Section — Prümmer, Manuale Theologiae Moralis
§ 2. Physical Impotence
797. Notion. The impediment of impotence is "the impossibility of coition, or a defect of mind or body or of both, by which someone is prevented from carnally commingling with another (in the natural manner)." Thus St. Raymond of Peñafort.47a
Explanation. It is said, 1. the impossibility of coition. Coition is defined by Gasparri48 as "the insertion of the virile member into the woman's vagina with the emission of semen." Hence incapacity for conceiving and for generating must be altogether distinguished from impotence as it is discussed here. In the commingling of man and woman, three things are to be distinguished: active conception, or coition; passive conception, or the vivification of the female ovum; generation, or the birth of the generated human being. For the validity of matrimony, only the possibility of active conception is required. For if this copula is perfect on the part of the man and the woman, it is only accidentally that pregnancy and generation do not follow from it. And so, if spouses have completed the carnal copula in this manner, they are rightly said to have performed the conjugal debt. But all things that follow afterward depend upon nature, and by no means upon the spouses. Not without reason has someone compared the conjugal act with eating. Nutrition is completed by three things: eating, digestion, and assimilation. Eating is ordered to digestion, but digestion to assimilation. Thus, in like manner, coition is ordered to passive conception, but this conception to generation. One who places nourishing food into his mouth and swallows it is said truly to eat, although, because of a disorder of the stomach, all digestion and nutrition are altogether impossible. Eating, as such, is perfect; if it attains no effect, the eating itself is not to be blamed. But if someone swallows inedible matter (stones, iron, etc.), he is no longer properly said to eat. The case is similar in carnal copulation: if true virile semen is naturally deposited in the female vessel, that act of itself suffices for conception and generation. But if neither conception nor generation actually follows, this is accidental, and not essential. Therefore such a copula is licit, nor are those who can complete commingling in this manner to be barred from matrimony, although conception and generation are impossible because of natural defects.49 - Furthermore, matrimony was instituted not only for generating offspring, but also as a remedy for concupiscence. Hence St. Paul says: "Because of fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn."50 Therefore it is licit rightly to complete the marital copula, even if no generation is hoped for. The doctrine thus far set forth concerning the notion of impotence is greatly strengthened by repeated decisions of the Holy Office,51 which permitted matrimony to women who (as deprived of both ovaries and of the uterus) certainly could not complete a copula of itself apt for generation.
It is said, 2. or a defect of mind or body or of both (by which someone is prevented from commingling with another in the natural manner). - By these words are indicated the causes from which impotence is wont to arise. These causes are both spiritual or psychic and bodily. Among spiritual causes, the ancient canonists spoke much about sorcery, which consists in the influence of a demon impeding the perfect conjugal act. Although an influence of this kind is possible, nevertheless it is not easily to be admitted; indeed, in our times certain examples of this influence are entirely lacking. - Among other spiritual or psychic causes producing impotence, the first place is held by weariness, hatred, and aversion existing between spouses, and vehement homosexuality. Sometimes the genital nerves are so vehemently affected by affections of this kind that perfect coition is plainly impossible. Yet these spiritual or psychic causes rarely produce perpetual impotence. For they are wont to cease with the passage of time, unless bodily causes are also present. Bodily causes are distinguished on the part of the man or on the part of the woman.
