Celibacy on wedding night

[1ke]

Any thoughts on the comment I posted again? Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

Yes. Husband can touch wife, wife can touch husband. Kiss, hug, touch, . . . with or without clothing.

However, be aware that it might be frustrating or lead to “oh what the heck” so know your own limits and reasons you decided to postpone in the first place.

Don’t put pressure on yourself or your spouse if all you want to do is sleep. Cuz- yeah- it’s an exhausting day that doesn’t need performance anxiety on top of it.

And genital to genital contact is considered achieving not avoiding behavior.

 

[catholic24]

Thanks. We seem to be on the same page. I appreciate your thoughts. I’m not a scrupulous guy, but take getting my wife to heaven seriously and just want to do the right thing.

 

[Norseman82]

Also, there’s a misconception out there that all Catholic couples can use NFP at will to avoid pregnancy. That’s incorrect. There must be a serious reason to need to avoid pregnancy.

And “BOOM! goes the dynamite!”

 

[Dolphin]

How about the whole Lord of the Rings movies also

 

[Dolphin]

Thanks. We seem to be on the same page. I appreciate your thoughts. I’m not a scrupulous guy, but take getting my wife to heaven seriously and just want to do the right thing.

My prayers for you and your fiancé and your marriage. Sounds like you two are gonna do really well with this mindset

 

[Dolphin]

Haha me neither

To be honest I read and watched all of Harry Potter and enjoyed it.

I slept through the hobbit movies lol

 

[HomeschoolDad]

catholic24:

If we are practicing NFP and aren’t able to have sex on our wedding night due to my fiance’s cycle but still want to be close (but still chaste of course), where do we draw the line?

I don’t ask that from a legalistic point of view but out of a desire to be close to her and still chaste.

I would break the rules on my wedding night.

Are you suggesting violating the teachings of the Church on sexual morality within marriage?

 

[AdamP88]

If we are practicing NFP and aren’t able to have sex on our wedding night due to my fiance’s cycle but still want to be close (but still chaste of course), where do we draw the line?

Just have your wedding night and honeymoon. Then worry about NFP. That’s what I did. You’re only going to have one wedding night and it’s fairly unlikely that you’ll conceive.

You’re not asking the right question here. You shouldn’t be looking for a loophole or to see how far you can go without sinning…that just leads to sinning.

 

[AdamP88]

Are you suggesting violating the teachings of the Church on sexual morality within marriage?

I think he’s suggesting they break the rules of NFP on their wedding night.

 

[1ke]

Just have your wedding night and honeymoon.

There’s nothing magic about when a couple consummates their marriage. It doesn’t have to be on the night they get married, whether NFP is a consideration or not.

Then worry about NFP.

If the OP and his fiancée have discerned a need for NFP I don’t think people should tell them to have intercourse and not worry about it, especially with the addition of “ it’s fairly unlikely that you’ll conceive.”.

it’s fairly unlikely that you’ll conceive.

Genital intimacy during the known fertile time is called “abandoning the method” in NFP, it’s achieving behavior.

And when you observe you are in the fertile period and have intercourse, it certainly is likely that you’ll conceive.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

Are you suggesting violating the teachings of the Church on sexual morality within marriage?

I think he’s suggesting they break the rules of NFP on their wedding night.

Oh, OK, that’s fine. I was startled to think that someone on this board would be suggesting practices that are contrary to Church teaching.

We were married in Poland and they have a custom there, that the bride and groom cannot leave the reception until the very last guest leaves, and they do not “end the reception at such-and-such a time” — the reception ends when there are no more guests. The only thing I could figure out is that it must be some kind of quasi-superstitious thing, where the longer, the better-attended, the more joyous, and the more vigorously celebrated the reception is, the happier (and perhaps even more fecund) the marriage will be. Or maybe they just like to party.

Anyway, ours lasted until past dawn, and the only thing we did, was to try to get a couple of hours’ sleep.

 

[catholic24]

Where else but the internet could one’s practice of the virtue of prudence, which necessarily involves seeking advice of other learned Catholics, be misconstrued as a bad thing?

I simply expressed a desire to be chaste and close to my wife on our wedding night without being sexual and asked what that could look like and where the line should be drawn. I’m not seeking a loophole I’m seeking wisdom. And I was very explicit in my original question that I was not approaching the topic from a legalistic point of view, but was looking for practical advice.

Because if prudence is “right reason in action,” then a conversation about specific actions is kind of important, no?

 

[AdamP88]

There’s nothing magic about when a couple consummates their marriage. It doesn’t have to be on the night they get married, whether NFP is a consideration or not.

That’s your opinion. It’s obviously up to them when they consummate but I’m operating from the assumption that they, as most couples would, would like a little romance on their first night as man and wife. Sure, there’s nothing “magical” about it but most couples wish to consummate their marriage straight away.

If the OP and his fiancée have discerned a need for NFP I don’t think people should tell them to have intercourse and not worry about it

Why not? If their reason for NFP is not a life or death situation then they’re capable of taking advice or leaving it in terms of that. I’m hardly undermining their reason or discernment process by suggesting that they consider this.

