Marital debt duty to have sex

  • Thread starter Thread starter chasingcars
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If it’s been months, it’s time for some serious self-evaluation and then a meeting with the spouse (in a neutral moment/place) about the matter.
 
Have you been married while you struggle with this sin? If not, I would maybe frame my opinion with “as a never-married person, I would like to believe that…”
 
blackforest said:
40.png
stinkcat_14:
The ups and downs of the marriage however do not end the obligation of the marital debt.
Click to expand...
I think that by the time having sex with your spouse feel like a begrudging debt to pay, marital counseling may be in order.
Click to expand...
No doubt. That has nothing to do with the moral obligation, however. For some couples, marital counseling would be a step in the right direction. However, sometimes a spouse refuses sex and refuses counseling. That compounds the moral problem.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
If a couple has a healthy sex life and even if one spouse has no good reason for not wanting sex, then forbearance would be pretty easy to arrange
Click to expand...
The thing is, even in that situation, having sex another time is already implied. One could say ‘No, I don’t feel like it’ and the refused spouse in your typical loving marriage would know this isn’t the end of his/her sexual life, and that they will have sex again sometime soon.

If someone were to reject in a really rude way, surely the sin would be being an arse instead of the action of refusing sex.
 
Lea101 said:
The thing is, even in that situation, having sex another time is already implied. One could say ‘No, I don’t feel like it’ and the refused spouse in your typical loving marriage would know this isn’t the end of his/her sexual life, and that they will have sex again sometime soon.
Click to expand...
I have not kept up with this whole thread since posting a couple of days ago. But I have seen enough then and now that I see a distinct problem with how many are approaching this subject. This post happens highlights the issue.

To many posters are intermingling two distinct, thought obviously related, acts with moral implications. There is the issue of unreasonably refusing sex and there is the second issue of a spouse’s response upon being refused. So I will address them one at a time.

Even if a spouse who has been refused realizes they will have sex again sometime soon, an unreasonable refusal is still a sin. Now, as my first post stated, the Church leaves it up to our prudential judgement as to what is a reasonable cause. But most moral theologians include illness, fatigue, adultery, physical/moral abuse. So lets just all agree that those are reasonable causes for refusing sex.

Now, lets say we have a fairly normal marriage, not perfect, but no major issues. Lets say the husband is watching Monday night football. His wife starts makes a request for sex in one of the ways that naturally evolves in a given marriage. He knows what she wants, but he just wants to watch his football game. So he says, knowing when the game is over that both of them will be too tired, no. There seems to be the thought on this thread that if its a one time event, no foul. She knows, after all that it is “not the end of her sex life”. Well, its a sin, IMO. And the problem with any sin, especially if we do not acknowledge it as a sin (why does the church encourage examination of consciences?), it is likely to happen again. If we are desensitized to sin, we sin more often. And if this behavior happens more often it could cause serious damage to a marriage.

Now, perhaps the wife is reading a good book and the husband starts making “advances”. Perhaps she says “Honey, how about in the morning, I would really like to read this book?” Assuming the question was sincere, she did not refuse, she just asked him to withdraw the request. If he says, “no problem”, then I would say its not a sin at all. She did not refuse him. If, however, he grudgingly says ok, but after a few minutes of boredom renews (perhaps a little more “convincingly”) his advance, she should know that he did not really concur with her request. So further refusal is at that point a sin, IMO.

Now, there may be parvity of matter, if this is a very rare event and they have a healthy sex life, but it is a sin none the less.
 
Last edited:
As to how a person responds to being refused? Lets be clear, no one can force sex on the other, not physically or psychologically. The loving way to handle it is to accept the refusal graciously and give one’s spouse the benefit of the doubt and assume it is a reasonable refusal (after all, we are not our spouse’s conscience). But realize, a spouse who does this is not making the sin of refusal disappear.

But there has been a couple of posts that almost make me laugh (one sees it all the time) and I have to wonder if those who post it have every been married or it makes me wonder if they have a very boring marriage. I am talking about the statement “I would never want to have sex with my spouse if he/she didn’t want to”. Really? Look back at my book reading example. The wife is reading a book and does not initially respond to the “request” (perhaps not saying no, just maybe ignoring her husband hoping he gets the message and goes away). Have none of you in this situation never redoubled your efforts, perhaps go around to the back of the chair and start with a shoulder massage, maybe bring a glass a wine in to the picture? And if successful, the book reading spouse ends up having a fine time. In my opinion, that’s the romantic way to deal with a refusal.
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
Now, perhaps the wife is reading a good book and the husband starts making “advances”. Perhaps she says “Honey, how about in the morning, I would really like to read this book?” Assuming the question was sincere, she did not refuse, she just asked him to withdraw the request. If he says, “no problem”, then I would say its not a sin at all. She did not refuse him. If, however, he grudgingly says ok, but after a few minutes of boredom renews (perhaps a little more “convincingly”) his advance, she should know that he did not really concur with her request. So further refusal is at that point a sin, IMO.
Click to expand...
This is where you lose me. If he grudgingly says fine, then tries again in a few minutes, he’s the one acting badly. He knows she doesn’t want to have sex and he’s pushing. She’s of course free to change her mind, but she doesn’t have to. She’s perfectly within her rights to say “sweetheart, really, not tonight.” She doesn’t have to “request” a night off like a soldier asking for leave.