47a Summa, bk. 4, De impotentia coeundi, § 2. - Canonists vehemently dispute concerning the genuine notion of the impediment of impotence. The definition given by St. Raymond seems better than that which is wont to be given by other authors: "The impediment of impotence is the perpetual and antecedent incapacity of a man or woman for completing a copula of itself apt for generation." For both the authority of great authors and the decisions of the Holy Office permitting the matrimony of an excised woman, who certainly cannot exercise a copula of itself apt for generation, favor Raymond's definition. Hence Gasparri rightly says, loc. cit., n. 510: "We, after diligently weighing all things, both the doctrine of the canons and the declarations of the Apostolic See and the conclusions of physiologists or physicians, say that impotence for coition is an incapacity for the copula by which the man and woman become one flesh, or, in other words, by which virile semen enters the woman's vagina." St. Thomas seems to agree with St. Raymond; for he explains the impediment of impotence as an incapacity for rendering the conjugal debt (Suppl., q. 58, a. 1). Wigandt (Tribunal confessar., tr. 16, exam. 6, q. 10), Reiffenstuel (on bk. 4, tit. 15, n. 2), Ferraris (Prompta Bibl., s.v. "Debitum coniugale"), and, among the moderns, especially Eschbach (Disp. physiol.-theol., 190), speak in the same manner. The latter says: "The canonical diriment impediment of impotence is solely the antecedent and perpetual incapacity of the spouses for the perfect copula, by which, namely, the man, penetrating the female vessel with the natural debt, pours true semen into it." Thus also Larraga-Saralegui (Prontuario de Teología moral, 3rd ed., n. 1501) and Augustus Sili, who, as consultor in the celebrated Münster case (1899), cites sixteen authors for this opinion of his (Analecta eccl. VIII [1900], 253). Thus also Vogt (Das kirchl. Eherecht, § 33), De Smet (De sponsal. et matrim., 3rd ed., n. 554), who calls this opinion speculatively probable and practically safe; Noldin-Schmitt (De sacr., 17th ed., n. 567); Wernz-Vidal (Ius can. V, n. 219). Among moderns, Antonelli (De conceptu impotentiae), Leitner (Lehrb. des kirchl. Eherechtes, § 26, p. 145), Lehmkuhl (Theol. mor. II, n. 975), Rosset (De sacr. matrim., n. 1406), and others hold the contrary opinion.
48 De matrim. I, n. 510.
49 Cf. Eschbach, Disp. physiol.-theol., disp. 2, c. 3; and Van de Burgt-Schaepman, Tract. de matrim., pt. 2, c. 6, § 11.
50 1 Cor. 7:2 ff.
51 Cf. below, n. 799, note 56.
798. On the part of the man, the following are enumerated among the bodily causes producing impotence:
a) The absence or atrophy of both testicles. Therefore eunuchs and castrated men are impotent. Eunuchs are those who were born without testicles, which sometimes occurs in cryptorchidism; but castrated men are those who have been deprived of the testicles by art or accident. Sixtus V declared that eunuchs and castrated men truly labor under the canonical impediment of impotence.52 Before this authentic declaration, the canonists did not agree. Thus Peter Ledesma53 writes: "The Church never judged it certain that castrated men lacking both testicles contracted true matrimony; for there were always opinions in the Church concerning this matter, and therefore, because of that variety of opinions, she permitted marriages of this kind, just as she permits others which are made in the Church according to probable opinions. But now it has been determined by the Head of the Church that they do not contract true marriages." - The same seems more probably to be said of those who have undergone the surgical operation which is called vasectomy and which in our times is frequently performed by physicians. This operation consists in the severing of the "vasa deferentia." A man whose vasa deferentia have been severed can still complete the carnal copula and can even introduce semen into the female vessel, but that semen now lacks spermatozoa and is not semen in the proper sense, since spermatozoa are an essential part of sperm. Therefore between a man who has undergone vasectomy and one who has undergone complete castration there seems to be only an accidental difference, and accordingly both are judged to be impotent.54 - Complete castration is perpetual and complete impotence.
b) Certain diseases of the nerves, such as sexual anesthesia, which is also called anaphrodisia and is the absence of erectile capacity for completing the copula; aphrodisia, which consists in excessive venereal excitation, by which it happens that the emission of semen precedes penetration.55 Such or similar diseases, unless they are joined with an incurable mental disease or with a defect of the organs, are wont to cease with the passage of time.
c) Deformity or absence of the virile member. Such deformities are hypospadias, epispadias, excessive size of the virile member, etc.
