Posted on 01/19/2019 11:33:40 AM PST by Salvation
Second marriages The Church does not gauge the validity of a union by the happiness of the people who have entered it Msgr. Charles Pope 1/9/2019
Question: Jesus says if you divorce your wife and marry another, you commit adultery. But we see many seemingly happy people in their second marriage. What is your perspective on this?
— Paul VanHoudt, Erie, Colorado
Answer: The implied premise of your question is that happiness and joy are determining criteria for what is right and wrong. Such a premise is flawed. Doing what is right does not always bring immediate happiness. Sometimes what is right is challenging and irksome, and we must trust in the ultimate happiness of doing what is right, not simply the passing happiness that may come from doing what is wrong. Jesus summons us to take up our cross and follow him, not our pillow. He further warns, “Woe to you who laugh now, for you will mourn and weep” (Lk 6:25).
A second problematic premise of your observation is a rather personalized understanding of happiness. People in second marriages may manifest happiness, but it is often not such a happy reality in the eyes of their children or other family members, who may have very mixed feelings, including sorrow. Many children of divorced families carry hurts and scars from the experience. They had to process the tragic reality that Mom and Dad don’t love each other anymore and, apparently, I am not a good enough reason for them to stay together. This may harm their trust in people and their own moral, spiritual and emotional formation. They may have to spend time at different homes and navigate confusing relationships if their parents go on to date and marry others. Even as they become adults, these complexities and ambiguities remain. When the parents put down the cross of working at their marriage, it is usually the children who must pick it up. Thus, when it comes to happiness, more must be considered than the couple.
All that said, noting that some people go on to great fulfillment in second marriages and even come into the Church or grow in holiness, cannot be wholly disregarded. There may be indications that God is offering blessings in what is objectively problematic. For this pastoral reason and others, the Church is willing to look into the questions of prior marriages and see if there are causes for the nullity of that first marriage. A declaration of nullity is a judgment of the Church that some essential aspect of marriage was lacking in the prior marriage and that it was not “what God has joined together.” There is not space here to fully explain nullity. However, it should be added that the mere happiness of spouses in a current marriage is not a consideration in granting annulments for a prior marriage. Only data regarding the prior marriage are considered.
First thank you for posting. Appreciated.
It is helpful to do two things regarding this topic.
1. look at all the complete teaching of Scripture regarding divorce, which Mark 10 does not wholly contain.
2. define who is who in the passages.
In the Mark 10 passage, written to a gentile audience, there is no exception clause stated for adultery
In the Matthew passages, written to a Jewish audience, further clarifies Moses' instructions regarding divorce. Christ says that only grievous sexual sin justifies breaking the marriage covenant and is the only reason to end a marriage.
When the complete words of Christ are tallied, there is only an exception for sexual sin.
The person who has been sinned against by his or her spouse does not commit adultery, but is the victim of adultery.
The marriage is not required to be ended, but can be ended after an adultery is committed. Christ does not say this person who ends a marriage because of adultery is committing adultery by remarrying.
In fact, there is no reason to end a marriage via divorce for adultery, if the divorce doesn't actually end the marriage. Is someone has been set free from a marriage, because adultery ended the marriage, then there is no restriction of marriage for an unmarried and free person.
This is very different than a divorce initiator - man or woman, divorcing apart from adultery - who marries another, and causes the his or her new spouse to commit adultery.
Given that theological papers and books have been written on the various view, there is no way we can adequately cover it on a FR thread. There are those who find a way to claim you get one spouse for your entire life, regardless if you are widowed or not. One and done. They manage to justify this using Scripture. In fact, in seminary, we spent too much time examining all the views in Scripture and in the original languages.
Once you get involved in real lives, it gets messy fast. If I had more time, over coffee, I'd tell you a story from my Mission's professor, whose first assignment was to a church in Haiti... but alas.
