Oral Sex and Mortal Sin

[Lorarose]

That is not contraceptive so it would be

OK…I don’t know if you read all the posts, but some are arguing that ANY act of OS where the man does not “complete” inside his wife is intrinsically evil.
However…if he then proceeds to make love to his wife, it seems they are not contracepting either.

So…I’m trying to understand if the sin is in the “spilling of the seed” - or if it is in the intent to contracept.

 

[Corki]

OK…I don’t know if you read all the posts, but some are arguing that ANY act of OS where the man does not “complete” inside his wife is intrinsically evil.
However…if he then proceeds to make love to his wife, it seems they are not contracepting either.

So…I’m trying to understand if the sin is in the “spilling of the seed” - or if it is in the intent to contracept.

Neither, as I understand it. As I read Theology of the Body and other writings, the teaching is that true sexual experiences are **equivalent **to the marital embrace. Anything else, such as oral sex or masturbation is a twisted (disordered) and counterfeit attempt at true sexual experience. Oral stimulation can be licit if it is part of the whole “package” - the marital embrace with the man climaxing “inside” and with both openness to life and unitive intent. To use it for anything else would be to use it (the act) not as a precursor to the marital embrace (good) but for some other end (bad) and to use the spouse as a tool for that other end rather than a partner in the marital embrace.

 

[Lorarose]

[Oral stimulation can be licit if it is part of the whole “package” - the marital embrace with the man climaxing “inside” and with both openness to life and unitive intent. To use it for anything else would be to use it (the act) not as a precursor to the marital embrace (good) but for some other end (bad) and to use the spouse as a tool for that other end rather than a partner in the marital embrace.
/QUOTE]

It seems odd that this does not apply to the woman as well.
It is being argued that OS is fine for her and not for him.
So…what if he received OS - and then proceeds to make love to her.
This is not contraceptive.

 

[tjm8]

I have a question. Rather ban all sex not related to procreation, birth control, etc why not have the church decide how many children a married couple between the ages of say 18 and 35 should have? I was told by a Priest a lot of years ago that the Church likes couples to have 3 children. ( I thought 2 was plenty myself .) Then it could make a law that those who produce that number of births before the woman is 35 years of age could plan their family any way the like. I know it sounds insane but a plan like that might get a lot of Catholic out of being sinners, and the Church out of our bedrooms. It might also increase the number of practicing Catholics. I know I’ll catch a lot of flack for this post but someone needs to do a little thinking outside the box. To many people just drop out of church because of this issue.

 

[LittleDeb]

It seems odd that this does not apply to the woman as well.
It is being argued that OS is fine for her and not for him.
So…what if he received OS - and then proceeds to make love to her.
This is not contraceptive.

Again, oral stimulation is fine on the male. But to try to rely on a male being able to have a second orgasm so it is ordered to procreation just doesn’t work on a regular basis. Each act must be ordered toward procreation.

This might very well be about “spilling the seed” for this particular discussion. It is really about purposeful spilling vs. accidental spilling (ie nocturnal emissions.) Oral stimulation on a female might produce orgasm, but it does not alter the procreative act. There is no part of either spouse that is “off limits” for the purpose of stimulation. The act however, by its very nature, is ordered toward procreation. To break that bond makes the act something different.

 

[setter]

You ARE in one of those tough spots…you are married, so clearly the route of complete abstinence is difficult, yet you and your spouse have perhaps determined that even NFP does not meet your circumstances, since you cannot have more children right now.

I would like to personally assure you (via experience) that total abstinence can be done. It, uh, isn’t fun though. However, it produces a huge change of perspective, and that isn’t bad.

I agree, the stuck feeling is truly there. Many people would see it as impossible to suspend relations with their spouse lest they end up divorced, for example. It all depends. I’ve felt stuck before, but not on the identical set of horns. Have you tried talking this out with a priest?

I’ve wondered about married couples from the past as well, just what went through their heads and all. Do you feel that the Holy Spirit is behind the rules at all? He does know our hearts and struggles for sure.

I don’t know why I asked so many questions, just, I guess I understand about being stuck and I wish I could help. But I know, only the HS can help, really.

This is a testimony that is sorely lacking in Catholic circles these days, even amongst the private counsel of many clergy. Unfortunately, too many Catholics have been conditioned to expect less than seeking holiness and perfection in Jesus Christ through a willful embrace of the crosses that God presents to us in our various vocations meant for our sanctification. This excerpt from Humanae Vitae acknowledges the challenge and supernatural life that married couples are called to live and witness to.

