1,942
edits
Changes
→Dissenting position #1: reply
:There absolutely is such a justification. Openness (not a physiological potential, but a psychological/emotional openness) and desire for children are necessary conditions for marriage in my position. An infertile couple may know that they are infertile, however still be open to and desire to have children. As a result, this position would not preclude them from marrying. Scripture and Tradition seem to imply that Abraham and Sarah, Jacob and Rachel, Elkinah and Hannah, and Zachariah and Elizabeth did not cease having marital relations after realising that there was a problem with their fertility. Adoption would seem a natural option for such couples. --[[User:Gmharvey|Gmharvey]] ([[User talk:Gmharvey|talk]]) 08:49, June 28, 2018 (UTC)
If procreation is a "necessary" condition of marriage, that means a couple incapable of having a child together (through primary or secondary infertility, or menopause, or any number of medical reasons), then they will never be really married, because they cannot fulfill a necessary condition of marriage. Adoption is not procreation, and not a single father East or West has suggested a requirement that an infertile couple adopt. Which means that procreation cannot be a necessary condition of marriage. One can hold, as the Orthodox tradition does, that procreation is normative nut not necessary for marriage. And the biblical witnesses you give on sex despite infertility make the case against the view that procreation is the only good thing in sex -- the view held by Augustine and Clement of Alexandria, both of whom believed that desire for one's spouse was sinful. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] ([[User talk:Fr Lev|talk]]) 13:28, June 28, 2018 (UTC)
