Discuss: Married Sexuality

[C_S_P_B]

her view, as she posited it was “most theologically accurate.”

i disagree that her view is most theologically accurate. if violet had recourse to church documents, then she might like to point to them.

as for preaching, where have i asserted my position was most theologically accurate? i didnt. in fact, i replied that what might be my OWN inferences (that perhaps daily intercourse is NOT advised) are irrelevant and may even be eroneous. so, nowhere did i assert daily intercourse is “wrong.”

so CSPB, as a response you toss a lot of Scriptural salvos and vinegar and inuendo of feminist mentality? feminism? really? me? yikes, man. just yikes.

So far you have avoided this, which I posted previously. “violet81 proposed a generous view marital relations that approached daily relations (and then in subsequent posts shared her views on abstinence). She said she believe this approach was “theologically accurate.” Since violet81’s view is NOT contrary to Catholic Church teaching, how can it be incorrect?”

On CAF, there is no identification of gender. I will treat you as a person. I would not accept sloppy thinking from a man. Should I be more gentle and use a lower standard of logic for someone that appears to be a woman? You take offense but offer no analysis of any misapplication of logic. I will not be shamed or deflected by such tactics. Offer something of substance or stand down.

You have accused someone else of being wrong. Is violet81 wrong for the trivial matter of professing a belief in a daily intention for marital relations or for being too generous by not exercising restraint in her marital bed?

 

[searching04]

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry over this giant can of worms I opened.

Post after post after post on these boards seems to reflect a lot of very dissatisfied men and women. It seems to me that an intention for daily relations could solve a lot of the problems I have seen. St Paul seems to be saying we should be constantly ready to render the marriage debt Doing it by default prevents either spouse from feeling like a beggar.

Moderation looks different to different people. I personally think abstinence during Lent and every Friday is a good idea.

Cry from laughter, and let’s go fishing!

The fact is there *are *a great deal of sexually frustrated, dissatisfied, confused Catholics. The church has done a terrible job of addressing the impact of teachings and documents, short of TOB which is becoming prevalent and which still does not resolve it… And maybe there are no other answers to issues other than “it’s a sacrifice”. Any other answer would be to tell people to sin, I guess. Communication between spouses is critical, but when there is a difference in feelings and beliefs, communication suffers as will the relationship, and intimacy, and sex… And because we are expected to just accept everything without question and get told 'sacrifice", that simply leads to more issues. What’s the answer? Haven’t found it.

Funny also that if you read the posts, the men are the ones defending violet and the women seem to be the ones questioning, though I may have missed something. Does that men men just want sex? No. I think it means just as someone posted a long way back - men view/use sex as their totally giving of themselves to their wives in the most intimate way possible (and we wish our wives would, too). Limit that ability and/or opportunities, and it limits a very key piece of our expressing love and intimacy with our spouses, and raises huge disagreements with the church.

I still wholeheartedly agree with your premise, and combined with Consecrated’s post, is perfect.

 

[violet81]

Funny also that if you read the posts, the men are the ones defending violet and the women seem to be the ones questioning, though I may have missed something. Does that men men just want sex? No. I think it means just as someone posted a long way back - men view/use sex as their totally giving of themselves to their wives in the most intimate way possible (and we wish our wives would, too). Limit that ability and/or opportunities, and it limits a very key piece of our expressing love and intimacy with our spouses, and raises huge disagreements with the church.

I don’t think it has as much to do with sex-drive as it does with the psychology of men and women. Masculinity is an active force, and the marital act is a reflection of that. I think when a man has sex with his wife he doesn’t just feel pleasure, but also a sense of significance and purpose that transfers into other areas of life. This is just my own opinion but I think that sex as an energizing affect on the male psyche and a calming affect on the female psyche. I read somewhere that women use to be treated for hysteria by having an orgasm induced. I am not saying that is what causes hysteria, but their may be an ounce of truth to the idea.

