Question Four. On Licit Things in Marriage.

93. Principles. The question is whether and when internal acts of lust (thoughts, delectations, and desires) and imperfect acts (touches, kisses, embraces, looks, and conversations) are licit for spouses. Further, spouses perform these acts either alone or mutually; and if the acts are mutual, they either have an order to intercourse or do not have this order. Here, however, we consider actions which do not have an actual order to having intercourse, since above (n. 70) it has been said concerning those which are ordered to intercourse actually to be had. Now, for solving the proposed question, two principles must be noted:

1. In spouses that alone is a grave sin which is against the primary end of marriage; but apart from voluntary pollution, whether solitary or onanistic, and the crime of sodomy, nothing is against the primary end of marriage, which is the generation of offspring. All other actions in themselves, or considered in their nature, are licit for spouses, and become sins if they are exercised for pleasure alone or with foreseen danger of pollution without a just cause.

a. Pollution and its proximate danger are no less illicit in married persons than in the unmarried; indeed both pollution itself and actions which induce its proximate danger are a graver sin in married persons than in the unmarried, because through them not only chastity, but at the same time the right of the other spouse, is injured. For this reason married persons are bound under grave sin to avoid pollution and its danger, just as the unmarried are bound to this.

b. They ask whether also in wives pollution, namely complete venereal delectation which occurs with the effusion of vaginal humor, and its proximate danger, is a grave sin. Those who affirm this bring forward these reasons: because there occurs an effusion of humor, not indeed prolific, which nevertheless is uniquely destined by nature to generation, namely to rendering it easier and more pleasurable; because the effusion occurs with the greatest organic commotion; because it brings complete delectation.

2. Venereal delectation sought within marriage is in itself licit for spouses: for marriage, since it grants a right to the conjugal act, brings it about that the delectation instituted for that act, which is gravely illicit for the unmarried, becomes licit for the married. Nor is it licit to them only when they intend intercourse, but also when they either cannot have intercourse or do not wish to have it.

a. Sought within marriage, i.e. by acts ordered by their nature to the conjugal act, such as mutual touches, looks, conversations, etc., which by their nature are apt to dispose to intercourse and prepare it. And since even touches and looks which a married person exercises upon his own body can be ordered to the conjugal act, the married person who shamefully touches or looks at himself does not seek delectation outside marriage, but within marriage.

b. Venereal delectation is licit for married persons, upon whom there lies the office of conserving and propagating the human race, just as the delectation of food and drink is licit for men universally, upon whom there lies the office of conserving the human individual. And just as excess in the use of the delectation of foods is a venial sin because of defect of an honorable end, so excess in the enjoyment of venereal delectation, with proximate danger of pollution excluded, is a venial sin because of defect of an honorable end.

c. Therefore those acts which by their nature excite lust, such as touches, kisses, looks, etc., are in themselves licit for spouses apart from proximate danger of pollution, provided they have an honorable end. The honorable end on account of which acts of this kind are performed by married persons is chiefly this, that conjugal love may be manifested and fostered.¹

¹ Cf. Sanchez l. c., disp. 41, n. 2 ff. Sporer l. c., n. 502 ff. Gobat, Experient. theol. de sacram., tr. 10, n. 666 ff.

94. Corollaries. From these principles the following corollaries are now inferred: a. concerning mutual imperfect acts; b. concerning solitary imperfect acts; c. concerning morose delectations in spouses.

1. Mutual imperfect acts which are not joined with proximate danger of pollution are no sin if they are done from a reasonable cause; they are a venial sin if they are exercised without a reasonable cause from pleasure alone.

a. Therefore one who looks at or touches his wife immodestly, without the intention of intercourse and from mere pleasure, does not sin mortally, provided danger of pollution is absent: for looks and touches of this kind are licit for spouses of themselves; but if they are done without an honorable end, they are a venial sin, because the disordered use of a thing otherwise licit is only a venial sin.

b. There are some who condemn enormously obscene acts between spouses as grave sin, even apart from danger of pollution. Among acts of this kind they recount: if they touch themselves with mouth or tongue on the genitals, and similar things. But in these acts, as in the rest, two elements must be distinguished. The first is danger of pollution. This is common to them, even though in a greater degree, with all imperfect acts; therefore insofar as this danger is considered, a special malice does not belong to them. The other element is the obscenity or foulness, as it is called. But between married persons there is no action, nor can one be imagined, which on account of foulness alone is so intrinsically evil that it can never become licit. Therefore authors are not lacking (Sanchez, Filliuci, Sporer, Ballerini, Berardi, etc.) who judge that those acts are not to be exempted from the common rule concerning the liceity of imperfect acts. Therefore if by experience it were established that in determined persons those acts do not induce proximate danger of pollution, at least they would not be gravely sinful.

