Paladin D Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Wow, I think my credibility and I.Q. level has reached an all-time low. Please ignore my previous two posts, obviously I was not adding one and one together, and didn't realize how impotence would hinder the sacramental nature of marriage. I didn't connect the dots. This what happens when you read something too quick, don't think it through (or think at all), and comment on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thy Geekdom Come Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 [quote name='Kitty' post='1569327' date='Jun 12 2008, 01:12 AM']Well, it makes 0 sense to me. And besides, why does the church want to pry into this man's sexual capabilities? If this couple came to the bishop and asked to be married, did the bishop ask them if they could have sex? Isn't that an invasion of privacy?[/quote] The Church is the servant of God and helps us to understand God's will. God invented sex and He certainly intended it for something. Therefore, the Church has a right to tell us how to use it. Now, sacraments, such as Marriage, are based on nature, meaning that God's grace uses human nature and build on that. So in marriage, the union of two persons (grace) is based on physical union of two persons (nature). If two persons can't be physically united (nature), then there's nothing for grace to build on and the two can't truly be united. In fact, it's even simpler than that. You see, there are different kinds of marriages. There's a sacramental marriage (a marriage between two Christians, which has grace) and a natural marriage (there are more types of marriage, too, but they're irrelevant). Natural marriage is the most basic kind of marriage based on natural law. Its the most basic type of marriage. In order for a sacramental marriage to take place, a natural marriage must also be possible. Now, one qualification of a natural marriage (and therefore of a sacramental marriage) is that the couple consummate the marriage through the sex act. Since marriage always involves sex, a couple that can't have sex can't get married, even through natural marriage, the most basic kind of marriage. Since natural marriage isn't possible, and sacraments are built on nature, a sacramental marriage is also impossible. It's not the Church trying to be cruel, it's just the way things are. In fact, the Church quite understandably is sad for those involved, but we can't change the way things are. If a disease or injury keeps a person from being able to have sex, the Church can't let that person marry any more than the Church can cure cancer. It's just the way things are. As for the privacy of the man involved, generally, these sorts of things are discussed as a part of pre-cana, when the engaged couple discusses marriage with the priest, so that all this can be sorted out. It's not an invasion of privacy because this is an area where the Church has a right to speak up and discuss things with people. The Church is like a doctor, she has the right to get involved in very personal things. God bless, Micah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prose Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Can somebody please explain to me why the Church has approved marriages for couples that are non-sexual. Like... hmmm ... lemme think of one... A non-sexual couple.... Um Mary and Joseph???? And there are other instances where the Church has approved marriages that are not sexual in nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCid Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 (edited) I just did a little bit of research and would like to withdraw my question on 'What about a Josephite marriage?' From what I read up on from [url="http://jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2005/07/marys_marriage.html"]Jimmy Akin[/url]'s blog, it appears that a couple must still have the possibility to consumate the marriage to enter into such a marriage. To quote directly: [quote]Impotence is the inability to perform the marital act. Perpetual and incurable impotence is an impediment to marriage because marriage involves exchanging the right to conjugal relations. Giving valid matrimonial consent means binding oneself to pay the marriage debt if the other party reasonably requests it. Therefore, if you don't have the ability to pay the marriage debt then you cannot truthfully promise to render it to another. Consueqently, you cannot give another the right to conjugal relations with you, and thus you cannot exchange valid matrimonial consent. It is possible, however, to exchange the right to conjugal relations even if neither party plans to exercise that right. To parties can plan never to have conjugal relations and yet exchange the right to do so should one or the other (or both) change their minds.[/quote] -edit- Prose, I believe this would answer your just posted question. Edited June 12, 2008 by CatholicCid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 (edited) [quote name='prose' post='1569346' date='Jun 12 2008, 02:30 AM']Can somebody please explain to me why the Church has approved marriages for couples that are non-sexual. Like... hmmm ... lemme think of one... A non-sexual couple.... Um Mary and Joseph???? And there are other instances where the Church has approved marriages that are not sexual in nature.