Husband won't sleep with wife

[Palamite]

Contemplative,

Marital sex is not a duty of charity equivalant to almsgiving!

Of course it is. You’re also on the outs with your own church in denying this is so.

If anything, it is far more immediate and pressing a duty than almsgiving, if the old (and correct) maxim “charity begins in the home” is to have any meaning. It does us no credit to elect to involve ourselves in objectively good deeds with regard to strangers, if we at the same time willfully neglect our duties (dictated by both charity and justice) to those we live with and share the bonds of family and blood with. It would like me assuming I’m pious because I visit the sick in hospitals, while utterly neglecting to show concrete and essential acts of love and assistance to my own wife and children.

The marital act is mutual self-giving of a husband and wife. If either he or she is not in the mood then the other should either simmer down or do their very best to push some hot spots to get juices flowing. What is so hard about that? Either you grumbling, hot and bothered folks get it or you don’t…

Maybe your “grumbling, hot and bothered” evaluation may be appropriate to others, but I assure you this is not a problem I have in my marriage. No marriage is perfect (neither is my own), but fortunately my wife (who is not even a Christian) is a loving, giving person, and has not assumed the protitutesque posture of only showing physical affection when she stands to “get something” out of it. So my participation in this forum on this topic is not born out of any personal angst, but rather by my annoyance with injustice being bandied about as a “right” or even worse, a form of piety.

I do agree though, that if a couple is having “problems”, it’s good and prudent for the offended partner to try and help the situation as best as they can - maybe doing more to “interest” their disinterested spouse. However when all is said and done, all such efforts are a result of loving compassion, not justice. OTOH. when a spouse denies their partner in this way, they are offending a duty not simply born from charity, but also from justice; they owe this to their spouse, unless there is some grave reason preventing this (serious illness, dangers to an unborn child, infidelity on the part of the spouse making the request, a lack of material support from the husband, etc.)

A husband or a wife who denies their spouse’s reasonable requests for sexual intimacy, barring the above type of grave reasons, is according to your church, objectively committing a mortal sin.

 

[migurl]

Here is an analogy from Christopher West’s book:

" you can’t reduce chocolate chip cookies merely to chocolate chips, but without the chocolate chips, you no longer have chocolate chip cookies. Chocolate chips are what define this type of cookie. There are other kinds of cookies, but if they don’t have chocolate chips, they can’t honestly be called chocolate chip cookies." He says this in reference to why those who are permanetly unable to have sex cannot have a valid marriage because they are unable to create the “chocolate chip cookie” that is marriage. Marriage is the chocolate chip cookie, sex is the chocolate chips. I’ll see if he answers our question directly…

 

[contemplative]

migurl:

Here is an analogy from Christopher West’s book:

" you can’t reduce chocolate chip cookies merely to chocolate chips, but without the chocolate chips, you no longer have chocolate chip cookies. Chocolate chips are what define this type of cookie. There are other kinds of cookies, but if they don’t have chocolate chips, they can’t honestly be called chocolate chip cookies." He says this in reference to why those who are permanetly unable to have sex cannot have a valid marriage because they are unable to create the “chocolate chip cookie” that is marriage. Marriage is the chocolate chip cookie, sex is the chocolate chips. I’ll see if he answers our question directly…

I know quite a bit about making, baking and eating chocochip cookies.

I do know that there are times when a ball of dough falls from the spoon onto the cookie sheet…with only one or two chips…sometimes not even a single chip…

…one single chip…or no chips…I still eat it as though it is a chocochip cookie…

 

[contemplative]

From Simply Sane by Gerald May

Love

We think of loving someone. As if love were something one could create, give or receive. Often we even feel that love is something one “should” do. And then one may begin to wonder if one is capable of loving.

Who does the loving? Consider that loving cannot be “done” by anyone. When love is recognized, it is already there. Happening. It can be discovered, its presence can be recognized, but it can never be manufactured. And though love may be buried from awareness, it cannot be killed. So there really is no question as to whether one is capable of loving. The only question is whether one is capable of seeing the love which is already there.

We tend to think of love as attachment, binding, bonding and committing. But love is only free. Love accepts and allows totally. Because there is oneness in love, there is no giving and no taking. There is not even relationship. What does it really mean to be in love? Not that I have love for you, but that you and I are in love? We exist, as one, immersed in love, more deeply than in the air we breathe.

And this “self” which creeps in upon freely being time and time again. Can it be loved? It certainly need not be hated. Only love will free it to be what it will be, while hatred can but force it into more and more rigid, frozen postures. Discover then, the love that is there for your self and for your predicament.

