So...within marriage, this is ok?

[joshkt79]

I posted this in another thread as a response to a post, but I’ll re-post it here.

A husband cannot masturbate, at all, for whatever reason. Even if his wife gives him permission and even if he does not climax, it’s still wrong and a sin.

But a wife can masturbate the husband, just as long as he climaxes inside his wife’s vagina.

I’m not understanding this. Someone explain

 

[BigFellaMick]

any kind of sexual activity is permitted within marriage as long as he finishes inside you. Any time you have sexual activity it must be both unitive and procreative. God Bless

 

[Nate13]

Josh I think the question you are missing here is why would a wife wish to masturbate her husband before having him finish inside her? From my understanding I see this and oral stimulation as foreplay to get both parties to the point where they can engage in the true sexual act. This is necessary because it sometimes takes time before both parties are ready to go and oral or manual stimulation is necessary to get to this point. I think anything past this point is circumspect and the couple really needs to be asking themselves why they are doing it and whether it really is bringing them closer together even if they end up finishing in the right place.

 

[promethius]

any kind of sexual activity is permitted within marriage as long as he finishes inside you. Any time you have sexual activity it must be both unitive and procreative. God Bless

Not quite true. We are forbidden from any sexual practice which denegrates the other as though they are nothing more than an object for our own sexual pleasure. Lust is treating the ends (the person) as a means (an object).

So even when there is a lack of contraception, an act can still be a violation of lust if it reduces the dignity of the person to that of an object for pleasure.

 

[Bookcat]

Various kinds of chaste foreplay is permitted (such is not masturbation…).

One must of course avoid hedonism too…etc

Catechism:

2360 Sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman. In marriage the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion. Marriage bonds between baptized persons are sanctified by the sacrament.

2361 "Sexuality, by means of which man and woman give themselves to one another through the acts which are proper and exclusive to spouses, is not something simply biological, but concerns the innermost being of the human person as such. It is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and woman commit themselves totally to one another until death."142

Tobias got out of bed and said to Sarah, “Sister, get up, and let us pray and implore our Lord that he grant us mercy and safety.” So she got up, and they began to pray and implore that they might be kept safe. Tobias began by saying, “Blessed are you, O God of our fathers… You made Adam, and for him you made his wife Eve as a helper and support. From the two of them the race of mankind has sprung. You said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; let us make a helper for him like himself.’ I now am taking this kinswoman of mine, not because of lust, but with sincerity. Grant that she and I may find mercy and that we may grow old together.” and they both said, “Amen, Amen.” Then they went to sleep for the night.143

**2362 "The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; the truly human performance of these acts fosters the self-giving they signify and enriches the spouses in joy and gratitude."144 Sexuality is a source of joy and pleasure:

The Creator himself . . . established that in the [generative] function, spouses should experience pleasure and enjoyment of body and spirit. Therefore, the spouses do nothing evil in seeking this pleasure and enjoyment. They accept what the Creator has intended for them. At the same time, spouses should know how to keep themselves within the limits of just moderation.145**

2363 The spouses’ union achieves the twofold end of marriage: the good of the spouses themselves and the transmission of life. These two meanings or values of marriage cannot be separated without altering the couple’s spiritual life and compromising the goods of marriage and the future of the family.
The conjugal love of man and woman thus stands under the twofold obligation of fidelity and fecundity.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I posted this in another thread as a response to a post, but I’ll re-post it here.

A husband cannot masturbate, at all, for whatever reason. Even if his wife gives him permission and even if he does not climax, it’s still wrong and a sin.

But a wife can masturbate the husband, just as long as he climaxes inside his wife’s vagina.

I’m not understanding this. Someone explain

It took some time to me to understand your post. If the wife “masturbates” the husband this is not called masturbation and falls outside the definition of masturbation. The difference is the same as you caress your face and she caresses your face: does this have anything in common.

The term “masturabtion” for what you describe the wife is doing is horrible. Unless what you describe is mechanically done, the couple reaches “that” (which is not “that”) for an act of love, of giving pleasure to the other, to prepare for the sexual act and not as an end in itself.

just as long as he climaxes inside his wife’s vagina.

gives another horrible description of what is going on. So sex with a wife = masturbation+ejaculation inside the vagina ? This is robotic, without love, without passion, without any kind of human relation.

