Rejecting Marital Act

  • Thread starter Thread starter annie17on12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

annie17on12

Guest
The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
Click to expand...
First, let me say that I am almost as traditional as a Catholic can get, but I read recently that if wives turn down their husband in the bedroom they have committed a grave sin. First, I think this support rape culture and second that’s not what Jesus taught. If a wife is withholding sex to manipulate her husband that obviously not okay. But, if a wife is tired, I think she can say “maybe in the morning/tomorrow sweetie” and go to sleep without fearing she will go to hell. The blame is almost always put on women in this situation, but Husbands are supposed to love their wives as Christ loved the church in that he laid down his life for his beloved. I think a good Christian man can maintain self-control for the love of his wife and more so for God. I take the passage that usually accompanies this idea to be an outline of how to love your spouse, but I think it is taking it way too far to be damning people to hell for saying “no” for perfectly legitimate reasons. I think the husband who can’t be compassionate to his wife is far more sinful than a wife that isn’t in the mood. Legally, if a husband demands sex after a wife has said “no” and forces her to have sex anyway is guilty of rape. I’m interested to hear thoughts, but I just wanted to share my thoughts because I have read far too many posts here from wives who are neglected or emotionally abused by their husbands and in turn are told they are sinning by members on this forum. Jesus would never support a husband forcing sex on his wife and he would never allow the wife to go to hell for having a bad day. Spouses sacrifice in many ways for each other besides sex. My husband would never demand sex, and he even understands when I am tired. I also understand when he is tired and at those times we can cool down through putting out minds on other things. Also, NFP advocates times where a couple abstain from sex if having children would be an excessive burden on the couple. All these reasons are legitimate and I am really saddened for the women who come here for help and are told they are sinning. It’s not okay at all.

Also, if a woman wants to sacrifice for her husband and have sex when she isn’t in the mood that is fantastic, but it shouldn’t be the rule. Even though sex is very important, marriage is so much more than sex.

I’m interested to see if there is doctrine on this subject. I haven’t found any though.
 
annie17on12 said:
if wives turn down their husband in the bedroom they have committed a grave sin.
Click to expand...
Maybe. Maybe not.

I’m not sure what you read or where you read it. Certainly the marital debt is serious, but not unilateral nor automatically a sin.

Like all sins, if a spouse sins when refusing the marital debt, there are three fonts of morality to look at when making a determination as to whether any sin has been committed much less a “grave” one…and grave sin requires three elements.
 
I am agree with you.
No spouse is requiered to have sex when they are tired or not in the mood.
There are far more complicated moral and medical issues which can prevent husband and wife to have sex. Marriage does not always equal with the possibility to have sex.

Some àpeople and theologians can say ambigious things on “marital debt” which make wifes guilty…

I don’t believe that the Catholic Church, or Saint Paul have said that a wife who don’t rend the “debt” will go to hell, but are rather selfish and this selfishness can lead her spouse into temptations.

And in my experience it is not always the husband who force or requiered sex from his wife and the wife who don’t want to, the opposite can be true.
It’s could be hard when one want to have sex and the other said no again and gain for a very long period…
 
annie17on12 said:
…

I’m interested to see if there is doctrine on this subject. I haven’t found any though.
Click to expand...
The rule is that neither the husband nor wife can justify being uncharitable.

John 13
34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another.
Click to expand...
Ephesians 5:
22 Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord.

25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church …
Click to expand...
 
Is “marital debt” always a term which are currently use in moral theology?

I haven’t read recent official articles with this.
 
Pardon this Ent’s ignorance on this topic, but if both spouses yield their bodies to each other, if the husband wants to have sex but the wife doesn’t, then she isn’t withholding her body from her husband. She is merely saying no to his body. So no sin there.

That might be simplifying it too much, but it makes sense to me.
 
One other thought I had is that the Virgin Mary was married and yet never had to fulfill the “marriage debt” and she is the queen of heaven. I also scoured through the Catechism of the Catholic Church and found nowhere obliging wives to say yes to their husbands every time.
 
Thanks.
Great encyclical who gives me answers and peace.
But Casti Connubii is from the 1930’s.

Is there something newer?
 
annie…: I agree with you. Having said that, try not to be too harsh on folks that fall for that going to hell stuff for not having sex with the hubby when he wants. This is a culture in which a saint (not sure which one, but may be able to find out) said or wrote that masturbation is a worse sin than rape. Go figure.
 
