Marital Relations During Pregnancy

[hlmem]

I understand the importance of “finishing” inside your wife and such.

But my question is if your wife is pregnant. Is it ok to “finish” outside your wife by her use of manual or oral sex to you.

I ask because if she is already pregnant and can not obviously get fertilized from sex, is it wrong to "finish"outside of her because you are not “wasting seed” as it could not be used to create life since she is already pregnant

Hope that made sense.

 

[baltobetsy]

Makes sense, but, no. You still have to do it the right way.

Betsy

 

[hlmem]

Makes sense, but, no. You still have to do it the right way.

Betsy

I’ll just add it makes sense for it to be no.

But if it is no, I ask “to not waste seed” cant be the only reason to finish only inside your wife than because if it was than it would be wasted anyway.

So what other reasons must we finish correctly

 

[apricot_yogurt]

Speaking as a woman, for a man to pull out so to speak at that moment, is very often going to frustrate the woman sexually. In my past, employing this method left me feeling used and objectified.

 

[setter]

Natural infertility (whether temporary or permanent) on the part of one of the spouses does not lessen the demand that the conjugal act be open to fertility in the act of total self giving. Otherwise the fidelity and fecundity of the conjugal act is not retained …which is a very serious violation of authentic conjugal love (see CCC paragraphs 2360 - 2372).

1643 “Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter - appeal of the body and instinct, power of feeling and affectivity, aspiration of the spirit and of will. It aims at a deeply personal unity, a unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility. In a word it is a question of the normal characteristics of all natural conjugal love, but with a new significance which not only purifies and strengthens them, but raises them to the extent of making them the expression of specifically Christian values.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church)

 

[hlmem]

To Yogurt-

I respect your view. I feel my question was more aimed where the woman might enjoy it “other places”. Obviously if a woman such as yourself would not enjoy it the man should be respectful of that.

To Setter-

In your statement you said even though the loss of fertility is only temp the couple should be open to fertility.

But I ask if the woman is already pregnant there is not openness because no fertility could come from an already pregnant woman,

 

[Seatuck]

To Yogurt-

I respect your view. I feel my question was more aimed where the woman might enjoy it “other places”. Obviously if a woman such as yourself would not enjoy it the man should be respectful of that.

To Setter-

In your statement you said even though the loss of fertility is only temp the couple should be open to fertility.

But I ask if the woman is already pregnant there is not openness because no fertility could come from an already pregnant woman,

Perhaps you don’t understand the importance of the man finishing inside the woman as well as you think. The act itself must remain life giving whether the person is able to become pregnant or not. When your wife has gone through menopause and can’t become pregnant the teaching remains the same. The marital act must be a complete gift of your bodily self - which means the natural end to a man’s sexual experience occurring inside the wife.

 

[hlmem]

Perhaps you don’t understand the importance of the man finishing inside the woman as well as you think. The act itself must remain life giving whether the person is able to become pregnant or not. When your wife has gone through menopause and can’t become pregnant the teaching remains the same. The marital act must be a complete gift of your bodily self - which means the natural end to a man’s sexual experience occurring inside the wife.

ok, but you never explain why

 

[setter]

ok, but you never explain why

Why? …because it contradicts the innate language of the body of reciprocal self giving:

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:

Thus** the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other**. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality. (CCC)

BTW – Did you read yet those paragraphs of the CCC that I directed you to?

 

[fix]

ok, but you never explain why

This is a quote that may help:

Sex intercourse is the responsible human action of a man and
woman in bodily communion; a moral fact as well as a physical
fact. This action must be of that kind from which generation can
follow, the male seed being left in the proper female organ, the
vagina. If this be done in the natural manner and there be no
attempt to impede or frustrate its consequences, then in itself
the action possesses an inherent direction towards the blessing
of fruitfulness, and is a life-giving, or more precisely a life-
offering action, whether actual generation takes place or not. On
the contrary, if the seed is not sown in the vagina but in a
pseudo-vagina or is sterilized in the vagina or is prevented from
entering the womb within the period of the action, then the
action is altered in its very nature and cannot be called a
generative kind of act.

