paraplegics being denied marrige (i cant spell)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andrew_11
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Andrew_11

Guest
I just read a thread in the ask an apologist section ( forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=85386 ) the apologist said that a if a parplegic (actually anyone) who was impotent would be denied marrige because they could not connsumate the marrige, which the apologist claimed was necessarry. My point is this, Mary and Joseph never connsumated their marrige, why would a person who was not able to consummate a marrige be denied, it would be the same as a couple who decided not to consummate a marrige (as Mary and Joseph did).
 
Wow, this is really odd. Talk about discrimination against those with a disability! So If I understand this correctly, if you have this disability the Church will not recognize your marriage??!!! 😦 That is terrible!!! Hope someone posts about this who has some more info.
Thanks for posting this Andrew,
Nonie
 
40.png
Nonie:
Wow, this is really odd. Talk about discrimination against those with a disability! So If I understand this correctly, if you have this disability the Church will not recognize your marriage??!!! 😦 That is terrible!!! Hope someone posts about this who has some more info.
Thanks for posting this Andrew,
Nonie
Click to expand...
No, you had a little misunderstanding, the reason was not that they were a paraplegic, it was that they were unable to consummate the marrige. Read the whole post and the thread in ask an apologist. I do however agree with you that this is discrimination. I have never really questioned a church teaching, but im questioning this one.
 
There have been previous posts about how to be intimate with a spouse WITHOUT sexual intercourse in this forum wihich explained quite well that there ARE alternatives (I believe that it was in context of NFP and ways to be intimate without becoming pregnant). I see no good reason (ok - I know that is asking for trouble when there will be a quote from the catechism and the previous post’s link to the same question) why anyone can’t get married even if they are not capable of intercourse. I thought being open to children is what counts. It is up to God if he will bless a couple with children - not man. To say that this couple cannot get married is the same as saying marriage is only really about sex…How sad that someone could make that kind of judgement on another. I know a couple where she was a quadraplegic and they could not have “intercourse” per se…Well, she DID get pregnant (yep - his little soldiers made their way to where they needed to be - no intercourse). It sounds more like an attempt to allow only the “perfect people” access to human intimacy with the blessing of marriage…that is just WRONG.

HOM
 
Impotence is an impediment to marriage. The permanent and incurable physical inability of either party to consummate the marriage means that there can be no marriage, because there is no possibility of marital relations.

A couple may, for sufficient reason, mutually decide not to have marital relations, but there must still be the physical capacity to do so.
 
40.png
JimG:
Impotence is an impediment to marriage. The permanent and incurable physical inability of either party to consummate the marriage means that there can be no marriage, because there is no possibility of marital relations.

A couple may, for sufficient reason, mutually decide not to have marital relations, but there must still be the physical capacity to do so.
Click to expand...
I dont see a good reason why an impotent couple cannot marry, they could love each other, and even adopt and raise a child.
 
Heart Of Mary:
To say that this couple cannot get married is the same as saying marriage is only really about sex…
Click to expand...
You make a great point, this degrades marriage to nothing but sex.
 
You can read what Aquinas says about it here. I didn’t read through the whole article. I think the idea is that man and woman, when married, in a sense “owe” their bodies to each other for the purpose of marital relations. Aquinas calls this “the marital debt.” One is not allowed to incur the marital debt if one has no way of paying it.
 
40.png
Andrew_11:
I dont see a good reason why an impotent couple cannot marry, they could love each other, and even adopt and raise a child.
Click to expand...
Yes, but gay couples make the same argument. Marriage is not only about sex. But marital relations is the way in which the marriage covenant is ratified and renewed.
 
As a Catholic, am I bound to believe that paraplegics cannot marry, can this rule be changed?
 
40.png
Andrew_11:
As a Catholic, am I bound to believe that paraplegics cannot marry, can this rule be changed?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure if this is just canon law, or if it is considered unchangeable, because it goes to the heart of the nature of marriage.

(PS–the rule says nothing whatever about paraplegics, only about the ability or inability to physically consummate a marriage. Not all paraplegics are permanently impotent.)
 
Heart Of Mary:
There have been previous posts about how to be intimate with a spouse WITHOUT sexual intercourse in this forum wihich explained quite well that there ARE alternatives (I believe that it was in context of NFP and ways to be intimate without becoming pregnant). I see no good reason (ok - I know that is asking for trouble when there will be a quote from the catechism and the previous post’s link to the same question) why anyone can’t get married even if they are not capable of intercourse. I thought being open to children is what counts. It is up to God if he will bless a couple with children - not man. To say that this couple cannot get married is the same as saying marriage is only really about sex…How sad that someone could make that kind of judgement on another. I know a couple where she was a quadraplegic and they could not have “intercourse” per se…Well, she DID get pregnant (yep - his little soldiers made their way to where they needed to be - no intercourse). It sounds more like an attempt to allow only the “perfect people” access to human intimacy with the blessing of marriage…that is just WRONG.

HOM
Click to expand...
JimG said it right.
I don’t have much time to get into this tonight, but
  • there is no way to reach the unitive and procreative aspects of the marital embrace without intercourse. Furthermore, when using NFP the couple has to be careful with what they do since some levels of intimacy are only ok as part of the marital embrace. Also, there is no other physical way to reach the level of intimacy/unity that is part of the marital embrace.
  • If the quadraplegic couple was able to get pregnant then it sounds like they were either able to have intercourse or they made use of some method that is not moral.
  • Consider this analogy I have heard: Would you consider the fact that blind people aren’t allowed to drive an attempt to allow only the “perfect people” have access to driving their own vehicle?
 
