sex within marriage

[angell1]

sorry for asking this again, I think I’m still not really getting it.

when would it constitute a sin to say no to sex?

what if you are asked, and have a headache or something so you asked to postpone, but the other spouse insists? common sense dictates that they would understand, but what if they don’t?

I’m still trying to get over what I learned, that if one spouse so much as opens their mouth and mentions it, then you have to do it, no choice

is there anything in the catechism or anywhere else on this? I’ve seen a few websites, but they seem questionable so I’d obviously prefer to stick to church teaching

 

[1ke]

when would it constitute a sin to say no to sex?

If you repeatedly refuse your spouse’s reasonable request over an extended period of time, it could be grave matter.

what if you are asked, and have a headache or something so you asked to postpone, but the other spouse insists?

Shame on them, and no you are not obligated to have relations when you don’t feel well.

common sense dictates that they would understand, but what if they don’t?

Then they need a night on the couch to consider the error of their ways,

I’m still trying to get over what I learned, that if one spouse so much as opens their mouth and mentions it, then you have to do it, no choice

I don’t know who told you this or where you got this impression. If you have mentioned it, I don’t recall.

You are not married. So this should be no concern to you at all. If you are obsessing over a sin you might commit years in the future, you need counseling more than ever.

is there anything in the catechism or anywhere else on this? I’ve seen a few websites, but they seem questionable so I’d obviously prefer to stick to church teaching

Like just about everything else you struggle with, it is a prudential matter. There is no list.

That is because this is an interpersonal exchange between two people. They are both involved and both of their feelings and concerns have weight in the discussion and ultimate decision. It is a decision both parties negotiate. That is the way life is. Especially married life. It’s give and take, compromise.

 

[e_c]

The answer to this question lies in the same place that the answer to your other recent NFP thread lies…

“Is it reasonable?”

These are not absolutes. There is a broad framework of rules but you are asking about what is “inside the box.” What is inside the box, in this case, is a spirit, not a letter, if that makes sense.

Another way to ask might be, “Where is your heart?”

There’s not a black and white answer for this stuff. It’s “prudential” and requires wisdom to make the right decision the right way.

 

[Crown_of_Stars]

I don’t think sex should be forced, even within a marriage. A case example would be…A woman who finds sex painful, unbearable, and unpleasant. Forcing her to do it would not be enjoyable for her, and, in my eyes, this would constitute rape. I think, as a man and as her husband, he should respect this of her, and maybe try to get her help. There is a physical condition which could make it unbearably painful. Why should a woman be forced to do something that is horrible for her?

 

[angell1]

If you repeatedly refuse your spouse’s reasonable request over an extended period of time, it could be grave matter.

Shame on them, and no you are not obligated to have relations when you don’t feel well.

Then they need a night on the couch to consider the error of their ways,

I don’t know who told you this or where you got this impression. If you have mentioned it, I don’t recall.

You are not married. So this should be no concern to you at all. If you are obsessing over a sin you might commit years in the future, you need counseling more than ever.

Like just about everything else you struggle with, it is a prudential matter. There is no list.

That is because this is an interpersonal exchange between two people. They are both involved and both of their feelings and concerns have weight in the discussion and ultimate decision. It is a decision both parties negotiate. That is the way life is. Especially married life. It’s give and take, compromise.

friends and relatives, from previous generations, who insist that they “had” to have 13 kids or so because the church said it was against God to stop having children or to refuse sex to your husband for any reason

 

[angell1]

If you repeatedly refuse your spouse’s reasonable request over an extended period of time, it could be grave matter.

Shame on them, and no you are not obligated to have relations when you don’t feel well.

Then they need a night on the couch to consider the error of their ways,

I don’t know who told you this or where you got this impression. If you have mentioned it, I don’t recall.

You are not married. So this should be no concern to you at all. If you are obsessing over a sin you might commit years in the future, you need counseling more than ever.

Like just about everything else you struggle with, it is a prudential matter. There is no list.

That is because this is an interpersonal exchange between two people. They are both involved and both of their feelings and concerns have weight in the discussion and ultimate decision. It is a decision both parties negotiate. That is the way life is. Especially married life. It’s give and take, compromise.

and sadly, I don’t know too many marriage there it’s like that, most of my experience is “my way or no way” type of thing

 

[Petaro]

A real husband looks always for the benefit of his wife. His love has to be unconditional and sacrificial if necessary for her wellbeing. His love is gentle, never forced. Her love is in understanding the rightful needs of her husband and herself, always open to the possibility of life which gives it sanctity and honour. Prudence, wisdom, discussion and compromise are the ways of love in marriage. We are all vulnerable to those we love the most. Timing and frequency of love making is the subject of wise and loving discussion, each more open to the other’s needs than their own. But marriage is not only the public declaration of a sexual relationship in a sociological framework; but a sacrament of mutual love and respect that makes such discussions so important and so valuable in expressing that love to your spouse in falling over each other to compromise towards each other’s needs at the time.

