Sex after a vasectomy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Raider_Red
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If I’m recalling correctly (and it’s late, so I could be off on this - I welcome a correction if necessary) a man who has either had a vasectomy, or is impotent prior to being married is forbidden to enter into a marriage within the Catholic Church since the main purpose of marriage is to procreate (the same would apply to a woman who has had her tubes tied or uses any form of artificial birth control).

If the vasectomy occurs during the course of the Catholic marriage, he is then in a state of mortal sin until he becomes remorseful, confesses, is absolved and attempts to have it reversed. This topic is discussed in depth on the SSPX website:

sspx.org/catholic_faqs/catholic_faqs__morality.htm#sterilization

He he is infertile, assuming he didn’t know it until he and his wife tried to have a baby, there’s no moral issue because the intent to have kids was there.

This is more than enough thinking for me for the night! 😃
No. That is not accurate. Sterility is not an impediment to marriage but impotence is.
Getting a vasectomy is a forgivable sin if accompanied by contrition.

Canon 1084.1 Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage.
Canon 1084.2 If the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether the doubt be one of law or one of fact, the marriage is not to be prevented nor, while the doubt persists, is it to be declared null.
Canon 1084.3 Without prejudice to the provisions of canon 1098, sterility neither forbids nor invalidates a marriage.
 
But the Church doesn’t forbid marriage to infertile men or to men with vasectomies. I’m just trying to understand why impotent men wouldn’t be in the same category.
You have been on this board for some time now and seen the multiple references to Theology of the body and so forth. Give them a read and you will see why the ability to have sex is important to the sacrament of marriage.

Marriage is designed for both procreation and the good of the spouses. Marital sex is both procreative and unitive. Some moral theologians also discuss that marriage is a remedy for concupiscence . Men and women have a sexual drive and it’s natural and ordered place is within marriage. Therefore the ability to have sex is required from a physical standpoint. The marital act speaks a sacramental language. It is how the couple ratifies and renews their marriage vows. Therefore the ability to perform the marital act is required from a sacramental or symbolic sense as well.
 
I was mildly amused to see someone think it possible that someone without a womb could give birth. The logic that you can “intend” to procreate whilst being knowingly infertile (not subfertile) escapes me.
 
I was mildly amused to see someone think it possible that someone without a womb could give birth. The logic that you can “intend” to procreate whilst being knowingly infertile (not subfertile) escapes me.
Well, technically you could have an ectopic and a c-section.😉

I wouldn’t put much hope in that though.
 
Still having relations with his wife, regardless of the validity of the marriage.
I can think of a couple Priests that I know who would say “absolutely not”. Most won’t be that hard-core, but it depends on the individual.
A vasectomy does not render the marriage invalid. Can you give me a document that states that it does? If a man is truly remorseful for having done this and then continues in the marital embrace with the acceptance of future children (and this has been known to happen) then the sin is absolved. I am SURE glad that many on this forum are not God. What a conditional love He would be… Jesus said to those who nailed Him to the Cross, " Father forgive them for they know not what they do"… Thank you Jesus!!
 
If I’m recalling correctly (and it’s late, so I could be off on this - I welcome a correction if necessary) a man who has either had a vasectomy, or is impotent prior to being married is forbidden to enter into a marriage within the Catholic Church ***since the main purpose of marriage is to procreate ***(the same would apply to a woman who has had her tubes tied or uses any form of artificial birth control).

If the vasectomy occurs during the course of the Catholic marriage, he is then in a state of mortal sin until he becomes remorseful, confesses, is absolved and attempts to have it reversed. This topic is discussed in depth on the SSPX website:

sspx.org/catholic_faqs/catholic_faqs__morality.htm#sterilization

He he is infertile, assuming he didn’t know it until he and his wife tried to have a baby, there’s no moral issue because the intent to have kids was there.

This is more than enough thinking for me for the night! 😃
Partially correct.
 
I know a guy that had a vasectomy after his third child was born because he said they were poor and couldn’t afford three children let alone four or five. He has since become Catholic and is now convicted of the decision and we were discussing ramifications in regards to his decision. I’m not too informed in this arena to help him out but was curious about something I didn’t bring up to him. Every time he and his wife have sex, the procreative aspect has been permanently removed and the unitive aspect is the only one there. What are the moral ramifications, if any, that are present here. I think I’m wording this correctly and would just like to know so I can correctly offer words of encouragement while at the same time be direct and pastoral. 🤷
The Catholic Church believes that God allows natural forms of birth control.

In his Angelus address on July 17, 1994, Pope John Paul II restated the Church’s position:

"Unfortunately, Catholic thought is often misunderstood … as if the Church supported an ideology of fertility at all costs, urging married couples to procreate indiscriminately and without thought for the future. But one need only study the pronouncements of the Magisterium to know that this is not so.

Truly, in begetting life the spouses fulfill one of the highest dimensions of their calling: they are God’s co-workers. Precisely for this reason they must have an extremely responsible attitude. In deciding whether or not to have a child, they must not be motivated by selfishness or carelessness, but by a prudent, conscious generosity that weighs the possibilities and circumstances, and especially gives priority to the welfare of the unborn child.

Therefore, when there is a reason not to procreate, this choice is permissible and may even be necessary. However, there remains the duty of carrying it out with criteria and methods that respect the total truth of the marital act in its unitive and procreative dimension, as wisely regulated by nature itself in its biological rhythms. One can comply with them and use them to advantage, but they cannot be “violated” by artificial interference."

Judeo-Christian tradition has taught for thousands of years:
  1. Single people should be celibate.
  2. Married people should be faithful to each other (adultery is wrong).
  3. Married couples should welcome God’s gift of children and, therefore, artificial birth control is against the will of God.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, in paragraph no. 2399, that while regulation of births is an aspect of responsible parenthood, “Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).”

Can you think of any other bodily function that can be suggested to be blocked or cut off? For doctors to suggest we could plug our tear ducts, or obstruct our digestive system, without serious repercussions would be ludicrous. And there are serious repercussions which have surfaced with vasectomies; i.e., chronic pain may result, chronic immune and inflammatory responses to vasectomy that are the basis of disease models for cancer, heart and neurodegenerative disease, there may also be the beginnings of dementia because of auto-immune insufficiency due to vasectomies.

As the years goes on, more research is done. It’s not a good thing, in the final analysis.
 
Well, technically you could have an ectopic and a c-section.😉

I wouldn’t put much hope in that though.
Of course you couldn’t. The whole issue and life-threatening problem with an ectopic pregnancy is that an embryo can’t grow there, although of course occasionally and unfortunately sometimes implantation takes place there. What makes you think a baby could grow anywhere close to term in a Fallopian tube?

I think the whole mindset of “With God, anything is possible” - while in an absolute sense is true - when applied to the idea of women lacking wombs still getting pregnant is, as the nuns used to say, to “tempt God.” It reminds me of the first thief in today’s Passion reading who *dares *Jesus to save himself.
 
The spermatazoa couldn’t get through to the salpinx in the first place to cause an ectopic pregnancy.
 
Those priests are wrong. The Church does not require abstinence. Just repentance and absolution. Some couples may wish to reverse a surgical procedure to restore their marital relations and that is supported but not required. Some couples may wish to practice a form of NFP as a form of reparation and that is also supported but not required.
You’re correct, I agree.
 
The spermatazoa couldn’t get through to the salpinx in the first place to cause an ectopic pregnancy.
I know I have read in some professional journals of ectopic pregnancy post hysterectomy. Even post Hysterectomy with a Bilateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy. I suppose there would have to have been conception prior to hysterectomy or a fistula allowing the sperm to pass. Miracles do happen. I know in one article I read there were 36 or so cases where 22 were thought to have occurred prior to surgery leaving several to have occurred after.
 
No. That is not accurate. Sterility is not an impediment to marriage but impotence is. Getting a vasectomy is a forgivable sin if accompanied by contrition.
Right - I covered that in a previous post.
 
A vasectomy does not render the marriage invalid. Can you give me a document that states that it does? If a man is truly remorseful for having done this and then continues in the marital embrace with the acceptance of future children (and this has been known to happen) then the sin is absolved. I am SURE glad that many on this forum are not God. What a conditional love He would be… Jesus said to those who nailed Him to the Cross, " Father forgive them for they know not what they do"… Thank you Jesus!!
Never did I state that a vasectomy renders a marriage invalid. In fact, I went over absolution more than once. In the referenced post, I was talking about particular Priests that DO believe that it does. NOT the Church itself - or me.
 
