Is it wrong for a man to masturbate his wife, within marriage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Morgn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Morgn

Guest
It seems this would be a way to give her some sexual satisfaction when periods of NFP require abstinence. I know personal masturbation is wrong, but because this isn’t technically personal, and this doesn’t cause a loss of semen, then is it still wrong?
 
I personally do not know the Church teaching on it

but if it stregnthens the bond in marriage and is done in mutual love and respect not pure Lust - I beleive it would be fine
 
Mutual masturbation ie oral sex is mentioned approvingly in the song of songs. I belirve that the Church sees nothing wrong with it so long as it is foreplay prior to the actual sexusl act. On its own it would not be acceptable but as foreplay it is fine.

I may be wrong but I do not think that Catholic sexual ethics would approve of it on its own if it is not part of foreplay.
 
…I suppose it’s wrong to also makeout with one’s wife, and not finish it off with procreative sex? Please tell me I’m wrong with this one at least, because I think I might scream…
 
By make out do you mean kissing or touching? I wouldn’t think so if that is what you meant. As long as masturbation and/or oral sex were used as foreplay and not the “end means” then I don’t think the Church has a problem with it.
 
No it’s not wrong to “Make out” with your wife.
  1. making out is not having sex. it’s using your bodies , minds and sould to express the natural and right physical affection you have for eachother as affirmed by your marriage vows “To have and to hold”
  2. masterbation:
    The catechism does describe this as a gravely dissordered act. It does not specify gender.
I believe in the Theology of the Body, and in other places we are strongly reccomended (especialy we men) to ensure that our spouses are sexually satisified.
The sexual embrace should be self sacrificing that means each partner should be focused on giving himself (or herself) to the other, not satisfying his or her own lust.

For a man to receive manual or oral stimulation from his wife as part of this act could make it difficult for him to complete the act in a manner which is open to life. (many men are prone to climaxing early)

Women do not normally have this problem, and for a man to ensure his wife is tended to and cherished, most certainly include his ensuring that she is enjoying the physical aspects of the embrace. that should include stimulation of any or many of her erogenous zones.

Therefore: I believe the answer to the question above is:
  1. when used as foreplay: no this is not allways sinfull, and can be a gift of self to your spouse.
  2. when used instead of sex: this is explicitly taught against buy the church. Using such methods during times of abstainance are most particularly not living the required virtue of Chastity that will help to express the required techniques for successful NFP.
A comical confession:
Personally I can find that being aware of the enjoyment of my wife can be a greater stimulation to me than physical contact… and I have accidentally “Finished early” on a couple of occasions when using the techniques discussed above. - in trying to ensure that my wife is well warmed up and ready for me.
I believe this situation - as it was not the intended outcome of the actions is not sinful in itself - even if it can be somewhat disappointing for both of us.
 
anruari said:
No it’s not wrong to “Make out” with your wife.
  1. making out is not having sex. it’s using your bodies , minds and sould to express the natural and right physical affection you have for eachother as affirmed by your marriage vows “To have and to hold”
  2. masterbation:
    The catechism does describe this as a gravely dissordered act. It does not specify gender.
I believe in the Theology of the Body, and in other places we are strongly reccomended (especialy we men) to ensure that our spouses are sexually satisified.
The sexual embrace should be self sacrificing that means each partner should be focused on giving himself (or herself) to the other, not satisfying his or her own lust.

For a man to receive manual or oral stimulation from his wife as part of this act could make it difficult for him to complete the act in a manner which is open to life. (many men are prone to climaxing early)

Women do not normally have this problem, and for a man to ensure his wife is tended to and cherished, most certainly include his ensuring that she is enjoying the physical aspects of the embrace. that should include stimulation of any or many of her erogenous zones.

Therefore: I believe the answer to the question above is:
  1. when used as foreplay: no this is not allways sinfull, and can be a gift of self to your spouse.
  2. when used instead of sex: this is explicitly taught against buy the church. Using such methods during times of abstainance are most particularly not living the required virtue of Chastity that will help to express the required techniques for successful NFP.
A comical confession:
Personally I can find that being aware of the enjoyment of my wife can be a greater stimulation to me than physical contact… and I have accidentally “Finished early” on a couple of occasions when using the techniques discussed above. - in trying to ensure that my wife is well warmed up and ready for me.
I believe this situation - as it was not the intended outcome of the actions is not sinful in itself - even if it can be somewhat disappointing for both of us.
Click to expand...
thanks for the reply 🙂
 
