The New Catholic Church? Have the Rules Really Changed?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TruthSkr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is a specific course, not every Parish uses this brand of marriage prep.

Some use the Augustine Institute’s “Beloved” courses.

Some use Dynamic Catholic’s “Better Together”.

A Diocese may have several approved curricula and then allow each Pastor to determine how he will do it in his parish. I’ve worked for many priests, one of them did one on one marriage prep himself. The Bishop was okay with it.

Yes, every Diocese has guidelines for marriage prep, the brand that is used may vary.
 
Last edited:
TruthSkr said:
So are you saying that if you have a physical disability you do not have the same requirements as someone who does not? This has been my wife’s argument all along. She would say that if we are unable to have intercourse then we must accommodate.
Click to expand...
People who are unable to do a task, who are dis-abled, are not required to do that task. So yes, if you have a disability, you do not have the same requirements. The issue is whether your disability has bearing on your sex life, which can be complicated. But no, you are required to do what you cannot do.

I think you should listen to your wife. She knows the situation better than any of the priests you have spoken to. She is important to this situation and anything you decide should be with her and for her.
 
Babaganoush said:
I imagine That if either of you are disabled it would change the circumstances.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but there is reason to believe otherwise.

496. What is the meaning of the conjugal act?

2362-2367

The conjugal act has a twofold meaning: unitive (the mutual self-giving of the spouses) and procreative (an openness to the transmission of life). No one may break the inseparable connection which God has established between these two meanings of the conjugal act by excluding one or the other of them. (Compendium to the Catechism)
 
I don’t think disability makes a difference because the Church can and does deny marriage to people in cases where the inability to consummate (permanent impotence) exists. From what I understand that is for men as well as women. Infertility is not something that makes marriage impossible but the inability to engage in intercourse does. So if the disability occurred after marriage, my understanding is the couple would be required to abstain from relations if intercourse becomes impossible.

I am not 100% positive since so many priests have stated otherwise. I will continue to pray for your marriage.
 
13pollitos said:
Infertility is not something that makes marriage impossible but the inability to engage in intercourse does. So if the disability occurred after marriage, my understanding is the couple would be required to abstain from relations if intercourse becomes impossible.
Click to expand...
The difficulty arising here is “the conjugal act” or “relations.” I assume you are not trying to suggest that if intercourse becomes impossible, the couple would be required to abstain from intercourse. Nor do you mean that husband and wife must separate (end all relations) if intercourse becomes impossible. So what does “relations” mean? Some definition might help explain why those relations are or are not permitted.

Similarly, the conjugal act in Ender’s post is what is impossible due to disability. Or does it have a wider meaning? The claim that there is an “inseparable connection” seems erroneous; are we to say that a married couple who cannot engage in the conjugal act are forbidden to express a love that unites them? That seems to be the claim. I can understand why different priests have different opinions on that.
 
Dovekin said:
husband and wife must separate (end all relations) if intercourse becomes impossible.
Click to expand...
Giant leap from “we are disabled and can no longer perform the marital act” and “must separate”. Marriage is a nice thing in marriage, it is not the be all and end all of marriage. Should that chapter close due to illness or infirmity, the couple simply moves to another chapter.
 
Just want to clarify here. I believe I misquoted the priest. What I think he actually said was that he’d be putting his soul on the line if he wasn’t telling me the truth.
 
I agree that speaking with a qualified person would be best. The problem is finding a qualified person. I thought my pastor was the most qualified person I knew.
 
I don’t know if I need to do this because I’ve recently read enough know the answer to my questions, but it may be good for the bishop to know what his priests are telling people.
 
13pollitos said:
my understanding is the couple would be required to abstain from relations if intercourse becomes impossible.
Click to expand...
This is what I was reaponding to. I offered opposite ends of a spectrum of what “relations” might mean; It could not mean intercourse, but neither could it mean end the marriage. So what does relations mean?
 
Any sexual relations. If intercourse is impossible than you must avoid anything that could be used as a “replacement” for intercourse.
 
Mutual masturbation intentionally done in order to climax is not permitted, if that is what you are asking.
 
TruthSkr said:
…
I have been raised in the Catholic faith to believe that what a priest tells you in the confessional is what you are to believe. Three out of four priests told me it’s not a mortal sin. …
Click to expand...
The Catechism should be used since priests make mistakes. Determination that one has committed a mortal sin requires information on grievous matter, sufficient reflection, and full consent of the will. The Catechism provides information on gravity, the others you provide.

Catechism
2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.
Click to expand...
Note the word and. So that will include the conjugal act and the preparation for it.

A marriage is consummated by a proper conjugal act. A spouse is not required to participate in what is improper. The Vatican has ruled that marriage is not consummated with the use of a condom. The Church is certainly “in the bedroom” when it comes to determining nullity. See the canon law which shows idea of total donation (CIC):
  • Can. 1061 §1. A valid marriage between the baptized is called ratum tantum if it has not been consummated; it is called ratum et consummatum if the spouses have performed between themselves in a human fashion a conjugal act which is suitable in itself for the procreation of offspring, to which marriage is ordered by its nature and by which the spouses become one flesh.
  • 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.
  • Can. 1135 Each spouse has an equal duty and right to those things which belong to the partnership of conjugal life.
Union should be intimate and chaste.

Catechism
2362 "The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; …
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
TheLittleLady said:
Mutual masturbation intentionally done in order to climax is not permitted, if that is what you are asking.
Click to expand...
What I was asking is what “relations” means, with the hope that we could understand why they are allowed or not. If mutual masturbation is what you mean by impernissible relations, why would it not be allowed?
13pollitos said:
If intercourse is impossible than you must avoid anything that could be used as a “replacement” for intercourse.
Click to expand...
A little better, since you give a reason, but there is no explanation of the reason. Why avoid anything that could be used as a “replacement” for what has been lost through disability? Do you also forbid prosthetic legs? If intercourse has a unitive role, why would you not replace it? Are you saying the marriage is over?
 
Dovekin said:
If mutual masturbation is what you mean by impernissible relations, why would it not be allowed?
Click to expand...
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2352.htm

2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. “Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action.” “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of “the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved.”

To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.
 
TheLittleLady said:
“The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.”
Click to expand...
We are discussing the use of it within marriage. The argument against masturbation here appears to be for a person performing it on himself. Why does it apply to a husband and wife who are unable to have intercourse? Is it that “mutual masturbation” is not an act of mutual self-giving? How does one know?

The failure to achieve “human procreation” is not possible in this scenario, so that cannot be part of the problem.
 
Dovekin said:
A little better, since you give a reason, but there is no explanation of the reason. Why avoid anything that could be used as a “replacement” for what has been lost through disability? Do you also forbid prosthetic legs? If intercourse has a unitive role, why would you not replace it? Are you saying the marriage is over?
Click to expand...
There are tons of writings and documents online about this very issue. TheLittleLady linked a few resources as well.
 
Yes! And our Lord desires that we pray and receive Him in the Eucharist in order to be open to His grace to carry our cross. He gave us everything we need to follow Him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top