Well, im goin to hit the sack now, but this has been an interesting conversation and Jim G has made some good points, and now im not sure which way im leaning, but as a traditional Catholic, I will give the Church the benifit of the doubt until it is proven otherwise. I always find that if I dont agree with a Church teaching at first, when I do some research about its reasoning, I understand why it is and accept it. Thanks to everyone who contributed.
 
40.png
JimG:
Yes, but gay couples make the same argument. Marriage is not only about sex. But marital relations is the way in which the marriage covenant is ratified and renewed.
Click to expand...
Wow! I did not even come close to making that connection, until you pointed it out. I don’t know how I missed it. 🤓
 
40.png
Andrew_11:
No, you had a little misunderstanding, the reason was not that they were a paraplegic, it was that they were unable to consummate the marrige. Read the whole post and the thread in ask an apologist. I do however agree with you that this is discrimination. I have never really questioned a church teaching, but im questioning this one.
Click to expand...
Of course it’s discrimination. Contrary to the line pushed by the mainstream media, not all discrimination is bad. Discrimination can often be a good thing. NOT to discriminate can sometimes be a sin. The Church discriminates all the time in deciding whether a person is a suitable candidate to receive one or other Sacrament.
And as the marriage of the Virgin Mary and St Joseph wasn’t a Sacrament of the Catholic Church, they didn’t have to obey the Church’s rules regarding the Sacrament of Marriage. Especially as St Joseph apparently died before the Church was founded.

Btw I understand that contrary to common opinion, the great majority of paraplegics CAN have sexual intercourse.
 
40.png
JimG:
Yes, but gay couples make the same argument. Marriage is not only about sex. But marital relations is the way in which the marriage covenant is ratified and renewed.
Click to expand...
But at the same time, this is COMPLETELY different that gay couples. Gay couples are able to produce children apart from one another, but choose not to… paraplegics are unable to not from their choice…

Has anyone asked an apologist???
 
40.png
twhicke:
Has anyone asked an apologist???
Click to expand...
Well , apparently, someone did which is why we have this thread. (I even asked a question to the apologist related to this impotence thing when I first came to Catholic Answers and I’m still waiting for their answer 😦 ) This teaching about impotence as an impediment to marriage is something that I still struggle with. I think it is unfair to a man, who through no fault of his own, is unable to consummate the sexual act. I think JimG’s posts made sense, but I also agree with Andrew_11. But I must accept this teaching even though I don’t fully understand it.

I don’t know, but you know what, for once I am appreciative of the work that certain researchers and surgeons are doing to find ways to treat “erectile dysfunction”. (I thought that medical community was wasting its resources just trying to cater to the sex-obsessed modern culture.) I think Fr. Hogan in the EWTN website mentioned that with the advent of modern technology and medicine, practically no physician would attest that impotence is perpetual in anyone, thus lending to doubt as to whether there is an impediment to marriage.

As to this marital debt thing, is Aquinas the only theologian that has pondered on this? Another question related to this: the Church recognizes Josephite marriages as valid but still the couple must be physically capable of consummating the act. These marriages are still valid since the couple “exchange rights to have marital relations” even though they don’t necessarily fulfill those rights. Makes me wonder why people enter into this kind of marriage in the first place if for example one party would someday demand of this “marriage debt” in the course of their marriage. On the other hand, it makes me wonder why the couple would exchange these “rights to marital relations” in the first place if they have committed to not consummating theirmarriage. Does any of this make sense? I don’t think I make sense to myself either :confused:
 
40.png
Andrew_11:
I dont see a good reason why an impotent couple cannot marry, they could love each other, and even adopt and raise a child.
Click to expand...
Canon law does not rest on personal opinion and is not up for a vote. The full answer lies in a complete understanding of marriage and natural law. A marriage that cannot be consummated because of the physical incapacity of either party is not valid because it is not marriage. This is also the reason why two persons of the same gender cannot validly marry, they are incapable of the marriage act. Christopher Wests Theology of the Body for Beginners is an excellent introduction to the topic of marriage in natural law.
 
40.png
Andrew_11:
. I always find that if I dont agree with a Church teaching at first, when I do some research about its reasoning, I understand why it is and accept it. Thanks .
Click to expand...
this should be posted in a sticky as required reading for everyone using the forums.
 
40.png
puzzleannie:
Canon law does not rest on personal opinion and is not up for a vote. The full answer lies in a complete understanding of marriage and natural law. A marriage that cannot be consummated because of the physical incapacity of either party is not valid because it is not marriage. This is also the reason why two persons of the same gender cannot validly marry, they are incapable of the marriage act. Christopher Wests Theology of the Body for Beginners is an excellent introduction to the topic of marriage in natural law.
Click to expand...
Are sterile people allowed to married? What I know is that sterility found after marriage can be a cause for nullity but, is it really an impediment to marriage if one finds it before?

If so, the argument of the Church impeding the marriage of people that can not consummate it does not go into the direction of procreation. I mean, the Church would then allow people to marry if they are able to have normal physical relations not if they are able to procreate.
I don’t know.

Regards,

Jose
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top