. I have also read about something called gay bowel disease, but I do not know if it results from anal penetration alone, or from transmissions of STDs to the bowels.
It seems that the gay population is far more aware than the heterosexual population, which is quite a shame, because that means a lot of couples might be tempted to try it, until the wife gets horribly injured or infected.
Again, none of this addresses the question of sinfulness, but it doesn’t seem like a loving thing for do, for a husband to seriously endanger his wife’s health and well-being that way, once he is made aware of its dangers.

Dr. Popcak, who wrote Holy Sex, advised against it for these very reasons, if I remember correctly. It has been a while since I read his book, so I might be remembering a different book on married sexuality.

 

[KatieM2]

Katie, you need to tell us what your definition of* lust* is.

The Church says it is, “…the disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. …”

Seeking sexual climax, in the context of marital relations, is not disordered. Seeking sexual climax with one’s husband during sexual relations is not a desire for an inordinate enjoyment of sexual please but a desire for the normal sexual pleasure that the Lord has given us.

I think the definition you have provided is a good one. Procreative intercourse cannot happen without a man climaxing inside his wife, so the male orgasm is not ‘inordinate’. The female equivalent is clearly not needed for conception, so it qualifies as ‘inordinate’, except in the tiny handful of women who supposedly always have orgasms from penetration alone, without any unnatural stimulation, and that cannot be prevented by a change in position or the husband’s technique.

 

[mommamaree]

I think the definition you have provided is a good one. Procreative intercourse cannot happen without a man climaxing inside his wife, so the male orgasm is not ‘inordinate’. The female equivalent is clearly not needed for conception, so it qualifies as ‘inordinate’, except in the tiny handful of women who supposedly always have orgasms from penetration alone, without any unnatural stimulation, and that cannot be prevented by a change in position or the husband’s technique.

This is 100% false.

 

[questionfrommom]

You’re going to find a bunch of people jumping on here with their own personal opinions about what is right and wrong in sex (which is fine - everyone can have their personal opinions). But, if you are asking what is the official Church teaching on this, it’s not actually that complicated.

To sum it up, there are really only three hard and fast rules regarding sexual activity within marriage:

**1. The man and woman must have the intention of the man climaxing inside the woman;

1. The woman’s climax should come “within the context of” intercourse, where the man and the woman have the intention of the man climaxing inside the woman; and
2. No artificial contraceptives may be used with the intention of preventing pregnancy.
   **
   These are the clear limitations laid out by the magisterium. Other Catholics have other opinions out there about other restrictions and things that are “immoral”, and people are of course free to have (and live by) those opinions. However, they are just opinions and not binding on all Catholics. Those are the only three defined hard and fast rules about sexual activity between married couples. If both couples are fine with an activity, and it doesn’t violate one of those three rules, it’s perfectly permissible and between the married couple.

With regard to 1, there is the qualifier “the intention of” because, especially when you are newly married, there might be some “oops” moments. If you are truly waiting for marriage, as a man, you might be too excited and, while you and your wife intend for you to finish inside the woman, you may be overstimulated and you may climax before you get to that point. If that happens, don’t worry about it and obsessed that you “sinned” or weren’t “open to life.” Your wife will likely feel desirable and everything is fine. Speaking from experience, for Catholic couples that wait until marriage, that type of thing can happen, especially as newlyweds.

With regard to 2, essentially that means no sexual activity outside of “the context of intercourse.” No mutual masturbation. Now, there is no strict rule on “how long,” but, in the couples judgment, it must be within the context of intercourse. If the man climaxes inside the woman, they talk lay in bed and talk and cuddle for 5 minutes, and then the man helps the woman finish, probably fine. If the man finishes inside the woman; he heads out the door to pick up some groceries and wash his car, 2 hours later comes back to finish off his wife, probably not “within the context” of the original act. But, what that means is within the prudent discretion of the couple.

The qualifier is also added “within the intention of…” because, there may be times when, in the course of sexual activity, the man helps the woman achieve climax, with the intention of later climaxing inside the woman (also fine). However, before the man can climax, 3 year old daughter knocks on the door crying with a tummy Ache, the smoke detector goes off, etc., and the man doesn’t climax. Don’t obsess about it, it wasn’t a sin. The intention was right.

The point is that sex should be unitive and procreative. This means that for sexual activity within a married, the three concrete rules are that the man and the woman must intend that:
(1) the man climaxes inside the woman; and
(2) The woman’s climax occurs “within the context of” (whether before, after or during) intercourse.
(3) Not to use artificial contraception with the intention of preventing pregnancy.

Don’t sweat it. If you follow those three rules, then nothing you are doing is violating what the magisterium teaches. There are endless discussions about various people’s opinions about what is or isn’t compatible with the “procreative” or “unitive” aspects of sex. Those are all interesting, but they are just opinions.

Of course, the other “subjective” rule is that everything done should be respectful and loving to the other spouse. So, even if it’s not “morally impermissible” to, for example, use handcuffs. If one spouse finds it disrespectful, unloving, or demeanining, then it should not be done.

As a follow-up to this, do the same “rules” apply when you are already pregnant? We are pregnant with our 3rd and found out I have placenta previa. Because of this we are not suppossed to have intercourse, likely for the remainder of the pregnancy (~6 months), but minimally for 3 months until the next sonogram when we’ll see if the placenta has moved. Thanks for your help!

 

[Rau]

Would anal sex (with a condom), sex toys and oral sex be permissible in foreplay within the 3 rules? Is there anything from the Church specifically writing on this kind of foreplay?

Would you view anal sex as a loving, tender, marital act?

 

[Rau]

I think the definition you have provided is a good one. Procreative intercourse cannot happen without a man climaxing inside his wife, so the male orgasm is not ‘inordinate’. The female equivalent is clearly not needed for conception, so it qualifies as ‘inordinate’, except in the tiny handful of women who supposedly always have orgasms from penetration alone, without any unnatural stimulation, and that cannot be prevented by a change in position or the husband’s technique.

Has something you’ve read persuaded you to your view. Do you see an error in JP2’s reasoning that arrived at a different conclusion?

Sex during infertile times is also not required for conception, yet it is a good thing, and pleasurable. Why is that?

Why are women capable of orgasms at all given your comment that they have no relevance to procreative sex?