martial sex

I’m not married but I just wanted to check on a couple of sexual acts that people (preferably married) happen. Cunnilingus and felatio. I myself am not interested in cunnilingus but is it a forbidden act in accordance with any church teachings?


“Marital” sex :stuck_out_tongue:

Both are acceptable as methods of foreplay PROVIDED they lead to sexual intercourse with the man finishing the act in the woman’s vagina.

Woah… I have heard the opposite… that it’s not okay. Cunnilingus is a sin and it’s degrading to both persons involved.

oh confusion:p

You are correct, it is allowable as foreplay only if it leads up to sexual intercourse with the man “climaxing” within the woman. For this reason, if you were to perform any of the two acts, I would recommend only cunnilingus because some men tend to finish earlier than the woman.

Umm… and how is this an “Apologetics / Social Justice” question? Just sayin’…

I don’t know. I thought this was social morals of the church. Not “Justice” I bet this is OT here. As a matter of fact I don’t know where it would be on topic.


See what the CAF apologist’s say:

It’s posted on the Moral Theology subforum, as some other sex-related questions are.

If you feel it’s degrading to both persons involved, I’m sure you’d say the same about fellatio? Can’t have it both ways…however, whether you find either disgusting, neither one is a sin when done in the context of marital foreplay when it ends in marital intercourse.

You heard wrong and have been misinformed.

Provided the acts lead to a properly ordered ending the Church has no problem with oral sex.

Cunnilingus is not a sin in this context.


Cunnilingus is not ‘‘degrading to both persons involved’’.

My personal opinion.

Sarah x :slight_smile:

No, it wasn’t, but it looks like it’s gotten moved there…

For understanding, you need to discern what is:

The moral natural order of female body,
The moral natural order of male body;
Thus, the moral natural order of the union of bodies (marital act, the fact of making one flesh between wife and husband, with sexual cooperation (mutual and reciprocal) in the human fashion.

For that, the theology of body ( dual humanity, sexed, sexual, alterity and complementarity), the theology of body of male (the theology of male orgasm), the theology of body of female (theology of female orgasms), the theology of the marital act. The theology is the work on the holy books, holy tradition, the holy anthroplogy that was explained by God. Yes, there is a theology of sex.

For that, there is the philosophy of body ( dual humanity, sexed, sexual, alterity and complementarity), the philosophy of body of male (the philosophy of male orgasm), the philosophy of of body of female (philosophy of female orgasms), the philosophy of the marital act: only the objective and realistic philosophy is in link with the natural law. Yes, there is a philosophy of sex. We have to study the actions, the facts in order to understand the primary causes, the Ends, the functions, the roles. Philosophy of the natural law (methaphysics, natural theology (theodicy), the epistemology for understand the natural order of the creation).

The marital act is a phenomenon (before, during and after the union of bodies). At each step, there are natural rules: mutual and reciprocal preparation with corollaries (the preliminaries non sexual, the sexual preliminaries in the human fashion, not like the other animal), the union of bodies with corollaries, and then after this union.

Each member of couple has to do his job, has to give his body, has to participate in the respect of his own nature, has to receive the body of the other.

To give, to receive and to offer in the respect of moral natural law of human beings.

Although I also highly recommend martial sex :smiley:

Definately puts the ‘gosh’ in the O Goshi :D:D:D

Sarah x :slight_smile:

I clicked on this thread in order to find out what ‘martial sex’ was, lol :stuck_out_tongue:

It’s a new form of karate, but some will say it’s judo, and others will say it tae kwon do. Many people have different ideas of what form it is and what moves are allowed and what are considered illegal. There have been important documents written about it, but even so, the interpretation of those documents are often the cause of many threads and heated debates here on CAF. :wink:

There are no magisterial documents approving of these types of sexual act, even in marriage. There are no magisterial documents approving of any unnatural sexual acts, even if they are used for the purpose of foreplay, even if a natural sexual act occurs before or after. The Church has never approved of these types of unnatural sexual acts within marriage.

If anyone says that the Church approves of such acts, ask them to present a quote from a magisterial document making such an assertion. They cannot do so.

As a matter of opinion, theologians do not agree on this subject.

But here is an article from Catholic theologian Alice von Hildebrand on her answer to this question, as well as her late husband’s answer (Dietrich von Hildebrand). She rejects the “so-called ‘one rule’ – that married couples ‘may do whatever they wish,’ as long as they don’t use contraception, ‘both feel loved and respected,’ and the marital act culminates within the woman…”

This is the best one I have read in a while. Especially because it is the big “O” and not the small “uki”. :smiley:

Ron, you have stated on your blog that “foreplay” is an unnatural act, so there is to be no touching or caressing of either partner by either partner. I can’t imagine what kind of mechanical act that turns a loving marital embrace into. Not to mention likely painful for the woman…no kissing, no hugging, no caressing? Doesn’t sound very bonding and loving to me.

You will also find no Church document speaking of such acts of foreplay as “unnatural sexual acts within marriage”. If anyone says that such acts of foreplay, leading up to natural sex, are unnatural within marriage…let him/her present a quote from a magesterial document making such an assertion. They cannot do so. :wink:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit