Sterility; women after operations

Mere barrenness or sterility is not impotence, nor does it make marriage impossible or unlawful. There is a controversy among experts as to whether removal of the ovaries or of the womb or of both organs makes a woman impotent or only sterile. The decisions which have been given by the Roman Congregations in particular cases are quoted in defence of both opinions, and as yet no general solution of the question has been given. Until this happens, a woman who has undergone such operations should not marry without consulting the bishop, but if she is already married the more favourable opinion should be followed. This impediment is recognized by English law.

Those able to have intercourse, and therefore not bound by the impediment, are men who can place an act of itself apt for generation; likewise wives who are capable of admitting acts of this sort. But an act of itself apt for generation consists, on the part of the man, in this: that the man penetrates the woman's vagina and pours forth true semen there; on the part of the woman, in this: that she permits the penetration of the male member and the effusion of semen in the vagina. These things laid down, I say:

I. They lawfully have intercourse:

1. Those who are only incapable of generating, such as sterile women; or old men who lack fertile semen (St. Alphonsus VI, 1095).

2. Women who cannot retain semen.

3. Women whose uterus or ovaries have been removed. For to those to whom marriage must be permitted, the use of it is also permitted. But marriage must be permitted to the aforesaid women.¹ The final reason for affirming this, however, is that in the case the act placed is of itself apt for generation.

4. Women who have undergone oophorectomy. Oophorectomy consists in the division of the oviduct or canal by which semen is led to the ovaries; hence it only brings it about that the semen of the man cannot ascend to the ovaries, but it does not prevent its being poured forth into the vagina, or prevent an act of itself apt for generation from being placed.

87. II. It is disputed whether one who has undergone vasectomy and a castrated man lawfully have intercourse.

1. One who has undergone vasectomy. Vasectomy consists in this: that, after an incision has been made through the scrotum, the organ carrying semen elaborated by the testicles is cut away, so that the way to ejaculation is broken off for the semen. From this it follows that one who has undergone vasectomy cannot, after the emptying of the epididymis, pour forth semen into the vagina;² hence, if the completed act of venereal things is admitted, he is truly polluted.

2. A castrated man. To him both imperfect intercourse, or penetration of the vagina, and incomplete acts seem lawful. For a castrated man, by force of marriage, received and retains the right to perfect intercourse. Now the right to perfect intercourse carries with it the right both to the act which is an essential part of perfect intercourse, that is, to penetration of the vagina, and to the acts which by their nature are referred to perfect intercourse, that is, to incomplete acts.

Objection 1. No one can have a right to something unlawful. But perfect intercourse is radically and irremediably unlawful for a castrated man.

Response. Perfect intercourse for a castrated man is rather impossible than unlawful (cf. St. Alphonsus VI, 933).

Objection 2. Since a castrated man is unfit for an act of itself apt for generation, that is, since he cannot pour semen into the vagina, the insemination of the wife becomes mere pollution.

Response. Since the wife, from the act which is an essential part of perfect intercourse, that is, from penetration of the vagina, seems to receive the right to insemination, this is undeservedly called pollution. But as to the fact that the insemination of the wife is frustrated of its end, both the man and the wife permit this.

Question. Whether marriage and its use can be permitted: 1. to a man lacking testicles, into whose scrotum the testicles of an animal have been inserted, which we know sometimes has taken place; 2. to a woman for whom a vagina has been made artificially.

Response. As regards the former case, it seems that it must be answered affirmatively as soon as, in view of the declaration or doubt of an expert, the testicles must be judged at least probably to have become part of the body and to produce human semen, although infertile. Likewise as regards the other case, it seems that it must be answered affirmatively as soon as, again considering the declaration or doubt of an expert, the vagina has at least probably become part of the body (cf. can. 1068, § 1). In both cases, however, the future partner must be warned. Moreover, it is certainly to be advised that, when the case occurs, ecclesiastical authority be consulted.

¹ Cf. Sacred Congregation of the Council, December 16, 1905; Sacred Congregation for the Discipline of the Sacraments, April 2, 1909.

² Namely, those who have undergone vasectomy, and likewise castrates whose testicles have been crushed in mature age, can for some space of time emit semen kept in the epididymis; but after the said semen has been emitted, they can indeed preserve the erectability of the member and penetrate the vagina, and even ejaculate a certain liquid, but this liquid is not true semen, but some watery humor secreted by the prostate gland (De Smet, De Matrimonio, II, n. 550).

