Rape your wife?

You cannot physically force your wife to sɛҳuąƖ intercourse. Refusing might be sinful on her part (if there is no grave reason), but this cannot excuse violence, physical or psychological.

Speaking for my own country, there was actually no law against marital rape till the 60s or 70s.

Let's put this in perspective here: we're talking about situations where a man can spend years in prison for taking what his wife promised to give him for the rest of her life.  Can a jury (juries really should be comprised of men) really believe in the vast majority of cases that some horrible outrage has been committed that justifies a long term incarceration?

While it seems like I might agree with this, I wonder what moral theologians of the past taught on the matter?

In a quick search, I could not find anything in this matter.

It is clear that the notion of the marital debt/right to each other is completely lost. And this is also a big problem with current laws.

There is no doubt that ordinarily, the spouse has to consent to marital intercourse, otherwise it would be gravely sinful.
In the same time, there can be not much doubt, even though one has a right in justice, that demanding it, especially with force, could easily destroy the mutual love and peace of a marriage.

From the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, chapter seven:

5 Defraud not one another, except, perhaps, by consent, for a time, that you may give yourselves to prayer; and return together again, lest Satan tempt you for your incontinency. 6 But I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment. 7 For I would that all men were even as myself: but every one hath his proper gift from God; one after this manner, and another after that.

It is clear from Holy Scripture that men and women are not to willfully abstain from marital relations for ANY reason, unless it be for an AGREED-UPON time period AND an AGREED-UPON purpose, which is prayer (or some other beneficial spiritual exercise). Even in those cases, the Apostle says PERHAPS that would be a good idea, but that ultimately, the charge to serve one another connubially is more important than the charge to 'be spiritual' IF the couple is going to continue marital relations at all. The Apostle is concerned that Satan will get a foothold in the couple's life together by tempting their flesh if they are not both willing to uphold their commitment to each other without hesitation.

St. Paul goes on to say that he is merely INDULGING some people's insistence upon these times of enforced celibacy because he knows they are trying to live both as people of the world and as spiritual saints of God. He refers to people's continence, in terms of its own merit, as a 'proper gift from God', some which are stronger, and some which are weaker.

He then explains in the later verses the ONLY good reason to abstain from relations, and that is to give them up totally, because they are ultimately USELESS to us in the pursuit of sanctity. St. Paul says that those who have marriage commitments are always wrapped up in how they can please their spouse (from the context, we are still talking about connubial pleasure, not the pleasure of keeping a home or working a job for money and support of a lifestyle). He insists, and rightly so, that the best way for those who have entered into marriage to live is as though they did NOT have that responsibility; in other words, for both spouses to leave off those relations altogether.

In short, if one is going to have marital relations at all, then one should have them freely and NOT contrive reasons not to, whatsoever. That means there is no excuse for either spouse to be reluctant in their duties in that regard.

If, however, both spouses are committed to sanctity and are BOTH willing to give up relations in order that their whole bodies and total affections might please God, then they are strongly encouraged by St. Paul to abandon those relations and thus not only free them to pursue greater depths of devotion but also to obliterate any opportunity that the Devil would have to destroy their lives of grace by means of temptations. Temptation of a weak spouse who feels 'cheated' out of conjugal benefits is one of the most common and most devastating occasions of sin, and the Apostle here is giving wonderful advice to those who would avoid it.

St. Paul, Apostle and martyr, pray for us.

St. Gemma Galgani, holy virgin, pray for us.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

The topic heading of this thread is completely embarassing and gives fodder to the secularists to use in declaring Trads are misogynist lunatics.

How the He** can there be "rape in a Catholic sense"? This is absurd.

I suggest that Matthew change the thread title.

No one condones men who ravage their wives, but it must be admitted that the marital rape *law* forms a wedge for the gynaecocracy to use against the family, by weaponizing the marriage debt for women's benefit.

If we are speaking of marriages in the Catholic sense I don't see how it's possible for a husband to rape his wife.