Posted on 06/09/2008 1:00:14 PM PDT by Borges
Indeed.
Marriage, according to Scripture, has both a unitive and a procreative aspect.
A person who is involuntarily infertile can still participate in the unitive aspect of marriage.
A male who is permanently impotent can participate in neither aspect of marriage, and is therefore incapable of validly contracting marriage.
In other words, your definition of compassion is to choose to offend God in order to please men and their sentimental preoccupations.
Hadn't you heard that life isn't about truth? It's about feelings.
If you don't get the answer you really, really wanted when you ask a question, it's because the truth is mean.
No one here wants a God who asks sacrifices of us.
It's about faith and some it seems are lacking in it. IF a spouse married to someone who is incapable of a sex act makes them tempted then how much more so those who are required vows of celibacy for Nun's or Priest? Sex is only a part of marriage it does not make it or break it. Ever hear of the term adversity? Adversity is GOD's tempering tool to mode, shape, and strengthen persons. One believer facing adversity is strong through the Grace of GOD. Two persons facing adversity together are very strong especially I GOD is in the marriage because Three Cord Rope is not easily broken.
So which is it? Church Laws or compassion, love and mercy GOD ask of us? You, me, the Pope, nor a Protestant preacher does not know whom GOD brings together, His Divine purpose or reasoning for the union may not be known for years later. Christ warned us all of becoming obsessed with Laws while ignoring compassion, love, and mercy. I understand the situation and the answers should come from the couple and an answer from GOD himself via The Holy Spirit. Or is that a feeling also? I don't think so. The presence of the Holy Spirit and guidance can be a very Live, overcoming, and real event.
Thank you for your support, I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one on this side of this issue.
You'll notice that the bishop doesn't use phrases like "screw you", unlike yourself. He is respectful, reverent, and obedient to the matrimonial policies of his Church, the true Church which has been around for 2,000 years. The Catholic Church is the leading promoter of traditional marriage between a man and a woman, with procreation an obvious and expected outcome. The Catholic Church is in no way opposed to this man's marriage outside The Church.
and go get married in the church of a more compassionate Christian denomination.
You have your choice of 10,000 prottie me-too denominations for your ceremony so I'm sure you won't go un-hitched. Maybe you can bring in some Black Sabbath or something even more irreverent.
What do either of you know about the sacrifices a spouse to a disable person makes? What do you know about what GOD may ask of a person to do? It is not something to be taken lightly. 23 years +two weeks ago I buried my beloved first love in the prime of our lives. Two months later I found friendship with a woman raising two kids alone. The friendship grew but marriage wasn't the goal. Then came the afternoon when our world as we knew it changed forever. She nearly died while I was rushing her to the hospital. That evening her arms would not come down from her chest. The doctors told us quadriplegia and gave little hope. A week later two preachers entered her room and I was there. But there was another in there as well as the men began praying over her and laying on hands.
A very real presence we all felt a voice only I heard. "It's going to be OK". Well Praise the Lord she's gonna walk soon. Nope a few weeks passed no walking just hand movement.
Feelings? Yea I had some them I lost all feeling I had for anyone including myself. I panicked and I ran but not far or long. I went back that night and a Nun {I'm not RC BTW} talked to me and asked me what was troubling me and I tried to explain it. She said the body and mind must have rest. It worked.
But what about what I was told? What did it all mean? I loved this woman and she loved me. She was facing 4 more months in the hospital. I knew in my heart what was to be although I did not understand and acted in faith because what was being asked of me I was incapable of doing especially the rest of my life. I asked her to marry me. Not out of pity or sense of duty but rather love. I knew in my heart what was right and I knew not to do so was wrong. Running away did not work.
Man oh man we had a rough time the first year. As our time together grew so did our bond so did our GOD dependency to see us through. 14 years ago came my disability. GOD works in mysterious ways. I have the brawn she needs and she has the ability to help me when I have problems functioning mentally during attacks.