That isn’t to say that men and women should have lots of sex to function properly… I just think it is indicative of the truth of our biology, and that truth is a mirror to theological truths. When we must deny our bodies a legitimate need God helps us… IE when God wants us to fast from food He will keep us alive and healthy. If He does not want us to fast from food and we do it for some unspiritual reasons then we may find ourselves very sick- like in the case of anorexics.

When it comes to abstinence I think we just need to reflect on what our reasons are. Are they arbitrary? Or are is it mutually agreed upon spiritual discipline? There is a big difference, imo.

 

[violet81]

You have accused someone else of being wrong. Is violet81 wrong for the trivial matter of professing a belief in a daily intention for marital relations or for being too generous by not exercising restraint in her marital bed?

This is what I am wondering. Is she saying that frequent marital relations is wrong, or is she saying that to suggest it is “most theologically accurate” is wrong?

 

[searching04]

I don’t think it has as much to do with sex-drive as it does with the psychology of men and women. Masculinity is an active force, and the marital act is a reflection of that. I think when a man has sex with his wife he doesn’t just feel pleasure, but also a sense of significance and purpose that transfers into other areas of life. This is just my own opinion but I think that sex as an energizing affect on the male psyche

Oh, BINGO ! This is also beautifully said, and from a female! Someone gets us guys! And you have said it so much more elegantly than I have in trying to explain the same. “An active force; a reflection of that; a sense of significance and purpose” - exaclty, exactly, why making love to my wife and wanting and desiring to make her feel as good as possible IS totally giving of myself to her. Take that away or limit it, and what do you think the impact is going to be in a relationship? It isn’t just because guys want sex. And I will say that this is so well said, the church needs to take note - couples seeking sex aren’t doing it just for the pleasure, but the church is so worried people will focus on it, it ignore what violet so elegantly said.

and a calming affect on the female psyche. I read somewhere that women use to be treated for hysteria by having an orgasm induced. I am not saying that is what causes hysteria, but their may be an ounce of truth to the idea.

That isn’t to say that men and women should have lots of sex to function properly…

Thinking biologically, there are hormones and all that stuff released in the body and brain during sex; it isn’t just emotional, because the emotions are tied to the body. Same with the concept of a runner’s high. But tying the two for this discussion, it is the emotional side as well as the physical for men desiring sex with their spouse.

I just think it is indicative of the truth of our biology, and that truth is a mirror to theological truths. When we must deny our bodies a legitimate need God helps us… IE when God wants us to fast from food He will keep us alive and healthy. If He does not want us to fast from food and we do it for some unspiritual reasons then we may find ourselves very sick- like in the case of anorexics.

When it comes to abstinence I think we just need to reflect on what our reasons are. Are they arbitrary? Or are is it mutually agreed upon spiritual discipline? There is a big difference, imo.

Very good point above.

to the whole post!

 

[C_S_P_B]

Oxytocin, the “cuddle hormone,” doesn’t flow in men until after intercourse. Oxytocin is much more active and easily triggered in women, even just by talking. Why did God design men this way? Maybe men become softer with physical relations!

Now you all can draw your own conclusions about the reasons for my abrasiveness! LOL

Women have hormonally induced changes in their behavior and emotions throughout the month. Maybe the women that expect men to control their nature and desires should expend the energy restraining their own variable emotions . After all… fair is fair.

Since this is unlikely to happen, it would probably be advisable for husbands and wives to accommodate the proclivities of each other. Maybe sex is a lubricant that serves to reduce friction in life!

 

[searching04]

Oxytocin, the “cuddle hormone,” doesn’t flow in men until after intercourse. Oxytocin is much more active and easily triggered in women, even just by talking. Why did God design men this way? Maybe men become softer with physical relations!

Now you all can draw your own conclusions about the reasons for my abrasiveness! LOL

Women have hormonally induced changes in their behavior and emotions throughout the month. Maybe the women that expect men to control their nature and desires should expend the energy restraining their own variable emotions . After all… fair is fair.

