Amoris Laetitia 154: Imposing One’s Will Through Sex

amoris laetitia memeRape is out, according to Humanae Vitae, among other sources:

154. We also know that, within marriage itself, sex can become a source of suffering and manipulation. Hence it must be clearly reaffirmed that “a conjugal act imposed on one’s spouse without regard to his or her condition, or personal and reasonable wishes in the matter, is no true act of love, and therefore offends the moral order in its particular application to the intimate relationship of husband and wife”.(Humanae Vitae 13)

A humanist perspective:

The acts proper to the sexual union of husband and wife correspond to the nature of sexuality as
willed by God when they take place in “a manner which is truly human”.(Gaudium et Spes 49)

And biblical:

Saint Paul insists: “Let no one transgress and wrong his brother or sister in this matter” (1 Th 4:6). Even though Paul was writing in the context of a patriarchal culture in which women were considered completely subordinate to men, he nonetheless taught that sex must involve communication between the spouses: he brings up the possibility of postponing sexual relations for a period, but “by agreement” (1 Cor 7:5).

Remember that Amoris Laetitia is online here.


About catholicsensibility

Todd lives in the Pacific Northwest, serving a Catholic parish as a lay minister.
This entry was posted in Amoris Laetitia. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Amoris Laetitia 154: Imposing One’s Will Through Sex

  1. Liam says:

    We forget the legacy of the “marriage debt” in civil law: that marriage was “consent” so that there could be no criminal marital rape, something that has only been undone in American law since the 1970s. In my strolls through the religious-side of the alt-Right, one comes across men who question that development….

    • Todd says:

      Of course some question it. For some people, they view the world as their oyster. For white privilege, the world is their playground: bullies rule.

  2. FrMichael says:

    “For white privilege, the world is their playground: bullies rule.” I’m not sure what your “white privilege” kick you are currently on has to do with this particular subject.

  3. FrMichael says:

    My implied question wasn’t about defining “white privilege.” I live in Northern California, believe me, there are plenty of people walking around these parts spouting off about it. My question was why the host brought up this term in connection with AL 154. He answered it: the concept of bullying. I thank him for the answer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s