Since you do not explain how you fall under the exception, it is only possible to provide some qualification. Jesus’ and Paul’s constant and forceful teaching about the permanence of sacramental marriage as recorded elsewhere in Scripture makes it clear that Jesus was not making an exception in the case of valid, sacramental marriages. The constant teaching of the Catholic Church attests to this as well.
t is important to note that in Jesus’ teaching about marriage and divorce, his concern was with the presumption that divorce actually ends a sacramental marriage and enables the spouses to remarry. He said to his disciples, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery" (Mark 10:11–12). But divorce that does not presume to end a sacramental marriage (e.g., divorce intended only to legally separate the spouses) is not necessarily evil.
Paul’s teaching agrees with this: "To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, let her remain single or else be reconciled to her husband)—and that the husband should not divorce his wife" (1 Cor. 7:10–11). Paul understood that divorce is a terrible thing, yet it is sometimes a reality. Even so, divorce does not end a sacramental marriage.
Matthew 19:9
NIV: And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.So, Jesus Himself said that there was an exception for divorce if a man's wife commits adultery. Mine first wife did. Am I the sinner who has corrupted the faith and brought about gay marriage?
NLT: And I tell you this, whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery--unless his wife has been unfaithful.
KJV: And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
You're evading. There is only one exception given in Matthew 19:9 and 5thGenTexan wrote that is the exception they fall under.
Further, 5thGenTexan said nothing of remarriage so your ensuing 'lecture' is a diversion to cover the tracks of your first evasion. Only after you scribbled enough do you realize your logic breaks down as you admit that divorce "is not necessarily evil".
As for your posting of this half-wit conceited priest, the Catholic Church is open for business in bribes. To be able to receive communion after a divorce. it is necessary to pay for the annulment service and to have a good story as to why the spouse duped and deceived you into marriage. This corruption in pay-to-play is widespread. And if one priest refrains, it's easy enough to eventually find one that will engage. It's all about money.
The truth is that Catholics are sinners like all other Christians of other denominations but the difference is that so Catholics don't want to admit it in Church for fear of their Church. The resulting arrogance and hypocrisy creates confusion and enemies.
Faithful Episcopalians shocked by their leadership are not flocking to the Catholic Church for answers, they are running to the Orthodox who have never changed their divine liturgy in more than 2000 years and who approach parishioners in humility while confessing sin in thought, word and deed.
As opposed to haughty Catholic pride and ugly arrogance, here is a typical Orthodox prayer that conveys the constant theme that we are all sinners before God:
A Prayer of St. John Chrysostom
I believe, O Lord, and I confess that thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the living God, who didst come into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief. And I believe that this is truly thine own immaculate Body, and that this is truly thine own precious Blood. Wherefore I pray thee, have mercy upon me and forgive my transgressions both voluntary and involuntary, of word and of deed, of knowledge and of ignorance; and make me worthy to partake without condemnation of thine immaculate mysteries, unto remission of my sins and unto life everlasting. Amen.
The Catholic Church (liberal) annulment process has made it easy for catholics to end their marriages... since Vatican II, the marriage bond once claimed does not hold water any more......people refer to the annulment process as the “Catholic divorce”.
Grounds for an annulment of the wedding vows can be:
1) Not wanting children, because the purpose of marriage is to have children.
2) Hidden drug and alcohol abuse (and probably other addictions) at time of marriage .
3) Infidelity before, during and after the marriage.
4) Immaturity to be able to make a life long commitment, like marrying at 17 and the marriage only last a very short time.
5) Forced to marry by spouse, parents or circumstances like pregnancy.
6) Physical or verbal abuse before, during and after the marriage.
Then there is also what is called the “Pauline Privilege” that deals with the conversion of an unbaptized spouse to the Catholic faith and the other unbaptized spouse does not support it.
5Th doesn’t owe YOU or anyone else any explanation of how or why he falls under the exception.
What makes you think people answer to you or any other Catholic for that matter?
What chutzpah.
That relies upon the false presumption that there is necessarily a difference (as re the indissoluble binding aspect) btwn marriage outside the church and that within it, and that the various varied reasons by which Rome can rule that a marriage never took place, and that adultery or abandonment in a valid marriage does not terminate it, is Scriptural.
Of course, the veracity of RC teaching need not rest upon the weight of Scriptural testimony, but that is another, if related, issue.