Sexual charity in the couple?

[fpt]

According to the natural links between wife and husband (natural contract that is at the spring of interpersonnal obligations within couple), do you think that each spouse has an natural contractual moral obligation to go to the medical doctor and to take treatment - pills, exercices, psychological therapy with catholic doctor, and to be followed by a priest (under what conditions?), if for instance:

Husband has premature ejaculations;
Husband has problems of erection;
Husband has no orgasm;
Husband has no ejaculation;
Husband is too often touched by the impotency, not always (not to do the link with the perpetual impotency); Husband in the western countries, could he be in moral obligation to take viagra if his wife wants marital sex?
Husband does not want, ever to be active during sexual intercourses;
Husband does not want natural and moral foreplay and / or natural and moral afterplay.
Husband is not, ever at the initiative of sexual intercourses;

Wife has problems of vaginism;
Wife has no pleasure;
Wife has no orgasm;
Wife seems to be frigid;
Wife does not want, ever to be active during marital sex;
Wife does not want natural and moral foreplay and / or natural and moral afterplay.
Wife is not,ever at the initiative of sexual intercourses;

In the detail I reserve my answers, but at the first glance I think that there are moral obligations in favor its spouse to make something, because conjugal sexual charity is important.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

According to the natural links between wife and husband (natural contract that is at the spring of interpersonnal obligations within couple), do you think that each spouse has an natural contractual moral obligation to go to the medical doctor and to take treatment - pills, exercices, psychological therapy with catholic doctor, and to be followed by a priest (under what conditions?), if for instance:

Husband has premature ejaculations;
Husband has problems of erection;
Husband has no orgasm;
Husband has no ejaculation;
Husband is too often touched by the impotency, not always (not to do the link with the perpetual impotency); Husband in the western countries, could he be in moral obligation to take viagra if his wife wants marital sex?
Husband does not want, ever to be active during sexual intercourses;
Husband does not want natural and moral foreplay and / or natural and moral afterplay.
Husband is not, ever at the initiative of sexual intercourses;

Wife has problems of vaginism;
Wife has no pleasure;
Wife has no orgasm;
Wife seems to be frigid;
Wife does not want, ever to be active during marital sex;
Wife does not want natural and moral foreplay and / or natural and moral afterplay.
Wife is not,ever at the initiative of sexual intercourses;

In the detail I reserve my answers, but at the first glance I think that there are moral obligations in favor its spouse to make something, because conjugal sexual charity is important.

I think you are right.
The problems that you pose, though, sometimes hard very hard to solve, for they involve intellectual and emotive levels of approach.
Priests are not the best so talk about is for they have more important things to do.
I would say that we would need a specialist that is greatly needed but I know no one who had it: Mater in Catholic Sexuality. There are university degrees in Sexuality but I know none in Catholic Sexuality.

 

[dailey]

I agree. It would be selfish, and quite possibly a sin, if the husband/wife were to refuse treatment or speaking with a priest.

 

[Nicko]

What’s “vaginism”?

 

[fpt]

What’s “vaginism”?

I wanted to write Vaginismus. The translation from my mother tongue was not quite correct.

 

[losh14]

I think the obligation that each partner of the couple has is to provide for the spouse as both can agree, charitably and genitively, and that it’s difficult to stipulate some sort of norm for sexual charity. Part of this is differences in libido - I know Catholic couples who are happy but make love perhaps a few times a year, and I know Catholic couples who feel distant from one another if it’s been more than a week. Part of it is also related to sexual history. A difference in the level of sexual experience, for example, and while the ideal is for both spouses to enter marriage as chaste virgins, the reality is that not all couples are such. The key is for each spouse to conform his or her mind to what is mutually agreeable, and to do any less is tantamount to abuse.

I note that your list inclines towards matters that would decrease sexual activity - I would think a list should include also those matters that may increase sexual activity in such a way as to be dysfunctional - nymphomania and satyrism, paraphilia in one or both spouses, etc.

That said, there are physical and there are mental impediments. I’m inclined to think the mental impediments - a fear of sex, for example, or of intimacy (being close emotionally) - indicate other underlying issues such that counseling to address those issues (for example, an irrational fear of abandonment or a distrust of the spouse) may help the marriage function better overall. The key is to help develop a sense of true intimacy, whether that’s within sex or simply in everyday interactions. Physical issues are another question. We know that over time the biology of sex is prone to fail - every man at some point in his life loses his virility. Is that something that should be treated medically or should this age-enforced chastity be accepted with grace? I think that would depend upon the couple.

 

[JRKH]

The simple answer is that each partner is to love the other “as themselves”.

