Marriage and postmenopausal women

[Maxirad]

Is it true that postmenopausal women who are legitimately single cannot get married in the Catholic Church in most cases? After all, isn’t procreation the definitive reason for marriage?

 

[1ke]

Is it true that postmenopausal women who are legitimately single cannot get married in the Catholic Church in most cases?

No, it is not true.

After all, isn’t procreation the definitive reason for marriage?

Procreation is one of two reasons for marriage. It is not the “definitive” reason for marriage.

If one is capable of sexual intercourse, one is capable of marriage. Infertility is not an impediment to marriage.

 

[manualman]

Is it true that postmenopausal women who are legitimately single cannot get married in the Catholic Church in most cases? After all, isn’t procreation the definitive reason for marriage?

Let me guess: you’ve been reading “gay marriage” threads. Am I right?

Marriage is for a man and woman because it is the nature of marriage that it is ordered towards procreation. A post-menopausal woman is still a woman, as is one who has had a hysterectomy or is infertile for other unintentional reasons.

The infertility of such a relationship is circumstantial. The infertility of a gay couple is the NATURE of that relationship. Big difference (though few realize it in our “only outcomes matter” culture today).

 

[SonCatcher]

In the stories relating to Sarah and Elizabeth, we see that “postmenopausal” does not necessarily mean “unable to conceive.”

 

[PietroPaolo]

Marriage is ordered to procreation. Not every sex act, or even every man-woman couple will produce children, but each licit sex act (i.e. coitus) is ordered to procreation (this holds true for a postmenopausal woman). Thus, every couple that can get married must be able to perform a licit sex act. A postmenopausal woman can perform a licit sex act. Thus, a postmenopausal woman can get married.

No homosexual sex act is coitus. Thus no homosexual sex act is ordered to procreation. But all marriages must be ordered to procreation. Therefore, no homosexual couple can get married.

Nota bene: “ordered to” is not equivalent to “capable of”. Eyes are ordered to seeing. A healthy man’s eyes are both ordered to seeing and capable of seeing. A blind man’s eyes are ordered to seeing but are incapable of seeing. No one’s ears are ordered to or capable of seeing.

Does that help?

 

[SonCatcher]

There are two cases in the Bible where postmenopausal women conceived children (Sarah and Elizabeth). This demonstrates that menopause is nothing to God. Therefore, it could not be an impediment.

 

[Allegra]

Is it true that postmenopausal women who are legitimately single cannot get married in the Catholic Church in most cases? After all, isn’t procreation the definitive reason for marriage?

The couple has to be physically able to have intercourse. They do not have to be fertile.

 

[Maxirad]

In most cases, both the husband and the wife have to be open to the possibility of having children, right?

 

[1ke]

In most cases, both the husband and the wife have to be open to the possibility of having children, right?

Let’s be clear in our terms. The Church teaches the couple must be able to have intercourse (consummation) and that each marital act of intercourse should be *objectively ordered *to unity and procreation.

The Church says nothing about the “possibility of having children”.

If they are sterile, they are not barred from marriage, as each act of intercourse is still objectively ordered to both unity and procreation.

 

[donna369]

i have a little confusion myself now. does this mean that if say, the man has ed and therefore can not truly consummate the act that the couple cannot marry?

 

[1ke]

i have a little confusion myself now. does this mean that if say, the man has ed and therefore can not truly consummate the act that the couple cannot marry?

Permanent, antecedent impotence is indeed an impediment to valid marriage.

Whether or not a person with ED has permanent impotence would be a question for a doctor, as that is typically not the case. Whether they are impotent from a canon law perspective is a question for a canonist.

Can.* 1084 §1. Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have intercourse, whether on the part of the man or the woman, whether absolute or relative, nullifies marriage by its very nature.

§2. If the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether by a doubt about the law or a doubt about a fact, a marriage must not be impeded nor, while the doubt remains, declared null.

§3. Sterility neither prohibits nor nullifies marriage, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 1098.

 

[livingwordunity]

A husband and wife don’t cease to be married after the wife reaches menopause. And as others have pointed out, there are at least two examples in the Bible, Sarah and Elizabeth, of a woman who conceived after menopause. God made the male sex organ and the female sex organ to complement each other in a way that is ordered toward procreation. And also like someone else pointed out as an analogy, an eye is ordered toward seeing, and even if it loses the ability to see it’s still an eye and not an ear.