[/quote] Josephite marriages? I'm curious about this as well (since I'm ignorant on the issue). [size=5][b]Edit:[/b][/size] Seems like [b][i]CatholicCid[/b][/i] satisfied my curiousity. Edited June 12, 2008 by Paladin D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deus te Amat Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 What about St. Therese's parents? They were advised, by their spiritual director, to live as brother and sister for many years, to increase their devotion to God. Eventually, he told them to make it a physical relationship, and so Therese and her sisters were born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 [quote name='Deus_te_Amat' post='1569350' date='Jun 12 2008, 02:38 AM']What about St. Therese's parents? They were advised, by their spiritual director, to live as brother and sister for many years, to increase their devotion to God. Eventually, he told them to make it a physical relationship, and so Therese and her sisters were born.[/quote] See [b]CatholicCid[/b]'s find, it's a couple posts above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 It's not the civil marriage or remarriage after divorce that gets you in trouble with the church, it's the sex. If two people are living together, but non having sex, then there is no impediment to their receiving communion. To have a sacramental marriage, there has to be an indistinguishable bond. It is the one sacrament that isn't actually conferred by the priest, but rather by the couple. They confer the sacrament on each other, and the priest is just a witness to the vows. That's why when a couple who has been married civilly, when they have their church ceremony, it is called a marriage blessing. The sacrament isn't complete until it is consummated, even if it is only consummated once, then there is a bond. To those of us who have experienced this sacrament, the rules make complete sense. The church is just codifying what we have known for centuries about marriage, but lately as a society seem to have lost track of, and that is the bond between a man and woman. I heard it described once as two people who love each other so much, that they want to be as close as they can possibly become. Becoming one in marriage is something that only a man and a woman can experience, and everything else is just a pale imitation, that includes gay marriage, promiscuity, or self abuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aalpha1989 Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 I'd just like to say that I'm sorry for coming down so hard on you guys and Paladin, you show amazing humility which I wish I had. I work at it, but you are much better . Maybe that's why you deserve the flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thy Geekdom Come Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 [quote name='CatherineM' post='1569384' date='Jun 12 2008, 02:46 AM']It's not the civil marriage or remarriage after divorce that gets you in trouble with the church, it's the sex. If two people are living together, but non having sex, then there is no impediment to their receiving communion.[/quote] That's not entirely accurate. Grave scandal can also be an impediment to Communion, and cohabitating is a scandalous thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 I went for training last week at the Tribunal office to be a liaison between the office and people who are seeking an annulment. I was really surprised when impotence was stated as a grounds and that if one or both parties were aware of this prior to the marriage, the marriage was invalid. Someone asked about two people who were past the age of being able to consummate the marriage who wanted to get married and they said no, the marriage is not valid if you can't consummate it. Raphael, your response was great. Marriage is all about the natural law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 [quote name='Raphael' post='1569432' date='Jun 12 2008, 09:00 AM']That's not entirely accurate. Grave scandal can also be an impediment to Communion, and cohabitating is a scandalous thing.[/quote] So... what you're saying is that it [i]may[/i] cause scandal because people [i]may[/i] erroneously believe that the paraplegic man is having sex with a woman who is not his wife. But if he actually could have sex with her, he would make her his wife. But since he can't, they can't marry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardillacid Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 [quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1569455' date='Jun 12 2008, 09:27 AM']So... what you're saying is that it [i]may[/i] cause scandal because people [i]may[/i] erroneously believe that the paraplegic man is having sex with a woman who is not his wife. But if he actually could have sex with her, he would make her his wife. But since he can't, they can't marry.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thy Geekdom Come Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 [quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1569455' date='Jun 12 2008, 09:27 AM']So... what you're saying is that it [i]may[/i] cause scandal because people [i]may[/i] erroneously believe that the paraplegic man is having sex with a woman who is not his wife. But if he actually could have sex with her, he would make her his wife. But since he can't, they can't marry.[/quote] I was just making a general statement, not one specific to this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Hrm... I might be mangling this, but from my foggy memory from my Christian Marriage class... The marriage is not "complete" until it is consummated. The vows stated in public are the public witness for what happens in the bedroom later. That is why sexual intercourse consummates the marriage and it is called the "marriage act." Please correct me if I've remembered wrong. It's been six years since then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now