Monday, May 5, 2014

Sexual Deprivation In Marital Rape

Within a presupposition that man rapes a woman (not the vice versa), we could theoretically speculate if there is an acceptable situation within a Christian marriage where a Christian husband be probably excused for raping his wife.

Marital rape (spousal rape) is criminalized in many countries, and rightfully so. Rape by definition is non-consensual, so anything non-consensual is offensive in a human relationship. Even if marital rape is not criminalized by the country concerned, we should initially concede that it is incorrect and should not be permitted – theologically and by the judiciary.

What could be the causes of marital rape? How would God view marital rape?

The broad causes could be depravity and deprivation. While depravity is totally unjustified, deprivation should be examined more closely.

In a respectable marriage, the demand of excessive or inappropriate sex by a spouse manifests the depravity of his mind. In this context, the rapist-husband is depraved, and also the primary cause of the rape, while the raped-wife is the victim. The rapist-husband is wrong while the other is not wrong (the raped wife, who is the victim).

In contrast, when sex is intentionally and vengefully deprived in a marriage, depravity manifests primarily through the spouse who primarily deprives the partner of sex. In this instance, it is possible for the deprived husband to seek sexual favors from outside the marriage. This is sin, since adultery, under any setting, is sin. Hence let us assume that the deprived husband does not stray outside the marriage.

But out of sheer desperation, if the sexually deprived husband rapes his wife, shouldn’t the deprivation of sex be seriously considered before meting out punishment to the rapist husband? The fact remains that in the event of a rape in this marriage, the primary cause for the rape is the wife who deprived her husband of sex.

The husband, who was deprived of sex, chose rape, which is the sinful route to quench his desire for sex. This is sin. But the wife who caused depravity is also equally, if not more, in sin. Therefore in this instance, one person’s depravity activates the depravity of the other.

In countries where spousal rape is criminalized, we can be sure that the rapist-husband would be punished by the law. We can also be reasonably confident that the wife who deprived her husband of sex, and thereby activated him to rape her, would probably go unpunished.

While one sinner receives punishment for his sin, the other sinner remains a victim to receive compassion from all concerned. This is unjust.

God, the just judge, does not permit injustice. God takes all sins into account. In God’s eyes both would be sinners.   

The Bible teaches sacrifice in marriage so to prevent adultery and rape. Please read these verses, “…But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command (1 Corinthians 7: 1-6, NIV, Emphasis Mine).      

Importantly, and in a nutshell, the Bible teaches that, as much as possible, the husband and the wife should not intentionally and vengefully deprive each other sexually. But the sexually deprived spouse does not have any right, whatsoever, to rape the partner. The Bible is emphatic about this as well.

Because all men and women are sinners by nature, some Christian husbands/ wives can intentionally and vengefully deprive their spouses of sexual relationship. This is possible even in a Christian marriage. How then should the deprived spouse overcome this situation without sinning against God?

Remaining in Christ is the only option. If we remain in Christ, we will bear fruit, one such fruit is the fruit of “self-control” (Galatians 5: 23; cf. 2 Peter 1: 6; Acts 24: 25). The husband, who is deprived of sex from his wife, requires ‘self-control’ to remain clean. The fruit of self-control is only possible when the individual constantly remains in Christ. Self-control keeps the marriage bed pure. 

What about the wife who intentionally and vengefully deprives her husband of sex in the marriage? Obviously, this wife is spiritually immature especially when her unholy intention and revenge of sexually depriving her husband extends over a period of days and weeks. Without proper Christian counseling, this marriage is a recipe for disaster.

Importantly, a sincere doubt could be raised as to whether a vengeful person is a Christian to begin with.

First, revenge is an act of hatred, which is the opposite of love. Second, the one who takes revenge on his/her own spouse and that for a prolonged time period exhibits a ruthless and severe poverty of love. Third, when neighborly love lacks in a Christian, his/her love for God can seriously be questioned. The same thought process can be applied to the husband who [continually] rapes his wife.

There is another tangent to this. Those subscribing to postmodern and relativistic worldviews could argue for the spousal freedom - that the individual [in a Christian marriage] should be free to decide whether or not to sexually relate with the spouse.

This thought mocks the biblical teaching found in 1 Corinthians 7. This even mocks all the teaching on sacrificial love.

The love the relativists subscribe to is ‘self-love.’ This love cares only about the self. This love does not care about others.

If the relativists advocate spousal freedom to the wife, by the same token, would they advocate spousal freedom to the husband to seek sexual favors from outside the marriage? Some hardcore relativists would say yes! When spousal freedom is granted without any boundaries the outcome would be nothing but chaos. 

Normatively, the relativists and postmoderns are consistently inconsistent. While in some instances they will recommend subjectivism, they will also innately and intentionally contradict their own relativistic worldview in other instances.

For instance, those relativists and postmoderns who argue for spousal freedom to not participate sexually in a marriage would not tolerate chaos on the road (where every man can drive the way they want and at the speed they want without regarding traffic rules). On one hand they would covet chaos in a marriage but on the other hand they would not covet chaos on the road they travel in. Such is their hypocrisy. In other words, they would subscribe to relativism in marriage but would subscribe to objectivism on roads for traffic regulation.

What about the spouse who is raped? This person should seek Christian counseling, all the while hoping and praying that the counselor would deal with the situation in a godly manner. This person too should remain in the Lord, for only the Lord can heal the pain in body and in mind.

To conclude, depravity of any form or size is sin. Deprivation of sex in a marriage is a sin. A true Christian spouse would not submit her husband to such humiliation. The husband who has been deprived of sex should primarily derive strength from the Lord to remain pure by remaining close to the Lord always. The wife raped by her Christian husband should seek Christian counseling and more importantly seek the Lord for healing and restoration.

Moreover, in case of an unrepentant continuance of the sin of marital rape or deprivation of sex, a temporary separation could be advised by the Christian counselor, after analyzing the marriage with godly wisdom.


But our overriding prayer is for every marriage to glorify God through sacrificial love and mutual respect. Amen. 

No comments: