"Marriage Debt" Owed Toward God?

[Geremia]

Is it possible for a husband and wife within child-bearing years who have no desire for marriage relations to still, nevertheless, owe a "marriage debt" to God? God's first commandment, after all, was to be fruitful and multiply.

[Jayne]

As I understand it, the marriage debt is something that a husband and wife owe to each other.  I do not see how it makes sense to think of it as pertaining to God.

[Geremia]

As I understand it, the marriage debt is something that a husband and wife owe to each other.

Yes, it would be an extended usage of "marriage debt."

I do not see how it makes sense to think of it as pertaining to God.

Because He commanded to be fruitful and multiply.

[Jayne]

As I understand it, the marriage debt is something that a husband and wife owe to each other.

Yes, it would be an extended usage of "marriage debt."

I do not see how it makes sense to think of it as pertaining to God.

Because He commanded to be fruitful and multiply.

But is there any indication that anyone has ever used the term "marriage debt" with that meaning?  Making up non-traditional ways to use terms often just leads to confusion.  I do not see why anyone would want to extend the meaning to something different from what it has been for centuries.

There are many things that God has commanded concerning marriage, e.g. "be fruitful and multiply" "thou shalt not commit adultery"  "what God has brought together, let no man put asunder".  What would be the point of referring to God's commands about marriage as a "marriage debt"? 

[james03]

Is it possible for a husband and wife within child-bearing years who have no desire for marriage relations to still, nevertheless, owe a "marriage debt" to God?

Your terminology is off, but yes, married couples should have children.  So the first question is do they already have children?  If so, then no, nothing requires them to have more children.  It is up to them.

If they don't have children, then yes, they should be open to that.  If there are serious matters making this unwise, they should consult with a priest on the matter.

Basically it is wrong to get married with an intention of never having children.

[Chestertonian]

God commands humanity to be fruitful and multiply, yet he makes Sarah (and many other couples) infertile. 

I also think it seems cruel to require people to have sex they don't want. 

[Maximilian]

But is there any indication that anyone has ever used the term "marriage debt" with that meaning? 

Yes, there is. Here is Pope Pius XII's "Allocution to Midwives":

"The reason is that marriage obliges the partners to a state of life, which even as it confers certain rights so it also imposes the accomplishment of a positive work concerning the state itself. In such a case, the general principle may be applied that a positive action may be omitted if grave motives, independent of the good will of those who are obliged to perform it, show that its performance is inopportune, or prove that it may not be claimed with equal right by the petitioner—in this case, mankind.

The matrimonial contract, which confers on the married couple the right to satisfy the inclination of nature, constitutes them in a state of life, namely, the matrimonial state. Now, on married couples, who make use of the specific act of their state, nature and the Creator impose the function of providing for the preservation of mankind. This is the characteristic service which gives rise to the peculiar value of their state, the bonum prolis. The individual and society, the people and the State, the Church itself, depend for their existence, in the order established by God, on fruitful marriages. Therefore, to embrace the matrimonial state, to use continually the faculty proper to such a state and lawful only therein, and, at the same time, to avoid its primary duty without a grave reason, would be a sin against the very nature of married life."

This doesn't necessarily answer the original question. And you can see that this requirement is imposed only on couples who make use of the marital right. However, he does use several words and phrases which describe mandatory obligations.

[Jayne]

But is there any indication that anyone has ever used the term "marriage debt" with that meaning? 

Yes, there is. Here is Pope Pius XII's "Allocution to Midwives":

"The reason is that marriage obliges the partners to a state of life, which even as it confers certain rights so it also imposes the accomplishment of a positive work concerning the state itself. In such a case, the general principle may be applied that a positive action may be omitted if grave motives, independent of the good will of those who are obliged to perform it, show that its performance is inopportune, or prove that it may not be claimed with equal right by the petitioner—in this case, mankind.

