Dear Father Angelo,

first of all I want to thank you for the great service you perform, in you and in your answers I have often found a guide and a great help to continue my journey of faith.

My name is …, I am married and I have a question regarding sexual behavior to have with my wife.

Specifically, I have not yet been able to understand whether during the sexual act holding back and “blocking” everything and therefore interrupting the act itself before pollution is formally considered a sin or not.

During confession two different priests told me that it is not, but recently when I confessed to a third priest he told me the opposite.

I would like to unravel this doubt once and for all and finally have a fixed direction to follow (also because when it happens I do not dare take communion without first having confessed).

I know well that coitus interruptus is a serious sin, but in this case by blocking everything and not reaching pollution I believe that we cannot speak of coitus interruptus.

I thank you infinitely and send you my warmest regards.

Priest’s answer

Dear friend,

1. This matter was discussed in the middle of the last century.

This way of behaving within marital intimacy was given a particular name: it was called reserved embrace.

2. At a certain point the Holy Office intervened, which later changed its name to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and currently to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The title given to this answer is already eloquent: Warning of the Holy Office, June 30, 1952.

3. Ecco il testo:
“Per non mancare al suo compito in cosa così importante che riguarda la santità del matrimonio e la salvezza delle anime, … la congregazione del Santo Uffizio, su espresso mandato … di Pio XII, esorta seriamente tutti i suddetti scrittori a desistere da tale modo di comportarsi. …
I sacerdoti poi, nella cura delle anime e nella direzione delle coscienze, mai, sia di propria iniziativa, sia su richiesta, presumano di parlare così, come se da parte della legge cristiana non ci fosse nulla da obiettare contro l’amplesso riservato” (DS 3907).

6. Chi non tende alla santità non capisce questo linguaggio.
Tu lo capisci. Sai cosa significa camminare nelle vie di Dio e ti accorgi da te stesso se un passo è falso senza che alcuno te lo dica.

7. Viene in mente ciò che ha scritto Dante, evidentemente per sua personale esperienza: “o dignitosa coscïenza e netta, come t’è picciol fallo amaro morso!”

Ti benedico, ti auguro ogni bene e ti ricordo nella preghiera. 
Padre Angelo

13 Febbraio 2024|Un sacerdote risponde – Teologia morale – Morale sessuale e matrimoniale

3. Here is the text:

“In order not to fail in its duty in such an important matter that concerns the sanctity of marriage and the salvation of souls, … the Congregation of the Holy Office, by express mandate … of Pius XII, seriously exhorts all the aforementioned writers to desist from this way of behaving. …

Priests, then, in the care of souls and in the direction of consciences, never, either on their own initiative or upon request, presume to speak in this way, as if on the part of Christian law there was nothing to object to reserved embrace” (DS 3907). T-N

4. The language of the warning needs no comment because it is clear.

And that is why I will not add a word.

I will only say that the warning was effective because silence immediately fell on this subject by everyone.

6. Those who do not strive for holiness do not understand this language.

You understand it. You know what it means to walk in the ways of God and you realize for yourself if a step is wrong without anyone telling you.

7. What Dante wrote comes to mind, evidently from his personal experience: “ O noble conscience, and without a stain, How sharp a sting is trivial fault to thee!”.

I bless you, I wish you all the best and I remember you in prayer.

Father Angelo

Questo articolo è disponibile anche in: Italian Spanish Portuguese