Mortal Sin in the Marriage Bed.

  • Thread starter Thread starter TLM08
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TLM08

Guest
Suppose a temporary or even permanant medical condition exists that makes normal marital relations difficult yet the wife still desires to “take care of” her husband in a non-intercourse manner. Is this a mortal sin? :confused:

(How’s THAT for achieving clarity without using a naughty word?) 😉
 
TLM08 said:
Suppose a temporary or even permanant medical condition exists that makes normal marital relations difficult yet the wife still desires to “take care of” her husband in a non-intercourse manner. Is this a mortal sin? :confused:

(How’s THAT for achieving clarity without using a naughty word?) 😉
Click to expand...
Yes it would be grave matter. The couple should focus on non sexual intimacy while the condition exhists and try again at a later date. No substitue for the marital act is morally acceptable.
 
TLM08 said:
Suppose a temporary or even permanant medical condition exists that makes normal marital relations difficult yet the wife still desires to “take care of” her husband in a non-intercourse manner. Is this a mortal sin? :confused:

(How’s THAT for achieving clarity without using a naughty word?) 😉
Click to expand...
The bottom line for Catholics is that the marital act, as God designed it, allows humans to image the Trinity. It’s an incredible gift, when you think about it. Intentionally removing the procreative element from the act however, shatters the image.

In the situation you reference, we can tell you is that this couple is dealing with grave matter, as Seatuck said. What we can’t tell you is how culpable they might be of commiting mortal sin.
 
Check out the book Theology of the Body for Beginners by Christopher West.
 
An as an aside:

What make believe world does this wife come from…😃
 
TLM08 said:
Suppose a temporary or even permanant medical condition exists that makes normal marital relations difficult yet the wife still desires to “take care of” her husband in a non-intercourse manner. Is this a mortal sin? :confused:

(How’s THAT for achieving clarity without using a naughty word?) 😉
Click to expand...
It is gravely disordered, a violation of the Sixth Commandment.

If done with full knowledge and free will, it is a mortal sin.
 
1ke said:
It is gravely disordered, a violation of the Sixth Commandment.

If done with full knowledge and free will, it is a mortal sin.
Click to expand...
In light of my original post then, the man would have no other choice than to live as a celibate? It seems that this would be a nearly impossible standard of behavior for a married man.
 
TLM08 said:
In light of my original post then, the man would have no other choice than to live as a celibate?
Click to expand...
Yes, this is true. The man and woman would live in continence until such time as they could have intercourse.
TLM08 said:
It seems that this would be a nearly impossible standard of behavior for a married man.
Click to expand...
It is not impossible for men and women to exercise their intellect and will-- that which separates us from beasts-- for the good.

This is the definition of virtue. We are called to virtue and holiness.

The culture of death tells us we should not have to be virtuous and holy. Christians should know the lies of the devil when they see them.
 
Ther are 2 ways in which a couple can make a perfect gift of themselves to each other sexually, which fall within the the boundries of marital chastity: 1) In the Marriage act; 2) In perfect Abstinence. There is no in-between. It’s all or nothing.

If one or the couple is unable to engage in the marital act, then neither of the couple are able to engage in the act, otherwise it’s not the complete giving of husband and wife to each other, but reduces the sacred act to mere act of selfishness.
 
TLM08 said:
In light of my original post then, the man would have no other choice than to live as a celibate? It seems that this would be a nearly impossible standard of behavior for a married man.
Click to expand...
Not hard at all. I lived celibate for years before getting married. Celibacy is a choice and a challenge for some. For others it is not a choice.
 
So, if a wife had a hystorectomy, they should not have sex? This would go along with your premise that only sex which is open to life is acceptable in marriage.
 
bov said:
So, if a wife had a hystorectomy, they should not have sex? This would go along with your premise that only sex which is open to life is acceptable in marriage.
Click to expand...
If she had a hysterectomy only to avoid pregnancy (sounds pretty extreme) then it would be wrong. If it was medically necessary, it wouldn’t be wrong, any more than marital relations between a post-menopausal wife and her husband would be wrong.
 
I know of a couple with this exact case. The wife is subject to miscarriages. I think she already had a couple. Any pregancy could end up in a miscarriage. So, they have decided that they won’t have intercourse until her child-bearing years are over.

So, yes, it can be done!
 
Charybdis said:
I know of a couple with this exact case. The wife is subject to miscarriages. I think she already had a couple. Any pregancy could end up in a miscarriage. So, they have decided that they won’t have intercourse until her child-bearing years are over.

So, yes, it can be done!
Click to expand...
I don’t understand this. A pregnancy might in miscarriage, but hen again, it might not. In either case, why not leave it up to God? A miscarriage is not sinful. Why are they abstaining? Is the miscarriage a threat to her life?

God Bless
 
petitsourice said:
Not hard at all. I lived celibate for years before getting married. Celibacy is a choice and a challenge for some. For others it is not a choice.
Click to expand...
But that was before marriage.

To practice abstinence *within *a marriage is totally a different story
 
Prolonged abstinence within a marriage is dangerous, I think.

Even Scriptures say that “only for a short time” should the married couple be separated. It’s written for a reason, I think.
 
TotallyConfused said:
Prolonged abstinence within a marriage is dangerous, I think.

Even Scriptures say that “only for a short time” should the married couple be separated. It’s written for a reason, I think.
Click to expand...
Men who remarry quickly after the death of their wife usually do so because they really enjoyed being married. This is a positive reflection on the deceased wife. I told my wife that I would be bringing a date to her funeral… she bonked me on the head with the skillet… Go figure! 🤷

😃
 
Here is an intersting twist: What if the wife is already pregnant and put on pelvic rest?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top