FMEO: physical disability and sexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter Offdoodykcrn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ExCatholicGuy said:
Can someone explain why one is a bar to marriage and the other is not? Both are physiological conditions which prevent the conception of children through sexual intercourse.
Click to expand...
It isn’t about not being able to conceive children and infertility is not the an empediment. A couple must be able to consummate their vows.

It’s easy to forget that the marital act is called that for a reason. Sex is supposed to be a right exclusive to marriage.
 
Bruised_Reed said:
It isn’t about not being able to conceive children and infertility is not the an empediment. A couple must be able to consummate their vows.

It’s easy to forget that the marital act is called that for a reason. Sex is supposed to be a right exclusive to marriage.
Click to expand...
So, in theory, a piece of surgically implanted plastic could be the factor which makes a man capable of being joined with a woman in the eyes of God?
 
Thanks, St. Francis - I appreciate your straightforward answer. Honestly, though, (FWIW) this is the sort of doctrine which led to my losing belief in the Catholic Church as the repository of truth.
 
ExCatholicGuy said:
Thanks, St. Francis - I appreciate your straightforward answer. Honestly, though, (FWIW) this is the sort of doctrine which led to my losing belief in the Catholic Church as the repository of truth.
Click to expand...
Do not all sacraments have conditions that must be met? Why is this condition unreasonable to you?
 
The church gives god the chance to work a miracle in cases of the barren (and therefore barren-ness is not an impediment to marriage), but doesn’t afford him that same opportunity in cases of the impotent?
 
fix said:
Do not all sacraments have conditions that must be met? Why is this condition unreasonable to you?
Click to expand...
Because (1) it’s the only sacramental condition which depends on a specific physical disability, and (2) because that disability is - as a previous poster noted - very often treatable by modern medicine, it lacks the timeless consistency of the other conditions; i.e. a man may be eligible for marriage today who just a few decades ago would not have been.
 
Rico_S said:
The church gives god the chance to work a miracle in cases of the barren (and therefore barren-ness is not an impediment to marriage), but doesn’t afford him that same opportunity in cases of the impotent?
Click to expand...
I was going to raise exactly the same point. It seems that the Church has decided which physiological conditions God is capable of overcoming.

I suspect God might have other ideas on that!
 
ExCatholicGuy said:
Thanks, St. Francis - I appreciate your straightforward answer. Honestly, though, (FWIW) this is the sort of doctrine which led to my losing belief in the Catholic Church as the repository of truth.
Click to expand...
Before I returned to the Church, I did not understand a lot of Church teachings. Even after I returned, I still had problems accepting certain things. For me, aside from prayer and willingness to accept Church teaching, it was a matter of understanding that God has a *completely *different point of view, one which I could grasp if I worked at it. At first, it was just quick glimpses, but gradually I came to understand it more and more.

Possibly an experience I had many years before I returned helped. I was just beginning to pray, and I had to go to a meeting with a seriously obnoxious man, which I complained about to my friend who was the one encouraging me to pray. She said pray for him. I was rolling my eyes about this, and all I could pray was, God, I’m only doing this because my friend said to… not a great prayer, but shortly afterwards, it was like my mind flipped over. Instead of seeing how mean and annoying this man was, I saw that he was in pain over various things in his life, one of which I had known about, so really, my mind needed flipping.

So it does all make sense and come together, but only from a different point of view altogether.
 
ExCatholicGuy said:
Because (1) it’s the only sacramental condition which depends on a specific physical disability, and (2) because that disability is - as a previous poster noted - very often treatable by modern medicine, it lacks the timeless consistency of the other conditions; i.e. a man may be eligible for marriage today who just a few decades ago would not have been.
Click to expand...
temporary or curable impotency is not an impediment to marriage, it is only permanent impotency which is an impediment.
 
That doesn’t address my point.

Above you allowed for God to intervene even in the barren…so that a child might be brought forth. Do you not allow for God to intervene and make the act possible so that a child might be brought forth as well?
 
I wanted to go back to where your point started. You say if the possibilty of procreation is not present, then no marriage. That is why impotence is a impediment to marriage. Does sterility not also make impossible procreation?

You counter with
Sterility is qualitatively different from impotence. There are often levels of sterility (lack of motility, low count) that do not render impregnation “impossible”, but merely less likely. Even if one party is literally “baren”, historically we have seen pregnancy is still not an impossibility with God (hence my reference to Abraham). However, if impotence is the problem, God does not have the opportunity to intervene in a “marital act”.
Click to expand...
So you are saying that being barren can still lead to children b/c God can intervene, but if you can’t have sex, there is no way to intervene on the act.

