Replies

"...the RCC denied a couple a church wedding because the man was not physically able to have sex due to spinal cord damage. IF the couple knows this and understands this they should be allowed marriage in any church."

The RCC was right to deny a church wedding in this case, because the attempted marriage would not have been valid, sacramentally, since it was not consummated physically. The meaning of marriage, according to the Bible, is that the two become one flesh. They are not one flesh if they cannot or do not perform the Act of Marriage.

This is why, as well, two men cannot get married, or two women, or two surgical neuters that don't have sexual organs at all. They may love each other, be beautifully and sincerely committed to each other, want to spend their lives together in mutual fidelity and unity of heart and mind --- might they not? two loving men? --- but they cannot marry precisely because they can not minister to each other the holy Act of Marriage, which is sacred bodily union of the type by which the human race is procreated.

It doesn't matter whether one or both of them are infertile. What matters for the Sacrament, is that they can and do perform the unique, specific act which makes them one flesh.

BTW, two men do not become "one flesh" no matter how tenderly devoted to each other they may be, and no matter what kind of jiggery-pokery they do. If it does not involve the husband ejaculating into the wife's genital tract, it is not a completed act of natural intercourse.

Historically, this is why the RCC Church said that King Henry VIII's marriage with his first wife, Catherneof Aragn, was valid and indissoluble. Henry said the first marriage was not valid because he was married to his brother's (Arthur's) widow. The Church said that although Catherine and Arthur had been married in Church, the marriage was never consummated (Arthur was very sick at the time of his marriage, and died not too long after) and therefore Catherine had validly married when he wedded Henry, and the marriage could not be annulled.

Thus having a rather serious impact on the course of history, as everybody knows.

Genesis ch 2 18And the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a companion who will help him.” 19So the LORD God formed from the soil every kind of animal and bird. He brought them to Adam£ to see what he would call them, and Adam chose a name for each one. 20He gave names to all the livestock, birds, and wild animals. But still there was no companion suitable for him. 21So the LORD God caused Adam to fall into a deep sleep. He took one of Adam’s ribs£ and closed up the place from which he had taken it. 22Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib and brought her to Adam. 23“At last!” Adam exclaimed. “She is part of my own flesh and bone! She will be called ‘woman,’ because she was taken out of a man.” 24This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.

Woman was given unto man before the fall BEFORE any sex act was recorded. Adam and Eve were man and wife in chapter 2. Sex is mentioned where? Chapter 4.

You insist upon bringing gay relationships into this discussion which the Bible specifically prohibits . Worse you try and lower a loving relationship of a heterosexual relationship to that one of a Biblical forbidden gay relationship. Please learn the difference.