Condoms and consumation

  • Thread starter Thread starter FiveLinden
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FiveLinden

Guest
Hypothetical situation for discussion: a couple, free to do so, marry following all appropriate canons. They each intend their marriage to be open to life and hope to have children. However after the ceremony they discuss things and decide to have sex for the time being using condoms. After a time but before having sex without condoms the couple decide they would like to separate. The see advice on an annulment. Their advice is that their marriage is valid. But, they say, intercourse using a condom is not actually intercourse. The act is not completed in the woman’s body. Therefore the marriage has not been consummated, and therefore can be declared null. (I think that’s the word in the case of non-consumption rather than annulment).
 
I don’t think there’s a definitive position on this scenario at this time.
 
Sexual intercourse with a condom is still sexual intercourse. The fact they practiced contraception does not change the fact they had sex.

Also, not an expert but voluntary failure to consummate does not sound to me like grounds for annulment.
 
Zaccheus said:
Sexual intercourse with a condom is still sexual intercourse.
Click to expand...
Because it is not suitable for procreation, it would appear the church views it as not able to consummate. Or you read the canon law to be saying something else?
 
Last edited:
Consummation does not require fertility. It requires only a successful act of sexual intercourse.

Do you regard a woman using the birth-control pill as not able to have sex/consummate the marriage?
 
Consult with competent authority. Speculative questions lead to speculative answers, at best.
 
When they were using condoms, when/if the condom malfunctioned, would they have aborted the child or lovingly accepted that child?
 
It appears that, according to the Canon, the Marriage is still valid, just not consummated, IF such a sex act is not considered natural. For the sake of argument, let’s assume the sex act which took place does not meet the requirement for consummation. The Marriage is still considered “ratum tantum”, or "only valid [but not consummated]. It’s still a valid Marriage, so long as no impediments to Marriage existed at the time of the wedding.
Short answer: take it to the Church where qualified persons will evaluate the situation and make a declaration of either nullity or validity.
 
Last edited:
Zaccheus said:
Consummation does not require fertility. It requires only a successful act of sexual intercourse.
Click to expand...
Are you taking any note of the Canon law, or simply considering the ordinary language use of the word?

Is sex with a condom even a “one flesh” union?
Zaccheus said:
Do you regard a woman using the birth-control pill as not able to have sex/consummate the marriage?
Click to expand...
Plainly she can have sex. As to whether she “consummated” the marriage (as the church uses the term) - I am not sure, as the act of intercourse itself was a one flesh union and suitable for procreation though the pill stands in the way of procreation.
 
Last edited:
The answer to that question would relate the intention of the Parties in regard to the “good of children” and would concern a possible declaration of nullity based on “simulation” of marital consent.

The question in the OP relates to possible “dissolution” of a non-consummated marriage. I don’t have citations at hand but the Holy See operates with the understanding that a marital act that is actually, physically impeded by a condom does not result in consummation.

Dan
 
acanonlawyer said:
I don’t have citations at hand but the Holy See operates with the understanding that a marital act that is actually, physically impeded by a condom does not result in consummation.
Click to expand...
That seems to what the wording in the Canon law demands.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top