Since this is unlikely to happen, it would probably be advisable for husbands and wives to accommodate the proclivities of each other. Maybe sex is a lubricant that serves to reduce friction in life!

:clapping: Careful ! Someone might acuse you of being dirty!

 

[searching04]

Oxytocin, the “cuddle hormone,” doesn’t flow in men until after intercourse. Oxytocin is much more active and easily triggered in women, even just by talking. Why did God design men this way? Maybe men become softer with physical relations!

Now you all can draw your own conclusions about the reasons for my abrasiveness! LOL

Women have hormonally induced changes in their behavior and emotions throughout the month. Maybe the women that expect men to control their nature and desires should expend the energy restraining their own variable emotions . After all… fair is fair.

Since this is unlikely to happen, it would probably be advisable for husbands and wives to accommodate the proclivities of each other. Maybe sex is a lubricant that serves to reduce friction in life!

OK, sorry - I can’t help it. I’m listening to a country station and guess what song just came on? Wait for it…

“Heaven’s Just a Sin Away”

 

[baylee]

ENCOURAGES, not DICTATES. Nowhere in any teaching does it say if a couple desires sex daily that it is wrong. The point is to not take each other or sex for granted, is it not? That is where abstaining and moderation comes in. But it is up to the couple to decide that, or the church - if you are exactly following teachings - would have prohibited it like it does other things.

Goes right back to the church trying to save us from ourselves. It can teach the reasons why moderation is good; it cannot make the decision on what is right for each couple. And that is where and why dissention, disagreement, and confusion comes in with Catholics and sex.

OK, this is getting ridiculous. No, the Church does not dictate that daily sex is wrong or a sin. It does, however, encourage moderation, self denial and self restraint. Personally, I fail to see how moderation, self-denial and self restraint = daily sex. If I exercised every day that would not be exercising in moderation. If I drank every day, that would not be drinking in moderation.

However, the point that monicatholic and I have been making is that violet has said that her view is “most theologically accurate”. I’m curious. Why do you (and others) continue to argue with monicatholic for her views and defend violet? You keep saying that Church teachings do not push frequency, so why aren’t you just as displeased with violet for stating that daily sex is “most theologically accurate”?

 

[baylee]

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry over this giant can of worms I opened.

Post after post after post on these boards seems to reflect a lot of very dissatisfied men and women. It seems to me that an intention for daily relations could solve a lot of the problems I have seen. St Paul seems to be saying we should be constantly ready to render the marriage debt Doing it by default prevents either spouse from feeling like a beggar.

Moderation looks different to different people. I personally think abstinence during Lent and every Friday is a good idea.

You know I don’t know what you believe anymore. Your posts consistently contradict one another. One minute you say daily sex is most theologically accurate and now you’re saying abstaining one of those days (Fridays) is a good idea. So daily sex is not the best idea…it’s now 6 days a week?

 

[violet81]

2362 "The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; the truly human performance of these acts fosters the self-giving they signify and enriches the spouses in joy and gratitude."145 Sexuality is a source of joy and pleasure:

The Creator himself . . . established that in the [generative] function, spouses should experience pleasure and enjoyment of body and spirit. Therefore, the spouses do nothing evil in seeking this pleasure and enjoyment. They accept what the Creator has intended for them. **At the same time, spouses should know how to keep themselves within the limits of just moderation.146
**

Define “just”.

A man or a woman has a right to their spouses body, but sometimes we must moderate that right out of charity. My husband may be too tired, so I am being “just” by denying my own right to his body and letting him sleep.

A husband has a right to his wifes body, but she is fertile and another pregnancy would be an enormous burden. The “just” husband abstains during the fertile period.

“Just” moderation can just as easily go in the other direction. Moderation means the avoidance of extremes. It could be an extreme deprivation to one spouse to only have sex once a week, while to the other spouse feels it is not a deprivation. Justice requires a balanced understanding of the needs of both spouses.