 

[Rau]

There is a debate on another thread where the question of the morality, or otherwise, of a couple getting married, when that couple knows in advance, that they will avoid pregnancy (for sake of argument - by licit means - NFP) as a consequence of a genetic disorder they both share which creates a high probability (25%) of an horrendous medical condition for their child. Their intention is to avoid pregnancy by this means for so long as the very high risk persists. For sake of argument, we can assume that if they did marry, and their genetic condition were to become curable or subject to treatment, then the couple would love to have a child(ren).

Posters on this thread may care to comment on the validity of a marriage entered into in the above circumstances.

But then consider an extended scenario. Suppose the couple were to conclude that they cannot be validly married in this situation, and so do not marry. Thirty years later, the woman has entered the menopause. Might they now marry?

 

[fpt]

Is it true that postmenopausal women who are legitimately single cannot get married in the Catholic Church in most cases? After all, isn’t procreation the definitive reason for marriage?

The conjugal love has no age, if the bride is sexually potent, and if the bridegroom is also sexually potent. No moral problem, and no moral issue.

The conjugal love and the marital act are only for one male with one female, whatever their age. The sexual act in the marriage, between 14 year old for female and 16 year old for mal until the death (see the canon law of the catholic church: the physical puberty of female, the physical puberty of male, the psychical maturity of male, the psychical maturity of female, the knowledge of the sexed and sexual object of this contract and this institution). The fact of saying the contrary is not very natural, is not universal ,and thus is not very catholic. It is very sad, unfair, awful, morally wrong of having this type of doctrine and of practice.

The marriage is only for procreation??? A very odd view of ends of marriage??? It is only for making babies!!! The four other ends of marital act? : The fact of expressing the conjugal love; the fact of improving the bonding of conjugal love; the fact of avoiding the bad effect of concupiscence; the fact of having the conjugal sexual fun, in love with the tenderness.

The age of each spouse for entering in the marriage, and in order to lead the marital act? From 14 years for the female until her death (canon law): Yes; From 16 years for the male until his death (canon law): Yes

The marital act?
During wife’s periods (menstruations): Yes
During pregnancy: Yes
Days, before the childbirth: Yes
After the childbirth: how many days after, the norm: yes (after two weeks, or after 4 weeks, or after six weeks, in function of each woman)
During breastfeeding: Yes
During menopause: Yes
After menopause: Yes
During fertile times of woman; Yes
During infertile times of woman: Yes
During the use of the N.F.P.: Yes
Wife without uterus: yes
Wife with fallopian tubes that are tied: yes
Wife without fallopian tube: yes
Wife without uterus and without fallopian tube: yes
Wife without ovary: yes
Wife without uterus, without fallopian tube, without ovary: Yes
Husband with a vasectomy: yes
Husband with a dry ejaculation: yes

Per se, it is not a venial sin or a mortal sin of practicing the conjugal act in function of those cases.

Be careful to weird doctrines

 

[TeachCatechism]

I know of at least two cases where post menopausal women got married in the church.

 

[JimG]

I know of at least two cases where post menopausal women got married in the church.

Of course. Being past menopause is not an impediment to being married in the Church. Post menopausal women are still capable of conjugal relations.

 

[Rence]

Is it true that postmenopausal women who are legitimately single cannot get married in the Catholic Church in most cases? After all, isn’t procreation the definitive reason for marriage?

No, your first statement is not true. And your second sentence is true, but doesn’t mean postmenopausal women can’t get married. Yes, they can get married. In fact, due to circumstances, that’s probably what I will do …

 

[Rau]

No, your first statement is not true. And your second sentence is true, but doesn’t mean postmenopausal women can’t get married. Yes, they can get married. In fact, due to circumstances, that’s probably what I will do …

I ask this question genuinely, and not knowing the answer: If you agree with the earlier poster that procreation is “the definitive reason” to get married, then what reason does a post menopausal woman have to get married?

 

[Rence]

I ask this question genuinely, and not knowing the answer: If you agree with the earlier poster that procreation is “the definitive reason” to get married, then what reason does a post menopausal woman have to get married?

For all the reasons that come with being married. Having children is not the ONLY reason to get married. The Church only requires being open to life. If it’s God’s will that a post-menopausal woman have a child, then she will. It’s not like it’s never happened before.

 

[Rau]

For all the reasons that come with being married. Having children is not the ONLY reason to get married. The Church only requires being open to life. If it’s God’s will that a post-menopausal woman have a child, then she will. It’s not like it’s never happened before.

What does “definitive reason” mean?