Catholic marital relations

[jwakja]

Sex is an instinctive desire that fulfills roles rather than an act of love. We are human animals.

 

[OraLabora]

There are a number of factors to keep in mind when discussing these kinds of things.
One is that Church teaching is to be seen as normative, that is, it is correct under all “normal” circumstances.
The Church’s teachings regarding sex are based on a couple of basic principles.

1. That it be reserved to a couple in a committed, lifelong relationship (married)
2. That it be open to procreation (physically unitive)
3. That it be spiritually unitive and an expression of marital love - That our partners are not “objects” used for our own pleasure.

Individual circumstances can vary from these norms.
Such circumstances should be prayerfully discerned and discussed by the couple and also they can and should be discussed with a trusted confessor.

Peace
James

I think that’s pretty much correct, and thank you for your balanced answer. From my experience in the confessional (in general… not related to this particular topic, which I refuse to discuss in personal terms on the 'net), the underlying premise is that God expects you to do your best. That’s what varies in individual circumstances.

What the Church teaches regarding the marital union is an absolute and unshakable fundamental truth. But individual circumstances can make that difficult, or an unusual hardship as in the OP’s circumstances. As my confessor says “it is not necessary to be so scrupulous about overcoming a sin that you make yourself or everyone around you miserable; God expects you to try your best though, and appreciates and recognizes the effort, even if the result isn’t 100% perfect.”

But as you note that is between confessor and penitent. It would be wrong tell everyone here that since the confessor said it was OK to a specific penitent, that it’s a free pass for everyone.

But it is equally wrong (such as on the masturbation threads) to accuse the OP or anyone of “mortal sin” if their adaptations are not 100% faithful to Church teaching. Just as it is never OK to tell someone to go ahead and sin, it is never OK to tell someone they are guilty of mortal sin, something that is up to a confessor to help discern, and really, is something that only God knows for certain.

The best advice is what you posted: take it up with a confessor, preferably a regular confessor who is familiar with one’s circumstance, and take heed of his advice.

 

[JRKH]

Abstain? Not an option in all cases. Marital relations after 60 produces no children and is an expression of love in a marital relationship. God gave this physical act to us to be enjoyed by married couples as an expression of their love as well.

I would be interested in cases where you believe abstaining is not an option.

Peace
James

 

[hilde_the_dog]

jwaka - --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Sex is an instinctive desire that fulfills roles rather than an act of love. We are human animals.” It is a desire that should be properly ordered and controlled unlike animals. Those animal desires are to be subordinate to our calling. As such it should be one that we should control lest we fall into being nothing but animals.

 

[JRKH]

I think that’s pretty much correct, and thank you for your balanced answer. From my experience in the confessional (in general… not related to this particular topic, which I refuse to discuss in personal terms on the 'net), the underlying premise is that God expects you to do your best. That’s what varies in individual circumstances.

What the Church teaches regarding the marital union is an absolute and unshakable fundamental truth. But individual circumstances can make that difficult, or an unusual hardship as in the OP’s circumstances. As my confessor says “it is not necessary to be so scrupulous about overcoming a sin that you make yourself or everyone around you miserable; God expects you to try your best though, and appreciates and recognizes the effort, even if the result isn’t 100% perfect.”

But as you note that is between confessor and penitent. It would be wrong tell everyone here that since the confessor said it was OK to a specific penitent, that it’s a free pass for everyone.

But it is equally wrong (such as on the masturbation threads) to accuse the OP or anyone of “mortal sin” if their adaptations are not 100% faithful to Church teaching. Just as it is never OK to tell someone to go ahead and sin, it is never OK to tell someone they are guilty of mortal sin, something that is up to a confessor to help discern, and really, is something that only God knows for certain.

The best advice is what you posted: take it up with a confessor, preferably a regular confessor who is familiar with one’s circumstance, and take heed of his advice.

Thank you for your very kind and supportive post.

I think that often times even good Catholics can be caught in something of a “catch 22”. We do not feel we can give advice to another that is outside of the actual teachings of the Church (we certainly don’t want to be false teachers), especially on a public forum, and yet we recognize that there are very personal aspects to many of these issues that can allow for some leeway in particular and specific situations.

We see in the NT where Jesus was not above “bending the rules” a bit where a loving response overrode the “legalistic” attitude. This was shown in the case of healing the withered hand on the sabbath, and of refusing to condemn the adulterous all are guilty of sin.
It wasn’t that He was discounting “The Law” but rather he was demonstrating the higher principle of Love that governs the proper understanding and implementation of “Law”.
We, as disciples of Christ, should never lose sight of this principle.

