Divorce?

[tghockett1]

Just curious I know that a lot of protestants who consider divorce a totally acceptable alternative to marriage.  It's really easy to point to the gospel where Jesus spells out his teaching but I always get stumped on that "exception clause".  You know the one where Jesus says "except on the grounds of unchastity" or i've seen translations that use "whoredom" or "fornication" in place of unchastity.  What is he really getting at here though.  I'd be really interested to know the original greek word that was used and what exactly it meant.  I have my CCC so I can read all about the churches teaching but I would like to have a biblical argument as well for my protestant brothers and sisters.

 

thanks

 

[MIKolbe]

moved for a wider response

[Gabriela]

I don't know the answer to your question, but I do know that the CCC cites pretty much everything it teaches. If you look at the footnotes in the section on divorce, it will refer you to biblical passages.

[Winchester]

moved for a wider response

 

Is this about your hips?

[theculturewarrior]

There is a cliche in telenovelas where a man falls in love with a beautiful woman only to find out that his father was adventurous and his fiancee is his half-sister.  In a situation like that, the Church references the Sermon on the Mount.  The marriage would be unlawful, although fortunately a team of screenwriters always sweeps in to save the day.  If a man is already married, and a woman found this out on their honeymoon, again, the marriage is unlawful.  The Church holds that the marriage never existed.  For the sacrament to be valid, it requires consent of both parties, and that both parties be available for marriage.  In the first case, they lacked the information that they needed to make informed consent in addition to being unable to provide that information to Church, who would have asked them to reconsider.  In the second case, the marriage didn't exist because the man was already in one.  That woman could marry again with a clean conscience.  In the Church, if you are married, you are married for life.  If you divorce and remarry, then you are committing adultery or the marriage never existed and has been annulled by the Church.

[truthfinder]

There is a cliche in telenovelas where a man falls in love with a beautiful woman only to find out that his father was adventurous and his fiancee is his half-sister.  In a situation like that, the Church references the Sermon on the Mount.  The marriage would be unlawful, although fortunately a team of screenwriters always sweeps in to save the day. 

 

I'm thinking it would be invalid - not just grounds for divorce - because of the canons against consanguinity. 

[theculturewarrior]

That's just it.  In the Church, you are either married or not.  There is no grounds for divorce other than that the marriage never actually existed.

[Aloysius]

There is a argument to be made for the translation "except for an unlawful marriage", which would parallel the Church annulment practices; but with the translation of fornication or adultery we would understand it to refer to the type of fornication or adultery that would occur in the context of an invalid marriage or re-marriage, everything is determined by whether there was a valid sacrament; and in any event separation is permitted in extreme cases, just not re-marriage so long as both spouses are still alive.

 

the Eastern Orthodox permit, in the case of adultery, the re-marriage of the wronged party but not of the adulterer.  this is viewed as a concession, the one who re-marries is basically pardoned for the wrongness of the re-marriage, so it is recognized that the re-marriage is a wrong state of affairs, the permission is a pardon for that wrongness.  while I believe the Catholic view, this view is certainly much more preferable than a Protestant view that sees nothing wrong with a re-marriage.

[Gabriela]

I have a very pious Protestant friend who insists that divorce is always wrong. As she and her husband explain it, the part of the New Testament where Jesus says that remarriage is only permitted in case of adultery uses some Greek word that makes clear He is talking only about betrothed (i.e., engaged) couples, not married couples. Thus, if a fiance(e) engages in fornication, then the engagement can be broken. But a marriage can never be broken, and even an engagement—which is a promise of marriage—cannot be broken for any reason but fornication.

 

Is there any ground for this?

[LinaSt.Cecilia2772]

I have a question regarding divorce too. What if the marriage, which was performed in the Catholic church, was an abusive marriage?? Say domestic violence occurred in some way where it wouldn't be safe for anyone to be in that marriage anymore, especially if children were involved? What does the church teach on that and when can annulments be given truthfully?

[theculturewarrior]

I have a question regarding divorce too. What if the marriage, which was performed in the Catholic church, was an abusive marriage?? Say domestic violence occurred in some way where it wouldn't be safe for anyone to be in that marriage anymore, especially if children were involved? What does the church teach on that and when can annulments be given truthfully?

 

I don't have a specific answer to this, except there is a Website from the US Bishops called ForYourMarriage.  They have a section on domestic violence and mentions it as grounds for an annulment.  I am not an expert but I know a lot of women get into abusive relationships because the guy lies to her, pressures her to marry, etc.  I think that annulment could be very truthfully given in many such cases because the abuser damaged the voluntary nature of the consent and also lied to her (or him, because men suffer too).  Best thing would be to talk to a priest.

 

Also, what Aloysius says is very pertinent here.  The Church is on the side of domestic violence survivors and does not require a woman or her children to suffer that kind of abuse.  This could involve separation without remarriage, until or after the question of the validity of the marriage is answered.

Edited December 7, 2012 by theculturewarrior

[Aloysius]

there is sometimes a case for separation, even a case for civil divorce, that is separate from the question of an annulment.  such a marriage might also have a cause for annulment, but the first answer is separation and divorce if necessary to get away from the abusive situation, but one does not then necessarily have to re-marry, though at that point it may be helpful to consult a priest and/or a canon lawyer and lay out to them the history of your relationship to see if there is grounds for annulment (often I think it is presumed that for a relationship to be that abusive, there was likely some defect in the relationship from the very beginning that may have invalidated the marriage from the start).  but there exists the possibility that you would be called to remain effectively single for the rest of your life (well, for the rest of your sacramental spouse's life, at least) if there were not found to be grounds for annulment. 

Edited December 7, 2012 by Aloysius

[CatholicCid]

A quick reference for the greek of Matthew 19:9 ("I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.")

 

 

 

 

 

 

What may appear as a loophole is a consequence of misinterpretation or mistranslation. The King James Version and others translate the passage into English words that appear to say fornication, unchastity, or adultery are exceptions that allow a divorce.

 

The constant teaching of the Church has been that a valid sacramental marriage can not be broken, even if one party sins. As Matthew 19:6 says, "Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate." Biblical scholars, such as J. Bonsirven, have pointed out that the Greek word that is pivotal here is "porneia," which means unlawful sexual intercourse. The Gospel does not use the Greek word "moicheia," which is the ordinary Greek word for adultery.

 

The intent appears to be to distinguish a true marriage from concubinage. What is being said is that if a man and a woman are in fact married, the bond is inseparable. But if they are not married, just "living together," then there is no lawful marriage and there can be a separation or annulment. The wording of the New American Bible for Matthew 19:9 is a translation that gives us this sense.

 

 

http://tinyurl.com/bpgweut

 

 

[Basilisa Marie]

Fact is, there isn't a good New Testament argument for divorce.  Others have posted excellent things, but since I can't prop them, I'll just add that it's also important to note that Jesus never intended for divorce to be a "thing," and trying to find a nice biblical way of justifying divorce isn't using the word of God like it's intended.  They're basically trying to find an easy way out, and nothing about being a Christian is supposed to be easy.  

 

As for cases of abuse, again, like others have said, that's different.  Divorce is often encouraged in those situations, for plenty of reasons.  But civil marriage and sacramental marriage are two very different things.  One is a legal contract, the other is a sacrament.