The Catholic Background to Sex

The act itself is life offering whether one is unintentionally sterile or not. It is not only a physical or biological issue it is a moral issue. The moral aspect of the act requires that it have a proper moral intention and a proper moral means and end as well.

 

[Seatuck]

The why is based on the theological understanding that the husband and wife are a reflection of the trinity. Especially while engaging the marital act. Remember we understand the Father and Son experience a love that manifests itself in a third person- the Holy Spirit. They participate in a self-donation that is so complete and holds nothing back. This is the gift and responsibility that God has given to marriage. Husband and wife engage in the marital act so completely and holding nothing back which will at times result in a third person. Now since the Father never holds anything back from the Son or vice versa so it is with the husband and wife who we know from scripture become one with the Sacrament of Marriage.

Here’s a paper that explains the idea of self-donation based on Theology of the Body. I realize it is about same sex attraction also. But that is part of the understanding.

christendom-awake.org/pages/mshivana/popejohnpaulII.htm

You should consider investing in one of the products put out by Christopher West. Either a tape/CD set or his book The Good News About Sex and Marriage. You can look in the Catholic Answers archives to listen to a show he has done. Unless you want to dig in to Theology of the Body by Pope John Paul all by yourself which you of course are also free to do. I found it difficult because I didn’ t understand many of the nuances of marriage.

 

[st_lucy]

I understand the importance of “finishing” inside your wife and such.

But my question is if your wife is pregnant. Is it ok to “finish” outside your wife by her use of manual or oral sex to you.

I ask because if she is already pregnant and can not obviously get fertilized from sex, is it wrong to "finish"outside of her because you are not “wasting seed” as it could not be used to create life since she is already pregnant

Hope that made sense.

I think anytime you are denying the chance for God to work a miracle can’t be good.

Even if your wife is pregnant she can still conceive another child. It is rare but it has happened. You can read about it here.

multiples.about.com/od/glossary/g/superfetation.htm

 

[buffalo]

**Warning - sensitive subject -

‘makes women happy’**

 

[LovedForever]

**Warning - sensitive subject -

‘makes women happy’**

Very interesting! And it makes sense that there would more benefits, as God designed it, for sex practiced in the properly ordered way!

 

[BlestOne]

Trust in God! I know it is virtually unheard of but a woman can get pregnant while pregnant… I had a female friend that was RH negative with a previous child whose father was RH positive. She was 3 months pregnant when she started having problems with the pregnancy. Doctors scheduled a D&C when she lost the baby. When she went in for the D&C they discovered she was newly pregnant (4 weeks) in addition to the 4 mo old fetus she lost. My friend was literally pregnant for a full year. Had her husband not “finished” inside her during pregnancy she would have still lost the one, but wouldn’t have had the other. Tell me God can’t make miracles… What of Sarah, Abrahams wife? She was in her 90’s when she gave birth.

 

[Daniel_Kane]

Marriage is a sacrament and acts proper to the married have a sacramental quality in that one needs to be initiated into the sacrament of marriage to participate in “martial acts”.

The martial act has a particular matter and form to it, as do all sacramental acts. This matter and form in its most basic setting involves the completion of the marital act by the deposition of fluid into the genital tract of the female in a manner that is apt for the generation of children. If a man can not ejaculate, he can not get married.

The matter and form of the act is independent of the fact that one is pregnant or not, fertile or not, too old for children, and so on. The martial act is by the design of God made to be both unitative and procreative simultaneously in at least an iconic or metaphysical sense. All of the married, regardless of their physical state (old, sterile, pregnant, etc.) are held to this same particular form (ejaculation of fluid into the genital tract of the female) because this form is always and everywhere unitative and procreative, even if in reality the procreative end has already been met or is impossible to achieve. The symbolism of the act still must be present for it to meet its proper end of simultaneous unity and procreation. Even if pregnancy is impossible in the temporal order, the act itself must be “apt for the generation of children” as the act is still an iconic reflection of the Trinity (as already pointed out) and therefore must be at least is metaphorically open to life.

