(NSFW) Marriage Act Question

[underacloud]

Thread started: Feb 12, '11
Resurrected once: Jul 19, '12
Resurrected twice: Sep 6, '13
Resurrected thrice: Yesterday

This thread wants to die…let it go people.

 

[Lochias]

 

[chaela_may]

The OP was not discussing anal sex. He was asking…nearly 3 years ago… if prostate stimulation as part of foreplay was allowed. Prostate stimulation as part of foreplay is literally stimulating the prostate by inserting a finger or object to create or intensify arousal as a prelude to or even during normal vaginal intercourse.

actually, op was discussing anal sex (or anal play, if you prefer to split hairs). that’s what prostate stimulation is.

Thread started: Feb 12, '11
Resurrected once: Jul 19, '12
Resurrected twice: Sep 6, '13
Resurrected thrice: Yesterday

This thread wants to die…let it go people.

for my part, i’m hoping for an actual answer. all i’ve gotten so far is disgust. even the priest who answered left me confused. he said that every act has to be unitive and procreative and that’s why anal sex isn’t allowed, but, by that logic, oral sex is immoral as well, yet the church teaches that this is okay as foreplay. if that’s true, then anal sex and anal play should also be okay as foreplay. i formed an intelligent question and have yet to receive anything like a good response. i’d like an answer with real logic and doctrine, but i (and the op) have only gotten diatribes and two thumbs-up, with the exception of waywardson, who still managed to contradict himself without realizing it.

but, in my defense, i don’t think that i did any of the resurrecting. i just get email alerts and still hope that some intelligent answer will be forthcoming.

https://imgur.com/4Zeah

lol

 

[chaela_may]

i’ve also asked the apologists about anal sex more than once, but the question is never answered. because i’ve asked a number of times in a number of ways and because no question about anal sex has ever been answered by an apologist, i’m starting to accept that there might not be any clear teaching on the matter.

 

[MJJean]

actually, op was discussing anal sex (or anal play, if you prefer to split hairs). that’s what prostate stimulation is

Anal sex is literally defined as inserting a penis into an anus. Male to male or male to female. “Anal play” or prostate stimulation is more broadly defined as anything that stimulates the anus or prostate. As I said, finger, sex toy, etc. It can include anal sex, but doesn’t have to. Prostate stimulation without anal sex is often used to help men with spinal injuries and certain other health problems be able to achieve erection, intercourse, and ejaculation when they otherwise wouldn’t be able to do so.

 

[Lochias]

Prostate stimulation without anal sex is often used to help men with spinal injuries and certain other health problems be able to achieve erection, intercourse, and ejaculation when they otherwise wouldn’t be able to do so.

In that context, as long as the act finished in ordered fashion, I would think it’d be okay.

 

[underacloud]

for my part, i’m hoping for an actual answer. all i’ve gotten so far is disgust. even the priest who answered left me confused. he said that every act has to be unitive and procreative and that’s why anal sex isn’t allowed, but, by that logic, oral sex is immoral as well, yet the church teaches that this is okay as foreplay. if that’s true, then anal sex and anal play should also be okay as foreplay. i formed an intelligent question and have yet to receive anything like a good response. i’d like an answer with real logic and doctrine, but i (and the op) have only gotten diatribes and two thumbs-up, with the exception of waywardson, who still managed to contradict himself without realizing it.

If you use the search function on this forum you’ll find a fair few threads that have discussed this topic. There is no doctrine that explicitly prohibits or allows anal foreplay. You will find in other threads a lot of arguments either way, to say that it is allowed (similar logic as you point out to oral sex as foreplay being permissable), or that it is prohibited (usually because it is “unnatural” or considered sodomy). I won’t comment on the merits of these arguments but you can explore them for yourself. Please note that hygene is an important consideration, regardless of the other moral issues to work through.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Anal sex is literally defined as inserting a penis into an anus.

That’s true in a secular sense and definition. When discussing it in a Catholic context though, “sex” typically means something different (as do many other terms). “Sex” generally implies finishing; so terms like “foreplay” are used for this act if it is finished in natural way.

 

[MJJean]

That’s true in a secular sense and definition. When discussing it in a Catholic context though, “sex” typically means something different (as do many other terms). “Sex” generally implies finishing; so terms like “foreplay” are used for this act if it is finished in natural way.