1. We do not at all intend to hide the sometimes serious difficulties inherent in the life of Christian married persons; for them as for everyone else, “the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life.” But the hope of that life must illuminate their way, as with courage they strive to live with wisdom, justice and piety in this present time, knowing that the figure of this world passes away.

Let married couples, then, face up to the efforts needed, supported by the faith and hope which “do not disappoint . . . because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to Us”; let them implore divine assistance by persevering prayer; above all, let them draw from the source of grace and charity in the Eucharist. And if sin should still keep its hold over them, let them not be discouraged, but rather have recourse with humble perseverance to the mercy of God, which is poured forth in the sacrament of Penance. In this way they will be enabled to achieve the fullness of conjugal life described by the Apostle: “husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the Church . . . husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the Church . . . this is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.”

dads.org/humanae.asp

 

[tjm8]

Good point! The church’s teaching on BC seem to me to be a ruse. It cites natural law a lot which is really natural law as defined the Pope. If the pope spent some time at the zoo, on a dairy farm, or just watching TV shows about animals he would think twice about it. The celibate life of a priest is not the conducive to learning about sex and birth control. And, yes I know, the pope has a lot of advisers but I wonder how many times he asks for advice on BC from someone who is not a priest or does not share his point of view.

If God really wanted to have man only practice NFP he would have given us sex drives similar to that of the rest of the animal population on earth. They don’t have sex just to express love or for pleasure. They have sex only when the female is in heat. (Definition:sexually receptive stage: a time during a female mammal’s reproductive cycle when she is fertile and ready to mate.) . That may be only once per year usually in the spring. It all depends on the cycle time from conception until the offspring is weaned. Animals in nature also don’t have to be concerned about over population or caring for the
children with birth defects, etc. Nature takes care of all that in what is sometimes a harsh manner.

 

[setter]

Good point! The church’s teaching on BC seem to me to be a ruse. It cites natural law a lot which is really natural law as defined the Pope. If the pope spent some time at the zoo, on a dairy farm, or just watching TV shows about animals he would think twice about it. The celibate life of a priest is not the conducive to learning about sex and birth control. And, yes I know, the pope has a lot of advisers but I wonder how many times he asks for advice on BC from someone who is not a priest or does not share his point of view.

The Popes have put a lot of thought into these matters (as the guardians of souls) and POPE PAUL Vl did commission a wide cross section of clergy and laity when considering (name removed by moderator)ut for Humanae Vitae.

BTW – The celibate vocation is especially conducive to a less subjectively biased consideration and discernment of God’s voice for morality in sexual matters.

If God really wanted to have man only practice NFP he would have given us sex drives similar to that of the rest of the animal population on earth. They don’t have sex just to express love or for pleasure. They have sex only when the female is in heat. (Definition:sexually receptive stage: a time during a female mammal’s reproductive cycle when she is fertile and ready to mate.) . That may be only once per year usually in the spring. It all depends on the cycle time from conception until the offspring is weaned. Animals in nature also don’t have to be concerned about over population or caring for the
children with birth defects, etc. Nature takes care of all that in what is sometimes a harsh manner.

Unlike the rest of creation, God created man in His image and likeness as rational being, and not a puppet with limited animal intelligence that needs to be guided and directed instinctual drives.

 

[tjm8]

Still, if he really wanted humans to not have sex except for procreation he could have arranged for that.
I’m sure the Popes have consulted many of laity but do you know their positions on the subject.
“The celibate vocation is especially conducive” Not on this subject.

 

[setter]

Still, if he really wanted humans to not have sex except for procreation he could have arranged for that.
I’m sure the Popes have consulted many of laity but do you know their positions on the subject.
“The celibate vocation is especially conducive” Not on this subject.

Since God did not impose any restrictions for marital intimacy during His designed natural periods of infertility, one could properly deduce that God did not intent for sexual intercourse to be strictly for pro-creation only. The Church has always acknowledged this, though at times in history has emphasized the procreative.

This is why “The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood.” (*Catechism of the Catholic Church *2399)

HUMANAE VITAE

ENCYCLICAL LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL Vl

ON THE REGULATION OF BIRTH

Issued on July 25, 1968

TO THE VENERABLE PATRIARCHS, ARCHBISHOPS AND BISHOPS AND OTHER LOCAL ORDINARIES IN PEACE AND COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE, TO PRIESTS, THE FAITHFUL AND TO ALL MEN OF GOOD WILL

VENERABLE BROTHERS AND BELOVED SONS:

1. The most serious duty of transmitting human life, for which married persons are the free and responsible collaborators of God the Creator, has always been a source of great joys to them, even if sometimes accompanied by not a few difficulties and by distress.