 

[violet81]

You know I don’t know what you believe anymore. Your posts consistently contradict one another. One minute you say daily sex is most theologically accurate and now you’re saying abstaining one of those days (Fridays) is a good idea. So daily sex is not the best idea…it’s now 6 days a week?

From my original post:

Thats the norm…not something that happens when the stars align just right and both couples are in the mood. The exceptions to this are things like menses, illness, extreme exhaustion, lack of privacy, agreed upon fasting period, or if one partner has had an affair. If sex will not happen…for whatever reason…then it should be announced compassionately so that neither spouse must face rejection in the evening.

I mentioned the “exceptions” when I made the original post. No sex on Fridays would be in the “agreed upon fasting period” category.

 

[baylee]

I mentioned the “exceptions” when I made the original post. No sex on Fridays would be in the “agreed upon fasting period” category.

Hmmm. Sounded to me like fasting “period” meant more than just one day per week. Otherwise, why have a goal of daily sex? I don’t know. I still feel like your posts keep evolving as things move along. Maybe it’s me.

 

[cviolette]

From my original post:

I mentioned the “exceptions” when I made the original post. No sex on Fridays would be in the “agreed upon fasting period” category./QUOTE}

Are you not suppose to have sex when fasting?

 

[violet81]

Hmmm. Sounded to me like fasting “period” meant more than just one day per week. Otherwise, why have a goal of daily sex? I don’t know. I still feel like your posts keep evolving as things move along. Maybe it’s me.

I did just recently suggest Friday. I don’t currently abstain on Fridays but I would start if we stopped using NFP. If my husband agreed to it we might even include the traditional Jewish fasting period, and then everyday after that (other than Friday) would be “available” by default. Right now we abstain enough with the NFP and other life circumstances.

I think the point of my OP gets lost amongst details. The point is that by making intercourse a frequent unitive ritual you are 1. giving of yourself more fully to your spouse 2. possibly preventing the sexual issues that often arise in marriage with mis-matched drives 3. keeping intercourse a priority so other obligations do not drive a wedge in the relationship 4. strengthening each other against temptation 5. encouraging passion in a marriage that will bleed over into other areas. 6. Teaches children to respect their parents privacy.

 

[violet81]

violet81;7411749:

From my original post:

I mentioned the “exceptions” when I made the original post. No sex on Fridays would be in the “agreed upon fasting period” category.

I think you can, though I think it is suggested you don’t if your spouse is in agreement.

 

[C_S_P_B]

Are you not suppose to have sex when fasting?

Fasting is another word for abstaining. So in **violet81’s **usage it meant not having sex, which does often go along with forgoing peasurable things so simultatneously the two might go together but there are no Catholic rules on this.

I am trying… but Oh… I can’t resist… The former general discipline and now Lenten discipline of “no meat on Friday’s” only refers to food. (But of course there is no problem with also fasting from sex.)

 

[rmartensjr]

So does anyone have any thoughts about my wife of 33 years and mother of our 8 children (using NFP), who decided 6 years ago that there will be no more marital relations?

 

[cviolette]

Fasting is another word for abstaining. So in **violet81’s **usage it meant not having sex, which does often go along with forgoing peasurable things so simultatneously the two might go together but there are no Catholic rules on this.

I am trying… but Oh… I can’t resist… The former general discipline and now Lenten discipline of “no meat on Friday’s” only refers to food. (But of course there is no problem with also fasting from sex.)

LOL! Good to know. I will stick with just giving up food

 

[violet81]

So does anyone have any thoughts about my wife of 33 years and mother of our 8 children (using NFP), who decided 6 years ago that there will be no more marital relations?

She is not allowed to do that.

I would find yourself a traditionalist priest to talk to. Maybe he could talk to her about her responsibilities. An NO priest is probably not going to help you much.