So, translating secular to Catholic, the OP’s question would be more like " Is anal foreplay licit?" since he specifically states that they finish in the natural way. Is that correct?

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

So, translating secular to Catholic, the OP’s question would be more like " Is anal foreplay licit?" since he specifically states that they finish in the natural way. Is that correct?

Absolutely correct.

Technically the Church has no official position on the matter when it is used as foreplay, stimulation, etc. in the context of the overall marital act. Obviously many laypeople, apologists, church officials, etc. do, but these opinions differ and are not official.

 

[Lochias]

In this instance, everything would depend on context. We are to take the rules and guidelines of the Church and apply them appropriately to situations like these, since the Church would never be able to give a solid “Do X but not Y” on EVERY issue in the world.

If people are doing it simply for the sake of the pleasure it builds, with the attitude of “as long as we finish it licitly, EVERYTHING is okay!” then they are on dangerous ground.

 

[chaela_may]

Anal sex is literally defined as inserting a penis into an anus. Male to male or male to female. “Anal play” or prostate stimulation is more broadly defined as anything that stimulates the anus or prostate. As I said, finger, sex toy, etc. It can include anal sex, but doesn’t have to. Prostate stimulation without anal sex is often used to help men with spinal injuries and certain other health problems be able to achieve erection, intercourse, and ejaculation when they otherwise wouldn’t be able to do so.

oral sex is also defined as sexual stimulation in genital areas, with no penetration necessary. like i said, splitting hairs. it has little to do with op’s question or mine.

If you use the search function on this forum you’ll find a fair few threads that have discussed this topic. There is no doctrine that explicitly prohibits or allows anal foreplay. You will find in other threads a lot of arguments either way, to say that it is allowed (similar logic as you point out to oral sex as foreplay being permissable), or that it is prohibited (usually because it is “unnatural” or considered sodomy). I won’t comment on the merits of these arguments but you can explore them for yourself. Please note that hygene is an important consideration, regardless of the other moral issues to work through.

i already have looked, actually. just like op, i didn’t find much of use. i already addressed hygiene as well; that is the crux of my question, actually.

In this instance, everything would depend on context. We are to take the rules and guidelines of the Church and apply them appropriately to situations like these, since the Church would never be able to give a solid “Do X but not Y” on EVERY issue in the world.

If people are doing it simply for the sake of the pleasure it builds, with the attitude of “as long as we finish it licitly, EVERYTHING is okay!” then they are on dangerous ground.

agreed.

 

[chaela_may]

because there’s so much repetition going on, i’ll restate.

op asked for any pertinent church teaching. waywardson addressed that pretty well, although his bias against anal stimulation led him to an incomplete conclusion.

after the thread was resurrected by him, i asked something more specific, hoping that he, personally, would answer. first, i pointed out that waywardson’s questions were not as rhetorical as they first seemed; that anal sex/play without penile penetration of the woman’s anus can very well be loving and not lustful, is not intrinsically unhealthy (for which i gave biological reasons), is not necessarily degrading, demeaning, or uncomfortable, and can be perfectly unitive.

having answered that, i addressed the issue of anal sex with penetration in the wife’s anus. i asked if the penis should be cleaned prior to penetrating the wife’s vagina or if anal penetration itself is so stimulating as to be an occasion to sin. does it just depend on the couple? is it to be avoided completely, just to be on the safe side?

to add to that question, i’ve also been introduced to the idea of placing ejaculate from the wife’s anus to the opening (not inside) the wife’s vagina. because the flow of vaginal fluid continuously pushes debris out, this would minimize or eliminate the risk of infection while still allowing (although greatly diminishing) the likelihood of impregnation. technically, this would make the sex act procreative and i’ve already addressed how anal sex/play can be unitive. how licit is this? does it make pregnancy so unlikely as to be contraceptive (even though nfp also makes pregnancy very unlikely)? is it a legitimate means of countering the likelihood that the husband won’t have the physical wherewithal to avoid ejaculating in the wife’s anus?

i’ve been ignoring all the, ‘that’s disgusting! you’re disgusting! i would never do that!’ replies. in my marriage, it happened naturally and we didn’t find it depraved. it was always very unitive. i admit, however, that i’m not normal, in this and many other ways, but that’s just how God made me. most women are disgusted by it. anal sex is obviously not for them. my husband also has a lot of stamina, so anal sex was an option for us; he could keep from ejaculating in my anus.

i’m not looking for opinions. i’m looking for doctrine, actual catholic teaching. if there is none, then i’ll take opinions, but not from this forum. i’ve been trying for years to get an answer out of one of my parish priests, but our church is huge and they’re very busy. if (and only if) i can’t find official teaching, then i’ll accept the unofficial teaching of my priest(s).