2. Mutual imperfect acts which are foreseen to be joined with proximate danger of pollution are no sin if they are exercised from a grave cause of necessity, utility, or decency, and there is no danger of consent. For just as the unmarried can perform licit acts from a grave cause, even if pollution follows from them besides the intention (n. 36 ff.), so married persons can perform licit acts from a grave cause, even if pollution is foreseen to follow; but acts of this kind are licit for married persons.

a. A cause of this kind, sufficiently grave, is: for fostering or restoring mutual love; for averting suspicion of infidelity or of love toward another person; for obeying the other party asking that those acts be permitted or rendered.

b. Since pollution itself is illicit in itself, it is not permitted to consent to the delectation joined with pollution; nevertheless most spouses are ignorant of the malice of this consent, and it is not expedient to admonish them about this matter, lest from material sins there be made formal sins.¹

3. Mutual imperfect acts which are foreseen to be joined with proximate danger of pollution are a grave sin if by their nature they induce that danger and are exercised without a just cause: for pollution is no less illicit for spouses than for the unmarried; therefore whatever of itself induces its proximate danger is also illicit for them.

Spouses who, because of supervening impotence, cannot have the conjugal act can licitly perform mutual imperfect acts from an honorable end, provided proximate danger of pollution is excluded, even if sometimes it follows accidentally. Nevertheless they must beware of consent to its pleasure, since it is illicit.

¹ Cf. Lehmkuhl, II, n. 836.

95. Solitary imperfect acts in married persons are venial sins if they are done without danger of pollution; and they are mortal sins if by their nature they induce proximate danger of pollution. The reason for the first is that they are done from pleasure alone; the reason for the second is that married persons must avoid pollution and its danger no less than the unmarried.

It is said that imperfect acts, e.g. shameful touches which a spouse performs upon his own body, apart from danger of pollution are light sins, because the opinion teaching that they are grave sins is not certain. The reason of St. Alphonsus, who says that the contrary opinion is more probable (n. 936), is this: marriage does not confer upon a spouse a right over his own body, except that he may dispose himself for intercourse; therefore if he does not dispose himself for this, he can no more use his own body than an unmarried person. The reason of those who with Sanchez¹ hold that those acts are only a venial sin is this: they would be mortal because of venereal delectation directly willed; but venereal delectation directly willed, apart from foreseen danger of pollution, pertains to those things which in marriage are licit by their nature; therefore in married persons, if it is admitted from pleasure alone without a just cause, it is a venial sin (n. 93).

¹ Cf. Sanchez l. 9, disp. 44, n. 16.

96. 1. Morose delectations (joys) and desires concerning those things which are licit for spouses are no sin; concerning those things which are prohibited under light sin, they are a light sin; concerning those things which are prohibited under grave sin, they are a grave sin, because delectation receives its morality from its object.

a. Therefore delectation concerning intercourse thought of as present, joy concerning intercourse had or to be had, and desire for it, with proximate danger of pollution nevertheless excluded, is not a sin, even if venereal delectation arises from them: for it is joy and desire concerning a licit thing. In practice, however, complacency of this kind concerning conjugal intercourse, although by reason of the object it is licit in itself, nevertheless is not free from light sin, because it is an idle occupation and has no other end besides pleasure. But if a thought of this kind and the delectation arising from it is admitted from a reasonable end, e.g. for driving away melancholy, it is altogether without sin.

b. If a married person is spiritually delighted about intercourse with another person, he commits grave sin, because the object of the delectation is gravely illicit; for he is delighted about adultery.

2. Venereal delectation from a licit thought, voluntarily admitted outside intercourse, with proximate danger of pollution excluded, is of itself not a sin, because the matrimonial state makes it licit; moreover, considering the circumstances in which spouses are found, venereal delectations easily and frequently arise; hence an intolerable burden would be imposed upon them if they had to avoid consent in those things.

From these things it is clear that morose delectations, and venereal delectations arising from them, of spouses concerning acts had or to be had with the other party are not sins except by reason of idleness; but delectations concerning gravely dishonorable acts with an extraneous person are grave sins, because they are delighted about an illicit object. Therefore spouses who accuse themselves of morose delectations should be asked whether they were delighted about their own spouse or about an extraneous person, and they should be suitably instructed not to take delectation from an illicit object.¹

¹ Cf. St. Alphonsus l. 5, n. 25. Ballerini-Palmieri I, n. 555 ff.