Marital Relations, what is allowable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jayda
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jayda

Guest
hola

does anybody know authoritatively what is allowable between a husband and wife in the bedroom? i do not wish this to become crass but it is a very important question for me as i have only been married for one year and also i have experienced a variety of opinions on this question with my friends…

i was always under the impression that anything which is not procreative is sinful… but my friends say that we are allowed to have certain kinds of sex if it is as a precursor or foreplay to procreative kinds…

i live in a new area and i am too embarassed to ask this question of my priest until i get to know him better… does anybody know the answer to this? also could you please provide me with the doctrine, part of canon law, or biblical verse that specifically says what is not allowed between a wife and her husband?

Dominus Vobiscum
 
I highly recommend you pick up a copy of Christopher West’s book “The Good News About Sex And Marriage” which deals with just such topics.
 
To answer in its most simplest form, anything is permissible as foreplay as long as it ends in (sorry to be blunt) the husband’s ejaculation inside of his wife’s vagina.

I would HIGHLY recommend Christopher West’s “The Good News About Sex and Marriage” it would answer almost all of your questions…a very easy read.

Fr. Stan Fortunato once asked an Arch Bishop what was allowed within the marital act since he had a lot of people questioning him and he said (the Arch Bishop) that they could “swing from the ceiling fans if they want as long as it ends with the husband ‘finishing’ inside his wife.”

Fr. Larry Richards says that “anything is permissible in the marital act as long as it ends with the husband finishing inside his wife, as long as the acts are not degrading to either person.”

Sorry I do not have specific teachings, but if you search the ‘Moral Theology’ forums this is often discussed.
 
I second 1ke’s recommendation…also: “Love and Responsibility” - JPII, “Humanae Vitae” - Pope Paul VI, and “Naked without Shame” - Christopher West.

These will help clearly and completely explain Church teaching and the reasoning behind it…were if, say, I were trying to tell you, I may have an understanding of it, but may not explain it fully. I will say that Artificial Birth Controol is never allowable. God bless!!
 
1ke said:
I highly recommend you pick up a copy of Christopher West’s book “The Good News About Sex And Marriage” which deals with just such topics.
Click to expand...
👍 we always seem to be on the same page!
 
I will say that the question is very vaild and normal. I asked, too. That said, follow the advice of the first three posters who responded and you will fine.

Be cautious of getting sucked into lengthy virtual arguments; there are many others who will disgree with you no matter what.

If you have not read the Catechism and have pretty much done what you wished as a married couple (we did), it may come as a surprise and be difficult to follow. Mirror Mirror hit it on the head.

God bless, good luck.
 
Mirror_Mirror said:
as long as the acts are not degrading to either person."
Click to expand...
hola

does degrading just mean ‘not pro creative’ or does it encompass other things? does a wife have a right to refuse foreplay that she does not agree with… like if her husband wanted to have different kinds of sex she disagrees with?

Dominus Vobiscum
 
Jayda said:
hola

does degrading just mean ‘not pro creative’ or does it encompass other things? does a wife have a right to refuse foreplay that she does not agree with… like if her husband wanted to have different kinds of sex she disagrees with?

Dominus Vobiscum
Click to expand...
Every marital act must encompass two things:

It must be unitive and it must be procreative.

By degrading that would mean if the husband wants the wife to perform oral sex on him and she does not want to then it would be degrading to her to perform such an act or vice versa. You should not be forced to do something (even with your husband or wife) that you do not want to do.

So I say yes the wife has a right to refuse foreplay and or different kinds of sex that she does not agree with.

Please pick up a copy of the aforementioned book.

Peace!!
 
Mirror_Mirror said:
Every marital act must encompass two things:

It must be unitive and it must be procreative.

I would maybe clarify it further as it goes to the original question: every act where the man will reach climax must *end *inside the woman for it to be unitive and procreative. Oral or manual stimulation, or other acts of stimulation, are fine - if they are not degrading, forced, coerced, etc - and if they do not end in climax for the man, other than inside the woman.

By degrading that would mean if the husband wants the wife to perform oral sex on him and she does not want to then it would be degrading to her to perform such an act or vice versa. You should not be forced to do something (even with your husband or wife) that you do not want to do.

Ditto. I would not ask my wife to do something she does not like nor would she anyway. Trying something new you both agree to and discover you do not like is not going to be degrading necessarily; it means you found something you didn’t like.

So I say yes the wife has a right to refuse foreplay and or different kinds of sex that she does not agree with.

Please pick up a copy of the aforementioned book.

Peace!!
Click to expand...
 
Mirror_Mirror said:
To answer in its most simplest form, anything is permissible as foreplay as long as it ends in (sorry to be blunt) the husband’s ejaculation inside of his wife’s vagina.
Click to expand...
Yes, and so long as there’s no ejaculation anywhere else.

The act must be unitive, procreative (open to conception, i.e. no artificial contraceptives used), humano modo - “human fashion” - the dignity of each spouse must be respected.

Searching06 gives you some great advice.
Jayda said:
hola

does degrading just mean ‘not pro creative’ or does it encompass other things? does a wife have a right to refuse foreplay that she does not agree with… like if her husband wanted to have different kinds of sex she disagrees with?

Dominus Vobiscum
Click to expand...
Yes, she does. The husband’s right to marital relations doesn’t mean he has the right to sex whenever he wants and in whatever way he wants. He gets a wife, not a pleasure slave. It’s uncharitable to insist on something one finds pleasurable but the other spouse doesn’t like doing - a dangerous self-serving attitude contrary to the nature and purpose of marriage, which is a communion of all life and mutual sacrifice geared towards leading each other to salvation. As for the nature and purpose of marriage, here’s some legislation:
Can. 1055 §1. The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized.
Click to expand...
IMHO it’s pretty clear…

Additionally, the Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians (the entirety of it) is a handbook of what sacrifice means. Husbands are meant to die for their wives if need be, not to require their favourite sexual services the wives don’t particularly like. The First Epistle to the Corinthians is another nice sourcebook for love - also the entirety. Makes no point marking specific verses.
 
