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

[ATeutonicKnight]

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.

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.

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.

Here is a link on the matter of sexual intercourse given to me by a Priest: twotlj.org/G-2-9-E.html It is all in line with Church teaching.

 

[chevalier]

Here is a link on the matter of sexual intercourse given to me by a Priest: twotlj.org/G-2-9-E.html It is all in line with Church teaching.

That paper is a bit inconsistent logically, e.g.:

Many acts that appear to meet the other criteria must be excluded inasmuch as they do not meet this one. For instance, some wives find oral stimulation of the penis repugnant, and for many men the practice leads to ejaculation outside the vagina. Again, any self-stimulation which does not pertain very closely to marital intercourse is likely to constitute masturbation or to be an occasion of that sin (see 2.f, below).

The “for instance” part and the “again, any” part are not actually connected logically. However, the entire paragraph 2f sounds very sensible:

f) Married persons never should seek independent sexual satisfaction. As has been explained, the married may engage in various marital acts short of intercourse and may stimulate themselves to prepare for marital intercourse (see 1.h). But if either husband or wife intentionally does anything to obtain sexual satisfaction without reference to his or her spouse, that act is contrary to the gift of self which realizes the good of marriage, and so violates marital communion. Such acts involve infidelity, because by them married persons treat their bodies, which they had dedicated to one-flesh communion, as if retaining authority over them.

An attempt to obtain sexual satisfaction plainly lacks reference to one’s spouse in either of two cases: (i) if it is intentionally directed to complete sexual satisfaction apart from marital intercourse, and (ii) if it involves reference to some third party (whether or not it is directed to complete sexual satisfaction apart from marital intercourse). In these cases, the act is wrong not only specifically as infidelity, but also on the same basis (which will be explained) as masturbation or fornication for those who are not married.

Moreover, such acts cannot be justified by any sort of ulterior reference to the good of marriage—for example, as part of a program of treatment for sexual dysfunction or as stimulation to prepare for marital intercourse—since, even given such an ulterior reference, they are bad means to the good end.

Please note that it does not condone self-stimulation. Problem starts on 2h):

i) Mutually agreeable erotic words, looks, gestures, and bodily contact of various sorts, including manual and oral stimulation of the genitals, can prepare psychologically and/or physiologically for marital intercourse, and can intensify the experience of communion and make it more gratifying.** Self-stimulating acts also can prepare oneself for intercourse**.

I disagree with the bolded part. Or rather they can prepare someone for intercourse but this doesn’t make them good. It’s still having sex with oneself, not with the spouse. The author contradicts himself because he previously mentions that seeking sexual satisfaction without reference to the spouse is wrong and it seems to follow from the author’s words that such a reference should not be loose.

Self-stimulation in preparation for intercourse is by definition a loose reference to the spouse, if any at all. It’s basically “warming up” for intercourse. Problem being that the pleasure seeking and giving is contained entirely within one’s own body. It is, for example, one’s own hand which stimulates one’s own genitals.

I’m not saying that one should avoid any activity that results in sexual pleasure from performing it but that I disagree with the idea that, shall we say, being in a sexual dialogue with oneself (e.g. hand + genitals of the same person) as opposed to with the spouse is wrong. And one can’t have sex with both himself or herself and the spouse at the same time.

Hence, acts by the husband or the wife intended to intensify to orgasm her sexual arousal in continuity with any complete act of marital intercourse belong to that intercourse, and so they are marital, even if done during foreplay or after the husband’s ejaculation and withdrawal. However, any act intended to bring about her orgasm through arousal in no way continuous with that involved in marital intercourse would be a nonmarital act, and therefore wrong.

I disagree with the supposed legitimacy of self-stimulation in such a case. In self-stimulating, one becomes his or her own sexual partner at least in so far as that specific activity is concerned.

 

[AnaTurin]

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.

I mostly agree with you, but what about the “It must occur before, during or after the sexual act.”

Okay, makes sense, but HOW LONG before? HOW LONG after?

I’m not trying to pick at your words, I’m just wondering, seriously. How legalistic can we get on this topic?