I think one should not have sex with the book rules of Chastity in one hand and the catechism in the other. Sex is an act of love and many things can happen, for instance, premature ejaculation (outside the vagina) and you are not going to the priest saying that it was outside the vagina. It happened but does not mean that happens always.

I think put a procedure manual on the head of the bed is the most horrible thing that you can do.

 

[Nate13]

This shouldn’t be seen as mechanical. If that is considered mechanical then so is saying it has to be with a woman and you have to be married to that woman… The whole point is that all of this should be a given as we most of us already consider such things like it having to be between an man and woman who are married. If someone doesn’t see it as a given, then they should start researching as to why so they can better understand the purpose of the sexual act.

 

[Castelan]

I may be wrong but I think the main point here is the question of masturbation in general. Only now are we beginning to really learn about all the mysteries of the body, only now are we beginning to get scientific proof of causes and effects of disease. It is transpiring, scientifically, that masturbation is actually healthy. If there are ways of preventing diseases caused by non-ejaculation, ways which God has inspired us to discover then, perhaps, in the not too distant future, the rules on masturbation will be changed, much as views on the universe were changed when it was scientifically proved that it was the Sun at the centre of our galaxy and not our planet.

 

[Bookcat]

I may be wrong but I think the main point here is the question of masturbation in general. Only now are we beginning to really learn about all the mysteries of the body, only now are we beginning to get scientific proof of causes and effects of disease. It is transpiring, scientifically, that masturbation is actually healthy. If there are ways of preventing diseases caused by non-ejaculation, ways which God has inspired us to discover then, perhaps, in the not too distant future, the rules on masturbation will be changed, much as views on the universe were changed when it was scientifically proved that it was the Sun at the centre of our galaxy and not our planet.

The “end does not justify the means”. One can never “masturbate” for some good reason. Period. Empirical science may one day determine that it is “healthy” in someway to commit adultery …such would not make adultery into a health treatment. Both remain intrinsically evil.

(though of course we see every day that this study is overturned by that study…so I would not even begin to take such too seriously anyhow!)

(and it should be noted…that there is a difference between masturbation and foreplay etc…)

 

[Castelan]

Masturbation is considered a grave sin because it wastes sperm. Abortion – wasting a human embryo – was, until relatively recently, not considered a grave sin at all, if performed within 40 days of conceiving, as there was a belief that the embryo was “ensouled” only some months after conception. It was only after “ensoulment” had taken place that a the woman who had an abortion was considered a murderer. I cannot ascertain on what premise such a conviction, that one could pin-point with precision the time of ensoulment, was based. Nonetheless, I find there is some sort of disturbing contradiction here: wasting sperm, definite “no”, wasting an embryo, might be “acceptable”.
However, that was back in history, and I only mention this because our knowledge of the body is still developing and because the issues of masturbation and abortion are, to me, very closely related. I also believe that behind all human knowledge lies the inspiration of God, and if God has inspired us to discover the beneficial effects of masturbation then who are we to question His Divine authority and discard His gift?

 

[Bookcat]

Masturbation is considered a grave sin because it wastes sperm.

Your understanding of the Churches teaching here and otherwise in that post is not quite correct. I would refer you to the Catechism on these questions. Also my prior post.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Masturbation is considered a grave sin because it wastes sperm. Abortion – wasting a human embryo – was, until relatively recently, not considered a grave sin at all, if performed within 40 days of conceiving, as there was a belief that the embryo was “ensouled” only some months after conception. It was only after “ensoulment” had taken place that a the woman who had an abortion was considered a murderer. I cannot ascertain on what premise such a conviction, that one could pin-point with precision the time of ensoulment, was based. Nonetheless, I find there is some sort of disturbing contradiction here: wasting sperm, definite “no”, wasting an embryo, might be “acceptable”.
However, that was back in history, and I only mention this because our knowledge of the body is still developing and because the issues of masturbation and abortion are, to me, very closely related. I also believe that behind all human knowledge lies the inspiration of God, and if God has inspired us to discover the beneficial effects of masturbation then who are we to question His Divine authority and discard His gift?