 

[Vico]

sorry for asking this again, I think I’m still not really getting it.

when would it constitute a sin to say no to sex?

what if you are asked, and have a headache or something so you asked to postpone, but the other spouse insists? common sense dictates that they would understand, but what if they don’t?

I’m still trying to get over what I learned, that if one spouse so much as opens their mouth and mentions it, then you have to do it, no choice

is there anything in the catechism or anywhere else on this? I’ve seen a few websites, but they seem questionable so I’d obviously prefer to stick to church teaching

One book to read on the topic is:MORALS AND MARRIAGE The Catholic Background to Sex by T. G. WAYNE (1936)

The principle is this: whenever either the husband or the wife
seriously and reasonably asks for the marriage due the other is
bound to render it. Reasonably asks: no one in marriage engages
to become a convenience for another’s passion; neither must force
their every wish on the other; they are equal and, particularly
as regards the marriage act, have the same rights. It is most
desirable that the action should be mutual. This will not be too
difficult if the two love one another in a human way and are
ready to be considerate and make sacrifices, if each tries to
serve the other, and if it is realized that for their happiness
together the act should be the comfort and content of both.

ewtn.com/library/MARRIAGE/MORMAR.txt

 

[Rau]

friends and relatives, from previous generations, who insist that they “had” to have 13 kids or so because the church said it was against God to stop having children or to refuse sex to your husband for any reason

But you now realise those friends and relatives were themselves misguided, right?

 

[Ron_Conte]

Claim: “The principle is this: whenever either the husband or the wife seriously and reasonably asks for the marriage due the other is bound to render it.”

Not true.

Declining marital relations on occasion is not intrinsically evil, so the morality of the decision depends on intention and circumstances.

The marital debt, the obligation to have marital relations, applies over time. If one spouse refuses the other for a lengthy period of time, a proportionate reason is needed because (given good intentions) the morality of the act depends mainly on the circumstances.

No particular reason is needed for the occasional refusal. However, refusal for a lengthy time might put the other spouse in danger of temptation to sexual sins. Even so, a grave reason can justify refusal for a longer period of time (such as danger to the wife or conceived child’s health if pregnancy occurs).

For a young married couple, they also have an obligation to pursue the highest good of marriage, which is the procreation and education of children (generatio et educatio prolis). For an older married couple, who have some children and are nearing the end of the procreative years, this obligation has less moral weight.

 

[heart4home]

sorry for asking this again, I think I’m still not really getting it.

when would it constitute a sin to say no to sex?

what if you are asked, and have a headache or something so you asked to postpone, but the other spouse insists? common sense dictates that they would understand, but what if they don’t?

I’m still trying to get over what I learned, that if one spouse so much as opens their mouth and mentions it, then you have to do it, no choice

is there anything in the catechism or anywhere else on this? I’ve seen a few websites, but they seem questionable so I’d obviously prefer to stick to church teaching

Are you in a relationship? I see somebody mentioned you are not married.

If you marry a loving caring person, then this should not be a problem.

When you are in a relationship, if the partner pressures you to do things that you don’t want to repeatedly, and I’m not even talking about sex here, then you will see that they suffer from some degree of selfishness

This doesn’t mean that you don’t ever do things you don’t want to for the sake of your spouse, because obviously there is give and take.

I disagree that you never have sex because you have a headache, but it depends on the degree of headache and whether your spouse is attentive to your present discomfort. Often a loving massage will help with the headache and lead to sex. But this is all discovered through the course of your relationship, which varies by couple.

If you love your spouse, you will not want to pressure or deny. And it will take a while to figure how this works in your own situation.

 

[heart4home]

and sadly, I don’t know too many marriage there it’s like that, most of my experience is “my way or no way” type of thing

Is this your own personal experience, or what you’ve been told by others?

My husband has never treated me in such a way. We have a large family by choice, not out of my duty to meet his needs.

I don’t know many men today, that want to take on a large family just so they can have sex on demand. There’s certainly infertile times in a month where his needs could be met.

I think that in such cases, people have gone into marriage without asking the hard questions of each other. In times past, I can imagine this was more common, because certain subjects seemed to be taboo. Today, most young people are much more open and ask these types of questions of each other.

Purposely lying to a person in the premarriage stage about what you will expect in marriage, I imagine would be a grave sin.

 

[1ke]

friends and relatives, from previous generations, who insist that they “had” to have 13 kids or so because the church said it was against God to stop having children or to refuse sex to your husband for any reason

yes, the same people who said you could catch diseases from toilet seats and get pregnant from kissing.

Look, I am sorry you were told nonsense. Some of them may very well have felt like that. But the Church never taught a person had to have kids until they died of exhaustion nor that they had to have sex on demand.

Casti Connubii was written in that generation and it does not say that.

 

[Bookcat]

Is there a “marital obligation” to have relations? Yes. Are there limits to the this obligation? Yes. Even some exceptions to the obligation (like the person is drunk or insane or has committed adultery etc etc).