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

People have to be careful with applying adjectives to the word “sex” in a Catholic context. To be blunt, generally “sex” in the Catholic context for males implies ejaculation. So statements such as “anal sex and finishing in the natural way” are contradictory and confusing. Foreplay/stimulation/etc. should be used unless intended otherwise. Anal sex IS prohibited, because sex finishes in a manner that the Church objects to. Anal stimulation/foreplay/etc. is NOT prohibited.

 

[underacloud]

i’m not looking for opinions. i’m looking for doctrine, actual catholic teaching. if there is none, then i’ll take opinions, but not from this forum. i’ve been trying for years to get an answer out of one of my parish priests, but our church is huge and they’re very busy. if (and only if) i can’t find official teaching, then i’ll accept the unofficial teaching of my priest(s).

As discussed, there is no doctrine on this issue. The Church cannot provide comprehensive doctrine on the minutae of every aspect of our lives. So it would seem to be time to stop posting questions here and discuss this with a trusted priest.

 

[chaela_may]

As discussed, there is no doctrine on this issue. The Church cannot provide comprehensive doctrine on the minutae of every aspect of our lives. So it would seem to be time to stop posting questions here and discuss this with a trusted priest.

i was hoping that there was more official insight to be had, but, as i said, i’m starting to accept that there isn’t. i am worried about getting that discussion, “with a trusted priest.” as i said, we’ve been trying to have a sit-down meeting with one of our priests for years. i was just kind of taking a shotgun approach: keep paying attention to this thread (i gave up asking an apologist) while still trying to get that meeting with the priest.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Since the Church has no official opinion on the matter of using this as foreplay between married couples. any priest is only going to be able to give his own unofficial opinion.

 

[EasterJoy]

I was taught by a conservative priest at a Catholic high school that what is masturbation by yourself is foreplay when it is with your wife and ordered toward mutual gift and a truly procreative act as its end. (Anal sex as a form of foreplay also presents practical problems in terms of hygiene and the delicate nature of the tissues involved. We are bound to take care of our bodies’ welfare.)

As for people who say that this or that is “disgusting”, I’ve heard that from people who hear that others conduct marital relations with the lights on. I was taught that personal liking or disliking is important between spouses, that feelings ought to be respected first and foremost, but that other than things that are liked for problematic reasons–because they are degrading or cause pain, for instance, which are disordered goals–a couple has a great deal of leeway.

 

[underacloud]

I was taught by a conservative priest at a Catholic high school that what is masturbation by yourself is foreplay when it is with your wife and ordered toward mutual gift and a truly procreative act as its end. (Anal sex as a form of foreplay also presents practical problems in terms of hygiene and the delicate nature of the tissues involved. We are bound to take care of our bodies’ welfare.)

As for people who say that this or that is “disgusting”, I’ve heard that from people who hear that others conduct marital relations with the lights on. I was taught that personal liking or disliking is important between spouses, that feelings ought to be respected first and foremost, but that other than things that are liked for problematic reasons–because they are degrading or cause pain, for instance, which are disordered goals–a couple has a great deal of leeway.

With regard to leeway, I think we should be mindful of the old saying:

“unity in necessary things; liberty in doubtful things; charity in all things”

Which is to say, where the Church has no clear teaching/doctrine on the matter, individual Catholics enjoy a good degree of liberty in their moral choices. As long as the key principles of sex being unitive and procreative are respected, the Church does not seem to introde further into maried couples sex lives.

 

[EasterJoy]

With regard to leeway, I think we should be mindful of the old saying:

“unity in necessary things; liberty in doubtful things; charity in all things”

Which is to say, where the Church has no clear teaching/doctrine on the matter, individual Catholics enjoy a good degree of liberty in their moral choices. As long as the key principles of sex being unitive and procreative are respected, the Church does not seem to introde further into maried couples sex lives.

I think so, too. Couples have to be honest about their interior dispositions, but it is possible to be too scrupulous, too. Erring on that side is not without its possible harms. Following that saying you cited is a very good way to approach these questions!