Searching beneath anxiety, one will find fear. And beneath fear hurt will be discovered. Beneath the hurt will be guilt. Beneath the guilt lie rage and hatred. But do not stop with this, for beneath the rage lies frustrated desire. Finally, beneath and beyond desire, is love. In every feeling, look deeply. Explore without ceasing. At bottom, love is. Realizing this, need one do anything about the anxiety one feels?

 

[jman507]

Are you trying to say that regardless of what one’s actions might be they have no bearing on love? From a certain angle I would say it does, but that is not a complete view of love. Why would say that the greatest act of love is to lay down your own life for another? Why would Jesus say the one who best loved his neighbor was the Good Semeritian? I would say its more than a feeling laying hidden under hate, guilt, & frustrated desire, while it is also something independent of Man it is also shown in his will.

 

[Black_Jaque]

From Simply Sane by Gerald May

Love

We think of loving someone. As if love were something one could create, give or receive. Often we even feel that love is something one “should” do. And then one may begin to wonder if one is capable of loving.

Who does the loving? Consider that loving cannot be “done” by anyone. When love is recognized, it is already there. Happening. It can be discovered, its presence can be recognized, but it can never be manufactured. And though love may be buried from awareness, it cannot be killed. So there really is no question as to whether one is capable of loving. The only question is whether one is capable of seeing the love which is already there.

We tend to think of love as attachment, binding, bonding and committing. But love is only free. Love accepts and allows totally. Because there is oneness in love, there is no giving and no taking. There is not even relationship. What does it really mean to be in love? Not that I have love for you, but that you and I are in love? We exist, as one, immersed in love, more deeply than in the air we breathe.

And this “self” which creeps in upon freely being time and time again. Can it be loved? It certainly need not be hated. Only love will free it to be what it will be, while hatred can but force it into more and more rigid, frozen postures. Discover then, the love that is there for your self and for your predicament.

Searching beneath anxiety, one will find fear. And beneath fear hurt will be discovered. Beneath the hurt will be guilt. Beneath the guilt lie rage and hatred. But do not stop with this, for beneath the rage lies frustrated desire. Finally, beneath and beyond desire, is love. In every feeling, look deeply. Explore without ceasing. At bottom, love is. Realizing this, need one do anything about the anxiety one feels? Rubbish!

 

[migurl]

Why is that rubbish??? Maybe God has blessed me (and/or my future husband) with the desire to give my love in that way to my husband as often as I am able. I trust that if once in a while I let him know that I would prefer to cuddle up instead of have sex (not when I am ill, but just not feeling like it) that he will have compassion for me because I do not routinley refuse his advances. If I were to make a habit out of refusing him, he would have every right to be hurt. If there was a valid reason i.e sickness, extreme stress or I felt that I was not able to give him PURE love (maybe I felt lustful and if I made love it would be a sin since I am coming at it from the wrong place) then it would be my responsibility to tell him why so he can understand and find a way to help me. If I kept it from him I would be guilty of dishonesty and he would have no reason to think that I had a good reason to not give him my love. I thnk that made sense…

 

[Black_Jaque]

Why is it rubbish?

Because:

Who does the loving? Consider that loving cannot be “done” by anyone.

I don’t buy it. Loving someone is an action verb. If you talk the talk you’d better be prepared to walk the walk.

Because there is oneness in love, there is no giving and no taking. There is not even relationship.

Huh? OK I suppose it would be better worded that there is giving and receiving, you cannot “take” love. But no relationship? Uh, I don’t want to marry someone and then not have a relationship with them. What do you suppose they mean by the term marital relations?

This is probably the most poignant part of the whole poem:

And then one may begin to wonder if one is capable of loving.

Tough job it is, loving. And man alone is incapable of loving truly. That’s why we need God to love through us.

The only question is whether one is capable of seeing the love which is already there.

Oh yeehah! I can sit on the couch and watch football every evening, and totally ignore my wife for the duration of our marriage. Then when she begins to wonder if I love her any more I can just tell her it’s her problem she’s just not looking hard enough.

The fact remains that loving a person is something one does (not feels). And it really is possible to do a very poor job of loving someone. In fact one could do such a pathetic job that it could be said that one doesn’t love the other person at all.

 

[Raphe]

DreadVandal:

Folks,

A man has lost interest in having sex. The love and romance have just died and he just doesn’t feel like having sex anymore. The idea of having sex with his wife brings on a feeling of pressure and anxiety. His marriage isn’t absolutely horrible. But he feels as though his wife was not emotionally there for him early in their marriage and now he just feels like sex is just going through the motions, no intimacy involved.