Mirror_Mirror said:
Fr. Stan Fortunato once asked an Arch Bishop what was allowed within the marital act since he had a lot of people questioning him and he said (the Arch Bishop) that they could "swing from the ceiling fans if they want /QUOTE]

😃 👍 :rotfl: :blushing:
Click to expand...
 
I’ll add one more book to the list-

In Pursuit of Love:Catholic Morality and Human Sexuality by Vincent Genovesi.
 
If you’ve got an extra day or two bop over to the “Moral Theology” forum on this site and do a search on oral, anal, or missionary. After about 4 hours worth of reading you’ll be so confused about the “can’s, can’ts, what ifs” you’ll wish you never asked the question.

“Monty Python” nailed it on the head…
“Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm gets wasted,
God gets quite irate.”

Most of the replies here have summed it up well.
 
Fr. Larry Richards says that “anything is permissible in the marital act as long as it ends with the husband finishing inside his wife, as long as the acts are not degrading to either person.”

Spoken like a man who has never had to please a woman ~ in or out of bed.
The marital act is not complete until both parties have achieved sexual fulfillment. The idea implicit in the above quote is that the marital act is finished when he is finished. This attitude is exploitive and abusive in nature. Any man who does not see to the sexual pleasure of his spouse is sexually exploiting her and is guilty of serious sin against the Sacrament. Not to put too fine an edge on it, if a person thinks that it’s finished because he/she is finished, he/she is guilty of rape at every sexual encounter in which this is the practical norm.
The location of the penis at the moment of the woman’s orgasm (and trust me, the woman is not going to have an orgasm if hubby is doing something that turns her off) is of no concern to anyone but the parties immediately involved. That includes the parish priest, the spiritual director, the bishop, the pope, and God.
The point is that sexual pleasure in marriage is something that must be worked out by honest communication between partners. It takes time and effort, but it is time and effort well spent. No one has the authority to tell you what is or is not acceptable. This is an area where mutual agreement between husband and wife is the only criterion.

Matthew
 
Matthew, with respect, I appreciate your post but I think you missed the point of what the priest was saying. He was restricting where a man may orgasm, not a woman.
 
drafdog said:
Fr. Larry Richards says that “anything is permissible in the marital act as long as it ends with the husband finishing inside his wife, as long as the acts are not degrading to either person.”

Spoken like a man who has never had to please a woman ~ in or out of bed.
The marital act is not complete until both parties have achieved sexual fulfillment. The idea implicit in the above quote is that the marital act is finished when he is finished. This attitude is exploitive and abusive in nature. Any man who does not see to the sexual pleasure of his spouse is sexually exploiting her and is guilty of serious sin against the Sacrament. Not to put too fine an edge on it, if a person thinks that it’s finished because he/she is finished, he/she is guilty of rape at every sexual encounter in which this is the practical norm.
The location of the penis at the moment of the woman’s orgasm (and trust me, the woman is not going to have an orgasm if hubby is doing something that turns her off) is of no concern to anyone but the parties immediately involved. That includes the parish priest, the spiritual director, the bishop, the pope, and God.
The point is that sexual pleasure in marriage is something that must be worked out by honest communication between partners. It takes time and effort, but it is time and effort well spent. No one has the authority to tell you what is or is not acceptable. This is an area where mutual agreement between husband and wife is the only criterion.

Matthew
Click to expand...
Matthew,

Let me tell you, as jazzbaby1 did, you completely missed the point of the quote. I apolgize in advance for not “setting the stage” of the quote and not giving it completely. You must realize that Fr. Larry (one of the most outspoken and strongest priests we have) when he said this was talking about oral sex and foreplay. He was in NO WAY saying that the sexual act is over once the man has an orgasm inside his wife. His statement is that leading up to sexual intercourse anything (as long as it is not degrading to either spouse) is accepted by the church. He has also said in other talks that after the husband has “finished” inside of his wife that he can bring her to orgasm as long as it is within the same marital act.

You attack on him of “Spoken like a man who has never had to please a woman ~in or out of bed” is such a slap in the face to him and to all priests. I for one am offended by that statement and think that you should take a few moments before you write something like that attacking those that are here to DO THE WORK OF GOD on this earth. They have sacrificed so much for their vocation…and what do they get?

Lastly, I wanted to say that to your statement that the location of the penis when the woman has an orgasm is not of God’s concern, oh really? You think that God does not care? Hmmm? Interesting. God created sex. God knows all about sex.
 
Don’t attack ME because YOU misquoted someone else. I have only the quotation as given to go on. I stand by my response to the quote as given. It implies a poor attitude toward women and marital sex.
As the original posting was from a woman, I thought that it was emminantly relevant that the attitude not be allowed to go unchallenged. A husband is responsible for providing sexual pleasure for his wife and anything less in his approach to sex is selfish and is not to be tolerated. Yes, God did create sex and knows better how it works than we do, and no, the position of the penis is not particularly relevant to the woman’s pleasure, the gentle stimulation of the clitoris is, however. God wants Her daughters to enjoy sex as much as Her sons, and has charged Her sons with that task in marriage. How a man and a woman work out the mechanics of her sexual pleasure is a matter for them and only them to decide.

Matthew
 
drafdog said:
God wants Her daughters to enjoy sex as much as Her sons, and has charged Her sons with that task in marriage. How a man and a woman work out the mechanics of her sexual pleasure is a matter for them and only them to decide.
Click to expand...
Is God now referred to as Her?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top