“Can the woman N. N., rendered sterile by the defect arising from the excision of both ovaries, be permitted lawfully to enter into Matrimony or not?—Response. The matter having been maturely and long considered, the Marriage of the woman in question is not to be impeded.” Holy Office, 3 February 1887.

“Can the woman N. N., whose two ovaries and uterus were removed by a surgical operation, be admitted to contracting Matrimony?—Response. The Marriage is not to be impeded.” Holy Office, 30 July 1890.

The prohibition which the Sacred Congregation places upon an impotent party, in causes of impotence, against contracting other nuptials without having obtained permission from the same Sacred Congregation, does not introduce an invalidating impediment. Cf. A. S. S., vol. 6, p. 518; vol. 11, p. 595.

10. (B) A woman who has undergone this operation cannot licitly contract marriage unless she makes the man whom she intends to marry more certain concerning this matter; for, since the primary end of marriage is the generation of offspring, she would deceive the spouse in a grave matter if, knowing very well that she is wholly unfit for generation, she manifested nothing to him concerning a matter of such moment.

57. Hence also it is not licit for spouses to render themselves incapable of copula by excessive labors, vigils, austerities, or a fortiori by pollutions, adulteries, or other illicit acts. - Nor is it licit for one, without necessity or the consent of the other, to be absent for a notable time: for this is equivalent to denial of the debt.

Certain women, already burdened with offspring or of more advanced age, sometimes think that by denying the debt they do not sin gravely; if this is not done often, and the man is not exposed to danger of sinning, nor any fruit is hoped for from admonition, they can be left in good faith; but they must be admonished not by acting thus to expose the man to danger of incontinence.

Spouses are excused from rendering the debt within the first two months from the celebrated nuptials, certainly indeed if they are thinking of entering religion; probably even if they do not have this in mind. But that privilege ceases, even within the two months, as soon as the marriage has been consummated. Besides, most do not use that privilege because they are ignorant of it.

The uses of the scalpel which chiefly pertain to our subject are especially these in the man:

50. - Circumcision, which cuts away an excessively narrow prepuce, or phimosis, is very useful for removing excessive irritation arising from various things gradually collected under the skin. The less good habits of boys are often to be imputed to phimosis.

51. - Castration consists essentially in the removal of both testicles.

Sometimes, as among the Turks, the penis itself is removed from those who serve in the "harem." These were called carsamatia. The effects of the cutting short vary according to the age at which it was done.

Those who are castrated before the seventh year of age retain a body greatly altered physically; they are impotent for completing copulation, and generally, though not always, remain immune from sexual libido. They are also affected not a little morally as a result, and are not accustomed to possess a virile spirit. In adulthood, however, this mutilation has little influence upon the exterior appearance of the body; at least for a long time, if the penis has been preserved, it permits the faculty of copulation to remain. Nor is libido quieted by this operation. Sacred Scripture itself testifies to the libidinous affection of eunuchs when it says, "The lust of a eunuch shall deflower a young maiden" ¹; and to their impatient impotence when it adds, "Seeing with his eyes and groaning, like a eunuch embracing a virgin and sighing" ². The comic poet Terence also reports it in this verse: "But, by Pollux, I had heard that they were the greatest lovers of women, but could do nothing" ³.

¹ Ecclesiasticus 20:2.

² Ibid., 30:21.

³ Eunuchus, act 4, scene 3.

Castrated boys are also deprived of the secondary signs of virility: beard, hair, and masculine voice.

Wherefore, since a stable sexual depravity can scarcely be established before adulthood, since the operation is otherwise gravely harmful, and since its very efficacy upon venereal appetite is uncertain, castration cannot be recommended as a remedy for perverted appetite ⁴.

⁴ Compare Féré, op. cit., pp. 9-11; Forel, op. cit., p. 24; Moll, op. cit., pp. 154, 156, 157, 673.

When it must be done because of disease, physicians are accustomed to supply artificial testicles, lest the castrated man be too greatly afflicted by a visible sign of impotence.

