Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Does a potential spouse have a right to know sɛҳuąƖ history before marriage?  (Read 51075 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
He was a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ before marriage and never told anyone.  He kept a secret, a lie.

Still is not grounds for an annulment.

Offline Geremia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
  • Reputation: +1559/-361
  • Gender: Male
    • St. Isidore e-book library
He was a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ before marriage and never told anyone.
So? ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity isn't an impediment to marriage. ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity a form of lust, and committing a sin of lust isn't an impediment.
St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co


Änσnymσus

  • Guest
So? ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity isn't an impediment to marriage. ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity a form of lust, and committing a sin of lust isn't an impediment.
But a person may have chosen not to marry them if they knew. If a woman lied to me about being a virgin I would seek an annulment because I never would have married her if I knew.

Offline Geremia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
  • Reputation: +1559/-361
  • Gender: Male
    • St. Isidore e-book library
But a person may have chosen not to marry them if they knew. If a woman lied to me about being a virgin I would seek an annulment because I never would have married her if I knew.

It's against canon law to affix conditions to the marriage contract, unless you obtain the bishop's written permission:

Quote
Can. 1102 §1. A marriage subject to a condition about the future cannot be contracted validly.

§2. A marriage entered into subject to a condition about the past or the present is valid or not insofar as that which is subject to the condition exists or not.

§3. The condition mentioned in §2, however, cannot be placed licitly without the written permission of the local ordinary.

Interestingly, the 1917 version doesn't require bishop's permission for past or present conditions:
Quote
Canon 1092
 
(1983 CIC 1102)

[Regarding] a condition once imposed and not revoked:

1.°      If it concerns the future [and is] necessary or impossible, or of turpitude, but not contrary to the substance of marriage, it is considered as not applied;

2.°      If it concerns the future [and is] against the substance of marriage, it renders [marriage] invalid;

3.°      If it concerns the future [and is] licit, it suspends the validity of the marriage;

4.°      If it is about the past or the present, the marriage will be valid or not insofar as the condition exists or not.
St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co

Online Seraphina

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
  • Reputation: +3051/-313
  • Gender: Female
:facepalm: If I was tricked into marrying a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ man, meaning, if he had acted upon it and not told me, or had the desire and not told me, I would separate from him even if I couldn’t get an annulment. To me, that is a non-negotiable. I would never marry a man who had ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ attraction or had been an active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. 
I know someone to whom this happened. They already had two daughters and he’d been with the man both before and throughout their marriage. When he was caught, he wanted to have his “lover” move in with them!  They weren’t Catholic, some kind of Protestant. She took the girls and moved back in with her parents. It was a long, drawn out, nasty divorce in which she was forced to grant him the girls every other weekend and he got the house as it was paid for and in his and his mother’s name on the deed. She got the older car and the camper van. He kept the new car, the outboard boat, and the two dogs.  
I’ve no idea what happened to him, but she did remarry when the girls were mostly grown. He was a widower with several adult children. So far as I know, they are still together, living in the Boston, MA area. 


Änσnymσus

  • Guest
If I was tricked into marrying a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ man
Then you have terrible gαydar…

Online Seraphina

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
  • Reputation: +3051/-313
  • Gender: Female
Then you have terrible gαydar…
I was speaking theoretically. I have a pretty good gαydar. My lesbometer is excellent.
My Dad, amazingly, was only average in sensing these things. He was 110% man, but very pure of heart, so when someone turned out to be otherwise, it was always a shock to him.
My Mom, on the other hand, could seize up a person in a few seconds, not only for being a sɛҳuąƖ deviant but for honesty, trustworthiness, temperament, personality type. Any boyfriends of we girls had to meet Dad, but he had to also pass the Mom test. They were a good team. Dad would greet them politely, Mom would measure them and pass on the results to Dad. If they didn’t pass, Dad used his authority to send them packing. Once Dad spoke, that was it. You didn’t mess with him. Had Mom lived, she’d turn 100 on Friday.  RIP, both Mom and Dad.

Offline Geremia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
  • Reputation: +1559/-361
  • Gender: Male
    • St. Isidore e-book library
when someone turned out to be otherwise, it was always a shock to him.
Sodomy is the highest degree of lust, and only God's grace keeps us in a state of grace.
St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co


Online Seraphina

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
  • Reputation: +3051/-313
  • Gender: Female
Sodomy is the highest degree of lust, and only God's grace keeps us in a state of grace.
Only God’s Grace keeps us in a state of grace, period. Wouldn’t bestiality or with a corpse be even worse?  Not that they aren’t all odious in God’s sight and entirely against nature.  The least intelligent animals don’t stoop so low. 

Offline Geremia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
  • Reputation: +1559/-361
  • Gender: Male
    • St. Isidore e-book library
Wouldn’t bestiality or with a corpse be even worse?
That's a type of sin against nature.

St. Thomas gives this ranking (II II q. 154 a. 12 ad 4), in ascending gravity.
I think he means this ranking:
1. "uncleanness, which consists in the mere omission of copulation with another"
2. "sodomy, because use of the right sex is not observed"
3. "not observing the right manner of copulation, which is more grievous if the abuse regards the "vas" than if it affects the manner of copulation in respect of other circuмstances"
4. "bestiality, because use of the due species is not observed"
St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
But a person may have chosen not to marry them if they knew. If a woman lied to me about being a virgin I would seek an annulment because I never would have married her if I knew.
Are you, yourself, a virgin?  


Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Are you, yourself, a virgin? 
Does a man's virginity pay the bills?

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Does a man's virginity pay the bills?
What kind of question is that? :fryingpan: Bills have nothing to do with virginity. 

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Are you, yourself, a virgin? 
Isn’t this a bit too personal for CathInfo?
Maybe leave it for the couple and the Confessional if necessary! :facepalm:

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Does a man's virginity pay the bills?
Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your standards.