Does it have to be within an hour?
A few minutes?
Until sunset/sunrise?

Let’s say (hypothetically) that a couple has sex, and the man thinks the woman had an orgasm, but she didn’t. For some reason, she doesn’t tell him until, i don’t know, like 10 hours later. In that case, if the man “helps” her “finish”, either manually or orally, is this a sin since so many hours have gone by?

Do you see what I’m getting at here? I feel like sometimes we become sex Pharisees, and I’m not sure what to make of it. Where do you draw the line?

 

[Fiasco]

I’m embarrassed

So you should be.

you publicly expose your ignorance!

Yeah? “Judge not…”

Please perform due diligence and scholarship prior to posting.

The old proverb: “Look before you leap.” may apply.

One link:
www.dawneden.blogspot.com/2010_07_01_archive.html

“America” magazine`s certainly not my favourite, but:
www.americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?entry_id=3133

A number of years ago, Christopher West was in this country (Australia), and one of his presentations was recorded onto CD. Some of his language was a bit crude.
At one point, he refers to the (then) Pope: “How does this old guy know all of this?” The tone of his voice said more than the words… In other words, his** STYLE **is sometimes questionable.
Elsewhere, he tells a joke which is in particularly bad taste.

i havent read a word of his book, but im not surprised some people have expressed concern.
A lady said to me that she`d purchased the book and was disturbed by some of its contents. Did she say that West said it was OK for a husband to sodomize his wife? Not sure about that one… Probably another can of worms…

 

[fpt]

Physical affection during NFP

During the time where a couple agrees for no marital relations (marital act) for spacing of pregnancies, for avoiding a new baby, because there are fair and serious reasons or because the complete marital act is not possible for any reasons, what are the types of physical tenderness without orgasm that are morally okay, not wrong and normally not immoral (not sinful), as there would be, per se, the respect of the catholic moral rules?

What is the physical tenderness that is moral during sexual abstinence because of NFP?

I guess:

Be like " brother and sister ", but this expression seems to me not very irrelevant, even enough so absurd.
For me, the couple has to find their " creative abstinence " with their physical tenderness without orgasm. Are you okay? Do you have documents about this topics?

I have my idea, but I want to find books, doctrines and practices on this special subtopic…, in order to sharing with catholics: to get advice.

 

[AnaTurin]

“Be like brother and sister”??

That’s kind of creepy. Sorry, but it is.

I think that advice only applies to people who are in an invalid “marriage” and therefor not legitimately married.

Am I the only one out there that feels like Catholics are becoming sexual Pharisees? Are we so fixated on following “the rules” to such an extent that we have made sex into some mechanical operation? I’m not in any way suggesting that anyone break any rules of the Church. I just don’t know why the Catholic conversation about sex has become something that is obsessed with legalism.

I can’t answer the OP’s question of whether it is “technically” wrong or not, but I will say that his selfless desire to please his wife seems like a beautiful thing to me

 

[fpt]

“Be like brother and sister”??

That’s kind of creepy. Sorry, but it is.

I think that advice only applies to people who are in an invalid “marriage” and therefor not legitimately married.

Am I the only one out there that feels like Catholics are becoming sexual Pharisees? Are we so fixated on following “the rules” to such an extent that we have made sex into some mechanical operation? I’m not in any way suggesting that anyone break any rules of the Church. I just don’t know why the Catholic conversation about sex has become something that is obsessed with legalism.

I can’t answer the OP’s question of whether it is “technically” wrong or not, but I will say that his selfless desire to please his wife seems like a beautiful thing to me

If you are researching on this topic (the morality of marital and the catholicism, the conjugal moral in the catholic wedding), you will note that since the world is world (in the holy bible untill now in the catholic church) the moralists, the theologians, the lawyers, the canonists, the thinkers, the philosophers, the priests, the monks, the friars, the bishops, the popes, the nuns, the doctors, the nurses, the midwifes… have writen on this topic. Each one with a point of special view in functions of period of story and in function of their disciplines (philosophy, theology, medecine, law, spirituality., sexology…etc). The sexual speech from the catholic thinkers is not a new thing. I

1. For instance, a quote from a document of catholic church " At the same time, spouses should know how to keep themselves within the limits of just moderation". How to define the just moderation? That is the question??? In the past, some theologians have tried to give a definition in using of questions – Why, what for, where, when, how, how often, how many times, how speed, how long, how old, after how many children???
   And
   In giving their own answers that can be very weird.
2. What is the physical tenderness that is moral during sexual abstinence within the couple?

