T
tammy_b
Guest
If a person becomes attached to the opposite sex and nothing physical has happened is it grounds for divorce?
- Status
1
1ke
Guest
No.
R
Rdunbar123
Guest
I would say it depends, if it causes you to devote less time and affection to your spouse, or you spend all your time at home daydreaming of the other person. I would say yes. If it is just an attraction while you are around the person probably not. you did not go into a lot of detail, is this a co-worker, in-law? I would say be cautious, I’m not an expert for sure but I expect many affairs start out just with an attraction and no bad intent. after all most of us were initially drawn to our spouses by such an attraction. the thing about co workers especially, is you see them at there best, not before morning coffee, sloppily dressed.
B
BlueEyedLady
Guest
For me personally infidelity of any kind is grounds for divorce, and I think in a lot of ways an emotional affair would be worse than a physical one.
C
Corki
Guest
Do you mean from a Catholic perspective? Catholics are allowed to sepaparte from thier spouses, for a time or permanently, to protect themselves and their children. Only you, after consulting with your priest, can decide if this is the case for you. (technically, I think you need permission from your Bishop if you are not in immediate danger, but I think this is handled usually by pastors)
M
MJJean
Guest
Anyone can file for divorce for any reason. The question is should they? That is up to the individual.
Personally, I would treat an emotional involvement the same as a physical involvement. Would I divorce my husband over an affair? Not necessarily. If we were both willing to work on the root cause of the affair and recommit to the marriage, no. If he were unwilling to end the affair, work on the root cause, and recommit to the marriage, then yes.
The real question is would the person seeking divorce be willing to stay celibate and never remarry if they were unable to get an annulment through the Church.
Remember, divorce is legal and separate from the Church. Remarriage after divorce is legal separate from the Church. Being divorced doesn’t prevent one from receiving the Sacraments (other than marriage). Being divorced and remarried without an annulment does prevent one from receiving the Sacraments (except Confession) unless the situation is resolved with an annulment through the Church. So, for Catholics, being divorced means either seeking and obtaining an annulment, if possible, or remaining single (unmarried) for the rest of your life.
Personally, I would treat an emotional involvement the same as a physical involvement. Would I divorce my husband over an affair? Not necessarily. If we were both willing to work on the root cause of the affair and recommit to the marriage, no. If he were unwilling to end the affair, work on the root cause, and recommit to the marriage, then yes.
The real question is would the person seeking divorce be willing to stay celibate and never remarry if they were unable to get an annulment through the Church.
Remember, divorce is legal and separate from the Church. Remarriage after divorce is legal separate from the Church. Being divorced doesn’t prevent one from receiving the Sacraments (other than marriage). Being divorced and remarried without an annulment does prevent one from receiving the Sacraments (except Confession) unless the situation is resolved with an annulment through the Church. So, for Catholics, being divorced means either seeking and obtaining an annulment, if possible, or remaining single (unmarried) for the rest of your life.
S
Steveabrous
Guest
I think it is unrealistic to expect spouses to be “In love” with each other and not be atrracted to other people for the rest of their lives. So, if there has been no physical contact I would say No. However if this is situation were the “Affair” is causing the person to ignore their spouse in favor of this other person it is a little different.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
A Catholic is permitted to separate with the bond remaining when there is a physical infidelity, but even then it is highly encouraged that there be a reconciliation. Yes, it is permitted to separate with the bond remaining when the common conjugal life cannot be carried on in peace and safety, too, but for a married couple there has to be a earnest effort to live under the same roof in conjugal love for the entire marriage.
A Catholic is only permitted a divorce after a separation with the bond remaining if a just handling of joint assets or custody of the children cannot be accomplished without it. A civil divorce is a grave matter that abandons the essential goods of marriage and creates a public scandal; it cannot be chosen without an equally grave reason! After all, unless there is a serious defect that has been present since the beginning of a marriage, the couple is still joined by their vows even if they can no longer live under the same roof. A civil divorce for the purpose of a just arrangement between them does not change that.
