Marriage Denial to Impotent a moral evil?

[anixx]

This isn’t completely true. I am getting married shortly and as part of the process I had to swear under oath that I am not aware of any reason why I would not be able to have intercourse.

This is not the practice of the Church. The only time, something like the sorts is required, and it is not an oath by far, is at a marriage between a Catholic and another non-Catholic christian or between a Catholic or an unbaptized (not christian). And then there is something called a Reversal, that states that the non-Catholic part has taken to knowledge that the Catholic part must do all that he can that the children may be baptized and raised Catholic. That’s it. There is no oath. Cannon 1125,2

 

[Bookcat]

The church denies marriage to those who are permanently impotent prior to marriage. How can this be morally justified?

I am asking how this teaching can be morally justified. I believe it’s a moral evil.

Tis the nature of marriage. One has to be physically capable of the marital act.

Certain, perpetual and antecedent impotence.

 

[Marie5890]

(It’s when I read things like this that make me not surprised people leave the church and go elsewhere. Seems to fly in the face of the mercy of God as well as the Sabbath being made for man, not man for the Sabbath. The church’s teachings, like them or not, can be are real burden. A real heavy yoke and stumbling block. Oh well…)

 

[Bookcat]

It’s pretty simple, really. In marriage, a husband and wife promise permanence, fidelity, and openness to life. They voluntarily give to each other the exclusive right to marital intercourse. A person cannot give what one does not have. If a person is permanently and incurably incapable of marital intercourse before the vows are exchanged, there can be no marriage. No exchange of marital rights, no marriage.

(For exactly the same reason, same sex marriage is impossible: there can never be marital intercourse due to lack of sexual complementarity.)

 

[Bookcat]

(It’s when I read things like this that make me not surprised people leave the church and go elsewhere. Seems to fly in the face of the mercy of God as well as the Sabbath being made for man, not man for the Sabbath. The church’s teachings, like them or not, can be are real burden. A real heavy yoke and stumbling block. Oh well…)

Nope.

Tis nature (or rather a defect of nature…).

 

[Bookcat]

Seems to fly in the face of the mercy of God as well as the Sabbath being made for man, not man for the Sabbath. The church’s teachings, like them or not, can be are real burden.

Tis nature (or rather a defect of nature…).

And it is regarding too the nature of marriage.

The Churches teaching rather recognize and live the truth of what is Marriage.

 

[Bookcat]

It’s pretty simple, really. In marriage, a husband and wife promise permanence, fidelity, and openness to life. They voluntarily give to each other the exclusive right to marital intercourse. A person cannot give what one does not have. If a person is permanently and incurably incapable of marital intercourse before the vows are exchanged, there can be no marriage. No exchange of marital rights, no marriage.

(For exactly the same reason, same sex marriage is impossible: there can never be marital intercourse due to lack of sexual complementarity.)

 

[Marie5890]

Nope.

Tis nature (or rather a defect of nature…).

And it is regarding too the nature of marriage.

And it’s still no wonder to me that people leave the church and go elsewhere…

So nature is more powerful than God’s mercy…wow…

 

[Bookcat]

And it’s still no wonder to me that people leave the church and go elsewhere…

Many left Jesus in the Gospels when he gave a hard saying…

Jesus turned then to his disciples and asked “are you too going to leave me?”

To which Peter replied -“where would we go – you have the words of eternal life”

 

[Marie5890]

Many left Jesus in the Gospels when he gave a hard saying…

Jesus turned then to his disciples and asked “are you too going to leave me?”

To which Peter replied -“where would we go – you have the words of eternal life”

Not talking about people leaving Christ.

Talking about people leaving the church…They are not one and same.

 

[anixx]

Not talking about people leaving Christ.

Talking about people leaving the church…They are not one and same.

Well, actually, it kind of is. Christ is the Head of the Church, and she is His mystical Body. You can have one with out the other. Or He is the Groom, and she is His Bride. It’s like saying: I’m coming to visit you, but hide your wife, I don’t want to see her.

 

[Bookcat]

Not talking about people leaving Christ.

Talking about people leaving the church…They are not one and same.

“About Jesus Christ and the Church, I simply know they’re just one thing, and we shouldn’t complicate the matter.” ~ St. Jeanne de Arc

 

[Bookcat]

Not talking about people leaving Christ.

