Permissable sex

[Convert_in_99]

Convert, Could you repost on “Whats Ok and What’s Not Regarding Marital Sexuality?” I would do it but don’t want to plagiarize your entire post.

**I’m confused. Do you mean to cut and paste this onto a different thread? I think I saw that thread somewhere.

You have my permission to cut and paste the whole thing to another thread, give the info to friends or family and so on, so long as nothing is altered! **

 

[TIME]

Convert, Thanks, Done.

 

[TheClassic]

Inside the wife’s vagina. Think about the reason for this requirement- each act must be both unitive AND procreative. Anal sex in and of itself is NOT procreative, and I dare say it would be a special couple that would find anal sex to be mutually unitive.

That being said, the serious sanitary issues that result from anal contact followed by vaginal contact make it rather impractical. I would encourage those considering anal sex to search and pray about what it is they are looking for in their sexual relationship.

I thought anal penetration (sodomy) was wrong, even between husband and wife.

**As for what is allowed…its really quite simple.

The husband must always, 100% of the time climax (ejaculate) inside his wife’s vagina.
**

The act must be procreative, but is there anything that really says the act can only consist of one orgasm? It seems that it would acceptable for husband to ejaculate outside, bring his wife to climax, then ejaculate again inside. Why is this not considered a a single conjugal act?

 

[Mirror_Mirror]

The act must be procreative, but is there anything that really says the act can only consist of one orgasm? It seems that it would acceptable for husband to ejaculate outside, bring his wife to climax, then ejaculate again inside. Why is this not considered a a single conjugal act?

The bolded statement is contradictory. If the act must be (which it must be every time) procreative how is the husband’s orgasm outside of his wife’s vagina procreative? Each time the husband ejaculates it should be in the vagina, it cannot be procreative otherwise.

 

[TheClassic]

The bolded statement is contradictory. If the act must be (which it must be every time) procreative how is the husband’s orgasm outside of his wife’s vagina procreative? Each time the husband ejaculates it should be in the vagina, it cannot be procreative otherwise.

How can a question be contradictory? I’m asking how is “the act” defined? Why can the conjugal act not be defined as more than a single orgasm? If one orgasm results in semen ejaculated within the vagina, then the act as a whole is procreative. Kissing in itself is not procreative, but it can still be part of the conjugal act. In the same way, I am suggesting that one orgasm can be part of a larger conjugal act that is still procreative.

 

[Mirror_Mirror]

How can a question be contradictory? I’m asking how is “the act” defined? Why can the conjugal act not be defined as more than a single orgasm? If one orgasm results in semen ejaculated within the vagina, then the act as a whole is procreative. Kissing in itself is not procreative, but it can still be part of the conjugal act. In the same way, I am suggesting that one orgasm can be part of a larger conjugal act that is still procreative.

It is contradictory because you stated that the act must be procreative and then that there is an ejaculation outside of the vagina, contradicting the original statement that the act must be procreative. Each time the husband ejaculates whether it is just one time or ten times in one night, it must always be inside the vagina or it is not procreative.

I am not sure I completely understand why there is a need for an ejaculation to be outside of the vagina in the marital act? Also, although it may be possible, it is not that easy for a male to have two orgasms in close proximity.

 

[steve975]

Wow. Some of these responses have really surprised me and I am soon to get the Catechism to educate myself thoroughly on this stuff.

1. I have a hard time believing that the man can be stimulated (orally or otherwise) outside of the vagina. Even if the man intends to climax inside the vagina, it just seems like any stimulation whatsoever outside willfully places the couple in a position of temptation under which the man might be tempted to climax outside. Isn’t this the same reason why even passionate kissing isn’t allowed prior to marriage – because it willfully places the couple in a position where they might be tempted to do more? Or getting drunk willfully placing someone in a position where they may more easily be vulnerable to sin? So how can the man possibly be allowed any stimulation outside of the vagina?
2. So you’re sure that the man can orally or manually stimulate the woman? I was worried about this, as a lot of women have trouble climaxing from vaginal intercourse. But if this is true, can this be considered a “procreative” act? I hope this is true, but are you sure?
3. So if the spouses must always intend to have intercourse following any foreplay, does this rule out passionate kissing? Can a man even passionately kiss his wife without intending to have intercourse? From what Convert says, it seems like some foreplay like this without intercourse is allowed but I wanted confirmation.
4. Also, if the spouses must intend to have intercourse following foreplay, does the man have to ejaculate? I know the man can’t ejaculate outside the vagina, but can the couple have intercourse where the man doesn’t ejaculate at all?

 

[rusty20]

Wow. Some of these responses have really surprised me and I am soon to get the Catechism to educate myself thoroughly on this stuff.