52. - Vasectomy or deferentectomy resects the vas deferens above both testicles, by which the sperm properly so called is conducted to the urethral canal. Since only the exterior secretion of the testicle is removed, sexual appetite remains, so that the faculty of intercourse by no means ceases; but, since nemaspermata are lacking, copulation necessarily becomes sterile.

There are some, especially in America, who proclaim this operation most effective for tempering an excessively burning libido; and they declare at the same time that it can be brought about without great difficulty that the canal is afterwards restored. But a true demonstration of its efficacy is still lacking ⁵; and other physicians entirely deny that the separated parts of the vessel can easily be joined well again. Compare the Reverend Father Ferreres, De vasectomia duplici, etc.

⁵ Because of the things which we noted above concerning the twofold secretion, a diminution of sexual libido, if there is any, would have to be explained by a certain hidden alteration of the testicles.

53. In the woman, moreover, besides:

1. Certain operations which pertain here, so that the opening of the vagina may be dilated or opened; or, contrariwise, that the labia dilated by intercourse may be contracted and virginity apparently restored, even with the hymen repaired; we must mention:

2. Castration, by which the ovaries are removed. Observe, however, that the perfect excision of both ovaries can be established with certainty, at least when a certain manner of operating has been employed.

3. Sometimes the uterus itself is excised together with the ovaries; this operation is called Porro from the physician who originated it.

Note well. Among uncultivated peoples, incisions are sometimes made in the exterior labia of the sexual parts, which, because they imitate male circumcision, are called by the same name of circumcision.

4. By the general name laparotomy are designated operations by which the abdomen is opened.

5. To obtain sterility, some physicians merely bruise the ovaries, or ligate the oviduct, so that it can no longer communicate with the uterus.

6. Conversely, so that a living fetus can be brought forth by another route than that of the uterus, the Caesarean operation is available, namely, a longitudinal section of the abdomen; while by

7. Symphysiotomy the very space through which the fetus can emerge through the opening of the vagina is enlarged.

8. A part of the clitoris can sometimes be cut away with sufficient usefulness for diminishing libido.

65. - 1. From the demonstrated thesis we have the means of knowing who are to be called impotent and who sterile. But because of the importance and use of the matter, we shall give a distinct paragraph to this corollary. From here we now turn aside to a few scholia.

66. - 2. The three goods by which the nuptials of the faithful are said by St. Augustine ¹ to be rendered honorable are essential in very different ways. For the sacrament, or indissolubility, is so essential that you strive against it in vain, for a valid dissolution is impossible. The positive duty of fidelity cannot be cast off, but it can be physically violated by sin. Spouses can, however, legitimately abstain from generating offspring; yet spouses are prohibited from using marriage in a manner which is opposed to this positive good. In a not dissimilar manner St. Bonaventure ² wrote: "One, namely the sacrament, is of the necessity of matrimony... but the other two goods belong in one manner to being, and in another manner to well-being."

¹ De Genesi ad litteram, book 9, chapter 7.

² In IV Sent., dist. 31, art. 1, q. 3.

67. - 3. The formula sufficiently customary today, by which, for the validity of matrimony, they require the capacity for copulation which of itself is apt for generation, seems to us to suffer from some ambiguity.

68. - 4. The canonical Code wisely abstains from defining impotence and sterility.

Canon 1068 teaches these things concerning this argument: 1. Any antecedent and perpetual impotence invalidates matrimony by the very law of nature. 2. "If the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether by a doubt of law or a doubt of fact, the marriage is not to be impeded." 3. "Sterility neither invalidates nor impedes matrimony."

The Code of France, which is still in force in Belgium, is silent concerning impotence. The authors of the Code judged this proof too difficult and scandalous to admit this impediment formally. A difficulty of this kind can have some force in the civil forum, but none in the ecclesiastical forum, which touches conscience more closely: for difficulty of investigation and danger of scandal do not dispense from the natural law.

But does impotence furnish a legitimate cause for civil divorce? This is controverted. Nevertheless, there are some who think that, where impotence for intercourse is manifest, the marriage can be civilly invalidated as lacking its object or vitiated by substantial error. Compare Aubry and Rau (Droit civil), who embrace the stricter position, vol. 5, p. 100 ff.

