Comments on: What does the Church Teach about Oral Sex?

By: Ethan

Ethan — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 02:16:10 +0000

quilty, I’m guessing the celibate people you are referring to are the Magisterium. Well, first of all, they devote their lives to the Church, namely us, for her well-being. I agree with you that the sexual relationship of a married couple is theirs to share among themselves and God. However, just because the couple is married doesn’t mean they are free from sin concerning matters of sex. In marrying in the Church the couple agreed to give themselves to each other to become one body and to raise child. The marital act is therefore also founded on being both procreative and unitive. The Church teaches this because it is for the good of the couple. Sometimes couples may think that they have only themselves to worry about and therefore why not do whatever pleases us in bed? Well, while they gave themselves to each other in marriage they also pledged to raise children and therefore must also think about children, even if as in your case it is unlikely that they should conceive. However, think about the women in the Bible who conceived when they were thought barren: Sarah and Elizabeth. What would have happened if they and their spouses thought of only themselves while in bed? The bottom line is nothing is impossible without God. The married couple promised God that they would give themselves to each other in a way so that God would be able to bring about life through them if He so chooses. Then I suppose that participating in the marital act in a conceivable way is the best way to keep your sexual relationship between you, your husband, and God.

By: quilty

quilty — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:06:39 +0000

I also agree with Brenden B. and Elizabeth. Jesus did not establish these rules and it is nowhere in the Bible. God gave us our sexuality. How is it that celibate people establish these rules anyway?

By: quilty

quilty — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:49:53 +0000

This is all between God, my husband, & me. because it comes down to “personal relationship with God”. Why are church fathers even involved in this. People have different degrees of sex drive. Married couples can decide for themselves what is right in their beds. I thought this site was wonderful and I was going to share it on facebook until I read this stuff. This is what alienates me from truly embracing Catholicism after the sex scandals.

By: George

George — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 16:41:51 +0000

My wife is pregnant. How does the church view oral sex for the husband in this case? Is he still required to climax in his wife?

By: Rick

Rick — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:33:33 +0000

@Garth: ” NFP allows the option to avoid pregnancy when we discern, through prayer, that having a child at that particular time would not be prudent, but is still open to creation.”

It seems like looking at your finances is a better way of deciding whether it would be prudent to procreate, rather than praying.

By: Rick

Rick — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:35:29 +0000

But we know that sex doesn’t come from God. Sex evolved because it gave those animals a survival advantage. So, if sex doesn’t come from God, why can’t couples choose for themselves when to have sex and how to have sex?

By: pedro

pedro — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:21:36 +0000

So my wife giving me a hand job in the shower is sinful? Mortal or venial?

By: ELIZABETH

ELIZABETH — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 15:30:22 +0000

My partner is not Catholic, I am. I am 81 years old and enjoy intimacy very much, surprise for some one my age? My partner is impotent, and he sees nothing wrong in us engaging in oral sex. He says we are not hurting anyone, why should we suffer the few years we have left..

By: Love

Love — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 01:04:18 +0000

I think oral sex is wrong and unhealthy, on the other hand manual manipulation is fine.In the Bible Jesus used his hands many times to show love and affection. Of coure this was not of a sexual nature.

By: Brendan B

Brendan B — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 21:34:59 +0000

OK, let me add another factor to the debate. As our good Catholic couple enters their 60′s & 70′s, some physical changes begin to take place. At times, not everything works the way you want it to. Sometimes the male may not be able to achieve a full erection. Other times the female may experience painful intercourse. This couple still has urges and wants those intimate moments, but “full intercourse” is not always possible. Under these circumstances, what are they permitted to do? If anything? Admittedly, I do have a vested interest in the answer to this.
Thanks

By: Amy

Amy — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 20:25:08 +0000

Where would the Church stand on the question of oral sex without vaginal intercourse while a woman is pregnant? I think that the teaching would be the same, i.e., that it would not be permissible outside of a complete sex act. However, my husband thinks otherwise and argues that if you cannot conceive while you are pregnant, why the prohibition on oral sex? Any clarification you can provide would be much appreciated.

By: mike

mike — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 19:08:53 +0000

Jane and Andrew,

The church’s teaching is actually that each act must be procreative AND unitive–meaning that sex is not merely for procreative activity but that that activity must spring from love.

More importantly each act needs to be OPEN to procreation–so procreation need not happen such as having sex during an infertile period or if you are infertile yourself.

Jane, it’s not about being a burden–that’s exactly the teaching’s point. The point is giving one’s self fully and completely without fear in sexual expression to your partner.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 18:36:54 +0000

Jane, the teaching concerning a man’s orgasm during oral sex is in place to teach that vaginal intercourse is the fullness of sexual expression between a married couple. In JPII’s book “Love & Responsibility” he says that men should try to delay their orgasms so that their orgasms may be simultaneous with their wife’s orgasm. This is all taught because vaginal intercourse is the literal moment that “two shall become one flesh”. However this can only apply in a licit manner when there is an openess to new life. Performing acts of sexual expression that seek to limit the openess to new life is contrary to natural law. As it states in the article a man’s orgasm is directly tied to the creation of new life and any use of it that is contrary to its main purpose is contrary to God’s Will. There also happens to be Biblical Proof in the story about Judah and Tamar, the part that has to do with Judah’s son, Onan. Read Genesis 38:9.

