Divorce and adultry

[cheezey]

…“until death ye do part” is considered a nice ideal, but realistically, unattainable - and God will forgive. After all, that’s His job.

I have asked, that’s for sure.

I was thinking of this subject this morning. I thought of His Word. I also thought of how my husband drove me into a utility pole. You betcha I am divorced. I’ve wondered about this subject from this particular perspective. Would He have wanted me to stay only to be at such risk? I am trying to understand these posts…

 

[Cavaradossi]

You make an interesting point. I wonder how you consider the following argument:

Why would Matthew have used porneia if he meant immoral sexual acts where one party is married - adultery, which was commonly referred to as moixaw?

If we refer to Matthew 5:32 “except for the cause of fornication (porneia), makes her commit adultery (moixaw)”. Porneia in the NT seems to be used to include fornication of two individuals that are not married (pre martial sex rather than adultery which exclusively means immorality where one party is married). Consider 1 Cor 7:1-2 "it is good for a man not to touch a woman. But because of immoralities (porneia), let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Clearly Paul is teaching that it is better to marry than “burn with passion” so to speak.

Thus, I believe that fornication is not a perfect term for the original Greek, because fornication can mean both married or unmarried parties. At best then, I believe that Matthew alone is not clear whether Jesus meant extra marriage sex or pre martial sex. We then though can appeal to the remainder of scripture to discern the true context which seems to be clear - a valid marriage cannot be broken for any reason.

Of course if Matthew meant immorality where neither party is married, then we cannot conclude that divorce for adultery is inherently acceptable (although this would be strong evidence of a lack of commitment, thus no marriage occurring). If this meaning is true, then the only logical conclusion is that Matthew meant a situation in which marriage did not truly exist for some illegitimate reason meaning that these individuals were not committing adultery, but rather pre martial sex.

St. Gregory of Nyssa actually has a passage on the meaning of the words fornication (πορνεία) and adultery (μοιχεία). The fourth canon of St. Gregory of Nyssa in the Pedalion remarks that some do not distinguish between the two, deeming fornication to be tantamount to adultery. Others make the distinction that fornication is the act of polluting oneself with illicit sexual relations which do no injury to another man (the woman involved, in other words, is unmarried, so there is no husband to be injured), whereas it is the admixture of fornication and injury to another man (brought on by defiling his wife) which produces the sin of adultery, which is more grave. St. Basil, furthermore, in his first canonical epistle, recognizes that the man who cohabits with another woman after his wife has abandoned him unjustly is not blameworthy, citing Mt. 5:32. Given the way that the Greek interpreters of Scripture understood that passage in the Gospel of Matthew and the word πορνεία, I just don’t see how it is tenable to assert that πορνεία should be understood in such a restricted fashion.

 

[alchemon]

St. Gregory of Nyssa actually has a passage on the meaning of the words fornication (πορνεία) and adultery (μοιχεία). The fourth canon of St. Gregory of Nyssa in the Pedalion remarks that some do not distinguish between the two, deeming fornication to be tantamount to adultery. Others make the distinction that fornication is the act of polluting oneself with illicit sexual relations which do no injury to another man (the woman involved, in other words, is unmarried, so there is no husband to be injured), whereas it is the admixture of fornication and injury to another man (brought on by defiling his wife) which produces the sin of adultery, which is more grave. St. Basil, furthermore, in his first canonical epistle, recognizes that the man who cohabits with another woman after his wife has abandoned him unjustly is not blameworthy, citing Mt. 5:32. Given the way that the Greek interpreters of Scripture understood that passage in the Gospel of Matthew and the word πορνεία, I just don’t see how it is tenable to assert that πορνεία should be understood in such a restricted fashion.

You make a good point and has made me realize that I butchered/made a bad error on something in my post. When I wrote “I believe that fornication is not a perfect term for the original Greek” I should have added in the “context of these verses”. Thus what I wrote should have had the ticker that I am referring to porneia as used in the context of the verses mentioned which are very similar in the message they are trying to convey.