The Codes of Germany, Switzerland, and Hungary are also silent concerning impotence. Nevertheless, since the Code of Germany grants annulment on account of error in articles 1333 and 1334, it offers a means of invalidating a marriage which was contracted with an impotent person in ignorance. And in this indirect manner there is restored the opinion, abandoned today, which was held by many, for example the Master of the Sentences ³ and St. Thomas ⁴, and which equated the impediment of impotence with the impediment of servile condition, insofar as marriages contracted in ignorance with an impotent person or a slave, and those alone, would be null. But when the ability to use marriage is excluded, the very handing over of bodies is at the same time excluded, so that a covenant of common life can in no way be called matrimonial. Compare Sanchez, De Matrimonio, book 7, disputation 97.

³ In IV Sent., dist. 34, chapter 1.

⁴ Supplementum, III, q. 58, art. 1, ad 4.

The Code of Austria, § 60, recognizes the impediment of antecedent and perpetual impotence for performing the conjugal debt. A suit can be brought only by a spouse. Impotence is not presumed. In a doubt concerning perpetuity, the spouses must cohabit for a year (§§ 96, 99, 100).

The Code of Spain places among the diriment impediments physical impotence for procreating, absolute or relative, which is antecedent, manifest, perpetual, and incurable (article 83).

The Code of Italy, article 107, permits one spouse to petition for a declaration of the nullity of marriage because of manifest, prior, and perpetual impotence.

The Code of Portugal, although it does not itself mention this impediment, nevertheless holds valid the decisions of the ecclesiastical forum by which the marriage of Catholics is invalidated. Compare articles 1086-1088.

69. The argumentation of those who deny the potency of an excised woman seems to us to be vitiated by this twofold error. And since each is frequently committed in moral matters, we note them both briefly here.

1. They transfer to the end of nature the care which human beings ought to exercise concerning the preservation of the order of nature.

2. They abuse the distinction between per se and per accidens, as the Reverend Father Ojetti also shows ⁵.

⁵ Synopsis, no. 2419.

When all requisites concur, then indeed the effect will be impeded only per accidens. Thus it happens that the good intended through the order of nature - for example, the right formation of offspring - is frustrated per accidens, with that order preserved, as for example in conjugal copulation. But if an element required for validity or lawfulness is lacking, the act deprived of that element is per se null or prohibited, although it happens per accidens that the element is lacking. Nor does this assertion hold: the act is lawful because an element required for me is lacking per accidens.

In a similar manner in the present cause, if one who can never generate is to be called impotent, one who is now unable to exercise a copulation which is expected to be fecund labors under temporary impotence; nor can one who is unable to generate for a time be held merely sterile. And if the formal rationale of the impediment is the frustration of the primary end of nature, whenever that frustration is certain, the same conclusion ought to hold. Wherefore the distinction by which Dr. Antonelli separates organic or "constitutional" causes from others seems arbitrary to us.

Indeed, if impossibility of generation takes away the faculty for marriage, it also takes away, so long as it lasts, the faculty for truly conjugal copulation.

76. - 1. We must call that man sterile who emits semen devoid of spermatozoa (azoospermia), whether because the testicles are affected by disease or because they cannot communicate with the urethra, or whose spermatozoa do not live (necrospermia) because of disturbed testicular function or disease of the seminal vesicle or the prostate. Compare Antonelli, vol. 2, no. 650, who discusses the causes in the following numbers.

2. A woman will be sterile who supplies no ovum, or who, because of a defect of an organ or disturbed functions, gives no place for the union of ovum and sperm, or whose ovum cannot mature. Dr. Antonelli enumerates various causes (vol. 2, nos. 661-678), where he also observes that causes of sterility are far more frequent in a woman than in a man.

V. Impotence and sterility. The impotence of coeundi, or of copulating, is one thing; the impotence of generating is another. The former dirimently impedes marriage, which consists in the mutual handing over of bodies in order to carnal copulation, and therefore has as its immediate end copulation itself: this is impotence with respect to marriage itself. The latter, the impotence of generating, does not impede marriage itself, but only the further principal end for which marriage was instituted: this is not impotence of marriage, but only its sterility.

