R
royal_archer
Guest
in a case like this, and the lack of intimate relations alone, would it be possible for the husband to get an annulment.
- Status
H
hasikelee
Guest
Lol, you find sexual intercourse not pleasurable and have never achieved an orgasm…
So therefore you wonder if you can just avoid having sex?
Would you think this way about any other part of your body? What if you found eating to be a horrible experience and you were always underweight. I guess you would just look for an excuse not to eat?
If other body parts weren’t working, you would be calling your doctor, anxiously looking for a solution.
So therefore you wonder if you can just avoid having sex?
Would you think this way about any other part of your body? What if you found eating to be a horrible experience and you were always underweight. I guess you would just look for an excuse not to eat?
If other body parts weren’t working, you would be calling your doctor, anxiously looking for a solution.
1
1ke
Guest
H
Holly3278
Guest
What I recommend is that you see your doctor to find out the root cause of your low sex drive and maybe get put on some medication to help your drive. That way you don’t have to deny your spouse sexual relations.
God bless!
God bless!
C
Calliso
Guest
Yeah but you need to eat no matter how much you hate it unless something is seriously wrong with you mentally eventually hunger will win over and you will eat. I do think she needs to go to the doctor though…course the funny thing is with me going to the doctor I think is what caused many problems in that um area. But I am sure I am an unusual case.
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
How can a woman give anything to anyone against her will? If it’s against her will, it’s not a gift, is it?
A married woman is not JUST a woman, but a “married” woman, being one person of two persons of one flesh.
Part of the fact of the (human) flesh is the giving of sexuality in chastity within the fleshly relationship.
It is for no one but the two parties of the “one flesh composed of two persons” to decide how best to give each other of their sexuality, but to NOT give to the other person of their one flesh in a way which demonstrates their mutual love is to divide that which God has brought together.
A married woman may decide to refuse the gift of her PRESENCE to the other person of their one flesh, by starving herself to death for example, and in doing so breaks the marriage.
To not give that which must be given to sustain the single fleshedness of those two (married) persons is to destroy the two-persons-in-one-flesh state that only God can rightly destroy.
There is the sin.
Women, or men, who destroy their married condition because of their “(disordered) needs” (as per Dameedna’s definitions above) reject religion because they value their “needs” over those of God, as is really always the case of anyone who rejects God’s mandated religion.
M
maria_rose
Guest
dear Junebug,
May I speak to you Woman to woman. I am 40ish and My Husband has not touched me in over a year. I am the one with the higher sex drive and it has truly been a tough cross to bear. Please be grateful that he loves and desires you so passionately . That is wonderful and a great gift to you. I’d give a great deal to have my husband desire me so much. I am not fat or ugly.
My husband’s drive is just gone. Will it ever return? God willing!
Junebug, please get checked out medically and maybe talk to a counselor. Don’t deny yourself a wonderful outlet for your love and his.
Trust me ,being denied intimacy leads to serious temptation. It takes all my faith, prayers and will power to remain a faithful wife and I continue to be with God’s help.
Let’s pray for each other.
God love you!
May I speak to you Woman to woman. I am 40ish and My Husband has not touched me in over a year. I am the one with the higher sex drive and it has truly been a tough cross to bear. Please be grateful that he loves and desires you so passionately . That is wonderful and a great gift to you. I’d give a great deal to have my husband desire me so much. I am not fat or ugly.
My husband’s drive is just gone. Will it ever return? God willing!
Junebug, please get checked out medically and maybe talk to a counselor. Don’t deny yourself a wonderful outlet for your love and his.
Trust me ,being denied intimacy leads to serious temptation. It takes all my faith, prayers and will power to remain a faithful wife and I continue to be with God’s help.
Let’s pray for each other.
God love you!
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
Why would the person being denied have any more right to “break the bond that only God can break” than the person doing the denying?
If the marriage is a real marriage, then it’s an unbreakable bond, except by God via death.
One needn’t live with someone who would rather not be married while being married, but both parties are still obligated to be chaste, as are all people at all times.
R
royal_archer
Guest
But by entering a mariage both parties agreed willingly already. Mariage is a lifetime commitment of an intimate nature. If one of the parties is no longer willing to honnor the commitment can you consider the mariage to be in tact?
R
royal_archer
Guest
My question is: is this a real marriage? It seems that one person already backed out of the marriage when they shut off intimacy. If the marriage is over the remaining spouse has a right to be remarried, right? Based on the OPs post both parties agreed to the relationship and then years later one party made a unilateral decision that they would not have marrital relations. It seems like the one being denied should have some redress in the situation, right? Of course this is a hypothetical discusion since we don’t have all of the background details.
OP I don’t mean to be harsh towards you but I feel I can better relate to your husbands point of view than yours given my being on the oposite side of a similar situation.
J
joeybaggz
Guest
Beg to differ. There is a defective intention in the nullity process called “error in person”. At least that is what it was called ten years ago or so.
Error in person means that the person one marries is not the person he/she believed the other to be. For instance in the courtship period, one party tells another that they enjoy sex and look forward to a fulfilling relationship, and then after the marriage, says, sorry, I don’t really like sex and I am not going to have it.; In that case there is a deception that affected the free choice of the other partner to enter into the marriage.
It’s a little like defective intention against children. One partner says they want children and then after the marriage informs the other partner that they really don’t, they just said that to get the wronged partner to marry.