The matrimonial contract, which confers on the married couple the right to satisfy the inclination of nature, constitutes them in a state of life, namely, the matrimonial state. Now, on married couples, who make use of the specific act of their state, nature and the Creator impose the function of providing for the preservation of mankind. This is the characteristic service which gives rise to the peculiar value of their state, the bonum prolis. The individual and society, the people and the State, the Church itself, depend for their existence, in the order established by God, on fruitful marriages. Therefore, to embrace the matrimonial state, to use continually the faculty proper to such a state and lawful only therein, and, at the same time, to avoid its primary duty without a grave reason, would be a sin against the very nature of married life."

This doesn't necessarily answer the original question. And you can see that this requirement is imposed only on couples who make use of the marital right. However, he does use several words and phrases which describe mandatory obligations.

This is a great passage for explaining why artificial birth control is wrong, but I do not see it using the expression "marriage debt" with the extended meaning that Geremia is talking about. 

[Bonaventure]

Why would a man and woman who didn't want to have sex ever marry? Possible 500 years ago during arranged marriages, not today.

Anyone who's not marrying his best friend whom he happens to be sexually attracted to is a fool.

[Jayne]

Why would a man and woman who didn't want to have sex ever marry? Possible 500 years ago during arranged marriages, not today.

Anyone who's not marrying his best friend whom he happens to be sexually attracted to is a fool.

I have heard of situations in which people have sexual attraction at the time of the marriage but lose it later.  This is a known side effect of various medications and also a symptom of some medical conditions.  If both spouses lost desire for sex, they might agree to abstain.  I am not aware of any teaching that says that people in this situation would be obliged to force themselves to the marriage act.

[Chestertonian]

Why would a man and woman who didn't want to have sex ever marry? Possible 500 years ago during arranged marriages, not today.

Anyone who's not marrying his best friend whom he happens to be sexually attracted to is a fool.

There's a difference between being attracted to someone and wanting sex.

Normally when you have a debt, and you have the money to pay for it, you pay for it.  But sometimes if you're too broke to pay your bills you have to declare bankruptcy, you have nothing left to pay.

A lot can happen in a marriage that decreases someone's libido... medications, hormonal shifts, depression, stress at work.  For some people, sex is painful.  Life isn't always a bowl of cherries.

[Chestertonian]

Also, if for some reason, the marital debt is something married couples owe to God instead of (or in addition to) each other, how often are people supposed to renew this debt?  God has never really specified a "debt payment plan" i.e. a suggestion for how often couples have to engage in the conjugal act.  "Be fruitful and multiply" does not equal "Go at it like rabbits even if the thought of it makes you want to puke" or something

[drummerboy]

Why would a man and woman who didn't want to have sex ever marry? Possible 500 years ago during arranged marriages, not today.

Anyone who's not marrying his best friend whom he happens to be sexually attracted to is a fool.

[Penelope]

There is such thing as a Josephite marriage, which is a legitimate and acceptable marriage in the eyes of the Church. Couples who have previously not been abstinent in their marriages may also mutually agree to be abstinent from X point forward, whether as a form of penance or to concentrate on prayer and the spiritual life, with the understanding that if one party wants to revoke the agreement, it must be revoked.

Even if a couple does not have children, I don't believe that they are required to continue having marital relations in the hopes that they may conceive, particularly if they are no longer interested in marital relations. If the couple mutually agrees to cease having relations, I believe that this is allowed. It's not really recommended, but it is allowed under the proper spiritual guidance of a priest. Fr. Ripperger mentioned it in a lecture that I listened to a while back.

[Bonaventure]

Why would a man and woman who didn't want to have sex ever marry? Possible 500 years ago during arranged marriages, not today.

Anyone who's not marrying his best friend whom he happens to be sexually attracted to is a fool.

There's a difference between being attracted to someone and wanting sex.

Normally when you have a debt, and you have the money to pay for it, you pay for it.  But sometimes if you're too broke to pay your bills you have to declare bankruptcy, you have nothing left to pay.

A lot can happen in a marriage that decreases someone's libido... medications, hormonal shifts, depression, stress at work.  For some people, sex is painful.  Life isn't always a bowl of cherries.

I'm not talking about not being in the mood, pain, illness, etc. I am talking about, from the get go, an outright refusal to have sex for lack of attraction, but doing it anyway to "please God." That was certainly common in times past, but I think it's imprudent today.