Intimate woes of a newly wed

[mommamaree]

**
Is sex the same as the marital embrace…NO. is the marital embrace the same as sex - I guess most of you in the thread believe so. I continue to refuse to call what my spouse and I exchange as “sex.”

This is a Catholic forum ~ I wonder why more of the posts on this thread do not understand the difference.**

Sex is an abbreviation for sexual intercouse.
There are two sexes. “Male and female He created them.” The two sexes are male and female. Humans are sexual beings. This means that they reproduce sexually. This further means that both male and female, both of the sexes, are required to produce offspring. The act which produces offspring is called sexual intercourse, or sexual relations. The Church teaches about complementarity of the sexes. The Church teaches that sexual relations is reserved for marriage.

You and your husband are free to call your intimate relations whatever you like. No one here is forcing you to use any particular term in your intimate life.

What is being objected to is your assertion that having sex is wrong but that the engaging in the maritial embrace is honorable. Or alternatively, that using the term “sex” instead of “marital embrace” is unacceptable. Your opinion is just that, your opinion. Plenty of Church documents use the terms “sex acts”, “sex”, “sexual”, etc. and your opinion does not override the magisterium.

If I have time later, I will provide some citations to support the Church’s teachings on sex and terminology referring to it.

 

[jmjconder]

I will stand by my posts and try to retreat from this discussion. Clearly no one seems to undertand the point I am making.

 

[SpeSalvi]

We all understand the point you’re trying to make, the problem is that getting THAT hung up on a single definition is a little inane. You say potato, I say potahto…

 

[Debora123]

JMJ Conder…

I’m STILL waiting. I’m still waiting…

 

[shainski]

I will stand by my posts and try to retreat from this discussion. Clearly no one seems to undertand the point I am making.

well, i’m sorry you left just as i first read through this. I just finished reading the entire thread - and nowhere do you actually explain what you mean. I wish you did.

I think it is not that people do not appreciate the meaning of “marital embrace”, but, i think, you got a negative impression of the meaning of “sex”. Others don’t seem to share this connotation for that word.

But, it would be nice of you to put it in black and white. I think you are implying that it would be like using the words “cuisine” and “grub” for food. One might imply fine dining at a ritzy restaurant, and the other the cattle feed at all-you-can eat buffet. (but i’m not sure that’s what you mean, because you haven’t explained it)

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

**Sounds like none of the posts understand what I am trying to convey.

If you asked the general public what sex is - many will agree it is intercourse. However if you ask what the MARITAL (thank you for pointing out my sp errors in such a loving ?] way) embrace is few could define it.

Is sex the same as the marital embrace…NO. is the marital embrace the same as sex - I guess most of you in the thread believe so. I continue to refuse to call what my spouse and I exchange as “sex.”

This is a Catholic forum ~ I wonder why more of the posts on this thread do not understand the difference.**

I’m still hung up on your claim that the marital embrace is not (or ought not?) be pleasurable. This does not jive with reality nor with the Church.

 

[thewanderer]

Sounds like none of the posts understand what I am trying to convey.

If you asked the general public what sex is - many will agree it is intercourse. However if you ask what the MARITAL (thank you for pointing out my sp errors in such a loving ?] way) embrace is few could define it.

**Is sex the same as the marital embrace…NO. is the marital embrace the same as sex - I guess most of you in the thread believe so. I continue to refuse to call what my spouse and I exchange as “sex.” **

This is a Catholic forum ~ I wonder why more of the posts on this thread do not understand the difference.

Here’s the thing, while I understand the distinction you are making, I, and just about everyone I know, do not use the word ‘sex’ to signify the same concept that you apparantly do. You use it to signify something selfish which is solely pleasure seeking. That is not what I mean by it nor is it what others on this thread mean. You’re problem is not with the content of what other people are saying, but rather it is simply that you dislike that they use the word sex in a different way than you do.

 

[underacloud]

To me, this is a set theory problem…yes, mathematics.

Sex is one set.

Marriage is another set.

The “marital embrace” is where these two sets intersect; when married people have sex.

But we can delve deeper too…

Unitive (purpose of sex) is another set; a subset within sex.

Procreative (purpse of sex) is another set; a subset within sex, which may or may not intersect with the unitive set for any given couple.

The “marital embrace” conducted in a licit manner is where all four sets intersect…I wish I could draw a picture here to make it clear.

The marital embrace is thus a subset within sex. It is certainly a type of sex, but is different from other types of sex. It seems jmjconder would prefer to not use the broader term sex because it conflates the marital embrace with other, less worthy, forms of sex. But the marital embrace definitely belongs to the larger set of sex, and people engaging in the marital embrace are not wrong in saying that they are having sex.

 

[faithfully]

Seriously?

This is insane.

When you search the Holy See website, an excellent site for Catholic information (wouldn’t you all agree?), you will find they dedicate several articles to SEX.

Any person who has not identified themselves as any sort of expert in the matter, other than by username easily held by anyone with internet access, does not hold an ounce of water in their random, unsupported claims on this topic.

jmj… you need to provide a source to prove your stance, rather than just ramble about how lacking in knowledge all of us Catholics. Including the Catholics that write for the Holy See.

 

[LightBound]

The proper term for a married couple is the martial embrace - not sex.

Gee, I thought the correct term was “marital debt”, being that I always get vehemently corrected by those who insist on being the “debt managers” here on CAF when I say “marital embrace” or “marital intimacy”

 

[Lochias]

**Sounds like none of the posts understand what I am trying to convey.

If you asked the general public what sex is - many will agree it is intercourse. However if you ask what the MARITAL (thank you for pointing out my sp errors in such a loving ?] way) embrace is few could define it.

Is sex the same as the marital embrace…NO. is the marital embrace the same as sex - I guess most of you in the thread believe so. I continue to refuse to call what my spouse and I exchange as “sex.”

This is a Catholic forum ~ I wonder why more of the posts on this thread do not understand the difference.**

http://cdn4.alis.me/x/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Not_sure_if_serious.jpg

 

[twoangels]

No, its not a sin. Anyone who insists on regulating the right way to have sex in a step by step approved guide is going to just cause sexual difficulties. Our difficulties seem to be different. Honestly your post surprised me because I actually find climaxing before makes sex less painful. We’ve approached it that way for awhile because without it, sometimes sex would otherwise simply still be too painful for me to bear.

 

[jmjconder]

To me, this is a set theory problem…yes, mathematics.

Sex is one set.

Marriage is another set.

The “marital embrace” is where these two sets intersect; when married people have sex.

But we can delve deeper too…

Unitive (purpose of sex) is another set; a subset within sex.

Procreative (purpse of sex) is another set; a subset within sex, which may or may not intersect with the unitive set for any given couple.

The “marital embrace” conducted in a licit manner is where all four sets intersect…I wish I could draw a picture here to make it clear.

The marital embrace is thus a subset within sex. It is certainly a type of sex, but is different from other types of sex. It seems jmjconder would prefer to not use the broader term sex because it conflates the marital embrace with other, less worthy, forms of sex. But the marital embrace definitely belongs to the larger set of sex, and people engaging in the marital embrace are not wrong in saying that they are having sex.

Thank you.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Thank you.

Why do you thank the other poster, when we are saying essentially the same thing? Notice at the end of the post, “sex” includes the marital embrace. You have stated the two are mutually exclusive.

This is semantics, whether you want to believe it or not.

And I said before, let’s stop this useless argument in this thread, it’s not even related to the OP’s post. I advise you to start your own thread if you want to continue to argue your point.