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.
Is homosexual sex unitive? I don’t think it is. What is it that is uniting? Purely on the physical level, as wideawake indicated, it’s hard to see how sperm cells are in any way uniting with the cells of someone’s descending colon. With natural intercourse, there is a true union and true fusion that results in a new human being.
The only possible uniting that could be going on between two men is spiritual. But you can share a spiritual bond with all kinds of people without bedding them, so I’m not sure why sodomy enters into the picture.
Essentially, what homosexuality does is that it seeks a good—the spiritual union of two souls—and then improperly moves it into a sexual venue. A while back I read some testimony from folks who had “lived the life” and then for various reasons left it. Many of them were very clear about their psychological motivations—they said they craved male companionship, but no matter how many men they slept with, they could never find it. To me, biology aside, that’s Exhibit A of the non-unitive nature of homosexuality.
That’s much better, but still unacceptable.
He should have just said “no comment on private matters,” regardless of being “attacked” or not.
When Church teaching is publicly attacked, it must be publicly defended.
Mt 10:27
It was no longer a private matter the moment the complainer went to the press.
The verse cited does not support your proposition of defending the roman regulation.
This is the message at issue in that verse is this:
7As you go, preach this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven is near.’ 8Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy,[b]drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=10&version=31
Please again note, I have zero against the RCC or RCs.
It’s a fine denomination.
I do respectfully think that the RCC, like all denominations are wont to do (Baptists with their dunking and no drinking comes to mind), add well-meaning, but ultimately misquided, rules and regulations to the Gospel.
“Is homosexual sex unitive? I don’t think it is. What is it that is uniting? Purely on the physical level, as wideawake indicated, it’s hard to see how sperm cells are in any way uniting with the cells of someone’s descending colon. With natural intercourse, there is a true union and true fusion that results in a new human being.”
I guess I should confess that to my ol’ protestant self, this bishop’s decision sounds pretty silly. However, your post brings up exactly the confusion that I had. Wideawake appears to be distinguishing between the physical union of two people (i.e. Part A going into Slot B — “unitive”) and the union of sperm and egg (i.e. “procreative”). Thus, you’re making the case that I’m quite familiar with — that homosexual marriage is not procreative. However, wideawake notes that Catholics believe that unitive sex is sufficient grounds for marriage.
“The only possible uniting that could be going on between two men is spiritual.”
I’ve heard that there are ways of physically uniting these folks. Wideawake has suggested that this doesn’t count, though, because Slot C and Slot B are not morally equivalent. Having been raised with admonitions to stay away from Catholics, I never really understood their theology. It’s interesting to hear a little about it.
The original intention of woman's creation was not for reproduction but rather companionship. Read Genesis 2 Reproduction came after the curse. Placing this burden upon men and women as an absolute is as ridiculous as having them pluck out their eyes if it causes them to sin. Does the church require that also? No!
The reason marriage is falling apart in the west is because the blasted government under LBJ created the great society. Men were going around fathering children not being responsible for them. Taking care of ones own by society was abandoned. Let the government do it. It is a moral decline and many a child was born because of it out of wedlock. So the idea that sex cures it all even in marriage is RIDICLOUS! Reproduction is but a small part of overall marriage it is a blessing if it happens. It's important but is not the sole purpose of marriage & why man and women are united. That was not the origional intention.
If you are not going to read what I wrote, then please refrain from commenting on it.
Lots of things sound silly until they are explained well, so no harm there. :)
It’s a tangled question, and I’m trying also to wrap my brain around this in terms of the model marriage of Mary and Joseph and the longstanding tradition of married saints embracing voluntary celibacy. I’ll have to think about it some more.
As to your comment about hypothetical ways to “unite” two male gametes...maybe, but even so, that unity would take place in the laboratory and not in the bedroom. The sex would still be as sterile as ever.
If you cannot consummate the marriage, don't get married in a Catholic church. How hard is that to understand?
No you did not.
Had you read what I wrote, you would have realized that I addressed the unitive aspect of marriage as well as the procreative - yet you characterize my posts as only looking at the procreative and not the unitive.
The issue in question here is not the man's infertility or fertility - it is his impotence.