In other words: the primary end of the institution of marriage is one thing, and is generation; and the end of the thing instituted, or of marriage itself, is another, and is copulation of itself apt for generation. If this immediate end is attained, the thing itself is valid, even if by accident it is impossible that the further end, or primary end of the institution, be attained. But carnal copulation of itself apt for generation is essentially the act by which, through intromission of the virile member into the female genital canal, virile semen is emitted and deposited there. Hence whatever renders that copulation impossible, absolutely or relatively, constitutes the impediment of impotence; whatever does not impede copulation, but only generation, is not impotence, but only sterility. Hence:

A. Impotence (onvermogen) is present whenever there are not organs ready for carnal copulation, or when, though the organ remains, copulation is nevertheless impossible. It is absolute or relative according as it is toward every person or toward only some person. Hence:

1. In the man impotence is: a) absence of the virile member; b) defect of both testicles, or their perfect contusion or atrophy;¹⁴ c) double vasectomy, or resection of both deferent canals; d) disproportion of the virile member; e) hypospadia¹⁵ and epispadia, by which the meatus opens not at the extremity but in the middle of the virile member, whether on the lower part or on the upper part, so that the semen cannot be poured into the female genital canal; f) aphrodisia, or excessive heat, by which, from exaggerated excitation, the semen is lost before copulation; and anaphrodisia, or excessive frigidity, by which erection of the virile member and expulsion of semen are impeded.

¹⁴ Those who lack both testicles are called eunuchs; cf. Mt. XIX, 10 sq. Some are spadones, who are born thus; others are castrated, who by human art have been deprived of the testicles or even of the virile member itself. "A spado, or one who is born a eunuch, and one who was castrated as an infant, is incapable of true copulation; those deprived of both testes in adult age remain capable of copulation for some time, but generally through a more or less ample interval afterward they can no longer exercise copulation itself. Those deprived of the testes are deprived of the internal secretion by which the energy of copulating with effusion is nourished, so that they are destitute of satiative copulation with effusion, and then of the faculty of copulation." Thus Vermeersch, cited work, n. 60 and 84.

¹⁵ De Smet, De Matrimonio, n. 551, note 4, notes that that defect is sometimes cured by a mere change of position in copulating.

The first three make impotence absolute; the fifth and sixth make it relative; the fourth makes either one. The sixth ordinarily does not render one perpetually impotent; concerning the third it is disputed whether potency can be restored.

2. In the woman impotence is: a) defect of the female genital canal or of an opening in it, so that it cannot be perforated at all; b) excessive narrowness; c) vaginismus, by which, from excessive excitation, the external pudendum is closed, cannot endure intromission, and impedes copulation.

In the first case there is absolute impotence; in the second, relative; in the third, either one, and not always perpetual.

B. Sterility (onvruchtbaarheid) 1. in the man is the absence of prolific semen because, on account of an accidental and transient cause or an obstruction, the semen here and now is destitute of zoosperms, or because, on account of disease of the testicles, the seminal vesicle, the urethra, and so forth, the zoosperms are not sufficiently lively, or perish too quickly, or lack a necessary element, or are not apt to enter the ovum.

2. In the woman it is: a) perfect excision of both ovaries or perfect atrophy of them, so that no ovum is present; b) a vice or disturbance of the organ by which the ovum cannot mature; c) an impediment by which, whether naturally or artificially, for example from ligation of the oviduct or excision of the uterus, no conjunction of ovum and sperm is possible.

From these things one already understands that about which there was so much dispute: why absence of the testicles or of the emission of semen in the man is impotence, while absence of the ovaries or of the ovum in the woman is not.¹⁶ Namely, because the emission of semen is of the essence of copulation of itself apt for generation, whereas the ovum is not an essential element of copulation, but only of generation.

¹⁶ Thus the Holy Office, 3 February 1887; 23 July 1890; 31 July 1895; Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, 2 April 1909. Cf. Vermeersch, who maintains that this is the legitimate sense of the responses, and replies to adversaries, cited work, p. 53-55.

II. Whether sterilization constitutes impotence. We judge that the answer must be different for the woman and for the man.

A. In the woman, sterilization does not constitute true impotence for the matrimonial act or carnal intercourse, nor consequently for marriage itself; but induces only infertility or incapacity to generate. For sterilization in the woman results from deprivation of the ovaries or their perfect atrophy, or from an impediment by which the ovum is prevented from descending into the uterus. But this does not impede the matrimonial act or carnal intercourse, because the ovum is not an essential element of intercourse of itself apt for generation, but only of generation. Thus the Holy Office has resolved, at least practically; and the matter is easily understood: sterilization does not prevent the woman from receiving true semen in the vagina from the penetrating man and retaining it there. Therefore, nothing is lacking for the completion of intercourse itself in a woman who lacks ovaries or ova, or does not provide them.¹

¹ Nevertheless, a woman who suffers from sterility is bound, from natural honesty, to disclose it before marriage to an ignorant prospective spouse, lest the latter be deceived. And the same holds for a sterile or doubtfully impotent man.

