Where did the anti-family vibe come from?

[Jeremiah1278]

But I don’t have to say that. All I have to say is that I’m sterile. I don’t have to give a reason why I’m sterile. The Church will not refuse to marry someone who cannot have kids.

Of course the won’t refuse to witness and bless the marriage of someone who cannot have kids as long as that couple is open to life.

BTW, the process is a little different than what you might think if you’re saying, “All I have to do is say that I’m sterile… I don’t have to give a reason why I’m sterile.” The priest has a list of questions he must ask you. I don’t think there’s a question directly asking you whether you are sterile. He’s going to ask directly: Are you are open to having children and do you intend to raise them in the Catholic faith? So when you answer “no, we are not open to having children,” the matter is sort of closed. I’m sure at that point, it may come up that you are sterilized, but the cat’s out of the bag. The reason for your sterility is already out. So, in fact, why you are sterile is the very thing the priest will need to know.

Good luck to ya. I’m not being judgy. Just saying that the Church only recognizes marriage which is the unitive thing that happens when two people get together with hearts intent on replicating God’s greatest creation. You guys want a lifelong couple commitment thing, which is beautiful, but you don’t seem to want that which the Church recognizes as marriage.

 

[sweetpetunia]

But I don’t have to say that. All I have to say is that I’m sterile. I don’t have to give a reason why I’m sterile. The Church will not refuse to marry someone who cannot have kids.

You are correct that sterility neither impedes nor nullifies a marriage. (Antecedent and perpetual impotence does, but that’s a whole other matter.) Still, what you are saying sounds like a lie of omission to me. Depending upon the subject matter, a lie of omission can certainly invalidate a marriage.

Furthermore, I am not by any means an expert on canon law, but from my (albeit lay person’s) understanding, it would seem to me that you would not validly contract marriage as stipulated in Canon Law 1101.2.

Canon 1101.2 If, however, either or both of the parties should by a positive act of will exclude marriage itself or any essential element of marriage or any essential property, such party contracts invalidly.

E.T.A. When my husband and I got married, during the interview (of which parts were conducted separately and together) our priest has us take an oath (actually swear on the bible) that we would answer to the best of our knowledge the questions which were asked us of concerning our ability to contract marriage validly. He actually asked us multiple questions worded in such a way that it would be impossible to be evasive in the manner which you suggest.