Now some people have said that Jesus was speaking figuratively of an incestual, and thus, illegitimate marriage. I think that this is a strong argument especially when considered in light of who Jesus is speaking to and certain usages of the term porneia would fit well here,

I am referring more to a literal meaning: ie Jesus is saying divorce can occur if a marriage is found to be illegitimate (and thus the usage of porneia in the context of “pre martial sex” hence the distinction of the two terms).

To paraphrase I am saying in a literal sense the verse means:

“And I say to you, whoever puts away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another commits adultery”

If a man puts away his wife, after it is determined that they were in an illegitimate marriage - for whatever reason and hence the reason fornication was used rather than adultery - he is free to remarry. Otherwise, he commits adultery if he remarries.

 

[Duane1966]

Taken from an article by Dave Armstrong part 1.

Marriage Exception Matthew 19:9 (Porneia)

Does the exception clause in Matt 19:9 allow for divorce from a Christian marriage and a subsequent remarriage ? No.

Jesus Christ taught that marriage was to be for life. However, some people will argue that the exception clause in His teaching on marriage in Matt 19:9 proves that He allowed for a divorce from a Christian marriage and a subsequent re-marriage. And so they insist that the 2000 year old tradition in the Catholic Church is contrary to the Bible and is therefore to be rejected. The purpose of this article to demonstrate that this anti-Catholic argument is without any solid foundation.

Catholics have always taught that this teaching of Christ calls mankind to a much higher understanding of the value of marriage. Marriage is a Sacrament where the couple encounter Christ in a profound way. This life long bond as it is lived out reveals both the death and resurrection of Christ. As they get closer to Christ His passion and glory and are made manifest in their lives. The sacredness of the Marriage vow is such that a second marriage constitutes adultery. [Since, Protestants do not have this understanding it should be noted that the Catholic Church does not teach that it is necessarily so that a second marriage for a Protestant couple is necessarily an adulterous union.]

Here is Christ’s teaching:

Matthew 19:3-9
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.”
They said to him, “Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss (her) ?”
He said to them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.
I say to you, whoever divorces his wife except for unchastity and marries another commits adultery."

The exception clause, “except for unchastity,” is the crux of the argument. In the Greek the word for “unchastity” is “porneia.” In the Catholic NAB Bible words in parenthesis are inserted to reflect the constant tradition that has been passed down by the Apostles that a sacramental marriage is life long.

Matthew 19:9
“I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.” NAB

The Protestant argument against the Catholic Tradition states that the Greek word “porneia” means adultery, and that the exception clause necessarily justifies the couple who wish to consider the marriage vows to be no longer binding. And so the Protestant New International Version of the Bible gives the following translation:

Matthew 19:9
“I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.” NIV

So, for most Protestants marriage is meant to last a lifetime, but adultery justifies divorce and remarriage. Some Protestants hold that divorce, even in cases of adultery is wrong, but if a couple is divorced the “divorce” can be “forgiven” and the wronged spouse is free to remarry a second time. And even the spouse “causing” the divorce will usually be free to remarry if he or she finds a new church to attend.

Whereas, in the Catholic Church adultery is also recognized as wrong and it can be forgiven, and if a spouse wrongly divorces his mate he can be forgiven. However, for the Catholic, forgiveness only comes with conversion. That is, he or she, would be required to reconcile with their legitimate (first) mate, or at least not engage in marital relations with another. If a spouse sins by cheating on his vows by divorcing and marrying another he is required to repent and to renew his respecting and keeping of his original vow to his first and legitimate sacramental mate by not engaging in marital relations with another.

Whereas for most Protestants the “forgiven divorce” is recognized as to give justification to the spouse who wishes to continue to break and cheat on his original vow and to now live with his second (third, or fourth, etc.) mate. Although it claims as its goal to have life long marriages it allows for a sort of serial polygamy, that is more than one spouse, just one at a time.

Matthew 19:6
“So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.” NAB

To support their Protestant understanding some will cite Protestant Greek dictionaries which define the word “porneia” as fornication or adultery. However, any translation or dictionary will be limited by the prejudices of the author. In this case it is helpful to do a word study on the word in question to examine the context of the various uses of “porneia.” This will provide clues as to both what it could mean as well as to what it does not mean.