Also keep in mind that although the two spouses may fully intend to live married but separate lives, a civil divorce poses a very near occasion of the sin of bigamy. The temptation to attempt remarriage while the first bond remains but the couple live separate lives at separate addresses is very real. The temptation towards physical adultery will be even greater. That should always be avoided, if possible, and it is worth some sacrifice to accomplish that.
It is possible that a spouse who carries on a long-standing emotional affair by which he puts another person in the place that belongs to his wife alone could by that be afflicting his wife with emotional abuse. (And yes, it goes both ways.) So it is possible that an emotional affair that one spouse WILL NOT STOP even after lengthy mediation could give the other spouse grounds for saving themselves from getting their heart beat up day after day. It is not wrong for a Catholic spouse to say, “I cannot endure what you are doing to me forever, and I won’t, because it is killing me.” That isn’t an idle threat or a sin against marriage. Still, the innocent spouse does not have the same situation as one who is suffering physical infidelity, as well, and does need to stick in there as long as he or she can–not to just keep taking the abuse, but to try to mend the relationship. And, of course, with the advent of things like “sexting”, the boundaries between the physical and the emotional, while they are not blurred, have moved very much closer to each other. The leap from one to the other is not nearly so far as it used to be.
This is really a pastoral question. A spouse suffering from an ongoing emotional affair or from the aftermath of an emotional affair, particularly if the “emotional” affair really had a physical nature except that it was carried on via virtual means, needs the guidance of his or her pastor or a pastoral counselor chosen with the help of his or her pastor. This is not something to face with theory. This is something to face with the support of people who can see one’s eyes and look into them, and understand.
A Catholic is only permitted a divorce after a separation with the bond remaining if a just handling of joint assets or custody of the children cannot be accomplished without it. A civil divorce is a grave matter that abandons the essential goods of marriage and creates a public scandal; it cannot be chosen without an equally grave reason! After all, unless there is a serious defect that has been present since the beginning of a marriage, the couple is still joined by their vows even if they can no longer live under the same roof. A civil divorce for the purpose of a just arrangement between them does not change that.
Also keep in mind that although the two spouses may fully intend to live married but separate lives, a civil divorce poses a very near occasion of the sin of bigamy. The temptation to attempt remarriage while the first bond remains but the couple live separate lives at separate addresses is very real. The temptation towards physical adultery will be even greater. That should always be avoided, if possible, and it is worth some sacrifice to accomplish that.
It is possible that a spouse who carries on a long-standing emotional affair by which he puts another person in the place that belongs to his wife alone could by that be afflicting his wife with emotional abuse. (And yes, it goes both ways.) So it is possible that an emotional affair that one spouse WILL NOT STOP even after lengthy mediation could give the other spouse grounds for saving themselves from getting their heart beat up day after day. It is not wrong for a Catholic spouse to say, “I cannot endure what you are doing to me forever, and I won’t, because it is killing me.” That isn’t an idle threat or a sin against marriage. Still, the innocent spouse does not have the same situation as one who is suffering physical infidelity, as well, and does need to stick in there as long as he or she can–not to just keep taking the abuse, but to try to mend the relationship. And, of course, with the advent of things like “sexting”, the boundaries between the physical and the emotional, while they are not blurred, have moved very much closer to each other. The leap from one to the other is not nearly so far as it used to be.
This is really a pastoral question. A spouse suffering from an ongoing emotional affair or from the aftermath of an emotional affair, particularly if the “emotional” affair really had a physical nature except that it was carried on via virtual means, needs the guidance of his or her pastor or a pastoral counselor chosen with the help of his or her pastor. This is not something to face with theory. This is something to face with the support of people who can see one’s eyes and look into them, and understand.
1
1ke
Guest
It would seem the OP came to a Catholic forum, so I would think they might want a Catholic answer. No offense to the other posters, but their answers are not consistent with Catholic teaching on marriage:
SEPARATION WITH THE BOND REMAINING
Can.* 1151 Spouses have the duty and right to preserve conjugal living unless a legitimate cause excuses them.
Can.* 1152 §1. Although it is earnestly recommended that a spouse, moved by Christian charity and concerned for the good of the family, not refuse forgiveness to an adulterous partner and not disrupt conjugal life, nevertheless, if the spouse did not condone the fault of the other expressly or tacitly, the spouse has the right to sever conjugal living unless the spouse consented to the adultery, gave cause for it, or also committed adultery.
