Is it ok to get married later in life?

[Thorns]

I disagree with this. If, for example, you are living in an unstable situation and you are waiting to marry in order to make sure that any children born would not be in danger or poverty, then this is OK. But if you wait to marry to specifically avoid ever conceiving children to the point where you will only marry a postmenopausal or otherwise sterile woman, then this is not following God’s intent for marriage.

You are not supposed to enter marriage with the intent to avoid children, whether it be via the timing of the marriage or any other vehicle. They are not “open to life” at the time of the vows under this situation.

Are you saying that the couple in my example never will be open to life either? Kinda too late to change their mind at that point?

What if the couple never plans on using any form.of birth control ever. Doesnt that show that they are indeed open to life?

 

[Xantippe]

If the couple marries and is open to life when the vows are exchanged, then there is no issue. The fact that the couple married later in life to avoid having children is not a sin, simply because not having sex when one is not married is not a sin.

Very good.

The OP’s example is just an extreme example of the more everyday case where, for instance, a young couple might wait until they are out of school before marrying.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

I disagree with this. If, for example, you are living in an unstable situation and you are waiting to marry in order to make sure that any children born would not be in danger or poverty, then this is OK.

You appear to be conflating conditions for using NFP during marriage to avoid having children with those that do not wish to have children and aren’t married. They are entirely different situations. The Church does not teach that avoiding having children for those not married is sinful.

But if you wait to marry to specifically avoid ever conceiving children to the point where you will only marry a postmenopausal or otherwise sterile woman, then this is not following God’s intent for marriage.

The issue is simply whether or not the couple has a permanent intention against children when the vows are exchanged. If the couple gets married, and the woman is postmenopausal or sterile, but the couple is willing to accept a child should she miraculously become pregnant, the marriage would be presumed valid.

You are not supposed to enter marriage with the intent to avoid children, whether it be via the timing of the marriage or any other vehicle. They are not “open to life” at the time of the vows under this situation.

There is a difference between “avoiding” children and having a “permanent intention against” children. In fact, nowadays many Catholic enter marriage with the specific intent to avoid children for a time, often via contraception. Yet their marriages are presumed valid, since the intent is not permanent.

 

[thewanderer]

You appear to be conflating conditions for using NFP during marriage to avoid having children with those that do not wish to have children and aren’t married. They are entirely different situations. The Church does not teach that avoiding having children for those not married is sinful.

The issue is simply whether or not the couple has a permanent intention against children when the vows are exchanged. If the couple gets married, and the woman is postmenopausal or sterile, but the couple is willing to accept a child should she miraculously become pregnant, the marriage would be presumed valid.

There is a difference between “avoiding” children and having a “permanent intention against” children. In fact, nowadays many Catholic enter marriage with the specific intent to avoid children for a time, often via contraception. Yet their marriages are presumed valid, since the intent is not permanent.

Yup, its really simple. There is no sin in not getting married at any point in time because you don’t want to have children. Period. In fact, if you don’t want to have children and so would end up resenting them you absolutely should not get married. So the time during which the couple in question didn’t get married was not sinful. I mean, honestly, what in the world would be the sin?

Then, if they do get married later on when sterile the only thing that is important is that they are willing to accept a miraculous baby lovingly from God should such a miracle occur. If they approach the marriage with this attitude how in the world are they sinning? That is the correct attitude for marriage of a couple who are known to be sterile. There is nothing problematic about it at all, actually. The only problem would be if the couple in question are not willing to accept such a miracle lovingly.

 

[NSFrame]

My understanding is that the OP is asking if it’s OK to want to get married but to not want to have children - the answer to that is no.

It is not OK to “game the system” by intentionally marrying later in life in order to engage in a sort of permanent NFP. If it just so happens that you meet the right person at a stage in life where you are not fertile as a couple, then that is a different story. But it is not OK to circumvent the purpose of marriage so that you can have your cake and eat it too.

 

[AnnArbor]

My understanding is that the OP is asking if it’s OK to want to get married but to not want to have children - the answer to that is no.

It is not OK to “game the system” by intentionally marrying later in life in order to engage in a sort of permanent NFP. If it just so happens that you meet the right person at a stage in life where you are not fertile as a couple, then that is a different story. But it is not OK to circumvent the purpose of marriage so that you can have your cake and eat it too.

But you wouldn’t really be “having your cake and eating it too.” Because you’d have years and years of (presumably) chaste single life prior to enjoying all the benefits of marriage. Warrior Monk defined the requirements of marriage well and concisely – I don’t see what the problem would be in this scenario.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

But you wouldn’t really be “having your cake and eating it too.” Because you’d have years and years of (presumably) chaste single life prior to enjoying all the benefits of marriage. Warrior Monk defined the requirements of marriage well and concisely – I don’t see what the problem would be in this scenario.