To which I ask, why cannot God intervene with the impotence to make the act possible?
 
Rico_S said:
I wanted to go back to where your point started. You say if the possibilty of procreation is not present, then no marriage. That is why impotence is a impediment to marriage. Does sterility not also make impossible procreation?

You counter with

So you are saying that being barren can still lead to children b/c God can intervene, but if you can’t have sex, there is no way to intervene on the act.

To which I ask, why cannot God intervene with the impotence to make the act possible?
Click to expand...
If God intervenes, then the person can marry.
 
Rico_S said:
So you are saying that being barren can still lead to children b/c God can intervene, but if you can’t have sex, there is no way to intervene on the act.

To which I ask, why cannot God intervene with the impotence to make the act possible?
Click to expand...
If a person is barren, they are still capable of doing the marital act, which leaves the door open to God to intervene, because semen is still being ejaculated into the woman.

If there is impotence, it is impossible for that to happen, because God can make no intervention in the woman’s womb if there is no semen there.
 
dshix said:
If a person is barren, they are still capable of doing the marital act, which leaves the door open to God to intervene, because semen is still being ejaculated into the woman.

If there is impotence, it is impossible for that to happen, because God can make no intervention in the woman’s womb if there is no semen there.
Click to expand...
Why can’t He? I believe there is historical precendent 😉
 
ExCatholicGuy said:
Why can’t He? I believe there is historical precendent 😉
Click to expand...
God does not force things; He has given us free will and He respects that. When two persons engage in the marital act, they are basically saying “yes” to God for a child. If there is impotence, and they engage in acts other than the marital act, there is no context in which they are saying “yes” and therefore no child will be miraculously produced.

God created biology; he follows his own rules.
 
Rico_S said:
The church gives god the chance to work a miracle in cases of the barren (and therefore barren-ness is not an impediment to marriage), but doesn’t afford him that same opportunity in cases of the impotent?
Click to expand...
same sex couples are impotent so you figure God will work a miracle with them too??
really the teaching of impotenetece was not consdering those rendered impotent, mainly cause those in such a state didn’t exist until of late.

And as been metioned the Church does take modern medice in consideration for m/f couples only.

To remove this from the teaching deposit (impotence) would wound the Church’s teaching abilty against same sex marriage.
 
Offdoodykcrn said:
I am still grieving the loss of my husband and I am desperately trying to find my way back into the world without him by my side. The love we shared still lives, it gives me the strength I need to get on with my life.

I would still like to find out what other disabled people and/or their spouses think of this issue.

Peace and prosperity to all. :gopray:
Click to expand...
I am very sorry for your loss, and am glad that the memory of his love helps you keep going.

To answer your original question, my husband and I live as brother and sister. He was injured before our marriage, but when we married I wasn’t Catholic and he was lapsed. So we got married, and adopted two kids.
For awhile we practiced “disabled sex” I guess you’d call it, but then I became a Catholic.
When I finally came to realize that sex without consummation wasn’t okay, I told my husband. He wasn’t happy with it, but we get along okay with kisses, hugs, etc.
I have considered divorce for other reasons, because the road has been rocky at times, but don’t want to deprive my children of a decent father, even if he’s not perfect. I guess I could get a divorce and try finding a perfect husband, but think the odds are slim.
So maybe it is rigid and harsh to not allow us to practice whatever we like, but its the cross that God has given us – mostly me, because like your husband, mine is insensate. Life is so short, and heaven so precious, that if I’m stupid for following the church’s rules, I’ll be stupid for Christ’s sake.
A marriage is valid unless someone challenges it, so while our marriage is not technically valid, I doubt anybody’s going to jump up and challenge it. And I believe God isn’t bound by rules – I believe it’s His will that we ended up married, and have our children.
 
dshix said:
God does not force things; He has given us free will and He respects that. When two persons engage in the marital act, they are basically saying “yes” to God for a child. If there is impotence, and they engage in acts other than the marital act, there is no context in which they are saying “yes” and therefore no child will be miraculously produced.

God created biology; he follows his own rules.
Click to expand...
When I read that I thought of this video where Fr. Barron describes a miracle as an intensification of the natural order rather the the destruction of it.

youtube.com/watch?v=NlzOBoOKSTw
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top