I’ll just never get my mind around this mindset.
 
tafan2 said:
But there has been a couple of posts that almost make me laugh (one sees it all the time) and I have to wonder if those who post it have every been married or it makes me wonder if they have a very boring marriage. I am talking about the statement “I would never want to have sex with my spouse if he/she didn’t want to”. Really? Look back at my book reading example. The wife is reading a book and does not initially respond to the “request” (perhaps not saying no, just maybe ignoring her husband hoping he gets the message and goes away). Have none of you in this situation never redoubled your efforts, perhaps go around to the back of the chair and start with a shoulder massage, maybe bring a glass a wine in to the picture? And if successful, the book reading spouse ends up having a fine time. In my opinion, that’s the romantic way to deal with a refusal.
Click to expand...
I’m married and a sex-haver. (Don’t be jealous guys 😎) In any marriage, you learn the intricacies of your spouses behavior and quirks pretty early. I can tell when my wife means “no…but I’m willing to be convinced” and “no, really, just no.” I might attempt seduction using my sexy wiles in the first instance, but never the second.
 
BoomBoomMancini said:
If he grudgingly says fine, then tries again in a few minutes, he’s the one acting badly. He knows she doesn’t want to have sex and he’s pushing. She’s of course free to change her mind, but she doesn’t have to. She’s perfectly within her rights to say “sweetheart, really, not tonight.” She doesn’t have to “request” a night off like a soldier asking for leave.
Click to expand...
Again, two different moral issues: is she being reasonable in her refusal and how is he subsequently behaving. As to the first, in my opinion, just wanting to watch a football game or read a book is not a just cause cause for refusing sex. Loving our spouse is more important than those two activities. But as I said, its both a prudential judgement and it admits parvity of matter (ie a grave sin becomes very venial) if its not a common occurrence and there is no problem in the couple’s sex life. But IMO, she definitely should “ask for a night off”.

As to his behavior, as long as the renewal of the advance, hopefully that has been well established in the couple’s relationship as to when/how that is acceptable. I stated quite clearly that a spouse, in general, is to give the other the benefit of the doubt and assume it is a reasonable refusal.
 
Last edited:
Remember, in my example, there is no fatique or illness in the picture. She just wants to read a book more than loving her husband. And she, does not know, if he is perhaps having a problem with concupiscence at that point in time. So my opinion and yours differs.

But never the less, ieven if book reading is not reasonable, if we assume that she does not have a reasonable cause (pick an example, maybe my football game example), do you still say he/she “doesn’t need to ask for a night off”?
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
Remember, in my example, there is no fatique or illness in the picture. She just wants to read a book more than loving her husband. And she, does not know, if he is perhaps having a problem with concupiscence at that point in time. So my opinion and yours differs.
Click to expand...
Yes, we just disagree. She’s still morally clear in my book. And I don’t buy that not wanting to have sex means she’s not “loving her husband”.
 
tafan2 said:
But never the less, ieven if book reading is not reasonable, if we assume that she does not have a reasonable cause (pick an example, maybe my football game example), do you still say he/she “doesn’t need to ask for a night off”?
Click to expand...
Yes, there is still no need to “ask for a night off” provided there is an otherwise healthy and normal sex life.
 
Is that not the same as saying there is no unreasonable cause for refusal. After all, if a spouse never sins by saying no, why does the Church have the teaching? Only to protect from a pattern of behavior? Its that’s the case, its the only sin I can think of that is only a sin due to how often one commits it.
 
I think one of the factors in weighing “reasonableness” of the individual refusal is the health of the sex life generally. You can’t just look at the individual refusal in isolation.
 
For my own conscience, I will always look at individual actions in isolation. Those of the actions that if I am not worried about, can easily lead to bigger problems. If I was watching a football game or reading a book and refused my wife, I would certainly consider it sinful, regardless of the state of our sex life at the time. Its no different than telling a “white” lie (excepting its much more serious). It may not harm anything, but its awful easy to just start thinking its ok, and then it does become a pattern of behavior.
 
Last edited:
BoomBoomMancini said:
Yes, we just disagree. She’s still morally clear in my book. And I don’t buy that not wanting to have sex means she’s not “loving her husband”.
Click to expand...
You are certainly free to believe that wanting to read a book or watch a football game are just reasons for refusing sex, I am not sure that it can be backed up with Church teaching though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top