1. I have a hard time believing that the man can be stimulated (orally or otherwise) outside of the vagina. Even if the man intends to climax inside the vagina, it just seems like any stimulation whatsoever outside willfully places the couple in a position of temptation under which the man might be tempted to climax outside. Isn’t this the same reason why even passionate kissing isn’t allowed prior to marriage – because it willfully places the couple in a position where they might be tempted to do more? Or getting drunk willfully placing someone in a position where they may more easily be vulnerable to sin? So how can the man possibly be allowed any stimulation outside of the vagina?
2. So you’re sure that the man can orally or manually stimulate the woman? I was worried about this, as a lot of women have trouble climaxing from vaginal intercourse. But if this is true, can this be considered a “procreative” act? I hope this is true, but are you sure?
3. So if the spouses must always intend to have intercourse following any foreplay, does this rule out passionate kissing? Can a man even passionately kiss his wife without intending to have intercourse? From what Convert says, it seems like some foreplay like this without intercourse is allowed but I wanted confirmation.
4. Also, if the spouses must intend to have intercourse following foreplay, does the man have to ejaculate? I know the man can’t ejaculate outside the vagina, but can the couple have intercourse where the man doesn’t ejaculate at all?

good questions…i don’t have the answers, but I’m interested to see the Church’s answers…

 

[newbetx]

Wow. Some of these responses have really surprised me and I am soon to get the Catechism to educate myself thoroughly on this stuff.

1. I have a hard time believing that the man can be stimulated (orally or otherwise) outside of the vagina. Even if the man intends to climax inside the vagina, it just seems like any stimulation whatsoever outside willfully places the couple in a position of temptation under which the man might be tempted to climax outside. Isn’t this the same reason why even passionate kissing isn’t allowed prior to marriage – because it willfully places the couple in a position where they might be tempted to do more? Or getting drunk willfully placing someone in a position where they may more easily be vulnerable to sin? So how can the man possibly be allowed any stimulation outside of the vagina?

Knowing when to say “no” or “stop” is important. Many “rules” have been made up to avoid the sin of tempation. A couples sexuality is not an animal that needs to be caged. An “all or nothing” intimacy attitude is as dangerous as tempation to lust.

1. So you’re sure that the man can orally or manually stimulate the woman? I was worried about this, as a lot of women have trouble climaxing from vaginal intercourse. But if this is true, can this be considered a “procreative” act? I hope this is true, but are you sure?
   Yes, this is part of the good news!
2. So if the spouses must always intend to have intercourse following any foreplay, does this rule out passionate kissing? Can a man even passionately kiss his wife without intending to have intercourse? From what Convert says, it seems like some foreplay like this without intercourse is allowed but I wanted confirmation.
   Nothing I’ve read so far has indicated to me that there is a “line in the sand” you can not cross prior to orgasm. It is no sin to touch, taste, see or hear your spouse. Intimacy is not limited to intercourse. Of course, a couple has to really determine how far they can go without driving themselves crazy.
3. Also, if the spouses must intend to have intercourse following foreplay, does the man have to ejaculate? I know the man can’t ejaculate outside the vagina, but can the couple have intercourse where the man doesn’t ejaculate at all?
   Interesting question. From what I remember, I don’t think he can aviod at this point on purpose since it would not fufill the act. But a baby screaming or child banging on the door has stopped many acts this way and that is not sinful.

Much has to do with the intent of the act. Do you really know what the act means? I didn’t, but I do now. And you should too.
All these questions and MORE are answered for you definitively in Christopher West’s “The Good News About Sex and Marriage.” It’s well worth reading as many on CAF will attest. If you want to know, spend the few bucks on the book and read from cover to cover. And read it with your spouse! You can get some free MP3’s on the subject on christopherwest.com, but the book is way better than a few minutes of soundbites. The catechism does not address the issues in as easy to understand form as CW is able to present. Not to the level of detail or explaination, either. I highly recommend the book.

 

[steve975]

All these questions and MORE are answered for you definitively in Christopher West’s “The Good News About Sex and Marriage.” It’s well worth reading as many on CAF will attest. If you want to know, spend the few bucks on the book and read from cover to cover. And read it with your spouse! You can get some free MP3’s on the subject on christopherwest.com, but the book is way better than a few minutes of soundbites. The catechism does not address the issues in as easy to understand form as CW is able to present. Not to the level of detail or explaination, either. I highly recommend the book.

Thanks, and this is perfect. I just ordered that book last week and I believe it should be delivered today. I guess with this book, now I might not even need to read the related sections in the catechism from what you said. I’m not married, but I am pursuing a possible marriage with my girlfriend and we’re struggling with some of these issues. Maybe this book will help. Thanks!