When one gets married they are asked if they will “accept children lovingly from God” What the OP is asking is if it is ok to purposefully get out of the part of marriage ordained by God to foster procreation and family. It is the intent that matters here. The OP wants to know if it is ok to disagree about what marriage is but not enter into it until it will be barren. Yes, older people may get married. But to purposefully wait until you are barren to do so is not being open to life. And it flies in the face of the first command man has, to go forth and multiply. When one stands in front of God in judgement, do you really want to present him with a marriage based on not being what God intended? In short, this is a selfish way of trying to get around the “system” for selfish reasons. In this case, marital companionship.

Much like ABC is a cheat on the system so is this.

 

[Xantippe]

When one gets married they are asked if they will “accept children lovingly from God” What the OP is asking is if it is ok to purposefully get out of the part of marriage ordained by God to foster procreation and family. It is the intent that matters here. The OP wants to know if it is ok to disagree about what marriage is but not enter into it until it will be barren. Yes, older people may get married. But to purposefully wait until you are barren to do so is not being open to life. And it flies in the face of the first command man has, to go forth and multiply. When one stands in front of God in judgement, do you really want to present him with a marriage based on not being what God intended? In short, this is a selfish way of trying to get around the “system” for selfish reasons. In this case, marital companionship.

Much like ABC is a cheat on the system so is this.

Does the command to go forth and multiply require that we marry at a particular age? Do we have to get married and have children, even when we can’t find anybody suitable, just to fulfill that commandment?

It’s interesting, I think, that the “multiply” command does not appear elsewhere in the Bible than the dawn of humanity, although there are certainly many references elsewhere to the blessings of children. I suspect that the “multiply” commandment may have been time-limited, as there genuinely was a need for more population at the time.

As somebody said, marrying late is not having your cake and eating it, too–it’s having only half the cake.

 

[AnnArbor]

When one gets married they are asked if they will “accept children lovingly from God” What the OP is asking is if it is ok to purposefully get out of the part of marriage ordained by God to foster procreation and family. It is the intent that matters here. The OP wants to know if it is ok to disagree about what marriage is but not enter into it until it will be barren. Yes, older people may get married. But to purposefully wait until you are barren to do so is not being open to life. And it flies in the face of the first command man has, to go forth and multiply. When one stands in front of God in judgement, do you really want to present him with a marriage based on not being what God intended? In short, this is a selfish way of trying to get around the “system” for selfish reasons. In this case, marital companionship.

Much like ABC is a cheat on the system so is this.

I guess I don’t see it. During the time they are not married, they are in a different state of life. They may be in that state because they really feel they are not called to have children – or because they have a reason to believe having children would be dangerous. (Genetic issues, maternal health, etc.) They are making the sacrifice of marital companionship in order not to sin.

Then, when they are past the age of childbearing, as long as they are willing to accept the miracle of a child should one occur, they are not sinning by entering into the state of marriage and enjoying the delayed benefit of marital life.

I don’t see where the sin comes in. They are not actually “getting around the system.” In fact, they appear to be very respectful of it by avoiding the state of life that would involve parenthood when they know they are not called to it/capable of it. I don’t see this as being anything like a contraceptive mentality.

 

[maryjk]

My understanding is that the OP is asking if it’s OK to want to get married but to not want to have children - the answer to that is no.

It is not OK to “game the system” by intentionally marrying later in life in order to engage in a sort of permanent NFP. If it just so happens that you meet the right person at a stage in life where you are not fertile as a couple, then that is a different story. But it is not OK to circumvent the purpose of marriage so that you can have your cake and eat it too.

But that isn’t the question that is asked of couples getting married.

They are asked if they will welcome children that God sends. NOT if they *want *children.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

But that isn’t the question that is asked of couples getting married.

They are asked if they will welcome children that God sends. NOT if they *want *children.

Just for my own information, is this something they ask of any couple regardless of age?

 

[AnnArbor]

Just for my own information, is this something they ask of any couple regardless of age?

Yes.

 

[Xantippe]

I guess I don’t see it. During the time they are not married, they are in a different state of life. They may be in that state because they really feel they are not called to have children – or because they have a reason to believe having children would be dangerous. (Genetic issues, maternal health, etc.) They are making the sacrifice of marital companionship in order not to sin.