B. On the contrary, in the man, in whom various conditions can be considered:

1. Castration of both testicles most certainly constitutes the impediment of impotence, as we know from the declaration of Sixtus V, Cum frequenter, 27 June 1587, concerning eunuchs and spadones. The reason is both that they cannot complete perfectly satiating intercourse which calms concupiscence, and that they cannot emit true semen, but only a fluid similar to semen.

2. Irradiation of the testicles can produce sterility, and sometimes impotence, but only for a time.

3. Vasectomy appears to constitute true impotence, because a vasectomized man cannot emit true semen, but only a fluid similar to semen, since he cannot ejaculate anything elaborated by the testicles. But emission of true semen is an essential element of intercourse of itself apt for generation; and if such emission cannot occur, by that very fact an act apt for generation is impossible.

Recently some have said that carnal intercourse does not require that true semen elaborated by the testicles be emitted and deposited in the vagina, but that it suffices for the testicles to produce it, even if it cannot be emitted externally. Hence they say that vasectomized men are capable of intercourse.² But although this can suffice for copulation even with delight that is in some measure satiating, it nevertheless does not suffice for conjugal intercourse, or intercourse of itself apt for generation.

² Thus Dr. O'Malley and Gemelli, under the pretext that spermatozoa are not an essential element of true semen. But in this they most certainly err, for secretions elaborated by glands other than the testicles produce only a fluid apparently similar to semen. Most recently certain persons proposed the same opinion on the ground that vasectomized men are not incapable of intercourse. Vermeersch also acceded to this opinion, which hitherto he had not yet dared to hold and propose firmly. See Theologisch-praktische Quartalschrift, 1936: Aktuelle Fragen des Eherechts und der Ehemoral.

And indeed, that act is of itself apt for generation in which nothing on its own part is lacking for generation to follow; that is, an act which, from the manner in which it is performed and from all the elements required for it, including the very condition of the potency and the organ by which it is exercised, is apt for generation, although generation does not follow because of a defect arising from elsewhere. But in vasectomized men intercourse takes place in such a manner and condition that, from the very constitution of the organ, the emission of true semen and consequently generation are altogether impossible, because an essential element has been destroyed, namely, the communication of the canals which carry the semen. Therefore vasectomized men are not capable of an act of itself apt for generation. And although a certain fluid similar to semen can be ejaculated, true semen furnished with spermatozoa, which are an essential element of semen, cannot, since nothing elaborated by the testicles can be emitted. Hence, if we called such an act of itself apt for generation, they would certainly ridicule us. In the same way, the looking by which a blind man attempts to see those standing by would be called an act of itself apt for vision.

Vasectomized men, under this aspect, are like eunuchs.

They say: 1. Under another aspect they are not alike, because they can complete intercourse and seek the calming of concupiscence, which is a secondary end of marriage.

Response. They generally preserve the internal secretion of the testicles, and therefore sexual appetite and all the energy and capacity for intercourse that is even somewhat satiating; and thus a certain secondary end of marriage, the calming of concupiscence, could be obtained. But since this end is subordinated to the primary end, it cannot licitly be procured except by an act of itself apt for generation. "For there are, both in marriage itself and in the use of the conjugal right, secondary ends also," says the encyclical Casti connubii, "which spouses are by no means forbidden to intend, provided the intrinsic nature of that act is always preserved and therefore its ordination to the primary end." But among vasectomized men the nature of the act is perverted, and its order to generation is radically removed.

They insist: 2. According to the ancient theologians the power of intercourse sufficed, and there was no question of an act of itself apt for generation.