If a spouse is not there for someone emotionally, applying pressure for sex, and/or treating the other person like a piece of meat - those are all serious issues that should be addressed.

I think there are some valid reasons for not having sex if theyl infringe on the inherent dignity that God has given us. The question is how long does it take to address and resolve those issues?

If it is really an important issue to both of them, they should talk about it as much and early as they can to resolve it in a charitable and mutually respectful way. At the very least aim to build on where they are at head in a positive direction.

One of the key phrases in the explaination is “emotionally there for him EARLY in their marriage.” The question then should be, has the wife since changed? By saying “early” it suggests she has - or has at least made an effort.

If she has or has made clear and conscious efforts, the husband has an obligation to acknowledge this and forgive. Even if she still has a way to go but is headed in a positive directive, he should use it as an opportunity to build on it.

If this is the case, and he is not forgiving, compassionate, and understanding than I don’t think you have to go much further as to what the core issue really is. The ball would be in his court, and he may be the main contributor to why the relationship is stagnant at this stage.

The other issue is being treated like a peice of “meat.” We must remember that part of this is perception. He may feel that she is treating him like meat, but how can he know for sure?

Certain actions or things said may suggest it, but not neccessarily prove it right? Flirting with someone does not necessarily mean that you are treating someone like a piece of meat. You can treat them like a piece of meat, but then again it can be perfectly legitimate and respectful. I think the key here is respect. If he doesn’t like his butt being pinched or being flirted with at that point in time, I feel he is obliged to sift through his feelings and explain why. The fact that the two of them dated and got married shows an implied basis of consent. So, this is not the same as someone you are not in a relationship with doing these types of things. If they do that, it is up to the wife to give the person some space and at least respect their feelings. But the ultimate goal should be to resolving these issues because flirting and being a little bit “cheeky” is actually a good, healthy thing in a marriage that is healthy and loving - just as sex is.

None the less, his perception is important, and he should share his feelings and concerns with her. Are there any solutions that he has in mind to make him feel less like this? What can she do to mitigate these feelings? Has he thought these options through, and has he relayed these possible solutions to her? If he hasn’t he should. As it is said, “if you are not part of the solution - you are part of the problem.”

The other aspect is this that he should consider. Is it possible that after refusing a spouse sex for over a year, that the wife may be more desiring of sex than if they had sex on a routine basis? I think more than likely it would likely generate one of the two extremes - either wanting sex more (as is the case with her) or wanting it far less (such as in his case).

So, is it possible that by denying her sex, he is perpetuating this perceived problem - whether real or not? There is also a sympton in our fallen nature of wanting things sometimes that we can’t have. This doesn’t make it right or excusable, but it can be a real factor which should be considered because again this may be adding fuel to that fire.

Why not have a heart to heart conversation with her? If he feels he is being used or going through the motions, why not just say it? If she is dismissive, than persist.

Is the husbands attitude, “I would like to have sex with my wife again, but I would like to see some progress or key issues resolved first.” or is it “She has wronged me, and I’ll show her!”

If his attitude is the first one, he obviously has some leverage in resolving it. The question is whether he is using it to genuinely resolve the issue or if he is using it as a control to punish and further perpetuate any bitterness and resentment between them.

 

[Raphe]

Here are some key other questions I would ask. How is there prayer life - both individually AND as a couple??? I don’t think that can be over emphasized? Usually that solves most issues for nothing is impossible with God.

If they are praying, what are they praying for??? Are they including a petition for help in their marriage in their prayers? Are they seeking the gifts of the Holy Spirit such as wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, and knowledge…

Have they tried a devotion to St. Raphael? He is the patron saint of happy marriages.

In addtition, when is the last time they have gone to confession? Are they confessing the sins in their relationship? If they go to confession, do they go as a couple?

Have they tried marriage counseling with a good, holy marriage counselor that is interested in building marriages up - not tearing them down?

 

[Raphe]

contemplative:

Well I did something I swore I never would do…I talked to a priest about the marital bed.

This type of thread really got me going because I never considered it a sin to decline from marital relations if I did not feel like it…for whatever reason. I do not consider it a sin if my DH declines.

The priest’s reply and response to women who give it up even if they don’t feel like it??? this situation is like allowing their husbands to masturbate into them…I agree 100% with the priest…masturbating is all wrong…sexual intercourse should be mutual giving and taking.

The priest and I agreed that if a couple is having trouble ever agreeing to have sex then they certainly need to seek help. The question is how long a period should go by before help is sought…that I suppose depends on the individual couple.

I sense the priest’s analogy in the case you site is all wrong. Not all priests get it right all the time. So, I wouldn’t rely too heavily simply on what a priest says. I’m sure by now all of us have heard one errant thing or another from priests over the years.