52 Constitution Cum frequenter, June 27, 1587.
53 De magno sacr. matrim., q. 68, a. 2.
54 Thus also De Smet, De sponsal. et matrim., 3rd ed., n. 550; Ferreres in Eccl. Review (1912), 208 ff. Besides, the entire doctrine is not yet sufficiently clear, nor are the effects following from this operation sufficiently known. Hence Dr. A. O'Malley (in Eccl. Review, loc. cit.) teaches that impotence does not arise from vasectomy. If those things which this author says concerning the nature of vasectomy are true, then perhaps he rightly asserts: "The sexual act of a man who has undergone vasectomy has a perfect likeness to the sexual acts of men sterile from old age, debilitating disease, and other causes, who are permitted to enter matrimony and whose matrimony is valid; indeed, a man who has undergone vasectomy is sexually much more potent than all the others [just cited]" (loc. cit., 335 f.). The whole controversy will be resolved if it is established whether the fluid emitted by men who have undergone vasectomy is still true semen or not. If true semen is present (although sterile), impotence is not present. - An operation similar to vasectomy can also be performed in a woman by severing the Fallopian tubes. This vasectomy performed in a woman certainly does not cause the impediment of impotence. But vasectomy performed in a man is a doubtful impediment, and therefore after it matrimony is not necessarily to be impeded.
55 Cf. Surbled, La morale dans ses rapp. avec la méd. et l'hyg. II, 142.
799. On the part of the woman, impotence is caused:
a) by defect of the vagina;
b) by excessive narrowness of the vagina;
c) by the disease which is called vaginismus and which is a certain hyperesthesia or spasmodic contraction of the vagina prohibiting every coition.56
It is said, 3. by which someone is prevented from commingling naturally with another. In our times, so-called artificial fecundation is sometimes efficaciously employed by physicians. The Holy Office, having been asked whether the artificial fecundation of a woman is licit, responded on March 24, 1897: "It is not licit." - Nevertheless, it is still disputed among authors whether this artificial fecundation is never licit, because the Holy Office condemned only that artificial fecundation which is obtained after the pollution of the man, since this is intrinsically evil. But since there are other modes of artificial fecundation, Berardi,57 Eschbach,58 De Smet,59 Van de Burgt-Schaepman,60 and others teach that it is sometimes licit. But whatever may be true concerning the liceity of this artificial fecundation, the common opinion teaches that it does not remove the diriment impediment of impotence. The reason is that it does not give the power of naturally engaging in coition.
Scholion. On hermaphrodites. According to an ancient fable, a human being begotten of Hermes and Aphrodite was at the same time a participant in the male and female sex, or an androgyne. According to present-day physiology, such perfect participation in each sex does not exist. Sometimes, however, it happens that a human being is of doubtful sex, having sexual organs so deformed that even physicians doubt which sex prevails. Such apparent hermaphrodites are wont to be impotent for true carnal copulation and therefore labor under the impediment of impotence. In practice, when such a hermaphrodite wishes to contract matrimony or has already contracted it, it must be investigated with the aid of expert physicians whether the power of coition is present or not. But if such power is lacking, the diriment impediment of impotence is present.
56 Cf. De Smet, loc. cit., n. 550. It is much disputed among modern authors whether impotence arises in a woman if, either by nature or from a surgical operation, she lacks the uterus and both ovaries. All those authors cited above who define impotence as the impossibility of a copula apt for generation favor the affirmative opinion. For it is clearer than daylight that a woman who lacks the uterus and both ovaries cannot perform a copula of itself apt for generation. All those who place the impediment of impotence in the simple impossibility of naturally engaging in coition defend the negative opinion. This latter opinion is indeed truer, more common, and more conformable to the responses of the Holy Office. The Holy Office, February 3, 1887: "Can the woman N. N., whose two ovaries and uterus have been removed by a surgical operation, be admitted to contract matrimony? - Matrimony is not to be impeded." The Holy Office responded similarly on July 23, 1890; July 31, 1905; and March 3, 1909. You will find the objections which are raised resolved in De Smet, loc. cit., n. 556, who deservedly calls this opinion practically safe.
57 Praxis confess. I, n. 1009.
58 Disp. physiol.-theol., 70 ff.
59 De sponsal. et matrim., n. 560.
60 Tract. de matrim. I, n. 208.
800. Divisions. There are distinguished: 1. natural impotence, which exists from nature itself or from birth, that is, a defect of the genital organs; artificial or acquired impotence, which has arisen from a surgical operation, disease, injury, wound, etc.
