oral sex with my wife ok?

[CuriousInIL]

How is that possible? Aside from artificial insemination? Please site this and provide support for your statement.

I am still unsure what the basis is for your side. Could you please do us a favor an provide a concrete example of when the male orgasm is not required in the marital act? Aside from the couple being interrupted by some unforseen event.

I will try to do so later, I do not have time now.

But, one point of clarification, the points I am making are far from “my side.” Rather, I hope you can provide me the support for your statement and the statement of pig boy. As I believe I said up front in this discussion, I have long been looking for such support but simply cannot find it. What I am presenting is merely the arguments that have been consistently presented against me IRL when I have tried to take the positions that you and pig boy have taken.

Way way way way too often on this site, and especially here in MT, anyone who raises a question is pointed out as someone who doesn’t get it or is just trying to make trouble or similar thoughts. Sometimes that is certainly true (not ever for me though); however, many times it is just an effort to refine the points in the fire of questioning. Perhaps I am more used to this as this happens constantly in the legal profession. Why do so many folks here, that seem strong in their faith and beliefs, resort to huffing and puffing in the face of questions and, to me the most improper response to a question, attributing a “position” or “argument” to someone who has only dared to ask a question. Rant over.

I have no “horse in this race.” For the most part, and certainly in this thread, I have not voiced my opinions on the actions that are the subject of this thread, not do I intend to do so.

But, I do intend, here and elsewhere, to question so that all might grow and to ask for support where folks make statements that I have not seen support for.

 

[Miserissima]

He’s hardly an “early Church Father”.

Can someone please cite from this document where JPII states that oral activity is acceptable (my first request was ignored)?

I do believe that people are referring to JPII’s “Love and Responsibility.” It “…talks about trying to satisfy your spouse it specifically speaks about when a woman does not reach climax, but her husband does. It suggests that the husband should lovingly help her reach it. It never suggests that the man can complete the act outside of the wife’s body (which would not be open to life) nor does it say anything that would suggest oral sex outside of foreplay is ok.” (citation from an earlier thread)

In addition to the excerpts from the Summa and quoting Pius XI Casti Connubii, I’d like to offer something from Pope Pius XII had written in “Address to the Second World Congress on Fertility and Sterility,” 1956 (emphasis mine):

Marriage is a mutual commitment in which each side ceases to be autonomous, in various ways and also sexually: the sexual liberty in agreement together is great; here, so long as they are not immoderate so as to become slaves of sensuality, nothing is shameful, if the complete acts - the ones involving ejaculation of the man’s seed - that they engage in are true and real marriage acts.

And I’d really like to respond to this:

For the most part, and certainly in this thread, I have not voiced my opinions on the actions that are the subject of this thread, not do I intend to do so.

Please take this in the spirit of charity in which it is offered: perhaps you could clarify your question in a new thread and so we could stay on topic here? I would really like to explore your question, but in its own place.

 

[CuriousInIL]

I do believe that people are referring to JPII’s “Love and Responsibility.” It “…talks about trying to satisfy your spouse it specifically speaks about when a woman does not reach climax, but her husband does. It suggests that the husband should lovingly help her reach it. It never suggests that the man can complete the act outside of the wife’s body (which would not be open to life) nor does it say anything that would suggest oral sex outside of foreplay is ok.” (citation from an earlier thread)

In addition to the excerpts from the Summa and quoting Pius XI Casti Connubii, I’d like to offer something from Pope Pius XII had written in “Address to the Second World Congress on Fertility and Sterility,” 1956 (emphasis mine):

And I’d really like to respond to this:

Please take this in the spirit of charity in which it is offered: perhaps you could clarify your question in a new thread and so we could stay on topic here? I would really like to explore your question, but in its own place.

I think my posts have been entirely on topic, but because at least you think I have not been, I will stop.

 

[Miserissima]

I think my posts have been entirely on topic, but because at least you think I have not been, I will stop.

No no no! I think that your question is it’s a more specific… *specialized *topic that deserves to be addressed indpendently, that’s all. By all means Inever meant to dis-invite you from any discussion! That’s not at all my place. Please forgive me.

 

[Sir_Knight]

I know that I’m coming late to this discussion but I clearly remember during our pre-marriage sessions with the priest that we could do ANYTHING that we wanted with each other as long as it was mutually acceptable and was open to the possibility of new life.

