The so-called marital obligation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mommamaree
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
remember one phrase used repeatedly “mental electroshock to a positive end” in reference to threatening divorce to this wife. Some of the attitudes of posters in that thread and a couple of other threads was very frightening to me. I can easily imagine how that must sound to other people who have sexual trauma in their past.
These are not faceless entities out in the ether. We who ask sensitive questions here are people who are hurting and want to find advice and learn how to think about sexual issues in a more Christlike fashion. And suggesting to threaten divorce or annulment, or claiming this is all pishposh nonsense is cruel.
May I ask what language you would suggest to an sexually abused as a child woman who has not done the marital act more than a couple of times in the marriage for 3-4 years because of her trauma and in which the husband is desperate because he did not sign up for a sexless marriage? In the couple I had spoken of in the other thread, she absolutely refused to have sex… it was the last resort. He gave her the choice of going through therapy and working with her to heal and be able to have conjugal relations… or he would divorce and get an annulment so that he could have sex in marriage. Until he mentioned the word divorce, it was entirely beyond the wife’s comprehension and understanding that this was so extremely important to him (and rightfully so). He was asking her to fulfill her vows. Now, she was justified in not having sex with him as a wounded person… but she did have the obligation of doing what she could to get her to the point of having sex. Is there a kind way which a wife would understand how serious the matter is without bringing up mortal sin or divorce? Again, it’s not a mortal sin for her to refuse to have sex if it is too painful/traumatic… but she does have the obligation of seeking appropriate treatment. What is the sensitive way of saying this? How would you frame it so it doesn’t frighten her but does help her see that it is destroying the marriage?
 
Are you o.k. with this statement?

One definition of evil is to reduce a living being to the state of an inanimate object. Thus, those that try to interpret religious teaching so that they have the right to pressure another person into giving up the dignity of choosing when and where to engage in marital relations are in fact practicing evil.

I am not sure to understand you

What is your intellectual approach concerning the marital act? What is your point of view on the sexed and sexual state of marriage? What is the marital act? What is the reciprocal and mutual donation of bodies? What is the meaning of conjugal orgasm? Are you against the sexual conjugal pleasures? What is the place of carnal conjugal love in the marriage?

Is marital act only tolerable, because of potential babies? What are the functions, the ends of the marital act?
 
Are you o.k. with this statement?

One definition of evil is to reduce a living being to the state of an inanimate object. Thus, those that try to interpret religious teaching so that they have the right to pressure another person into giving up the dignity of choosing when and where to engage in marital relations are in fact practicing evil.

I am not sure to understand you

What is your intellectual approach concerning the marital act? What is your point of view on the sexed and sexual state of marriage? What is the marital act? What is the reciprocal and mutual donation of bodies? What is the meaning of conjugal orgasm? Are you against the sexual conjugal pleasures? What is the place of carnal conjugal love in the marriage?

Is marital act only tolerable, because of potential babies? What are the functions, the ends of the marital act?
My position is that each person has the dignity to decide when to offer up their body to his / her spouse. People who don’t respect another person’s dignity, for whatever reason, are reducing that person to the level of an object.

Also, you might want to consolidate your questions. Machine gun questioning can be misinterpreted as an attack, like using ALL CAPS can be interpreted as shouting.

I am unlikely to keep posting on this thread.
 
My position is that each person has the dignity to decide when to offer up their body to his / her spouse. People who don’t respect another person’s dignity, for whatever reason, are reducing that person to the level of an object.

Also, you might want to consolidate your questions. Machine gun questioning can be misinterpreted as an attack, like using ALL CAPS can be interpreted as shouting.

I am unlikely to keep posting on this thread.
I am totally okay with you that each spouse has to respect the human dignity of the other. Thus, in the couple, the sexual war, the sexual force, the conjugal rape (so horrible, awful, so wrong, very evil and a mortal sin) are not natural, are not catholic, are illicit and sinful. Radical feminism and masculinism are so wrong and very dangerous.

The woman is or should be the " New Eve of her Man " and the " Saint Mary Magdalene of her husband ", I mean:

The Female, the Fiancée, the Bride, the Sweetheart, the Love, the Mistress, the Lover, the Beloved, the Muse, the Princess, the Queen, the Friend, the Best-friend, the Girlfriend, the Helper, the Soul-Mate, the Companion, the Partner, the Associate, the Wife and the Potential Mother, the Educator, the Teacher, the Professor, the Thinker, the Philosopher, the Schoolgirl, the Pupil, the Student, the Follower, the Female Opposite Number, the Alterity, the Complementarity, the Person who reveals in him, his part of feminity and helps his masculinity, the Doctress, the Nurse, the Guide of her Husband.