So what? Geesh and you think today's society in the west is screwed up yet you can not it seems understand why? I want you to have sex says the church or else! Good grief!
Many secure and loving marriages are absent such act and flourish and are GOD centered. So tell me this then how is the Bishop even gonna tell if the man is cured? Look upon him during sex to have a look see? Paraplegia doesn't necessarilly mean impotence nor does quadriplegia.
This is insanity and misapplication of laws at their very worst. BTW his seed unless he was medically castrated {not the same thing as impotent} is still there and can be extracted.
That's not what is being said.
So tell me this then how is the Bishop even gonna tell if the man is cured? Look upon him during sex to have a look see?
If someone wants his wedding to be blessed by the Church, the Church will ask him whether or not the impediments to marriage apply.
Apparently the question was asked, and the answer given showed that there was an impediment to Christian marriage.
BTW his seed unless he was medically castrated {not the same thing as impotent} is still there and can be extracted.
The Church does not sanction artificial reproduction.
The RC Church tolorates a lot or breaking of it’s doctorines if the name is right. It tolorates the presence in it’s buildings and gives communion to a political family which calls for the murder of the unborn yet strains at a man and a woman being joined in marriage? What’s wrong with this picture? Something is very wrong and very missing. One set of laws for some and another set for others. But such is the state of many of todays churches. One church even invoking Christ name as it’s own leads the way in our moral decline. The United Church of Christ for example.
Now as for marriage though if the RC Church truly went by the absolute teachings given the Romans then indeed very, very, few would ever get married :>} Most of us realize the even Paul had his own prejudices and weaknesses.
Interesting claim.
It tolorates the presence in it’s buildings
Are you really unaware of the notion of a "public accomodation"?
and gives communion to a political family which calls for the murder of the unborn
I see - so your entire argument is that if some priest somewhere does the wrong thing, and another priest does the right thing, then the priest who does the right thing should be condemned.
yet strains at a man and a woman being joined in marriage?
The man in question is incapable of contracting marriage. The bishop cannot in conscience pretend that a non-marriage is a marriage.
Why should he be forced to lie to God, to himself and to the rest of the faithful so that two individuals can feel better about themselves?
Basically, your issue is that you do not agree with the Catholic Church on the necessary criteria for a marriage.
You are saying that the Catholic Church is wrong for not breaking God's law in order to accomodate two individuals.
You spoke earlier about "breaking doctrine" - when a person who shouldn't receive communion receives communion, this is a break in discipline - not doctrine.
It would be departing from Christian doctrine to pretend that a non-marriage is a marriage and proclaim it to be so.
I think the bishop was off the mark here. He's the bishop though and what he says goes in his diocese. If I were that man I'd find another bishop. Does the bishop not belive in the healing power of God. Is he certain that God will never allow a healing in this man? What about adoption? Adopted children deserve a loving two parent home as much as any other child.
I'm as Catholic as the Pope but I think this bishop was dead wrong.
To reiterate for the umpteenth time: there is a difference between infertility and impotence.
I'm as Catholic as the Pope but I think this bishop was dead wrong.
The bishop is following the Code of Canon Law, which is promulgated by this Pope as much as any other.
Canon Law on the subject:
SPECIFIC DIRIMENT IMPEDIMENTS
Can. 1083 §1. A man before he has completed his sixteenth year of age and a woman before she has completed her fourteenth year of age cannot enter into a valid marriage.
§2. The conference of bishops is free to establish a higher age for the licit celebration of marriage.
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.
The Catechism gives an understanding on what the difference is between sterility and impotence as per a valid marriage:
V. The Goods and Requirements of Conjugal Love
1643 "Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter - appeal of the body and instinct, power of feeling and affectivity, aspiration of the spirit and of will. It aims at a deeply personal unity, a unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility. In a word it is a question of the normal characteristics of all natural conjugal love, but with a new significance which not only purifies and strengthens them, but raises them to the extent of making them the expression of specifically Christian values."150
The unity and indissolubility of marriage
1644 The love of the spouses requires, of its very nature, the unity and indissolubility of the spouses' community of persons, which embraces their entire life: "so they are no longer two, but one flesh."151 They "are called to grow continually in their communion through day-to-day fidelity to their marriage promise of total mutual self-giving."152 This human communion is confirmed, purified, and completed by communion in Jesus Christ, given through the sacrament of Matrimony. It is deepened by lives of the common faith and by the Eucharist received together.
