Does sex, becoming one flesh, make you married?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill77
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes. You are talking about a Christian Marriage. Porneia is not a Christian marriage, yet a type of unholy marriage. A sacrilege. Sometimes these unions have a contract, sometimes they don’t. It’s the contract ones that the Church addresses with a decree of nulity.
 
Last edited:
TheLittleLady said:
Greek text of the Gospel (Matthew 5:32) uses the word PORNEIA which means ‘illict or unnatural relations’ as the only exception to the permanence of marriage (which in reality means there was no valid marriage if it was an unnatural union, as in the case of incest or homosexuality). The Greek word MOICHEIA means ‘adultery’ and that word is NOT used by the sacred author who wrote the Gospel. Hence, adultery, while still a serious and mortal sin, does not itself invalidate a marriage (unless the person NEVER intended to enter a faithful union from the day of their wedding vows.)
Click to expand...
Incest and homosexuality were commonplace when the bible was written, and incest was acceptable.
 
You mean acceptable by the Gentiles/Romans?

Prostitution was also acceptable.
 
rcwitness said:
You mean acceptable by the Gentiles/Romans?
Click to expand...
No, it was acceptable by others thousands of years ago. The early Christians married their cousins. Don’t think any married their brother or sister. Mary and Joseph were cousins, and it was acceptable then. Not prostitution, just what would be incestuous now.
 
Last edited:
The Old Testament commandment that a bill of divorce be given to the woman assumes the legitimacy of divorce itself. It is this that Jesus denies. (Unless the marriage is unlawful) : this “exceptive clause,” as it is often called, occurs also in Mt 19:9, where the Greek is slightly different. There are other sayings of Jesus about divorce that prohibit it absolutely (see Mk 10:11–12; Lk 16:18; cf. 1 Cor 7:10, 11b), and most scholars agree that they represent the stand of Jesus. Matthew’s “exceptive clauses” are understood by some as a modification of the absolute prohibition. It seems, however, that the unlawfulness that Matthew gives as a reason why a marriage must be broken refers to a situation peculiar to his community: the violation of Mosaic law forbidding marriage between persons of certain blood and/or legal relationship (Lv 18:6–18). Marriages of that sort were regarded as incest ( porneia ), but some rabbis allowed Gentile converts to Judaism who had contracted such marriages to remain in them. Matthew’s “exceptive clause” is against such permissiveness for Gentile converts to Christianity; cf. the similar prohibition of porneia in Acts 15:20, 29. In this interpretation, the clause constitutes no exception to the absolute prohibition of divorce when the marriage is lawful.
 
A related question here.

Just out of interest.

If a marriage is unlawful, but is consummated in good faith, and then susbsequently the unlawfulness is discovered and the marriage is annulled.

For example it could be discovered that one of the parties was not mentally sound, or that they are close blood relations but had not realized because, for example, they were adopted as children.

Does that, in the eyes of the Church, restore the chastity of the persons involved?

Or does consummation preclude annulment?
 
Last edited:
Only repentance and Christ’s forgiveness restores one.

The annulment is merely a formality of the Church to attempt to recognize a non Sacrament marriage.
 
rcwitness said:
Only repentance and Christ’s forgiveness restores one.
Click to expand...
Yes, but you can only seek forgiveness if you have done something wrong.

If the error was not voluntary, because as in my examples above, there were facts you did not know, there is no sin and thus there can be no forgieveness
 
Ah, yes… if the “porneia” (or reason for the porneia) which invalidated a marriage from being Christian was the fault of the other spouse alone, then restoration to chastity may not be necessary for the innocent spouse.
 
Last edited:
Discovering later that one party was not mentally sound from the time of vows is not very likely. Pope St JPII has said only very extreme cases would render a person unable to consent.
 
@TheLittleLady: as I recall, we were discussing this exact misunderstanding in a different thread! You were asserting that the “one flesh union” did mean sex, and I was objecting that this would imply exactly what the OP was asking – that extramarital sex creates the “one flesh union.”

See what I mean, now? How that misunderstanding of what the Church teaches can lead to confusion? 😉
 
Yes, her quote from the Catechism is referring to Christian marriage.
 
Only once.

The one flesh union refers to sex.

To paraphrase, the passage is: for this reason, two people of the opposite sex will freely give consent and enter into marriage. Once they have entered into a valid marriage, the will have sexual intercourse.

Intercourse does not make the marriage. The marriage consent permits/allows/encourages the intercourse.
 
Last edited:
There are two kinds of valid marriage:

Valid Natural Marriage
Valid Sacramental Marriage
 
Consentual sex = natural marriage. Yet not always with a contract.
 
Last edited:
TheLittleLady said:
The one flesh union refers to sex.
Click to expand...
I disagree.

That would mean that there is no “one flesh union” until consummation. (And, if consummation is delayed, then there is no valid “one flesh union” in marriage.) That runs counter to Catholic understandings of marriage.
TheLittleLady said:
Intercourse does not make the marriage.
Click to expand...
I agree! That’s why intercourse doesn’t make the union. 😉
 
Gorgias said:
That would mean that there is no “one flesh union” until consummation. (And, if consummation is delayed, then there is no valid “one flesh union” in marriage.) That runs counter to Catholic understandings of marriage.
Click to expand...
An unconsummated marriage can be dissolved.
 
Consentual Intercourse does make a marriage union. Just not necessarily a Christian one.
 
Last edited:
Please post from either Canon Law or the Catechism the references for this belief.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top