So they should have stopped to call their priest?The OP asked the question, NONE of us are qualified to answer it, that’s my opinion. God Bless, Memaw
They had already stopped. What they wanted to know was if it was a sinful act to do so. I’m not making it anything, are you? God Bless, MemawSo they should have stopped to call their priest?
You’re making this far more complicated than it is. The principles are clear and any straight thinking Catholic ought to be able to apply them. The Church does not expect us to run to our priest any time we are faced with a moral dilemma. A well formed conscience should be able to work through most moral issues, especially uncomplicated ones - and this one is simply not that complicated. That’s my opinion.
Actually, the OP was not clear whether this had happened or is a hypothetical question. They merely asked “Is it a sin…”.They had already stopped. What they wanted to know was if it was a sinful act to do so. I’m not making it anything, are you? God Bless, Memaw
The question certainly suggests the “change of mind” pertains to the factors that determine the decision to have sex, as opposed to some circumstance that arose in the course of the act (such as physical discomfort, etc). The reference to the “fertile time” certainly reinforces that too. I presume the woman is having 2nd thoughts about her preparedness to become pregnant at the present time.Is it a sin to start having sex but change your mind about having sex during a fertile period and stop before he’s finished? Is this allowed?
It’s a sin to deny your spouse sex, especially saying no after sex is started.Is it a sin to start having sex but change your mind about having sex during a fertile period and stop before he’s finished? Is this allowed?
Oh please…suppose a migraine that suddenly came on or a raging case of explosive diarrhea? Would you find it sinful to deny the spouse sex then or ask them to stop? What if you just weren’t interested in sex? It’s near impossible for a man to have sex if he’s not aroused and it’s painful for a woman who isn’t. Is that sinful then? Good grief, where on Earth did common sense go these days?It’s a sin to deny your spouse sex, especially saying no after sex is started.
That is sexual abuse.It’s a sin to deny your spouse sex, especially saying no after sex is started.
I guess it could be if the person purposley denied it to abuse the spouse.That is sexual abuse.
Could you clarify? Sexual abuse on who’s part?That is sexual abuse.
Not if he agreed to stop! God Bless, MemawThat is sexual abuse.
You don’t have a duty to do it whenever. If the woman says no, and the husband insists, because he has “a right”, she obviously won’t enjoy it on any level. PJII in Love and Responsibility comments that “If woman does not obtain sexual gratification from the sexual act there is a danger that her experience of it will be qualitatively inferior, will not involve her fully as a person” and also that “Marriage cannot be reduced to the physical relationship”Could you clarify? Sexual abuse on who’s part?
The Bible clearly states that husband and wife are to give their bodies freely to their spouses. That goes for men and women. Neglecting your fundamental marital duty is a sin.
Outside of a grave physiological concern, you have an obligation to give yourself to your spouse in marital relations within a reasonable amount of time. Not being in the mood, busy, don’t want another baby, etc. is not an excuse.You don’t have a duty to do it whenever.
He or she still has the obligation, even if inferior. A good spouse will work through this, but one still owes an obligation of their body.If the woman says no, and the husband insists, because he has “a right”, she obviously won’t enjoy it on any level. PJII in Love and Responsibility comments that “If woman does not obtain sexual gratification from the sexual act there is a danger that her experience of it will be qualitatively inferior, will not involve her fully as a person” and also that “Marriage cannot be reduced to the physical relationship”
No one here is talking about rape.Yes, it is good to have sex when your spouse requests it, but we each can still say no for good reasons, at any point. To continue against the will of your spouse is rape, reducing your spouse to an object for your gratification, basically masturbating using your spouse’s body. There is no lovemaking in a situation like that.
I’m a little confused here…would you please inform us as to what you think qualifies as a “grave” physiological reason to not have sex whenever your spouse wants it? You said that not being in the mood, being busy, or not wanting another baby is not an excuse. So, let me get this straight…if a man is not in the mood, it seems kind of difficult for him to have sex with his wife, as his being in the mood is rather necessary to perform, is it not? If the wife is not in the mood, it’s going to be a rather painful dry experience for her, so that’s not appropriate either, is it? As far as not wanting another baby…both husband and wife should agree if they feel it’s a good time to be open to life- if the mortgage is 3 months past due, both are out of work, or the wife is not physically or emotionally stable to have another child at the time, it seems like it’s a very valid excuse to avoid relations.Outside of a grave physiological concern, you have an obligation to give yourself to your spouse in marital relations within a reasonable amount of time. Not being in the mood, busy, don’t want another baby, etc. is not an excuse.
He or she still has the obligation, even if inferior. A good spouse will work through this, but one still owes an obligation of their body.
No one here is talking about rape.
If the spouse doesn’t have a grave reason, it is a sin to demand to stop marital relations once they have started, not to mention cruel to your spouse.
Just so that I’m clear, if a man had a condition that made erections incredibly painful, and the wife requested sex, are you saying that it would be a sin for him to not have sex with her?If the spouse doesn’t have a grave reason, it is a sin to demand to stop marital relations once they have started, not to mention cruel to your spouse.
I already stated grave physiological reasons were a legitimate reason not to have marital relations. Excruciating pain fits into that scenario, a little sore and tired does not.Just so that I’m clear, if a man had a condition that made erections incredibly painful, and the wife requested sex, are you saying that it would be a sin for him to not have sex with her?
A little sore and tired? What the…are you trying to normalize some kind of 50 shades garbage to fit into your agenda of a man’s got to have it when he wants it? Disgusting and definitely NOT Catholic teaching!!I already stated grave physiological reasons were a legitimate reason not to have marital relations. Excruciating pain fits into that scenario, a little sore and tired does not.
I know a man whose wife had extreme pain when having sex. They abstained for a while ,got it taken care of, and now have normal relations.
A “grave physiological concern” is not the only reason that the marriage debt may be denied. There are other factors too. And more generally the debt itself is only owed when it is “reasonably asked for”. Certainly, people’s understanding of the term “reasonably” will differ.Outside of a grave physiological concern, you have an obligation to give yourself to your spouse in marital relations within a reasonable amount of time. Not being in the mood, busy, don’t want another baby, etc. is not an excuse.
In fact, the idea of “demanding” it is, in my opinion, outrageous. To insist on something - out of the blue - over the reluctance of one’s spouse…is this how married couples are to behave? Surely not.…Is it reasonable to demand the marriage debt during the fertile time when husband and wife have already mutually agree to avoid conception (for just reasons)?..