 

[Hegesippus]

I am a newbie to the thread as well, but would just like to throw out some info. Theology of the Body by JP II is not an official Magisterial teaching and is not binding on the faithful. Some are questioning why anal sex keeps being brought up into the conversation. The answer is that if one applies the same logic of oral stimulation to that of anal stimulation it appears that it morally acceptable to for married couples to engage in this behavior, as long as the same rules apply. Namely the husband than finishes inside his wife’s vagina. Just some food for thought. The Church Fathers, I believe are universal in their condemnation of oral sex (I think this includes any engagement of the genitals with the mouth) for married couples. It is also interesting that the penance given for oral sex was harsher than that of anal sex.

 

[zemi]

I am a newbie to the thread as well, but would just like to throw out some info. Theology of the Body by JP II is not an official Magisterial teaching and is not binding on the faithful. Some are questioning why anal sex keeps being brought up into the conversation. The answer is that if one applies the same logic of oral stimulation to that of anal stimulation it appears that it morally acceptable to for married couples to engage in this behavior, as long as the same rules apply. Namely the husband than finishes inside his wife’s vagina. Just some food for thought. The Church Fathers, I believe are universal in their condemnation of oral sex (I think this includes any engagement of the genitals with the mouth) for married couples. It is also interesting that the penance given for oral sex was harsher than that of anal sex.

I would like to look at those Church Fathers (plainly out of interest). Do you have any sources for it? Thanks

 

[Hegesippus]

I would like to look at those Church Fathers (plainly out of interest). Do you have any sources for it? Thanks

This was taken from a post by Fr. Ambrose in the Eastern Christianity section

The Penitential of Saint Theodore the Archbishop of Canterbury in 670 required 1 year’s penance for inter-femoral contact (penis between thighs); 3 years for all lesbian activity; 7 to 15 years for anal intercourse; 7 to 22 years for fellatio (oral sex); and, for comparison, 7 to 10 years for murder; 15 years for infanticide (reduced to 7 years if the mother was a pauper).

It is interesting that the penances were usually greater for “those who befouled their lips” (as Saint Columban described oral sex in 600) than for those who used anal sex. When Saint Theodore says that oral sex is “the worst of all evils,” he quite literally means just that — that it is worse than murder (maximum 15 years’ penance) but oral sex deserves up to 22 years of penance and even a lifetime for the habitual offender. Probably this severity is due to the belief that the mouth was ordained to receive the eucharist

 

[Hegesippus]

This is also a quote from Fr. Ambrose which speaks to the sentiments of other posters who stated that oral sex, includes oral stimulation, was considered a sin for centuries.

“Until a few years ago many if not all countries upheld Christian standards against oral sex and anal sex. We are speaking not just of unmarried but of married couples For example, the State of Texas still has such laws on its books and still applies them. Oral sex in Texas remains a crime between married couples.”

I am not arguing either way, to tell the truth I do not believe oral stimulation to be morally wrong (within in the proper context of course), however JP II’s TOTB is mainly a philosophical work that is highly criticized by neo-scholastics because of some of the immoral behavior (in their opinion) that it allows for. For example, anal stimluation.

 

[Hegesippus]

St. Augustine, who might not be the best authority when it comes to sex, would certainly object to oral stimulation as well as NFP, post menopausal sex, as well as sex between a couple when the wife is experiencing her monthly cycle.

 

[roo]

I am not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone…

Just some food for thoughts…

We know that sexual intercourse for married couples is for procreation and being unitive. If the women is not able to conceive due to medical reasons or she is “too old,” then her intercourse would be unitive. You would not stop having relations because she cannot be “procreative.” If the man cannot give “new life”, the act would be unitive. We must remember that intercourse is also a giving of oneself and becoming one with each other and God. This unity is just as holy as new life. The same would be for the male if he doesn’t ejaculate in the vagina. There is still unity, if it was done in a holy manner. When it is done in a loving and giving way, God unites. We can argue this for years. It is between the wife, husband, and God when it comes to their bed (in a moral manner).

If sexual intercourse wasn’t a loving, giving, and let’s face it…ENJOYABLE, we would have less people running around.

 

[MrS]

This is also a quote from Fr. Ambrose which speaks to the sentiments of other posters who stated that oral sex, includes oral stimulation, was considered a sin for centuries.

I am not arguing either way, to tell the truth I do not believe oral stimulation to be morally wrong (within in the proper context of course), however JP II’s TOTB is mainly a philosophical work that is highly criticized by neo-scholastics because of some of the immoral behavior (in their opinion) that it allows for. For example, anal stimluation.