First off, by definition masturbation is defined in the Merriam Webster dictionary as such:

erotic stimulation especially of one’s own genital organs commonly resulting in orgasm and achieved by manual or other bodily contact exclusive of sexual intercourse

So yes, there could be masturbation through bodily contact -without it being performed manually. However, it would have to be **exclusive ** of sexual intercourse for it to be deemed masturbation.

Therefore, his analogy is all wrong because it doesn’t even meet the basic definition of masturbation. The best one could argue, is that the scenario you presented may be a case of marital rape.

In the example you give, that does not seem to be the case. It sounds as if it is a question of whether one feels like it or not.

If the act is open to life and unitive in nature there is nothing immoral about that. That is not masturbation by any stretch.

What makes masturbation immoral is because it is exclusive - there is no possibilty or openess to life. Similarly, that is why oral and anal sex are immoral - even in marriage - because they are also acts which are not open to life. Those issues however are even more grave because they are by definition acts of sodomy.

If a spouse is open to life, willing to perform a unitive act, and consenting to sex (i.e. they are not being raped) it does not matter how they feel or what their current desire is. That does not determine the morality of it. They do have a right to refuse, and the other spouse has an obligation to honor it. But this may say something in a rather loud non-verbal way - especially if refusals are routine. It would be reasonable for the other spouse to evaluate their level of love for them. The question for the one refusing is this, is that the type of environment and relationship they want to foster? Do they want their partner having doubts about their level or degree of love for them? Are they prepared for the other person to lose interest in them - or in some cases act emotionally and irrationally and getting involved in sinful things. Note: I am not saying this would justify this behavior but for every action there tends to be an equal and opposite reaction - even in relationships. Therefore it would be wise to take into consideration.

Really the priest could have used a better analogy. Why not compare our relationships with each other to that of our love and our relationship to the Lord. As Jesus said the two greatest commandments are to love God with all our heart, mind, body, and soul - and to love our neighbor as ourselves. Is it any wonder the two go together?

So, the more we love Him, the more open we are to going to mass, to adoration, praying, etc… right?

In a healthy relationship, we should not focus on the sacrifices that We make. In fact if we did it would no longer be healthy. And if we went that route, they would pale in comparison to the sacrifices Christ made. The same may be the case in our relationships with our spouses. If we start focusing on ourselves and the sacrifices we have to make or “what we get out of it,” we may find come judgement day that our sacrifices were actually much less than what our spouse made - so we should always be careful about this mindset.

 

[Raphe]

Also, when we go to mass on Sunday we do this out of duty - just like sex is a duty in a marital relationship. The choice is ours how we view it. In a healthy relationship, our focus is that on love not of duty. God is not a tyrant shaking His fist and demanding we love Him and go to Church. Isn’t that why we live in a free universe? It is all a test of love and heart.

Similarly, that is why spouses should not demand sex as a duty or debt simply to collect on and be paid. However, it must be born in mind, that in both cases our “yes” and our “no” is a testimony to the degree of our love - for that is all we truly own and therefore the greatest thing we can give.

In a unhealthy relationship - or one that at least needs some work - we can be self-centered and myopic. We may do things simply out of duty, maybe even begrudgingly. In such cases, where is the heart - even if the “feeling” or “desire” is missing?

Or, we can chose to do what we ought to do out of love. We may even find some peace, joy, and happiness in our decision.

What if Jesus had this mindset. Even He openly proclaimed that He did not feel exactly great about the thought of undergoing His passion. What if He based His decision solely on feelings? Wow, would we all be in rough shape, and what example would that set?

A good indicator of one’s love for God is one’s willingness to go to mass, to go to adoration, to pray, to help others… Another indicator may be the frequency. The willingness to die to ourselves - both in our exterior and interior life.

In essence, do we love to be with Him and in His company?
Isn’t this the purpose of life - to come to know Him, love Him, and serve Him who serves us? In a marital relationship how is the end goal any different?

Even if this is our hearts desire, we may be tested by the Lord. We may not always get rewarded with a good feeling or desire for doing the right thing and being good i.e. “spiritual dryness.” In fact, that is probably the greatest test to see when one still goes, still shows their honor and love for the Lord even when they don’t have that deep yearning and inner satisfaction of going.

The same could be said with respect to marital relations. It could, and probably is a test from the Lord. He knows our inner weaknesses. He knows best where we need to improve. He may allow the desire and personal reward of engaging in sex to be taken away from us, to test us.

It may be a test of love - not only for the spouse - but for the love of the Lord. For as the Lord said, whatever you do to the least of my people that you do unto me.