The private answers from moralists are very different, there is no unity. The same for the answers from couples.

In reality, the moral legalism about sex is not new. The rule is true love (goodness, sexual goodness from the natural law, for people who are not christian, and the charity and the sexual charity for christians).

 

[LucyLight]

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.

I don’t have a catechism in front of me, so my question is does the catechism just address men having orgasm outside of intercourse? My second question is, if a couple was “making out” during a time of abstinence, do to NFP, and the wife had an orgasm is this thought to be less sinful?

I know the second question wouldn’t be addressed in the catechism, so I’m wondering if any Catholic authors, apologists, theologians have written about that? Thanks

 

[LJN21]

I don’t have a catechism in front of me, so my question is does the catechism just address men having orgasm outside of intercourse? My second question is, if a couple was “making out” during a time of abstinence, do to NFP, and the wife had an orgasm is this thought to be less sinful?

I know the second question wouldn’t be addressed in the catechism, so I’m wondering if any Catholic authors, apologists, theologians have written about that? Thanks

In very brief, the Catechism doesn’t really address the specifics of either gender. It just said sex has to be procreative and unitive; masturbation, fornication, porn and adultery are bad.

From what I’ve read and been told by numerous sources. “Making out” is fine assuming you don’t push it to the point of orgasm. I don’t think its any less sinful for the woman than the man if you go past that point.

 

[LJN21]

I disagree with the bolded part. Or rather they can prepare someone for intercourse but this doesn’t make them good. It’s still having sex with oneself, not with the spouse. The author contradicts himself because he previously mentions that seeking sexual satisfaction without reference to the spouse is wrong and it seems to follow from the author’s words that such a reference should not be loose.

Self-stimulation in preparation for intercourse is by definition a loose reference to the spouse, if any at all. It’s basically “warming up” for intercourse. Problem being that the pleasure seeking and giving is contained entirely within one’s own body. It is, for example, one’s own hand which stimulates one’s own genitals.

I’m not saying that one should avoid any activity that results in sexual pleasure from performing it but that I disagree with the idea that, shall we say, being in a sexual dialogue with oneself (e.g. hand + genitals of the same person) as opposed to with the spouse is wrong. And one can’t have sex with both himself or herself and the spouse at the same time.

Well then, its got to be one or the other, if the act then ends procreatively and unitively then it was the Conjugal union and not an act of masturbation.

Touching ones self is not a sin, other wise taking a shower or going to the bathroom would be sinful. The sin is seeking sexual pleasure out side of the act for which it was intended. If its done INSIDE the act, to help the act along, there is nothing immoral about it.

Also if its used inside foreplay, there is nothing about it that can be remotely construed as a dialog with oneself.

 

[fpt]

I don’t have a catechism in front of me, so my question is does the catechism just address men having orgasm outside of intercourse? My second question is, if a couple was “making out” during a time of abstinence, do to NFP, and the wife had an orgasm is this thought to be less sinful?

I know the second question wouldn’t be addressed in the catechism, so I’m wondering if any Catholic authors, apologists, theologians have written about that? Thanks

Before all, you need to give the definition of “making out” in couple, because the meanings are multiple en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_out. In your thought, what is it?

 

[fpt]

What is the physical tenderness that is moral during sexual abstinence within the couple?

For me, the couple has to find his " creative abstinence " with his physical tenderness without orgasm. The only rule is to avoid the orgasm. The fact of being very affectionate does not mean the orgasm, what is so different. “Sexually exciting = or arousal = Sexually exciting = arousal = orgasm”, I do not think so. When I say very affectionate, I do not mean the climax.