 

[Kendy]

Still, if he really wanted humans to not have sex except for procreation he could have arranged for that.
I’m sure the Popes have consulted many of laity but do you know their positions on the subject.
“The celibate vocation is especially conducive” Not on this subject.

I particularly hate this accusation that if you are not open to having children then you are using each other. Of course, we should open to God’s will in our lives and perhaps, God is calling to be open to life when we are not and that is sinful. But that’s still separate than the assumption that the couple is using each other as a tool because they don’t want to have children. One could easily say the opposite— that if the couple is using each other as a means of reproduction and not as an expression of love.

BTW, I should add that I don’t think it’s ok to disobey the church. But the church really needs to think about what it means to have a rule that is almost universally ignored. I grew catholic, in a 90% catholic country, and I did not know a single person who used NFP. And it’s the same now. We all know that at least 80% (and I am being conservative) of catholics are contracepting. Now, of course, that does not mean it’s not sin. However, it’s also reflects a failure on the part of the church. If you have one rebellious child than it may not be your fault but when you have a houseful of rebellious children, you need to look at your parenting.

And the worst part about disobedience is that it leads to more disobedience. Once the “faithful” think the church is so unreasonable that it has no choice but to ignore her on one thing, it becomes easier to just ignore all her teachings. As a child of an unreasonable mother, I know that that was the case. My mom never picked her battles, she let everything turn into civil war and as a result, I didn’t listen to her on the important things to my detriment.

Again, not saying that the church’s teaching on contraception is necessarily unreasonable (although I am not fond of the always ejaculate inside no matter what your intention is rule), but a good mother, a good teacher gets her children on board with the program.

Kendy

 

[setter]

BTW, I should add that I don’t think it’s ok to disobey the church. But the church really needs to think about what it means to have a rule that is almost universally ignored. I grew catholic, in a 90% catholic country, and I did not know a single person who used NFP. And it’s the same now. We all know that at least 80% (and I am being conservative) of catholics are contracepting. Now, of course, that does not mean it’s not sin. However, it’s also reflects a failure on the part of the church. If you have one rebellious child than it may not be your fault but when you have a houseful of rebellious children, you need to look at your parenting.

And the worst part about disobedience is that it leads to more disobedience. Once the “faithful” think the church is so unreasonable that it has no choice but to ignore her on one thing, it becomes easier to just ignore all her teachings. As a child of an unreasonable mother, I know that that was the case. My mom never picked her battles, she let everything turn into civil war and as a result, I didn’t listen to her on the important things to my detriment.

Again, not saying that the church’s teaching on contraception is necessarily unreasonable (although I am not fond of the always ejaculate inside no matter what your intention is rule), but a good mother, a good teacher gets her children on board with the program.

Kendy

Barring that I may again be accused of being a “pompous jerk” for pointing out the obvious, IMO, the mutual responsibility and problem with the Church is exactly that the many dissenting Catholics are acting like selfish children, and the clergy have not always expected that the flock entrusted to their care are capable of assuming, accepting and growing into a mature adult faith walk with the person of Jesus Christ. Perhaps we should all take a lesson from St. Paul who was definite of calling believers to personal responsibility in developing an adult faith walk.

“For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need some one to teach you again the first principles of God’s word. You need milk, not solid food; for every one who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their faculties trained by practice to distinguish good from evil.” Hebrews 5: 12-14

Him we proclaim, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man mature in Christ.” **Colossians 1: 28 **

“…until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,” Ephesians 4: 13-15

 

[Kendy]

Barring that I may again be accused of being a “pompous jerk” for pointing out the obvious, IMO, the mutual responsibility and problem with the Church is exactly that the many dissenting Catholics are acting like selfish children, and the clergy have not always expected that the flock entrusted to their care are capable of assuming, accepting and growing into a mature adult faith walk with the person of Jesus Christ. Perhaps we should all take a lesson from St. Paul who was definite of calling believers to personal responsibility in developing an adult faith walk.

