Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

Discussion related to living as a Catholic in the single state of life. As long as a topic is being discussed from the perspective of a single Catholic then it will be on-topic.

Tobias and Sarah's story is from the Book of Tobit, and his journey is guided by Saint Raphael.
Learn More: Tobias & Sarah as led by Saint Raphael

Apr 17th 2013 new

(Quote) Lauren-927923 said: Paul also suggests the acceptability of mutual consent for periods of abstinence for prayer and ...
(Quote) Lauren-927923 said:

Paul also suggests the acceptability of mutual consent for periods of abstinence for prayer and then coming together again -- these passages don't address procreation they address sexual desire and its proper place within marriage -- the unitive function of marriage.

I think it is important to remember not to decouple the procreative from the unitive and I think it is possible to sin against one or both in how we approach conjugal relations within marriage.

--hide--


It's a bit of an old forum post from another site but I think this might help answer Patrick's question as well forums.catholic.com

It basically says something similar to what Lauren brought up in that it's considered acceptable to practice a period of abstinence within marriage from what I can gather, though it doesn't seem to be encouraged to do so for long periods of time. What most of the posters on the website generally said was that the NFP method is extremely reliable when used correctly, and that people shouldn't be too concerned about the chances of conceiving a child with it's usage, as the probability is considered minimal. I can't quote numbers, but have heard great results of it from sources close to me, and it's often compared to being as effective as contraceptives.

I can't speak from experience but get the impression that when a couple gets married, and has sex using this method, they are using sex for it's intended purpose as an ultimate show of love for a spouse, and lust is something considered to be something that is involved with couples who aren't married. Is lust possible between a married couple? That's something I'm not sure of and am curious, but imagine most acts committed between a married couple would be out of love.

I think the main take away point from this is that a married couple as long as they have the intention of having some children during marriage, having sex with your spouse isn't really considered a sinful act when used in conjunction with the NFP method.

Apr 17th 2013 new

I remember a man on Relevant Radio (Catholic Radio) say, "I had 7 kids. I got 7 raises." In otherwords, just because you think you will not be able to afford another kid does not mean God will not bless you with the means and money necessary to take care of and provide for that child.


Jesus tells his disciples "Do not worry about tomorrow..."


Another point that was made on Relevant Radio by a guest speaker was that back in the old days when contraception and Natural Family Planning was not known, women died in childbirth. So essentially, back in the old days, the woman was taking a risk when she performed the unitive marital act with a man. She was risking her own life! The guest speaker said that a question that we should ask ourselves before performing the act is, "Would I be willing to give my life for this person?"

Apr 17th 2013 new
(Quote) Emmanuel-940296 said: Is lust possible between a married couple?
(Quote) Emmanuel-940296 said: Is lust possible between a married couple?

--hide--
Yes lust is very possible between a married couple. Lust is when you use sex for your own pleasure instead of the mutual pleasure of the couple (regardless of timing and probability of children). So if a husband (or wife) is looking for sex even though the other has said "not tonight honey I have a headache" it's lust. In a General Audience JPII spoke about the dangers this can have on a marriage. While his comments were not well received at the time, it is very possible in marriage, and the spouses need to be vigilant to protect against it.
Apr 17th 2013 new

(Quote) Lauren-927923 said: Hi Patrick, I know you weren't the one who said they were secondary and primary, I ...
(Quote) Lauren-927923 said:

Hi Patrick, I know you weren't the one who said they were secondary and primary, I was just trying to keep the train of thought consistent as I wrote. I also thought it might be good to point out that the Catechism says "just reasons" instead of "grave reasons".

I think in direct answer to your question that yes it is possible that the unitive function of marriage is being neglected if complete abstinence is being practiced, especially if this includes such intimacies as touching, being physically close to another person and I am speaking of non-sexual but loving touches or engagements. Having said that, there are cases of vows to maintain virginity that have been carried over into marriage: Of course the marriage of Mary and Joseph, Old Testament precedence for the possibility -- Numbers Chapter 30 addresses these, additionally, a number of Saints either maintained a virgin state upon entering marriage or moved to a state of permanent abstinence after some point in their marriage, often as the stories go, attending to God's work instead often together as a couple. While these are noble actions, I think most of us are probably more likely to be as Paul describes in 1 Corinthians Chapter 7. This is an interesting chapter, in this we see Paul say in verse five:

5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

(Paul appears to have an aversion to sexual expression not unlike some of St. Augustine's statements, but for different reasons I think.) Paul also notes that there are different gifts, implying that for him celibacy is a gift, for others sexual desire and marriage is a gift.

