When are we "obliged to repudiate (formally separate from)" a spouse?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Job2007
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think highly of marriage as well, and I know sex isn’t the only thing involved. However, (and this might be a dirty little secret, but it is a truth) sex is part of one!

Being a male, sex is generally more important to us then it is to the ladies. This does not mean you have the right to go outside your marriage, but she has NO RIGHT to deny this to you.
 
Rascalking said:
I think highly of marriage as well, and I know sex isn’t the only thing involved. However, (and this might be a dirty little secret, but it is a truth) sex is part of one!

Being a male, sex is generally more important to us then it is to the ladies. This does not mean you have the right to go outside your marriage, but she has NO RIGHT to deny this to you.
Click to expand...
Right. We are men, not eunuchs. Men and women are both obligated to pay the marriage debt. If you take vows of marriage, you must be open to fecundity (the birth and rearing of children in the Catholic faith.)

If you are not open to natural marital relations, that are open to life, then you are violating one of the primary purposes of marriage. (Fidelity and fecundity are the two purposes mentioned in the catechism.) You are denying the marriage debt - it is often referred to as “sexual refusal”, in some current literature. Like any debt, it has to be paid. Someone who does not pay this debt is cheating both their spouse, and the Lord; marriage vows are not just to the spouse, but to Christ.

===========================================================

See this article, specifically section 30, on the “sins within marriage”:

olrl.org/Lessons/

Someone who refuses sex, or demands birth control, is living in mortal sin. It sounds like Job2007’s wife has managed to do both. She gives her husband two choices: birth control, or refusal of the marriage debt. Both are mortally sinful.

1 Corinthians 7 is the Scriptural basis for this analysis:

5
Do not deprive each other, except perhaps by mutual consent for a time, to be free for prayer, but then return to one another, so that Satan may not tempt you through your lack of self-control.
6
This I say by way of concession, however, not as a command.

Your wife is living in perpetual mortal sin, Job2007. So please pray for her repentance and return to the faith. If she is a true Christian, then she will give full ascent to the faith - and all the teachings of the Church. This includes the teachings on marital relations, and birth control.
 
I know I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know, but there was a piece by (Pope Paul VI?) about having marital relations with a contracepting spouse. Find out if she can be open to a form of female contraception.

This still doesn’t make sense to me. Wouldn’t she want sex?
 
Rascalking said:
I know I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know, but there was a piece by (Pope Paul VI?) about having marital relations with a contracepting spouse. Find out if she can be open to a form of female contraception.

This still doesn’t make sense to me. Wouldn’t she want sex?
Click to expand...
I think you are referencing the Vademeccum. It is the Papal Letter that advises confessors on how to to deal with violations of fecundity in marriage:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_12021997_vademecum_en.html

There is a discussion on it here, within this forum:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=209549

The Vademeccum does list some very rare circumstances, under which a person can licitly engage in relations with their contracepting spouse. It is very detailed, so read carefully.

But that was produced under JPII in 1997. I think you are confusing it with Humanae Vitae, which deals with the larger issue of infecund relations within marriage. And that was produce under Pope Paul VI:

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

This is all required reading for Job2007.

====================================================

Now, as to why this woman does not want to have sex? I am sure she has a myriad of reasons, excuses, and explanations. But I am equally sure that it all boils down to one simple point: selfishness. She is selfish. Egotistical. Self-Centered. Narcissistic. I don’t even know this woman, but I know this about her.

All people who deny their spouses natural relations, under normal circumstances, share this core trait. Rather than open themselves to their spouse, and to the creation of new life, they put themselves first.

They put themselves before God, their future children, and the needs of their spouses, whom they willingly married. This is perhaps the consummate act of selfishness, which is the opposite of humility, a paramount virtue.