Onan tried this in Genesis 38 (withdrawal) and it seems that even though he seemed to have a contraceptive intent which is absent here, God did not like it and killed him. God in Scripture rarely takes an individual life in the first person so and so withdrawal and “finishing outside” must be pretty grave matter.

It would seem that you are asking if it is OK to masturbate with your wife because your procreative intention is fulfilled. That answer, for the 2000+ year life of the Church is no, because the martial act has a particular matter and form and this form includes the deposition of ejaculate into the genital track of the female for the act to be properly completed. To do otherwise is grave matter.

 

[Sixtus]

I understand the importance of “finishing” inside your wife and such.

But my question is if your wife is pregnant. Is it ok to “finish” outside your wife by her use of manual or oral sex to you.

I ask because if she is already pregnant and can not obviously get fertilized from sex, is it wrong to "finish"outside of her because you are not “wasting seed” as it could not be used to create life since she is already pregnant

One suspects that traditionalist Protestants and Catholics alike will [ah…at lasts…agree on something] that IT IS WRONG!

But to be fair, they will agree that anything is wrong. They will probably agree that sex full stop is wrong. Personally, I think that if your wife is already pregnant, then it is not likely to be sinful, but there will be those who will argue it is wrong to put it anywhere but in the inside of a spouse.

It was argued elsewhere that even if a man is completely and irreversibly sterile, with absolute zero chance of making a baby where he was unable to make sperm cells, only sperm tailes, it was STILL wrong. So, guess they wil say ‘you are wrong chum’!

 

[Katie1723]

While I am sure every knows the correct answer to this OP’s “dilemma”, I would venture to guess that more people than care to admit, have indulged in what would not be considered “proper” or “correct” while their partner was pregnant. It happens because we are human.
Kathy

 

[setter]

While I am sure every knows the correct answer to this OP’s “dilemma”, I would venture to guess that more people than care to admit, have indulged in what would not be considered “proper” or “correct” while their partner was pregnant. It happens because we are human.
Kathy

Your point? It is still a gravely disordered act and serious sin if not mortal sin. Repentance is in order for those couples who knowingly or purposeful ignorance engage in such sinful behavior.

 

[Georgess]

Marriage is a sacrament and acts proper to the married have a sacramental quality in that one needs to be initiated into the sacrament of marriage to participate in “martial acts”.

The martial act has a particular matter and form to it, as do all sacramental acts. This matter and form in its most basic setting involves the completion of the marital act by the deposition of fluid into the genital tract of the female in a manner that is apt for the generation of children. If a man can not ejaculate, he can not get married.

The matter and form of the act is independent of the fact that one is pregnant or not, fertile or not, too old for children, and so on. The martial act is by the design of God made to be both unitative and procreative simultaneously in at least an iconic or metaphysical sense. All of the married, regardless of their physical state (old, sterile, pregnant, etc.) are held to this same particular form (ejaculation of fluid into the genital tract of the female) because this form is always and everywhere unitative and procreative, even if in reality the procreative end has already been met or is impossible to achieve. The symbolism of the act still must be present for it to meet its proper end of simultaneous unity and procreation. Even if pregnancy is impossible in the temporal order, the act itself must be “apt for the generation of children” as the act is still an iconic reflection of the Trinity (as already pointed out) and therefore must be at least is metaphorically open to life.

Onan tried this in Genesis 38 (withdrawal) and it seems that even though he seemed to have a contraceptive intent which is absent here, God did not like it and killed him. God in Scripture rarely takes an individual life in the first person so and so withdrawal and “finishing outside” must be pretty grave matter.

It would seem that you are asking if it is OK to masturbate with your wife because your procreative intention is fulfilled. That answer, for the 2000+ year life of the Church is no, because the martial act has a particular matter and form and this form includes the deposition of ejaculate into the genital track of the female for the act to be properly completed. To do otherwise is grave matter.

Very well put !

What couples often forget to realise too is that , that type of ‘infidelity’ to the sacramental aspect , can have repercussions in other areas that aslo need fidelity !

And too, for a couple who are already in the act, no one has studied as to if there are other ill effects from disorderd acts , even if the human logic might make one view things in a narrow legalistic mind !