And there can be mutually agreed upon postponements (aside from a near occasion of sin). One spouse may feel rather tired and ask to wait til another time…(hence no sin…)…

Also if one say looks at the older works one finds too it noted that while it is a grave obligation it can admit of parvity of matter (meaning there can be venial sin too involved…an example could venial be if it only briefly postponed by one of the persons once or twice (awaiting a better time for them) and no near occasion for mortal sin is present…but discuss this with ones confessor perhaps…)

Interestingly one such author notes -the grave obligation is when the person asks both:

“reasonably and seriously”…

And he notes that the request is not considered “serious” if made in the form of a desire rather than a definite will…

In any case the obligation is a serious one that can though not be in effect in certain circumstances (such as drunkeness etc) or which can be venial in others.

Ones confessor can advise in particular questions.

see 1 Cor 7:3 for the Scripture

 

[Bookcat]

friends and relatives, from previous generations, who insist that they “had” to have 13 kids or so because the church said it was against God to stop having children or to refuse sex to your husband for any reason

There is no “number” of kids …one is to be open to life.

And for the right reasons one may use NFP to avoid another conception.

Can it be sinful to stop having children? It can be sure. Like a person uses contraception…

Can it be sinful to refuse ones spouse? Yes

Does that mean that every refusal or request for another time is a sin?

No.

 

[Bookcat]

Is there a “marital obligation” to have relations? Yes. Are there limits to the this obligation? Yes. Even some exceptions to the obligation (like the person is drunk or insane or has committed adultery etc etc).

And there can be mutually agreed upon postponements (aside from a near occasion of sin). One spouse may feel rather tired and ask to wait til another time…(hence no sin…)…

Also if one say looks at the older works one finds too it noted that while it is a grave obligation it can admit of parvity of matter (meaning there can be venial sin too involved…an example could venial be if it only briefly postponed by one of the persons once or twice (awaiting a better time for them) and no near occasion for mortal sin is present…but discuss this with ones confessor perhaps…)

Interestingly one such author notes -the grave obligation is when the person asks both:

“reasonably and seriously”.…

And he notes that the request is not considered “serious” if made in the form of a desire rather than a definite will…

In any case the obligation is a serious one that can though not be in effect in certain circumstances (such as drunkeness etc) or which can be venial in others.

Ones confessor can advise in particular questions.

see 1 Cor 7:3 for the Scripture

 

[angell1]

Is this your own personal experience, or what you’ve been told by others?

My husband has never treated me in such a way. We have a large family by choice, not out of my duty to meet his needs.

I don’t know many men today, that want to take on a large family just so they can have sex on demand. There’s certainly infertile times in a month where his needs could be met.

I think that in such cases, people have gone into marriage without asking the hard questions of each other. In times past, I can imagine this was more common, because certain subjects seemed to be taboo. Today, most young people are much more open and ask these types of questions of each other.

Purposely lying to a person in the premarriage stage about what you will expect in marriage, I imagine would be a grave sin.

and that’s the other thing, how do you know if you’re called to have a large family or not?

it seems like, generally speaking, it’s expected that most catholic families be larger, or at least more the norm, and smaller families should be the exception.

I don’t know if that is what the church actualy is trying to say

 

[1ke]

and that’s the other thing, how do you know if you’re called to have a large family or not?

You discern WITH your husband. It’s a process. You don’t simply “know”. You discern. You and your husband come to that conclusion together.

it seems like, generally speaking, it’s expected that most catholic families be larger, or at least more the norm, and smaller families should be the exception.

I don’t know if that is what the church actualy is trying to say

The Church doesn’t teach anything different about parenthood than it does about every other aspect of our Christian faith-- a call to be generous, to respond to God in our state in life.

See Humanae Vitae. See Casti Connubii. See this document, Familiaris Consortio on the family:

w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio.html

 

[Vico]

Claim: “The principle is this: whenever either the husband or the wife seriously and reasonably asks for the marriage due the other is bound to render it.”

Not true.

…

Why do you suppose that Nihil obstat was given by Edouardus Can. Mahoney, S.Th.D. and Imprimatur by Joseph Butt, Vic. Gen.?

 

[angell1]

You discern WITH your husband. It’s a process. You don’t simply “know”. You discern. You and your husband come to that conclusion together.

The Church doesn’t teach anything different about parenthood than it does about every other aspect of our Christian faith-- a call to be generous, to respond to God in our state in life.

See Humanae Vitae. See Casti Connubii. See this document, Familiaris Consortio on the family:

w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio.html

I read it, doesn`t talk about family size

I understand the principle, I just always get the impression that smaller families are looked down upon

for example, I’ve heard many statements like “well we have 2 now, but we’re open to life so obviously we’re not stopping there”, as if people who only choose to have 2 for whatever reason are not open to life somehow

and the number of times I’ve been told that I must be spoiled, being basically an only child, or that only children are naturally more selfish

or maybe i just don’t know how to do proper discernment, everyone just says follow god’s will, which I usually don’t even know what that means, or what exactly he wills