Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: adiaireton8
Dear adiareton8,

Someone who is sterilized with just cause, it is my understanding, is free to marry if he or she isn’t impotent. A woman who has a hysterectomy because she has uterine cancer, or her ovaries removed because of cancer, is, to my understanding, still free to marry.

I have actually known Catholic women who have validly married who have had these surgeries for legitimate medical reasons.

Similarly, if a man were to receive medical treatment that incidentally rendered him infertile, but not impotent, it is my understanding that he could still marry.

I don’t know what would happen to someone made sterile for the purposes of avoiding procreation, i.e., a man who voluntarily received a vasectomy strictly to avoid procreation.

The canons don’t seem to suggest any differentiation between natural sterility and sterility imposed by human action.


sitetest

27 posted on 07/31/2007 1:31:08 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: sitetest
Interesting. Thanks again. I thought cases of castration/hysterectomy were treated like impotence. I guess I was wrong. The Church has a very high view of divine omnipotence. :-) Apparently, as long as the capacity for the conjugal act is there, a couple can be genuinely open to procreation. That says something about what the Church thinks about divine involvement in procreation.

-A8

28 posted on 07/31/2007 2:39:20 PM PDT by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson