Does the Bible support divorce?

[rcwitness]

St Paul tells us, from the Lord…

1 Corinthians 7
“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.
… A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. If the husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.”

Divorce, is not only a sin but impossible. Separation (and/or civil divorce) is permitted for the health/safety of those involved (sometimes). But we are told to seek reconciliation first.

The exception clauses in Matthew 19 and 5 use the Greek term “porneia”. This means that an unlawful marital union can be disolved/divorced from. This is not a lawful Christian marriage.

St Paul expresses this type in 1 Cor. 6

“Do you not know that he who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two shall become one.” But he who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Shun immorality.”

The word used for prostitution and immorality, is the same that Matthew uses. THESE unlawful sexual unions can be divorced from. THESE are fornication for a believer to commit.

Jesus did not use the word for adultery because adultery happens by a truly married person, nor does ANY Scripture say that abandonment disolves a Christian marriage.

Christian Matrimony reflects the relationship a believer has with the Lord. We ALWAYS have access to Reconciliation with Him, therefore we should always allow reconciliation with our spouses.

 

[LittleBee1]

This means that an unlawful marital union can be disolved/divorced from. This is not a lawful Christian marriage.

This comforted me as I was going through my own unwanted divorce. Most people are not aware of the ways in which a marital union is considered unlawful. My husband presented himself as a believer, even at one time considered a vocation - but it was a lie. He turned out to be atheist. During my daughter’s preparation for first communion, I was told that God did not intend for his handmaiden to marry a nonbeliever - so much weight was lifted from my shoulders. I no longer felt that I had disappointed Him.

 

[rcwitness]

I would have to leave that decision to a marriage Tribunal. If he admitted to not believe in the Gospel at the time of Matrimony, then it’s probably the Pauline Privilege. But if he was a Baptized believer, who later came into doubts… that is a different situation, no?

 

[rcwitness]

Here is the RSV-CE footnote commentary for the Matthew 5:32 passage:

The Greek word used here appears to refer to marriages that were not legally marriages because they were either within the forbidden degrees of consanguinity (Lev 18.6-16) or contracted with a Gentile. The phrase except on the ground of unchastity does not occur in the parallel passage in Lk 16.18. See also Mt 19.9 (Mk 10.11-12), and especially 1 Cor 7.10-11 which shows that the prohibition is unconditional.

 

[rcwitness]

Here is the footnotes from the NAB translation.

5:31–32 See Dt 24:1–5. 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.

 

[lonegreywolf20]

I guess I am lucky in that my marriage was not valid due to me and my ex-wife being Catholic and not getting married in the Catholic church, We did not have dispensation.

Nor did I know that we had to be married in the Catholic church as I had not been to a Catholic church since I was 14 except for funerals. So, I had no clue that it was a requirement.

So, she divorced me and I filed a lack of form and my marriage was declared invalid and I am able to remarry.

 

[rcwitness]

I guess I am lucky in that my marriage was not valid due to me and my ex-wife being Catholic and not getting married in the Catholic church, We did not have dispensation.

Nor did I know that we had to be married in the Catholic church as I had not been to a Catholic church since I was 14 except for funerals. So, I had no clue that it was a requirement.

So, she divorced me and I filed a lack of form and my marriage was declared invalid and I am able to remarry.

I wouldn’t say you are lucky. You were caught up in ignorance and neglecting faith, which led you into a relationship that damaged a portion of your life.

God’s mercy in your life is a blessing, if you continue in His kindness.

Don’t think I am judging you. I have made awful mistakes, and I allowed sin to rise up from within me and manifest in my own life. And it is threatening my own valid marriage!

 

[rcwitness]

The debate over the meaning of St Matthew’s so called “exception clause” is profound!

You could read an endless amount of studies on the topic, with many various conclusions.

The difficulty in knowing what Matthew meant by “porneia” in the context of what Jesus was saying is not very simple.

Jesus clearly confirms that He, Himself, is raising the standard of marriage back to what His Father established from the beginning, and no man is able to disolve. Yet, Matthew uses a term which has a potentially wide range of meanings to seemingly allow for marriage to be disolved.

What that does, is take the question of the Pharisees and leave it completely open again… UNLESS we accept porneia to have a more specific meaning.

The Catholic Church has definitely concluded that the exception for divorce means that certain couples who are living, or acted, as husband and wife, yet have done so by means of “porneia”, are able to divorce from that union. But couples who have entered into a lawful Christian marriage, are unable to disolve what God has joined, and if they seek another marriage relationship, it is adulterous.