Then, when they are past the age of childbearing, as long as they are willing to accept the miracle of a child should one occur, they are not sinning by entering into the state of marriage and enjoying the delayed benefit of marital life.

I don’t see where the sin comes in. They are not actually “getting around the system.” In fact, they appear to be very respectful of it by avoiding the state of life that would involve parenthood when they know they are not called to it/capable of it. I don’t see this as being anything like a contraceptive mentality.

Yep.

 

[Xantippe]

Just for my own information, is this something they ask of any couple regardless of age?

I’ve heard (but don’t have a source on this right now) that it may be omitted if the couple is elderly enough that the question will cause general merriment.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Does the command to go forth and multiply require that we marry at a particular age? Do we have to get married and have children, even when we can’t find anybody suitable, just to fulfill that commandment?

It’s interesting, I think, that the “multiply” command does not appear elsewhere in the Bible than the dawn of humanity, although there are certainly many references elsewhere to the blessings of children. I suspect that the “multiply” commandment may have been time-limited, as there genuinely was a need for more population at the time.

As somebody said, marrying late is not having your cake and eating it, too–it’s having only half the cake.

I don’t think we are prepared to weaken the command by saying it does not apply now. It applys now as much as then! Maybe even more so because Marriage was not a sacrament until Jesus elevated it to one. And it is pretty clear why God created marriage.

As somebody said, marrying late is not having your cake and eating it, too–it’s having only half the cake

But in this case it is not having half the cake, it is purposely scraping off the frosting.

Look, I don’t think this should turn into a “Can old people marry” thread. Because of course they can. I do think it is quite clear that the OP wants to manipulate the marital purpose because of selfish wants. Or a belief that they should not procreate. They want to use sex, not for it’s procreative use, but only for it’s unitive. And while nature does sure take it’s course with women in this timeline, manipulating for the sheer purpose of making sure one is never to procreate and for that reason alone postponing marraige, is a profanity of the marriage and of God.

 

[maryjk]

I’ve heard (but don’t have a source on this right now) that it may be omitted if the couple is elderly enough that the question will cause general merriment.

I don’t remember hearing it at a wedding I attended where the groom was in his nineties and the bride in her sixties.

Gee, since it was the bride’s first marriage, I wonder if the priest made sure she had tried to find a husband before she passed menopause. Otherwise, people might think she was gaming the system. (Sorry, but that sounds totally and utterly ridiculous.)

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I’ve heard (but don’t have a source on this right now) that it may be omitted if the couple is elderly enough that the question will cause general merriment.

I’d like to see a source for that!

 

[NSFrame]

But that isn’t the question that is asked of couples getting married.

They are asked if they will welcome children that God sends. NOT if they *want *children.

I’m not sure how they could be welcoming children that God might wish to send if they have waited until they are infertile to get married with the *specific intent *that they are thereby avoiding procreation. To me this sounds like a desire to circumvent God’s design for marriage.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Look, I don’t think this should turn into a “Can old people marry” thread. Because of course they can. I do think it is quite clear that the OP wants to manipulate the marital purpose because of selfish wants. Or a belief that they should not procreate. They want to use sex, not for it’s procreative use, but only for it’s unitive. And while nature does sure take it’s course with women in this timeline, manipulating for the sheer purpose of making sure one is never to procreate and for that reason alone postponing marraige, is a profanity of the marriage and of God.

The Church does not teach that the couple must marry when they are most fertile. You keep applying what is true during marriage to what isn’t true when the couple isn’t; it doesn’t work that way, and you won’t find anything authoritative to support your opinion.

I’d like to see a source for that!

What I think is being referenced is the vows being said at the time of marriage. Certain things can be changed without diminishing the meaning of the vows. A couple in their 60s would not reasonably be expected to have children naturally, and I believe they can remove that from their vows (with the pastor’s permission). Regardless, the couple would still be required to not have a permanent intention against children.

 

[AnnArbor]

The Church does not teach that the couple must marry when they are most fertile. You keep applying what is true during marriage to what isn’t true when the couple isn’t; it doesn’t work that way, and you won’t find anything authoritative to support your opinion.

What I think is being referenced is the vows being said at the time of marriage. Certain things can be changed without diminishing the meaning of the vows. A couple in their 60s would not reasonably be expected to have children naturally, and I believe they can remove that from their vows (with the pastor’s permission). Regardless, the couple would still be required to not have a permanent intention against children.

I think you are probably correct. We were married after children were possible, but the question was still asked – and our intent in answering also applied to the children we were bringing to the marriage already – we were accepting our roles as step-parents as well as being open to a miracle.