Wife No Longer Open to Marriage Act after Contraception Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter kjfurther17
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe, at this time. Though he would like intimacy and would therefore welcome a child (at the least). That’s my impression.

Ya know, this man seems very genuine and respectful, to me. He is humble about mistakes, and not trying to blame anyone. And he is also doing what he should, at this point.

He respects and loves his wife, and she is trying to follow his lead. I think they are a good couple, who hopefully work things out in faith.
 
Last edited:
The phrase “open to life” is fluffy and confuses people.

The Church uses the phrase “lovingly accept children from God” in the marriage vows. In documents the phrase is that each marital act is to be “ordered toward procreation”.

And @Ammi it is presumptious to tell the OP that he does not need to talk to his pastor. We need spiritual guidance from our Shepherd.
 
It was the priest who used the phrase “open to life”. And the Church also has. Any phrase you use could require further explaining. If a priest expressed that the Church requires of us to be “open to life” I’d probably ask what that specifically means, if I was not familiar with the phrase.

I didnt say he shouldn’t talk to his pastor. I said he doesnt “need” to. I actually think it would be beneficial for him and his pastor. But I also think that his wife would be the more appropriate one to be speaking with the pastor. Well, both of them together is probably the best case, if they are at some sort of stale mate.
 
Last edited:
Glad I turned notifications off haha, but most of you seemed to have hammered it out well enough. This scourge of ‘situational ethics’ that some of the responders seem to want to apply to that ONE Vatican document and its application to my marriage is troubling. Even if we had not had our marriage convalidated we would have had the talk eventually about how my return to the convictions of the Catholic faith would effect our intimacy, and that I would start to follow those precepts(no ‘proportionately grave reason’ exists to do otherwise, but regardless of that vague caveat).
 
As another aside, some of the responders are confusing in how they seem to want to clarify the admittedly vague clause, ‘open to children’ to the more solid ‘each marital act ordered towards procreation’(which I absolutely agree with, per Church teaching, natural law etc) and yet, at the same time, seem to want me to explore being intimate with my wife WHILE using contraception.
 
I think each way of conveying the teaching can be misleading.

A) Open to life
B) Each marital act must be ordered towards procreation.

(A) can lead to a diminished sense (such as producing a child is all that is necessary), while (B) could lead to the opposite end of the spectrum (such as each act of sex must be attempting to conceive).
 
Thats true, both phrases need further explanation, you’re right the second one makes it sound like we’re only intimate when EXPLICITLY trying to conceive, as opposed to merely being open and welcoming of the possibility. True Ammi
 
Basic English “ordered to” and “attempting to” are very different words.
 
Avoiding fertile periods is not strictly being ordered towards procreation. Quite the contrary. Yet, it is still remaining open to that order of process.
 
We can continue to demand for the absolute perfect exegesis of what the text states in full, but I have better explained it to my wife(in many more words) since the original post and things have progressed in a good direction.

In the words of Susan from the Parish Council: “Much Bless and aMem”
 
Yes, the marital act does not change regardless of the fertility of the wife. The order remains the same if she is fertile or not.
 
Yes, the biological order, but not necessarily the intentional order by the couple. So “ordered” can be understood as a verb.

You understand specifically and accurately, because you have learned from more than just the two phrases. That’s the point.
 
Last edited:
Ammi said:
not necessarily the intentional order by the couple
Click to expand...
There is no requirement for the couple to “intend to conceive” during every act.

We are permitted to refrain from marital relations when fertile with the intention to avoid conception.
 
I enjoy splitting hairs as well, my aunt was a hairdresser and barber, jk jk I think we’re all on the same page now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top