Perpetual impotence, which according to the prudent judgment of experts will never cease; temporary impotence, which can cease through human work without grave danger to life.
Absolute impotence, which renders a person impotent for carnal copulation with any person whatsoever;61 relative impotence, which renders carnal copulation impossible with a determinate person, but not with every person.
61 If a matrimony is dissolved when absolute impotence exists, the clause is wont to be added: "with passage to other nuptials forbidden," and thus there arises the impediment which is called the "prohibition of the Church."
801. 4. Antecedent impotence, which precedes the celebration of matrimony; consequent impotence, which supervenes upon a matrimony already legitimately contracted.
The law now in force. § 1. "Antecedent and perpetual impotence, whether on the part of the man or on the part of the woman, whether known to the other or not, whether absolute or relative, dirimes matrimony by the law of nature itself. § 2. If the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether by a doubt of law or a doubt of fact, matrimony is not to be impeded. § 3. Sterility neither dirimes nor impedes matrimony" (thus the Code of Canon Law, can. 1068).
Certain older authors62 taught that impotence was indeed an impediment to matrimony if it was unknown by the other contracting party, but not if it was known. This doctrine must now be abandoned, since the Code of Canon Law expressly establishes the contrary. - Sterility, which neither dirimes nor impedes matrimony, must be altogether distinguished from impotence.
62 Cf. St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 52, a. 1.
802. Manner of acting for the parish priest and confessor. Where a suspicion of impotence arises, the parish priest and confessor should employ the greatest prudence.
If someone doubts concerning his own physical impotence, he cannot licitly enter matrimony before the doubt has been resolved and the power of coition is morally certain. Therefore a prudent and God-fearing physician must be approached. If the doubt remains after diligent investigation, it is lawful to enter matrimony, as the Code manifestly establishes, provided that the other party has been made aware of the doubtful impotence. The reason is that for a grave cause it is lawful to administer a sacrament with doubtful validity. But in this case a grave cause is present, since otherwise the person who is doubtfully potent would have to remain celibate perpetually.
If a doubt concerning impotence arises after matrimony has already been contracted, it must first be cautiously investigated with the aid of an expert and upright physician whether impotence is truly present and whether it is perpetual and antecedent to the matrimony. If the physician responds that such impotence is not present, then the matrimony is valid, and it pertains not to the confessor or parish priest, but to the physician, to give remedies for obtaining true coition. But if the physician says that such impotence is certainly present, then the confessor or parish priest must prudently inquire whether the putative spouses are in good faith, that is, whether they consider the matrimony entered to be valid or not. But if the spouses are in good faith, they are not to be disturbed if great inconveniences are rightly feared from the dissolution of the matrimony, or if there is little hope that the putative spouses will live chastely together as brother and sister. But if the spouses are in bad faith, that is, if they know their matrimony to be null, then it must be imposed upon them either that they live chastely as brother and sister or that they seek the dissolution of the matrimony through a canonical process. This process must have at least two instances, according to the norm of the Constitution De miseratione of Benedict XIV, November 3, 1741; the Instruction of the Holy Office to the Eastern bishops, June 20, 1883; and the Code of Canon Law, cann. 1975-1981. There is no leisure here to treat this process, which is wont to last for quite a long time. See the canonists.63 In practice it is often easier to prove the non-consummation of the contracted matrimony than the existence of antecedent and perpetual impotence. Then it is preferable to seek from the Supreme Pontiff a dispensation from a ratified and non-consummated matrimony. See several cases of this dispensation in Analect. ecclesiast. I (1893), 111; Sacred Congregation of the Council, March 18, 1893; May 6, 1893; April 27, 1895; etc.
63 Cf. Leitner, Lehrb. des kirchl. Eherechtes, § 26, p. 152; Wernz-Vidal, Ius can. V, n. 234 ff.; our Man. iur. can., q. 540 f.