Talking about people leaving the church…They are not one and same.

Catechism

795 Christ and his Church thus together make up the “whole Christ” (Christus totus). The Church is one with Christ. The saints are acutely aware of this unity:

Let us rejoice then and give thanks that we have become not only Christians, but Christ himself. Do you understand and grasp, brethren, God's grace toward us? Marvel and rejoice: we have become Christ. For if he is the head, we are the members; he and we together are the whole man. . . . The fullness of Christ then is the head and the members. But what does "head and members" mean? Christ and the Church.

Our redeemer has shown himself to be one person with the holy Church whom he has taken to himself.

Head and members form as it were one and the same mystical person.

A reply of St. Joan of Arc to her judges sums up the faith of the holy doctors and the good sense of the believer: "About Jesus Christ and the Church, I simply know they're just one thing, and we shouldn't complicate the matter."

scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p2.htm#795

 

[EIF5A]

It’s pretty simple, really. In marriage, a husband and wife promise permanence, fidelity, and openness to life. They voluntarily give to each other the exclusive right to marital intercourse. A person cannot give what one does not have. If a person is permanently and incurably incapable of marital intercourse before the vows are exchanged, there can be no marriage. No exchange of marital rights, no marriage.

(For exactly the same reason, same sex marriage is impossible: there can never be marital intercourse due to lack of sexual complementarity.)

Can they live together in opposite sex marriage recognized by the law but not the Church?

 

[SMHW]

I am asking how this teaching can be morally justified. I believe it’s a moral evil.

As has been said before, this is kind of like the reason the Church does not bless same sex “unions”.

The Church is not so much denying marriage to a couple when there is (permanent) impotence as she is saying that labeling such unions as “marriage” is a lie. The Church would consider participating in the lie to be unjustifiable.

 

[Phemie]

This is not the practice of the Church. The only time, something like the sorts is required, and it is not an oath by far, is at a marriage between a Catholic and another non-Catholic christian or between a Catholic or an unbaptized (not christian). And then there is something called a Reversal, that states that the non-Catholic part has taken to knowledge that the Catholic part must do all that he can that the children may be baptized and raised Catholic. That’s it. There is no oath. Cannon 1125,2

Actually, yes, there are questions both the bride and groom have to answer under oath during the prenuptial investigation and whether they know of any reason why they could not have sex is one of those questions.

And yes, the Catholic party’s promise to do everything in his/her power to have the children baptized and raised Catholic is taken under oath. The non-Catholic party is simply informed of the promise and what it entails.

 

[LJN21]

And it’s still no wonder to me that people leave the church and go elsewhere…

So nature is more powerful than God’s mercy…wow…

What does God’s mercy have to do with nature?

God made nature and nature has rules, by observing God’s rules via nature we get Natural Law, Gods Laws imprinted on nature. God does not contradict Himself. He is merciful when we sin and ask for forgiveness but he doesn’t make something not a sin he has already ordained IS a sin.

 

[OraLabora]

Can they live together in opposite sex marriage recognized by the law but not the Church?

As far as I know yes. It would depend on the laws of the location. They would not be “validly married” in the eyes of the Church, but then since they cannot have marital relations they are not committing the sins of fornication or adultery (assuming spouses from previous marriage still alive). The only potential sin would be the sin of scandal. But if they present themselves as a married couple socially (which they are legally) there can’t be any scandal. People in their church community need not know when and where they were married. The only way there could be scandal is someone not minding their own business.

 

[SMHW]

So nature is more powerful than God’s mercy…wow…

I’m not completely sure why this is meaningful.

God does not give the Church to the ability to do anything at any time.

Miracles do happen. But for the most part the Church, even to bestow God’s mercy, does not cure cancer, solved political differences, and make it so we can flap our arms and fly.

But we think that the Church can just marry anyone. She can’t.

 

[Bookcat]

So nature is more powerful than God’s mercy…wow…

Certain defects of nature happen in this world in its present state of being on the way. or are even caused by human action or by an accident. Some of these defects or happenings prevent us from doing certain things -be it walking or seeing or marrying.

Thankfully we also can work to overcome many of these things by using the gifts God gives us of reason and thus the discoveries in medical science that continue.

But in any case – God can yes in his mercy make it up to them -and much much more then they ever imagine. In heaven and at the Resurrection!