Would Church allow marriage if couple doesn't want children but are open to it?

[TheAdvocate]

Would the Church allow marriage if couple doesn’t want children but are open to it? In other words, what if they don’t want to have children, hope they don’t have children, but they do not contracept, but only use NFP. Their attitude is, “Well, we’ll whatever we can to prevent conception (w/o resorting to artificial birth control), but if it happens, it happens…and we’ll welcome a baby and love little him or her.”

 

[robertkchacon]

Oh, good question! If the couple actually does not want children, it seems as though they really don’t want a marriage as understood by the Church. But, if they are open to children, they aren’t exactly closed to life either. They may not actively be seeking children but are open to Gods will. So, in a way they are truly submitting. Perhaps this is the minimum required to actually enter a valid marriage.

Good question. Interested in the correct answer.

Thanks!

 

[4love2God]

Hey, OP, you asked this question TWICE, in different sub-Forums, in 2 minutes.

I fully answered this question.

 

[1ke]

A real, permanent intention against children is an impediment to valid marriage.

This could have a material impact on the ability to give valid consent and would need to be disclosed to the pastor during the premarital preparation period. The pastor would need to carefully and thoroughly evaluate the situation and interview each person.

Anyone who says “yes” or “no” on this thread is speculating. In the end, only the pastor can determine, through thorough interviewing of the couple, whether or not an impediment to valid marriage exists.

 

[TheAdvocate]

Hey, OP, you asked this question TWICE, in different sub-Forums, in 2 minutes.

I fully answered this question.

Yes, I know. Sometimes people answer the question differently in different forum threads. I appreciate you answering this question. (Sometimes it’s hard to know where a topic belongs; this one, for instance, could legitimately be put into Family Life, Moral Theology, or the Sacraments sub-forum…I wish we had more categories.)

Thanks so much for answering my question.

 

[TheAdvocate]

A real, permanent intention against children is an impediment to valid marriage.

This could have a material impact on the ability to give valid consent and would need to be disclosed to the pastor during the premarital preparation period. The pastor would need to carefully and thoroughly evaluate the situation and interview each person.

Anyone who says “yes” or “no” on this thread is speculating. In the end, only the pastor can determine, through thorough interviewing of the couple, whether or not an impediment to valid marriage exists.

Ke, thanks for your response as always. You talk about the pastor interviewing each one to determine their individual situation. But what pastoral situation might permit them to marry in such a case?

 

[1ke]

Ke, thanks for your response as always. You talk about the pastor interviewing each one to determine their individual situation. But what pastoral situation might permit them to marry in such a case?

The situation would have to be that after interviewing them and understanding what they really mean by all this, it turns out they do not in fact have an intention against children. Because if they do, marriage is not possible. It’s a impediment to validly consenting to marriage.

“We don’t want children and we intend to never have any” smells like a permanent intention against children to me. If their will is fixed in this manner, they cannot give consent to one of the essential properties of marriage-- by a positive act of their will if they exclude this property of marriage then it is not a valid marriage.

 

[LisaB]

NFP can’t be validly used with what we call “contraceptive mentality.” So if you plan to carefully use it from the get-go and have no plans to stop, then yes, this would be an impediment to marriage. If you plan to be open to life and only use NFP for serious reasons, then it really doesn’t matter if you ‘want’ children or not. Feelings have nothing to do with validity of marriage, it’s your intent that matters. That said, no one is saying you have to have 10 kids. You may have a serious reason to stop after one. But you have to be careful not to use NFP as Catholic contraception, and that can be hard when you really don’t want any.

 

[chevalier]

According to my knowledge and understanding the intention to be always on NFP to avoid having children could lead to invalidity. Mere hoping that one would not have children would not lead to invalidity. Not desiring children but being ready to accept them wouldn’t either.

 

[pnewton]

A real, permanent intention against children is an impediment to valid marriage.

This could have a material impact on the ability to give valid consent and would need to be disclosed to the pastor during the premarital preparation period. The pastor would need to carefully and thoroughly evaluate the situation and interview each person.

Anyone who says “yes” or “no” on this thread is speculating. In the end, only the pastor can determine, through thorough interviewing of the couple, whether or not an impediment to valid marriage exists.

I think we are seeing the same thing worded different ways. No one can know this and a pastor would have to determine if the couple did not want children to the point of not being open to children, which is the impediment, which invalidates the marriage.

The question presents opposites and the actual position in between these two opposites would have to be determined.

 

[TheAdvocate]

What I’m talking about here is a couple that approaches a priest and tells them they have no desire to have children at all, and that they will do everything in their power–short of contraceptives–to prevent conception.

Marriage is supposed to be free, total, faithful, and fruitful. How can a priest allow them to marry, given that they don’t desire for the union to be fruitful? Intention matters when it comes to the validity of sacraments.

 

[1ke]

What I’m talking about here is a couple that approaches a priest and tells them they have no desire to have children at all, and that they will do everything in their power–short of contraceptives–to prevent conception.

Marriage is supposed to be free, total, faithful, and fruitful. How can a priest allow them to marry, given that they don’t desire for the union to be fruitful? Intention matters when it comes to the validity of sacraments.

We intend to never have children = permanent intention against children

 

[pnewton]

We intend to never have children = permanent intention against children

Exactly. Yet they also say they are open to children which does not equal permanent intention against children.

I think this is an excellent question and probably unanswerable without time and counseling.

 

[Mulligan2]

Some people don’t want children. Sex isn’t only for procreation. Think about it - how many children does the average couple have? 2 or 3?? So sex is procreative 2 or 3 times in their life. And it is unitive thousands of times.

 

[TheAdvocate]

Exactly. Yet they also say they are open to children which does not equal permanent intention against children.

I think this is an excellent question and probably unanswerable without time and counseling.

Not quite the same thing. They’re open to children in the sense that they won’t have an abortion if they’re pregnant, but they’re not intending to have children at all. I agree with 1ke on this one.

 

[oneofmany]

Read the marriage vows, I remember something in them about being open to having children so you would be taking a vow like that. If you ask the priest to leave that part out, he may refuse. You will need to ask your priest about this.

 

[pnewton]

Not quite the same thing. They’re open to children in the sense that they won’t have an abortion if they’re pregnant, but they’re not intending to have children at all. I agree with 1ke on this one.

Yes, they are not the same. Yet a permanent intention against children has a third meaning. Thus a priest would need to decide whether this third meaning is an obstacle to marriage.

I have no idea how this will play out. I am only noting the language.