By: Jane

Jane — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 04:37:57 +0000

This is a Church teaching that I cannot agree with. (I have thoroughly educated myself on the topic – so I am not uninformed!) I understand that procreative sex needs to be a part of a marriage. However, I do not believe that every sexual act/encounter must procreative. I don’t think God meant for sexual pleasure to be such a source of burden and worry. Spouses should love each other & seek to please each other. To reiterate: procreative (vaginal) sex should absolutely be a part of marriage, but I don’t see any good reason to limit ourselves to just that form of sexual expression!

By: mary

mary — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 17:24:25 +0000

so Oral stimulation in marriage is ok by the Catholic Church as long as the man (husband) does not climax outside his wife.
right?

By: Bob McGauliff

Bob McGauliff — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 04:14:14 +0000

Is kissing, hugging, petting, making out, oral or otherwise by definition considered sex? I am a bit confused by this.

By: Joe Brisbois

Joe Brisbois — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:37:24 +0000

Scenario: An aged couple, man 79 and woman 83, both lost their spouses, meet and fall in love, and the man is impotent but can ejaculate with stimulation. With procreation not possible is it premissible for them to have oral sex as an act of love and devotion between them before their marriage or when they are married as per the Catholic Church? Since procreation is out of the question, I cannot see why this would be sinful in either case as long as it is an act of love and devotion for one another.

By: Jim Irving

Jim Irving — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 03:17:05 +0000

It seems a little restrictive if the male, despite using medicine to overcome impotency, that a married couple’s days of intimacy are over because male penetration is not possible and oral sex is the only way to achieve a climax for both of the couples. But, it appears that if the male ejaculates while trying to have sex it is all right to perform oral sex on the spouse. Am I missing something?

By: Mike Hayes

Mike Hayes — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:59:07 +0000

Tom and Gerardo–

Tom the answer is no here. There is the unitive aspect of sex that needs to be part of this as we said above: “Oral sex or stimulation can never be used as a replacement for sexual intercourse. Stimulation is another matter.

And Gerardo, we’re not specifically talking about addiction here, but you make a good point, but there’s lots to consider. See our series “Skin Deep” at http://www.bustedhalo.com/features/skin-deep-part-1/

By: Gerardo

Gerardo — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:44:28 +0000

Sorry. Isn’t there a source where the Church says what is a sexual perversion and what isn’t?. Because any perversion is bad (is demonic in its origin). I think it would be important for the Church to clearly define this. Officialy. (Sorry for not putting all my comments in one).

By: Gerardo

Gerardo — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:42:03 +0000

I think if it is OK to perform oral sex, it should be discontinued if it is becoming a vice for anyone of the couple.

By: Gerardo

Gerardo — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:40:19 +0000

What about the mental attachment that a person can have after giving oral sex. Example, become mentally obsessed with your wife genitals? (I think this should be also considered, because it can be enslaving). Also women can get obsessed with the man’s genitals. There is a lot of evidence of that (sex addicts, etc.).

By: Tom

Tom — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 19:00:32 +0000

My wife is not Catholic and had her tubes tied when she was in her early twenties. We had all the children she could comfortably raise and decided she did not want to have any more. So, since it is impossible for her to have any more children (and is now in her 60′s), does that mean that any kind of sexual climax is OK for me, including oral sex since procreation is not humanly possible in our situation?

By: Garth

Garth — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 05:55:42 +0000

Great article Mike. Marc to respnd to your comments. NFP is not preventing creation. All necessary elements are present God can still act to create a human soul even when a man and woman are sure that they are not fertile at the time of intercourse. Many will attest that he He does still create even when couples are using NFP methods that are 98 – 99% effective in avoiding pregnancy. Think of it this way if God intended a woman to conceive everytime a husband and wife have sex then why didn’t He make woman fertile all the time as men are? It is because He wanted husbands and wives to enjoy the unitive nature of the marital embrace even when a child is not the product. NFP allows the option to avoid pregnancy when we discern, through prayer, that having a child at that particular time would not be prudent, but is still open to creation.

By: Charles

Charles — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:13:11 +0000

But what is wrong with bringing your wife to orgasm if we do not have intercourse? No fertility is lost. Pleasure cannot in itself be evil. This is truer when is oral sex is an expression of affection and passionate devotion.

By: Fred

Fred — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 22:37:03 +0000

Very informative article, but seems to assume that procreation is always possible. What if the wife is unable to conceive or, as happens, is unable to have intercourse? Why should lovemaking that leads to ejaculation in these circumstances be sinful?

By: Christine B. Whelan

Christine B. Whelan — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 20:46:03 +0000

Excellent piece, Mike! Something that all readers of my Pure Sex, Pure Love column should consult as well…

By: Marc

Marc — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 07:08:41 +0000

Yes…Nice Article Mike. I’m still not sure though why the church is so concerned with procreation. Would it be a sin (in the eyes of the church) for a married couple to never have kids? I think in oral sex (while neither supporting nor criticizing it), if a man climaxes outside of a woman, he neither provides opportunity for life nor kills any life. This seems to very closely related to the church’s position on condoms. Are all married couples supposed to either have 10 kids or have sex twice in their lives? I guess that’s where NFP comes in….but even that would be an action with the intention of preventing procreation! Let’s be honest…I’m confused.

By: Gideon

Gideon — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:31:42 +0000

Nice article, very informative.