 

[newbetx]

Thanks, and this is perfect. I just ordered that book last week and I believe it should be delivered today. I guess with this book, now I might not even need to read the related sections in the catechism from what you said. I’m not married, but I am pursuing a possible marriage with my girlfriend and we’re struggling with some of these issues. Maybe this book will help. Thanks!

The book WILL help but only if both of you read it, together. But please DO read the CCC. It is part of the basis for JP II’s TOB.

There is SO much to the full Theology of the Body. I’ve been reading and listening to things for over a year and I keep finding new perspectives and concepts I’d never have been open to before reading TGNAS&M. I think the book should be required reading for every engaged couple.

 

[jwashu]

Wow. Some of these responses have really surprised me and I am soon to get the Catechism to educate myself thoroughly on this stuff.

1. I have a hard time believing that the man can be stimulated (orally or otherwise) outside of the vagina. Even if the man intends to climax inside the vagina, it just seems like any stimulation whatsoever outside willfully places the couple in a position of temptation under which the man might be tempted to climax outside. Isn’t this the same reason why even passionate kissing isn’t allowed prior to marriage – because it willfully places the couple in a position where they might be tempted to do more? Or getting drunk willfully placing someone in a position where they may more easily be vulnerable to sin? So how can the man possibly be allowed any stimulation outside of the vagina?
2. So you’re sure that the man can orally or manually stimulate the woman? I was worried about this, as a lot of women have trouble climaxing from vaginal intercourse. But if this is true, can this be considered a “procreative” act? I hope this is true, but are you sure?
3. So if the spouses must always intend to have intercourse following any foreplay, does this rule out passionate kissing? Can a man even passionately kiss his wife without intending to have intercourse? From what Convert says, it seems like some foreplay like this without intercourse is allowed but I wanted confirmation.
4. Also, if the spouses must intend to have intercourse following foreplay, does the man have to ejaculate? I know the man can’t ejaculate outside the vagina, but can the couple have intercourse where the man doesn’t ejaculate at all?

First, you need to pick up a copy of “The Good News about Sex and Marraige” by Christopher West.

As a convert who had some very liberal views on Sexuality I have studied this subject a great deal… and I STILL have a lot to learn. However I tell you in good faith that the responses I’ll list to the questions are correct. Some can be found in the little “An Examination of Conscience” book most of us use for Confession.

1. Oral or manual stimulation IS ok within the teachings of the Church. The Church wants us to be completely open with each other and to love completely.
2. See answer to question, yes the man can do this for his wife (and should IMHO).
3. I think the real quesiton is, does passionate kissing always lead to intercourse? No for me it doesn’t. There are a lot of times I just grab my wife in the mornings (as a surprise) while she is getting dressed and kiss her passionately. Not as a prelude to sex but just because I love her. In those cases I can’t see how it would be a sin. However if you got to the point of excitement where there was “no turning back” in a sense and something else that wasn’t approved by the Church happened then quite possibly.
4. Yes, if you have intercourse then you have to ejaculate. Fr. Serpa answered this question recently on the “Ask an Apologist” section. I have to agree with his thought, not following through it an empty experience. If our spousal union mimicks the union and Love between the Father and the Son, which produces the Holy Spirit then not giving yourself completely would be a problem.

From another post I would add though that I do NOT believe that anal intercourse is permitted at all, even as foreplay.

Finally let me add again to pick up some informaiton on Theology of the Body. God and our Church wants us to enjoy sex with our spouse. It’s truly the renewing of the Marraige Sacrament. So my last suggestion would be to relax a little and enjoy each other.

Getting use to each others bodies in regards to extravaginal stimulation may result in some accidents. If they are truly “accidents” then you haven’t committed a motral sin but “accidents” won’t happen often. If they happen though and you feel guilty, go to confession, tell your Priest what’s going on. My guess is that you may find him more helpful than you think.

God Bless,

Joe

 

[RichT]

First, you need to pick up a copy of “The Good News about Sex and Marraige” by Christopher West.

From another post I would add though that I do NOT believe that anal intercourse is permitted at all, even as foreplay.

According to the book you mention above, on pages 93-94, Mr. West states that there is nothing inherently wrong with anal penetration as foreplay. It must be noted that he does go on to discuss the serious health risks associated with anal intercourse. So, it would seem that it is permissable as foreplay, but one must really consider the health risks. To each his own I guess.

I too want to add that some of the answers to this thread have been somewhat surprising. I think every marriage prep course ought to have as required reading, this book by Christopher West. It should also be used for married people going through RCIA.

 

[newbetx]

According to the book you mention above, on pages 93-94, Mr. West states that there is nothing inherently wrong with anal penetration as foreplay. It must be noted that he does go on to discuss the serious health risks associated with anal intercourse. So, it would seem that it is permissable as foreplay, but one must really consider the health risks. To each his own I guess.