Read more: catholicfidelity.com/apologetics-topics/holy-matrimony/marriage-exception-in-matthew-19-9/
Create your own website for free: webnode.com

to be continued…

 

[Duane1966]

part 2.

Before doing this word study we will examine how the King James Version actually supports the Catholic position.

Matthew 19:9
“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.” KJV

Here the Greek word “porneia” is translated as fornication. [The footnotes in the New American Standard Bible also list fornication as the “literal” meaning.] Fornication is the sin of two unmarried people having sexual intercourse. If either person is married or if both are married to other people then the sin is called adultery. So, the only way that the couple could commit fornication is if they were never really in a Christian marriage to begin with. While the King James Version prohibits a second marriage it makes allowance for couples who were never truly married in a Christian sense, such as father and his own daughter or a mother and her son being married together. Such marriages were not totally unheard of in regards to the pagans during the time of Christ.

Now we will investigate what the Greek word “porneia” means. Examining the context of the passages where the word “porneia” is used is helpful in discerning this.

In the following passages the Greek word “porneia” is translated as “unchastity.”

**Matthew 15:19
“For from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, unchastity, theft, false witness, blasphemy.”

Mark 7:21-22
“From within people, from their hearts, come evil thoughts, unchastity, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, licentiousness, envy, blasphemy, arrogance, folly.” NAB**

Notice that both “unchastity” [porneia] and “adultery” are prohibited. Therefore, from these passages we can see that porneia does not mean adultery as that would be redundant.

Another important usage of the term porneia is found in Acts 15.

Acts 15:28-29
“For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.” RSV

These prohibitions come from the deeply rooted Jewish tradition that is found in Leviticus chapters 17 and 18. Examining this context also gives us more insight into what is meant by unchastity, or porneia in the Greek. Consider the following as to how it relates to the four prohibitions in Acts 15:28-29, (1) from the sacrifice to idols, (2) from blood, (3) what is strangled [because therefore the blood would still be in it] and (4) from unchastity or porneia.

**Leviticus 17:7
“No longer shall they offer their sacrifices to the satyrs to whom they used to render their wanton worship. This shall be an everlasting ordinance for them and their descendants.”

Leviticus 17:12-14
"That is why I have told the Israelites: No one among you, not even a resident alien, may partake of blood.
… You shall not partake of the blood of any meat. Since the life of every living body is its blood, anyone who partakes of it shall be cut off.

Leviticus 17:15
“Everyone, whether a native or an alien, who eats of an animal that died of itself or was killed by a wild beast, shall wash his garments, bathe in water, and be unclean until evening, and then he will be clean.”

Leviticus 18:1-6
" … Speak to the Israelites and tell them: I, the LORD, am your God.
You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt … My decrees you shall carry out, and my statutes you shall take care to follow. … Keep, then, my statutes and decrees, for the man who carries them out will find life through them. …
‘None of you shall approach a close relative to have sexual intercourse with her. I am the LORD.’ "**

In fact chapter 18 goes on for 18 verses detailing for the Israelites of how they are to abstain from various types of incest or else they will be cut off from God’s people, cf. verse 29. So, we can see that it was these unlawful incestuous marriages that were being referred to by the word “porneia” and forbidden in Acts 15.

In the King James Version porneia is translated as “fornication” rather than “unchastity” in Acts 15:29. The New American Bible translates it as “unlawful marriage.”]

{B]It was these incestuous marriages among blood relatives were so offensive to both Jews and Christians. And it was just this type of marriage that St. Paul was speaking about 1 Corinthians which is the final example of the term “porneia” that we will investigate. Here the term “porneia” is translated as “immorality.”{/B]

1 Corinthians 5:1-5
“It is widely reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of a kind not found even among pagans—a man living with his father’s wife.
And you are inflated with pride. Should you not rather have been sorrowful? The one who did this deed should be expelled from your midst.
I, for my part … have already, as if present, pronounced judgment on the one who has committed this deed, in the name of (our) Lord Jesus: …
you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.” NAB

Thus, again we see that the term “porneia,” the same term that is used in the exception clause, in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9, on the prohibition from divorce and remarriage, is a reference to an unlawful and thus invalid marriage. It is not a reference, as Protestants view it, to a specific act committed during a legitimate “life-long” marriage.]

to be continued…

 

[Duane1966]

part 3.