How to define the good use of the prudence and the common sense on this topic without scrupulism…etc.?

In this situation: what is the near occasion of sin?; what are the constitutive elements of the near occasion of sin?; how do you evaluate the risk of this conjugal sin?

 

[tafan]

“Be like brother and sister”??

That’s kind of creepy. Sorry, but it is.

I think that advice only applies to people who are in an invalid “marriage” and therefor not legitimately married.

Am I the only one out there that feels like Catholics are becoming sexual Pharisees? Are we so fixated on following “the rules” to such an extent that we have made sex into some mechanical operation? I’m not in any way suggesting that anyone break any rules of the Church. I just don’t know why the Catholic conversation about sex has become something that is obsessed with legalism.

I can’t answer the OP’s question of whether it is “technically” wrong or not, but I will say that his selfless desire to please his wife seems like a beautiful thing to me

I think most people would find the following link instructive and it would answer a LOT of these questions:

twotlj.org/G-2-9-E.html

It is a from a good online book on Catholic Moral theology and has both a Nihil Obstat and a Imprimatur. The home page is twotlj.org/index.html

As to this “brother and sister” stuff during periods of abstinence, that is wrong. Married couples do not have to behave like brothers and sister. On the first page I linked scoll down about a little ways to section h under section 1. “h) Marital sexual acts short of intercourse can be chaste” and read that. It is quite clear and precise.

All of section 1 is worthwhile reading for many questions that come up on this forum

 

[Shine67]

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.

I think I’m with you one this. In the past few months my wife’s sex drive has shot up and if it were up to her, we’d have sex every day. While I am doing my best to satisfy her I find I can only orgasm every 2nd or 3rd day, unlike 20 years ago when we were first married. At first she was a little perturbed by this (“is there something wrong with me?”) however as I am able to perform well enough to give her an orgasm everyday, she’s pretty happy.

A couple of times, however, I’ve gone flaccid before she orgasmed but I was able to satisfy her manually.

I have assumed that all this has been okay as each time we started both fully wanting to complete the sex act and have whenever possible (believe me when I say this is want I want to do

 

[sainthumbert]

I think I’m with you one this. In the past few months my wife’s sex drive has shot up and if it were up to her, we’d have sex every day. While I am doing my best to satisfy her I find I can only orgasm every 2nd or 3rd day, unlike 20 years ago when we were first married. At first she was a little perturbed by this (“is there something wrong with me?”) however as I am able to perform well enough to give her an orgasm everyday, she’s pretty happy.

Oh you lucky dog! May I ask how old you are?

 

[Shine67]

Oh you lucky dog! May I ask how old you are?

sorry for not answering immediately - mid 40’s so I think it’s the pre-menopausal thing happening.

 

[coda]

How about if stimulation happens short of intercourse during a period of abstinence. Does [heavy ]stimulation count as foreplay if it happens days before eventual intercourse?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

How about if stimulation happens short of intercourse during a period of abstinence. Does [heavy ]stimulation count as foreplay if it happens days before eventual intercourse?

No, that’s a separate act and is sinful. Abstinence means abstaining from sexual acts. Sexual acts between a husband and wife must be procreative and unitive.

Please ask a new question and don’t bring an old thread to life.

 

[coda]

Pardon me, but I did ask a new question in the moral theology forum. Someone thought it appropriate to delete the question and replies which followed…Sorry to have disturbed your board surfing.

P.S. the moderators might want to delete inactive threads so as to preclude" bringing old threds to life"…

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Pardon me, but I did ask a new question in the moral theology forum. Someone thought it appropriate to delete the question and replies which followed…Sorry to have disturbed your board surfing.

P.S. the moderators might want to delete inactive threads so as to preclude" bringing old threds to life"…

The mods can’t delete all the old threads, it would take all of their time. You might want to contact the moderator of that forum to find out why your thread was deleted instead of finding a new forum to post it in.

You didn’t disturb me in the least and I hope you found the answer to your question. Foreplay is fine but as a separate act, it is sinful. I