Catholic Church's sexual teachings

[MichaelFilo]

Prior to starting, I would wish anyone who maybe scandalized by the content of this post, which regards to sex between married couples, and other related things, to not read any further. My intent is to not scandalize, but to clarify what I already persume.

The problem is thus : I realize in today's society where sexuality is an open topic and is hardly avoidable wherever anyone may go the Catholic faithful will not only have questions about sex, but will also want to know what is within the bounds of the Church's teachings (or so I hope they will care about the latter). My priestly vocation is still the underlying foundation for my future, and now I have a little less than 2 years to finish my pre-seminary research and education on theology, and I have come to realize that I sexuality is something that I'll have to speak on and council people on in the not so distant future. So, I'd like to have some answers now as a basis for whatever I may learn later on, so here goes:

[color=red]removed details of question due to the extent and mature content, and for younger audience--please see below for reply[/color]

And really, my biggest question: Realizing that sexual satisfaction is not the natural end of the sexual act, but a desirable "side-effect", would any of these situations be ruled out as a genuine issue simply because they are aimed directly at sexual gratification as opposed to procreation?

Sorry for the length but not all these issues are covered in the "Theology of the Body" by John Paul II.

God bless,
Mikey

Edited September 11, 2005 by littleflower+JMJ

[Laudate_Dominum]

Due to the "mature" and "graphic" nature of the question I should like to respond via PM.
There is nothing wrong with asking sex questions on the QA, but when such questions necessitate explicit descriptions of sexuality, which are inappropriate for the minds of the innocent, I would suggest private messaging the Church Scholar of your choice.

Regards

P.S. In the near future I hope to provide a general answer to your questions in this public forum, but intend do address the particulars via PM.

[Laudate_Dominum]

I will attempt to give a more general answer of sorts.

There is no official list of particular behaviours that are appropriate or inappropriate for the conjugal life.
However, the Church gives us general moral precepts and a rich and profound teaching with which to discern the particular matters.

The secular world tends to define the success of a couples "sex life" in terms of mere physical pleasure. Similarly, sex itself is often reduced to mere mechanics and "technique".

I'm not going to deny that these are realities in the conjugal life, but quite frankly they are low on the totem pole. In my opinion it is an offense to both human dignity and the holiness of sexuality to essentially view sex as a manipulation of the body to stimulate a physiological mechanism.
This attitude stems from an overall objectification of the body and sexuality, taken out of the full personal (and spiritual) context in which they belong.

The proper context of sexual union is that of authentic nuptial love and communion which is entirely personal and of course spiritual.
I shall attempt to be more particular. The secular idea that "good sex" is a matter of technique and what not-- simply the physical mechanics of stimulation-- is a grossly inadequate approach. The sensations associated with the physical union, ought to coincide with the bliss of personal and spiritual union. This, in my opinion, is "good sex". Something quite simple, that I believe is too often overlooked by the secular sexual ideology, is the psychological component of sexual intensity and pleasure.

I have more than once heard a fornicator remark, that you have not had sex unless you have been with someone you were in love with. Apparently sexual intensity and the depths of the pleasure are heightened when the person you are with is one who you are truly in love with, and when the encounter takes place in the spirit of that love.
On a purely biological level, this makes sense given the relationship between hormones associated with bonding and the modules of the brain that are active during the experience of being "in love". But this is still a superficial and inadequate outlook.

The fact is: sex is designed to express the total gift of self. In the context of a reciprocal total giving of self (which can only authentically occur in marriage), the depths of human sexuality are actualized and the full meaning of this act is experienced. Dimensions of the act become realized and the result, both physical, psychological, interpersonal, spiritual, etc. is something that far surpasses a utilitarian mode of sexual activity which is little more than the mutual using of persons as objects of masturbatory pleasure.

So my point is that if one is interested in cultivating a rich conjugal life, the focus ought not be on mechanics and what not, but rather on deepening the emotional and spiritual depths of the relationship and bringing that into the encounter. Rather than trying to learn techniques, or exercises, or taking drugs which alter the body's sexual propensities, I would say first and foremost cultivate and strive for that utterly total gift of self. To this end, I must recommend the Sacraments over Viagra and Adoration over Enzyte.