The sacrament of matrimony is only confected by the free, willing, and informed consent of both parties. It is akin to the civil legal principle of informed consent. If there is a serious and actual deception “pulled” on the other party, the church will investigate that as a condition affecting the free choice of the parties and will consider finding for the petitioner for the decree of nullity, and grant an annullment.
J
joeybaggz
Guest
An annullment is not out of the question. I refer to my above post.
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
I basically agree with this, but there are exceptions.
The op has not identified any of these, but for example if the spouse forces contraception to the act, the act is no longer a total giving of self and it may be reasonable to refuse. Handle that with caution, and if that’s the case consult a good priest whose loyal to Church teachings. I also bring up contraception because the original poster mentioned a low sex drive. Many women take the pill without realizing the birth control pill has a documented side effect of decreasing women’s sex drive. One study I read stated that side effect is sometimes irreversible even once the pill is stopped.
Someone already brought up infidelity. The Church teaches that a spouse is not obligated to engage in relations with her/his spouse who cheated. But I also remind the original poster that her husband does have a higher sex drive–and she should not place her husband in the position of having to struggle with sexual temptation.
It is called “making love” for a reason. Sexual intimacy is a physically bonding that should both express and build love. The “reasonable requests” discussed earlier takes that into account; a loving spouse neither tries to demand relations nor refuse. If you find that physical intimacy does not contribute to your marriage, something is wrong.
B
BlaineTog
Guest
I spot two fallacies. First, strawman. Both spouses have the obligation. That it comes up more for men than for women is incidental (and, I suspect, at least somewhat due to cultural pressure). Second, ambiguity. “Must,” in this context, refers to obligation, not freedom. The each spouse is totally free to give herself or not, just as I am free to punch someone in the face or not. Not that the two acts are the same, but in both cases, you have the freedom to perform the action that you want. However, one of the actions you should do, and the other you should not. You should not sin, even though you can. You should share yourself with your spouse, even though you are free to withhold.
1
1ke
Guest
You seem to have a wrong understanding of a decree of nullity. It applies to a defect at the time the marriage vows were exchanged, not anything that happens during the marriage.
The man in question has no “recourse” if by “recourse” you mean “leave the marriage”. The spouses should work together to correct the issue. But, if they don’t, the husband will need to take up his cross just like any other cross in marriage.
1
1ke
Guest
Of course it is a real marriage.
A marriage is not over until one spouse dies.
There is no such thing as remarriage.
No. There is no “redress” in the way you mean. Marriage is for life. Marriage is for life, for better or worse, in sickness and in health. The husband must stand by his wife, help her through the issues, but ultimately remain faithful no matter what.
1
1ke
Guest
There is nothing in the OP’s post that indicates there was an error in person or deception. Please refrain from making up huge hypothetical situations. Royal archer asked if the woman simply withdrawing (“the lack of intimate relations alone”) would be grounds for nullity. The answer to that is “no.”
There is nothing to indicate such a conversation occurred. And, before marriage how would one know if one “enjoyed sex” since one is not having sex? Hmmm…
They have certainly have been having sex. They have children. She does not desire sex anymore, and does not enjoy it. They should work together to find a solution. But, this is NOT a case of “deception”.
"That case"is not **this **case. You’ve made up all of this.
Again, the OP’s situation is not the situation you describe.
There was no deception here, based on the OP’s post.
Of course anyone is free to petition, it doesn’t mean it wil be granted.
A decree of nullity will not be granted just because the other party no longer desires sexual relations-- and that was the question asked by royal archer.
R
rinnie
Guest
I think sex is a wonderful gift that God has given a husband and wife. If you deny him its probally much deeper than you realize, is it because you are tired, stressed, etc. Thats what i would work on why? the true reason, maybe you are really mad and angry and dont even realize it. But thats where i would start, if its none of the above talk to him and maybe somehow between love and understanding you can enjoy it as much as him. I believe that is the way God wanted it, to give us an emotional bond and physical one at the sametime that no one else in this world can do. I believe there is a way to get past this, but you can only do it together. How now that is between the two of you to figure out. But im sure if you both try you can get past this, and someday have a rich and wonderful bond they only husband wife can share, Love and patience and time hopefully will be the ticket, and talk to eachother not at eachother.
J
joeybaggz
Guest
Read royalarchers original question. It states, “In a case like this”… it did not say, “in this case”
Royalarchers question, as stated, can be read as hypothetical and my answer was directed to the general question of annullment predicated on a defective intention. I did not address this case primarily because not all the circumstances are (or were) clear at time of post. And, in fairness to you, it can be read as particular. “In a case like this” swings both ways.
The late JPII was concerned about the frequency and liberal use of annullment in the US Church. Yet he sided with the opinion that, in the case of physical spousal abuse, such a situation may be justifiable grounds for a decree of nullity, even if the situation was not evident prior to the marriage.
Upshot - the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit is continually evaluating its practices and teachings. If psychological conditions exist that destroy the sacrament as it is understood, it is possible that current doctrine and tribunal decisions may be affected by such a condition. Unlike the wailings of the critics of the Church, she is not stuck in stone and does move with the direction of the Holy Spirit.
As to this case, I think these two people need a very competent marriage counselor and sex therapist, not a diocesan tribunal.
- Status