Morgn said:
…I suppose it’s wrong to also makeout with one’s wife, and not finish it off with procreative sex? Please tell me I’m wrong with this one at least, because I think I might scream…
Click to expand...
if by makeout you mean go on a date, the church doesnt have a position on that, that is a matter of church. But masturbation is not the same as making out and if you are not having foreplay the masturbation is a sin.
Peace
 
Morgn said:
It seems this would be a way to give her some sexual satisfaction when periods of NFP require abstinence. I know personal masturbation is wrong, but because this isn’t technically personal, and this doesn’t cause a loss of semen, then is it still wrong?
Click to expand...
Get yourself a copy of “Theology of the body” ( amazon.com/Theology-Body-Beginners-Introduction-Revolution/dp/1934217859/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1345474816&sr=1-2&keywords=theology+of+the+body)//)

I think you’ll find it very helpful.
 
Fiasco said:
Be careful!
Some of the activities given the thumbs up by Christopher West have been condemned by others.
Click to expand...
What? Please don’t take offense, but I’m embarrassed for you publicly expose your ignorance!
“Theology of the Body” is written by Pope John Paul II.
Please perform due diligence and scholarship prior to posting.
 
Morgn said:
It seems this would be a way to give her some sexual satisfaction when periods of NFP require abstinence. I know personal masturbation is wrong, but because this isn’t technically personal, and this doesn’t cause a loss of semen, then is it still wrong?
Click to expand...
It is still wrong for one partner to “pleasure” the other outside of the sexual act. Sex between married partners is to be both procreative and UNITIVE, which one person masturbating the other to climax is not. If that act happens as a part of foreplay, with intercourse afterward, it is OK for the woman, but not for the man, since ejaculation outside of the woman’s body is not procreative.

Making out when intercourse is not possible due to NFP can be inadvisable although I do not believe it is sinful IF and it’s a big IF, one can control one’s desires and urges and not give in to arousal. But why arouse one another unless sexual intercourse is available? Does not seem wise.
 
I have been relatively well educated in this area, so I will give you the short answer.

Is masturbating your spouse okay outside of the sexual act: All sexual acts such as this must lead up to the sexual act. You cannot simply stimulate your spouse orally or with your hand, have the spouse orgasm, and then stop for the night (Note: It is okay for women to orgasm outside of the sexual act because it is not necessary for procreation, but you CANNOT do this if you do not plan to have sexual intercourse. It must occur before, during or after the sexual act. The reason it may happen after the sexual act is because sometimes men ejaculate before women reach orgasm, in which it is okay to stimulate your wife to orgasm using your hand or mouth, if I am not mistaken.). It is okay to have oral sex and stimulate each other with your hand, but for the male you cannot orgasm intentionally outside of the sexual act. It must happen during the sexual act, and if you intentionally do not do so it is a grave sin.

If you need any clarifications just tell me.
 
Morgn said:
It seems this would be a way to give her some sexual satisfaction when periods of NFP require abstinence. I know personal masturbation is wrong, but because this isn’t technically personal, and this doesn’t cause a loss of semen, then is it still wrong?
Click to expand...
There isn’t really such a thing as to masturbate someone. Masturbation is basically self-stimulation. Digital or otherwise manual stimulation by the spouse is therefore not masturbation. It is simply digital or manual stimulation. There is nothing wrong with it per se. (And the only reason I’m saying “per se” is that I don’t want to give the impression of saying that it’s always okay no matter what. Which is basically true for any moral act because pretty much anything can be made immoral by the wrong motives. So just a disclaimer that’s longer than the actual argument.)

Please observe the difference between self-stimulation (sorry for being graphic but this basically means something like stroking oneself with one’s own hand) and manual/digital stimulation by spouse (spouse using something else than actual genital organs to produce pleasure in the other spouse, in this case hand or finger).

The lack of due differentiation here leads to confusion. Theologians need to be read carefully, especially if there’s a risk of the translator not really knowing the precise meanings of words while translating from a foreign language.

And my opinion is that self-stimulation is not morally permissible as it is basically having sex with oneself. There are some theologians who disagree (even JP2 can be interpreted as disagreeing) and none who expressly agree with my opinion. I may be wrong. But it would be very sad to me to be wrong on this one. I’m not sure how I’d survive the news. For the record, I’m not even married. It just feels so horribly bad even in theory. I’d rather not marry than accept that such a right exists and may be used.
 