How wonderful and wise GOD is to see into our futures and place us together :>} Now I would hate to think of where I would be now had I not married my dear wife. ADVERSITY! The Potters tool to strengthen his creations. It took me over a decade to realize "It's going to be OK" and why.
Compassion does not offend God. Sanctimoniousness does offend God, just like the behavior of the Pharisees.
The problem isn’t that he can’t have children, the problem is that he is unable to have intercourse. The Church teaches that intercourse, or the ability of a couple to join together and become one flesh, is a very important part of marriage. A couple has to be open to the possibility of life, but sometimes the couple is unable to concieve. It’s impossible for this couple to have intercourse. That is why the Church will not marry them.
See my post 49. As long as they are able to have sex, they can get married.
Thanks, Pinkbell...
Ed
Abraham was not impotent, but Sarah was unable to conceive- hence the “borrowing” of Hagar to produce a son. According to the criteria above, the Roman Church would not have married Sarah and Abraham because the two could not produce a child. But the Lord is Great, and Sarah was able to conceive even though men thought her to be barren.
Didn’t the same thing happen with St. John the Baptist’s parents?
So will the Roman Church cease marrying women who have passed menapause?
Want the church of "compassion"? See Oprah. I wonder what the first words God spoken to humans in the Bible are?
Thanks for the clear, succinct explanation.
Is it compassion to "marry" two men? After all, they really want to pretend to be married, and they will be very sad and hurt if they are not allowed to. Wouldn't God be pleased if someone were compassionate enough to bless their "union"?
Sanctimoniousness does offend God, just like the behavior of the Pharisees.
I see. You don't know what the word "sanctimonious" means.
False. As I have said about ten times now, impotence is an impediment to marriage. Involuntary sterility is not.
Scripture informs us that marriage has two purposes: unitive (that is, a physical and spiritual union - "the two become one flesh") and procreative (that is, having children - "be fruitful and multiply").
Not every marriage can fulfill both purposes, but it must fulfill at least one purpose - and since the unitive purpose undergirds the procreative purpose, the unitive is the minimum standard for contracting a valid marriage. If a relationship is neither unitive nor procreative, then it is not a marriage relationship but something else.
Another issue: impotence and infertility are two different things.
An impotent man may be fertile: i.e. he may be able to produce sperm but unable to have an erection. Only men can be impotent, by the nature of human sexuality.
A potent man can be infertile: i.e. he may be able to have an erection but unable to produce viable sperm.
A potent man is able to pursue the unitive purpose of marriage by having natural intercourse. An impotent man is unable to pursue either purpose of marriage because he is unable to have natural intercourse and unable to engage in natural procreation.
The larger picture: human beings are composite beings - they are composed of body and soul. Therefore marital union is both physical and spiritual and requires both physical union and spiritual union.
If marriage is purely based on personal affection and lacks the necessary physical component then marriage is redefined as an affective relationship between any two persons - not a physical union of a man and a woman.
There is a reason why marriage is falling apart in the West: it is being redefined as purely an emotional bond between any two people.
Hence "open" marriages. Hence "starter" marriages. Hence "gay" marriages.
“Not every marriage can fulfill both purposes, but it must fulfill at least one purpose...A potent man can be infertile: i.e. he may be able to have an erection but unable to produce viable sperm.”
That’s interesting. I wasn’t familiar with this aspect of Catholic teaching. Just curious, though — what is the barrier to gay marriage then? I always thought the problem was that it wasn’t procreative. However, it could certainly be argued to be unitive. If it’s the erection you’re after, aren’t two erections better than one?
Marriage is between a man and a woman - the Scriptural injunction specifically asserts that a man and a woman become one flesh in marriage, and Scripture further clarifies that intercourse between man and man is an abomination.
It is also biologically obvious that the conjoining of two reproductive systems - not a reproductive system and a digestive system - is the design of human nature.
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.