Please pray for your spouse, Job2007. She needs it. She really needs it.
 
mrpathetic said:
Please pray for your spouse, Job2007. She needs it. She really needs it.
Click to expand...
Yes, she does. She’s probably petrified. The OP states:
  1. He was fine with contraception (I’m assuming condoms?) until 3 years ago, and his wife feels like he’s “changed the rules” aka pulled the rug out from under her.
  2. She has MS - and 3 kids already here.
Isn’t it possible that she is terrified of what another pregnancy might do to her body? MS is a serious disease. It’s incurable. It’s a life sentence. She could feel fine today and be paralysed tomorrow. She may feel that another pregnancy could result in her death and leave their children motherless.

If she is sick, and taking medication, why would she want to add something with as many bad side effects as the pill to the mix? Of course she would prefer condoms. And now her spouse - who vowed to love her in sickness and in health - wants to “repudiate” her in sickness, when she is likely feeling vulnerable and unsure of the future.

Yes, NFP would be the best option. If he doesn’t want to use condoms he shouldn’t. But to demand “payment” of the “marital debt” (oh so mutally loving and uplifting and life-confirming, those terms - I’m surprised your wives aren’t swooning at your feet :rolleyes: is the wrong way to go about it.

But she’s not there yet and you can’t force it on her. Maybe instead of looking for permission to put aside his wife and mother of his children , the OP should practice a little corporeal work of mercy and take care of the sick - body and mind. She’s lived her whole life thinking ABC was okay, hasn’t had the same spiritual revelation as her husband, her body is not her own any more with the MS and can’t be trusted or counted on. Don’t underestimate that feeling - even though it may be illogical - when it comes to NFP. Of course she would rather put her trust in a piece of latex than a body that’s falling apart on the inside and doing all sorts of things it’s not supposed to! She would have to be a robot to think otherwise, especially if her husband suddenly changed his beliefs and expects her to as well.

What was your tactic from the beginning, Job? Have you lovingly told her you believe this is wrong, and hope she will learn to see it the same way, but that you will love her and be there for her until death (which is probably weighing quite heavily on her mind now) no matter what - or did you make a pronouncement that this is the way it’s going to be from now on, innundate her with religious experts who back you up, and expect her to fall in line?

Your conversion of heart wasn’t hers. She may have one yet but only if she is truly made to feel that you care about her physical and mental wellbeing and aren’t going to abandon her and the life you made together because of something you suddenly discovered in the CCC. It isn’t her fault you didn’t know the rules when you started and it isn’t her fault she has MS and is now facing a future of incredible pain and disability, possibly alone.

I will pray for your wife, and for you.
 
NoxSineStellae said:
If she is sick, and taking medication, why would she want to add something with as many bad side effects as the pill to the mix? Of course she would prefer condoms. And now her spouse - who vowed to love her in sickness and in health - wants to “repudiate” her in sickness, when she is likely feeling vulnerable and unsure of the future.

Yes, NFP would be the best option. If he doesn’t want to use condoms he shouldn’t. But to demand “payment” of the “marital debt” (oh so mutally loving and uplifting and life-confirming, those terms - I’m surprised your wives aren’t swooning at your feet :rolleyes: is the wrong way to go about it.

But she’s not there yet and you can’t force it on her. Maybe instead of looking for permission to put aside his wife and mother of his children , the OP should practice a little corporeal work of mercy and take care of the sick - body and mind.
Click to expand...
NFP is actually the only realistic option, under these circumstances. Job2007 cannot use artificial control himself, without committing mortal sin. Humanae Vitae and the Vademeccum are quite clear on that. Job2007’s spouse cannot use artificial controls, for medical reasons. So NFP is probably the only way for them to continue conjugal relations, while protecting the health of the spouse.

So I do see two tasks for Job2007: to a) convince her to consider using NFP, on a permanent basis, and b) to begin supporting her through this illness, through the utmost of Christian charity. This is the only way to rebuild a relationship that appears to be badly damaged.

I am sure that Job2007 understands that he needs to practice spiritual and corporal mercy on his spouse - to help her through this illness, and to help her join the Catholic faith through evangelization. Yes, he needs to attend to her, body and soul. And prayer is the primary tool of spiritual mercy, that he needs to use.