Ignatius said:
What? Please don’t take offense, but I’m embarrassed for you publicly expose your ignorance!
“Theology of the Body” is written by Pope John Paul II.
Please perform due diligence and scholarship prior to posting.
Click to expand...
True, but the book linked to, while entitled “Theology of the body” is a book by Christopher west based on his interpretation of the very much larger but harder to understand work by the Blessed John Paul II

I haven’t read either work, so I don’t know the specifics here… but I have heard of criticisms of Chris West’s interpretations.
 
chevalier said:
There isn’t really such a thing as to masturbate someone. Masturbation is basically self-stimulation. Digital or otherwise manual stimulation by the spouse is therefore not masturbation. It is simply digital or manual stimulation. There is nothing wrong with it per se. (And the only reason I’m saying “per se” is that I don’t want to give the impression of saying that it’s always okay no matter what. Which is basically true for any moral act because pretty much anything can be made immoral by the wrong motives. So just a disclaimer that’s longer than the actual argument.)

Please observe the difference between self-stimulation (sorry for being graphic but this basically means something like stroking oneself with one’s own hand) and manual/digital stimulation by spouse (spouse using something else than actual genital organs to produce pleasure in the other spouse, in this case hand or finger).

The lack of due differentiation here leads to confusion. Theologians need to be read carefully, especially if there’s a risk of the translator not really knowing the precise meanings of words while translating from a foreign language.

And my opinion is that self-stimulation is not morally permissible as it is basically having sex with oneself. There are some theologians who disagree (even JP2 can be interpreted as disagreeing) and none who expressly agree with my opinion. I may be wrong. But it would be very sad to me to be wrong on this one. I’m not sure how I’d survive the news. For the record, I’m not even married. It just feels so horribly bad even in theory. I’d rather not marry than accept that such a right exists and may be used.
Click to expand...
Thank you for pointing this out. I didn’t know how else to phrase it except to explain it, and seeing as how some are complaining about the sexual explicitness of some of the threads I figured I would avoid it. 😃
 
anruari said:
True, but the book linked to, while entitled “Theology of the body” is a book by Christopher west based on his interpretation of the very much larger but harder to understand work by the Blessed John Paul II

I haven’t read either work, so I don’t know the specifics here… but I have heard of criticisms of Chris West’s interpretations.
Click to expand...
Christopher West does an admirable job of trying to distill a complicated theological work into something more easily digestible for the laity. His words are not Gospel but the teaching of the Church is pretty clear in my estimation:

Every sexual encounter (which includes individual acts) brought to completion must be unitive and procreative in nature. How you get there is up to you. What you do after say, the husband is done, is up to you as well.

What you do when you’re trying to avoid conception is up to you as well, provided that you’re not bringing these acts to completion and those acts do not result in one party being overly tempted to complete them on his or her own. I don’t see that it as terribly nebulous.

In frank terms, orgasms for either party are for sexual encounters (which again, includes individual acts that can happen in any order and can vary from couple to couple) that are unitive and procreative in nature. As with anything else, of course, the individual acts must also be loving, sacrificial and comfortable for both spouses.
 
The_Bucket said:
Christopher West does an admirable job of trying to distill a complicated theological work into something more easily digestible for the laity. His words are not Gospel but the teaching of the Church is pretty clear in my estimation:

Every sexual encounter (which includes individual acts) brought to completion must be unitive and procreative in nature. How you get there is up to you. **What you do after say, the husband is done, is up to you as well. **
Click to expand...
I disagree with the bolded part if the “you” can mean the woman singularly, without requiring it to be a joint activity between the two.
What you do when you’re trying to avoid conception is up to you as well, provided that you’re not bringing these acts to completion and those acts do not result in one party being overly tempted to complete them on his or her own. I don’t see that it as terribly nebulous.
Click to expand...
Not sure it can actually involve advanced foreplay (as in just as long as you can resist the temptation to complete, which can be a far threshold for strong-willed people). Nor is it about engaging in incomplete acts. Just shaving off completion from the act doesn’t make it okay, wouldn’t be much different from coitus interruptus, which is not okay.
In frank terms, orgasms for either party are for sexual encounters (which again, includes individual acts that can happen in any order and can vary from couple to couple) that are unitive and procreative in nature. As with anything else, of course, the individual acts must also be loving, sacrificial and comfortable for both spouses.
Click to expand...
Masturbation as in individual act is an activity performed by self on self, e.g. stimulation of one’s own genital organs by one’s own hand. I can’t fathom it possibly being permissible even in the “context” of marital intercourse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top