And when you observe you are in the fertile period and have intercourse, it certainly is likely that you’ll conceive.

I would say it’s possible, maybe even probable, and obviously it differs from person to person, but in any given cycle, a woman is only around 15-30% likely to conceive so if they are prepared to take that risk then I would stand by what I said. Be intimate on the night and do your NFP after that.

 

[AdamP88]

Where else but the internet could one’s practice of the virtue of prudence, which necessarily involves seeking advice of other learned Catholics, be misconstrued as a bad thing?

I simply expressed a desire to be chaste and close to my wife on our wedding night without being sexual and asked what that could look like and where the line should be drawn. I’m not seeking a loophole I’m seeking wisdom. And I was very explicit in my original question that I was not approaching the topic from a legalistic point of view, but was looking for practical advice.

Fair enough, I apologise if I misunderstood. If you’re definitely going to follow the NFP from the start then perhaps you might just talk with each other and have a bit of a cuddle together before your first night in the same bed together.

Because if prudence is “right reason in action,” then a conversation about specific actions is kind of important, no?

Sure. If you aren’t planning on having sex, I would say to avoid any specifically sexual actions or touches. Otherwise if things get heated and you need to restrain yourselves it might be a little more difficult.

 

[AdamP88]

We were married in Poland and they have a custom there, that the bride and groom cannot leave the reception until the very last guest leaves, and they do not “end the reception at such-and-such a time” — the reception ends when there are no more guests. The only thing I could figure out is that it must be some kind of quasi-superstitious thing, where the longer, the better-attended, the more joyous, and the more vigorously celebrated the reception is, the happier (and perhaps even more fecund) the marriage will be. Or maybe they just like to party.

Anyway, ours lasted until past dawn, and the only thing we did, was to try to get a couple of hours’ sleep.

That’s interesting. I married a Latvian and we had the wedding in Ireland. Here, the bride and groom usually just leave when they feel like it, provided they have fulfilled all their duties as hosts.

Oh, OK, that’s fine. I was startled to think that someone on this board would be suggesting practices that are contrary to Church teaching.

It’s happened before.

 

[Rau]

Anyway, ours lasted until past dawn, and the only thing we did, was to try to get a couple of hours’ sleep.

Customs are curious things. As a guest, in that environment, I would feel it a display of a great lack of consideration to hold up the married couple till dawn!

 

[Inquisitor85]

I don’t know where you’re from OP, but in my experience with how long most wedding days actually are, and the sheer volume of alcohol flowing for the entire day and night, you’ll just pass out from exhaustion and/or having drank several times your own bodyweight in alcohol.

 

[Peaceable]

We were married in Poland and they have a custom there, that the bride and groom cannot leave the reception until the very last guest leaves, and they do not “end the reception at such-and-such a time

I shuddered when I saw this. If this were the tradition at an Indian wedding of any religious type, the bride and groom would never, ever be able to leave. Guests pretty much come and go, and stick around forever at these functions. (Joking aside, it is pretty wonderful to have friends and family around, this tradition sounds beautiful!)

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Is your wedding date locked in? Can you just try to get married outside your fiancés fertile window? Then you’re good to go.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

Anyway, ours lasted until past dawn, and the only thing we did, was to try to get a couple of hours’ sleep.

Customs are curious things. As a guest, in that environment, I would feel it a display of a great lack of consideration to hold up the married couple till dawn!

That is what I was thinking, but apparently Poles see it differently. There’s no concept of “maybe it would be a nice thing to wind up the reception at a reasonable hour, so the new couple can begin their honeymoon”. For one thing, while we did receive some wedding gifts, for the most part, the guests line up and give the bride and groom envelopes of money, along with well-wishes for their new life together. But that money isn’t really for the couple, it’s more like a “cover charge” to attend the reception, eat copious quantities of food, drink equally copious amounts of alcohol (other beverages are available), and dance and party like there’s no tomorrow. Not to be crude, but we barely broke even — had something like $200 left over after paying for the reception. This was over 25 years ago, and people’s means were very modest, as was the cost of the reception compared to its American counterpart. Our reception was in the gym of the municipal vocational school.

I shuddered when I saw this. If this were the tradition at an Indian wedding of any religious type, the bride and groom would never, ever be able to leave. Guests pretty much come and go, and stick around forever at these functions.

Actually, “back in the old days”, wedding celebrations sometimes lasted several days. It may have been some kind of holdover from pagan times — a celebration of the continuation of life and fertility (I’m just guessing), or maybe to secure the favor of their pagan god Swiatowid — or simply a respite from otherwise fairly austere, drab lives. Maybe a little bit of all of the above. I don’t know, I’m no anthropologist. Poland is a “from time immemorial” culture and I’m not sure anybody really knows why they have the customs they do. For instance, there’s this thing about not sitting on bare ground or grass. No idea where this comes from.