So. Allow me to apologize for that last post. The saint in question was Thomas Aquinas and apparently there are different views, or beliefs on what he actually said or meant. Different interpretations so to speak. Please forgive the impatience. I should have checked sources first not afterward.
 
Right: if the request is unreasonable, there is no sin in refusing.

Spouses should keep communication open about what’s reasonable or what isn’t, and if there are possible solutions to things getting in the way of intimacy, look into those. Assuming good will helps, too (e.g. first time dads, especially if they haven’t been very involved in prenatal care or delivery, may have unrealistic expectations.)
 
Last edited:
As to the marital debt, here is the except from Germain Grisez’s very good moral theology book “The Way of the Lord Jesus”

http://twotlj.org/G-2-9-E.html
g) Unreasonable refusal of marital intercourse is a grave matter. As has been explained, each spouse’s right to intercourse has limits, and usually when either is reluctant to have intercourse, the other should not insist. Still, sometimes a spouse has no justifying reason for being unwilling to cooperate. Such unwillingness can be motivated by anger and hatred, an unreasonable desire to avoid offspring, the manipulative use of marital intercourse to compel compliance in other matters, excessive preoccupation with other activities, and so on. Sometimes, too, one spouse without good reason travels alone or stays away from home for some time, thus depriving the other of the opportunity for marital intimacy. In all such cases, when the spouse deprived of marital intimacy makes it clear, by saying so or in any other way, that he or she desires it, the other should cooperate lovingly, and refusal is a grave matter.
The wrong of unreasonable reluctance to engage in marital intimacy admits of parvity but, like other injustices, only in cases in which, typically, the one who suffers the wrong considers it insignificant: for example, because intimacy is not denied for long and the unreasonable motive is not ill will but only some understandable weakness.
Of course, sometimes the spouses disagree about whether a refusal of marital intercourse is reasonable. Then both should try to find a harmonious solution, but if that is impossible, the spouse deprived of desired intimacy must remain faithful. Moreover, such a spouse should be tolerant, for even when a denial of intimacy is plainly unjustified, physical force, psychological coercion, nagging, and resentment are both incompatible with marital love and ineffective for obtaining the loving cooperation required for true marital communion.
Click to expand...
I would say that fatigue, illness, physical/emotional abuse, adultery are all reasonable causes for refusing sex with one’s spouse. But I have a problem with the “just not in the mood”. If a husband is simply watching Monday Night Football and doesn’t want to fullful a wife’s request, that to me seems very unreasonable. If a spouse just doesn’t want to put down the book they are reading, that is unreasonable.

But if a wife just got done putting the kids to bed, has been busy all day, and is exhausted: that would be very reasonable.
And there is always the “how about in the morning dear?” that is ok. The debt is not absolute with regards to timing. Charity and love towards each other, while remembering you have given yourself completely to your spouse in marriage, is all that people need to remember.
 
Last edited:
Thanks you. I have ever read. No marital Debt.

But you have right, truth does not change.

@Dacinom, sex has a weapon… I know that.
 
Paul hit the nail on the head in Ephesians. Sometimes it stung, sometimes it was source of strength. Always a mirror held up to our sacrament.

Communication, open and honest is the key.
 
tafan2 said:
I would say that fatigue, illness, physical/emotional abuse, adultery are all reasonable causes for refusing sex with one’s spouse. But I have a problem with the “just not in the mood”. If a husband is simply watching Monday Night Football and doesn’t want to fullful a wife’s request, that to me seems very unreasonable. If a spouse just doesn’t want to put down the book they are reading, that is unreasonable.
Click to expand...
I agree, more or less, but it depends on how often one is “not in the mood.” Everyone is entitled to an off night. Now, if someone is “not in the mood” for long stretches of time, leaving their spouse high and dry, that’s a different story. It also depends on how reasonable the requests are.

I also always wonder who these people are who are comfortable having sex knowing their spouse would rather not. Isn’t that just super awkward?
 
I think the fact that not a small number of women live in sexless marriages would change the way many people see the problem. It’s a bit heartbreaking to think of the women who desperately try to get their husbands attention only to get rejected.
 
To add to this, I think too that “I’m not in the mood” can mean a lot of different things. Spouses can and should be open with each other, but it can be embarrassing to say, “I would, but I have indigestion” or “I have a UTI” or “The mere thought of physical contact after small humans have climbed on me all day makes my skin crawl.”

In general, I think I would be reluctant to use “obligation” type language with a spouse. It’s true, but is it useful? As you say, is it even fun if you know your spouse isn’t into it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top