1645 "The unity of marriage, distinctly recognized by our Lord, is made clear in the equal personal dignity which must be accorded to man and wife in mutual and unreserved affection."153 Polygamy is contrary to conjugal love which is undivided and exclusive.154
The fidelity of conjugal love
1646 By its very nature conjugal love requires the inviolable fidelity of the spouses. This is the consequence of the gift of themselves which they make to each other. Love seeks to be definitive; it cannot be an arrangement "until further notice." the "intimate union of marriage, as a mutual giving of two persons, and the good of the children, demand total fidelity from the spouses and require an unbreakable union between them."155
1647 The deepest reason is found in the fidelity of God to his covenant, in that of Christ to his Church. Through the sacrament of Matrimony the spouses are enabled to represent this fidelity and witness to it. Through the sacrament, the indissolubility of marriage receives a new and deeper meaning.
1648 It can seem difficult, even impossible, to bind oneself for life to another human being. This makes it all the more important to proclaim the Good News that God loves us with a definitive and irrevocable love, that married couples share in this love, that it supports and sustains them, and that by their own faithfulness they can be witnesses to God's faithful love. Spouses who with God's grace give this witness, often in very difficult conditions, deserve the gratitude and support of the ecclesial community.156
1649 Yet there are some situations in which living together becomes practically impossible for a variety of reasons. In such cases the Church permits the physical separation of the couple and their living apart. the spouses do not cease to be husband and wife before God and so are not free to contract a new union. In this difficult situation, the best solution would be, if possible, reconciliation. the Christian community is called to help these persons live out their situation in a Christian manner and in fidelity to their marriage bond which remains indissoluble.157
1650 Today there are numerous Catholics in many countries who have recourse to civil divorce and contract new civil unions. In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ - "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery"158 The Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognized as valid, if the first marriage was. If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God's law. Consequently, they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists. For the same reason, they cannot exercise certain ecclesial responsibilities. Reconciliation through the sacrament of Penance can be granted only to those who have repented for having violated the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ, and who are committed to living in complete continence.
1651 Toward Christians who live in this situation, and who often keep the faith and desire to bring up their children in a Christian manner, priests and the whole community must manifest an attentive solicitude, so that they do not consider themselves separated from the Church, in whose life they can and must participate as baptized persons:
They should be encouraged to listen to the Word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts for justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God's grace.159
The openness to fertility
1652 "By its very nature the institution of marriage and married love is ordered to the procreation and education of the offspring and it is in them that it finds its crowning glory."160
Children are the supreme gift of marriage and contribute greatly to the good of the parents themselves. God himself said: "It is not good that man should be alone," and "from the beginning (he) made them male and female"; wishing to associate them in a special way in his own creative work, God blessed man and woman with the words: "Be fruitful and multiply." Hence, true married love and the whole structure of family life which results from it, without diminishment of the other ends of marriage, are directed to disposing the spouses to cooperate valiantly with the love of the Creator and Savior, who through them will increase and enrich his family from day to day.161
1653 The fruitfulness of conjugal love extends to the fruits of the moral, spiritual, and supernatural life that parents hand on to their children by education. Parents are the principal and first educators of their children.162 In this sense the fundamental task of marriage and family is to be at the service of life.163
1654 Spouses to whom God has not granted children can nevertheless have a conjugal life full of meaning, in both human and Christian terms. Their marriage can radiate a fruitfulness of charity, of hospitality, and of sacrifice.
So the bottom line is that relationship that characterizes marriage is built through conjugal love. Without that conjugal love, a true marriage cannot be built. Not to say that a close brother-sister relationship cannot exist or thrive, but not a genuine marriage.
I read your responses and they seem pharisitical at best. These people are doing nothing illicit, immoral or unnatural. How about a little Christian Charity?
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.