Response. They did not say this in express words, but it was implicitly contained there, as is evident from the declarations generally added. Moreover, this clearer manner of speaking has already been employed in theology for more than three centuries, and is sanctioned by the Code of Canon Law itself, indeed by canon 1081, §2, in which matrimonial consent itself is defined "as an act of the will by which each party gives and accepts a perpetual and exclusive right over the body, in order to acts of themselves apt for the generation of offspring." Such a declaration, pertaining to natural and divine law, could scarcely be said to be subject to change. Indeed, it appears to regard the universal Church, since it concerns "those things which by the very nature of the matter also affect the Oriental Church" (can. 1), and for this reason it would fall indirectly under the infallibility of the Church.

Therefore our manner of speaking is conformable to the opinion hitherto common for many centuries, and the new opinion does not appear solidly probable.

III. Whether the aforesaid impotence is perpetual or, on the contrary, potency for intercourse can be restored. Definitive impotence certainly results from castration, but the question concerns vasectomy.

Some affirm that the former physiological condition can be restored and communication between the testicles and the penis reestablished. For since the nerves, arteries, veins, and lymphatic vessels are not customarily cut in the operation of vasectomy, and their action remains intact, while only the spermatic cord or vas carrying the semen is resected, atrophy of the testicles does not follow from this, and communication of the excised deferent canal can be restored by suturing together its two extremities. Hence they say that the impotence is merely temporary. Others, regarding this as doubtful, and consequently judging that the aforesaid impotence can perhaps be removed by some operation, assert in consequence that marriage can be permitted to vasectomized men, according to canon 1068, §2: "If the impediment of impotence (namely, perpetual impotence) is doubtful, whether by a doubt of law or a doubt of fact, marriage is not to be impeded." But:

1. The doubt appears negative, as founded upon a mere hypothesis, since up to the present not even one fact is reported of a man who underwent vasectomy and whose potency was restored.³ But doubts which are negative are commonly taught not to be worthy of consideration, even in this matter.⁴

³ Concerning this Antonelli, op. cit., III, pp. 429-431, says: "It must be said that the operation of restoration of the deferent canal has up to the present been performed only in cases of epididymitis, with an outcome not too successful.... In a man after vasectomy, this operation has never (so far as I know) been performed. Moreover, there is the fact that the operation of restoration, according to the testimony of Dr. O'Malley himself, is very difficult, requires the greatest skill, and a certain outcome cannot be expected in it. For the lumen, or diameter, of the deferent canal is very small, since it is 1 to 2 1/2 millimeters, and sometimes even 1 millimeter. In the middle, the diameter of the canal reaches a third part of this thickness of the walls, according to ... all treatises of human anatomy. Hence it is exceedingly difficult so to suture the margins of the excised canal that communication can be established in a physiological manner. Nor can it be said that this was obtained in the operation of restoration of the canal in epididymitis.... In epididymitis a lumen not altogether obstructed can remain; but through vasectomy the extremities of the excised canal are necessarily covered by scars, and in the operation of restoration they become shorter, whereby their suturing and the restoration of the former condition become more difficult....

⁴ Cf. Vermeersch, Theologia Moralis, III, n. 720, referring to Wernz, IV, 345, note 35; Cappello, De Matrimonio, n. 367; Wernz-Vidal, Ius Canonicum, V, n. 223; Vermeersch-Creusen, Epitome Iuris Canonici, II, n. 341, 2; Génicot-Salsmans, Theologia Moralis, II, n. 487; Noldin-Schmitt, Theologia Moralis, III, n. 569, 4; Chrétien, De Matrimonio, n. 148, B, 1°, 2c.

2. Since, therefore, that operation is very problematic, a vasectomized man is rather to be regarded as perpetually impotent until it is established that potency has been restored to him. He, namely, concerning whom it is established that he was once impotent, must prove that he has become, or can become, potent.

3. Indeed, in practice the impotence is to be regarded as perpetual in the present state of surgical art, because no apt means for restoring potency yet exists.

4. Moreover, although prudence can warn that the impossibility of a certain surgical operation is not easily to be asserted theoretically, nevertheless in certain circumstances it appears impossible: namely, where, besides the cutting of the deferent canals, other vessels also have been excised or tied with a silk thread, and this has lasted for a notable time; or if the cut canals are so affected by atrophy that their physiological operations cannot be restored to their former condition, as can easily occur in a vasectomy which is not recent. Hence it would not be intelligible for marriage to be declared permissible to vasectomized men by a certain general rule and without discrimination. But in particular cases attention must be given to the manner in which the vasectomy was performed and to the present conditions of the organism, so that it can be known whether restoration is altogether impossible, or at least is not possible without grave danger; for then the impotence is perpetual.⁵ This can be established from the testimony of physicians. But if they disagree and the doubt remains, marriage is not to be impeded, although ordinarily it is to be dissuaded.