(p.s., there are circumstances when the “marriage debt” does not need to be paid. Sickness is indeed one of them. Other legitimate reasons include adultery, drunkenness, non-support, and the protection of an unborn baby. However, spouses are always encouraged to overcome these reasons, whenever possible. That way, conjugal relations can continue to serve the unitive purpose that it has in marriage. NFP is one of the ways that these obstacles can be overcome.)
 
Job,

You mentioned well into the thread that your wife has MS, but prior to that you suggested this situation has become a battle of the wills.

I don’t mean to minimize the the challenges of your wife’s illness, so please don’t take this questions as if I’m dismissing that aspect of your family life. Is her MS a factor in your marital relationship or the discussion of contraception? I know folks are often able to live very normal lives with MS. You said you have three kids now, so I am guessing at some point the MS was pretty mild?

This thread has taken a specific course, but I wonder what your perspective is. Your OP didn’t really mention her illness, so I’m wondering if her MS is even a factor in this discussion?

If so, then obviously that lends a different spin to the discussion. Just want to make sure my comments are on track and address your challenges.
 
Wives, be submissive to your husbands.

Love, honor and obey.

I’m sorry guys, but these days most women, even Catholic women, roll their eyes when they hear these words, as though they are an anachronism. It’s as if innate self-centeredness of original sin + women’s lib + centuries of “generational memory” of repression of women + some vague expectation of restitution for all the bad things men have done to women have combined into one big perfect storm of “THESE WORDS WILL NEVER APPLY TO ME”. It seems that, as a response to the prior culture of man-initiated divorce, many women have perhaps subconsciously decided they are going to set the tone of the marriage, and get “theirs” first, as a preemptive strike. 'Cause Momma didn’t raise no fool. This is what the “world” tells women to do; they are lies, and most women believe these lies, at least for a while, and often their whole lives.

Men get a different message from the world: to go and pursue a life curiously similar to that experienced in the Hefner mansion. Again, more lies.

Job, all you really can do is pray daily for the conversion of her heart, for your acceptance of the situation you have, and to fully understand the meaning of the words, “Husbands love your wives”. There is nothing else worthwhile, nothing else that provides eternal graces. Things may get worse before they get better, and if they do, hang on!! It wouldn’t be the first time our Lord made use of a crisis to acheive a greater end.

God bless you, Tim
 
I can’t believe that you would consider leaving a woman who has MS with three children. Please get some counseling. It sounds like she has some very serious reasons not to have more children.

I think the problem is that she wants YOU to be the one to use the birth control. It has been stated many times on these forums that if your spouse decides to use birth control against your wishes, you are NOT required to practice abstinence.

She is really free to do whatever she decides to do about birth control, but she is crossing a line when she says that YOU are the one who has to use it.
 
Listener said:
I can’t believe that you would consider leaving a woman who has MS with three children. Please get some counseling. It sounds like she has some very serious reasons not to have more children.

I think the problem is that she wants YOU to be the one to use the birth control. It has been stated many times on these forums that if your spouse decides to use birth control against your wishes, you are NOT required to practice abstinence.

She is really free to do whatever she decides to do about birth control, but she is crossing a line when she says that YOU are the one who has to use it.
Click to expand...
Agreed. That would be extraordinarily bad. I don’t think anyone is going to recommend this, under these circumstances. Job2007 is facing a difficult time, but that is no reason to abandon the marriage.

Separation is not permitted solely on the basis of denial of the marriage debt. Separation is only permitted under the following circumstances:
  1. adultery;
  2. heresy or apostasy;
  3. danger to life and limb (of any member of the family);
  4. the choice of evangelic perfection. (And this likely does not apply here.)
And I see no evidence of the first three criteria, either. So I see no basis for separation.

See this article, for an explanation:

newadvent.org/cathen/05054c.htm

**We need to pray for Job2007 to find the strength to stay, not to leave. **
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top