First, with all due respect to Fr. Ambrose, I have little or no confidence in his level of authority. He has said a lot of things here…

Second, I noticed your interests included cigars. Do you think the Church Fathers included this as a “violation” ??
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_5_3.gif just early morning attempt at humor… sorry

.

%between%

 

[darthsmozers]

I didn’t want this post to go unnoticed. You are so right on. I am sure others here, like myself, do appreciate those two cents.

I think people do keep using the term oral sex (which is wrong) with oral stimulation (which is okay so long as it leads to vaginal sex, climax…oh goodness how many times has this been repeated? lol)

Anal sex, which keeps being brought into the discussion, is essentially a *mockery of the sex act *that God intended. It has no place in the discussion at hand.

Thank you

 

[Hegesippus]

First, with all due respect to Fr. Ambrose, I have little or no confidence in his level of authority. He has said a lot of things here…

Second, I noticed your interests included cigars. Do you think the Church Fathers included this as a “violation” ??
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_5_3.gif just early morning attempt at humor… sorry

.

%between%

Fr. Ambrose, however, does bring up a good point concerning the iinfluence of Christianity and the legislation of laws. I believe this evidence favors the argument that oral stimulation was considered a sin in previous generations. Now, I cannot conclusively prove this so I should probably stop until I can. It would not surprise me if one could find info on the morality of oral sex due to the lengths that scholasticism would go to make sure no stone was left unturned.

 

[Hegesippus]

First, with all due respect to Fr. Ambrose, I have little or no confidence in his level of authority. He has said a lot of things here…

Second, I noticed your interests included cigars. Do you think the Church Fathers included this as a “violation” ??
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_5_3.gif just early morning attempt at humor… sorry

.

%between%

I have Pius X on my side on this one:thumbsup:

 

[Hegesippus]

I didn’t want this post to go unnoticed. You are so right on. I am sure others here, like myself, do appreciate those two cents.

I think people do keep using the term oral sex (which is wrong) with oral stimulation (which is okay so long as it leads to vaginal sex, climax…oh goodness how many times has this been repeated? lol)

Anal sex, which keeps being brought into the discussion, is essentially a *mockery of the sex act *that God intended. It has no place in the discussion at hand.

The logic that allows oral sex, and the biggest criticism from those who are argue that it is immoral, also allows other sexual pratctices which many consider immoral just as long as the husband finishes inside his wife’s vagina.

 

[blessedtoo]

Fr. Ambrose, however, does bring up a good point concerning the iinfluence of Christianity and the legislation of laws. I believe this evidence favors the argument that oral stimulation was considered a sin in previous generations. Now, I cannot conclusively prove this so I should probably stop until I can. It would not surprise me if one could find info on the morality of oral sex due to the lengths that scholasticism would go to make sure no stone was left unturned.

A sodomy law is a law that defines certain sexual acts as sex crimes. The precise sexual acts meant by the term sodomy are rarely spelled out in the law, but is typically understood by courts to include any sexual act which does not lead to procreation. Furthermore, Sodomy has many synonyms: buggery, crime against nature, unnatural act, deviant sexual intercourse. It also has a range of similar euphemisms.[1]
While in theory this may include heterosexual oral sex, anal sex, masturbation, and bestiality, in practice such laws are primarily enforced against sex between men (particularly anal sex).[2]
Most anti-sodomy laws in Western countries originated from a Christian world-view established from the bible. The Biblical book Leviticus defines sex between men as a crime that warrants capital punishment. [6]The New Testament also condemns Sodomy. The biblical book of Romans calls Sodomy “unnatural”, “degrading passions”, “indecent acts”

Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state, punishable by a lengthy term of imprisonment.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_law

 

[JenniferMoon]

The logic that allows oral sex, and the biggest criticism from those who are argue that it is immoral, also allows other sexual pratctices which many consider immoral just as long as the husband finishes inside his wife’s vagina.

Oh? I don’t see one person here saying anal sex is okay.

Even from a purely medical perspective, anal sex is dangerous and even more so if it were followed with vaginal sex, carrying bacteria from one to the other, and there are so many other risks we could go on for pages talking about them. Surely God would not want us to engage in a dangerous sexual behavior. But I don’t think anybody here is interested one whit in anal sex. Just the people who keep focusing on it, like yourself.
Anal sex is just wrong any way we look at it.

 

[JenniferMoon]

Blessedtoo, do you even know the difference between oral stimulation (within a loving marital union) and oral sex?

 

[StratusRose]

**

Most anti-sodomy laws in Western countries originated from a Christian world-view established from the bible.

I know that many states did ban anal sex, but has any state specifically banned oral sex?**