Doesn't seem to be on the list for us now unless I'm missing it: Canons 1040-49
On the marriage one, antecedent impotence is grounds for nullity if certain, whether known and disclosed or not, but a distinction is made between that and sterility, which is not: Canon 1084. All subject to canon 1098, material non-disclosure is always a ground.
I confess that it continues to escape me how the underlying logic of this, obviously ascribing importance and sacramental relevance to sexual acts going beyond the mere question of procreation, fits with the ban on gay marriage.
But then that's always struck me about JPII's Theology of the Body, to which that is a key idea (and which is full of lots of surprisingly good stuff, particularly on objectification), and no one would suggest he was in favour of gay marriage. (JPII was setting out his ideas on that theme at the same time as the current code was being drafted).
(I did, incidentally, have to look it up, IAALBNACL)
(While I understand why it's like that, I do wish the official trans of the CCL into English wasn't in such a near-incomprehensible technical dialect)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-02-19 08:38 pm (UTC)On the marriage one, antecedent impotence is grounds for nullity if certain, whether known and disclosed or not, but a distinction is made between that and sterility, which is not: Canon 1084. All subject to canon 1098, material non-disclosure is always a ground.
I confess that it continues to escape me how the underlying logic of this, obviously ascribing importance and sacramental relevance to sexual acts going beyond the mere question of procreation, fits with the ban on gay marriage.
But then that's always struck me about JPII's Theology of the Body, to which that is a key idea (and which is full of lots of surprisingly good stuff, particularly on objectification), and no one would suggest he was in favour of gay marriage. (JPII was setting out his ideas on that theme at the same time as the current code was being drafted).
(I did, incidentally, have to look it up, IAALBNACL)
(While I understand why it's like that, I do wish the official trans of the CCL into English wasn't in such a near-incomprehensible technical dialect)