Vasectomy, contraception, marriage

[mizznicole]

So I see from a previous thread that one can presumably marry a man with a vasectomy validly.

Why then are couples who have contracepted their entire marriage able to be given annulments on the grounds that they never consummated the vows?

Or is that scenario actually false?

Thank you, aspiring canonists.

 

[thistle]

So I see from a previous thread that one can presumably marry a man with a vasectomy validly.

Why then are couples who have contracepted their entire marriage able to be given annulments on the grounds that they never consummated the vows?

Or is that scenario actually false?

Thank you, aspiring canonists.

You are confusing infertility and impotence.

Permanent and known impotence prior to a marriage bars the person marrying in the Catholic Church. If impotence is found out after the marriage has taken place (and no medication like viagara can help) then its impossible to consummate the marriage which can then be dissolved.
Infertility is not a bar to marriage. Consummation only requires the husband’s penetration of his wife and a vasectomy does not prevent that.

 

[cameron_lansing]

So I see from a previous thread that one can presumably marry a man with a vasectomy validly.

Why then are couples who have contracepted their entire marriage able to be given annulments on the grounds that they never consummated the vows?

Or is that scenario actually false?

Thank you, aspiring canonists.

While I do not fall into that category, Thistle is quite accurate.

To elaborate though, if either or both parties formulated an intention by a positive act of the will to exclude children at the time of marital consent (the wedding) and then practiced contraception throughout the common life, there is a smoke of invalidity.

Since marriage is oriented to the good of spouses and to the good of children, a person cannot marry validity without including those aspects in his or her consent. The law presumes that when people marry, they do include them though (canon 1101 §1).

So, see canon 1055 §1. The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, which is ordered by its nature toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized.

And canon 1101 §2. If, however, either or both of the parties by a positive act of the will exclude marriage itself, some essential element of marriage, or some essential property of marriage, the party contracts invalidly.

That would have to be examined by a tribunal, of course, in a concrete case.

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

So, if a Catholic, faithful to the Church’s teachings on contraception, marries a non-Catholic, who does use contraception, would this marriage automatically be null? It has been said on this forum that a faithful Catholic is not obligated to abstain from sexual intercourse with his or her contraception-using spouse. However, if the non-Catholic entered into the marriage with the intent to use contraception, would this mean that the marriage was not truly contracted? If so, would it not be fornication for the faithful Catholic and his or her spouse to engage in sexual intercourse? Or, is the marriage presumed to be valid until an annulment is sought and granted?

 

[mizznicole]

Consummation only requires the husband’s penetration of his wife and a vasectomy does not prevent that.

Is that in canon law?

thx

 

[1ke]

Is that in canon law?

thx

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.

 

[Seatuck]

So, if a Catholic, faithful to the Church’s teachings on contraception, marries a non-Catholic, who does use contraception, would this marriage automatically be null? It has been said on this forum that a faithful Catholic is not obligated to abstain from sexual intercourse with his or her contraception-using spouse. However, if the non-Catholic entered into the marriage with the intent to use contraception, would this mean that the marriage was not truly contracted? If so, would it not be fornication for the faithful Catholic and his or her spouse to engage in sexual intercourse? Or, is the marriage presumed to be valid until an annulment is sought and granted?

All marriages are presumed valid until evidence contrary to that is brought to a competent authority in the church. Although there are the obvious ones that everyone can see such as not being married in the church without a dispensation.

Intent is also important. Catholic Marriage is called to be open to life at least at some point. So the contracepting spouse would need to be found to have denied that at the time of the marriage and was intending to never have children at any time during the marriage.

 

[otjm]

And as an aside, not all vasectomies “take”, and some have been able to be reversed.