Since in the marriage bond the two become one, they need to work together in mutual love to do what works best for them.

Love is the core moral obligation.

Peace
James

 

[fpt]

I think the obligation that each partner of the couple has is to provide for the spouse as both can agree, charitably and genitively, and that it’s difficult to stipulate some sort of norm for sexual charity. Part of this is differences in libido - I know Catholic couples who are happy but make love perhaps a few times a year, and I know Catholic couples who feel distant from one another if it’s been more than a week. Part of it is also related to sexual history. A difference in the level of sexual experience, for example, and while the ideal is for both spouses to enter marriage as chaste virgins, the reality is that not all couples are such. The key is for each spouse to conform his or her mind to what is mutually agreeable, and to do any less is tantamount to abuse.

I note that your list inclines towards matters that would decrease sexual activity - I would think a list should include also those matters that may increase sexual activity in such a way as to be dysfunctional - nymphomania and satyrism, paraphilia in one or both spouses, etc.

That said, there are physical and there are mental impediments. I’m inclined to think the mental impediments - a fear of sex, for example, or of intimacy (being close emotionally) - indicate other underlying issues such that counseling to address those issues (for example, an irrational fear of abandonment or a distrust of the spouse) may help the marriage function better overall. The key is to help develop a sense of true intimacy, whether that’s within sex or simply in everyday interactions. Physical issues are another question. We know that over time the biology of sex is prone to fail - every man at some point in his life loses his virility. Is that something that should be treated medically or should this age-enforced chastity be accepted with grace? I think that would depend upon the couple.

include also those matters that may increase sexual activity in such a way as to be dysfunctional - nymphomania and satyrism, paraphilia in one or both spouses, etc.

I am okay with you; that is a good point.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

According to the natural links between wife and husband (natural contract that is at the spring of interpersonnal obligations within couple), do you think that each spouse has an natural contractual moral obligation to go to the medical doctor and to take treatment - pills, exercices, psychological therapy with catholic doctor, and to be followed by a priest (under what conditions?), if for instance:

Husband has premature ejaculations;
Husband has problems of erection;
Husband has no orgasm;
Husband has no ejaculation;
Husband is too often touched by the impotency, not always (not to do the link with the perpetual impotency); Husband in the western countries, could he be in moral obligation to take viagra if his wife wants marital sex?
Husband does not want, ever to be active during sexual intercourses;
Husband does not want natural and moral foreplay and / or natural and moral afterplay.
Husband is not, ever at the initiative of sexual intercourses;

Wife has problems of vaginism;
Wife has no pleasure;
Wife has no orgasm;
Wife seems to be frigid;
Wife does not want, ever to be active during marital sex;
Wife does not want natural and moral foreplay and / or natural and moral afterplay.
Wife is not,ever at the initiative of sexual intercourses;

In the detail I reserve my answers, but at the first glance I think that there are moral obligations in favor its spouse to make something, because conjugal sexual charity is important.

I think your lists can be divided into medical issues and sexual outlook and communication issues. Medical issues can and should be addressed in a physician’s office. While a priest can provide moral guidance, unless he’s also a medical doctor he cannot and indeed should not diagnose or medically treat people.

I think people have a moral obligation to take care of their health as much as they can, I also think how this translates to real life largely depends on the couple and their particular situation, including their finances. In the US many insurance plans do not cover erectile dysfunction medications, which can cost as much as $10 a pill out of pocket. Is an uninsured couple morally obligated to spend a hundred or so USD on ED meds every month if they’re already struggling to buy groceries or pay the rent?

The other issues (sexual positions, foreplay, initiating sex, libido etc.) need to be worked out between a couple. This requires, like so much else in a marriage, trust and the ability to communicate well. If the trust isn’t there or communication is lacking, the couple can and should seek out professional intervention. If this means seeing a priest I don’t know. I’m just speaking for myself, but I would not be comfortable seeking the advice of my priest regarding such matters. And I can’t speak for priests, but I could imagine more than a few would be quick to point couples in the direction of a therapist’s office if presented with such questions.

Luna

 

[faithfully]

I think everything needs to be weighed out. Within the couple.

If a husband “needs viagra” I don’t think it’s really about taking that pill and that is somehow charitable. It’s more about, WHY does he need it? And let’s address that.

Nearly all these things are symptoms of something else. I don’t think it’s charitable at all to expect your spouse to put a bandaid on gushing wound. So that you can pretend the wound is not there and live “happily ever after.”

The charitable thing is to make sure you spouse is of healthy mind, body and spirit. And to remain so within your power for your spouse. The rest comes naturally.

IMO anyway!