Posted on 06/09/2008 1:00:14 PM PDT by Borges
Melbourne, June 9: A paraplegic man was recently denied a church marriage by a bishop in Italy because he was impotent, say reports.
The 26-year-old man ultimately had to go for a civil marriage on Saturday in Viterbo.
"No bishop, no priest can celebrate a wedding when he knows of admitted impotence as it is a motive for annulment (of the marriage),'' the Australian quoted Salvatore de Ciuco, spokesman for Bishop Lorenzo Chiarinelli of Viterbo in central Italy, as telling SkyTG24 television.
The groom has been paraplegic since he was involved in a car accident, said the television report.
His fiancee was aware of his impotency, the report added.
The curate of the parish, who was banned from marrying the couple, was present at their civil ceremony.
I may not be able to have children because of chemotherapy. So I guess that means I am doomed to be alone for my entire life.
I'm betting that the bishop did NOT "speak out about this man's very private problems."
I am betting that this man with very private problems spoke out about them.
You seem to think the purpose of marriage is only about sex and nothing more and that true love and spiritual connection can only be achieved through intercourse.
I may not have a lot of experience in this field but I would hope love is deeper than that and just being able to be in the presence of my wife would spiritually fulfill me.
IS THAT WHAT I SAID?, SERIOUSLY SHOW ME WHERE THOSE WERE MY EXACT WORDS!
People like you that read what you want to read really tick me off.
Wideawake, others and myself, have gone into great detail about the difference between impotency, and sterility, and why the former is an impediment to marriage but the latter isn't.
Here is my best advice; Go back Read ALL the posts especially the ones that Wideawake explains why impotency is an impediment, but sterility isn't, Then read the posts the cites the pertinent canons.
After doing that come back here and say "Wow Verga, you are one smart dude, I am really sorry that I didn't understand your post(s) the first time."
The Word of God says that marriage requires the ability of each spouse to partake in the unitive aspect of the sacrament, at minimum.
The bishop is merely passing the Word along.
Furthermore, it required about 550 years for the Catholic Church to admit that Galileo was correct, the Earth was in orbit about the Sun.
That is a complete myth, invented by the Church's enemies for propaganda purposes and retailed by the gullible.
Not in the slightest. Apparently you are unable to grasp this very simple teaching.
You seem to think the purpose of marriage is only about sex and nothing more and that true love and spiritual connection can only be achieved through intercourse.
Nothing I wrote suggests that. That is a straw man you have invented in order to avoid the real issue.
I may not have a lot of experience in this field but I would hope love is deeper than that and just being able to be in the presence of my wife would spiritually fulfill me.
Again, a human being is - by God's design - eternally composed of a body as well as a soul.
Pretending we are only souls is an attitude that leads to false doctrine.
Sorry, I go by the Bible and no where in the Bible is impotency a disqualification for marriage, or reason for divorce.
So in order to have a valid physical and spiritual marriage a couple need have sex only once? Believe it or not there are many couples out there who rarely if ever have sex and are deeply in love, to deny someone the sacred bond of marriage because of a physical defect is wrong. This type of teaching sounds like it comes right from the twisted mind of Muhammad.
No you don't go by the Bible, if you did you would be Catholic.
Second, That was not your initial position, But since the law and the facts don't support your position you need to go to your fall back position.
Let me know when you want to have a real discussion.
If you are going adopt a doctrine you need to site scripture and not the Church.
Wrong again.
Believe it or not there are many couples out there who rarely if ever have sex and are deeply in love, to deny someone the sacred bond of marriage because of a physical defect is wrong.
Speaking of "denying" marriage is just silly. One might as well say that the Church is denying the couple the ability to fly.
The fact is that he is incapable of contracting a valid marriage - there is no decision involved.
It is not as if the bishop could have sanctioned the marriage and the fact that he did not was a personal decision he made that could have gone the other way.
The bishop simply does not have the authority to solemnize a marriage when one of the spouses is incapable of marriage.
This type of teaching sounds like it comes right from the twisted mind of Muhammad.
In other words, if you are unable to grasp the argument, then you believe it makes sense to insult what you cannot comprehend.
This teaching comes straight from Holy Scripture - if you have an issue with it, take it up with Almighty God.
What about older couples who want to marry?
This is what my Bible says: The Church is the Pillar and Ground of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15)
Nothing in there about scripture being the pillar and foundation of anything.
Have you actually read the Bible, or just the verses you quote out of context?
I want to see a verse dealing solely with the issue of sex. So the Bible has no meaning or foundation. John 3:16 means nothing, but a council of learned bishops means everything?
If this is true why even read the Bible, just listen to the Pope.
1 Cor 7:3-5 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
Matthew 19:10 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” 11 But he said to them, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.”
Matthew 19:5.
Millions of men over the age of forty suffer from this problem and still enjoy a wonderful marriage.
LOL! That's why Viagra is such a very unpopular drug - because impotent men are so happily married.
I am young (23) but still feel I could be happily married and never have sex over the course of my life.
Good luck finding a spouse who feels the same way.
If you are going adopt a doctrine you need to site scripture and not the Church.
Here's an interesting passage of Scripture in which Saint Paul tells us why he is writing the Scripture in the first place:
"I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."
Your attempt to set up the Scriptures and the Church as opposing forces is illogical. The Church is the human author of, the preserver of, the defender of and the interpreter of the Scriptures - and is guided in these tasks by the Holy Spirit.
But I guess what you are saying is an impotent man can live with his girlfriend as long as he wants because no sex can happen and thus there is no sinning involved.
Also there are many ways to have a sexually fulfilling relationship without vaginal intercourse.
Having many friends in the Catholic Church, I have tried for years to understand it. I have read many issues here and elsewhere and the banter between the Catholics and non-Catholics. It is just so far apart from my Christian beliefs on so many levels, I just don’t get it. This issue is just one more time I say, WHAT????
That wasn't my point, which you completely avoided.
Also there are many ways to have a sexually fulfilling relationship without vaginal intercourse.
Of course, all of those ways are directly contrary to Christian morality.
The sin of the sodomites was not non traditional sex, it was sex outside of marraige and degrading sexual acts. In the bonds of marraige any act done out of love and with respect to each spouse is not sinful.
I believe your point about Viagra is that most people are driven by sex in their marriage and see it as a very important aspect to their marriage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.