§2. Tacit condonation exists if the innocent spouse has had marital relations voluntarily with the other spouse after having become certain of the adultery. It is presumed, moreover, if the spouse observed conjugal living for six months and did not make recourse to the ecclesiastical or civil authority.
§3. If the innocent spouse has severed conjugal living voluntarily, the spouse is to introduce a cause for separation within six months to the competent ecclesiastical authority which, after having investigated all the circumstances, is to consider carefully whether the innocent spouse can be moved to forgive the fault and not to prolong the separation permanently.
Can.* 1153 §1. If either of the spouses causes grave mental or physical danger to the other spouse or to the offspring or otherwise renders common life too diYcult, that spouse gives the other a legitimate cause for leaving, either by decree of the local ordinary or even on his or her own authority if there is danger in delay.
§2. In all cases, when the cause for the separation ceases, conjugal living must be restored unless ecclesiastical authority has established otherwise.
Can.* 1154 After the separation of the spouses has taken place, the adequate support and education of the children must always be suitably provided.
Can.* 1155 The innocent spouse laudably can readmit the other spouse to conjugal life; in this case the innocent spouse renounces the right to separate.
SEPARATION WITH THE BOND REMAINING
Can.* 1151 Spouses have the duty and right to preserve conjugal living unless a legitimate cause excuses them.
Can.* 1152 §1. Although it is earnestly recommended that a spouse, moved by Christian charity and concerned for the good of the family, not refuse forgiveness to an adulterous partner and not disrupt conjugal life, nevertheless, if the spouse did not condone the fault of the other expressly or tacitly, the spouse has the right to sever conjugal living unless the spouse consented to the adultery, gave cause for it, or also committed adultery.
§2. Tacit condonation exists if the innocent spouse has had marital relations voluntarily with the other spouse after having become certain of the adultery. It is presumed, moreover, if the spouse observed conjugal living for six months and did not make recourse to the ecclesiastical or civil authority.
§3. If the innocent spouse has severed conjugal living voluntarily, the spouse is to introduce a cause for separation within six months to the competent ecclesiastical authority which, after having investigated all the circumstances, is to consider carefully whether the innocent spouse can be moved to forgive the fault and not to prolong the separation permanently.
Can.* 1153 §1. If either of the spouses causes grave mental or physical danger to the other spouse or to the offspring or otherwise renders common life too diYcult, that spouse gives the other a legitimate cause for leaving, either by decree of the local ordinary or even on his or her own authority if there is danger in delay.
§2. In all cases, when the cause for the separation ceases, conjugal living must be restored unless ecclesiastical authority has established otherwise.
Can.* 1154 After the separation of the spouses has taken place, the adequate support and education of the children must always be suitably provided.
Can.* 1155 The innocent spouse laudably can readmit the other spouse to conjugal life; in this case the innocent spouse renounces the right to separate.
L
Lady_Love
Guest
I would ask myself, why is my husband seeking emotional comfort from another woman? Is he not getting the attention he needs from you? Are you affectionate? Do you praise him often? Do you appreciate him? Do you build him up? Do you ignore him? Do you criticize or nag too frequently? Emotional and sexual affairs are a sign that there is something wrong in the marriage and a marriage takes two. I’m not accusing you in any way but I think it is good to reflect on your responsibilities in the marriage before looking at the partner’s. It is easy to win back your spouses affection and attention if you treat him the way you did when you were dating. Delighting in your husband goes a long way.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Short answer, though: The innocent spouse has the right to demand that the “attachment” be severed, and in no uncertain terms. There is no right to “all but adultery” that gives carte blanche for emotional beatings. If there is a dispute as to whether some outside relationship is in fact an emotional affair or whether one spouse is being unacceptably jealous or paranoid, the couple ought to seek some mediation.
T
TheRealJuliane
Guest
Your response puts more of the responsibility onto the spouse who is innocent. Why is a husband seeking emotional comfort from another woman? HIS CHOICE to do so. His wife’s choices in the marriage do not excuse him from his sin to go outside the marriage. He should choose to work on the problems and not violate the vows he took before God.
