Skip to comments.Canon Law and Consummating a Marriage
Posted on 12/20/2013 5:09:00 AM PST by Weiss White
Q: Could you please explain what "ratum sed non consummatum" means with respect to marriage? I always thought that this was an antiquated term that no longer had any relevance, but recently I encountered it [in a current context] Why would it matter to the Church whether a marriage has been consummated or not? Fiona
A: The Latin phrase ratum sed non consummatum is translated literally as ratified but not consummated, and it has been used by theologians and canonists in regard to matrimony for many centuries. These four Latin words actually contain a wealth of information about the way the Church views marriage and its indissolubility. Canonically speaking, the consummation (or not) of a marriage can make a big difference! Lets take a look.
(Excerpt) Read more at canonlawmadeeasy.com ...
It is the reason the church will not approve a marriage if it is known that it cannot be consummated, as in the case of a paraplegic husband.
Everyone knows about this. The purpose of marriage is to propagate. Love is an element.
I doubt it.
You are correct. Otherwise why would there be contraception, abortion, etc. going on in marriages?
How do you call your religion the one, true religion when it disagrees with God so often???
1Co 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
1Co 7:27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.
1Co 7:28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.
Even if a virgin marries a once married person it is not a sin...
1Co 6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
1Co 6:16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
This is what anulls an anulment...If you had sex, you are married in God's eyes...You can't undo the sex...You can only divorce by leaving the partner and then remarrying if you wish...
All those man made rules your religion comes up are only created to put men and women under bondage...
Rom_8:15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
1Co_6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. 1Co_10:23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
Post removed per copyright complaint. Sorry, we are not allowed to post full text from canonlawmadeeasy.com.
There is NO scriptural foundation for “annulment” that is simply Romes way to get around divorce and still claim the moral “high ground”..It is simple hypocrisy
You got that right...
That’s an absurd statement...it basically says every woman who has had a hysterectomy, or any man who’s had a vasectomy or was infertile because of radiation, chemo, whatever, could never be married in the Catholic church.
Such goofy, absurd, extra-Biblical beliefs are why I could never be a Catholic.
It does look like an injection of human, I daresay worldly, theories. The Romans will of course come back and say that they have rights to revise Paul’s advice rather than recognizing it as a faithful and ageless reading of the general will of the Holy Spirit, and so the argument goes round and round.
Also I wonder about where their faith is with respect to God having the ability to work miracles. Suppose relations resulting in pregnancy are not possible today, who is going to bind God’s power that they won’t be possible tomorrow? (And they don’t exclude the old folks, at least.)