I know I have read in some professional journals of ectopic pregnancy post hysterectomy. Even post Hysterectomy with a Bilateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy. I suppose there would have to have been conception prior to hysterectomy or a fistula allowing the sperm to pass. Miracles do happen. I know in one article I read there were 36 or so cases where 22 were thought to have occurred prior to surgery leaving several to have occurred after.
I’d be interested to see the references. Rare is not the same as miraculous, is it? Obviously getting pregnant before surgery is totally from getting pregnant after surgery.
Formulating any kind of rational doctrine on the basis of vanishingly rare occurrences is nonsensical surely?

One need only add the rider a technically successful hysterectomy without suture line dehiscence etc to make the assertion secure.
 
Of course you couldn’t. The whole issue and life-threatening problem with an ectopic pregnancy is that an embryo can’t grow there, although of course occasionally and unfortunately sometimes implantation takes place there. What makes you think a baby could grow anywhere close to term in a Fallopian tube?

I think the whole mindset of “With God, anything is possible” - while in an absolute sense is true - when applied to the idea of women lacking wombs still getting pregnant is, as the nuns used to say, to “tempt God.” It reminds me of the first thief in today’s Passion reading who *dares *Jesus to save himself.
I don’t think it .Anyway Fallopian tubes are not the only type of ectopic. In any case the tube could split allowing the fetus to grow . Very rare and very dangerous to the life of the mother in any case. It’s quite a miracle.

resources.metapress.com/pdf-preview.axd?code=vpjv84y40tvab0fk&size=largest
 
I’d be interested to see the references. Rare is not the same as miraculous, is it? Obviously getting pregnant before surgery is totally from getting pregnant after surgery.
Formulating any kind of rational doctrine on the basis of vanishingly rare occurrences is nonsensical surely?
What doctrine is that?
 
I know I have read in some professional journals of ectopic pregnancy post hysterectomy. Even post Hysterectomy with a Bilateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy. I suppose there would have to have been conception prior to hysterectomy or a fistula allowing the sperm to pass. Miracles do happen. I know in one article I read there were 36 or so cases where 22 were thought to have occurred prior to surgery leaving several to have occurred after.
It is possible for an ectopic to occur after a hysterectomy - I saw it on one occasion while working in Healthcare - its very rare.

I think I saw this debated on another post (not the one I’ve quoted above), but…
A tubal pregnancy is not viable whether the woman has a uterus or not. They’re life threatening to the Mother if and when the tube ruptures, and the child would be unable to thrive and grow in an area with the width of a strand of hair. So dangerous.
 
Hi Thank You Jesus
Age has nothing to do with it. I am getting older and my girllfriend and I are planning on getting married. I must be able to consumate the marriage or we can not get married.
If a priest knows the man can not consumate the marriage before hand he will not marrie them.
As part of the Sacrament of Marriege they must become one flesh.

The man if necessary has to do what is necessary to acomplish this…

It is easier today with all the aids available.

Antrim
 
A vasectomy doesn’t mean impotence, usually, unless something goes wrong.
You’re correct in that a Catholic who is impotent is not permitted to marry in the Church as it would be entering into a union knowing that it will NOT produce children by natural methods.

I believe that the same goes for a Woman who has undergone a hysterectomy prior to marriage - for the same reason. Natural children aren’t possible.

This is where people usually get into the “Well, they can always adopt” debate. But rules are rules…

Erin-Anne :shamrock2:
The impotence is an impediment but not because natural children aren’t possible, rather that the impotent one cannot grant “a conjugal act in itself apt for the generation of offspring”. (Also male or female sterility is not an impediment to marriage.)

CIC Can. 1061
“§1 A valid marriage between baptised persons is said to be merely ratified, if it is not consummated; ratified and consummated, if the spouses have in a human manner engaged together in a conjugal act in itself apt for the generation of offspring. To this act marriage is by its nature ordered and by it the spouses become one flesh.”

CIC Can. 1084
§1 Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage.
§2 If the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether the doubt be one of law or one of fact, the marriage is not to be prevented nor, while the doubt persists, is it to be declared null.
§3 Without prejudice to the provisions of can. 1098, sterility neither forbids nor invalidates a marriage.

CIC Can. 1098
“A person contracts invalidly who enters marriage inveigled by deceit, perpetrated in order to secure consent, concerning some quality of the other party, which of its very nature can seriously disrupt the partnership of conjugal life.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top