“For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need some one to teach you again the first principles of God’s word. You need milk, not solid food; for every one who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their faculties trained by practice to distinguish good from evil.” Hebrews 5: 12-14

Him we proclaim, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man mature in Christ.” **Colossians 1: 28 **

“…until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,” Ephesians 4: 13-15

You are not being a pompous jerk, but you are letting the church off too easy. Again, using the houseful of rebellious children. IF you met a mother of six children, and five of them had either broken the law, had a child out of wedlock, or was a drunkard, would you not question the mothering. In the same way, the church has to take responsibility for her failure to get her children on board.

While I don’t normally recommend the magazine, Commonweal had a excellent article on how contraception has had a rippling effect on other areas of catholic life. People who are contracepting are less likely to go to confession knowing ful well that they will continue to contracept so there’s no point. As a result, they cannot deal with their other sins. Thus, sin leads to more sin. That’s just one example of this effect, and of course, there are many others— not the least of which is if I can ignore this one, what about the others ones.

Kendy

 

[gogogirl]

Wow, it is interesting to see that this thread has been revived. My husband and I took a lot of what was said in this thread into consideration back in April and have come to a decision that has been really enriching for us. I know it doesn’t agree with the church and what many of you have been saying but ultimately, our bedroom antics are between us and God.

We still engage in oral sex but only when it is not being used with a contraceptive mentality. For example, I will finish him off so to speak and then we will proceed to have full intercourse later the same evening. I can always count on my husband to rise to the occasion several times in a short time span so I don’t see why there is any harm in it. I personally love to give my husband that type of pleasure. There are times that I would rather pleasure him in that fashion then to have full blown intercourse.

It is really funny that you guys talk about the fact that OS prohibits procreation and all of that but once my husband and I took our sex lives away from the church and began enjoying each other without the constant worry of being in mortal sin we got pregnant. I enjoy giving him OS to completion and he enjoys receiving it. Guess what, we got pregnant the first month we resorted to our “old and sinful” ways.

 

[setter]

You are not being a pompous jerk, but you are letting the church off too easy. Again, using the houseful of rebellious children. IF you met a mother of six children, and five of them had either broken the law, had a child out of wedlock, or was a drunkard, would you not question the mothering. In the same way, the church has to take responsibility for her failure to get her children on board.

While I don’t normally recommend the magazine, Commonweal had a excellent article on how contraception has had a rippling effect on other areas of catholic life. People who are contracepting are less likely to go to confession knowing ful well that they will continue to contracept so there’s no point. As a result, they cannot deal with their other sins. Thus, sin leads to more sin. That’s just one example of this effect, and of course, there are many others— not the least of which is if I can ignore this one, what about the others ones.

Kendy

To be sure there is plenty of blame to be spread on both sides of the Church flock and clergy. Again, the Church proper has always held a clear voice, it has been in the failure to implement and the Church heirarchy to forthrighly “enforce” this teaching against ‘credentialed’ public dissent which has contributed to the false notion of autonomy of conscience and heterodoxy.

Again from Humanae Vitae:

1. And now, beloved sons, you who are priests, you who in virtue of your sacred office act as counselors and spiritual leaders both of individual men and women and of families—We turn to you filled with great confidence. For it is your principal duty—We are speaking especially to you who teach moral theology—to spell out clearly and completely the Church’s teaching on marriage. In the performance of your ministry you must be the first to give an example of that sincere obedience, inward as well as outward, which is due to the Magisterium of the Church. For, as you know, the pastors of the Church enjoy a special light of the Holy Spirit in teaching the truth. (39) And this, rather than the arguments they put forward, is why you are bound to such obedience. Nor will it escape you that if men’s peace of soul and the unity of the Christian people are to be preserved, then it is of the utmost importance that in moral as well as in dogmatic theology all should obey the Magisterium of the Church and should speak as with one voice. Therefore We make Our own the anxious words of the great Apostle Paul and with all Our heart We renew Our appeal to you: “I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.” (40)

1. Now it is an outstanding manifestation of charity toward souls to omit nothing from the saving doctrine of Christ; but this must always be joined with tolerance and charity, as Christ Himself showed in His conversations and dealings with men. For when He came, not to judge, but to save the world, (41) was He not bitterly severe toward sin, but patient and abounding in mercy toward sinners?

 

[Lorarose]

. I grew catholic, in a 90% catholic country, and I did not know a single person who used NFP.

After the birth of my 5th child my husband and I decided it was time to try NFP.
I became pregnant again within a year.
I decided to give it another try - I was told I must have done this wrong - or that wrong, and I considered that.
This time I became pregnant with my 7th within 3 years.