I too want to add that some of the answers to this thread have been somewhat surprising. I think every marriage prep course ought to have as required reading, this book by Christopher West. It should also be used for married people going through RCIA.

From what I heard, TGNAS&M is his first book. I think later, I’ve heard, but not verified, that anal intercourse is now denounced as an unsafe act.

As for required reading… I wish I had this when I went through RCIA and pre-cana. The more we get the word out, the better!

 

[Traddy]

As long as the couple doesn’t use anal penetration as a substitute for intercourse (i.e., only as foreplay…no orgasm for the man at all), and don’t force it upon either person, it’s fine, but because of the health risks, the man could use a condom while penetrating, and then when the couple agree it is time for vaginal intercourse, they begin that (with the condom coming off of course, lol).

 

[newbetx]

As long as the couple doesn’t use anal penetration as a substitute for intercourse (i.e., only as foreplay…no orgasm for the man at all), and don’t force it upon either person, it’s fine, but because of the health risks, the man could use a condom while penetrating, and then when the couple agree it is time for vaginal intercourse, they begin that (with the condom coming off of course, lol).

Hmm. soap and water maybe. I don’ t think there is ever any approved use of a regular condom… Even for this.

 

[jwashu]

According to the book you mention above, on pages 93-94, Mr. West states that there is nothing inherently wrong with anal penetration as foreplay. It must be noted that he does go on to discuss the serious health risks associated with anal intercourse. So, it would seem that it is permissable as foreplay, but one must really consider the health risks. To each his own I guess.

I too want to add that some of the answers to this thread have been somewhat surprising. I think every marriage prep course ought to have as required reading, this book by Christopher West. It should also be used for married people going through RCIA.

I’m not that far yet since I’m reading into to ToB at the same time… I believe the Examination of Conscience book says you can’t though but West’s stuff is great so far. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

Joe

 

[RichT]

I originally quoted from the 1st edition of this book.

I do have a revised 2006 edition of the book also, and after looking at it, Mr. West does change his stance on anal penetration, but not as firmly as some might think. He basically sums up the question by saying, “Perhaps in some abstract, objective sense there is nothing to condemn mere penetration of the anus as absolutely and in every case immoral. But subjectively speaking, for all of the above reasons it is very difficult to justify anal penetration as a loving act of foreplay to the marriage embrace. It is an act that seems to stem much from the disorder of lust than from a genuine desire to symbolize and renew the marriage commitment.”

So, it appears he does change is position, but still leaves the window open just a bit.

 

[newbetx]

I originally quoted from the 1st edition of this book.

I do have a revised 2006 edition of the book also, and after looking at it, Mr. West does change his stance on anal penetration, but not as firmly as some might think. He basically sums up the question by saying, “Perhaps in some abstract, objective sense there is nothing to condemn mere penetration of the anus as absolutely and in every case immoral. But subjectively speaking, for all of the above reasons it is very difficult to justify anal penetration as a loving act of foreplay to the marriage embrace. It is an act that seems to stem much from the disorder of lust than from a genuine desire to symbolize and renew the marriage commitment.”

So, it appears he does change is position, but still leaves the window open just a bit.

I think that he hasn’t found anything concretely wrong. And he studies this far more than I. I think that he’s saying a couple may go there if they please, but why? Same for ears and noses, I suppose. I guess just because someone doesn’t say it’s wrong, does not make it right. SOME people may require that type of stimulation, but most likely, it’s not required for anyone in general. All of the body is good. All of it. God made it. Any good thing can be made “bad” by acts of sin. So it would seem “leaving the door open” is all that he can do. I think from what we know, it has no advantage to a couple’s sexual relationship over vaginal sex. So we are where we are.

 

[Marc64]

Regarding no ejaculate!
Your discussions above are very well explained and I agree and have lived that life for 41 years of marriage. Now the times have changed with the experience of prostate cancer. I can no longer ejaculate but I do have some degree of reaching a climax. I no longer have natural erections. Erections are chemically induced on a periodic basis on a closely monitored basis (equally spaced). Timing is usually bad as libido is always low and erratic. My erections are not normal and vaginal penetration with my member rarely allows proper engagement for any climax completion. I have been getting treatment for penial rehabilitation and continue on that path. I still have a need for intimacy and so does my wife. Since there is no ejaculate, I fail to see the urgent need for vaginal IC for moral committment. Seems like loving mutual (manual, oral or other means) )stimulation for the sake of unitive love is in order. We don’t know which way to turn and tend to just shy away from being together. Other “Christian” religions don’t seem to have issues with. Has any one thought of this type of situation that affects thousands of troubled couples?
Thank you.
marc64