|
Objection 1: It would seem that a menstruous wife may not pay the
marriage debt to her husband at his asking. For it is written (Lev.
20:18) that if any man approach to a menstruous woman both shall
be put to death. Therefore it would seem that both he who asks and she
who grants are guilty of mortal sin.
Objection 2: Further, "Not only they that do them but they also
that consent to them are worthy of death" (Rm. 1:32). Now he
who knowingly asks for the debt from a menstruous woman sins mortally.
Therefore she also sins mortally by consenting to pay the debt.
Objection 3: Further, a madman must not be given back his sword
lest he kill himself or another. Therefore in like manner neither
should a wife give her body to her husband during her menses, lest he
be guilty of spiritual murder.
On the contrary, "The wife hath not power of her own body, but the
husband" (1 Cor. 7:4). Therefore at his asking his wife must
pay the debt even during her menses.
Further, the menstruous wife should not be an occasion of sin to her
husband. But she would give her husband an occasion of sin, if she
paid him not the debt at his asking; since he might commit
fornication. Therefore, etc.
I answer that, In this regard some have asserted that a menstruous
woman may not pay the debt even as she may not ask for it. For just as
she would not be bound to pay it if she had some personal ailment so as
to make it dangerous for herself, so is she not bound to pay for fear
of danger to the offspring. But this opinion would seem to derogate
from marriage, by which the husband is given entire power of his
wife's body with regard to the marriage act. Nor is there any
parallel between bodily affliction of the offspring and the danger to
her own body: since, if the wife be ailing, it is quite certain that
she would be endangered by the carnal act, whereas this is by no means
so certain with regard to the offspring which perhaps would not be
forthcoming.
Wherefore others say that a menstruous woman is never allowed to ask
for the debt; and that if her husband ask, he does so either knowingly
or in ignorance. If knowingly, she ought to dissuade him by her
prayers and admonitions; yet not so insistently as possibly to afford
him an occasion of falling into other, and those sinful, practices,
if he be deemed that way inclined. If however, he ask in ignorance,
the wife may put forward some motive, or allege sickness as a reason
for not paying the debt, unless there be fear of danger to her
husband. If, however, the husband ultimately persists in his
request, she must yield to his demand. But it would not be safe for
her to make known her disaffection, lest this make her husband
entertain a repulsion towards her, unless his prudence may be taken for
granted.
Reply to Objection 1: This refers to the case when both willingly
consent, but not when the woman pays the debt by force as it were.
Reply to Objection 2: Since there is no consent without the
concurrence of the will, the woman is not deemed to consent in her
husband's sin unless she pay the debt willingly. For when she is
unwilling she is passive rather than consenting.
Reply to Objection 3: A madman should be given back his sword if a
greater danger were feared from its not being returned to him: and thus
it is in the case in point.
|
|