Not to justify masturbation, but the consideration of “wasting sperm” is not the basis of the objections. That sperm is going to be wasted in nocturnal emissions if you don’t masturbate. And even in martial intercourse 99.99% of the sperm is wasted too. And half of all fertilized embryos are wasted by failing to attach. So wasting is not the issue. Respect for the proper function of the sexual organs is.

 

[OraLabora]

Not to justify masturbation, but the consideration of “wasting sperm” is not the basis of the objections. That sperm is going to be wasted in nocturnal emissions if you don’t masturbate. And even in martial intercourse 99.99% of the sperm is wasted too. And half of all fertilized embryos are wasted by failing to attach. So wasting is not the issue. Respect for the proper function of the sexual organs is.

Indeed, the notion of “wasting” sperm is tied into ancient Aristotelian concepts that sperm is a “seed” that contains the entire genetic material of a baby and the mother is only an incubator.

That said, on the question of “masturbation” during marital relations… well there’s a fine and somewhat blurry line between manual stimulation (i.e. foreplay) and “masturbation”. As a male gets older, say in his 50s+, the amount of stimulation needed to obtain an erection often increases. The amount of often vigorous stimulation required to achieve a usable erection might seem to some like “masturbation”, whereas in one’s 20s only light touching or even passionate kissing was all that was required.

Surely we aren’t to deny lovemaking to people in their 50s just because the man needs to be “masturbated” (i.e. vigorous manual stimulation) to achieve an erection

As married couples we need to spend less time worrying about the mechanics of the act and more time loving each other, and giving to the other. As we get older, certain adaptations are often necessary to maintain a healthy and loving sexual relationship with one’s spouse.

Pfaffenhoffen says:

I think put a procedure manual on the head of the bed is the most horrible thing that you can do.

Agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Castelan]

. Respect for the proper function of the sexual organs is.

I certainly agree with this, but I think that we must not forget that there are internal sexual organs and external genitalia. In this forum consideration is only being given to the latter, whereas both internal and external sexual organs are vital. As I understand it, to “respect the proper function of sexual organs”, means to keep the internal sexual organs in as good health as the external genitalia, and this may need external stimulation, surely. Apart from couples over fifty with all their problems, what happens to those who have not found a spouse at all? Are they to resort to visiting brothels? Would that be a better, more rule-abiding option? Or must they resign themselves to getting cancer?

 

[Bookcat]

All are to live a Chaste life.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM

 

[sharptiger999]

Any time you have sexual activity it must be both unitive and procreative.

I’m curious of this Catholic belief because a 40 yr old woman just re-married to a 45 year old guy. They do not plan on having children. (The woman already had two from a previous marriage). Are you telling me they can never have intercourse or any stimulation from each other?

 

[Nate13]

I’m curious of this Catholic belief because a 40 yr old woman just re-married to a 45 year old guy. They do not plan on having children. (The woman already had two from a previous marriage). Are you telling me they can never have intercourse or any stimulation from each other?

First question would be why don’t they plan on having children? Second, assuming they have a good reason for not pursuing anymore children they can use NFP. I’m assuming your statement is based upon the fact that you don’t understand what procreative means.

pro·cre·a·tive (prkr-tv)
adj.

1. Capable of reproducing; generative.
2. Of or relating to procreation: the procreative instinct.

Any act of vaginal intercourse would be procreative by nature until of course we take action to make it not so.

 

[Castelan]

It isn’t unknown for the Church to review it’s thinking. I’m quite happy to wait and see what happens on this issue.

 

[Bookcat]

I’m quite happy to wait and see what happens on this issue.

One will wait until the end of the world then. Such will not change.

 

[Nate13]

It isn’t unknown for the Church to review it’s thinking. I’m quite happy to wait and see what happens on this issue.

JPII went out and defended the Church’s position every Wednesday for 5 years, what more do you want? I’d be curious to know how the amount of literature written on this issue by Pope’s compares to other issues.