Asexuality And Marriage

[LittleWaySoul]

Technically they just have to have sex once for a valid marriage.

So... was the marriage between Mary and Joseph not valid? (Serious question).

[arfink]

So... was the marriage between Mary and Joseph not valid? (Serious question).

 

This one has always puzzled me too, although the best answer I have ever had is that their marriage was provided with fruitfulness through the activity of God through the Incarnation.

[Basilisa Marie]

Ok so if the asexual person did agree to have frequent sex, couldn't there still be unnecessary tension in the marriage? Isn't there a chance that the asexual person becomes tired of having sex and thus causes problems with their spouse? I guess this could be resolved with good communication and a good spiritual director. Also, it seems that there is the possibility that, even with sex, the non-asexual could be unsatisfied. I'd imagine that they'd be able to tell that their husband or wife wasn't as into sex as they were. Wouldn't this be unfair?

 

Although some truly asexual people exist, I'd argue that marriage would not be their usual vocation. And that if someone in a marriage wasn't enjoying sex at all, or only having sex to please his or her spouse, that there's a problem.  Ultimately it comes down to communication.  People have to speak up when they're feeling unfulfilled in the relationship.  A truly asexual person may find satisfaction in satisfying his or her spouse. But ultimately it's between the asexual person and his or her spouse. 

[PhuturePriest]

So... was the marriage between Mary and Joseph not valid? (Serious question).

 

One thing I was told is that their marriage was a Jewish marriage, not a Catholic one, so the rules that apply to us did not apply to them.

[Basilisa Marie]

Regarding Mary and Joseph:

 

1) We can't really retroactively apply rules.  There was a time in the Church where all you needed in some places was public consent, others private consent and consummation, etc.  This lead to a lot of obvious problems, so they changed it to consent in the presence of clergy and then private consummation. 

 

2) Technically, you just need the ability to consummate, and exchange the right to consummate with each other. http://jimmyakin.com/2005/07/marys_marriage.html

 

 

[CatherineM]

You guys are forgetting that in every marriage there will be a difference in the level of sexual desire between the spouses. Sometimes it depends on hormone levels, fatigue, and child care issues. Later in life, it can be medical. People with low sex drives are still capable of loving deeply, otherwise they aren't asexual, they're sociopathic.

[cappie]

    Canon 1060 Marriage enjoys the favour of law. Consequently, in doubt the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven. Emphasis mine.

 

 

    Canon 1061.1 A valid marriage between baptised persons is said to be merely ratified,  if it is not consummated; ratified and consummated, if the spouses have in a human manner engaged together in a conjugal act in itself apt for the generation of offspring. To this act marriage is by its nature ordered and by it the spouses become one flesh.

 

    Canon 1061.2 If the spouses have lived together after the celebration of their marriage, consummation is presumed until the contrary is proven. Emphasis mine.

 

This is a reasonable presumption of law and is of practical importance in cases where it is alleged not to have been consummated.  If the parties have lived together, even for a very brief period, the presumption can be displaced only by contrary proof

 

 

[southern california guy]

I've certainly heard about marriages where the wife refuses to have any sex and the husband sneaks off to the Asian massages.  But maybe that is more a case of a problem marriage rather than true asexual feelings.

[homeschoolmom]

I've certainly heard about marriages where the wife refuses to have any sex and the husband sneaks off to the Asian massages.  But maybe that is more a case of a problem marriage rather than true asexual feelings.

You are one of the weirdest posters Phatmass has ever had.

Edited June 29, 2013 by homeschoolmom

[southern california guy]

You are one of the weirdest posters Phatmass has ever had

 

Maybe not my most thought out post.  I was trying to say that I think that married people who say that they have no interest in intimacy with their spouse, aren't really not interested in intimacy, they are just angry at their spouse or "getting even" for something.

 

Having never been married I am certainly not an expert in this, but this wouldn't be the first time that I said something dumb.

Edited June 29, 2013 by southern california guy

[Poorly Catechized Convert]

Obviously this is the kind of thing you'd want to discuss before you get married to someone...

 

Of course, but some times something may sound okay until it's put into practice. At that point things could change quite a bit. My thought is that there's the possibility that while the asexual person and the non-asexual person may have talked about these things and found them doable, once they've been married for a while they find that the opposite is true. Granted it is also likely that things could work out just find and both remain satisfied.

 

 

So what happens if two  asexual Catholics ended up marrying. I know this is unlikely, but it's still relevant. How would the Church look upon such a marriage? In this case there is sex in order to have children. So the marriage is consummated and it is open to life. In such a marriage would the sex outside of trying to have children still be necessary? Since neither wants sex, would it its eventual absence be considered a problem?

 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2013 by Poorly Catechized Convert

[arfink]

Um, at this point I just wonder, why are you asking this?

 

The scenarios you are positing are contrived and/or uncommon enough as to be very unlikely.

[Anastasia13]

 

Of course, but some times something may sound okay until it's put into practice. At that point things could change quite a bit. My thought is that there's the possibility that while the asexual person and the non-asexual person may have talked about these things and found them doable, once they've been married for a while they find that the opposite is true. Granted it is also likely that things could work out just find and both remain satisfied.

 

 

So what happens if two  asexual Catholics ended up marrying. I know this is unlikely, but it's still relevant. How would the Church look upon such a marriage? In this case there is sex in order to have children. So the marriage is consummated and it is open to life. In such a marriage would the sex outside of trying to have children still be necessary? Since neither wants sex, would it its eventual absence be considered a problem?

 

 

 

Often even then, there is enough frustration beforehand if it's not going to work.

 

Usually asexual people either stayed about the same or became slightly more sexual rather than less sexual if there was a change once they finished puberty/entered a serious relationship. Sexuals in a relationship with an asexual would either become frustrated or stick it out. You will not find a strongly sexual in a lasting relationship with an asexual-they would break up before the alter.

 

It's doubtful that they would be obligated to have sex as long as they were both not interested.

[Poorly Catechized Convert]

Um, at this point I just wonder, why are you asking this?

The scenarios you are positing are contrived and/or uncommon enough as to be very unlikely.

I'm asking in part due to curiosity and also because, from what I can tell, it's likely that I'm asexual. Maybe I should have mentioned that sooner, but I prefer to keep myself out of questions like this.

[Poorly Catechized Convert]

Um, at this point I just wonder, why are you asking this?

The scenarios you are positing are contrived and/or uncommon enough as to be very unlikely.

I'm asking in part due to curiosity and also because, from what I can tell, it's likely that I'm asexual. Maybe I should have mentioned that sooner, but I prefer to keep myself out of questions like this.