Best
THE SIN OF REMARRIAGE ADULTERY (click here)
The basic idea is that the "exception clause ("saving for the cause of fornication" in Mt. 5:32; "except it be for fornication" in Mt. 19:9) does mot apply to the Gentile world.
Matthew was written by a Hebrew for Hebrews, and the exception clause only applies to the espousal portion of a Jewish marriage prodess, where the premarital year of abstinence before the consummation and the display of the tokens of the bride's virginity proves that the man is marrying a pure woman (Deut. 22:13-21).
That would still be true for orthodox Jews, but not then or now for a Gentile marriage. And you will recall that Matthew (Levi) made mention of this principle in his opening chapter that displays Joseph's concern regarding Mary's status after the Annunciation.
Again, involvement in sexual immorality, which is πορνεία (pornaya, which means kinkiness broader than the limiting translated definition "fornication"). It does include μοιχάω (moichaō, which is straightforward adultery), but it is not to be inyerpreted as a Biblical excuse for divorce in the case when (as in a Gentile marriage) the wedding has been already consummated.
Persistent and unrepentant sexual immorality that damages the plaintiff and/or the rest of the family may well justify separation, perhaps permanent, but divorce? No! That option for God's favor is not open to the offended Christian marriage partner. Jesus' doctrine did not allow for the offended person to divorce the offender, let alone get remarried and taint others.
That stance is not very popular in the Christian community, to say the least, but it is correct, and should be fully endorsed by a person claiming spiritual maturity. I know the cost of proper behavior personally, because I have experienced it for 46 years now, and I am very glad I have taken the path that is just in God's eyes.
Remarriage adultery is a deep sin, as is the acceptance, permission, and promotion of it by Christian leaders or counselors.
Correct, AMPU. Adultery, the union of two humans according to God’s plan for their bodies, is but a subclass of the more general term pornaya = sexual immorality of all kinds.
Nor does it appear in your second statement that you understand what the Bible says about the issue.
You are entirely correct.
These are just things Rome has told people, which are repeated without examination.
Begging your pardon, but your training regarding the issue does not serve you well. Jesus is only speaking of the violation and termination of the pre-consummation espousal portion of the Jewish marriage process. See Deuteronomy 22:13-21 and Matthew 1:18-19.
I'm certainly not wanting to offend you.
No offense taken, but I do not believe your answer is correct, because of the reasons I sent you via pm, just before you posted.
:-)
Best.
Molto bene . . .
I find it unbelievable that God would want someone to remain unmarried when their spouse committed adultery.
Their heart is pure.
That’s like saying I have to pay for the sins of my father.
That is unbiblical.
We don’t live by the old testament.
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all record Jesus Christ’s birth differently.
“That is why the exception does not use the Greek word moixeía. It is intended for marriages in the betrothal period that would not go forward and be completed as “what God has joined together.” ”
Actually, no one can say why the Holy Spirit inspired one word or another. That includes you. So that is an invalid, speculative argument that must be rejected.
Nor does the context mention a betrothal period.
The context applied to how men were practicing divorce for various reasons, citing Moses’ words, during any time in a marriage.
Christ’s answer limited the reason for divorce to one, but put no limit on the timeframe.
More than that adds to the passage.
“and not remarry if civilly divorced and the divorced spouse still lives.”
That is a Catholic thing, but not a Biblical thing - as long as the divorce was because of adultery.
Since you are Catholic, perhaps obey Rome.
For Christians, obey what God said.
“which means writing “This statement is absolutely a false reading of the Greek language and Scripture.”
No, category mistake on your part.
Your statement was just false.
“The Messiah said to divorce and remarry is adultery in both Mark and Luke. The exception for a certain case is only found in Matthew, as Joseph’s plan to divorce from Mary is only found in Matthew. “
Now, you’ve determined why the Holy Spirit includes whole passages??
No. This is simply your opinion.
The context of Mt 19:9 is not Joseph.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.