Of course, I am very disillusioned with the whole NFP issue. I think it is naive to think that it will work for everyone when it doesn’t. I got to this point by trying to be obedient…not by trying to be selfish and adolescent.

 

[setter]

Wow, it is interesting to see that this thread has been revived. My husband and I took a lot of what was said in this thread into consideration back in April and have come to a decision that has been really enriching for us. I know it doesn’t agree with the church and what many of you have been saying but ultimately, our bedroom antics are between us and God.

We still engage in oral sex but only when it is not being used with a contraceptive mentality. For example, I will finish him off so to speak and then we will proceed to have full intercourse later the same evening. I can always count on my husband to rise to the occasion several times in a short time span so I don’t see why there is any harm in it. I personally love to give my husband that type of pleasure. There are times that I would rather pleasure him in that fashion then to have full blown intercourse.

It is really funny that you guys talk about the fact that OS prohibits procreation and all of that but once my husband and I took our sex lives away from the church and began enjoying each other without the constant worry of being in mortal sin we got pregnant. I enjoy giving him OS to completion and he enjoys receiving it. Guess what, we got pregnant the first month we resorted to our “old and sinful” ways.

The manifest voice of defiance and proud of it.

 

[Kendy]

To be sure there is plenty of blame to be spread on both sides of the Church flock and clergy. Again, the Church proper has always held a clear voice, it has been in the failure to implement and the Church heirarchy to forthrighly “enforce” this teaching against ‘credentialed’ public dissent which has contributed to the false notion of autonomy of conscience and heterodoxy.

Again from Humanae Vitae:

One of the things I really struggle with is the fact that no distinction is made between putting chemicals in your body that can kill a fertilized egg and wanting to share some sexual intimacy with your spouse during a time when you know that bringing another child into the world is not what is bnest for your family.

I was particularly angry a couple who could not have intercourse because of a physical disability that they could also not have oral sex because they could not have intercourse. It just seemed really insensitive to deny this couple their only means of sexual affection. And it certainly made me wonder how well does this celibate clergy understands the issues of married life.

I have come to love the church more than I imagine in the past year, and I would never dream of leaving. However, these things really sadden me. I am especially saddened by the fact that wives like gogogirl feel like they have to function outside the bounds of the church.

Kendy

 

[Kendy]

After the birth of my 5th child my husband and I decided it was time to try NFP.
I became pregnant again within a year.
I decided to give it another try - I was told I must have done this wrong - or that wrong, and I considered that.
This time I became pregnant with my 7th within 3 years.

Of course, I am very disillusioned with the whole NFP issue. I think it is naive to think that it will work for everyone when it doesn’t. I got to this point by trying to be obedient…not by trying to be selfish and adolescent.

Larosse,

I think first you should consider the possibility that seven children is the number of children that God wants you to have. I would not want seven children either, but it’s not about what we want, but what He wants. And whether we have children or not, we always need to prayerfully consider His will. I feel like one side says, here’s the law, and the other side, it’s my choice. And frankly, I think both are wrong. The right attitude is what is God’s will for my life, my marriage, and my family. Am I surrending it all to Him, including my body? What factors motivate mu desired family size? What are my current circumstances and what would wisdom dictate in this situation? Etc.

Kendy

 

[setter]

One of the things I really struggle with is the fact that no distinction is made between putting chemicals in your body that can kill a fertilized egg and wanting to share some sexual intimacy with your spouse during a time when you know that bringing another child into the world is not what is bnest for your family.

I was particularly angry a couple who could not have intercourse because of a physical disability that they could also not have oral sex because they could not have intercourse. It just seemed really insensitive to deny this couple their only means of sexual affection. And it certainly made me wonder how well does this celibate clergy understands the issues of married life.

I have come to love the church more than I imagine in the past year, and I would never dream of leaving. However, these things really sadden me. I am especially saddened by the fact that wives like gogogirl feel like they have to function outside the bounds of the church.

Kendy

From a human point of view, it can seem unreasonable and intellectually self-serving. However, when the meaning and language of the conjugal union is developed to encompass the theological process as well as the biological process of the marital union, to violate one is to violate the other and violate what God has made sacred. It is not just celibate clergy who are called to a deeper appreciation of the marriage covenant. Ultimately, it comes down to a desire to know and live the truth and the grace of God to fully live Church teaching in matters of faith and morals, IMHO.