⁵ Gasparri, De Matrimonio, I, appendix De Vasectomia, 3° and 7°.

879. Perpetual impotence can be doubtful, either before matrimony to be contracted, or after matrimony has been contracted.

A. Before matrimony: 1. Someone cannot contract matrimony before he has resolved the doubt, as far as he can, by diligent investigation; otherwise he exposes himself to the danger of contracting an invalid matrimony and of gravely deceiving the other party.

2. If the doubt persists after diligent investigation, he can enter matrimony, provided he warns the other party concerning the doubt, because the right naturally belonging to man of entering matrimony prevails, for which each one is considered naturally apt until the contrary is proved (n. 862, C). Hence can. 1068, § 2: "if the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether by doubt of law or by doubt of fact, matrimony is not to be impeded."

Hence those who think that impotence in the vasectomized perhaps can be removed by a certain operation consequently assert that matrimony is not to be impeded for them, because their perpetual impotence is doubtful. But the doubt seems negative, as being founded on a mere hypothesis, since up to now not even any fact is reported concerning a man who had undergone vasectomy to whom potency was restored; 1 and negative doubts, even in this matter, are commonly taught not to be attended to. Therefore, since that operation is very problematic, the vasectomized man is rather to be considered perpetually impotent until it is established that potency has been restored to him. Moreover, although prudence can warn that the impossibility of a certain surgical operation is not easily to be asserted, nevertheless in some circumstances that operation seems impossible; hence it would not be understood that by some general rule and without distinction it should be established that matrimony is to be permitted to the vasectomized.

B. After matrimony: 1. He who seriously doubts must institute a diligent examination, and meanwhile abstain from asking the debt, although he is bound to render it to the other party not doubting.

2. If, after the examination has been instituted, the doubt remains, he can attempt copula as long as hope of completing it remains and until its impossibility is established, because one must stand for the value of matrimony (can. 1014).

3. He can also, for caution, seek, even with the other dissenting, a dispensation over ratified and non-consummated matrimony, provided non-consummation can be proved; but if they have cohabited together, it is presumed consummated until the contrary is proved (can. 1015, § 2).

1. Antonelli, Medicina Pastoralis, III, pp. 429-431.

880. Practical observations. - 1. A pastor or confessor who is consulted by a person about to contract matrimony who perhaps labors under impotence must warn that person to investigate the matter diligently and not omit to submit himself to the examination of expert physicians.

2. But if after matrimony has been contracted, a spouse explains to him that he can never complete the conjugal act, let him try prudently and modestly to investigate the cause of the matter; and if he detects that it is a physical defect, let him persuade that the matter be opened to a skilled and upright physician.

3. But if he notices that the spouses are in good faith concerning the value of the matrimony, often it is better to leave them in good faith lest worse things happen, at least if the impotence is occult and therefore no scandal is to be feared, especially if separation is morally impossible. On the contrary, if they are not in good faith or know the matrimony to be null, then the case is to be referred to the Ordinary.

4. The spouse who is doubtfully potent is bound to employ ordinary means for curing impotence, even with grave inconvenience, e.g., the man medicines strengthening his debility, the woman liniments and other means, even surgical means, for remedying narrowness. Hence, says St. Thomas, q. 58, a. 1, ad 5: A man, "if he cannot fulfill the carnal act with a virgin and can with a corrupted woman, then medically, by some instrument, he could break the barriers of modesty and be joined to her. Nor would this be against nature, because it would not be done for delectation, but for a remedy." But this can regularly be done without any danger, so that on account of this the woman could scarcely be excused from tolerating it, as the Mechlin Theology notes, n. 58, IV, ad 2. Nevertheless she would not be bound with grave danger, because that would be an extraordinary means.

2. Was Bridget made incapable of marrying on the supposition that she had undergone complete ovariotomy?

The question is disputed among experts and at present no certain answer can be given to it. When a case arises, it should be referred to the bishop, who will consult the Holy See if he can not decide it himself.