He likewise states in verse six that this is not a command but a concession. What's interesting here and in most of Paul's writing on the subject is the total surrender of one spouse to the other, the duty of one spouse to the other and vice versa -- which we see reflected in other Church teaching on the matter. Paul also suggests the acceptability of mutual consent for periods of abstinence for prayer and then coming together again -- these passages don't address procreation they address sexual desire and its proper place within marriage -- the unitive function of marriage.

I think it is important to remember not to decouple the procreative from the unitive and I think it is possible to sin against one or both in how we approach conjugal relations within marriage.

--hide--



If a couple were to practice complete virgnity in a marriage, I would have hard time believing the marriage was valid. The example of Mary would be one valid exception given the extraordinary circumstances. I am sure there would be some possible extraordinary circumstances that could apply today, but if a couple got married but never expected to consumate the marriage, that would seem like grounds for annulment.

My example would be mostly limited to extraordinary circumstances that could happens months or years within a marriage. Like if the wife got cancer or something - getting pregnant would likely be something that should be avoided. Should then just NFP be practiced or would complete abstinence be ok? If it were me, I wouldn't want to "risk it" with NFP. I would hope that wouldn't be a violation of the "unitive" element of a marriage and I would hope a priest would agree with me. It would seem to be hard to avoid non-sexual touching since she would still be my wife in such a circumstance.

The term "responsible parenthood" sounds like something you would hear from Planned Parenthood or something, so it makes me a bit uncomfortable. Every married couple shouldn't be expected to have mega families - but too many now settle for the typical 1 or 2 and quit trying. That I have issues with.....

Apr 17th 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-341178 said: The term "responsible parenthood" sounds like something you would hear from Planned P...
(Quote) Patrick-341178 said:

The term "responsible parenthood" sounds like something you would hear from Planned Parenthood or something, so it makes me a bit uncomfortable. Every married couple shouldn't be expected to have mega families - but too many now settle for the typical 1 or 2 and quit trying. That I have issues with.....

--hide--


The term should not make you uncomofortable as it is a direct qoute from Pope Paul VI's encylical 'Humanae Vitae'. There a NUMEROUS direct qoutes, but I draw your attention to Humanae Vitae 10 "Married love, therefore, requires of husband and wife the full awareness of their obligations in the matter of responsible parenthood, which today, rightly enough, is much insisted upon, but which at the same time should be rightly understood. Thus, we do well to consider responsible parenthood in the light of its varied legitimate and interrelated aspects."


As Pope Paul VI says responsible parenthood is a responsability of the married couple.

Apr 17th 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-341178 said: If a couple were to practice complete virgnity in a marriage, I would have hard time believing ...
(Quote) Patrick-341178 said:

If a couple were to practice complete virgnity in a marriage, I would have hard time believing the marriage was valid. The example of Mary would be one valid exception given the extraordinary circumstances.

--hide--


1) Yes complete virginity within marriage would be contrary to the promise the couples make at the alter to accept lovingly the children that God may give them. If they are not open to children, they can not answer that question (validly) with a Yes, and thus can not be married.


2) A good way to try and explain Mary's virginity is the marital act is meant to image the love of the trinity, and allows couples to participate in God's plan for new life. In the case of Mary & Joseph having sex would be paradoxical almost because Mary doesn't need to image the love of the trinity, she bore the Son of God within her womb, and thus through their virgial marriage still actively participated in God's plan for new life.

Apr 17th 2013 new

I do not believe anywhere has the church laid out what and to what extent constitutes a JUST reason (the correct term) to avoid pregnancy.

I find this post a bit presumptious. While based on truth-- yes, one does need a just reason. I find a bit arrogant to actually come up and lay out opinion as facts of church teaching.

The reasons are not for us to judge on, but are between the couple and God, and hopefully a good spiritual director.

Also, you are incorrect that there is primary and secondary reasons for marriage. They are of equal importance.

