Ok, here's the story.

A handicapped man in wheelchair isn't allowed to marry because he's impotent. An ecclesiastic wedding would be invalid.
Same reason they don't want homosexuals to marry, two people not being able to get kids by having sex.


This isn't something new though, I just read about a new case of this, so I thought I post it and ask you folks what you think about it.

Imho, well, it's sad but there is nothing he can do, he's actually some kind of devout catholic so changing church isn't an option.

I disagree with you. Changing church is an option. There are different ones all over the place. He's just choosing his church membership over marrying the person he supposedly loves.

You are also wrong in saying that he isn't allowed to marry. He is allowed to marry, but the Catholic church won't perform the ceremony. If he was married by someone else, they'd tell him he can't take communion or something, but I doubt they'd check. They told my wife she can't take communion because she married me, a non-Catholic, but she basically told the priest where he can stick it, that she needs communion, and she's been taking it every week for the 12 years since. That's her thing.

As for what I think about it? None of my business. That's Catholic business, and how they do things, and why I'll never be a Catholic. Anyone who has a problem with it can find another church, but they get zero, zip, nada sympathy from me. That goes for guy in the wheel chair - he gets no sympathy because he's in a situation of his own choosing.

I don't think faith is something you can choose. If he would try to find some way, maybe bribe a priest. He'd be betraying his own beliefs and of course his church.

I agree, faith in spiritual truths is still treated like truth. In other words, if you believe something is true, you can't just choose to believe something else.

If this guy believes that it is a spiritual truth that the Catholic church is authoritative in all things, he should submit to their authority. The point is, if he does, he is not a victim - he is a committed follower.

I guess the way I read your initial post on this is that you might be suggesting the RCC is the big bad guy and the disabled man is a victim. I don't see it that way.

Not that you are suggesting this, but I'll just throw something out, no government or authority should intervene and force the RCC to change its policy.

This can either be a point where the man sees a weakness in his world view and changes it, or he sees a weakness in himself - the desire to do something that doesn't match his world view, so he can adjust himself and his desires to sync with his world view.

Personally, I have no use for an organization that would put itself above love between two people. This is why I believe the government should stay out of the marriage business where they pick and choose who gets to marry who. This is also why I don't look for validation from an organization like the RCC. There are better ways for me. On the other hand, I think attatching oneself to something like the RCC helps many people toward the same end, so I won't condemn the RCC on this issue.

It seems a crazy position to me from the church. Are they consistent and insist that people already married should get divorced if they find out one of them is infertile? But wait ... isn't divorce also a no-no (not sure on that)?

Maybe they should allow such marriages, but the people involved should be counseled to pray for a miracle (or a medical cure). Or they should advise such couples to adopt kids who need homes?

You should know that despite not "offering" divorces revocation of a marriage is possible in some cases. Not being able of intercourse at all is one of them, infertility isn't.

I don't it is for us, as non-Catholics, to say what the RCC does or should do or not do, so long as it isn't hurting anyone or removing their rights and freedoms.

So I take it they don't approve of IVF methods of fertilization. What about the huge growth industry around new methods of curing impotence (erectile dysfunction as it is now known)? I would say that many men previously accepted as impotent are no longer so, thanks to a variety of treatments and devices. And who knows what new developments are coming?

The Catholic church also lied to Africans when the US started handing out free condoms. They convinced a good majority of them that the US was trying to poison them. So because the Catholic church has such a strong stance against contraceptives they're spreading aids not to mention making the food problem over there even worse.

I mean I would agree with you Rasczak and also disagree with you. Sure it's none of our business what they're doing but I think we are certainly allowed to comment about the church. If the church does something amusing, interesting, or otherwise does something that directly sparks conversation are we just supposed to keep our mouths shut and/or contain our humour? You should take a lighter look at things (serious).

I'd probably be the first to defend the church, at least the American part of it, because the Catholic church officially supports science in all its forms (including evolution) and is generally liberal about things like this. I don't know where the guy who cant get married lives but he could probably get married in a different Catholic church if he just looked around. Some Priests are strict like that, others are understanding and empathic even if it does "kind of break the rules a little."

A good question I should ask the pope the next time I see him ;P


That wouldn't work, the Roman Catholic Church is based on hierarchy, if a minister doesn't approve and they find out he gets excommunicated. I also fail to see why one would try to bypass the rules of the RCC to get married. If you don't care about the rules one shouldn't be a member or at least ask oneself if you really do what you believe in.

I, technically being catholic I only married in the register's office - civil marriage. so for the church I'm still unmarried.

By all means, policies like the one against condoms are entirely worthy of criticism, and not only are you allowed to criticize those policies, under some circumstances its the right thing to do. Also, at the same time, I don't believe the Catholic church should have its policies changed from the outside unless those policies are illegal or remove someone's liberties. If you examine my post history, you'll find I have been consistently critical of the RCC - an organization I have very limited respect for. However, in this case, regardless how stupid the RCC policy is, to imply the man is a victim and even suggest we as non-Catholics should have them change their policy, is more stupid.

BTW, the RCC does not support science it all its forms - for example, it doesn't support the science of birth control. But that's not what you meant. I just wanted to point out, evolution or no, the RCC is not the organization you want to hold up and say "look how advanced and enlighted they are" just after you pointed out they're trying to stop people threatened most by overpopulation and AIDS from using condoms.

Also, and this is just me, and I'm not pushing this particular opinon on anyone - if the wheelchair guy doesn't like the rules, I think he's a small person to shop around for a priest who'd consort with him to break the church's rules. A man with integrity would leave the fucked up rules and submit to a more sensible set of rules offered elsewhere - if he insists that someone must make spiritual rules for him.

BTW again, good job on your post. That was one of the more coherent, internally consistent, and compelling set of points I've seen you make in a while.

Yeah this might be true but from what I've seen at the church I used to go to most people don't seem to care too much. I've heard preachers say pretty much the same think I said to you; eg in your life try to follow Catholic principles but say, for example, you get sent off to war you don't really have much of a choice but to kill people. Different churches / preachers are going to have their own customs or beliefs about this but at my old church they were kind of like "well try your best and come to confession."

I do see your point about catholic policy though.Oh ok lol I didn't know what you were getting at. Of course it's none of the business of outsiders to try to change their policy, except maybe under extreme circumstances. This is kind of like how people were trying to force the boy scouts to accept gays. The Boy Scouts is a private organization and it is entirely their right to be able to reject gays from their group. Same logic for the Catholic Church.I was talking more comparatively. There are better churches than the Catholic Church as far as this goes but none are all that mainstream. If you look at Baptists, Lutherans etc the Catholic church seems to have a better stance with respect to science. They certainly have other problems though (eg the condom example, or supporting fascist dictators eg in Spain 70 years ago, or for that matter supporting Hitler and the Nazi party in Germany...). Just specifically with respect to science they seem to have a fairly good policy.