H
holyrood
Guest
Great advice here.
I suppose some could say I divorced over emotional infidelity. In truth, however, if we’re talking about an actual emotional affair, as opposed to being attracted to someone else, there are many shades of gray. We’re often talking about lies, secrecy, deception, disappearing for hours at a time, marital assets being used on the affair partner.
In truth, I didn’t divorce simply over an emotional affair, but over the fact that trust was so badly broken that I have no way of knowing they were ‘only’ emotional affairs, or if my health was at risk. The women and the lies were ongoing.
Keep in mind, too, that someone who lies on one subject will often lie on another, as well. The next step in the deceptions led to me finding large sums of money disappearing from my bank account when he could no longer afford his spending on his own income. A major reason I divorced–and I did so under the advice of three priests–was to get legal financial protection. In the process of the divorce, he was finally forced legally to tell me the whole truth, and I found out he’d also kept secret credit cards and run up nearly his entire annual income in debt.
For me, I believe legal divorce was the only way to keep a roof over the kids’ heads.
For some people, it is true they’re being unkind and thoughtless to their spouse. For others, this is simply not true. There are plenty of people who simply are broken, or lost, or crave the constant attention, sympathy, adulation, or whatever, of others. There are those who simply want what they want. There are plenty of cases where it really doesn’t matter how good it is at home, some spouses will stray, and they’ll tell you upfront their spouse is everything they could want and wonderful to them, yet they do it anyway.
I think it’s fair to ask these questions of oneself, but it’s *horribly *unfair and unkind to assume, in infidelity, that the betrayed spouse must have ‘done something’ or failed the cheating spouse in some way.
And no, treating him the way you did when you were dating does not always work. For some men (or women, if it’s the wife cheating), it’s a clear sign that he can continue to have his cake and eat it, too, and the more he cheats, the better it gets at home! What a deal!
T
TheRealJuliane
Guest
Thank you, you expressed this much better than I did!
P
PennyinCanada
Guest
I find that a lot of questions on this forum have to deal with how close can I get to the edge before I actually fall off. No one is asking the virtue questions!!
As a married person, they are to guard their hearts. By their own free will, they took a vow before God, friends and family to love this person for the rest of their lives. They are not free to start fantasizing about the neighbor or person at work. Really, come on, there are plenty of attractive people that one will meet in a lifetime. There is a discipline involved here. Of course. If one is feeling an attraction, make an effort to go the other way. No lunch dates, no flirtatious talk.
Right from our earliest years, the movies and tv shows show us that people can have a series of sexual partners without any consequences. It’s not true in the real world. We are made to be better than that! We are to model that to the world who don’t know any better.
As a married person, they are to guard their hearts. By their own free will, they took a vow before God, friends and family to love this person for the rest of their lives. They are not free to start fantasizing about the neighbor or person at work. Really, come on, there are plenty of attractive people that one will meet in a lifetime. There is a discipline involved here. Of course. If one is feeling an attraction, make an effort to go the other way. No lunch dates, no flirtatious talk.
Right from our earliest years, the movies and tv shows show us that people can have a series of sexual partners without any consequences. It’s not true in the real world. We are made to be better than that! We are to model that to the world who don’t know any better.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
I think this is one of the most common legitimate reasons for civil divorce with the bond remaining, although to be honest if I believed that I had attempted marriage with someone who had a pre-existing and durable lack of integrity, I’d look into whether the attempt at marriage was valid. If it turns out that someone has never been honest a day in their lives when the option to make their life easier could be had by a convenient lie, I don’t see how it could reasonably be said that they were capable of marriage. Certainly if someone married only because serious moral faults in their intended spouse were hidden from them, that is an issue, too.
I think there are a lot who want what they want, or who become convinced that enough is not enough for them. Married people are constantly being tempted towards infidelity! The devil doesn’t leave one spouse alone because the other spouse is innocent. Sometimes I think the devil actually targets the spouses of the most trusting, because it is easier to convince his targets that “no one will ever know.” This, I think, is where the adage, “The wife is always the last to know” comes from…that is, because so often the spouse is the last to question the offender’s integrity. When infidelity is the last thing you want to believe your spouse could do, it is going to be the last thing you look for. That isn’t a moral fault in the trusting person, but something their spouses should be extra-resolved not to offend against.