I am not condemning recourse to morally licit means of remedying physical ailments that hinder the conjugal life; rather I am trying to stress the fact that the secular mentality is incredibly warped and to be resisted at all costs.
In light of this; what of the questions regarding the use of various means (literature and what not) intended to "spice up" one's love life? While I can't say the Church has spoken specifically on the things of which you ask, I can say that it is unlikely such things would be in conformity with the Church's vision of sexuality and married love. Not that it’s all bad, but reading such sex manuals and things, which have been produced by secular agencies may be introducing influences into your conjugal life which would be a threat to marital chastity and the dignity of sexuality. Couples must guard and strive to perfect their existential intentionality or else the quality and authenticity of the union may be compromised. I know you can find Catholics who almost have an "anything goes" attitude regarding sexual acts, but I do not think this is wise.

To be specific, there is no official teachings that I am aware of that speaks directly on particular sexual acts, for example anal and oral sex. The majority of authors I have seen, for example the well known Christopher West, state that oral sex is perfectly legitimate so long as it leads up to a completed act of vaginal intercourse and ejaculation occurs in this context. This is well known. The common view on anal sex is quite similar in principle. I admit that based on the Church's teaching it is possible to draw these conclusions, and this is, I imagine, the majority view among orthodox moral theologians and the like. I have repeated these views in the past on this very QA board. But if you would like to know my personal opinion (I'm not repping the Church here), I actually would say that given the gravity of intentional ejaculation outside the context of "the union" [meaning vaginal intercourse] as it were, sustained oral stimulation of the male genitalia is at the very least an occasion of sin. With regard to the female I'd say there is a problem with sexual climax occurring in the context of a one-sided act, and that "the union", meaning vaginal intercourse, is of greater importance than what many would give it, and not simply because of the procreative end of the conjugal act, but because it alone is ordered toward the full meaning of that act and is the authentic expression of the gift within the language of the body. And anal sex in my opinion, besides being grotesque and a bit perverted, is an abuse of one's spouse given not simply the hygienic considerations and the demeaning nature of the act when one really examines its signification, but it is also a violation and an act of aggression toward the body of the spouse, given the physical structure of the anus and all the rest. One's wife ought to be treated with an inexpressible reverence and dignity. It does not seem very loving (at least in any ordered sense) or in keeping with the meaning of conjugal love to desire to sodomize one's wife; or to desire to be sodomized for that matter. It is disordered and mocks the conjugal act.
I'm not against foreplay by any means. I think it is a wonderful thing between spouses; but if those spouses are cultivating a properly ordered erotic love life, I would think that the behaviour involved would be dignified and expressive of love and the nuptial meaning of the body on every level. Certainly this does not exclude playfulness and eroticism, but of a kind that is reverent and in accord with personal dignity and integrity, and of a kind that promotes an attitude which recognizes, conforms to and incarnates the true meaning of the body and the transcendent dimension of conjugality.

Ultimately the extent and forms of behaviour involved in a couple’s conjugal life are for them to discern in the light of the Church's vision of spousal love, and in the grace of the sacrament. They ought to strive to image the ever holy union of Christ and His bride the Church in all things, for their mutual holiness and salvation, and for the honor and glory of God.

I shall address your questions more specifically and explicitly via PM. If my utter frankness hath offended anyone, I offer my humble apologies. I am not famous for tact.

Regards.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='MichaelFilo' date='Sep 11 2005, 01:29 PM']And really, my biggest question: Realizing that sexual satisfaction is not the natural end of the sexual act, but a desirable "side-effect", would any of these situations be ruled out as a genuine issue simply because they are aimed directly at sexual gratification as opposed to procreation?
[right][snapback]719404[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I thought I would add that the "sexual satisfaction" that you speak of is actually an essential part of the end of the conjugal act. The procreative and unitive dimensions of this act are not so much in a hierarchical relationship to one another but rather ought to be seen in their fundamental unity. They cannot be seperated without doing violence to the nature of sexual union.
Basically the ecstactic pleasure involved in conjugal union, and the climax of this pleasure are tremendously important in the unitive dimension of sex. These experiences are intended to bond the couple in love, and this bond is important even for the procreative side considering the best thing for the offspring is a closely bound mother and father. There are so many things that could be said about the purpose in God's plan for sexual pleasure... In any event, this satisfaction and pleasure is much more than a desirable "side-effect". I would say that spousal union without this intense pleasure would be quite lacking and far from God's plan and the mirroring of Christ and the Church which it ought to be. Bad sex really is "bad" sex.

In its proper context, ecstatic pleasure is a great good. Consider that many of the great mystics were given to encounter God in a state of ecstatic rapture. Sometimes in Christian thought (particularly puritanism) an attitude toward such things can manifest which considers extreme pleasure to be sinful. While I admit the danger of selfish hedonism is very real in our fallen state, there is still the possibility for holy and pure ecstatic experience, and a holy marriage happens to be one such context in which this can and ought to occur.

Regards.