Woman has to assume her feminity; she has to want to be a female; Husband has to receive the feminity of his wife; Husband has to give his masculinity to his wife. In the marriage, female has to understand the normal sexuality of her male

The man is or should be the " New Adam of his wife" and the " Holy Beloved of his wife" , I mean:

The Male, the Fiancé, the Bridegroom, the Sweetheart, the Love, the Lover, the Beloved, the Prince, the King, the Companion, the Friend, the Best friend, the Boy-friend, the Helper, the Soul-Mate, the Companion, the Partner, the Associate, the Husband and the potential Father, the Educator, the Teacher, the Professor, the Thinker, the Philosopher, the Master, the Mentor, the Follower, the Thinker, the Philosopher, the Schoolboy, the Pupil, the Student, the Male Opposite Number, the Alterity, the Complementarity, The Person who reveals in her, her part of masculinity and helps her feminity, the Doctor, the Nurse, the Guide of his Wife.

Man has to assume his virility (masculinity), he has to want to be a male; Woman has to receive the virility of her husband; Wife has to give her feminity to her husband. In the marriage, male has to understand the normal sexuality of his female.

It is a reciprocal duty:
In the marital act, wife is teacher, professor, doctor and master and lover for her husband.
In the marital act, husband is teacher, professor, doctor and master and lover for his wife.
In the marital act, wife is also schoolgirl, pupil, student and follower of her husband.
In the marital act, husband is schoolboy, pupil, student and follower of his wife.

The notion of " conjugal debt " is existing for solving the issues, that is the ultimate mechanism of the conjugal moral. The practice of marital act, that is a right, an obligation and a duty, has to take in consideration:

Liberty of each spouse with the corollaries: The will, the desire, the conscience, the vows the day of wedding, equal dignity;
Health of each spouse, life of each spouse;
Health of each member of the family;
Health of child during the pregnancy of his mother, life of child during the pregnancy of his mother;
Unitive aspect with the two dimensions ( the physical/physiological with the corollaries coming from the body and the psychological/mental/intellectual with the corollaries coming from soul);
Potential fecundity (procreative aspect);
The financial situation of family;
The circunstances of the marital request for union of bodies (when, where, why, what for);

By exeption, the marital act has not to be practiced under very special conditions coming from the exterior context ( for health of one spouse, for adultery of one spouse, and for irresponsibility of one spouse, these are reasonable reasons);

The medical reasons (physical, physiological, psychological, mental), the financial reasons, the affective reasons; the sentimental reasons are valid and licit for refusing the marital act.
 
I am sorry for the indignant tone of my last post. I can see by dedo’s and EasterJoy’s responses that this discussion was turned into more of an abstract, intellectual conversation in my absence, w ith no intent to imply anything sinful about my questions. 😊
Thanks to both of you for charitably responding to my foot-stomping tantrum of a post. :o. I know I have a lot to work on. I am being referred to a Catholic psychotherapist and will be speaking with my priest this week. Thank God! I need some relief.
 
I am sorry for the indignant tone of my last post. I can see by dedo’s and EasterJoy’s responses that this discussion was turned into more of an abstract, intellectual conversation in my absence, w ith no intent to imply anything sinful about my questions. 😊
Thanks to both of you for charitably responding to my foot-stomping tantrum of a post. :o. I know I have a lot to work on. I am being referred to a Catholic psychotherapist and will be speaking with my priest this week. Thank God! I need some relief.
It was not a tantrum! You were rightfully indignant and you deserved an apology, at least you deserved one from me. If we want to have an abstract discussion, after all, we can always start our own thread, yes? At any rate, if the discussion goes off on some tangent, it still needs to be mindful of the feelings of those who have previously posted, especially the OP! 👍
 
I am sorry for the indignant tone of my last post. I can see by dedo’s and EasterJoy’s responses that this discussion was turned into more of an abstract, intellectual conversation in my absence, w ith no intent to imply anything sinful about my questions. 😊
Thanks to both of you for charitably responding to my foot-stomping tantrum of a post. :o. I know I have a lot to work on. I am being referred to a Catholic psychotherapist and will be speaking with my priest this week. Thank God! I need some relief.
No problem Mommamaree,

And thank you for your kind words.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top