So, what if there is no "seed"?

[Vico]

Could you please provide a citation for this? Yes, canonically a man must be able to engage in physical intercourse, but what Church document states he must also produce sperm? Sterility is not an impediment. If a man is able to be one with his wife, but, through no fault of his own, nothing is ejaculated, is this actually grounds for an annulment?

Here is something to read on that topic.
The decree means that it is the current teaching of the Church that the doubly vasectomized male is capable of a marriage act provided erection, penetration, and the ejaculation of secretions from the prostate, seminal vesicles and various other glands is possible; that the grossly normal ejaculate is sufficient to fulfil the canonical concept of “true semen” and to achieve that *kind *of an act which otherwise would be generative, even though in this case the ejaculate is sterile and contains nothing elaborated in the testicles.

ewtn.com/library/Doctrine/IMPOSTER.HTM

 

[PhiloMed]

People talk about St. Augustine, but how many know that he was in a gnostic cult and had sexual issues. And then people wonder why he says that all sex carries the stain of sin which is a man made, false doctrine and amongst the earliest heresies. Or how about how martin luther had dreams about the devil in his rectum and all sorts of strange things.

But the legends live on and it’s alive and well today unfortunately.

People should be MUCH more concerned about not eating pork and shellfish. Go study the overriding principles on that issue and then you can laugh at the excuses man comes up with to disabeye God for their own pleasures in life.

Yet, when God gives you a pleasure to use and says that it’s good, and you dont want to use it, now mans wisdom becomes greater than God. Just like the pork.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[hazcompat]

Can you show me where in the Bible it says this? And especially that it’s a sin.

Genesis 38:8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Have intercourse with your brother’s wife, in fulfillment of your duty as brother-in-law, and thus preserve your brother’s line.”* 9 Onan, however, knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he had intercourse with his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground, to avoid giving offspring to his brother. 10What he did greatly offended the LORD, and the LORD took his life too.

Peace

 

[QuasiCatholic]

OK – here is what I don’t get about this whole “must be able to be erect, penetrate and ejaculate” thing as a condition for marriage.

Obviously a lot of people have sex before marriage. But we’re not SUPPOSED to. And guys aren’t supposed to masturbate either.

How on earth would anyone who had actually followed the rules KNOW whether they were capable of that? They should have never tried …

 

[Vico]

OK – here is what I don’t get about this whole “must be able to be erect, penetrate and ejaculate” thing as a condition for marriage.

Obviously a lot of people have sex before marriage. But we’re not SUPPOSED to. And guys aren’t supposed to masturbate either.

How on earth would anyone who had actually followed the rules KNOW whether they were capable of that? They should have never tried …

It may be discovered after the valid marriage has occurred, in which case:Can. 1142
For a just cause, the Roman Pontiff can dissolve a non-consummated marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and a non-baptized party at the request of both parties or of one of them, even if the other party is unwilling.

 

[Padster]

Fertility is not a requirement. A man must be able to be erect, penetrate, and ejaculate to meet potency requirements

This is an impossibility if one follows the rules of the Church to the letter.

Best wishes,
Padster

 

[TarkanAttila]

Simply in the interest of his own health, though, if nothing more pressing is going on… your fiancé may wish to have his, erm, semi-impotency? checked. While it’s nothing life-threatening, it is still a bodily disorder…

But it’s not spiritually or religiously necessary by any means.

 

[Vico]

Re: “Fertility is not a requirement. A man must be able to be erect, penetrate, and ejaculate to meet potency requirements…”

This is an impossibility if one follows the rules of the Church to the letter.

Best wishes,
Padster

The “impotence to have intercourse” invalidates but not sterility, per the Church.

CIC**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.

 

[PrincessRenae]

Simply in the interest of his own health, though, if nothing more pressing is going on… your fiancé may wish to have his, erm, semi-impotency? checked. While it’s nothing life-threatening, it is still a bodily disorder…

But it’s not spiritually or religiously necessary by any means.

Nah. The less sperm, the better!