H
holyrood
Guest
I will be looking into annulment on exactly these grounds. I can look back on previous decisions I’ve made and be confident that I never would have married him, had I known the full truth about many things.
Well said. And we believe others are like us. Especially our spouse. It is exactly those who would never dream of cheating who often have the hardest time believing their spouse would do so. Which is exactly what makes it so safe for the spouse to do it.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Manipulative people target trusting people. They especially target tenderhearted and giving people, because if they can get that, they practically have carte blanche. Even if they get caught in their lies once in awhile, they are one pretended repentance away from their next green light…they can plan they will get to “Pass Go” without ever being made to “Go to Jail”.
I’ve known this kind of person. Charm is their stock and trade. It makes the hair on the back of my neck to think of it. I’d go so far as to say that if your intended’s friends don’t trust them well beyond their other friends, be careful about marrying them. There is no substitute for integrity, and yet it is so little valued now that the liars have a far easier time hiding in the fold.
M
marymary1975
Guest
From what perspective are you talking? If you are speaking from a legal perspective if you file a divorce on the grounds of adultery, which would be the actual.ground for.an affair, you need to prove it and good luck trying to prove an emotional affair. Then again, there is the no fault grounds which would be what most people would use. From a catholic perspective it is not grounds for an anulment as anulment has to do with your state of mind at the time of marriage.
S
SonCatcher
Guest
Remember this scripture and I will explain:
Matthew 19:3-6
Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?”
He said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.”
At the time of Jesus, there was no doubt about the right to divorce. The Tanakh outlined how it was done. There was, however, a raging debate regarding grounds for divorce. One camp maintained that and reason, no matter how trivial (e.g. burned eggs, even once), was sufficient ground. The other camp insisted that only a serious reason (e.g. serial adultery) could be considered valid. The Pharisees were attempting to pigeonhole Jesus in one or the other camp so they could accuse him of being lax or rigorous, thereby potentially alienating half of his followers.
His answer denied the “right” to divorce at all. Therefore, there is no ground sufficient for a validly married couple to divorce in the eyes of God.
In some very unfortunate situations, it may become necessary for a couple to separate their household for safety of one or both. It may even be necessary for there to be a legal, civil separation. Nothing but death can make a validly married person free to marry anyone else, however.
Perhaps you were referring instead to the supposed exception in Matthew 19:9 ("I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”). Simply, this does not allow divorce. What it does is allow for the Church to discern whether a lawful (i.e. valid) marriage occurred in the first place (and is the basis for the annulment process we have today). There is nothing that could happen after a marriage that would render it unlawful/null. If a marriage is unlawful, it was so from its beginning.
Matthew 19:3-6
Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?”
He said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.”
At the time of Jesus, there was no doubt about the right to divorce. The Tanakh outlined how it was done. There was, however, a raging debate regarding grounds for divorce. One camp maintained that and reason, no matter how trivial (e.g. burned eggs, even once), was sufficient ground. The other camp insisted that only a serious reason (e.g. serial adultery) could be considered valid. The Pharisees were attempting to pigeonhole Jesus in one or the other camp so they could accuse him of being lax or rigorous, thereby potentially alienating half of his followers.
His answer denied the “right” to divorce at all. Therefore, there is no ground sufficient for a validly married couple to divorce in the eyes of God.
In some very unfortunate situations, it may become necessary for a couple to separate their household for safety of one or both. It may even be necessary for there to be a legal, civil separation. Nothing but death can make a validly married person free to marry anyone else, however.
Perhaps you were referring instead to the supposed exception in Matthew 19:9 ("I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”). Simply, this does not allow divorce. What it does is allow for the Church to discern whether a lawful (i.e. valid) marriage occurred in the first place (and is the basis for the annulment process we have today). There is nothing that could happen after a marriage that would render it unlawful/null. If a marriage is unlawful, it was so from its beginning.
- Status