Jesus’s teaching on marriage was revolutionary. No other religion, and no major Protestant religion has held fast to this teaching of His that is retained within the teachings of the Catholic Church. If the Protestant position of allowing the “divorce” to be forgiven and a subsequent marriage to be valid then it would not be that hard to live up to. And it would be unexplainable as to why the disciples responded in the next verse the way that they did if this exception clause was so wide.

Matthew 19:10
"(His) disciples said to him, ‘If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.’ "

In fact most of the passages about Marriage have **no exception clause at all. **

**Mark 10:1-12
"… He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

Luke 16:18
"Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and the one who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.

1 Corinthians 7:10-15
“To the married, however, I give this instruction (not I, but the Lord): a wife should not separate from her husband —and if she does separate she must either remain single or become reconciled to her husband—and a husband should not divorce his wife …” NAB **

The Book of Ephesians was the climax of St. Paul’s teachings. He started many Christian communities but it was to the Ephesians that he was able to explain the entire plan of God’s Salvation.

Acts 20:16-27
"Paul … had the presbyters of the church at Ephesus summoned.
When they came to him, he addressed them, “You know how I lived among you the whole time from the day I first came to the province of Asia. … and I did not at all shrink from telling you what was for your benefit, or from teaching you in public or in your homes. …
26 And so I solemnly declare to you this day that … I did not shrink from proclaiming to you the entire plan of God.” NAB

And it is in this Book of Ephesians that we find the pinnacle of his teaching on marriage.

**Ephesians 5:21-33
"Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ.
… Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her to sanctify her, cleansing her by the bath of water with the word, that he might present to himself the church in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
So (also) husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one hates his own flesh but rather nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body.

“For this reason a man shall leave (his) father and (his) mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”

This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church. In any case, each one of you should love his wife as himself, and the wife should respect her husband." NAB**

Since God is a part of the sacramental union of a married couple it is keeping that the vow be a life long vow. The Bible compares marriage to God’s love for the Church. Even if people in the Church sin against Him, He is always faithful to His unconditional love to them. It is this love, God’s love for the Church that is represented by the spouses vow to love each other until death do them part, for better or for worse.

Read more: catholicfidelity.com/apologetics-topics/holy-matrimony/marriage-exception-in-matthew-19-9/
Create your own website for free: webnode.com

 

[Duane1966]

Also from Dave Armstrong, same website.

The testimonies of the Fathers and the councils leave us no room for doubt. In numerous places they lay down the teaching that** not even in the case of adultery can the marriage bond be dissolved or the innocent party proceed to a new marriage**. They insist rather that the innocent party must remain unmarried after the dismissal of the guilty one, and can only enter upon new marriage in case death intervenes. (Herbermann, V, 56-57)

That article goes on to document this view from numerous patristic sources, including the Shepherd of Hermas, Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Basil of Cæsarea, John Chrysostom, Theodoret, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine.

The leading magazine of Evangelical Protestantism, Christianity Today (founded by Billy Graham), confirms these beliefs of the early Church. Michael Gorman, in his article entitled, “Divorce and Remarriage From Augustine to Zwingli” (December 14, 1992) wrote:

In the early church, many voices addressed the subjects of marriage, divorce, and remarriage, but their message, on the whole, was quite unified. Christian marriage, they said, is an indissoluble bond. **Divorce, with the implicit right of remarriage, was not an option for Christian couples (though Origen admits some toleration existed), but permanent separation was. *Remarriage after separation was considered punishable adultery or bigamy ***. . .

Read more: catholicfidelity.com/biblical-evidence-for-the-prohibition-of-divorce-by-dave-armstrong/
Create your own website for free: webnode.com