Peace
James

 

[jwakja]

Abstaining from sex in marriage would destroy many marriages. This physical expression is a major factor in most relationships IMO.

 

[Phemie]

Abstaining from sex in marriage would destroy many marriages. This physical expression is a major factor in most relationships IMO.

Important enough to risk death for?

 

[JRKH]

Abstaining from sex in marriage would destroy many marriages. This physical expression is a major factor in most relationships IMO.

I’m not sure if this is in answer to my question, “I would be interested in cases where you believe abstaining is not an option”, but if it is, I must say that it is not really an answer at all. It is merely your opinion.

You made the statement, “Abstain? Not an option in all cases” Those are your words.
So give, if you can, specific cases where abstinence is not an option.

Peace
James

 

[jwakja]

Then IMO. I can’t see where a marriage, IMO, wouldn’t suffer without a sexual relationship. Why be married? If I understand what you’re implying.

 

[JRKH]

Then IMO. I can’t see where a marriage, IMO, wouldn’t suffer without a sexual relationship. Why be married? If I understand what you’re implying.

I’m implying nothing at all. I was simply asking for you to educate me since you made the statement that abstinence was not an option in all cases.

As to marriages suffering without a sexual relationship, that is a VERY individual thing.
I am currently in a marriage without sex. WHY you ask? Because my wife suffers from Alzheimer’s disease. Has our marriage suffered? Yes - but not from sexual abstinence.

The question asked which prompted this exchange was this:
What if one spouse is HIV+ or diagnosed with Herpes. What to do about marital relations?
To which I responded that abstinence is the only (non-sinful) option available. WHY? Because there is no other “loving” option open. In such a case the desire to have sex would display a decidedly unloving outlook by endangering ones spouse. The Loving option is to NOT engage in sex.

The core of marriage must be Love and commitment on both parts. It is lifelong and while sex ARE a common and privileged part of marriage, there will undoubtedly be times, nearly EVERY marriage, when abstinence is required and there are situations and circumstances where abstinence can become permanent. If ti adversely effects the marriage to the point of threatening its very existence then there are other, deeper issues.

Peace
James

 

[OraLabora]

Let’s put it this way, when I confessed something because of my husband having the same problem as the OP, the priest didn’t say, ‘There, there, that’s OK.’ First he asked if medication would be a solution, and when assured that no, this was permanent, he made it clear that it was our cross to bear.

Ah but you’re proving the point about needing a good relationship with a regular confessor. Your confessor knows you can bear this cross; he knows you, your husband, and your marriage.

Not everyone is in the same situation; some marriages are shaky, some spouses difficult, some people weak. Just as some people are athletes and some run out of breath going up a flight of stairs, some people are spiritual athletes, and some have trouble finding their way, and can only move forward incrementally.

Assuming everyone is as strong as you and your husband are is a fundamental error that we all often make; having worked as a professional and in management for some 31 years, it’s a common mistake that HR departments make, assuming everyone is from the same cookie cutter.

Really, the best solution is to work these things out with a trusted confessor, and listen to his advice.

 

[Phemie]

Ah but you’re proving the point about needing a good relationship with a regular confessor. Your confessor knows you can bear this cross; he knows you, your husband, and your marriage.

Not everyone is in the same situation; some marriages are shaky, some spouses difficult, some people weak. Just as some people are athletes and some run out of breath going up a flight of stairs, some people are spiritual athletes, and some have trouble finding their way, and can only move forward incrementally.

Assuming everyone is as strong as you and your husband are is a fundamental error that we all often make; having worked as a professional and in management for some 31 years, it’s a common mistake that HR departments make, assuming everyone is from the same cookie cutter.

Really, the best solution is to work these things out with a trusted confessor, and listen to his advice.

Regular confessor? I don’t think so. He didn’t know me or my husband, at least not in any way that would have told him what we could or couldn’t deal with.

 

[SoDakTim]

Unitive and procreative is about as clear as mud when you read from several sources. I’m probably the only person who finds this hard to understand but I try. It’s hard for me to understand how having sex only to procreate is good for a marriage in today’s society.

To gain a better understanding of this subject, I highly recommend the the many books and studies put out by Christopher West concerning the Theology of the Body. His book, “Good news about Sex and Marriage” is a good place to start. His DVD sets/studies are great. If you are committed to your faith, the Church and your marriage, Christopher Wests materials, I believe, will strengthen you in all of these areas.