The fact is, is that the sacrifices, communication, and self-discipline required to practice NFP make it a VERY good filter and prevention against mortal sin. Not to say that its impossible to use NFP with selfish reasons, but even then for it to be a sin meeting the conditions to be mortal would be very unlikely.

Apr 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Emmanuel-940296 said: It's a bit of an old forum post from another site but I think this might help answ...
(Quote) Emmanuel-940296 said:



It's a bit of an old forum post from another site but I think this might help answer Patrick's question as well forums.catholic.com

It basically says something similar to what Lauren brought up in that it's considered acceptable to practice a period of abstinence within marriage from what I can gather, though it doesn't seem to be encouraged to do so for long periods of time. What most of the posters on the website generally said was that the NFP method is extremely reliable when used correctly, and that people shouldn't be too concerned about the chances of conceiving a child with it's usage, as the probability is considered minimal. I can't quote numbers, but have heard great results of it from sources close to me, and it's often compared to being as effective as contraceptives.

I can't speak from experience but get the impression that when a couple gets married, and has sex using this method, they are using sex for it's intended purpose as an ultimate show of love for a spouse, and lust is something considered to be something that is involved with couples who aren't married. Is lust possible between a married couple? That's something I'm not sure of and am curious, but imagine most acts committed between a married couple would be out of love.

I think the main take away point from this is that a married couple as long as they have the intention of having some children during marriage, having sex with your spouse isn't really considered a sinful act when used in conjunction with the NFP method.

--hide--



I am aware that if NFP is used properly it can be very effective. I suppose if there was a woman with cancer willing to open herself to the possibility of another child in marriage, that would be quite the selfless act. I don't know how I would feel about that, but God willing, I will never have to face such a terrible circumstance.

It is hard to condemn anyone using NFP since it would be so much easier in this day and age to use contraception so I am fully aware of that. I know that someday I may find myself in a situation where NFP needs to be used so I am careful not to judge anyone. However, I do agree that people using NFP need to consistently be examining how "grave" their situation is so NFP isn't becoming quasi-contraception.

Apr 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Peter-793888 said: The term should not make you uncomofortable as it is a direct qoute from Pope Paul V...
(Quote) Peter-793888 said:


The term should not make you uncomofortable as it is a direct qoute from Pope Paul VI's encylical 'Humanae Vitae'. There a NUMEROUS direct qoutes, but I draw your attention to Humanae Vitae 10 "Married love, therefore, requires of husband and wife the full awareness of their obligations in the matter of responsible parenthood, which today, rightly enough, is much insisted upon, but which at the same time should be rightly understood. Thus, we do well to consider responsible parenthood in the light of its varied legitimate and interrelated aspects."


As Pope Paul VI says responsible parenthood is a responsability of the married couple.

--hide--


I am aware of that. I was just saying that was how it sounded but now I wish I hadn't written that all.

Apr 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Emmanuel-940296 said: It's a bit of an old forum post from another site but I think this might help answ...
(Quote) Emmanuel-940296 said:



It's a bit of an old forum post from another site but I think this might help answer Patrick's question as well forums.catholic.com

It basically says something similar to what Lauren brought up in that it's considered acceptable to practice a period of abstinence within marriage from what I can gather, though it doesn't seem to be encouraged to do so for long periods of time. What most of the posters on the website generally said was that the NFP method is extremely reliable when used correctly, and that people shouldn't be too concerned about the chances of conceiving a child with it's usage, as the probability is considered minimal. I can't quote numbers, but have heard great results of it from sources close to me, and it's often compared to being as effective as contraceptives.

I can't speak from experience but get the impression that when a couple gets married, and has sex using this method, they are using sex for it's intended purpose as an ultimate show of love for a spouse, and lust is something considered to be something that is involved with couples who aren't married. Is lust possible between a married couple? That's something I'm not sure of and am curious, but imagine most acts committed between a married couple would be out of love.

I think the main take away point from this is that a married couple as long as they have the intention of having some children during marriage, having sex with your spouse isn't really considered a sinful act when used in conjunction with the NFP method.

--hide--



Thanks for the link. I wonder what happened with them. Why didn't they just delay their marriage another year? Problem solved.

Posts 11 - 20 of 113